Bush: B-2 Flights Over Tehran for ‘Peaceful Purposes’

Bush: B-2 Flights Over Tehran for ‘Peaceful Purposes’

By Scott Ott, Editor-in-Chief, ScrappleFace.com
News Fairly Unbalanced. We Report. You Decipher.

(2006-08-26) — Just hours after Iran opened a new plant capable of making plutonium “for peaceful purposes”, U.S. President George Bush assured his Iranian counterpart that any B-2 bombers that appear over Tehran in the near future would also serve peaceful purposes.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad cut the ribbon on the new heavy-water nuclear plant Saturday as part of a month-long Iranian tribute to the effectiveness of the United Nations.

Mr. Bush hailed Iran’s “transparent diplomacy” and said, “I called President Ahmadinejad today to congratulate him, and I told him that if he happens to notice one of them Stealth bombers going over his town at about 600 miles per hour, he can be assured that the pilot has only the best intentions in his heart for world peace.”

“There’s nothing like the B-2 when it comes to giving peace a chance,” Mr. Bush added.
http://www.scrappleface.com/?p=2319

Scrappleface isn't quite as funny as The Onion, but it's damn close. lol

-Kiamat Dusk

War is never funny, and threatening to violiate Rules of War is a serious War Crime which Dictator George needs to be arrested for.

The nation does not want another war, or are the only polls you pay attention too the polls funded by the fundies?

Bush is a War mongering dictator whose family do business with the people he now declares his self appointed war of terror on. The man needs to be charged with war crimes by the UN and locked up with key being thrown away. Either that or committed to a lunatic asylum, he scares me more than any Muslim country ever will

Peace

So you propose jailing people for crimes they haven't commited?

Just making sure we're on the same page here, because that's what you just said.



The nation rarely wants a war. War, however, sometimes happens none the less, and sticking one's head in the sand doesn't make the issue go away.

The Invasion of Iraq was illegal..

According to who?

In any event, that's not what Magnum said.

Yeah, no doubt Kofi is still upset because his oil for food bribes got cut off.

Koffi Annan is one of those people that if you arn't sure what the right position is on any issue find out where Koffi stands and take the opposite stance.

Geoff Erskine

Do you /really/ want to use the words of Mr. Annan, of all people, as a benchmark for what is legal and what isn't? The man would know neither law nor morality if they came up and bit him in the nuts.

That having been said, the scope of legal discussion over the legality of our actions with reguards to Res. 1441 would fill a building. Probably with microfilm, not paper. There has been no formal resolution one way or another. It may be your opinion that the war is illegal, and it may be Mr. Annan's opinion as well, but no formal resolution with reguards to the issue has been reached. Until then, it's not been found to be illegal, it's just speculation. The ICC is in a similar position at the moment.

By the way, I repeat: That's not what Magnum said.

We really need those B-2 flights!
--------------------------------------

Defying U.N., Iran Opens Nuclear Reactor

KHONDAB, Iran (AP) -- Iran's hard-line president on Saturday inaugurated a heavy-water production plant, a facility the West fears will be used to develop a nuclear bomb, as Tehran remained defiant ahead of a U.N. deadline that could lead to sanctions.

The U.N. has called on Tehran to stop the separate process of uranium enrichment -- which also can be used to create nuclear weapons -- by Thursday or face economic and political sanctions.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad declared that his nation's nuclear program poses no threat to other nations, even Israel, ''which is a definite enemy.''

Ahmadinejad said in a speech that Iran would never abandon what he once again called its purely peaceful nuclear program.

''There is no discussion of nuclear weapons,'' he said. ''We are not a threat to anybody even the Zionist regime, which is a definite enemy for the people of the region.''

Though the West's main worry has been enrichment of uranium that could be used in a bomb, it also has called on Iran to stop the construction of a heavy-water reactor near the production plant that Ahmadinejad inaugurated.

A senior Israeli lawmaker warned in a statement that the plant inauguration marks ''another leap in Iran's advance toward a nuclear bomb.''

Israeli legislator Ephraim Sneh of the Labor Party, a partner in the ruling coalition, said that the Jewish state must ''prepare itself militarily.'' Ahmadinejad last year called for Israel to be ''wiped off the map.''

The spent fuel from a heavy-water reactor can be reprocessed to extract plutonium for use in a bomb.

Reactors fueled by enriched uranium use regular -- or light -- water in the chain reaction that produces energy. Heavy water contains a heavier hydrogen particle, which allow the reactor to run on natural uranium mined by Iran, forgoing the enrichment progress.

Vice President Gholamreza Aghazadeh, who also heads the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, said the heavy-water facility will be used to treat and diagnose AIDS and cancer, and for other medicine and agricultural purposes.

Iran is scheduled to complete the reactor in 2009.

Iran responded Tuesday to package of incentives, presented by the five permanent members of the Security Council plus Germany, for it to halt uranium enrichment and return to negotiations on increasing international oversight of its nuclear program. Tehran said it would be open to negotiations but did not agree to the West's key demand to halt enrichment as a precondition to talks.

The International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N. nuclear watchdog, will report on the state of Iran's program by mid-September. If its report finds that enrichment is continuing, the council could move toward sanctions.

Tehran has called the Security Council resolution that set the Thursday deadline ''illegal'' and has insisted it won't give up its nuclear program.

''They may impose some restrictions on us under pressure. But will they be able to prevent the thoughts of a nation?'' Ahmadinejad said Saturday. ''Will they be able to prevent the progress and technology to a nation? They have to accept the reality of a powerful, peace-loving and developed Iran. This is in the interest of all governments and all nations whether they like it or not.''

Mohammed Saeedi, the deputy head of Iran's atomic organization, called the heavy-water plant ''one of the biggest nuclear projects'' in the country, state-run television reported.

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

Briana Dawson

OP was funny.

Iraq war was not illegal.

Saddam was a bad man and its probably best that he is gone.

Zero thought was given as to what would happen after he was removed and if the cure would be worse than the disease.

The Iraq war involved piss poor planning.

Bush and a lot of his supporters are morons.

Most of Bush's opponents are morons.

Bush's opponents are so hell bent on proving he's a moron they mistate or nearly everything about him thereby making him look better than the alternatives.

The world needs a rolling restart.

Was this the same UN that appointed Libya to be in charge of the human rights department?

Yep. I think the vote was like 30 out of 33 countries voted them to chair the human rights dept back around 2002/2003 I think.

Seeing how the U.N. is made up of mostly 3rd world and predominately African countries I am not surprised they wanted to Libya, a police state, watching over human rights.

Briana Dawson

who you think be better suited? Isreal?

You mean like the only polls YOU pay attention too are the ones funded by the libbies?

Yes.

Or, well, a lot of people.

Britain?

America?

Japan?

Australia?

You know, some country that actually has a concept of "rights"?

ah so either America.. or lapdogs to america.. great!

Those so-called "lapdogs" are independent and fully functional democratic nations who actually give their people a say in what their rights are. So yes, they would be great. Pretty much any other Western European nation would be much better than Libya (FFS) too (funny how they weren't mentioned though ).

Who would you like to see in the role, China? The Palestinians? Iran? lol

The fact that Libya was even considered for such a role just shows how unimportant the UN really is. If it actually mattered, no nation worth anything would have stood for that crap.

Jeeze, bark bark bark.

Can you be constructive and name a country you think is well suited to chair the U.N. department of human rights. Or is any country ok by you?

Briana Dawson

You do understand the concept of what the whole thing was about, right? It's not about "my country" or "your country", it's about "who has a history of actually caring about the things we're making this group to look in to".

Contrary to apparently-popular opinion, "U.N." is does not somehow stand for "Nations United Against America".

Just curious. Would you rather be accused of a crime and have a trial in Libya or any one of the following - USA, Britain, Australia or Japan?

Briana: Spain, Portugal, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Ireland, Scotland, Russia, Poland, Norway, Japan, South Korea, Canada, Brazil, Mexico, Australia, New Zealand......

But definitely do NOT include Israel.

Maybe the U.S. should sign the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, as well as Israel.

That would depend on what nationality I am... so Id say america unless Im african American or middle eatern, um ... britain I guess has cleaned up their act but Im Irish so I'll get shit from inmates.. but Id pick britain I guess ....

ROFLOLOLOL.. classic