Putin Says Iran Is Not Building A Nuclear Weapon
MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russian President Vladimir Putin said at a news briefing with French leader Nicolas Sarkozy on Wednesday that he has not seen any real evidence that Iran is trying to build a nuclear weapon.
“We do not have data that says Iran is trying to produce nuclear weapons. We do not have such objective data,” Putin said. “Therefore we proceed from a position that Iran has no such plans but we share the concern of our partners that all programs should be as transparent as possible.”
Be respectful of others and their opinions. Inflammatory remarks and inane leftist drivel will be deleted. It ain’t about free speech, remember you’re in a private domain. My website, my prerogative.
If you can't handle using your real email address, don't bother posting a comment.
Oh, okay, move along….
October 10th, 2007 at 4:09 amPutin is a cobra. I wouldn’t trust anything he says.
October 10th, 2007 at 4:13 am“Therefore we proceed from a position that Iran has no such plans but we share the concern of our partners that all programs should be as transparent as possible”
WTF? the programs are not transparent, if they were why would we have to argue over inspections?
pure bullshit
Patton and Macarthur must be rolling in their grave.
October 10th, 2007 at 4:50 amHe is just a corrupt commie… Iran is paying billions of dollars for Russian technology… just like Iraq used to. That is the only reason he supports them. He is like a democrat… he stands for nothing except is own right to tell everyone else what to do. Of course, he will have you murdered if you disagree.
October 10th, 2007 at 4:51 amPutin must be one gullible motherfucker then.
If the Iranians are doing nothing wrong, why aren’t they welcoming the inspectors and opening up their program for all to see?
October 10th, 2007 at 5:36 amOnce KGB always KGB. Ywah and I suppose Komrade Vlad has suddenly become a Democrat? Sure…right….uh…huh..
October 10th, 2007 at 5:39 amI am so like relieved.
I think we should go out and P A R T Y (like it’s 1999)
I thought for a while that Russia and China might have actually
wanted Iran to get the bomb, and that they were hoping that
those useful idiots might destroy a few American cities.
I am so glad to be proven wrong.
Now that Putin says nyet I can breath easy once more.
How do you spell coombyah?
Let’s elect Ron Paul or Hussein Osama.
If I wear a Che tee-shirt do I get lucky more often?
Thanks Vladamir!
October 10th, 2007 at 6:52 amThen Putin is either naive or lying, period. I vote for lying. The fact that his cronies are making megabucks selling weaponry and nuclear reactor materials to Iran surely has nothing to do with all this.
October 10th, 2007 at 7:00 amnothing to see here people..Komrade Putin says so, he is a very honest man and no reason to ever doubt a Russians word..Oh and im also selling ocean front condos in Kentucky, any takers?
October 10th, 2007 at 8:24 amPre-invasion:
“We’re only doing this for security.”
“We’re only doing this to provide for our citizens.”
Post-invasion:
“We’re only reaquiring our ancestral lands.”
“We’ll stop here and go no further if you speak nice of us and give us what we want.”
Even though Hitler said these things (or similar) before and during WW2, they certainly would fit the current situation also.
Does anyone else realize that the current global situation is eerily similar to that preceeding WW2?
October 10th, 2007 at 10:04 amIn the words of the Gipper “trust and VERIFY”
October 10th, 2007 at 10:18 amI think it was “trust BUT verify”…nonetheless the setiment is the same. But hey, Amhanutjob and Vlad, they can be trusted, right? Maybe that idiot Dummy Kucinich can go talk to both of them as well…
October 10th, 2007 at 12:20 pmInteresting article from the Tribune:
“Americans may be distracted by the war in Iraq, by the political campaign at home, by a thousand other daily events. It would be easy to miss the disparate signals that a storm is gathering over Iran… Much of the talk in the U.S. has been about what the Bush administration may do. Will the U.S. bomb Iran and could that really destroy its nuclear program? What kind of retaliation could America and its allies expect? But American leaders may not determine the ultimate shape of events. The more critical question is: What will Israel do if Iran can’t be stopped diplomatically? The Syrian strike isn’t an answer, but it could be a clue.’ 2007 is the year you determine whether diplomatic efforts will stop Iran,’ one Israeli source told Newsweek. ‘If by the end of the year that’s not working, 2008 becomes the year you take action.’ None of this suggests that an attack against Iran is—or should be—imminent. But it is impossible to imagine Israel will turn a blind eye while Tehran builds nukes, one of which could obliterate much of the Jewish state. If diplomacy fails and Israel attacks pre-emptively, Iran is likely to retaliate, either directly or through its terrorist proxies in Hamas and Hezbollah. Tehran can and probably would make more trouble for U.S. forces in Iraq. If that happens, or if an Israeli attack draws retaliation from others in the region, the U.S. could easily get drawn into a wider war not of its own making…. Would those who advocate military action against Iran be able to get international backing for it? Or would nations that feel threatened even bother to try? The diplomats dealing with Iran seem to think time is on their side. That may turn out to be a grave mistake.” —Chicago Tribune
October 10th, 2007 at 12:26 pm” But it is impossible to imagine Israel will turn a blind eye while Tehran builds nukes…”
They certainly didn’t “turn a blind eye” when Iraq was doing the same things.
October 10th, 2007 at 12:43 pmhttp://www.dailymotion.com/search/sarkozy/video/x36mx2_lemondefr-sarkozy-poutine-sur-liran_news
seems Sarko fails in his attempt to be the leader of the diplomacy on Iran resolution
October 11th, 2007 at 1:55 amhttp://img292.imageshack.us/img292/9242/20071011fig000000262517kz6.jpg
this photo is talkative,
Sarko just discovered he can’t access into the big boys yard, Putin is still the head dog, but with a panther attitude
anyway, I imagine Sarko ruminating a plan for a mediatic revenge
October 11th, 2007 at 3:40 amRemember the following Donald Rumsfeld quote:
“Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence”.
This was to explain why there were plans to invade Iraq when there was nothing in the way of proof of Iraqi WMDs. Well, we had it the Bush Administration way, with the entire onus being on a country that coincidentally is in Israel’s crosshairs (Shimon Peres even threatened to exterminate Iran’s population) to prove it is not guilty to trying to create a deterrent to said country, Israel. The absence of the impossible 100% certainty was then used to justify an aggressive war against Iraq during which they discovered that in fact Iraq was right all along and had no such weapons at all.
Now, Vladimir Putin is formulating a sane and sensible policy towards such cases, that it is up to others to prove that Iran has such a programme, and people get so very angry about it. They want to hold Iran to the same impossible standard used to lynch Iraq and cause 1 million plus deaths there. I guess that those who condemn Putin’s comment are those whose bloodlust has not been sufficiently quenched in the Iraq war. Then again, to such people, all those who oppose Israel in any way deserve to die and so get on with the killing already.
October 11th, 2007 at 7:28 pm“we dont have any data”. but you are selling weapons to these fascists, just like you sold them to saddam and every other dictator in the world. for putin, saying this is business as usual.
October 12th, 2007 at 12:24 am