What's new

–US threatens to quit nuke talks; Iran blames West for divide–

Poll: will the negotiations get the result?


  • Total voters
    12

Aramagedon

BANNED
Joined
Apr 29, 2015
Messages
8,801
Reaction score
-13
Country
Iran, Islamic Republic Of
Location
Iran, Islamic Republic Of
Associated Press By BRADLEY KLAPPER and MATTHEW LEE 12 hours ago

VIENNA (AP) — U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry threatened Thursday to walk away from nuclear talks as he signaled that diplomats won't conclude an agreement with Iran over the coming hours — another delay that this time could complicate American efforts to quickly implement any deal. The Iranians immediately fired back, accusing the U.S. and its European allies of causing the deadlock.

Kerry and other Western officials said Iran still hadn't made the tough political decision to roll back its nuclear program. But a senior Iranian official said it was the Americans and their partners who were backtracking on several key commitments related to Iran's permitted level of nuclear activity and definitively ending economic sanctions against Tehran.

"This is not open-ended," Kerry told reporters outside the 19th-century Viennese palace hosting the negotiations. "We can't wait forever for the decision to be made. If the tough decisions don't get made, we are absolutely prepared to call an end to this process."

It was the strongest indication yet of U.S. frustration with Iran, and vice versa, coming two days after President Barack Obama vowed a similar response to Iranian intransigence and suggesting patience was running out as the current round of talks headed into its 14th day.

Thursday's latest delay for a comprehensive deal is significant. Iran is demanding prompt easing of economic penalties for nuclear concessions, and the longer it takes world powers to make good on their promises, the longer they'll have to wait for the Iranians to scale back their nuclear program.


Under U.S. law, the seven nations negotiating in Vienna have to complete the accord before the end of Thursday in Washington to avoid invoking a 60-day congressional review period during which President Barack Obama cannot waive sanctions on Iran. If they meet the target, the review would only be 30 days.

The specter of prolonged public relations campaigns for and against the pact also may not work in Obama's favor. The delay could imply that the U.S., Iran and other negotiating powers may end up having to push off the talks until September when any deal would again only amount to a 30-day review period.

"We will not rush and we will not be rushed," Kerry said.

"We would not be here continuing to negotiate just for the sake of negotiating. We're here because we believe we are making real progress toward a comprehensive deal," he said. But, he added: "We are not going to sit at the negotiating table forever."

Kerry spoke after discussing the state-of-play with other world powers for almost an hour Thursday evening. That conversation followed a flurry of other closed-door meetings, including a 45-minute session between Kerry and Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif. The pair reconvened for more than an hour at night.

"We're working hard, but not rushed, to get the job done," Zarif tweeted.

A senior Iranian official, who briefed foreign reporters covering the talks on condition no one quote him by name, declared the West's reluctance to ease economic penalties the biggest obstacle. The U.S. is "obsessed" with sanctions, said the official, adding that the deadlock could prove a major setback.

French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said he would remain in Austria's capital for negotiations into Friday morning, citing "good things, but there is still work to do."

However, U.S. Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz, who has been leading the American negotiating team alongside Kerry, was to leave for Portugal for most of Friday to discuss climate change matters with the president, prime minister and other senior officials.

The current round of talks has already been extended twice since it started on June 27, as has an interim nuclear accord with Iran that these negotiations are meant to finalize. The preliminary deal was due to expire on June 30, then July 7 and then Friday. It would have to be renewed a third time if the talks go beyond Friday.


At an economic summit in Russia, Iran's President Hassan Rouhani said his nation was preparing for a "post-sanctions" era, suggesting a deal may be in sight to curb Iran's nuclear program in exchange for the lifting of economic sanctions.

Kerry spoke by phone with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, who was also in Russia and voiced optimism, saying he was prepared to return to Vienna.

And in what was widely seen as a hint that the talks might soon wrap up, the White House late Wednesday issued a brief statement saying President Barack Obama had conferred with the U.S. negotiating team through a secure video call.

The last time Obama held a secure conference call with his negotiators on the road was shortly before the framework for a final accord was reached on April 2 in Lausanne, Switzerland.

Kerry, nursing a broken leg, has been in Vienna since June 26, while Zarif has made one short trip to Tehran for consultations. Other foreign ministers have come and gone. All but the top diplomats from Russia and China were present at Thursday's meetings.


When the talks missed their second deadline it raised new questions about the ability of world powers to cut off all Iranian pathways to nuclear weapons through diplomacy.

Long-standing differences persist over inspections of Iranian facilities and the Islamic republic's research and development of advanced nuclear technology.

New difficulties also have surfaced over the past few days. Iran is pushing for an end to a U.N. arms embargo on the country but Washington opposes that demand.

Russia's Lavrov took Tehran's side.

"Our Western partners, who did not support a draft resolution entirely acceptable to the other parties, are at fault, not Iran," he tweeted.



___

Associated Press writer George Jahn contributed to this report.
 
did anybody think Iran was going to keep up it's end of the bargain??? they wouldn't allow inspectors in their secret nuke making facilities.

this whole thing been a sham. i honestly don't care if Iran wants nukes when you got NK who has them and throws a hissy fit over the smallest thing threatening nuclear attack. I would assume Iran would be mature if they had Nukes.

least we forget Israel also has nukes. so if Iran wants to wipe out Israel and Israel wipes out Iran so be it.
 
did anybody think Iran was going to keep up it's end of the bargain??? they wouldn't allow inspectors in their secret nuke making facilities.

this whole thing been a sham. i honestly don't care if Iran wants nukes when you got NK who has them and throws a hissy fit over the smallest thing threatening nuclear attack. I would assume Iran would be mature if they had Nukes.

least we forget Israel also has nukes. so if Iran wants to wipe out Israel and Israel wipes out Iran so be it.
Iran does not want nuke weapon.
 
fortunately all Rohani's (and his fellows) delusions will disappear soon.


that's bull and you know it.
actually it's your words which are absolute B.S
16 American intelligence agencies including CIA have clearly reported that Iran doesn't have any plan to build a nuclear bomb, so if you have any information you better to share it with them.

They don't want nuke, they want nuka-cola.
you too.
 
did anybody think Iran was going to keep up it's end of the bargain??? they wouldn't allow inspectors in their secret nuke making facilities.

this whole thing been a sham. i honestly don't care if Iran wants nukes when you got NK who has them and throws a hissy fit over the smallest thing threatening nuclear attack. I would assume Iran would be mature if they had Nukes.

least we forget Israel also has nukes. so if Iran wants to wipe out Israel and Israel wipes out Iran so be it.

Do you even know what you are talking about? Why is it that most 'White Americans' are absolutely ignorant about many issues outside America?

Do you even know why the talks are slowed down? There is only one problem remaining: U.S refuses to lift the arms embargo, despite the deal in Lausanne which said all UN security council sanctions will be lifted. Now they are backtracking, because they find it hard to lift arms embargo against Iran (which was put in place because of nuclear program). So it's U.S that is not keeping up its end of bargain, just as Russian FM said, it's western fault that the deal is not reached yet, because U.S is refusing to do what it promised to, that's why Iranian leader said, we will negotiate, but we will not trust U.S, given its history.


For your information, it was not Iran who asked for talks, it was U.S who did it, sending Oman's leader to Tehran, to express America's readiness to resolve the nuclear program once and for all. Now it is playing games in last minutes.

Iran has already accepted all it had promised to hold up, all of it.
 
the title is a little misleading as if Western partners dont have a unified stance. I wish this deal is reached without chocking either side. if it falls through then those who have funded and supported terror in the middle east and gave ISIS to the world will celebrate.
 
that's bull and you know it.

Why do you think all people should look at the world through your glasses? if Iran had any plan to make a bomb we would make it years ago I assure you no one could have done a damn thing to prevent it. but we don't want ...
 
did anybody think Iran was going to keep up it's end of the bargain??? they wouldn't allow inspectors in their secret nuke making facilities.

this whole thing been a sham. i honestly don't care if Iran wants nukes when you got NK who has them and throws a hissy fit over the smallest thing threatening nuclear attack. I would assume Iran would be mature if they had Nukes.

least we forget Israel also has nukes. so if Iran wants to wipe out Israel and Israel wipes out Iran so be it.
And why should they let anybody into their military facilities again?

Thanks but no thanks! We saw Iraq and know what happens then. As soon as US and its allied nations inspect as much as they want and make sure there are no surprise threats, then they will invade Iran. Comparing where Iraq is today thanks to US, I think not reaching a deal and maintain the current sanctions is preferable.
 
fortunately all Rohani's (and his fellows) delusions will disappear soon.



actually it's your words which are absolute B.S
16 American intelligence agencies including CIA have clearly reported that Iran doesn't have any plan to build a nuclear bomb, so if you have any information you better to share it with them.


you too.


Iran wants the bomb :argh:

the country doesn't need nuclear power. it's already running a surplus on electricity that it sending to neighbors right now.


Iran has some of the largest Natural gas reserves. it has plenty of energy.

and please don't tell me Iran is concerned for the environment :rofl:


build solar and wind if that's the case :wave:
 
Iran wants the bomb :argh:

the country doesn't need nuclear power. it's already running a surplus on electricity that it sending to neighbors right now.


Iran has some of the largest Natural gas reserves. it has plenty of energy.

and please don't tell me Iran is concerned for the environment :rofl:


build solar and wind if that's the case :wave:

This is not something that has to be explained to most people but it seems you Americans need help.
Here is a simple concept for you to get your head around, it'll be your homework for the day:

The less oil/gas resources a country uses for internal consumption = the more oil/gas it has to sell and hence more $$.
In other words, nuclear power used for electricity means more oil/gas is available for export and revenues.
 
Iran wants the bomb :argh:

the country doesn't need nuclear power. it's already running a surplus on electricity that it sending to neighbors right now.


Iran has some of the largest Natural gas reserves. it has plenty of energy.

and please don't tell me Iran is concerned for the environment :rofl:


build solar and wind if that's the case :wave:
By the same logic, US and Canada don't need nuclear power plants either as they both have enough fossil fuel reserves.

Using the natural gas reserves is not a sustainable way of generating energy. And I must say Iran is concerned about environment. Just search for air pollution in Tehran. Solar and wind can't generate the amount of energy required. If you have any technical knowledge you should know it.

And finally, where is the international law saying a country that has other means of generating energy should not pursue nuclear technology?
 
You shouldn't expect anything else from American imperialists and Christian Zionists....

Inspection demand of Iranian military sites a non-starter: Scholar

Washington and its allies’ demand of intrusive inspections of Iran’s military facilities is a non-starter in the P5+1 nuclear talks, an American scholar and journalist in Wisconsin says.

“It seems that the Obama administration and its allies in the P5+1 talks are holding up obstacles at the very last moment to the nuclear deal with Iran. And especially this issue of inspections, they are demanding extremely intrusive inspections,” said Dr. Kevin Barrett, a founding member of the Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance.

“At times – I am not sure what the details are at this moment, but earlier this week they were talking about demanding some kind of on-demand inspections of Iran’s military facilities. Of course, this is a non-starter, because the US has repeatedly threatened Iran militarily, saying nothing is off the table,” he stated.

Iran and the P5+1 countries - the United States, Britain, France, Russia, China and Germany - have been engaged in crucial talks in Vienna towards reaching a landmark agreement over Tehran’s nuclear program.

The negotiating sides missed an initial deadline of June 30 and all parties agreed on a new July 7 deadline. However, negotiations will continue for "a couple" of more days as some issues remain unresolved.

Dr. Barrett said that “the Israelis who have tremendous power in the US have been pushing for war with Iran ever since 9/11 which in fact was orchestrated largely by the neoconservatives, Likudnik Israelis, in order to turn the US military against the seven countries in five years which General Wesley Clark explains to us was the purpose of 9/11. And Iran was number seven on that list and by far the most important country that the Zionists wanted to attack.”

“So there is a clear-cut case of Western and especially Zionist aggression against Iran. They have been planning a war on Iran for several decades really, ever since the revolution of 1979. And in that context, demanding this kind of intrusive inspections of Iran’s military facilities is completely absurd, because these inspections are in fact espionage operations,” he added.

“This was explained by Scott Ritter in regards to the inspections in Iraq prior to the war that utterly destroyed that country. And clearly, they might be planning to do the same thing in Iran. The Iranian government would be completely crazy to allow on-demand inspections of its military facilities,” the scholar noted.

“So when they appeared to be raising that as an absolute necessary part of the deal, it makes one wonder whether they really want a deal or not, or whether that might be some kind of pressure point they are using to get something else. But one has to ask oneself what else do they want? The CIA and Israeli intelligence actually certified that Iran does not have a nuclear weapons program,” he pointed out.

“Even the Israelis admit that their only concern is that sometime after this deal expires – ten years from now – they are worried what might happen then? Well, this is completely ridiculous, especially given that the Israelis have 400 plus nuclear weapons, and the Americans have many, many thousands of nuclear weapons, as do many other countries around the world, while Iran is the only country in the world whose Supreme Leader has issued a fatwa completely banning all nuclear weapons, reiterating a ban imposed by the father of the Islamic Republic, Ayatollah Khomeini,” Dr. Barrett underlined.

US Secretary of State John Kerry told reporters in Vienna on Thursday that “we are not going to sit at the negotiating table forever.”

“Let me assure you we would not be here continuing to negotiate for the sake of negotiating,” he said. “We know that difficult decisions don't become easier over time.”

The top US diplomat said that the US and its negotiating partners are “prepared to call an end to this” if “tough decisions don't get made.”

During a meeting with a group of Democratic senators on Wednesday, President Barack Obama said the chances of a deal with Iran were less than 50-50 at this point, according to one of the senators present at the meeting.

PressTV-‘US and allies torpedoing Iran deal’
 
By the same logic, US and Canada don't need nuclear power plants either as they both have enough fossil fuel reserves.

Using the natural gas reserves is not a sustainable way of generating energy. And I must say Iran is concerned about environment. Just search for air pollution in Tehran. Solar and wind can't generate the amount of energy required. If you have any technical knowledge you should know it.

And finally, where is the international law saying a country that has other means of generating energy should not pursue nuclear technology?


that logic doesn't make sense.

U.S and Canada does need Nuclear power and has had it for more than 5 decades.

Iran wants nuclear weapons it's that simple and nuclear power is just a smokescreen
 
that logic doesn't make sense.

U.S and Canada does need Nuclear power and has had it for more than 5 decades.

Iran wants nuclear weapons it's that simple and nuclear power is just a smokescreen
And why do they need Nuclear power? Just because you say so? Or just because they have done it for the past 50 years or so? What kind of twisted logic is that?

Here, something for you to read:

Countries with the biggest oil reserves - Hydrocarbons Technology

Canada has the third biggest oil reserves in the world after Venezuela and Saudi Arabia and at the same time one of the richest nations for potential hydroelectric power and yet it has nuclear power plants.

If Iran wanted nuclear bomb, it would have it by now. US was able to build the bomb in couple of years during WWII with the technology available at that time. Don't you think today's Iran's technology is at least comparable to that of US during WWII? This debate is ongoing for more than a decade more than enough to build a bomb no matter how you look at it. If Iran still doesn't have it, which is something the whole world agree on, it is because it doesn't want it.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom