Iran Ready To Enter 'Serious' Talks

But News Agency Reports Tehran Unwilling To Abandon Nuclear Enrichment

(CBS/AP)  Iran said Tuesday it was ready for "serious negotiations" on its nuclear program, but a semi-official news agency reported the government was unwilling to abandon nuclear enrichment — the key U.S. demand.

Ali Larijani, the country's top nuclear negotiator, delivered a written response to ambassadors of Britain, China, Russia, France, Germany and Switzerland to a package of incentives aimed at persuading Iran to roll back on its nuclear program.

Larijani refused to disclose whether the response included an offer to suspend uranium enrichment, and no details of Iran's response were released. The state-run television quoted Larijani as telling the diplomats Iran "is prepared as of Aug. 23rd to enter serious negotiations" with the countries that proposed the incentives package.

But the semi-official Fars news agency reported that Iran rejected calls to suspend "nuclear activities" — or uranium enrichment — and "instead has offered a new formula to resolve the issues through dialogue."

Administration officials believe that by offering to talk, Iran is playing for time — and trying to give its trading partners Russia and China a good excuse to vote against sanctions in the U.N. Security Council, reports CBS News senior White House correspondent Bill Plante.

Iran delivered its response to the incentives offer nine days before a Security Council deadline for Iran to halt uranium enrichment or face economic and political sanctions.

The White House deferred comment on the Iranian government's response.

"The Security Council's deadline is Aug. 31. I'm not going to parse the Iranian government's document today here on the airplane," White House deputy press secretary Dana Perino said on Air Force One as President Bush flew to an appearance in Minnesota. "That is a job best left to the diplomats."

She said the U.S. government has received a copy of the document, but that she doesn't believe the president had seen it yet.

"We are aware of the rhetoric that has been coming out of the regime about a nuclear program and the president made very clear to everyone yesterday in his press conference that he thinks that that would be a mistake and dangerous for the region and the whole world," she added. "So let's let the diplomats take a look at this response before we parse it out too much here."

The European Union's foreign policy chief, Javier Solana, said the Iranian document was "extensive" and required "a detailed and careful analysis." He did not elaborate or provide any details.

In New York, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton, said Washington will "study the Iranian response carefully" but was prepared to move forward with sanctions against Tehran if its response to the incentives package was not positive.

[three-o-six]

What kind of rhetorical nonsense are you spouting here? With one sentence you recognize the UN's authority to govern in world matters. Yet you pronounce Israel as an "illegally" sanctioned nation. Do I need to remind you that it was the UN that legally recognized Israel in 1948? If it not the UN who decides what is a "legal" nation, then who does? What constitutes a legal nation? Who decides? Does your opinion count?
Not really. In the end "Brute Forc"%u201D decides and that is what this whole thing is about.

[three-o-six]

What kind of rhetorical nonsense are you spouting here? With one sentence you recognize the UN%u2019s authority to govern in world matters. Yet you pronounce Israel as an %u201Cillegally%u201D sanctioned nation. Do I need to remind you that it was the UN that legally recognized Israel in 1948? If it not the UN who decides what is a %u201Clegal%u201D nation then who is it? What constitutes a legal nation? Who decides? Does your opinion count?
Not really. In the end %u201CBrute Force%u201D decides and that is what this whole thing is about.

[three-o-six]

What kind of rhetorical nonsense are you spouting here? With one sentence you recognize the UN%u2019s authority to govern in world matters. Yet you pronounce Israel as an %u201Cillegally%u201D sanctioned nation. Do I need to remind you that it was the UN that legally recognized Israel in 1948? If it not the UN who decides what is a %u201Clegal%u201D nation then who is it? What constitutes a legal nation? Who decides? Does your opinion count?
Not really. In the end %u201CBrute Force%u201D decides and that is what this whole thing is about.

[reuben110-2009]

Having said that I do agree with Ronnie surprisingly enough, we do need guarentees that Iran will stop enrichment, in fact I would go so far as to say, Irans capabilities ought to be dismantled. However again, suspension should not be a pre-requisite, its us who are doing the requesting here. Why should they accept something that effectively says, you suspend your inalienable right under international law, and we may provide you with an off you may find accetable. We need guarentees, and pronto, so we must offer something that Iran accepts. Not the other way around.

[reuben110-2009]

Moreover, allow me to re-iterate, again it appears we want confrontation by the sound of our tone. We are derogatory, and we are coming across as too arrogant. The UN is a world body, not a US body, we make it sound like sanctions are a foregone conclusion, whereas the resolution states sanctions maybe applicable, not definately applicable, provided Irans business partners agree and do not veto. Again our stratey here is typical of our ludricous foreign policy. The truth is we want to attack Iran. So we are hoping they expand enrichment to provide us with an alliby.

And finally Ronnie, countries that steal oil(oil exports from Iraq to US up 186% IN THE PAST 24 MONTHS) are rightly accused of trying to dominate the oil supply, especially when the same country uses 40% of the worlds production, in my book that is a fair accusation, irrespective of whether the accusing country possesses oil or not. Not hypocritical, its unfortunately factual!

[reuben110-2009]

Firstly it is important to note that what Ahadinejad has said can be described as nothing short of inflammatory. 2 comments specifically,i have serious qualms with. The first I have forgiven him for, which was Isral should be wiped off the map. Now this may surprise many of you and rightly so, though in his defense I found that this comment was subject to opportune journalistic mistranslation that had the desired effect. It was an excerpt of a long speech, in which he was saying that Israel is an illegaly founded state, and because of its illegality it should be wiped off the map, and shifted, this is not what most people like to believe, a call for genocide.

Number 2, i still have a problem with him denying the holocaust, but again what he has said is fair, European jews died in the holocaust, not middle-easterners, what part did Palestine lay in this process? Why i it them that are paying the price? That is fair. However, he still denied a fact, though I think it would be amusing to allow him to send an impartial team to investigate!

So comments aside, as they seem to be used as propaganda, Ronnie says Iranian troops and weapons seem to turn up at random places. May I point out if that statement is not applicable to the US, I dont know what is.

cont....

[ronniehm]

In light of recent comments about wiping Israel off the map, I think we need guarantees that a nuclear weapons program cannot be developed in Iran. Guarantees, not promises. Considering how Iranian weapons and soldiers just seem to pop up in all the strangest places, I think Iran has the responsibility to provide that guarantee.

I don't get the oil thing. Sounds like paranoia. I can say that it makes me a little nauseous to hear countries that dominate the oil supply accuse anyone of trying to dominate the oil supply. That's just plain hypocrisy.

[reuben110-2009]

We are supposed to be a beacon of the civilised world. As uranium enrichment is in their hands, and it is us that are requesting suspension, why are we talking about suspension as a pre-requisite, its up to us to offer Iran a deal that will evoke suspension, not a tone that says stop what you have an inalienable right of producing and then we may offer you something you may see as acceptable.

They do not feel threatened by us, and why shoul they, sanctions isn't something new for Iran, Iran knows sanctions will be a bitter blow for Russia, and China and oil prices. The current resolution says, sanctions MAY be applicable, it doesnt say definately applicable or even likely to be applicable, they see our tone as a bullying tactic, and you can bet your bottom dollar that it sure as hell does not cut the mustard in Tehran.

I dont know how many high-IQ employees from the Ivy League the White House currently employs, but you would think and hope one of them will have the common sense to convince somebody higher up the pecking order to change their tone, because our tone illustrates, as usual, we are again interested in confrontation that leads to yet another oil robberry, Iran is having none of it. And rightly so. Lets offer them something worthwhile, and get inspectors in that not only monitor, but dismantle their current capabilities, its a situation that requires tact, not the foolishness that is so typical of our country's political strategy.

[jms_cheung]

The UN and EU leaders seem to be CRAZY and STUPID today? WHY? Instead of punishing terrorist states like Iran for making nuclear bombs, they are offering lucrative economic packages to them if they stop the uranium enrichment! Such silly approach is indeed dumb and stupid, for it only ENCOURAGE other terrorist states to start making `nuclear bombs' and thus qualified to blackmail the UN, US & European Union to offer them `lucrative economic packages'. The only sensible thing to do now to STOP global terrorism is for the the US & NATO to assume the absolute authority to PRE-EMPT (aerial bombardments) all Iranian nuclear facilities...thus solved the problem ...instead of having UNENDING silly UN meetings which GO NOWHERE..until Iran has invented the N-bomb!
This pre-emption against Iran is a deterrent and warning to all terrorist states which try to secretly make nuclear bombs!

[grazinggoat]

I'll provide a box of Kleenex for far more...

[ronniehm]

Thank you. I owe you one sneeze.

[grazinggoat]

U're just a good kid, Ronnie. Bless you...

[ronniehm]

Well, it's your information to share or not to share, but it sure seems like I'm the one being profiled if you can't trust me with it. Anyway, in my 38 years, I've been to just about every state in America too. I've also been to more than two dozen countries (visiting friends mostly), and I wouldn't hitchhike in a single one of them. Hell, I wouldn't even stop for gas between major cities in some of the countries I've visited.

[grazinggoat]

I know the states more than what you think. I was born here. That's all you need to know. I saw and still see what's going on. The changes are going on more than ever, but matter of fact we still have the freedom, many would die for... We are shifting toward something really not nice, if the states continue this way. Can you still hitch-hike in the states? Touring the States from top to bottom from East to West. Being welcome in each and every home? Maybe you're too young to remember. My kids cannot now... Can you? can your kids? Would you let them do that?

Luckily and hopefully we'll change that guy from the administration by the next elections.

[ronniehm]

British English: " ... our Gendarma and dictator behaviour ..."

You know, you're working awfully hard to avoid answering a simple question. So far I know your parents came from somewhere else and that you received some American training in genetics. Also, you're very afraid the answer will result in racial profiling. Try me. I may prove that you don't know what you think you know about me or America.

[ronniehm]

British English: " ... our Gendarma and dictator behaviour ..."

You know, you're working awfully hard to avoid answering a simple question. So far I know your parents came from somewhere else and that you received some American training in genetics. Also, you're very afraid the answer will result in racial profiling. Try me. I may prove that you don't know what you think you know about me or America.

[grazinggoat]

Yo RonnieMH, I've never said such a thing. Didn't say I'm followed by the secret services whatsoever. I'm not, and I'm not worth the secret service time ;)

What makes you say this is a british english? Don't know but when time comes to writing, I do things differently. I have had training here in America, in genetics, and focibly when you go into this type of environment you think differently, write differently. U ask questions. Why is this so?. Why is not that so? I watch a lot of foreign news. www.BBC.co.UK, www.CBC.ca our northern neighbours, and of course I read newspapers Left and Right... there you go Ronnie

[ronniehm]

There you go again. You've judged my question based on your opinion of me. Actually, I was just wondering where you picked up all the British English. It might help me understand why you think the secret service is following you. It also might make me wonder why you live in a country that you think resembles the Soviet Union. I've lived here all my life, and my wife grew up behind the Iron Curtain, so it's fascinating to us that anyone could claim there's any similarity whatsoever. We have first-hand experience. Where did you get your information about America and the Soviet Union?

[grazinggoat]

Before you continue asking a silly question such as where from. Think twice: I hope you're not into racial profiling...

[grazinggoat]

RonnieHM,
my parents came in Amercia probably at the same time than your parents came too...