US backs Egypt on nuke power

It may very well be that Iran wants nuke weapons.

Wanting and actually getting are two different things. I'm not falling for the fear-mongering. Just like at the claims made about Iraq.

Enriching weapons uranium to weapons grade is a tremoundous technical challange for anyone. In particular, a third world country.

This best course of action is to manage this problem. Diplomatically, and through IAEA. Not bomb or invade. Iran, even if it had the technical capacity, is likely years away from a bomb. No need to get carried away on this and make rash decisions.

By the way: IAEA took the unprecendent step last week, of saying the GOP congress was lying about Iran's nuke program.

Didn't suggest going to war or any other rash decision. I even said I don't really care if they have them as long as nuclear arsenals are kept under the control of nation states.

I'm just refuting the idea that we should help them build their nuclear reactors. They don't want our help because they want to build weapons.
 
IAEA was kicked out of Iran, they were not allowed to visit the sites they wanted to see, they were denied the info they needed. And they are a lame ass appeasement group to begin with, so that says alot about Iran. Iran can have nuke power, no one minds that. The weapons are another matter.
 
Cypress said:
I haven't heard any liberals say: "Let the inspectors back into Iran". Not once. So, I'm not sure where you even got that from.

I assumed it was commone knowledge that IAEA inspectors are operating in Iran.
Click to expand...
No, but several times on this thread I have heard how we should make such an offer of "help" that actually was offered and refused in the past.

Attempting to redirect is just an attempt at that. And probably another attempt to ignore that I am correct, that offer was made and refused in the past.
 
No, but several times on this thread I have heard how we should make such an offer of "help" that actually was offered and refused in the past.


Really? I must have missed that.
 
I guess the did not like the strings that were attached to the offers, would we like strings attached on such offers made to us ?
A sovern nation does not like to be controlled by such strings by another nation.
 
No, but several times on this thread I have heard how we should make such an offer of "help" that actually was offered and refused in the past.


are you pulling a Klattu on me Damo? I read the whole thread, and didn't see anyone say we should "help" build iran's nuke reactors, or help them enrich their nuke fuel.

Sorry. I just skimmed. I may have missed it.

bush's own offical policy, is that Iran has a right to civilian nuke power.
 
It is in the implication, people mean more than they say. It isn't just in this thread that it has happened either. I consistently hear how Bush is too stupid to make such an offer, while he has...

Or too stupid to take part in the talks, from behind the scenes, while I am positive that he does...

It is in the history of knowledge that we have of each other as well as statements in the thread. Ignoring our own personal history through three sites is as foolish as ignoring all history. The only people who do it, only do it so they can say, "I didn't read anybody saying that (meaning only in the literal sense) in this thread (a misdirect and a pretense that it was never stated or meant by any person in the thread)...

Pretend as you will, tobes was right in pointing out that it has been the US position to allow for it as long as they allowed inspection as they signed that Treaty. Pretending that they hadn't already agreed to that kind of oversight and saying, "Would we like it." is also another way to misdirect...
 
I believe Damo was referring to this comment by Care

Or, maybe this is a carrot for Iran, showing Iran that if they become more cooperative, as Egypt has done with the usa the past few years, then they too could get the nuclear power that they want?
 
Damocles said:
It is in the implication, people mean more than they say. It isn't just in this thread that it has happened either. I consistently hear how Bush is too stupid to make such an offer, while he has...

Or too stupid to take part in the talks, from behind the scenes, while I am positive that he does...

It is in the history of knowledge that we have of each other as well as statements in the thread. Ignoring our own personal history through three sites is as foolish as ignoring all history. The only people who do it, only do it so they can say, "I didn't read anybody saying that (meaning only in the literal sense) in this thread (a misdirect and a pretense that it was never stated or meant by any person in the thread)...

Pretend as you will, tobes was right in pointing out that it has been the US position to allow for it as long as they allowed inspection as they signed that Treaty. Pretending that they hadn't already agreed to that kind of oversight and saying, "Would we like it." is also another way to misdirect...
Click to expand...

LOL

You didn't say anything about implications. You said that severl times, people sactually said we should "help" iran build a nuke program.

Face it: you pulled a Klattu - you claimed something was said ("several times") when it wasn't.

Nothing Care or I said deviates in any significant way from what Bush himself said at the UN: bush said: Iran has a right to peaceful nuclear power, as long as they play nice - by their treaty obligations

You set up a strawman damo. And tried to read peoples minds for intent. Your original assertion was false ;)

I gotta run. Talk to you later damo ;)
 
IHateGovernment said:
I believe Damo was referring to this comment by Care

Or, maybe this is a carrot for Iran, showing Iran that if they become more cooperative, as Egypt has done with the usa the past few years, then they too could get the nuclear power that they want?
Click to expand...

So, we're not "helping" them build it, right? They can spend their own money and technical expertise to build it.

Nothing care or I said, deviates from what Bush himself said at the UN: That Iran as a right to peaceful nuclear power, as long as they play by the rules.

Using diplomacy, or carrots and sticks, is what every president does. There was not implications - stated or otherwise implied - that we would "help" them build nuke plants, or that the US would "help" them enrich their fuel.

And in fact Damo, said that this was allegedly mentioned "several times" in this thread. When it wasn't.

Damo - busted ;)
 
Iran nuke offer was long before Egypt became interested. In fact if Iran can have the bomb then I am sure Egypt and Saudi Arabia will want one or two for themselves. But I guess many libs would find that just fine.
 
Cypress said:
LOL

You didn't say anything about implications. You said that severl times, people sactually said we should "help" iran build a nuke program.

Face it: you pulled a Klattu - you claimed something was said ("several times") when it wasn't.

Nothing Care or I said deviates in any significant way from what Bush himself said at the UN: bush said: Iran has a right to peaceful nuclear power, as long as they play nice - by their treaty obligations

You set up a strawman damo. And tried to read peoples minds for intent. Your original assertion was false ;)

I gotta run. Talk to you later damo ;)
Click to expand...
Works for me... It doesn't change the validity of my statement. It happens all too often on these sites where one side gains so much strength in numbers that they often get away with blanket statements like, "Well Iran should be offered the same thing as Egypt!" when they already have. Then several people chime in on how right the person who made the remark is, while everybody else starts slapping them on the back. Then somebody states that "several times in this thread" somebody made such a statement, but it really just seemed that way because it was everybody agreeing with the statement made just once...

But you can pretend that it makes you "right" and me "wrong" when all it did was make an original assertion somewhat incorrect.
 
Damocles said:
Works for me... It doesn't change the validity of my statement. It happens all too often on these sites where one side gains so much strength in numbers that they often get away with blanket statements like, "Well Iran should be offered the same thing as Egypt!" when they already have. Then several people chime in on how right the person who made the remark is, while everybody else starts slapping them on the back. Then somebody states that "several times in this thread" somebody made such a statement, but it really just seemed that way because it was everybody agreeing with the statement made just once...

But you can pretend that it makes you "right" and me "wrong" when all it did was make an original assertion somewhat incorrect.
Click to expand...

"Well Iran should be offered the same thing as Egypt!"

You put this in quotes, but care didn't acutally say those words. To me, her post sounded like she was simply thinking out loud - and exploring all the various upsides and downsides to potential american actions. There was no definitive statemment that we "should" be helping Iran build a civilian nuke project.
 
Cypress said:
"Well Iran should be offered the same thing as Egypt!"

You put this in quotes, but care didn't acutally say those words. To me, her post sounded like she was simply thinking out loud - and exploring all the various upsides and downsides to potential american actions. There was no definitive statemment that we "should" be helping Iran build a civilian nuke project.
Click to expand...
I also stated that is wasn't a quote by saying something LIKE. You really don't get similes do you?
 
I'm just giving you crap, becasue you totally exaggerated damo.

There weren't "several" liberals on the thread, saying we should help iran build nuclear plants.

And Not one liberal has ever said we should beg the iranians to let the inspectors in. The inspectors are already in.

I most certain did say Iran has a right to civilian nuclear power. This is the same as Bush's stated postition. As long as they play by the rules.

Saying you have a right to own a firearm, doesn't mean I'm going the "help" you get a gun.
 
Cypress said:
I'm just giving you crap, becasue you totally exaggerated damo.

There weren't "several" liberals on the thread, saying we should help iran build nuclear plants.

And Not one liberal has ever said we should beg the iranians to let the inspectors in. The inspectors are already in.

I most certain did say Iran has a right to civilian nuclear power. This is the same as Bush's stated postition. As long as they play by the rules.

Saying you have a right to own a firearm, doesn't mean I'm going the "help" you get a gun.
Click to expand...
Right, I admitted to it. Exaggeration isn't a crime, nor does it limit the validity of my actual meaning.
 
Cypress said:
Good point. I hadn't thought of that.

Could be a carrot to iran. Officially, our policy is that iran does have a right to civilian nuclear power, as long as they play nice by their international treaty obligations.

I think some NeoCons just want war though.
Click to expand...
The inspectors are not "in", their limited access is part of the whole bid deal there. This is totally an exaggeration of your own.

The "same deal" as that of Egypt is exactly that...

You can "give me crap" but it doesn't change the fact that everybody was backslapping agreement on a totally inaccurate statement before I made the remark.

And you once again mistook a simile for a statement of fact. Actually read my original statement, you'll see that I said they can say some thing "like"...

In fact you were even one of the backslappers with this remark:

"Good point. I hadn't thought of that.

Could be a carrot to iran. Officially, our policy is that iran does have a right to civilian nuclear power, as long as they play nice by their international treaty obligations.

I think some NeoCons just want war though."

Notice the part about playing nice? *ahem* that's where things "like" if they just do this then we'll help them came along... Did you notice it? I did. It was after Care's, "and now we are going to help Egypt get nuclear Power while we deny Iran the same?" (this time it is a direct quote)...

Now we start seeing where I came up with my remark... Hmmm... Maybe I didn't exaggerate all that much then, hmmmm? ;)
 
Okay, Damo.

All your assertions about what posters on the thread said, were 100% accurate ;)

Can we move on now?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top