US: Burden on Iran to Show World it Doesn't Have Nuclear Weapons

As per Voice of America report-- Iran needs to prove the negative. Sounds familiar.


US: Burden on Iran to Show World it Doesn't Have Nuclear Weapons By Serena Parker
Washington
04 March 2005

<snip>

The U.S. government says it is Iran's responsibility to prove to the world that it doesn't have nuclear weapons capabilities. The United States accuses Iran of secretly developing a nuclear weapons program and lying to International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors about it. Iran denies these charges and says its nuclear program is only designed to generate electricity.

State Department spokesperson Richard Boucher says the burden is on Iran to show the world that it means what it says. “Iran claims it doesn't want a nuclear weapon,” he said. “They should be going out of their way to demonstrate to the world, to show the world with confidence that is true. They've been found for 20 years in covert programs.”

The IAEA says Iran has hidden nuclear activities for almost 20 years. Agency Chief Mohamed ElBaradei has called on Iran to provide a full accounting of its nuclear activities to IAEA inspectors, but it's unclear if Iran will cooperate. Earlier this week Iran threatened to break seals put in place by IAEA inspectors and test essential parts for machines for nuclear work. Meanwhile, satellite images indicate that Iran has begun construction on a second nuclear facility, which could be used to produce bomb-grade plutonium.

Western diplomats close to the IAEA said Friday that Iran is building deep tunnels to store nuclear material at a site where it is known to have carried out uranium enrichment activities. They speculate the tunnels are to hide and protect nuclear components from a possible aerial strike by the United States or Israel.
State Department spokesperson Richard Boucher said these all fit into the pattern that Iran has followed over the years, to say one thing and do another.

"There are repeated situations where Iran has been found to not be disclosing the whole truth about its programs, which continues to raise questions about Iran,” he added. “And so rather than making statements that raise further questions about their intentions, one would think that if Iran were really sincere about what it has promised, they would be going out of their way to show that they were not seeking a nuclear weapon. They would be going out of their way to build confidence in the international community."

<snip>

http://www.voanews.com/english/2005-03-04-voa63.cfm

We'll see, I guess.

Canya? Huh, canya? :crazy:

Wonder if Iran will get half of a 48 hour ultimatum, too.

since that is merely a pipedream what gives the U.S the right to demand no other country can have them when the U.S has at least 30,000?

If Iran can't have them then Israel should give up theirs.

in Iran, I'd be sweating a little right now.

NUCS? In that the US is demonstrably ignorant when it comes to determing whether a nation actually does possess WMD's it seems rather a dangerously arrogant assumption to assume one does not.

If I had them, I sure as hell wouldn't tell anyone....they'd find out the minute my country was invaded.

RC

1) the us was not demonstrably ignorant. That assertion assumes that the administration was not simply lying about wmd. I reject that assumption. The administration deliberately falsified the iraq intelligence, rejecting all analysis that indicated any doubt or provided any contrary evidence to the thesis that iraq had wmd. They knew exactly what the situation was. At best they were perhaps moderately suprised that no banned weapons at all were found.

2) if you have nukes you announce your nuke capability at the earliest possible moment - like the day after you have manufactured your sixth bomb, or better yet make seven and set off one as a test. The idea is to never use them, and the way you do that is to make sure your enemies know that you have them.

Killing you enemy while he kills you won't make you any less dead.

I recall Kim Jong Il saying right after the US marched into Iraq: "They didn't have nuclear weapons. That's why they were invaded".

Moral = get nukes, and you'll be safe.

What else are they going to think? It's obvious that the US wants Iran to disarm, and then they'll march in.

And I believe Iran does have nuclear weapons. Notice, they've been threatening "a hell on earth", "a decision they'll regret", for anyone who dares to invade their country. Yes, I believe they have nuclear capacity right now. If not, they will within weeks. Russia and maybe even India (possibly Pakistan) will be helping them along.

It's about the oil.

There are several reports speculating that Saudi Arabia may not have the world's #1 proven oil reserves. Which means that Iran will take the #1 spot. The US will fight for that country, tooth and nail. And quickly, before it's too late.

:-(

Why is it that some nations are allowed to have Nukes - like us, but not other countries?

ALL NUKE SHOULD BE DESTROYED.

"State Department spokesperson Richard Boucher said these all fit into the pattern that Iran has followed over the years, to say one thing and do another."

strange...sounds like another country i have in mind...:eyes:

Karl Rove is just a freakin evil genious. They are leading the mainstream media, with the US popular opinion to follow shortly, down the same road; notice all of the rhetoric on Iran and Syria. Soon we'll be hearing "imminent threat to our national security" language. Bush is talking today about how Syria must pull all of their troops out of Lebanon as if he even knows the history of the conflict.

I would love it if one reporter would get a spine, hold up a map of the middle east, and ask our illustrious commander-in-chief to point out where Syria and Lebanon are on the map. I am CONFIDENT he wouldn't even know where they are. Certainly most of his patriotic supporters wouldn't know where they are.

Eventually he will fuck with the wrong country...one which might already have Nucs but is quiet about it. Yep the fat little dough boy asshole will keep swaggering about dicking with other countries untill he pisses the wrong one off....the quiet one....they'll simply launch....particularily when it becomes obvious they have nothing to loose if they do.

Have you ever witnesses a bully fuck with a geeky little nerd until the nerd goes ballistic? I have, and it ain't pretty. See, the bully is playing games when he is pushing the nerd around....when the nerd blows his stack, he ain't playing games though....he's looking at it as life and death. He'll bight, poke eyes, scratch and tear out hair.

Mark my words, it's comming.

RC

That will a sufficient, but not necessary indication that an attack is in the works. I wonder if they will bother with a dog and pony show at the U.N. with Rice standing in for Powell. I think they will dispense with that charade this time, myself.

Will someone identify the source of this moronic idea
and fire their ass?

This only fools folks from red state educational systems like Kansas and Texas, Karl. The literate world is neither fooled or amused by this idiocy.

Can't be proven.

Except for a few things. He's killing off our kids to the point no one else wants to join his imperialism.

Read www.icasualties.org

sweden, norway and finland...prove to us you don't have nukes! okay, maybe just norway since you've got all that sweet, sweet crude!

Bass Ackwards.
Figures.
Us Murkins, ain't we a hoot !
Torture Kamps, Invasions, Takeovers, Murder of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians--
LET FREEDUMB RANG

Why does this sound so horribly fucking familiar? "Prove you DON'T have them."

Richard Boucher is a mindless turd.

Get real.

...they are attacked by Israel or the United States. They are going to hit us where it hurts folks. They have wised up considerably. The targets will be energy facilities in the Persian Gulf.

What will your electric and fuel bills go to?

Am I the only one that finds it ironic that Iran is being lectured about revealing and giving up their nuclear weapons by the only country that's actually used them against another country?

How about the US giving up our nuclear weapons, and then we can talk without sounding hypocritical.

No one ever mentions that though.

Don

screaming about em for years,
http://www.nonviolence.org/vanunuand even after his release from prison after doing 18 years, he was re-arrested because he gave an interview to Amy Goodman.



Guess who gave Israel the nukes?

When is the wolrd going to say enough is enough, stop humoring the neocons and start indicting them for war crimes?

http://japan.usembassy.gov/e/p/tp-20030116a1.html

U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld says it is up to Saddam Hussein's regime to prove to U.N. weapons inspectors that Iraq does not posses chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear weapons.

At a Pentagon briefing January 15, Rumsfeld said the joint team of inspectors from the U.N. Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC), which was created to disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction, and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) are looking for complete compliance from Baghdad. He said Iraq is known to be quite effective at denial and deception of its WMD programs.

"The president has repeatedly made clear -- and it bears repeating -- that the burden of proof is not on the United States, it's not on the United Nations or the international community to prove that Iraq has these weapons," he said. "The burden of proof is on the Iraqi regime to prove that it is disarming, and to show the inspectors where the weapons are."

U.N. weapons inspectors do not have the duty or ability to uncover weapons hidden in a vast country, Rumsfeld said. Their job is to confirm the evidence of voluntary and total disarmament cooperatively given by Iraq, he said.

Has the intelligence of the average American sunk so low? Shit, we deserve to be defeated on the greater platform of the world if we are such a bunch of dumb asses.

Me: Bush must prove he is not a druggie or resign

Me: Bush most prove he didn't steal the election or resign.

Shall I go on?

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Say that this situation is the Republicans now using an "Guilty until proven innocent" standard in foreign policy, that this is UnAmerican, and that the American standard is "Innocent Until Proven Guilty".

This also applies internationally, and it is because we VIOLATED this standard with Iraq that we are in the trouble we are there today. Iraq was ultimately found *not guilty* of the "crime" we used as justification for invading them, ie. making WMDs. Therefore, applying the same standard is erroneous and can lead us into the same kind of trouble.

Then point to the treatment of terrorism suspects in this manner, in that they are treated as if guilty, whether or not they, in fact, are.

"If you obey them, you will be punished too." It's government not only by the Mayberry Machiavellis but also the Marquis de Sade.