Angry US says Iran must end nuclear program in two weeks

[Neil D]

By Frank Walker and agencies

March 12, 2006

Page 1 of 2

So, how are we gonna stop this?

THE United States is pushing the United Nations Security Council to give Iran a two-week deadline to halt nuclear work that could be related to the making of weapons.

The ultimatum to Iran to step down from its nuclear defiance or face sanctions could come as soon as Friday when the 15 members of the Security Council meet in New York.

A draft text prepared for the council by European nations yesterday said Iran should "without delay re-establish full, sustained and verifiable suspension of all enrichment-related and reprocessing [for plutonium] activities" with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

Prime Minister John Howard has said Iran's program should be referred to the UN and it would be a test of the UN's effectiveness. But he believes it is too early to talk of sanctions.

With Russia and China opposing direct action, the Security Council is unlikely to rush into sanctions. It is likely first to urge Iran to accept IAEA demands that it halt all uranium enrichment work.

But the US is increasing the pressure to force Iran to step back from its refusal to co-operate with the IAEA.

US President George Bush yesterday labelled Iran a "grave national security concern" as its leader, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, had stated a desire to destroy Israel.

[Bravus]

I was a bit mystified by Bush's speech, just because 'Israel' and 'national security' (for the US) seem like different issues. Not a Bush-bash, just a comment... and I still think I hear a distant drumbeat.

[Ron Lambert]

Someething will have to be done about Iran. If the US and other nations do not, then Israel certainly will. Iran has rockets which can reach Israel. Iran has called for the destruction of Israel. If Iran is working to develop nuclear warheads that could be placed on those missiles, then Israel must act.

[Bravus]

But Iran has repeatedly claimed its nuclear program is for peaceful uses, and the IAEA seems to be confirming that. The argument that 'we will decide which nations can and cannot have nuclear power stations' is worrying.

[Dr. Shane]

The problem with Iran is that they support terrorists. That is the difference between China or the Philipians getting nuclear weapons and Iran.

[bevin]

The USA supports terrorists, and we have nuclear weapons

/Bevin

[lazarus]

Haven't we heard all of this before....Its strangly familiar.

Indulge me a little while. i've changed Iran for Iraq in the following posts .

Ron said....

Quote:

---

Someething will have to be done about

Iraq

. If the US and other nations do not, then Israel certainly will.

Iraq

has rockets which can reach Israel.

Iraq

has called for the destruction of Israel. If

Iraq

is working to develop nuclear warheads that could be placed on those missiles, then Israel must act.

---

Shane said...

Quote:

---

The problem with

Iraq

is that they support terrorists

---

As you listen to Bush, Condi et al its the same old stuff.... and we are falling for it all over again.

Then there are the house democrats who spinelessly follow only to bleet in couple of years when thing go horribly wrong. If the US WAS and IS dead wrong about Iraq why do we believe we will and are dead right about Iran?

Why should the American people let this woefully shortsighted and incompetent administration lead them into another war?