U.S. Says Iran Offer Falls Short

France Agrees; Russia And China Back Call For Negotiations

(AP)  Iran urged Europe on Wednesday to pay attention to what it called "positive" signals in its counterproposal to a nuclear incentives package aimed at persuading Tehran to roll back its nuclear program. Russia and China backed Iran's call for negotiations to end the standoff.

But the United States and France said Tehran's offer falls short, setting the stage for a possible fight at the United Nations if the West pushes for sanctions.

Diplomats were studying the details of Iran's offer a day after Tehran presented it Tuesday without any detailed public comment. Iran's proposal offers negotiations on its nuclear program but apparently resists suspending uranium enrichment — the key Security Council demand to avoid sanctions.

A statement by the State Department acknowledged that Iran considered its proposal to be a serious one and "we will review it." But it went on to say that Iran's response "falls short of the conditions set by the Security Council."

Nevertheless, the Iranians on Wednesday sought to portray their detailed counteroffer as a major initiative that could lead to resolution of the year-long dispute without having to resort to a bruising fight over sanctions.

It appeared the counteroffer was designed to entice European countries, China and Russia into further negotiations without accepting a suspension of uranium enrichment — a key step in making nuclear weapons — as a precondition for talks.

That could drive a wedge among the five veto-wielding powers on the Security Council, with the Americans, British and French on one side and the Russians and Chinese on the other. Last month, Russia said the Security Council was in no rush to pressure Iran, striking a more conciliatory tone than the United States.

"If the Europeans pay proper attention to positive and clear signals included in Iran's response, the case will be solved through negotiation and without tension," state-controlled radio quoted Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi as saying Wednesday.

Asefi described Iran's proposal as a sign of his country's good will to resolve the standoff.

The dispute over Tehran's nuclear program revolves around Iran's insistence that it wants to master the technology simply to generate electricity. But critics say Iran is interested in enrichment because it wants to make nuclear weapons.

French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy said "the door is still open" for negotiations — but only if Iran suspends uranium enrichment first. German Foreign Ministry spokesman Martin Jaeger said the demand to halt enrichment indicated "that Iran clearly has lost the confidence of the international community that its nuclear program is civilian."

But Moscow and Beijing appeared receptive toward further talks. Russia's Foreign Ministry said it would continue to seek a negotiated solution, and China appealed for dialogue, urging “constructive measures” by Iran and patience from the United States and its allies.

Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Mikhail Kamynin said talk of sanctions was "premature" before the Aug. 31 deadline set by the Security Council for Iran to halt uranium enrichment or face the risk of economic and political sanctions.

"The Russian side has started studying the Iranian reply along with its partners in the sextet," Kamynin said in a statement, referring to the five permanent Security Council members plus Germany.

“Russia will continue with its course of searching for a political solution ... and will continue to seek to preserve the role of the International Atomic Energy Agency and prevent the erosion of the nonproliferation regime.”

[grazinggoat]

DoveyBush msut be sharpening his knife. There comes the pig. He just wants this opportunity to fall short in order to find a new foe and boost his popularity and approval, which are falling at 6G-speed, in the American Public Polls.

What better than having a rogue state, part of HIS famous Axis of Evil. Please remind the people that Iran hasn't recently issued any threat to the USA, since they tried the opening to dialogue with the USA. The tough toned talk always comes from incompetency icon GWBush Administration. Don't forget The IAEA, the United Nations Watchdog in NuKilar matter has full access to the Iranian NuKilar installations. And As per their government's spokesperson the only goal they have is pacific usage of Nukilar technology, a RIGHT clearly indicated in the Non-Proliferation Agreements, for all independant Nations. This will be a repetition of the senario of the CondiRice talking and lying in front of the world representatives (like did Colin Powell prior to entering into Iraq for the second Golf War)

[grazinggoat]

Had the invasion of Iran by the US army to take place, with all the strains it has to fill up its mission in IRAQ, I just cannot imagine what would it be like with a country like Iran with 70-some million population. Let's preserve our youth and remove this blood-thirsty GWB from power during next elections.

[ronniehm]

Peaceful nuclear technology isn't Iran's only goal. Wiping Israel off the map is also a stated goal. You were also incorrect to say that George Bush's approval rating is falling. It's rising. Oh also, you mistakenly said that inspectors have been allowed full access to Iran. They were turned away as recently as a few days ago. Once again, the hate drives the details.

[grazinggoat]

(... continued)
In your previous comments you require more garantees from Iran, not to access to NUKILAR weapons, and I agree hundred percent. I'd like to see no NUKILAR weapons, nowhere. Removed from all nations on earth, but that'll stay only a wish, knowing that no way power-greedy nations will get rid of them, and give up an inch of their pseudo-power/advantage. Everybody knows that the total power of all nuclear weapons can destroy earth population as much 10 successive times...

IRANIANS ARE NOT ANGELS, NOR ISRAELIS ARE. But that is not a reason to deny a nation from a technology. All wise judgemental decision making should be based of forseeing events, that is what makes a ruler a good one or bad. We saw what how the invasion of Lebanon by Israel in the 1980's. Recent events are not brighter. That has caused a lot of havoc in the mind of middle easterners. No wonder why Iran is looking to acquire NUKILAR weapons, seeing the threat coming from DoveyTurtle-Face Olmert.

It's good to have watchdogs looking after that. I'd like to see Iran Pressured and continuously probed regarding the nuclear weapons development, but we cannot and should not deny them this technology, relatively cleanc, and so cheap to produce Energy for pacific use.

[grazinggoat]

Based on what are you accusing me of Hating? Hating whom, hating what? Don't get it personal, but this starts to be rough on one's sanity. If U continue those futile comments, I'll let you debate between yourself and yourself, RonnieHM.

We're trying to work by rules and rights or aren't we. The UN non-profilation treaties to which Iran (but not Israel) has voluntarily agreed and consequently ratified. There is no obligation for any Nation to agree on it. Anytime, a Nation can get out of it.
But a fair question would be to ask WHY ISRAEL HAS NOT RATIFIED SUCH A TREATY? WHY ISRAEL HAS AN ARSENAL OF OVER 100 NUKILAR WARHEADS? WHY? WHOM ARE THEY AFRAID OF? FRANCE? UK? OR MAYBE USA? CHINA MAYBE, OR ITS FRIEND RUSSIA...

When you deny a nation access to a technology it'll do everyhting to get it, and even more. When you try to prevent a kid from trying to drink, or smoke, if that is his desire, guess what will happen. First thing you know in a week or so, your son has caused damages at a neighbor while he was drunk.
(please see ...continued)

[reuben110-2009]

Look fellas its really very simple. We are conducting ourselves typically like a bunch of morons. This whole issue needs a sense of urgency, the truth of the matter is we haven't addressed the problem as of yet because we are waiting for it to emerge as a bigger problem than it currently is, we have got our eyes firmly on the Oil.

Our stance simply put, says in effect, give up your inalienable right under international law, and we may offer you something you may find acceptable. It doesnt cut the mustard in Tehran, we need to provide a comprehensive offer right now, have it accepted, and not only have enrichment susended but dismatle the facilities at which it occurs. Its that simple, why should they suspend enrichment when they do not know what it is in exchange for.

Oh and Ronnie, Bush's rating maybe rising, but even you will admit it is far lower than what can be defined as healthy. Secondly Iran are not breaking International Law by not allowing inspectors in.

[grazinggoat]

Yo guys, U have not answered my questions regarding Israel. Mordechai Vanunu has revealed the existence of this cente for Uranium Enrichment in that spot of the world that would be soooo nice and idyllic to keep it free from nukes. (Too late) to change the fate of that spot of the world?. Let Israel dismantle the installations frst, then Iran shall follow... I think (I don't like it, I hate it I'd say) it's a balance of power adjustment that is played there.

Let's look at facts. Download Google Earth and have a look at Iran's Theran. It's a population of 15 Million humans, this bigger than New York-New-Jersey agglomeration, man, bigger. It needs energy, so much. To provide that with traditional fossil-generated electrical power, it'll kill them by pollution, that'll not be good from a global warming point of view... they need it, and they have the right to it. Let's just watch every single move toward weapon, by pressuring them and making a permanent presence of the IAEA, in their country, more, I think they'd accept independant observers from the outside, so much they need this technology.

[grazinggoat]

With all my respect for you Reuben, you think that this is decent proposition? Leave your inalienable right, for a comprehensive offer. You are saying to those people. Yep you are less than humans, we made an error, or the international community or Humanity erred by granting you an inalienable right, and here we're taking it back from you... this is INJUSTICE, and that is against the international laws, and the US constitution, drafted long time ago.

There was one guy named Adolf, in the middle of 1930s who started something similar, saying to a group of people, you are less than the others...

I think this is not dignity safe-guarding for the internationl community, especially to the West to propose such a thing. Especially if they are not asking us for financial support to obtain this technology. Iran should have access tot his technology, by their own mean, with all the watchdogs that we (US and UN) judge appropriate, in order to prevent them from acquiring nuclear weapons.

[ronniehm]

..... Unfortunately for Iran, they don't have their own planet. If they did, they would certainly have the right to do whatever the hell they want. But they don't. They're supposed to be part of a world community, and that's when rights become responsibilities. Iran has done nothing to deserve our trust, and so we need guarantees that they're not developing weapons. Maybe we should trust Iran. Maybe they're really sincere about creating energy. And maybe we still remember an embassy full of hostages, and maybe we remember an Iran-funded Hezbollah blowing up some American and French troops in Beirut. Sorry, trust is earned, not demanded. That's why we have to have UN babysitters in Lebanon doing exactly what Israel did. That's why we have to have UN babysitters checking on Iran to see if they're building bad toys. That's why we had to have UN babysitters checking on Iraq. These countries act like children, and in the eyes of children, yeah maybe the babysitter looks mean. But you can't debate with children. They have a different perception of reality. For children, it's all about what they want. They'll lie and cheat and tell you you're mean for taking away their toys. Essentially, I believe that's your argument. And yes, I will now debate with myself. At least I know it will be civil.

[ronniehm]

The more I see the way you talk, the more I understand why you have the position that you have. You're arrogant, childish, rude and mean ... all the things I see in the president of Iran. From that, you demand that everyone treat you like an adult. Instead of making an argument, you try to belittle the people you hate. Turtle Face? Is that supposed to be your political point of view? I'm supposed to debate whether someone's face looks like a turtle? Well, I guess maybe I should debate myself because I honestly haven't done much reading on that subject. You never let the actual facts get in the way of a good one-liner either. I mean if Bush's rating is up a few points, why throw away a good joke about falling at 6G speed? Then you accuse other people of lying? How? How is that possible when you yourself constantly cite details that you clearly made up to fit your comedy routine? Everything you accuse others of doing, you do. You remind me of myself when I was 4 years old. If I got caught taking a cookie, I just point to someone else who took a cookie ... as if that makes it right. ......

[grazinggoat]

...Continued 2
Also re-read your answer, and tell me if you%u2019re not repeating what I said regarding the right of others to exploit the nuclear technologies as per UN-NPA and the guarantees I%u2019m requesting from them as to install watchdogs at every telephone post in the country, until we%u2019re sure of their intent. You are talking of the 230 US and some 50 French soldiers, who perished in Beirut, in the 1980%u2019s when Israel was invading Lebanon and occupying the south of Lebanon up to Beirut. See in what circumstances this happened? At that time, Hezbollah has been created, in order to resist the occupation by Israel of South Lebanon. It%u2019s unfortunate that young people (and older ones) give their lives while sleeping, in a cowardly act of terror, but those were military, and until now nobody has proved it was Hezbollah, who can say it was not an Israeli job? (In Reference to USS Liberty). Why has not our intelligence been able to gather the appropriate information and prevent the blow?


For Turtle-Face comment, you shouldn%u2019t even bring that up. I%u2019m not laughing at the person itself. When it comes to humans and Creation, I don%u2019t allow myself to discriminate. I%u2019m just attacking the persona public. In all democracies hopefully we%u2019re allowed to caricaturize, and hope we%u2019ll be able to, forever...

[grazinggoat]

%u2026Continued 1
For the rest I'm debating the reason why we're still having the same team that lied to us and got back into power. Maybe your understanding of the hundreds of thousand (United Nations World Health Organization (WHO) figures say 500,000 half of them infants) people who have died in Iraq, and the hundreds who are, currently, killed on a daily basis result of the disruption in the Equilibrium of populations dynamic inside Iraq, disrupted by our invasion, are not significant for you, after all they%u2019re not significant, being only goyim.

Pretending to bring the virtue of Democracy, what did we bring them? Heavy loads of depleted Uranium that%u2019ll help them grow some nice cancers, and suffer some birth defects for the generations to come. Way to go! Way to go!

You know, the responsibility of being a president is, but should NOT be restricted to the well being of his own fellow subjects, and only his national interests, but also for other%u2019s nationals%u2019 interest as well, especially when one nation is invading another and when it%u2019s coming from the most powerful nation on Earth. We are living on the same planet and we breathe the same air and drink the same water. Our biological needs are exactly the same. I feel sorry when I hear of an environmental catastrophe hitting a country, because I know that this will be reaching me or my kids one day or another.
Please see continued 2%u2026

[grazinggoat]

Of Course RonnieHM, I like your reaction; that is you have nothing more substantial to say against what I%u2019m advancing. So you start to put me down and hurling. You take my words and distort them the way you want ant tell me I%u2019m rude and mean, when I%u2019m trying to be assertive. So be it. That shows that what I%u2019m saying stands right. Because in your distorted mind all what you see, and think is fine and don%u2019t even want to consider any other view, this is called narrow-mindedness or dictatorship, call it whatever you like...

You don't even agree on the lies that have been brought to the face of the Americans in to order to %u2018evilize%u2019 the Iraqi leader, (whom I'm not defending, by the way.... and I insist I'm not defending this crappy persona), and lawlessly invade that country.

I refer you to these web pages and tell me if the present team leading our destiny as a nation has lied to the Americans or not or if it still deserves America%u2019s trust...

http://www.alternet.org/story/16274/
http://www.antiwar.com/rep/utley9.html
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20040329/scheer
http://www.tvnewslies.org/html/iraq_lies.html
http://www.americanprogress.org/AccountTempFiles/cf/%7BE9245FE4-9A2B-43C7-A521-5D6FF2E06E03%7D/PRIRAQCLAIMFACT1029.HTM

You want more?

Please read them.
Please see continued 1%u2026

[reuben110-2009]

Grazingoat,

I apreciate what you had to say to me i've been offline a while, and having read your post to me, I think what you are saying is fair, and I have learnt a little bit more having read some of your other comments, I wish other people would have the decency to follow my example when its abundantly clear that their point of view has been nullified, a little grace goes a long way Ronnie. I'm not saying my comment was useless, but I will concede that I think your rebuttle shed light on a few issues I didn't consider at the time . What I didn't in fact mention, that i wanted to earlier on, is that when I say Irans nucleur capabilities should be dismantled, I forgot to add that they ought to be shifted to Russia. I dont know what your opinion on this matter will be though upon hearing that proposal, I thought it served as a fitting solution. And I hasten to add the most ideal situation would be global nucleur (weapon)disarmament, what is the point?

When I read that Tehrans population is 15 million, it staggerd me a little, no wonder they are persuing nucleur energy. As far as this derogatory stance we take goes, Im afraid i couldnt agree with you more.
CONT...

[reuben110-2009]

The US is a condascending nation, it is critical of any nation that does not agree with its values, regardless of cultural differences, this is a typical example. This is the same nation that we offered to build nucleur plants for in the time of the Shah. ow because we do not like its leadership, its apperently not allowed. I have never been a fan of our foreign policy or the way in which we conduct ourselves on the global stage. It leaves a bad impression, and a sour taste. No wonder we are so politically isolated, are only friend and allie still owes us a great deal of money, so its not surprising that they appear to be with us, but anyone can see the political polarisation we are subject to, and it shouldn't surprise anyone.