Jump to content

Menace Nucléaire Israélienne Contre L'iran


Ronnie Hayek

Recommended Posts

C'est ce qu'on appelle "putting one's money where one's mouth is". Avec une si petite somme, on penserait presque que les paroles sortent d'un orifice plus étroit.

Il est vrai que je n'ai pas l'orifice élargi par les néo-cons. Mais le simple fait de pouvoir prouver avoir eu raison doit suffire à un homme de bien. Et puis je réserve ma générosité à des sujets plus importants.

Link to comment

:icon_up: Mettons 20 € pour punir les paroles en l'air et accusations gratuites.

Formellement, si le IHT affirme que les USA ou Israel ont bombardé un site nucléaire iranien en 2007 alors je te devrais 20 € mais dans le cas contraire c'est toi qui me les devra.

Au cas où tu gagnes et en plus Chirac pose sa candidature à la présidentielle de 2007, alors je doublerai ma dette sans contrepartie.

Acceptes-tu ?

Link to comment
Il est vrai que je n'ai pas l'orifice élargi par les néo-cons. […]

Ils ne t'ont rien fait ? Pourtant, vu ce que tu dis sur eux, on aurait pu croire. Décidément, que de méchanceté gratuite en ce bas monde ! :icon_up:

Link to comment
Je te propose que l'on fixe comme critère objectif qu'Israël ou les Etats-Unis bombardent au moins l'un des sites nucléaires de l'Iran. Ca t'irait?

C'est pas vraiment ça qui m'inquiète le plus. Je pense qu'on pourra parler de guerre si des troupes terrestres US envahissent l'Iran.

Link to comment
Ils ne t'ont rien fait ? Pourtant, vu ce que tu dis sur eux, on aurait pu croire. Décidément, que de méchanceté gratuite en ce bas monde ! :icon_up:

Le crachat dans les chaussures ! La pisse dans le jus d'orange !

Link to comment
  • 3 weeks later...

Il semblerait que les Iraniens aient plus de sens commun que beaucoup de commentateurs occidentaux : les critiques pleuvent sur Ahmadinejad à cause de ses positions téméraires et provocatrices au sujet du nucléaire iranien. Même là-bas, on se rend compte qu'il n'est en rien d'héroïque et qu'il place le pays dans une situation compliquée.

Ahmadinejad under fire in Iran for hardline nuclear stance

· Newspapers criticise 'no reverse gear' remark

· US and Britain begin push for tougher sanctions

Robert Tait in Tehran and Ian Black

Tuesday February 27, 2007

The Guardian

Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, came under fire from domestic critics yesterday for his uncompromising stance on the nuclear issue as the US and Britain launched a new diplomatic effort to agree harsher UN sanctions they hope will force Tehran to halt uranium enrichment.

Mohammad Atrianfar, a respected political commentator, accused the president of using "the language of the bazaar" and said his comments had made it harder for Ali Larijani, the country's top nuclear negotiator, to reach a compromise with European diplomats.

The president made global headlines at the weekend by declaring that his country's quest for nuclear energy was an unstoppable train, adding to the sense of crisis as emergency talks got under way in London yesterday.

Critics from across the Iranian political spectrum took him to task for his "no brakes or reverse gear" remarks, bolstering claims in the west that his hardline position may be starting to backfire.

"This rhetoric is not suitable for a president and has no place in diplomatic circles," said Mr Atrianfar, a confidant of Hashemi Rafsanjani, an influential regime insider and rival of Mr Ahmadinejad. "It is the language people in the bazaar and alleyways use to address the simplest issues of life."

Fayaz Zahed, leader of the pro-reform Islamic Iran Solidarity party, criticised the president for seeking to emulate the populist Venezuelan president, Hugo Chavez, rather than internationally revered leaders such as Nelson Mandela or Vaclav Havel.

"The brake exists to get the train safely to its destination," Mr Zahed wrote in the newspaper Etemad-e Melli. "Perhaps on the journey, we might find the track broken and are obliged to move our passengers by using the reverse gear to get to a safer track. Iran is a nation of earthquakes, flood and national disasters! You are our head. We should be able to trust you."

Even the fundamentalist newspaper Resalat, usually a supporter of Mr Ahmadinejad, was critical. "Neither weakness nor inexperience and unnecessary rhetorical aggression is acceptable in our foreign policy," it said.

In London, the Foreign Office's political director, John Sawers, was talking to colleagues from the US, France, Russia, China - the other four permanent members of the UN security council - and Germany, holder of the EU's rotating presidency. The meeting was described as "a productive first session" by the Foreign Office.

The US and Britain are pushing for tougher financial and trade sanctions on Iran but will have to work hard to overcome objections from Russia and China before they can be codified into a new UN resolution.

The US representative, Nicholas Burns, the undersecretary of state, has been stressing Washington's commitment to diplomacy to resolve the crisis, in contrast to the continuing refusal of the White House to rule out military action.

Sergei Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister, underlined Moscow's unease when he criticised the US for talk of using force.

"Forecasts and suggestions about a strike on Iran have become more frequent and this is worrying," he was quoted as telling President Vladimir Putin.

A UN resolution in December barred the transfer of technology and know-how to Iran's nuclear and missile programme. New measures could include travel bans and asset freezes on individuals and organisations involved in them. Trade sanctions, including a ban on EU export credits, would be harder to agree.

The foreign secretary, Margaret Beckett, said Iran was treading a "dangerous route" but the west still wanted to negotiate. "The steps that we have taken are reversible. There is nothing that we would like better than to be able to reverse them and no longer to have to continue with sanctions," she said in Islamabad.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/iran/story/0,,20…rticle_continue

Link to comment

Je dévie un peu, mais il y a eu deux policiers Iraniens tués par des rebelles dans une zône frontalière du Pakistant. L'Iran se plaint que le Pakistan ne fait pas assez pour contrôler ces éléments violents. (ça devient une tendance, après l'Inde et l'Afghanistan).

Link to comment
Je dévie un peu, mais il y a eu deux policiers Iraniens tués par des rebelles dans une zône frontalière du Pakistant. L'Iran se plaint que le Pakistan ne fait pas assez pour contrôler ces éléments violents. (ça devient une tendance, après l'Inde et l'Afghanistan).

A se demander comment le pouvoir de Moucharraf fait encore pour tenir. Je pense même qu'il sera renversé dès qu'il tentera de contrôler lesdits trublions.

Link to comment
  • 1 month later...
Il semblerait que les Iraniens aient plus de sens commun que beaucoup de commentateurs occidentaux : les critiques pleuvent sur Ahmadinejad…

Et cela continue : après une première tentative infructueuse, le parlement iranien se mobilise pour réduire la durée du mandat d'Ahmadinejad.

The Iranian Parliament vs. Ahmadinejad, Round Two

PJM Tel AvivApril 23, 2007 1:15 AM

In a bold move last year, Iranian legislative body, known as the Majles, made a failed attempt to cut their President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s term in office. Now they are trying to do it again — and this time they just might have a shot.

by Meir Javendafar

Even in as secretive a government as Iran, it is anything but confidential that the members of the country’s parliament are not big fans of President Ahmadinejad.

If anyone had doubts, they were removed last year when the Iranian legislative body, known as the Majles, voted to reduce the president’s term by eighteen months. They failed that first time, but now, still determined, they are making another attempt. (link in Farsi)

The official reason given at the time of their first try was that because parliamentary elections usually take place one year before the presidential elections. This, the Majiles argued, creates unnecessary expenses for the country - if both elections were held on the same day, time and money could be saved.

Furthermore, the Majles elections usually cause plans and policies under consideration to be suspended for six months before the elections, due to campaigning needs, and the usual uncertainty which surround upcoming elections. This also happens six months before the presidential polling.

Despite the validity of its arguments, and the approval of the bill by majority of parliamentarians, the Majles failed in its attempt to move the presidential elections forward — because the Guardian Council, did not approve the bill. The Guardian Council, composed of 12 powerful members, has the authority to review all bills passed by the Majles, and approve or reject them on the basis of whether they are in accordance to Islamic law and the Iranian constitution.

Most observers thought that after the Council issued the veto the first time, the parliamentarians would abandon their attempt to cut Ahmadinejad’s term short. They were wrong.

The reason – the Majles’s considerations aren’t really practical or budgetary — they’re personal. I

t’s no coincidence that they decided to try to make this change during Ahmadinejad’s term. After all, he is not the first president whose elections take place one year after theirs. The Iranian election system was the same when Khamenei, Rafsanjani and Khatami were president, but the Majles had no incentive to make the changes with presidents who made an effort to work with them.

Ahmadinejad on the other hand, soon after being elected, started to turn his back on them. In one notable case, involving the funding of the Emam Reza Love Fund (An Ahmadinejad-created fund which provides cheap loans to poor newly married couples), he completely ignored the Majles, and carried on as if the parliament did not exist after the Majles did not pass the full $1.3 billion budget allocated for it.

Instead of reducing the figure, or trying to come to some sort of a deal, Ahmadinejad circumvented the parliament in order to get what he wanted, fully funding his pet project using executive power given to his office that is only supposed to be exercised under exceptional circumstances.

Behavior of this sort, in addition to the president’s decision to ignore the repeated parliamentary calls to tackle the problem of inflation, have created considerable personal animosity against him; the results of which can be seen in this second attempt to reduce his term, this time by four months.

If the Guardian Council disapproves again, Iranian law dictates that the matter must be referred to the Expediency Council, whose job is it to resolve outstanding issues between the Guardian Council and the Majles.

What makes the situation particularly worrisome for Ahmadinejad is the fact that the Expediency Council is headed by his arch rival, and political nemesis, Ayatollah Rafsanjani — Ahmadinejad’s most powerful foe with a number of scores to settle with him. The first offense was the firing of Rafsanjani’s firing of his son from the Tehran Municipality in 2005, by Ahmadinejad (who was then Mayor), because he took a two week vacation from work in order to assist in his father’s campaign.

Then, obviously was the surprise defeat of Rafsanjani in the 2005 presidential elections. This left Rafsanjani absolutely furious, and he charged that there was electoral fraud in Ahmadinejad’s favor.

Since then, he has been waiting to get even with Ahmadinejad, and this could be the chance he has been waiting for.

But all is not lost for the Iranian president. It is very possible that Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei might step in to save Ahmadinejad. Still, this move by the parliament his isolation should be taken as a clear sign by the West — among other recent signs — that they are dealing with a weakening politician, and not the nuclear champion of Iran, as he would like the world to think.

http://pajamasmedia.com/2007/04/the_irania…ent_vs_pres.php

Link to comment
  • 4 months later...
fillontankig3.th.jpg

Bruits de botte mais ce n'est pas du côté des américains ou des israeliens : la France se lâche et je gagne toujours mon pari. Qu'il est mignon Fillon dans son chachar.

Du côté américain tout de même : http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml…16/wiran116.xml

Peut être que W. va prendre les paris avec toi…

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...