You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Syria-Lebanon-Iran
Iran nuclear talks off - Iranian official
2006-07-06
Iran said on Wednesday crucial talks between the European Union and Iran on incentives aimed at ending a nuclear stand-off have been postponed for a week, giving no immediate official reason for the delay. "The meeting has changed to the next week. They (the Iranian delegation) will not come (to Brussels) today," a senior Iranian nuclear official who requested anonymity told Reuters. Iran's Fars news agency reported that Larijani had cancelled his trip to Belgium "for some reasons" and that the meeting could be rescheduled in coming days.

The office of EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana, whose had been due to meet Iranian nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani, could not immediately confirm when the meeting, set by Western powers as a deadline for Iran's response, would take place. Solana spoke by telephone with Larijani on Wednesday, an EU official said.

Iran had said it needs more time to reply to the incentives offer, adding to longstanding Western suspicions that it has been playing for time in the stand-off. But an analyst in Tehran said a visit to the European Parliament in Strasbourg on the same day by the leader of the outlawed National Council of Resistance of Iran, regarded by the government as a terrorist group, appeared to be the reason. Maryam Rajavi, who is based in France and whose organisation is the political wing of the outlawed Peoples Mujahideen armed group, was invited to the legislature by a cross-party group of EU lawmakers who call themselves "Friends of a Free Iran". "One might think that this didn't please the Iranians, but it could also be a welcome pretext for the Iranians," the analyst said, who asked not to be identified.

Diplomats said divisions in the U.N. Security Council over what action to take on Iran meant there had been little chance of responding either at the Brussels meeting or before a July 15 summit of G8 leading industrialised nations in Russia.
Posted by:Fred

#10  B83 Dial-a-Yield. From a few KT to 1.2MT, airburst or groundburst. As long as one does not mind bomber or fighter delivery.
Posted by: ed   2006-07-06 19:46  

#9  Well,yes, we find that our current warheads, even the smallest, are too large to use in a tactical environment. We need very low yield nukes for ground penetration to smash underground works with shock waves, but not cause large surface radiation emissions. These are being developed. Strangely, it's almost more difficult to build a small one vs. a large one. Delivery from a parabolic trajectory allows sufficient penetration before detonation.
Posted by: SOP35/Rat   2006-07-06 19:37  

#8  I agree OP. And I doubt a Nimitz can be dispatched without nukes.

What this really means is that the Euros will have been made to undeniably look like saps by the UN (Russia & China) and Iran. The up shot of the Korea fiasco will be that Japan and the US will be made to look weak, if not saps by the UN (Russia & China). The UN is going to be the big loser this summer. Bush needs to nominate a new UN ambassador. He may not. or he may nominate Bolton plus, whomever that might be. Or he might submit Bolton for confirmation again leaving the post open till the Senate votes. It's going to be interesting. And interesting to watch the new SecGen selection. I'm not certain that post will be filled either. Especially with all the major contributors looking like weak, dumb saps.
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2006-07-06 18:54  

#7  Do the EUros just enjoy being the Iranians butt boys? I'm trying really hard to understand these Euro folks motivation, but it completely baffles me.
Posted by: ed   2006-07-06 18:47  

#6   it gave us more time to manufacture the 5 kt. warheads for Tridents that we'll eventually use on you.
The smallest US warhead is a 10kt artillery shell for 175mm howitzers. Anything on a Tomahawk would be from 75Kt to 1Mt. Tridents are equipped with 10/12 1Mt Mk-24-type thermonuclear warheads. Currently the largest weapon in the US inventory is a 10Mt air-dropped City-crusher that is (supposedly) not deployed.

Iran would probably be greeted first and foremost with tactical, conventional weapons from B-1, B-52, and B-2 bombers, tactical Navy and Air Force fighters, submarine- and warship-launched Tomahawk conventional weapons, and Naval gunfire. The US wouldn't use nukes unless things got totally out of hand, or the Iranians managed to sink a Nimitz-class carrier. If that happened, all bets are off.
Posted by: Old Patriot   2006-07-06 18:29  

#5  We knew there would be no negotiating with you. Unfortunately, we wasted time and went thru the motions anyway to be PC. Yes, it gave you more time. But, it gave us more time to manufacture the 5 kt. warheads for Tridents that we'll eventually use on you.
Posted by: SOP35/Rat   2006-07-06 12:02  

#4  whic h means six more weeks before nutbar starts his armagheddon.
Posted by: Thinemp Whimble2412   2006-07-06 09:02  

#3  The 12th Imam must've come out of the well and saw his shadow...
Posted by: tu3031   2006-07-06 07:32  

#2  giving no immediate official reason for the delay

Update: The official reason for the delay is to buy time to enrich a bit more uranium.
Posted by: grb   2006-07-06 02:51  

#1  Oh dear, was it the tea?
Posted by: Captain America   2006-07-06 00:51  

00:00