If Iran Was a Bollinger Band

[grantx]

Dcraig,

Multilateralism and national sovereignty seem almost contradictory. That’s all the UN has – principles based on what can be regarded (with hindsight) as wishy-washy ideology. Brings to mind the Peace and Reconciliation principle in parts of Africa – apologise for atrocities and you’re forgiven (or contrition all the way to bank).

Split,

re Darfur and Mogadishu, but nobody is acting.

Grant.

 

[DDI]

With the report that came out yesterday I doubt it.

As far as further serious UN sanctions the Chinese and Russians will tell Bush/Cheney/Sarkozy to F off

 

[JuniorMark]

With the report that came out yesterday I doubt it.

As far as further serious UN sanctions the Chinese and Russians will tell Bush/Cheney/Sarkozy to F off

If the USA wants to bomb out Iran, no one will stop it. The USA is the only strong country. There is no the USSR anymore.
Russia is simply the state with interests, and both the USA and Eurounion don’t pay attention to them. China is stronger in all aspects. And China is the real opponent to the USA. But it agreed to toughen sanctions against Iran.

But what for? ... Recently in the press appeared the report of the USA secret services, that Iran doesn’t perform any military developments since 2003.
And they have a right to a peaceful atom according the rules of international law.
some one need war

 

[BSD]

And China is the real opponent to the USA. But it agreed to toughen sanctions against Iran.

China's out of sanctions:

China pulls out of Iran sanctions meeting

Latest stand:

China's ambassador to the UN says a new US intelligence report on Iran's nuclear programme raises questions about the need for new sanctions.
The ambassador, Wang Guangya, said the UN Security Council would have to consider the new information because "now things have changed".

A US intelligence report released on Monday said Iran halted a nuclear weapons programme in 2003.

Mr Wang was asked whether the new National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iran made the prospect of a third round of UN sanctions against Iran less likely.

"I think the council members will have to consider that, because I think we all start from the presumption that now things have changed," he said.

But what for? ... Recently in the press appeared the report of the USA secret services, that Iran doesn’t perform any military developments since 2003.
And they have a right to a peaceful atom according the rules of international law.
some one need war

Absolutely, what for indeed, particularly after this:

Bush's concocted Iran "Threat" Debunked