Ahmadinejad to Annan: We won't halt enrichment
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad favors negotiations on his country's nuclear program but won't halt uranium enrichment ahead of talks, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan said Sunday after meeting the leader.
'On the nuclear issue, the president reaffirmed to me Iran's preparedness and commitment to hold negotiations' with western powers to find a solution to the impasse over Tehran's nuclear activities, Annan said.
However, Ahmadinejad 'reiterated that he did not accept suspension before negotiations,' Annan told a joint press conference with Iranian Foreign Minister Manoucher Mottaki." Read more.
For those of you who haven't been able to connect the dots yet, this should help spell it out to you as to why Iran stalls and drags their feet on the negotiating of uranium enrichment. That's why in an earlier post I said diplomacy has produced no results other than delay, and delay is a result. And in this case it is the planned effect wanted by Iran. Delay is not really delay if it produces progress. If suspension is off the negotiating table and enrichment continues, then stalling becomes a tool. A tool of progress.
We have witnessed this before. We were unable to stop China in the '60s to develop nuclear weapons. We were unable to stop Pakistan, India, and North Korea in their quest. What are the prospects of us stopping Iran? We know the UN and the EU do not have the will to do it. The U.S. and Israel realistically would be the ones to act. Unfortunately, nuking Iran might be the only way to destroy their nuclear programs. Now I am not necessarily advocating this, I'm just saying it like it is.
We have to decide how important it is to stop Iran's quest. What are the consequences of Iran obtaining nuclear weapons? If acquiring nukes and either using them themselves, or letting the nukes fall into the hands of every 'Bin Laden - Zarqawi - Zawahiri - Nasrallah' wannabes that come along, so they can attack us, what choice do we have?
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home