So Iran's Next then...

by searchfothetruth 18 Replies latest members adult

• 

  searchfothetruth

  I wonder what Lies we will be fed to 'prove' that we need to attack Iran next........

  BBC News Article:

  Last Updated: Wednesday, 28 May, 2003, 10:16 GMT 11:16 UK

  Email this to a friend

  Printable version

  US steps up pressure on Iran

  Rumsfeld: Iran being "unhelpful" regarding Iraq Senior Bush administration officials have issued new warnings to Iran not to interfere in the reconstruction of Iraq. Tehran was also told to do more to tackle terrorism despite its claims that it has arrested members of Osama Bin Laden's al-Qaeda network. US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld was one of those with strong words for Tehran, warning that any attempt by Iran to build an Islamic republic in its neighbour Iraq would be quashed. He told the Council of Foreign Relations that Iran was "being unhelpful today with respect to Iraq". "Iran should be on notice; efforts to try to remake Iraq in Iran's image will be aggressively put down," Mr Rumsfeld said. In the same speech, Mr Rumsfeld acknowledged that Iraq may have destroyed all its chemical munitions and weapons of mass destruction before the US-led invasion last March. He said this may explain why such weapons were not used against coalition forces during the recent conflict. Nuclear claims The defence secretary's comments about Iraq came amid further accusations from Washington that Tehran has been harbouring fugitive members of Osama Bin Laden's al-Qaeda network and trying to develop nuclear weapons. Analysis: US-Iran rift widens White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said on Tuesday that steps Iran had taken regarding the capture of al-Qaeda suspects were "insufficient", despite the country's arrest of several suspected members on Monday. He also said the US continued to suspect that weapons development was at the heart of Iran's nuclear industry. Iran has denied all the allegations, with foreign ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi saying he hoped the US would "avoid taking an interventionist stance". The heat on Iran is likely to be turned up even further on 16 June if - as Washington hopes - the International Atomic Energy Agency signals grave doubts that Iran's network of nuclear facilities are merely designed for power generation. The issue of Iran is said to have revived the split between moderates in the Bush administration who favour diplomacy and hardliners who prefer more robust action. The issue of Iraqi weapons programmes has proved contentious On Tuesday a meeting between top US officials on Iran was reportedly suspended until Thursday, US officials told Reuters news agency, which observers say may be due to such a split. Iran suspects hardliners in Washington of moving to undermine or change Iran's Islamic system, the BBC's Jim Muir in Tehran says, while the US in turn is worried that Islamic factions may try to install a theocracy-like government in Baghdad, echoing the Iranian regime that came to power in the 1979 revolution. Washington also accuses Tehran of links to suicide attacks on Western targets in the Saudi capital Riyadh earlier this month which killed 34 people. Email this to a friend Printable version
• 

  minimus

  England? I mean, France.
• 

  Yerusalyim

  First, O Searching one, you need to prove any lies were told about Iraq. Iran and Syria both have a Rendevous with Destiny, maybe war, maybe not, but anyone who thinks these guys are harbouring terrorists is just plain uninformed.
• 

  searchfothetruth

  Yeru,

  Look at the article that I posted at the end of the WMD thread...even Rumsfeld has now admitted that the WMD may have all been destroyed before the war....do you mean the type of lies that the US/British government have been spewing out...?
• 

  Yerusalyim

  So the fact that Iraq destroyed it's weapons, and sent others to Syria, means the US lied? Or does it mean things changed. It wasn't the UN Weapons Inspectors that drove Iraq to do this (IF that's what happened). A fact changed isn't the same as a lie. The reports some have given is this was done just days before the US went in, after they were sure we were coming.
• 

  Pleasuredome

  yeru

  if iraq had transported WMD to syria, would you say the the US wouldn't have known about it?
• 

  Yerusalyim

  Yeppers, it's more than just a little possible, The US doesn't know everything. It's also possible that the Intelligence we used wasn't as good as it should have been. it's also possible that with 12 years to hide his weapons it may take that long to find them. Seems the administration was right about the mobile bio labs though. That in and of itself was a violation that Iraq (and France) denied.
• 

  ThiChi

  Thank El we now have leaders that are willing to stand up to these tyrants and radicals. The appeasement policies of the last forty years have not worked. If Iran and others want to coddle to terrorists and religious zealots, then be prepared to meet the Bush Doctrine...........
• 

  Pleasuredome

  yes good news that the suspected bio labs that were shown in the pics were found. trouble is proving that they were more than suspect. a bit like the news reports making a major deal out of the fact that iraqi's had respirators, which could only mean that they had NBC weapons.
• 

  ISP

  Interesting point, SFT.

  I dont think the UK will go with the US on this one and I dont think the US will do much either. That doesn't mean they cannot threaten, like they are doing.

  Blair got the benefit of the doubt with Iraq...it was saddam after all. He wont get it again. Similar story with the US. I think diplomacy has been well set up by the show of force with Iraq.

  ISP