"Iran says US presence at nuclear talks "positive
DAMASCUS (Reuters) - The United States said on Wednesday it was sending an envoy to Geneva to join nuclear talks with Iran for the first time, to underline to the Islamic Republic and others that Washington wanted a diplomatic solution to the impasse.
French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner told reporters in English outside a European security meeting in Vienna:
"I talked to Mottaki and he was open, but open to what? That is always the case. We talk and talk with the Iranians, but it's always disillusion. Iran's (written) response to our offer said, 'OK to dialogue', but nothing about enrichment, as if they had not read our letter. I have lots of hope for these talks, but I don't expect anything from them. France has had lots of talks with Iran (on nuclear issues) but they have never produced anything."
Nice attitude to go in with, 'eh?
He said Tehran was still not addressing "the core of the subject" -- an enrichment suspension, or an interim freeze on steps to expand the proliferation-prone activity.
This guy must be an Israeli stooge.
We know this next woman is.
U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, asked if she expected a positive response from Iran, told reporters:
"I don't know. The point we are making is that the United States is firmly behind this diplomacy and firmly behind and unified with our allies. Hopefully the Iranians will take that message."
And if they don't, then what?
Tensions with Iran have intensified, particularly since Tehran tested missiles last week, pushing up oil prices, rattling Israeli nerves and prompting Washington to say it would defend its allies against any possible attacks."
That last paragraph disgusts me!
First of all, it has been Israel and their rhetoric that has driven up oil prices, not Iran.
And they rattled poor little Israel's nerves, huh?
I'm so sick of the Israeli bias inherent in the AmeriKan MSM I can hardly stand it anymore.
And that is what 'prompted" the U.S. to say it would "defend" blah, blah, blah.
They can't even get a background paragraph correct, along with the rest of the agenda-pushing lies.
Sigh.
Gee, what a surprise, huh? PFFFT!
GENEVA - A US decision to bend policy and sit down with Iran at nuclear talks produced no results yesterday, with Tehran rebuffing a call by Washington and five other world powers to freeze uranium enrichment.
In response, the six gave Iran two weeks to respond to their demand, setting the stage for a new round of UN sanctions. Iran's refusal to consider suspending enrichment was an indirect slap at the United States.
Undersecretary of State William Burns delivered "a clear, simple message" when it was his turn to speak, McCormack told reporters in Washington. He cited Burns as telling his Tehran counterpart: "Iran must suspend uranium enrichment to have negotiations involving the United States."
John Bolton, who served as Washington's former ambassador to the UN and undersecretary of state in charge of the Iran file, said the outcome proved that Tehran never had "serious intentions to give up its nuclear program."
And the New York Times dutifully picks up the Zionist War Trumpet!
Didn't we already go through this on Iraq?
Yes, you read my title correctly. Today's New York Times includes an op-ed piece by Benny Morris, a Professor of Middle Eastern history at Ben Gurion University. He claims Israel will most certainly attack Iran within the next 4 to 7 months, and if conventional weapons are unsuccessful to knock out Iran's nuclear program, than Israel will escalate to the use of nuclear weapons."
And I'll title the NYT piece my local picked up with the headline they gave me, o.k.?
"Iran Nuclear Talks Fizzle"
GENEVA — International talks on Iran’s nuclear ambitions ended in deadlock on Saturday, despite the Bush administration’s decision to reverse policy and send a senior American official to the table for the first time.
I'm not buying the "reversal of position" shit. This is a trap!
It's Iraq all over again, and no one in AmeriKa cares.
Iran responded with a written document that failed to address the main issue: international demands that it stop enriching uranium. And Iranian diplomats reiterated before the talks that they considered the issue nonnegotiable.
But officials involved in Saturday’s negotiations said that when they repeatedly pressed the Iranians to say whether they could accept the idea, the question was evaded every time. “We still didn’t get the answer we were looking for,” the European Union foreign policy chief, Javier Solana, said at a news conference after several hours of talks, held in Geneva’s City Hall.
Iranians negotiate like Israelis?
Despite the shift in American willingness to talk, one point of policy clearly has not changed: the Bush administration wants to avoid the impression that it is negotiating with Iran before it suspends its production of enriched uranium, which can be used to make electricity or fuel bombs.
Even the subject of a joint photograph was one of dispute. The only photo accepted by the American side was one with all parties at the table. The Americans objected to the idea of a photo of Mr. Solana and Mr. Jalili at a joint news conference with Mr. Burns and the other participants standing behind them.
Such junior high shit!!
Complicating the diplomacy was the fact that before Saturday’s talks, the six powers were not united on a joint strategy on how to proceed. The American delegation had told its partners that Mr. Burns’s appearance was a one-time event and that Iran had two weeks to decide whether to accept the “freeze-for-freeze” formula. Germany, Russia and China, by contrast, argued that there should be time to explore the negotiating track with Iran.
