HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says ...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 10:31 AM

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says Iran ready for nuclear talks with US

Last edited Sun Feb 10, 2013, 12:41 PM - Edit history (3)

Source: The Guardian.

Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, said Sunday that he is ready to have talks with United States if the West stops pressuring his country. His remarks constituted the latest in a series of hints from leaders in both Washington and Tehran about the prospect of direct bilateral negotiations over the Islamic Republic's controversial nuclear program. However, Washington is highly unlikely to relax sanctions on Iran and Tehran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has final say on key state decisions, says that his country won't negotiate under threat. This makes it hard to envision how talks could take place.

Ahmadinejad is in his final months of his term of office and his followers are weakened by a feud with the Islamic Republic's clerical establishment. His latest statement, which implies that he is an equal player with Khamenei in foreign policy matters, may simply be an attempt to appear as though he is still politically relevant.

"You pull away the gun from the face of the Iranian nation, and I myself will enter the talks with you," Ahmadinejad said at a ceremony marking the 34th anniversary of the 1979 revolution that toppled a Western-backed monarch and ushered in the Islamic Republic.

He said the West had recently taken a "better" tone toward Iran a nod to statements made by vice president Joe Biden last week, in which he said the United States was prepared talk directly to Iran. But the Iranian president said this was not enough. The West claims Iran's nuclear activities are aimed at developing weapons. Iran denies it seeks atomic arms, saying its nuclear fuel is only for energy-producing reactors and medical applications, and insists that its operations will continue.

Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/feb/10/mahmoud-ahmadinejad-iran-nuclear-talks-us



It's an Iranian version of "Good Cop, Bad Cop?"

22 replies, 3132 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 22 replies Author Time Post
Reply Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says Iran ready for nuclear talks with US (Original post)
another_liberal Feb 2013 OP
sulphurdunn Feb 2013 #1
another_liberal Feb 2013 #2
sulphurdunn Feb 2013 #4
another_liberal Feb 2013 #6
pampango Feb 2013 #3
sulphurdunn Feb 2013 #5
John2 Feb 2013 #7
Dreamer Tatum Feb 2013 #15
sulphurdunn Feb 2013 #17
daleo Feb 2013 #8
Behind the Aegis Feb 2013 #9
awoke_in_2003 Feb 2013 #10
daleo Feb 2013 #12
sulphurdunn Feb 2013 #18
Behind the Aegis Feb 2013 #19
sulphurdunn Feb 2013 #20
another_liberal Feb 2013 #11
sulphurdunn Feb 2013 #21
another_liberal Feb 2013 #22
quadrature Feb 2013 #13
24601 Feb 2013 #14
Beacool Feb 2013 #16

Response to another_liberal (Original post)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 12:29 PM

1. Oh no!

Something like that could endanger the global strategy of the warmongering neocon chickenhawks who are eternally impatient to invest the blood of others in wars from which they profit in dollars.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sulphurdunn (Reply #1)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 12:46 PM

2. Subtext . . .?

Last edited Sun Feb 10, 2013, 02:51 PM - Edit history (2)

It seems there's a subtext of sarcasm?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Reply #2)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 01:46 PM

4. No subtext.

No sarcasm. Not even hyperbole. Just fact. Ask the maimed. Unfortunately, you can't ask the dead.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sulphurdunn (Reply #4)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 02:49 PM

6. Yes, . . .

Yes, it is at least that bad, and all done in our name.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sulphurdunn (Reply #1)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 01:07 PM

3. Not to worry. "Supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei rebuffs US offer of direct talks."

Supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei says talks suggested by US vice-president would not solve the problem between them.

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's supreme leader, has turned down an offer of direct talks made by US Vice-President Joe Biden this week, saying they would not solve the problem between them.

"Some naive people like the idea of negotiating with America, however, negotiations will not solve the problem," Khamenei said in a speech to officials and members of Iran's air force carried on his official website.

"American policy in the Middle East has been destroyed and Americans now need to play a new card. That card is dragging Iran into negotiations."

"That offer stands but it must be real and tangible," Biden said in a speech in Munich.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2013/02/20132712135063966.html


Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is on his way out and has never had the power that Khamenei has. Ahmadinejad talks but no one in the Iranian government listens to him.

Our warmonging neocon chickenhawks and Iran's hard liners keep each other in business with right wing rhetoric. Khamenei is the real power in Iran so the dance will continue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pampango (Reply #3)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 01:49 PM

5. It seems like

Ahmadinejad is always on his way out but never gone.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sulphurdunn (Reply #5)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 03:28 PM

7. Maybe he has just

 

been a tool of the clerics. It is not a Democracy as long as the clerics have supreme power. If you want an example of a government that mixes religion with Politics, Iran is a good example for those who want to do it in this country. It is no different than any other dictatorship.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sulphurdunn (Reply #1)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 01:15 PM

15. What year do you think this is? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dreamer Tatum (Reply #15)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 08:28 PM

17. You tell me,

and I'll tell you if you're right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Original post)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 05:51 PM

8. Maybe that means they have a few bombs in a safe place

And thus can negotiate from a stronger position. Not that they would come out and say that on the record. If so, they would be following Israel's example of having a bomb, sending signals to that effect, but never coming out and saying so exactly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to daleo (Reply #8)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 06:15 PM

9. The only difference, which so many here seem to "forget,...

...is Israel isn't a signatory of the NPT, Iran is

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Behind the Aegis (Reply #9)


Response to Behind the Aegis (Reply #9)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 11:53 PM

12. In relation to my post that distinction doesn't really matter

I was talking about the actual possession of nuclear weapons and the ramifications on real world negotiations, not legalities such as the NPT. I would say that the NPT becomes moot once a country has working survivable nukes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Behind the Aegis (Reply #9)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 08:43 PM

18. That puts Israel

in the same club with other peaceful, luminary non-NPT states like North Korea, India and Pakistan. If US News and World Report had a "most likely to start WWIII" ranking, these countries would be ranked 1 through 4. No wonder the Iranians want nukes. If they had them, it would also dissuade conventional attacks from Israel and the US the neocons want so desperately.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sulphurdunn (Reply #18)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 12:26 AM

19. So it makes it OK in your book. Good to know, and hardly surprising.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Behind the Aegis (Reply #19)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 11:33 AM

20. It doesn't make it

anything in my book. It just is. "Good to know, and hardly surprising," says more about your values than mine.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to daleo (Reply #8)

Sun Feb 10, 2013, 11:46 PM

11. They have radiation weapons . . .

I'm reasonably certain they have radiation weapons, not nuclear bombs but "dirty warheads." If one went off over a city, though, nobody would be living there for a long while.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Reply #11)

Wed Feb 13, 2013, 07:33 PM

21. We have thousands

of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, possibly a stockpile big enough kill most if not all life on earth. That's a pretty strong deterrent to anyone who is sane, and I think whatever else the Iranian leadership's shortcomings, collective suicidal madness is not one of them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sulphurdunn (Reply #21)

Wed Feb 13, 2013, 07:39 PM

22. No doubt . . .

There is no doubt that for any other country to attack the United States would be madness. Iran's leaders must realize were they to use any kind of WMD on our soil, they would have only have hours to live.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Original post)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 02:29 AM

13. c'mon...next step..argue about

the shape of the table

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Original post)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 01:02 PM

14. Yes, all we have to do is convert everyone in the US to (Sh ia) Islam, provide tactical

nuclear weapons to The Lebanese Hizballah, drop a 10 MT nuke on Tel Aviv and Riyadh - and deport Jimmy Carter to Iran to face justice for protecting the Shah. What a generous offer.

Do I really needs to say it?...sarcasm.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Original post)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 02:52 PM

16. It seems that they first need to sort out their own power struggles.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread