The coolest place on the internet, according to this tagline.
Ask • Archive • FAQ
November 10, 2013
A lot of concrete progress has been achieved, but some differences remain.
European Union foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton said after Iran nuclear talks in Geneva. No deal was reached after much hope there would be one last night. All participating parties will reconvene November 20th for continued talks.
12:00 // 3 weeks ago
November 9, 2013
I can tell you, without any exaggeration, we not only narrowed differences but we made significant progress. There’s no question in my mind that we are closer now.
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry • Speaking on the status of negotiations with the Iranian government, aimed at preventing them from creating a nuclear weapon (Iran maintains their nuclear program is for civilian purposes). The talks went on for three days. and according to Kerry, they were encouraging, but the sides, representing Iran, the five permanent members of the UN Security Council (China, France, Russia, the United States, and the United Kingdom) and Germany ended their rendezvous in Geneva tonight with no deal in place. Negotiations are planned to resume November 20th. France, according to Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius, is opposed to the current nature of a proposed deal, which he termed a “fool’s deal” — similar opposition to that voiced by Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu. source
20:46 // 3 weeks ago
September 24, 2013
Iran’s nuclear program, and for that matter, that of all other countries, must pursue exclusively peaceful purposes. Nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction have no place in Iran’s security and defense doctrine. Our national interests make it imperative that we remove any and all reasonable concerns about Iran’s peaceful nuclear program.
Iranian President Hassan Rouhani • Speaking on Iran’s nuclear ambitions, an expectedly hot topic within his address to the United Nations today. Rouhani struck a considerably more conciliatory and cooperative tone in his remarks than was customary throughout his predecessor’s tenure — for his anti-American and Israeli rhetoric, as well as his history of Holocaust denial, officials from the U.S. had made a habit in recent years of walking out on speeches by the Iranian president. That was not the case today, however, as while Rouhani defended Iran’s right to enrich uranium for non-weapons purposes, this is a considerable change in tone. Although President Obama spoke to the UN just hours later, the two heads of state reportedly did not meet. source
20:21 // 2 months ago
June 2, 2012
Obama personally approved use of Stuxnet computer virus against Iran
- then Back in June 2010, a super-sophisticated computer virus attack was waged on the Iranian nuclear program. Named “Stuxnet,” the virus disrupted and temporarily shut down about 1,000 of the nation’s 5,000 uranium centrifuges.
- nowThe decision to push ahead with Stuxnet, which the U.S. and Israel teamed on, came directly from President Obama — he accelerated the attack, part of a U.S. effort to halt Iran’s nuclear program code-named “Olympic Games.” source
13:01 // 1 year ago
May 19, 2012
[Iran’s] continuing violation of international rules and norms and inability thus far to convince the world community that it is not pursuing the weaponization of nuclear power is of grave concern to all of us. We’re hopeful we can resolve this issue in a peaceful fashion with respect to Iran that recognizes their sovereignty but also recognizes their responsibilities.
President Obama • Speaking on Iran’s nuclear program, which many in the international community believe to be attempting weapons production. The timeline for such a weapon, if Iran is actually or would actually pursue it, is yet two years from completion, as we’ve touched on before. The remarks were made at the G-8 summit (the “Group of Eight,” for the uninitiated) at the Camp David presidential retreat, and were made while Obama stood beside British Prime Minister David Cameron and newly-minted President of France, Francois Hollande. The short-term takeaway from this? Continued economic sanctions, and more tension leading up to next week’s meeting with Iranian officials at a world leader summit in Baghdad. source (via • follow)
13:20 // 1 year ago
April 27, 2012
In a major concession, Obama administration officials say they could support allowing Iran to continue a crucial element of its disputed nuclear program if the government in Tehran took other major steps to curb its ability to develop a nuclear bomb.
The officials told the Los Angeles Times they might agree to let Tehran continue enriching uranium up to concentrations of 5% if the Iranian government agreed to unrestricted inspections, and strict oversight and safeguards that the United Nations long has demanded.
Iran has begun enriching small amounts of uranium to 20% purity in February 2010 for what it contends are peaceful purposes, although most of its stockpile is purified at lower levels. Uranium can be used as bomb fuel at about 90% enrichment.
Is the U.S. changing its tune on Iran? (via @UpfrontNews)
14:21 // 1 year ago
March 6, 2012
We all agree that the international community should demonstrate its commitment to a diplomatic solution by acknowledging Iran’s agreement to meet, by testing its desire to talk and by offering it the opportunity to respond to our legitimate concerns about its nuclear intentions.
British Foreign Secretary William Hague • Discussing the decision that a group of six global powers agreed to resume talks with Iran over the country’s nuclear situation — a set of talks that had broken off about a year ago. The talks came as Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu, who sees Iran as his country’s most dangerous enemy, was in the U.S. to talk to Obama. Israel has seemingly been looking to possibly attack Iran’s nuclear facilities, but Obama has urged the country to continue to let diplomatic mechanisms to do the work. source (via • follow)
11:15 // 1 year ago
February 29, 2012
Suffocating sanctions could lead to a grave economic situation in Iran and to a shortage of food. This would force the regime to consider whether the nuclear adventure is worthwhile, while the Persian people have nothing to eat and may rise up as was the case in Syria, Tunisia and other Arab states.
An unnamed Israeli official • Calling for the U.S. to cripple Iran’s economy with harder sanctions, to cause food shortages for the Iranian public as a means to gain diplomatic leverage. The impetus of this thinking came earlier today, when North Korea agreed to halt production of new nuclear weapons in exchange for food aid. While respecting the existential concern Iran’s nuclear prospects pose for Israel, the fact that the U.S. would itself impose a food shortage (unlike North Korea, where state mismanagement and famine were to blame) seems like it would aim the Iranian public’s outrage outward, not inward. The Arab spring had much do with economics, Tunisia’s high unemployment, for example, but a foreign state inducing hunger and starvation, and hoping people will therefore turn against their own government? That seems highly unlikely, as well as morally dubious. source (via • follow)
15:32 // 1 year ago
February 27, 2012
Israeli officials said that if they eventually decide a strike is necessary, they would keep the Americans in the dark to decrease the likelihood that the U.S. would be held responsible for failing to stop Israel’s potential attack. The U.S. has been working with the Israelis for months to persuade them that an attack would be only a temporary setback to Iran’s nuclear program.
An AP article suggesting that Israel will keep the U.S. out of the loop if it tries attacking Iran. Well, until now, that is. Good work uncovering this one, Associated Press. Now they just lost deniability. (via @BreakingNews)
22:02 // 1 year ago