NationStates Jolt Archive

The NCSOD would like to congratulate te leaders of these fine countries for staying inline with the school's policy on appeasement-GOOD GOING GUYS!



======================================================================

EU Asks U.S. To Consider Plane Sales to Iran

By REUTERS


European countries have asked the United States to consider selling new airplanes to Iran as part of a proposed package of incentives aimed at resolving the nuclear crisis with Tehran, diplomats said on May 19.

The Europeans have also proposed a regional dialogue that some hope could eventually draw the Washington and Tehran, adversaries for a generation, into direct talks.

The package was formally presented to the United States, Russia and China shortly after it was agreed on May 18 by Britain, France, Germany and European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana, one diplomat told Reuters.

When the United States first signed on to a European initiative in early 2005 aimed at persuading Iran to abandon nuclear weapons-related activities, it agreed to consider selling airplane spare parts as an inducement to Tehran.

But Iran, under sweeping U.S. sanctions for three decades, has also asked for planes to modernize its aging fleet.

One question for Washington now is "could we go beyond spare parts and consider providing Iran with new planes, which would necessarily need acceptance by the U.S.," a senior European diplomat told reporters.

Another European diplomat said the package "will have some element concerning airplanes ... The proposal is framed towards what the Iranians told us they were interested in last year before negotiations ended."

The United States and major powers are involved in a diplomatic stand-off with Iran over its nuclear program -- which the West says is aimed at producing nuclear weapons but which Tehran insists is purely a peaceful energy program.

It's not appeasement, it's just not bullying. Iran quite rightly can turn around and say "well why can't we have nuclear power?" And just saying "come on then we'll fight ya!" isn't perhaps the best way to get them to do as we say. More importantly it will unite the Iranian people, whom I believe are probably OK, but are also saying "why can't we have nuclear power?" and their leaders who are raving.

European interests in the area may be different, get used to it.

European interests in the area may be different, get used to it.

Hey! Don't think you damned terrorist lovers can get away with not doing things the good American way! I for one welcome the day when American tanks roll down Downing Street!. It's the final step of the special relationship! All of Europe needs to think like that. Then we'll be good people.

It's not appeasement, it's just not bullying. Iran quite rightly can turn around and say "well why can't we have nuclear power?" And just saying "come on then we'll fight ya!" isn't perhaps the best way to get them to do as we say. More importantly it will unite the Iranian people, whom I believe are probably OK, but are also saying "why can't we have nuclear power?" and their leaders who are raving.
Let's not forget the somewhat hypocrite stance of the USA on nuclear weapons.

"We have shitloads of them, many times enough to blow the planet to smithereens, and not only do we refuse to honor disarmament treaties, but we're thinking up excuse to use tactical nukes. However, we'll be damned before we let you get the A-Bomb too!"

Some would think preaching by example would yield more results.

Every man has a different solution to solve a problem, diplomacy is all about getting everyone to adapt the same solution...

I thought it was aquote, I don't know who it was or if I quoted it right :D

Hey! Don't think you damned terrorist lovers can get away with not doing things the good American way! I for one welcome the day when American tanks roll down Downing Street!. It's the final step of the special relationship! All of Europe needs to think like that. Then we'll be good people.

Ahhh! More interesting! Does a US tank fit in Downing Street? ;)

http://www.myphotographs.net/england/image7.html

*Sighs*

I always feel sorry for Chamberlain. The man always gets such bad press. I bet half the people who use his name haven't even looked into the reasons behind his actions past a wikipedia entry or two.

Yes, the man made a lot of mistakes, but he did a lot to try and make up for them on the Appeasement front, even if he wasn't the greatest of Prime Ministers.

Ahhh! More interesting! Does a US tank fit in Downing Street? ;)

http://www.myphotographs.net/england/image7.html

If it smooshes the police and the cars it can.

Ahhh! More interesting! Does a US tank fit in Downing Street? ;)

http://www.myphotographs.net/england/image7.html

More importantly, does a British tank fit through the White House gates?

Let's not forget the somewhat hypocrite stance of the USA on nuclear weapons.

"We have shitloads of them, many times enough to blow the planet to smithereens, and not only do we refuse to honor disarmament treaties, but we're thinking up excuse to use tactical nukes. However, we'll be damned before we let you get the A-Bomb too!"

Some would think preaching by example would yield more results.

The difference is the US is a well established country that got its nukes out of dire necessity during the latter half of WW2, whereas Iran is a country whose support of terrorism is documented and has aggressive designs on it's neighbors.
I haven't seen President Bush calling for the destruction of Israel.

More importantly, does a British tank fit through the White House gates?

If Tony wants to come over he can park in the special places reserved for British Challengers.

Ahhh! More interesting! Does a US tank fit in Downing Street? ;)

http://www.myphotographs.net/england/image7.htmlThat site isn't all that reliable. It refers to Piccadilly Circus as Times Square, and Constitution Arch as St Pauls Cathedral.

It believes this is Big Ben
http://www.myphotographs.net/england/image34.html

More importantly, does a British tank fit through the White House gates?

Now that would be fine sight

*yawns*

Just bunch up your eyebrows, insert your fingertips in your ears, and keep telling yourself the world really is black & white, kiddo.

*yawns*

Just bunch up your eyebrows, insert your fingertips in your ears, and keep telling yourself the world really is black & white, kiddo.

I thimk thats the whole point. The world isn't black and white, therefore negotiation and diplomacy consists of more than "don't do this or we'll kick your ass".

It believes this is Big Ben
http://www.myphotographs.net/england/image34.html
St Paul's Cathedral:
http://www.myphotographs.net/england/image36.html

:D

I think it would make a hell of a lot more sense to let them develop nuclear power and keep their military outdated than to give them advanced military technology and hope that they will obey requests to halt enrichment.

At least if we let them do it openly it will be a lot easier to spy on them and destroy their nuclear sites in the event of a war than it would be if they did it secretly. Conventional weapons are a far greater threat than nukes, so providing Iran with them will be much more detrimental to our interests than any nuclear reactor could be even if those reactors resulted in Iranian nukes.

After all, you can't nuke the Strait of Hormuz but you can launch airstrikes against the ships travelling it. Plus, it's a lot harder to deliver a successful nuclear strike without the technology to launch them properly...giving them planes provides them with a windfall in navigation and aircraft technology.

The NCSOD would like to congratulate te leaders of these fine countries for staying inline with the school's policy on appeasement-GOOD GOING GUYS!
I don't see the problem. Iran may be developing nukes because it thinks the West is gearing up for a major attack. If we sell them planes then they will think otherwise. After all, who would ever sell a country planes and then invade them? Bombing Iran is not the most effective solution to everything.

I would, however, not like to see Iran getting bomber planes. We don't want them over Israel.

I think it would make a hell of a lot more sense to let them develop nuclear power and keep their military outdated than to give them advanced military technology and hope that they will obey requests to halt enrichment.

At least if we let them do it openly it will be a lot easier to spy on them and destroy their nuclear sites in the event of a war than it would be if they did it secretly. Conventional weapons are a far greater threat than nukes, so providing Iran with them will be much more detrimental to our interests than any nuclear reactor could be even if those reactors resulted in Iranian nukes.

After all, you can't nuke the Strait of Hormuz but you can launch airstrikes against the ships travelling it. Plus, it's a lot harder to deliver a successful nuclear strike without the technology to launch them properly...giving them planes provides them with a windfall in navigation and aircraft technology.

It's talking about civilian planes.
http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=worldNews&storyID=2006-05-19T224049Z_01_WBT005419_RTRUKOC_0_UK-NUCLEAR-IRAN-USA.xml

I think it would make a hell of a lot more sense to let them develop nuclear power and keep their military outdated than to give them advanced military technology and hope that they will obey requests to halt enrichment.

At least if we let them do it openly it will be a lot easier to spy on them and destroy their nuclear sites in the event of a war than it would be if they did it secretly. Conventional weapons are a far greater threat than nukes, so providing Iran with them will be much more detrimental to our interests than any nuclear reactor could be even if those reactors resulted in Iranian nukes.

After all, you can't nuke the Strait of Hormuz but you can launch airstrikes against the ships travelling it. Plus, it's a lot harder to deliver a successful nuclear strike without the technology to launch them properly...giving them planes provides them with a windfall in navigation and aircraft technology.
Good points. Maybe you are right.

It's talking about civilian planes.
http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=worldNews&storyID=2006-05-19T224049Z_01_WBT005419_RTRUKOC_0_UK-NUCLEAR-IRAN-USA.xml

Many of the parts in civilian planes can also be used in military systems; the concern would be that the navigational systems and certain parts might be used to upgrade their airforce and missle systems, or even worse that deals might be made to actually sell military equipment under the guise of civilian aircraft transactions.

I thimk thats the whole point. The world isn't black and white, therefore negotiation and diplomacy consists of more than "don't do this or we'll kick your ass".
Well, it certainly ought to...

I don't see the problem. Iran may be developing nukes because it thinks the West is gearing up for a major attack. If we sell them planes then they will think otherwise. After all, who would ever sell a country planes and then invade them? Bombing Iran is not the most effective solution to everything.

I would, however, not like to see Iran getting bomber planes. We don't want them over Israel.

Iran will think the west is grearing up for an attack no matter what. Imagine Germany, Pre-WW2. Hitler didn't stop for nothing and used every little chance he could to arm and fuel his war machine. Ahamgenined or whatever his name is will do the same.

Many of the parts in civilian planes can also be used in military systems; the concern would be that the navigational systems and certain parts might be used to upgrade their airforce and missle systems, or even worse that deals might be made to actually sell military equipment under the guise of civilian aircraft transactions.

Yep and the aluminum in them could be used to make tubes to process uranium.

Note: Ban export of soda cans to Iran.

Quote:
RAFSANJANI SAYS MUSLIMS SHOULD USE NUCLEAR WEAPON AGAINST ISRAEL

TEHRAN 14 Dec. (IPS) One of Iran’s most influential ruling cleric called Friday on the Muslim states to use nuclear weapon against Israel, assuring them that while such an attack would annihilate Israel, it would cost them "damages only".

"If a day comes when the world of Islam is duly equipped with the arms Israel has in possession, the strategy of colonialism would face a stalemate because application of an atomic bomb would not leave any thing in Israel but the same thing would just produce damages in the Muslim world", Ayatollah Ali Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani told the crowd at the traditional Friday prayers in Tehran.

Analysts said not only Mr. Hashemi-Rafsanjani’s speech was the strongest against Israel, but also this is the first time that a prominent leader of the Islamic Republic openly suggests the use of nuclear weapon against the Jewish State.

"It seems that Mr. Hashemi-Rafsanjani is forgetting that due to the present intertwinement of Israel and Palestine, the destruction of the Jewish State would also means the mass killing of Palestinian population as well", observed one Iranian commentator




http://www.iran-press-service.com/ar...ats_141201.htm

http://www.iranian.ws/iran_news/publ...le_15197.shtml


Why dont we send them some of our extra nukes ? At any rate the nut in venezuela already offered to send Iran his fleet of F-16's didnt he ? I think thats what the latest whoha crap about suspending arms sales to the dude is all about...might be a better idea to just stop buying oil from Citgo ...but hey..that would be sane .

The world needs an enema send nukes to Iran . send them planes ..send them rockets and tanks..after all its only fair...so what if they seem a bit extreme and in some cases a bit unstable...a nice little exchange of nukes will do us all a great deal of good ...we wont have to worry about that region anymore for one .....and the islamic jihadist / hammas / hezbolla dudes will all be busy fighting in heaven / hell over virgins....they get nukes ...crap...you think there's a virgin shortage now ? with all the new martyrs ...well I wouldnt want to be in that line ...

I remember when we used to argue that NUKES needed to be done AWAY with ...less nukes ..disarmament...you know sane shit ?

Now you have idiots actually defending Irans rights to join the world of Nuclear insanity...Did anyone ever ask ...WTF is wrong with this picture ?

When a bunch of Iranian radioactive dust turns up in YOUR soup ...the remains of the idiots who decided nuking Israel or ANY other country was a good thing ...well maybe then a little light bulb will go off over your head and you'll try to figure out how to keep anyone else from playing in the nuclear playground .

These morons need there ass's kicked..but by their own people ...before he forces someone else to stamp him out...he's playing a very dangerouse game . I would hope the average Iranian might be able to figure it out .

If not they get to join the stamped out club , and find themselves " liberated " .:rolleyes: hey just think we can call it another war for oil and maybe gas will go up to 6.00 a gallon ..What happened to all the damm oil Bush is supposed to have stolen from Iraq ? I want some ...it cost me 55.00 frikin bucks to fill up a damm camry ! Maybe Chenny has it all hidden on his ranch...

Why dont we send them some of our extra nukes ? At any rate the nut in venezuela already offered to send Iran his fleet of F-16's didnt he ?

Considering that the US has stopped shipment of aircraft parts to Venezuela, giving them away is probably the smart thing to do while they're still worth something as opposed to worthless unserviceable aircraft.

Economics junior. You sell your stuff before depreciation makes it worthless scrap.


might be a better idea to just stop buying oil from Citgo ...but hey..that would be sane .

Are you sure you missed the 'in' for the second part of your name? Or are you just drunk? Cause last I looked, there was no nation by the name of Citgo.


The world needs an enema

I'm not sure how a drug used to encourage bowel movement would help the world. Unless constipation is more widespread than I believed.


I remember when we used to argue that NUKES needed to be done AWAY with ...less nukes ..disarmament...you know sane shit ?

I don't see you arguing for US disarmament of it's nuclear weapons.


Now you have idiots actually defending Irans rights to join the world of Nuclear insanity...Did anyone ever ask ...WTF is wrong with this picture ?


Example: North Korea has nukes. The White House tries diplomacy and appeasement.

Iran does not have nukes. The White House uses Axis of evil speeches and continues to use aggressive rhetoric.

Conclusion: Nukes makes the White House stay away from invading you.


When a bunch of Iranian radioactive dust turns up in YOUR soup ...the remains of the idiots who decided nuking Israel or ANY other country was a good thing ...well maybe then a little light bulb will go off over your head and you'll try to figure out how to keep anyone else from playing in the nuclear playground .

It's a public playground. Either everyone plays or no one does. Otherwise, you'd get elitist brats.


If not they get to join the stamped out club , and find themselves " liberated " .:rolleyes: hey just think we can call it another war for oil and maybe gas will go up to 6.00 a gallon ..What happened to all the damm oil Bush is supposed to have stolen from Iraq ? I want some ...it cost me 55.00 frikin bucks to fill up a damm camry ! Maybe Chenny has it all hidden on his ranch...

It's called a monopoly genius. Just the oil cartel (about as good as one) have control of the oil supply doesn't mean it's neccessary for them to sell it cheap. Besides, refineries are already maxed out and the loss of the ones near New Orleans didn't do the end line supply any good.

Economics. It's your friend. It can keep you from looking like an idiot.

Considering that the US has stopped shipment of aircraft parts to Venezuela, giving them away is probably the smart thing to do while they're still worth something as opposed to worthless unserviceable aircraft.

Economics junior. You sell your stuff before depreciation makes it worthless scrap.



Are you sure you missed the 'in' for the second part of your name? Or are you just drunk? Cause last I looked, there was no nation by the name of Citgo.



I'm not sure how a drug used to encourage bowel movement would help the world. Unless constipation is more widespread than I believed.



I don't see you arguing for US disarmament of it's nuclear weapons.



Example: North Korea has nukes. The White House tries diplomacy and appeasement.

Iran does not have nukes. The White House uses Axis of evil speeches and continues to use aggressive rhetoric.

Conclusion: Nukes makes the White House stay away from invading you.



It's a public playground. Either everyone plays or no one does. Otherwise, you'd get elitist brats.



It's called a monopoly genius. Just the oil cartel (about as good as one) have control of the oil supply doesn't mean it's neccessary for them to sell it cheap. Besides, refineries are already maxed out and the loss of the ones near New Orleans didn't do the end line supply any good.

Economics. It's your friend. It can keep you from looking like an idiot.


Right....say to yourself " SARCASM " is my friend...

Citgo is owned by Venezuela...is that news to you ?

Also I advocate eventual TOTAL disarmament of nukes by all nations on the EARTH and think its insane to add to the group that holds nukes...

I never said sell I said send...I dont remember the word sell being mentioned...except by you..the Iranians already have a bunch of planes they cant get parts for ..what part of retarded do you think THEY are ? And by giving them away..ummm excuse me but what part of "economics " deals with giving shit away ? At any rate the Iranians I guess collect worthless unservicable air craft so I guess you are making some sort of sense to someone ..

I guess you would be economics senior if you knew that giving something away wasnt the same as selling it .

North Korea ...look at that thing called a map...is next to China..its an entirely different ballgame compared to Iran..They already have nukes.
Iran just wants them ...for what ? To wave around ? For mayday parades ?

Economics is sure as hell not helping you any .

Just to send it off topic again, but I believe that the picture of Downing Street is in fact Downing Street, regardless of how inaccurate the site is on other things.

Downing street really isnt that impressive when you see it. If it didnt have the gates at the end, you probably wouldnt notice it all, unless looking for it.

Let's not forget the somewhat hypocrite stance of the USA on nuclear weapons.

"We have shitloads of them, many times enough to blow the planet to smithereens, and not only do we refuse to honor disarmament treaties, but we're thinking up excuse to use tactical nukes. However, we'll be damned before we let you get the A-Bomb too!"

Some would think preaching by example would yield more results.

Funny...I could have sworn I'd heard about Ohio subs being converted to carry cruise missiles, and the Minuteman ICBM being phased out...

Here's an idea...we'll start disarming when everyone else does...last I checked none of the Nuclear Powers are planning on doing anything substantial regarding disarmarment anytime soon.

It's not about disarmament.

It's about not having people who stated repeatedly they hate the West have nukes.

No problem at all with, say, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Australia, New Zealand or other Western sphere nations getting nukes (France has them).

As a matter of fact, I want these nations to have as many nukes as possible.

It's not about disarmament.

It's about not having people who stated repeatedly they hate the West have nukes.

No problem at all with, say, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Australia, New Zealand or other Western sphere nations getting nukes (France has them).

So, if you repeatedly say you don't like western regimes, you can't have nukes; but if you don't like the eastern ones, you can?

So, if you repeatedly say you don't like western regimes, you can't have nukes; but if you don't like the eastern ones, you can?

No, it's about not letting a regime that preaches destruction and hatred for the west (And israel) wind up with canned sunshine. They also support terrorism. 1+1=2. Heck, India's got Nukes yet they're not western....not much of a problem there because they are a well established government that isn't likely to start nuking its neighbors and/or supporting terrorists with nukes.

Heck, India's got Nukes yet they're not western....not much of a problem there because they are a well established government that isn't likely to start nuking its neighbors
Tell that to Pakistan. They'll be so thrilled, they'll ditch their own nukes.:rolleyes: