Arizona Sports Fans Network  

Go Back   Arizona Sports Fans Network > Other Stuff > Politics and Religion > Polls

View Poll Results: Iranian Nuclear Power for Stability in Iraq?
Yes. 0 0%
No. 16 84.21%
Maybe. 3 15.79%
Voters: 19. You may not vote on this poll

Thread Tools Display Modes
Old March 17th, 2006, 04:58 AM   #1
Ads by Google
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: 85249
Posts: 23,009

POD: Would you accept Iran's offer to help "stabilize" Iraq in exchange for...

...acceptance of their right to have nuclear power?

I kept the poll answers simple (Yes, No, Maybe) so folks can extrapolate from there.


Iran Offers to Enter Iraq Talks With U.S.

Iran Offers to Enter Into Talks With United States Aimed at Stabilizing Situation in Iraq


The Associated Press

TEHRAN, Iran - Iran offered Thursday to enter into talks with the United States aimed at stabilizing Iraq. The Bush administration said it would discuss the insurgency with the Islamic republic, but not nuclear issues. It was the first time Iran has agreed to negotiate with the superpower it calls the "Great Satan" a move that appeared to reflect the desire of at least some top Iranian officials to relieve Western pressure over Tehran's nuclear program in return for help on Iraq, which is sliding ominously toward civil war.

But Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and other administration officials stressed that said any discussions would not cover Tehran's disputed nuclear program.

Rice, speaking during a trip to Sydney, Australia, declined to provide a timeline for potential talks but indicated they would involve only the U.S. ambassador in Iraq, Zalmay Khalilzad.

"This is not a negotiation of some kind," Rice said after meeting with Australia's prime minister, John Howard.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan said earlier that Khalilzad would have a narrow mandate dealing specifically with Iraq. He called the nuclear debate "a separate issue."

The secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, Ali Larijani, told reporters any talks between the United States and Iran would be limited to Iraqi issues. Larijani, who is also Iran's top nuclear negotiator, said Khalilzad had repeatedly invited Iran for talks on Iraq.

Despite the caveats, any direct dialogue between Tehran and Washington could be the beginning of negotiations between the two foes over Iran's nuclear program.

A Washington analyst on Iran, Jon Alterman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said that while talks would not go further than Iraq, their atmosphere "will spill over into every other area of contention between the United States and Iran."

Washington accuses Iran of trying to build nuclear weapons and is leading a campaign for U.N. Security Council action. Iran denies the allegation, but would like to avoid any penalties from the U.N. body, which is expected to discuss Iran's nuclear program this month.

In an effort to break an impasse over how to deal with Iran's suspect nuclear program, the five veto-wielding nations on the Security Council and Germany will meet in New York Monday, officials at the U.N. said.
Plans for the high-level negotiations underscored the urgency that Britain, France and the United States feel about the Iran issue, and reflected just how deep the divisions are between those three and China and Russia, which want only mild Security Council action on Iran.

The United States also accuses Iran of meddling in Iraqi politics and of sending weapons and men to support the insurgency.

"To resolve Iraqi issues, and to help the establishment of an independent and free government in Iraq, we agree to (talks with the United States)," Larijani told reporters after a closed meeting of parliament Thursday. He added that negotiators would be appointed for the talks, but declined to give further details.

His statement marked the first time since the 1979 Islamic Revolution that Iran had officially proposed dialogue with the United States.

Analyst Davoud Hermidas Bavand, a professor of international relations at Tehran's Imam Sadeq University, said Larijani's call was a genuine offer that could have significant consequences.

"This could be the beginning of a major breakthrough, ending more than two and a half decades of estrangement between Tehran and Washington," Bavand said.

He said some clerics within the ruling establishment are convinced Iran will be harmed by a head-on collision with the world over its nuclear activities.
How much support such views enjoy is unclear, but it is known that there are clerics who disagree with the foreign policy of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who takes a hard line against dialogue with the United States.

Bavand said when Iran's nuclear program was reported to the U.N. Security Council last month, Russia and China sent messages to Iran saying that if it wanted a face-saving solution, it had to talk to America.
"Iran needs America to calm the growing tension over its nuclear program," Bavand said. At the same time, Washington wants to restore stability to Iraq, "and Iran has sufficient weight and influence to help it out."
Another political analyst, Saeed Leylaz, also said Tehran would be prepared to trade progress on Iraq with movement on the nuclear issue by Washington.

"Continued instability in Iraq is hampering America's plans for the Middle East. Iran is ready to use its Iraq card to protect its nuclear achievements before it is too late," Leylaz said.

The proposal to hold direct talks on Iraq came a day after the senior Iraqi Shiite politician, Abdul-Aziz al-Hakim, called for Iran-U.S. talks.
"I demand the leadership in Iran to open a clear dialogue with America about Iraq," said al-Hakim, who has close ties with Iran. "It is in the interests of the Iraqi people that such dialogue is opened and reaches an understanding on various issues."

U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld recently accused Iranian Revolutionary Guards of assisting the smuggling of explosives and bomb-making material into Iraq.

Iran denied it, saying the occupying forces were responsible for the instability in Iraq.

But Iran has expressed grave concern about the violence in Iraq, where sectarian fighting and reprisal killings have escalated recently.
The United States broke diplomatic relations with Iran in 1979 after the U.S. Embassy in Tehran was seized by students to protest Washington's refusal to hand over Iran's former monarch for trial. The militants held 52 Americans hostage for 444 days.

Tehran-Washington relations began thawing after the 1997 election of former President Mohammad Khatami, who called for cultural and athletic exchanges to help bring down the wall of mistrust between both countries.

But relations worsened after President Bush named Iran as part of an "axis of evil."

Nevertheless, Iran supported the reconstruction process in Afghanistan after U.S.-supported forces ousted the Taliban regime in late 2001. It also took part in the international agreement signed in Germany that mapped out Afghanistan's transition to democracy.

DjaugheOld is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 17th, 2006, 05:25 AM   #2
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 16,774
Send a message via AIM to CaptTurbo

Once they have a non extremist "I want to kil everyone that isnt Muslim" government than sure.
CaptTurbo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 17th, 2006, 05:49 AM   #3
Ads by Google
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: 85249
Posts: 23,009
I say 'No'...only to the fact that Condi has spent the last 15 months of orchestrating sharp diplomatic manoeuvring to create an international consensus regarding Iran.

I believe Tehran is looking to muddle up the picture.
DjaugheOld is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 17th, 2006, 07:13 AM   #4
Jolly Nihilist
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Old Town Scottsdale
Posts: 7,385
We are Team America, World Police!
Iran is only a neighboring country to Iraq!
justAndy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 17th, 2006, 07:22 AM   #5
Divide Et Impera
Registered User
Divide Et Impera's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Maricopa, AZ
Age: 39
Posts: 14,396
Divide Et Impera is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 17th, 2006, 04:53 PM   #6
Posts About Nothing.
LoyaltyisaCurse's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: CA
Age: 41
Posts: 26,191
Um, No...Remeber that last time we supported Iran and Iraq at the same time?
"Going from the Raiders receivers to Larry Fitzgerald is like trading a Spam dinner for a well-aged T-bone steak." --Dan Hanzus

When I play rock, paper, scissors, I keep a glass of water in my hand and when my opponent throws down I throw the water in his face and say "Water". Beats all three, scissors can't cut-it, paper dissolves and the rock sinks. Plus it usually surprises the hell out of them.
LoyaltyisaCurse is offline   Reply With Quote


foreign policy

Similar Searches

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Sitemap:1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38

Latest Threads
- by Mitch
- by FArting
- by FArting

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:22 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2002 - 2014
Inactive Reminders By Icora Web Design