Non-Aligned Movement on Iran nuclear issue

Akhundi

your concerns could be real if US ever spoke out against Russia, China
or Pakistan having nuclear weapons.

It is too late to do anything about those countries.

These unelected despots have actual
weapons that can anhilate America by ballistic missiles or terrorism.
Soviet Union was even worst.

None of those, including teh Soviets, ever had a death wish. Can you say the same for the IRI? Honestly?

Therefore, no one can take any American
seriously when they have concern over Iran's nuclear ENERGY program.

Energy program? Is this the part where I'm supposed to laugh? Even the people who claim they believe the IRI only wants nuclear energy, don't. You don't believe it either, Akhundi. Reading between the lines of your comment, it isn't hard to see that you yourself are defending the IRI's right (as you see it) to nuclear WEAPONS. Is that just nationalism, or do you actually wnat to see the IRI use those weaposn, once it possesses them? 

Mr. Programmer Craig

your concerns could be real if US ever spoke out against Russia, China or Pakistan having nuclear weapons. These unelected despots have actual weapons that can anhilate America by ballistic missiles or terrorism. Soviet Union was even worst. Therefore, no one can take any American seriously when they have concern over Iran's nuclear ENERGY program.

Actually most of the world thinks it must not be that big a deal if US is faily cozy with some unelected despots but not others.

world community

Good to see that NAM is speaking out. It is so irritating to see the US administration and its handful of cronies speak on behalf of the "world community". I noticed that they pull the "world community" stuff whenever they want to push around other countries that are actually part of a larger "world community."

AnonymousAnonymous

Well, I personally wish that nobody had nuclear weapons. But I find it particularly alarming when un-elected despots have access to technology that could literally end human existance. Nobody has any control over what quality of person is running the show in a country like that, and tyrants tend to be mentally ill... generally speaking. Crazy people don't mix well with nuclear warheads.

You state: "Freedom and

You state: "Freedom and nuclear technology, when it come to Iran, are mutually exclusive because this issue was never put to vote by a democratically elected parliament and thesfore is not a freely chosen path to fuel technology.

Sorry that I had to disappoint you but when there is no basic freedom in a country, like Iran, all decisons are taken without the vote of the people. Period."

Which countries with nuclear technology have subjected their nuclear programs to a parliamentary vote? Democracy is the best form of government, but it is absurd to imply (as you appear to do) that any decision not subjected to a "democratic" parliamentary vote has no legitimacy. Was the decision to mobilize in self-defense after the Iraqi invasion of 1980 also illegitimate? Are all decisions taken by the IRI illegitimate? Perhaps, the Iranian people should have halted any decision-making during the Iran-Iraq war pending the arrival of "a democratically elected parliament"?

The bottom line is that Iran's nuclear program can help advance Iran's energy, strategic, and (if need be) its self-defense interests. What business do Iranian emigrants, as we both seem to be, have in seeking to oppose such a program?

AnonymousAnonymous are you kidding?

The nuclear technology cannot replace more than 10-12 percent of oil consumption and this is at a much higher cost than using fossil fuels. Besides, you obviously do not live in Iran otherwise you wouldn't have said what you said. At present, we are not using our own oil for domestic consumption. Car fuel, or gas as you American boys would call it, is IMPORTED from Russia and Syria. So what are you talking about? It was bad enough for the Pahalvi regime to have access to atomic bomb, it is hundred times worse for the IRI to have the A-bomb. Freedom and nuclear technology, when it come to Iran, are mutually exclusive because this issue was never put to vote by a democratically elected parliament and thesfore is not a freely chosen path to fuel technology .

Sorry that I had to disappoint you but when there is no basic freedom in a country, like Iran, all decisons are taken without the vote of the people. Period.

"Free Thinker": how about the right of defense against invasion

The "right to freedom" (which both the IRI and the monarchy denied the Iranian people) and the "right to atomic technology" are not mutually exclusive. Iran can have both. We can support Iran's drive for nuclear technology (which was initiated by the Pahlavi regime) and it's pursuit of greater freedoms. If Iran can attain nuclear power, then it will have more of its oil available for export rather than for domestic consumption--this was precisely the argument used by the Shah's regime for its nuclear program, and U.S. administrations at that time supported the Shah's views.

What inaliegnable right?

Which one is ore of a right. he right to freedom or the right to atomic technology? The right to feed ourselves or the right to atomic bomb?

PS

Close their embassy now.

Closing embassies rather than storming them and taking the diplomats hostage would certainly be a step in the right direction! I fully support you on that!

Judge Judy

For as long as Iran has not attacked anyone, all accusations are mere balogny and for intimidation.

That is simply untrue. If a nuclear attack was required to "prove" an intent to build nuclear weapons, the International Atomic Energy Agency wouldn't exist. There wouldn't be any need for it to exist, because the hostile intent would be self-evident.

First things First,

Before the British we need to get rig of these clowns that are running the country. Mullah's got to go.

well

It doesn't matter what they THINK, what matters is the "inalienable right". For as long as Iran has not attacked anyone, all accusations are mere balogny and for intimidation. For as long as the British rule Iran we will continue to have such problems with the world and opium all over our country and corruption records. Let's get the British out of our motherland once and for all. Close their embassy now.

has in this statement

has in this statement "reaffirmed the basic and inalienable right of
all states to develop research, production and use of atomic energy for
peaceful purposes...

That's the crux of the problem right there, isn't it? None of the countries that might feel threatened by an Iran with nuclear weapons believe that Iran has "peaceful purposes" in mind. I don't think there are even very many Iranians who believe that. I could be wrong.