Could the IAEA be anymore toothless?

[Xiahou]

Diplomats, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to be quoted, made clear that insufficient progress by Sept. 3 could lead the board to consider reporting Iran to the
U.N. Security Council, which has the power to slap the regime with crippling sanctions.

So, Iran is in violation of it's treaties and had been running a covert nuclear program, now they do it flagrantly out in the open and the best the IAEA can do is "We'll let you go to it for another month.... but THEN we just might, maybe, think about reporting you to the security council if you don't stop, or at least talk about stopping, maybe."? Yeah guys, that'll learn em.

LINK

[Devastatin Dave]

P###ies....

[Louis VI the Fat]

I, er...I hope that the US will completely by-pass the UN-security council, takes no heed of world opinion and launches a pre-emptive strike against Iran to stop it from gaining WMD's.

The world doesn't need nuclear-armed ayatollahs.

I seriously do, I'm not being sarcastic


Dang! 500 posts.

[Don Corleone]

Louis mon ami...what are you saying, bête? You could lose your citizenship for taking such a stance!!! Non, non, non. When you find yourself agreeing with an American administration, particularly a Republican one, you must seek psychiatric help! Les américains est toujours erroné.

We've talked about this numerous times in the Backroom. No way the US/UK are going it alone again. If it's not another coalition, consider Iran nuclear armed.

[Al Khalifah]

*sigh* looks like another case for the World Police to sort out.

[Louis VI the Fat]

Louis mon ami...what are you saying, bête? You could lose your citizenship for taking such a stance!!! Non, non, non. When you find yourself agreeing with an American administration, particularly a Republican one, you must seek psychiatric help! Les américains est toujours erroné.

Non, pas toujours!

And I don't need to seek psychiatric help. I need to seek political asylum if they ever find out...

[Goofball]

Louis mon ami...what are you saying, bête? You could lose your citizenship for taking such a stance!!! Non, non, non. When you find yourself agreeing with an American administration, particularly a Republican one, you must seek psychiatric help! Les américains est toujours erroné.

We've talked about this numerous times in the Backroom. No way the US/UK are going it alone again. If it's not another coalition, consider Iran nuclear armed.

Sorry Don, but I'm just curious: When was the last time the US/UK had to "go it alone" disarming a nuclear power?

Aside from that, I agree: the U.N. needs more teeth. But since only the U.S. really has the power to give it teeth, I guess it will never happen.

[Redleg]

Aside from that, I agree: the U.N. needs more teeth. But since only the U.S. really has the power to give it teeth, I guess it will never happen.

The United Nations did not want to do the right thing for 14 years in regards to Iraq - and the United States is blamed for the United Nations failures to enforce not one resolution - but 14 of them. But if the United Nations want more teeth - it is up to the United States to give it more teeth.

Now that is funny in my opinion. The United Nations failed in its obligations to meet its own charter not once but several times. Why should the United States give it any more teeth - when as a body its failed to meet its own imposed resolutions and enforce its own resolutions against other member nations.

It needs reformed and revamped - not given more teeth in its current corrupted form.

[Xiahou]

Indeed, it won't be the US that blocks UN action on Iran. And it isn't the US that is blocking UN action in the Sudan. But I guess it's fashionable to blame us nonetheless.

[AntiochusIII]

So, Iran is in violation of it's treaties and had been running a covert nuclear program, now they do it flagrantly out in the open and the best the IAEA can do is "We'll let you go to it for another month.... but THEN we just might, maybe, think about reporting you to the security council if you don't stop, or at least talk about stopping, maybe."? Yeah guys, that'll learn em.

LINK

To answer your question (the topic title), yes, they CAN be more toothless.

But, true, this is pathetic. The UN should've got something done already had it not been because too many people would lose their own precious nuclear programs if Iran is to stop. Iran is just playing the usual game and everybody knows that. Look at North Korea for example! Those bunch of bastards are destabilizing the region already, with or with the nuclear bombs. It could've been easier just to do it the Israeli way though, bomb [only] the facilities to hell and see what can THEY (Iran, North Korea, and those bunch of government-based nuclear-loving fanatics) complain about after that, and who will care to listen.

Your (US) military is capable of that, isn't it. And (no sarcasm nor offense intended, honest) Bush proves he is capable of aggressively doing something reckless and blunt. Just what we need now.

[drone]

It could've been easier just to do it the Israeli way though, bomb [only] the facilities to hell and see what can THEY (Iran, North Korea, and those bunch of government-based nuclear-loving fanatics) complain about after that, and who will care to listen.

What's to keep the Isrealis from doing it again? A large portion of their flight path has now become "friendly skies"...

[Red Harvest]

Don't look for the U.S. to do anything on this one. The Iraqi WMD claims have effectively hamstrung any authority we might have had on such issues.

I guess we'll have to leave it up to the French. Lord help us.

[Proletariat]

Thanks, UN. Told ya so.

[Strike For The South]

I guess we'll have to leave it up to the French. Lord help us.

[Papewaio]

It was made toothless by the powers that set it up so that they themselves could not be told no more testing... French South Pacific Nuclear testing anyone...

This is what happens when a rubber stamp commission is setup. Eventually they rubber stamp something that isn't so palatable.

[Proletariat]

If 9/11 proved anything, it proved that doing nothing isn't "the safe play"; very often "doing nothing" is what gets us killed.

If we do nothing, we don't just empower Iran, we empower every other tin horn dictatorship to spend every dime so they can get to the 'nuclear safe zone'. The belief will be that once you go nuclear the Americans must talk to you. If we allow this to be the standard we guarantee hundreds of other states with nuclear weapons. You might be prepared for a nuclear Iran, but are you prepared for a nuclear Venezuela, Cuba, Zimbabwe, Egypt, Saudi Royal Family? I don't even want these guys in the Admirals Club at JFK much less sitting across the negotiating table saying "we got nukes - give us 5 billion dollars -or else".

We pushed Iran over once before with a little help from our friends in the CIA. I would think with the help of 70,000 Persian expats we could do a pretty good job of throwing them off balance. We must end this menace, quickly. For our sake and for the sake of the Iranian people who if we do nothing will be condemned for another generation to live under the rule of the mullahs. We cannot allow another generation to live in the taliban-lite nightmare that comes from Tehran, not just for their sake, but because by allowing it we condemn ourselves and their neighbors to eventual all out nuclear warfare.

I've said it before, our only choice here is fighting them when they have the bomb or fighting them before they have the bomb, you only have to decide which of those scenarios have odds that favor our success.

Iran has no moral order which will keep them from using the bomb. If we let them get the bomb, they will use the bomb. They will use it on us.

Unlike Pakistan which has the deterrent of Nuclear India, Iran has no opposing nuclear force on its border. As far as "Israel as an opposing force", Iran welcomes a war with Israel, they are not deterred by the idea of a war with Israel, it's their actual goal.

Action in Iran is going to happen, one way or the other.

[Adrian II]

So, Iran is in violation of it's treaties and had been running a covert nuclear program, now they do it flagrantly out in the open and the best the IAEA can do is "We'll let you go to it for another month...

The issue is not that Iran is demonstrably developing a nuclear weapon. Tehran has hidden its uranium enrichment programme for 18 years, but this secrecy has now ostensibly come to an end and enriching uranium for fuel is perfectly legal under any international treaty, all the more so if it takes place under the watchful eye of the IAEA.

An Iranian secret nuclear weapons programme can not be ruled out because the IAEA 'is not yet in a position to conclude that there are no undeclared nuclear materials or activities in Iran' (quote from yesterday's IAEA-statement).

Iran has now restarted its nuclear fuel development programme openly, not secretly. And for most of the 'world community' this is not a big deal. Many countries are doing the same, and many others are (re)considering the development of a nuclear weapon as a possible outcome of their peaceful atomic programmes. Iran has all the more reason to do so because it is 'surrounded' by nuclear powers (Russia, China, Pakistan, Israel and the United States) and likely future nuclear powers (Turkey, Saudi Arabia).