ElBaradei says he’ll quit IAEA if Iran is attacked.
ElBaradei says he’ll quit IAEA if Iran is attacked.
In an interview with AlArabiya television yesterday, International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Mohamad ElBaradei said that he would resign from his position “if a military strike is carried out against Iran at this time.” ElBaradei said that he doesn’t see Iran as a “grave and urgent danger” and that an attack now “would turn the region into a fireball“:
“I don’t believe that what I see in Iran today is a current, grave and urgent danger. If a military strike is carried out against Iran at this time … it would make me unable to continue my work,” International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Mohamad ElBaradei told Al Arabiya television in an interview.
“A military strike, in my opinion, would be worse than anything possible. It would turn the region into a fireball,” he said, emphasizing that any attack would only make the Islamic Republic more determined to obtain nuclear power.
The comments by ElBaradei, whom war hawks have attacked as an “Iran apologist,” came on the same day that the New York Times reported that a recent Israeli military exercise “appeared to be a rehearsal for a potential bombing attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
From memory, it was an inspector for the IEAE who said that IraQ didn’t have WMDs and was summarily dismissed by the Repugs, thrown off the case, and otherwise disgraced in the full visage of the world on TV and internet.
After this, does this guy think he can get away with telling his honest opinion ?
June 21st, 2008 at 5:38 pmEmerging from a 90-minute White House meeting with President George W. Bush on June 4, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said the two leaders were of one mind:
“We reached AGREEMENT on the need to take care of the Iranian threat. I left with a lot less question marks [than] I had entered with regarding the means, the timetable restrictions, and American resoluteness to deal with the problem. George Bush understands the severity of the Iranian threat and the need to vanquish it, and intends to act on that matter BEFORE THE END of his term in the White House.”
At least this time we are spared the “mushroom cloud” bugaboo. Neither Bush nor Cheney wish to call attention, even indirectly, to the fact that ALL 16 U.S. intelligence agencies concluded last November that Iran had stopped nuclear weapons-related work in 2003 and had not resumed it as of last year.
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/06/20/9771/
June 21st, 2008 at 5:46 pmI recall a study saying that bombing a nuclear research site would send fallout downwind into Pakistan, India, Thailand, etc.
As well as retaliation in closing the Straits of Hormuz, and perhaps unleashing Shiite fury against the US troops in Iraq.
That’s a lot of cost.
And gain what?
June 21st, 2008 at 5:47 pmThe comments by ElBaradei, whom war hawks have attacked as an “Iran apologist,” came on the same day that the New York Times reported that a recent Israeli military exercise “appeared to be a rehearsal for a potential bombing attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities.”
Thanks to Israel we are all phucked!!
June 21st, 2008 at 5:48 pmOh I see, we’re supposed to believe him just because he was right about Iraq all along. Uh huh. Right.
I’ll let Bush and Cheney make the call on this one, thank you. Even if by some miracle they were wrong (ha!), at least you know they are just protecting us, and those pussy dems would be too scared…..
Damn! Just pretending to think like a wingnut scares the living sh*t out of me. Not to mention makes one feel nauseous.
June 21st, 2008 at 5:50 pmRUCerious asks:
And gain what?
Why, $8.00 a gallon gas. Mission Accomplished!
June 21st, 2008 at 5:52 pmlokidog Says:
Damn! Just pretending to think like a wingnut scares the living sh*t out of me. Not to mention makes one feel nauseous.
I truly hope those dark and evil thoughts didn’t poison you…
June 21st, 2008 at 6:01 pm#3-RUCerious is absolutely correct. If the United States is stupid enough to bomb Iran, then retribution against U.S. forces in Iraq [where they do not belong, despite Obama's foolish desire to leave close to 10,000 troops in either Iraq or the nearby region] will undoubtedly occur. The ideal, which one hopes is not in vain, is for the military on those ships and planes to refuse those illegal orders that they may be given, which would be to bomb innocent Iranians and to poison their underground water supply. Astoundingly, Pelosi, Reid, and even Obama continue to insist that impeachment against perhaps the most corrupt and criminal administration in this country’s history is to remain off the table. Perhaps the only way these Democrats might change their minds would be if Bush and/or Cheney were to be caught in a closet with a ten year old boy or girl. So much for the [alleged] agent of hope and change advocating accountability for this dishonorable and wicked administration.
June 21st, 2008 at 6:06 pmIf a military strike is carried out against Iran at this time … it would make me unable to continue my work,” International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Mohamad ElBaradei told Al Arabiya television in an interview.
He’s got a point. It’d be damn near impossible to do weapons inspection on smoking ruins…
June 21st, 2008 at 6:08 pmucsbclassics53 Says:
I truly hope those dark and evil thoughts didn’t poison you…
Nah, but I just told the wife to take me to the hospital – I think I’m having a stroke.
Now that’s some quick justice!
j/k about the stroke, of course, but I shall tread softly and stay away from power tools the rest of the day. Can’t be too careful!
June 21st, 2008 at 6:13 pmSerious concerns include the vulnerability of the critical U.S. supply line from Kuwait to Baghdad, our inability to reinforce and the eventual possibility that the U.S. might be forced into a choice between ignominious retreat and using, or threatening to use, “mini-nukes.”
Pentagon opposition was confirmed in a July 2007 commentary by former Bush adviser Michael Gerson, who noted the “fear of the military leadership” that Iran would have “escalation dominance” in any conflict with the U.S.
Writing in the Washington Post last July, Gerson indicated that “escalation dominance” means, “in a broadened conflict, the Iranians could complicate our lives in Iraq and the region more than we complicate theirs.”
The Joint Chiefs also have opposed the option of attacking Iran’s nuclear sites.
June 21st, 2008 at 6:14 pmElBaradei and Hans Blix were roundly criticized by the right wing warmongers yet who turned out to be correct?
Anyone who expresses an opinion – based upon evidence and facts – that is in opposition to the propaganda spewed forth by Bush&Co, is subject to extremes of criticism of himself, his findings, his opinion and even the facts he presents.
This is Bush&Co — honest evaluations not accepted.
June 21st, 2008 at 6:19 pmI would be sorry to see this man forced to resign by the belligerent actions of Israel or any other power.
Over the last three weeks 77 House Democrats and 92 Republicans have agreed to cosponsor a new resolution against Iran that demands that President Bush “initiate an international effort” to impose a land, sea, and air blockade on Iran to prevent it from importing gasoline and to inspect all cargo entering or leaving Iran.
Such a blockade imposed without United Nations authority (which the resolution does not call for) would be widely construed as an act of war. Some congressional sources say the House could vote on the resolution, H.Con.Res. 362, as early as next week.
June 21st, 2008 at 6:26 pmOnly under a government under seize of corruption do we have to worry if Iran is attacked.
Each day, when I start the day, I listen to the news with dreaded anticipation for news of:
1. Has Obama been assassinated
June 21st, 2008 at 6:32 pm2. Have the thugs bombed Iran yet.
oh COME ON! Gimme a BREAK!
With a name like “Mohamad ElBaradei” instead of Smith or Jones (or Bush or Rockefeller), everyone knows that the only time he’ll tell the truth is if they torture it out of him.
June 21st, 2008 at 6:33 pm(snark)
ElBaradei says he’ll quit IAEA if Iran is attacked.
Just wondering, but is El Baradei Arabic for Harry Reid?
June 21st, 2008 at 6:35 pm.
Hitler had his Europe…
BushCo has their Middle East.
Hitler hated Jews…
BushCo hates brown skinned Muslims.
Hitler had his concentration camps…
BushCo has Gitmo, Abu Ghraib, and ships.
Mirror mirror on the wall, who’s the fairest of them all…?
.
June 21st, 2008 at 6:38 pmThe hopefull part is : the new resolution against Iran (Res.362) …. demands that President Bush “initiate an international effort” .
Bush could probably get Albania to sign on…but to be effective….one would need a Navy. Fortunately, most countries with a Navy see Bush as an ineffective Warmonger.
Russia and China, and therfore the UN Security council, will most likely oppose this Blockade.
June 21st, 2008 at 6:46 pmhe said, emphasizing that any attack would only make the Islamic Republic more determined to obtain nuclear power.
No shit sherlock. Why do countries have nuclear weapons? As a deterrent towards other countries attacking them. So, if Israel attacks Iran, Iran will have a bigger need for that deterrent.
I still don’t understand why Israel can have nuclear weapons and Iran can’t. Why is that? Between the two countries, Israel has been more aggressive towards its neighbors that Iran has. Who gets to decide and why do they get to decide?
June 21st, 2008 at 6:48 pmSatirev,
here’s the link, and the names of the cosponsors.
http://stopaipac.org/iranresolution.htm
June 21st, 2008 at 6:48 pmY’all,
My comment at #13 is awaiting “moderation” and I have to wonder why?
Is it “Israel” or “Schumer” or “Mukasey” or what??? Is the word “schmuck” not allowed? There are no curse words…no insults…just questions and opinions…
Yet, for some reason this comment is suspect ’round here…
June 21st, 2008 at 6:50 pmdixie blood Says:
Y’all,…Is the word “schmuck” not allowed?
– - You got your answer. Twice.
June 21st, 2008 at 6:53 pmCorrection to comment # 9. It would have been bad enough if Obama desired to leave 10,000 troops either in Iraq or in the region even after his phased [not immediate] withdrawal has been finally completed. He is actually advocating leaving close to 100,000 U.S. forces in Iraq or the nearby region, which, of course, will do nothing to win the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people in [justifiably] believing that the United States has any intention of ever leaving their country.
June 21st, 2008 at 7:00 pmJeebus, lokidog. I was about to puke…
June 21st, 2008 at 7:22 pmBush is still trying to bring on Armageddon for his insane Evangelical “base”.
Jesus save us from your followers.
June 21st, 2008 at 7:27 pmlokidog Says:
Oh I see, we’re supposed to believe him just because he was right about Iraq all along. Uh huh. Right.
I’ll let Bush and Cheney make the call on this one, thank you. Even if by some miracle they were wrong (ha!), at least you know they are just protecting us, and those pussy dems would be too scared…..
Damn! Just pretending to think like a wingnut scares the living sh*t out of me. Not to mention makes one feel nauseous.
You had me feeling like ray liotta in Goodfellas. Good one!
June 21st, 2008 at 7:34 pmNice troll cleanup on isle 3 TP.
June 21st, 2008 at 7:51 pmList of pigs supporting H.Con.Res.362
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=hc110-362
June 21st, 2008 at 8:14 pmmy link didn’t work – click on show cosponsors(146)
June 21st, 2008 at 8:15 pmCongratulations, johnsom, your fascination with a phallic symbol of warfare goes wanger in hand with your screen name.
June 21st, 2008 at 10:29 pmWell johnsom, I’m sure a military expert like yourself also knows how many programs have been, cut, postponed, reduced or canceled in order to maintain our forces in Iraq. What’s that? No? Well. here’s a short list.
New tankers? number reduced.
New rifle/carbine? canceled
MRAP? reduced and delayed
Amphibious assault vehicle? delayed
F-35? reduced and delayed
F-22? reduced
B-2? reduced
F-117? scheduled for early withdrawal in lieu of overhaul
New artillery, next-gen aircraft weapons, side arms, grenade launchers? Cut, reduced, delayed and canceled.
And on the subject of subs? The Seawolf class was canceled after a few units and the Virginia Class, of which the New Hampshire is a member? It’s facing reduction due to cost overruns.
But, of course, a military expert like yourself knew all that. Right?
June 21st, 2008 at 11:06 pmThat’s the way to conduct foreign policy in the twenty first century, jonscum. Threaten to blow up any and every body who doesn’t kow tow.
Jerkoff.
June 21st, 2008 at 11:11 pmI don’t think there is any way to stop Bush or Israel from attacking Iran. I believe one/both will strike in Oct.. If this happens, get ready for the $8 gas and probably all of our troops in Iraq will be history.
June 21st, 2008 at 11:14 pmMohamed ElBaradei, Scott Ritter, and Hans Blix were right in 2002 — Iraq had no WMD. Did we listen to these men?
And will we listen now? Ritter will speak in Louisville KY on Thursday night 6/16. Very timely. He spoke here in Oct. 2002 and said point blank — “Iraq has no WMD, it is not a threat to the US, and the US should not attack.”
Please do everything you can to stop HR 362 and Senate 580, two bills that call for a blockade of Iran — an act of War. It is time to hit the streets people!
June 21st, 2008 at 11:36 pmjohnsom Says:
This talk with bluster and carry a big stick and use it freely mentality is what is wrong with America.
It is the same jock mentality that has destroyed our public school system(what do we spend money on in the public school system? Teachers, computers? no Football stadiums). Why is the public school system in decay? Because it’s about football instead of education. They are being run as corporations instead of educational facilities(see admin bldgs with as many administrators as educators)
Bullying has become a huge problem in the public school system. Gee, didn’t see that coming with the jocks and cheerleaders being the most important people on campus. They don’t even have to learn anything…..just win so we can fund more of the same……see columbine. Who were they hunting? Jocks and cheerleaders…..go figure.
Same mentality has carried over after graduation for decades now and spilled freely into corporate America. Dog eat dog is the rule. Every man for themselves. I got mine, the hell with you and yours.
The dumbing down of America is fairly well complete. Even bush no longer has to use the English language. He bastarizes it regularly for 8 years and for some reason no one is even upset about it.
Agression and anger is the rule for daily life in America. They used to say “love it or leave it” and now days there are many who would gladly leave it if they were able. We are trapped here with the adolesents running things.
Mature, intelligent people do not speak as johnsom does and the fact that this mentality is rampant in America speaks volumes for our future. Hold on tight, we are making enemies that will last a long time.
June 22nd, 2008 at 8:45 amHi johnsom.
June 22nd, 2008 at 9:26 amDid you get a chubby over that new and ultra lame Rambo movie? Just wondering…
ElBaradei’s position is understandable as having been one of the proponents of truth about Iraq. But there is nothing bush would like better than seeing him go. So, I predict the mission is on.
June 22nd, 2008 at 10:03 amJeez………when will this insanity end?
June 22nd, 2008 at 12:03 pmWon’t that bring Jesus back?
June 22nd, 2008 at 12:17 pmgreen Says:
Jeez………when will this insanity end?
June 22nd, 2008 at 12:03 pm
When the guilty are brought to justice.
As for mr. johnsom. The point, which I think is obvious to any logical person, is that Bushco’s adventure in the Mideast has resulted in a material weakening of the u.S. military that will take many years, of responsible stewardship, to fix.
They have squandered our strength and security while creating enemies around the world. Our ability to wage war and protect our security has been severely damaged and will be limited until adults are once again in charge.
June 22nd, 2008 at 3:36 pmGreat for Bush. One less obstacle. Like Tsvangarai quitting the race because Mugabe’s thugs made voting too dangerous, ElBaradei quitting is one less contrarian Bush has to deal with it. He did his farewell European tour and he thinks he’s pals with all of the leaders there now, so who cares if he makes ElBaradei quits?
June 22nd, 2008 at 4:43 pmAs Paul O’Neill said “It was all about finding a way to do it” about selling the Iraq war. Bush is finding a way to do it to Iran. Bolton and Kristol and friends at Fox told us so. When they call, Bush answers.
Ok, so there is one good reason to attack Iran.
Just joking, but let’s be honest: Mohamad ElBaradei coddles terrorist states and condone countries building nuclear progams. He has no business in his current position. His threat to “resign” should be laughed at.
Just because the B-Team was wrong about Iran doesn’t make this guy right. I suspect in 1945 he would look at Hiroshima and say “There may be some evidence that a country has nuclear capabilities, but we need more evidence. I see no reason to take action at this point.” The guy is a hack.
June 22nd, 2008 at 5:01 pmSkeeter1 Says:
El Baradei has more integrety in his shirt pocket than you or your ilk has in a dump truck. He was right about Iraq and you were wrong….you just won’t admit you were wrong but you were.
June 22nd, 2008 at 8:33 pmI wish I could believe that Shrub wouldn’t do it.
But knowing his past actions, the Neocon dreams of conquest, and Shrub’s opinion that God and History will show him right, I can’t.
OTOH – it is easy to see the Neocons dropping the big one to make sure we can’t get out.
June 22nd, 2008 at 10:06 pmFred,
June 23rd, 2008 at 9:50 amWhat “ilk” are you talking about?
What position on Iraq where you referring to?
Moreoever, what “integrity” have you found in this guy?