Paris ready to cooperate with Iran in nuclear power

phoenix80

Banned
Paris ready to cooperate with Iran in nuclear power

Tehran Times ^ | October 19, 2005

In a meeting with President Mahmud Ahmadinejad in Tehran on Tuesday, French Ambassador Bernard Poletti said his country is ready to cooperate with Iran in the production of nuclear electricity.

France is aware of Iran's concerns and its demand to access to nuclear technology for the production of nuclear electricity and is prepared to cooperate in this regard, he added.

The French ambassador to Tehran also presented a letter from Jacques Chirac to the Iranian president and expressed hope that he would be able to play a constructive role in the promotion of ties between the two countries during his mission to Iran.

Ahmadinejad said Iran's announcement that it is prepared to accept other countries as partners in its nuclear activities was the best and most important proposal for confidence building, transparency, and proving the peaceful nature of Iran?s nuclear program. However, the French governments position toward Iran?s nuclear program is a hurdle to the expansion of ties between the two states, the president observed, noting, Public opinion in Iran regards France as reasonable, free, and a supporter of justice, and due to this view, it was expected that the government of that country would be on the side of Iran in the nuclear issue.

Ahmadinejad stated that Iran does not seek nuclear arms and not only does not need such arms but also calls for total nuclear disarmament throughout the world.

Unfortunately, despite all the cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency, through the adoption of some unjust positions, some countries are trying to impose their views on the Iranian nation.

It is absurd that certain countries that possess stockpiles of nuclear weapons are trying to undermine Irans civilian nuclear program, the president said, adding, No free and independent country in the world would accept such an imposition.

Our nation has been disturbed by the recent behavior of France, and it is expected that the government of France will take positive and constructive steps in order to remedy the damage to bilateral relations.

http://www.tehrantimes.com/Description.asp?Da=10/19/2005&Cat=2&Num=011


------------------------

I wonder what French will say about this. And I wonder why the French would like to cooperate with all despotic regimes and dictatorships.
Once it was Saddam, now it is the Mullahs. :roll:
 
Well, what is the nature of the cooperation? It says they want to help them get their nuclear electricity going... is that calling Tehran's bluff? Or are they merely helping Tehran with it's mask?
 
IRAN+FRANCE=NUCLEAR POWER... WRONG!

Iran is one of the largest holders of oil. THEY ARE FREAKING OPEC FOR GOD'S SAKE! What do they need nuclear power for? They have all of the oil.
 
I'm not sure whether I'm the only one here that senses something of a double standard. I am non to worried about the Iranians, maybe wrong maybe not. I'm also not trying to alter anybodies view on this matter, just trying to shine al different light on the matter:

IRAN+FRANCE=NUCLEAR POWER... WRONG!

I, for one think that is equally wrong for the US, UK, Pakistan and India to have nuclear power. I know that the Pakistans think this too of the Indians and vice versa. And Iran is probably non to pleased that the US has them and they can't.

You can't hug your children with nuclear arms, but you sure as hell can protect them with it!

I think the Iranians think this too, and the other Nuclear Powers. Maybe that's why they all want them so bad.
 
Okay, Iran is a TERRORIST STATE! The US and UK isn't. Oakistan and Indina are problems. And last time I checked France is a nuclear power too. So if you want us to Disarm our nukes. You should have the french disarm theirs too.

Iran is a problem along with N. Korea.

NUKES+NUTS=WWIII

IRAN+FRANCE=PROBLEMS

France is a major arms dealer in the world. They are number three, the US is number one and the PRC is number two.

And lastly Iran wants nukes. Not nuclear power. We know it and they know it. If Iran gets nukes than terrorist and scumbags will have them too. The Soviets already cuased that problem and I bet you that the PRC is also selling them too.
 
Oakistan! You know... that country with all those oaks! I wanna go there!

:eek: Sorry..

Oh but you're right, Iran is a terror state. That is why the US and others can hold judgement against them. Try not being totally goof ball crazy loco, then we'll talk about nuclear equality.
 
But isn't it a circular argument? They want them to wipe Israel of the map... So? You wanted yours to wipe Russia of the map and it didn't happen. Somehow many regimes develop the MAD-syndrom. The knowledge that you will kill yourself in the process lessens the thirst to use them.

And the argument: "It is a terrorist state" isn't that too in the eye of the beholder? What is terrorism?

Main Entry: ter·ror·ism
Pronunciation: 'ter-&r-"i-z&m
Function: noun
: the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion
Source: Merriam - Webster Dictionary)

But threatening with armed intervention is also a form of coercion and could hence be seen as state terrorism. Isn't this a case of an egg - chicken argument?

Don't get me wrong, because I'm no fan of the Iranian government. But one state calling the other one false and aiming it foreign policy on intervening should realise that things aren't always what they seem. Which source do you believe? The one that says the enemy is bad? Well the other side believes that one as well and mass destruction is never far off. I just get very weary of it all.......
 
Well no actually, The muslims can kill all hte jews and only loose a hundred million muslims. That would be worth it to them. Crazy TERRIOST regimes like Iran should not have nuclear weapons. Responsible countrys like USA, France, Britian, dare i say China can have nukes because there for defensive purposes. Iran plans to use there nukes to

A- Destroy Israel
B- Use as a threat
 
Ted said:
But isn't it a circular argument? They want them to wipe Israel of the map... So? You wanted yours to wipe Russia of the map and it didn't happen. Somehow many regimes develop the MAD-syndrom. The knowledge that you will kill yourself in the process lessens the thirst to use them.

This is were you are wrong. This is althogether a different entity than the USSR.

The US an USSR wanted to wipe each other of the map, but it was never set in stone that they had to.

For the Muslims (the radical ones especially) it is a different story, it is in their prophecies that someday they will counquer Europe, and kill all the Jews. So they will basicly stuck into fullfilling this in order to legitimize their religion. Not only that, but they simply believe it as fact that it will happen, and see it as their duty to do their part so it does happen.

The possesion of nukes will give them leverage to do both.

But the good news is; they will NOT use their nuclear capabilty as a direct nuclear bomb as far as striking any cities. Like you said MAD situation. Although the loss of their own life to take yours is still victory to them, since to them they inherit paradise. Even so, they are much smarter than that.

The bad new is; they will use this nuclear capability as an EMP device. The EMP device although will sustain hardly any direct loss of human life, this will be far more devestating, than any nuclear attack on a city or even multiple cities. Their eventual goal is to form a Muslim empire. They will use this technology that they are developing now, as part of the weapons of this empire sometime in the near future, in their bid to conquer Europe.

So basicly their aquisition of nuclear weapon will eventually lead to WW3 which they are preparing for now, and they know this, and we (the West) don't.

Don't know what an EMP device is?
Most people don't. But the effects are more devastating than a single or even multiple nuclear bombs directed upon cities. Although the intial direct casualties are virtually zero.
Click here and scroll down a little.
!!!INFO ALERT!!!Effects of EMP blast
 
Ted said:
But isn't it a circular argument? They want them to wipe Israel of the map... So? You wanted yours to wipe Russia of the map and it didn't happen. Somehow many regimes develop the MAD-syndrom. The knowledge that you will kill yourself in the process lessens the thirst to use them.

And the argument: "It is a terrorist state" isn't that too in the eye of the beholder? What is terrorism?

Main Entry: ter·ror·ism
Pronunciation: 'ter-&r-"i-z&m
Function: noun
: the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion
Source: Merriam - Webster Dictionary)

But threatening with armed intervention is also a form of coercion and could hence be seen as state terrorism. Isn't this a case of an egg - chicken argument?

Don't get me wrong, because I'm no fan of the Iranian government. But one state calling the other one false and aiming it foreign policy on intervening should realise that things aren't always what they seem. Which source do you believe? The one that says the enemy is bad? Well the other side believes that one as well and mass destruction is never far off. I just get very weary of it all.......

Yeah sure, armed intervention is the exact same thing as paying some punks to go blow up civilians. Violence equality for all!

I don't understand what's the deal here. I have no clue how the Iranian government is somehow equal to the US. Or why it is so hard to think of them as bad guys.

It really boggles my mind how you can consider it to be alright for that government to hold nuclear weapons, with it's connections and ambitions- you truely believe that?
 
With all due respect, Ted!

Your views on Iran are pacifistic and clueless. You may need to search more in that regard
 
Pacifistic, most certainly! Eventhough I've never been in the military I've seen, heard and read enough about it to hate it. I don't say abolish all arms, because the world we live in...... well, that will be the end.

Clueless.... I might. I don't think that holding on an outline of morals or restraint is being clueless. I don't believe in whiping a country of the face of the earth because someone else points them out as being a threat. It didn't work like that in highschool and it certainy doesn't work for me in real life.
I've read a lot on that repulsive PC and the journalists making up facts. What I'm saying is: what facts do you use to base your opinion on? Aren't they the same facts made by the people you so often criticize?

To end my closing statement (sounds nice doesn't it?) I'll use a quote Tolkien wrote some years ago:

Many that live deserve death. And some die that deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then be not too eager to deal out death in the name of justice, fearing for your own safety. Even the wise cannot see all ends.
J. R. R. Tolkien, The Lord Of the Rings, Book Four, Chapter One

He said this about an evil creature of whom many thought deserved to die. I kind a like it and try to look at people this way before condemning them to my bombers and infantry. What you do will reflect on you for eternity (another nice quote) so you better make sure you use the right facts. It takes some sort of optimism to run into harms way without having the facts sorted out. Something I would call "clueless". Of course intervention is needed at times, as I said before. But invading a country on the pretext of weapons os mass destruction and biological weapons and not finding any...... well, to my eyes it looks rather silly. And before some of you say: "well we won't sit and wait for them to blow up in my back yard!" All I say is: get your facts and fugures straight before you strike!
 
Of course I can,t agree NukePlant of Iran.
North korea may buy Nukebomb from Iran.
But,Japan have been supporting Iran for many years by YEN and tech.
And so many Iranian are living in Japan.
At least, Iranian know propriety more than China and south korea.
Before Iran,we should know chinese Nuke missile is targetting Tokyo and Washington.
 
Well I am in Paris right now and this is the first I have heard about this story. Im not saying its baloney but its odd the the French or International News hasnt said anything as this is a major diveregence from what France original position.

I will state for the record that there is absolutly no way France would given technology that would lead to Iran owning a nuclear weapon, however the are methods of creating nuclear electricity (such as light water reactors) that impossible to be used in a weapons program. Perhaps the article is refering to that.

Point of Correction: Somebody stated that Iran is sitting on oil, thats not a 100% true statement. It does have oil, but only a limited supply which is expected to run out in about 15 years. Iran does pocess enormous(perhaps the largest in the world?) quantities of Natural Gas.
 
never heard this news. Personnaly I doubt that we'll give this technology to Iran...
Another source than the "Tehran Times" ?
 
mmarsh said:
I will state for the record that there is absolutly no way France would given technology that would lead to Iran owning a nuclear weapon, however the are methods of creating nuclear electricity (such as light water reactors) that impossible to be used in a weapons program. Perhaps the article is refering to that.

That's what I hoped/figured.

And Ted, this isn't highschool. I don't want to invade Iran or something, far from it, what a terrible mess that would be.

But why do you want to close your eyes and dismiss the bad news about Iran as lies and deception? It's a bad government, okay? Everyone knows that. They have connections to terror networks. They hate the west (primarily the US) and despise Israel. Not that hard to come to the conclusion that these people should not have nuclear technology.
 
Back
Top