Originally Posted by Scrumtralecent I agree. I'm not sure why we are discussing this. It's clearly taking three steps back and we're doing the hokey pokey here again with France. The exact quotes: "We must, on the one hand, together, Iran and the six countries, meet and set an agenda, ...
| |||||||
|
| Register to Post a Reply |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools |
| | #21 | ||||
| Braccae tuae aperiuntur. Reform Party NJ ![]() ![]()
| It's clearly taking three steps back and we're doing the hokey pokey here again with France. The exact quotes: "We must, on the one hand, together, Iran and the six countries, meet and set an agenda, then start negotiations. Then, during these negotiations, I suggest that the six renounce referring (Iran to) the UN Security Council and that Iran renounce uranium enrichment during negotiations," he said in an interview with Europe-1 radio. "I don’t believe in a solution without dialogue. "I am not pessimistic. I think that Iran is a great nation, an old culture, an old civilisation, and that we can find solutions through dialogue." What they are very clearly saying is. Let's forget this whole business with Sanctions and the UN Security Counsel and keep dialogue. We have been going through dialogue. It has gotten us nowhere and Iran further along their enrichment. France is clearly saying they no longer wish to involve the UN Security Counsel in dealings with Iran. They no longer support sanctions, they want to continue trying to work it out through the same failed methods we've been hacking over. | ||||
| Register to Reply to This Post |
| | #22 | ||||
| Braccae tuae aperiuntur. Reform Party NJ ![]() ![]()
| Originally Posted by Donkey® If we're going through the UN then I care. If we're gonna handle this alone after they tell us to fuck off, that's a completely different story. At that point anything France has to say is falling on deaf ears.
The problem is that when countries like France which have veto power and a permanent seat start backing off the use of UN authority on Iran it makes our argument weaker. Why the fuck should Iran stop enrichment now if they can already see permanent members of the UN won't allow sanctions to go through? It's buying them even more time. France has severely set us back on this. One of the worst things that could have happened with Iran was one of the permanent seat members to change their stance on sanctions this late in the game. It completely throws everything out of wack and negotiations astray. The noose has been lifted from Iran and we're back where we friggin started months ago... only now Iran is even further along and they have France publicly saying they don't want sanctions which gives them more freedom to do whatever they want. France shouldn't get involved in issues like Hezbollah and Iran if they're gonna keep doing this shit. They just make matters worse. | ||||
| Register to Reply to This Post |
| | #23 | ||||
| Ron Paul '08 Republican Queens, NY ![]()
| Originally Posted by JaJae Whoa! Unjustified bias
France is just trying to keep level head to make a fair 50:50 decision. While the US charges headlong into another war. One that we so desperately want just as we did with Iraq. Evidence on Iran actually making a nuclear weapon is shaky at best. The stories of them enriching weapons-grade uranium may well be entirely false. You want France to "play with the rest of the team"? Well the "rest" of the team (or just us) is hopped up on self-persrcribed nationalistic steriods, it appears our team uniforms are leather blinders on either side of our eyes -- unable to see any other realities but our own that we have fabricated for ourselves. We don't see the whole picture at all, and it looks as though we want the planet to succumb to our "Straussian roid-rage". I am not one to stand for it. Subjective reality is a very useful tool. | ||||
| Register to Reply to This Post |
| vBulletin 3.7.4 -- Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. | Custom Artwork and Theme (TM) 2006, Liberty Lounge |