Condi Rice: U.S. Is OK With Iran Having Nuclear Power: Updated!
By Logan Murphy Saturday Nov 10, 2007 3:01pm
Download | play 
Download | play
The Bush administration has taken a staunch "no nukes" approach to Iran, rarely differentiating between nuclear power and weapons, but when asked about Iran's nuclear program this morning on This Week, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice claims that the U.S. has absolutely no problem with Iran having nuclear power, they just need to give up their goal of producing nuclear weapons.
Uh oh, I think somebody is going to be getting a nasty phone call from Dick Cheney very soon...
Rice: "...We have not even rejected the idea that Iran should have civil nuclear power and in fact, would be prepared under certain circumstances to participate in that. They just have to give up the fuel cycle -- the enrichment and reprocessing that can lead to the technologies that can lead to a nuclear weapon.
Rice is also asked about the Kyl/Lieberman amendment and if the Bush Administration intends to use it as an excuse to invade Iran. Condi reassures Stephanopoulos that the president's powers to protect the country are fully intact -- essentially saying he doesn't need the amendment to invade, but that they had no plans to move on it. Um, why doesn't that reassure me?
Update:
John Amato:
"I'll be going on Sam Seder's Sunday radio show at 2PM PST with Glenn Greenwald and Digby for about 45 minutes to discuss Giuliani & Pat Robertson & Bernie Kerik---the Mukasey confirmation debacle and the Telecom Immunity deal to name a few topics...Click here to listen to it online...
Login or Register to post comments.
double-talk...
two questions:
would the president's chief of staff and the defense secretary be aware of or have a veto over a presidential directive allowing the sale of (civilian) nuclear technology from the west to iran ??
who were ford's chief of staff and defense secretary when he signed just that kind of directive ??
just askin'
Yes, Condi, we are fine with Iran having nuclear power.
It's you we're not fine with.
You are the ultimate shill and liar for Bush/Cheney. You are unfit for office or for service to the United States.
You have blood on your hands, just like the Pink lady said.
I am speculating here, but is the ulterior motive for this change in tone to persuade Iran to trade oil in dollars?
GOP gone GAY-first conviction
Ahmadinejad has made it clear that the problem with this line of thinking is that other nations have promised to help them with their nuclear power thing for decades and always renege. He has stressed that the enrichment thing is to be able to stop having to rely upon other nations. I tend to believe this because I saw a very old nuclear power ad or poster for Iran a while back.
Lie,lie,lie,lie,lie,lie,lie,lie,bend the truth,lie,lie and LIE some more.If I knew the gender equivalent to uncle tom I would use it here.You can look at her and know she will say anything and stab you in the back in a new york second.
pathetic.
Keep in mind the following: As the sun sets on the U.S. empire in Iraq, Afghanistan and global currency markets, the Russians and Chinese are quietly going about their business assisting Iran with developing their nuclear power plants and and signing long-term oil and gas development contracts. There has also been considerable chatter about Russia selling Iran sophisticated anti-aircraft missile systems, to supplement their very large arsenal of surface-to-ship missiles and surface-to-surface missiles, not to mention the anti-tank weapons used with such great effect against the IDF by Hezbollah.
When the smoke finally clears, the U.S. will be what Russia was right after the fall of the Soviet Union, a bankrupt former power ruled by oligarchs and criminals - in other words, exactly what it is today.
Yes, yes.. As the leader of the hair 9and double-speak) club for women our administration has always said even though Iran may not have anything to do with my du', the fact is that we've gone to the table and had two UN resolutions of double speak to appreciate here. It's not my hair that is the problem, it is why is Iran not doing it's hair.
God damn typos, that could have been comical.
Wow!..Kinda strayed of the party line.OH.....she's in for it now.I can just see Dickie's eyes bulging out, snot and smoke coming out of his nose.And that smirk....missing from his face.
With peak oil, Iran is holding the ace, oil.
We will start talking to them because our economy depends on it.
Yes, the president's powers are fully intact. Those intact powers still do not include any constitutional authority to preemptively attack a sovereign nation which has not launched military operations against us without the unambiguous consent of congress and the rule of international law.
I've heard that Iran is actually past peak-oil for their country and thus is legitimately concerned about their country's future energy needs. That potentially critical concern of Iran's is not even being discussed in the MSM. It should be part of the broader dialogue.
It's a shame that for the most part - American's have no interest in the "broader dialogue"
*
Furthermore, the president does not take an oath to protect the country. He takes an oath to protect the constitution. The notion that he can unilaterally do whatever he deems necessary to defend the country is why we're in the mess we are in.
Actually, the U.S. economy does not depend on Iranian oil but on preventing our economic rivals - particularly China - from locking in access at the expense of our ever-diminishing circle of friends. At least that's the grand geo-political scheme of things. Most of our imported oil comes from.... Canada, Mexico, Venezuela, and Nigeria (hence the creation of AFRICOM recently and why we're slowly getting bogged down in the the quagmire of civil wars in the Horn of Africa and elsewhere).
Recent reading suggests that the Chinese are working overtime to secure access to oil from Africa, Iran, Iraq and Venezuela, along with mending their fence with long-time adversary Russia. Thus, rather than sitting on top of the world as the lone Superpower, the U.S. is looking increasingly isolated and dependent on the kindness / generosity of others.
OPEC sits with its finger on the trigger of switching to euro-pricing for oil; while the Chinese simply have to say the word (as they hinted at last week, sending the Dow spiraling downward) that they're diversifying their foreign currency holdings away from dollars to other currencies. Then it's all over except for the finger-pointing and endless litany of "stabbed in the back" conspiracy theories.
If I were AIPAC I'd be getting very, very afraid. When people think of "stab in the back" it's hard not to recall (for those who actually can recall anything historical) the German Dolchstoßlegende that saddled Germany's WWI woes ultimately on the Jews and the communists. Of course, Americans have always hated communists - except in the early 20th century when American workers were struggling for labor rights - but there aren't any left. That leaves only one group to blame.
John Amato,
While on air with the Sam Seder Show, when discussing these issues with FISA-impeachment, could you raise these two [2] issues:
1. Why not remove Pelosi as Speaker, clearning the way for impeachment; and
2. How about State AG direct-proseuctions of the President and VP?
Did I read this right -- "president’s powers to protect the country are fully intact — essentially saying he doesn’t need the amendment to invade, -- President plans to use the 9-11 AUMF to invade Iran?
Jeez..........
So, Condi is off the Cheney Reservation...that must explain this story of late from Think Progress.
If I remember correctly, it was IRAN that wanted to talk to US and international community regarding neclear power. If I remember correctly it was the bush administration that is accusing IRAN of building a nuclear bomb; Iran denied and even invited US and international community to inspect the facility for which is being developed for nuclear power plant to generate electricity; and US rejected the invitation.
It appears that the bush administration is trying to provoke a WAR with IRAN and was using IRAN's development of Nuclear Power Plant and confusing the public that IT was for developing Nuclear Bomb according to the bush administration.
WHICH is it? What is the truth? Are you now saying that IRAN is building a nuclear arsenal AND Nuclear power plant? Is this threat to IRAN another one of those IRAQ mistake and miscalculation?
Iran would be foolish to suspend fuel enrichment on the (likely false) promise that the US would supply fuel for their Nuclear Power Plant. They would also be foolish to depend on Europe of Russia for a guarantee of fuel; there is absolutely no way to ensure supply and no way to guarantee that Iran wouldn't be held hostage to exorbitant prices or extortion once they have switched over to Nuclear Power as the primary energy source for their major cities.
This stance she's describing is still unreasonable.
Iran has the right to develop a nuclear fuel cycle. The IAEA is in the process of clearing up undeclared aspects of the Iranian nuclear program, and this ought to be encouraged.
Part of the reason Iran wants to develop their own nuclear cycle it is to become less dependent on the west for its energy needs. The Iranians are proud in this respect. Very nationalistic - and understandably they do not want to have to bow to any demands the west might make on them. If the Iranians are not allowed to develop their own nuclear power cycle, then some degree of power over their energy industry would lie in foreign hands. Much of their industry could be held hostage to western demands, whatever they might be. The nuclear fuel cycle would just become a tool for leverage against them. Obviously this is not in their best interests.
I think it's long overdue that the Iranian "problem" be analyzed in this light, rather than a confrontational one.
George Orwell: There Will Be War To Avoid War
We will invade Iran to avoid military action:
DNC may grow a spine . . .
GOP might defend the Constitution . . .
The US Congress might oppose the President . . .
Proud American @ 19:
US did the same with Iraq: US sold Iraq the WMD; but ignored the fact that Saddam was destroying them.
The US will sell-plant the evidence to justify illegal actdivity.
reality beat me to it... sorry for being redundant.
after this interview, I wonder if Cheney has invited Condi to go on a hunting trip...
Eric in Ottawa @ 21:
Look around, everyone is talking about oil running out, "Peak oil." Sure, Iran has oil, but -- if "peak oil" arguments are correct, oil will run out. Eventually. Can't argue "we're running out of oil" as an excuse to say, "We need to Invade Iraq in 2003," then blame Iran for attempting to find other energy sources.
Yes, the President is attempting to argue both sides of the argument, then confuse people. Watch, there is more on the way: "Oh, we said it was OK for nuclear power, but we aren't going to talk about this evidence we just fabricated using illegal interrogations." yes, the US is abusing Iraqis to make up evidence to justify invading Iran.
Iran is doing the responsible thing: Finding other sources of energy. The US is using that as an excuse to inavde. The US will use anything as an excuse to invade. Time to prosecute Members of Congress who rubber stamp these war crimes.
Orders to invade Iran are illegal.
Who decides whether they are seeking power or a bomb Obviously not the IAEA because their finding was that Iran didn't appear to be seeking a weapon Yet we hear over and over "Da gonna git dat bomb"
Old gap tooth is so reassuring
What has me concerned: War with Iran would be another pretext to clamp down on Americans.
konchster @ 27:
That's irrelevant. A lawful war requires an imminent threat. Working on nuclear power or "the bomb" -- today, in 2007 -- isn't an imminent threat.
I wish the American public would quit wasting time wondering if Congress is going to impeach or stop this war: Assume they're not. Rather, I would prefer the American public to accept: Congress is irrelevant; but the States have the power to challenge the US Congress and President for this illegal activity.
Congressional assent to illegal activity does not oblige the states to do the same. They can independently act to prosecute the President, VP, and Members of Congress.
This is like watching a train wreck in slow motion. The States have the power to end this non-sense.
Former Lebanese MP says his money could improve Rice's looks, Bush’s mental health.
http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/syria/?id=22992
the president’s powers to protect the country are fully intact
So this is the excuse the lying criminals will try to use to invade Poland, I mean Iran. I hope plans are underway around the world to stop the reincarnation of Adolf Hitler.
As with Iran, look more excuses to do nothing and wait. "We can't do anything now, let's wait." But waiting to act on the ilegal US plans in Iran is going to make it harder: "Oh, you didn't do anything then/before/earlier, now we can't do anything." This is a lame excuse to justify inaction/an oath of office violation (malfeasance) and is clearly not fully asserting one's oath of office:
DNC has the power in the House. Use it now. "Progress" is what we have: GOP has (partially) supported impeachment by refusing to let the Kucinich bill die. Stop this attitude of excuses. Get on with leadership. Now. In the mean time, the public needs to discuss a new system of government, direct prosecutions of the Members of Congress, and state level efforts to prosecute the President and Vice President. Yes, the Congress is irrelevant; let's get the States moving on enforcing/defending the Constitution. This Congress has its chance. It's failed.
"in fact, we have put forward a proposal with our lies"
I think she meant our allies...but maybe not.
not a big fan of Dr. Rice, but I'm starting to get an idea of why she's saying and doing things against traditional administration decisions or procedures. I mean, look what they did to the last loyal darkie.
Cheney flunked out of Yale, and later got a masters in poli sci from frickin Wymoning.
Bush actually graduated from Yale, but all he got was a C average Bachelors in history.
Rice, on the other hand earned a Master's in poli sci from Notre Dame at the tender age of 20... one year after earning hear Bachelor's... and had a doctorate in poli sci by 26. She's taught poli sci at Stanford, and was one of the primary speakers at UC Berkley. She was also raised by a presbyterian minister, and spent a lot of her formative years dealing with varying levels of racism, both from strangers and trusted friends.
she's a smart chick. smarter than the punks outing CIA analysts and diverting America's attention from Iraq to women in a coma.
I have a feeling she sees the writing on the wall, and she's proactively protecting her career.
Colin Powell got stabbed in the back, and now his career and reputation are ruined. I have a feeling that she recognized this not long after she was promoted. I think that statements like the one in the clip serve to build a protective layer of armor on her own back.
I have a feeling there's significant infighting at the upper levels of the PNAC movement, and she's positioning some defenses for herself.
Eric in Ottawa @ 21:
Yes, well you are still left with the inevitable fact that if the Iranians reprocess their own fuel, they will develop nuclear weapons. Reprocessing is the key. So by allowing them full reign there, you are defacto allowing proliferation.
I don't know if that is the nuance of the Bush line or not, but it is true. Of course, Russia or the U.S. transporting spent fuel offsite is also a non-trival intrusion/proposition.
As I recall the problem with gas prices in Iran (everywhere really) is lack of refinery capacity. The "well, duh!" solution would be: JUST BUILD A DAMN REFINERY.
So there are plenty of lies on both sides here.
Condi will flip flop again and get puff pieced in more interviews by the friendly memory holists in big media
GRRRREAT job on Seder's show, John! Why don't you ever go on MSNBC?
33 jeff z Says: the president’s powers to protect the country are fully intact
So this is the excuse the lying criminals will try to use to invade Poland, I mean Iran. I hope plans are underway around the world to stop the reincarnation of Adolf Hitler.
Adolph is alive and well. He shaved his mustache off and changed his name to George.
Condi is just counting down the days when she will be free of this incompetent regime so Chevron can rename that oil tanker after her.
burnt @ 36:
If so, it sure goes to highlight the difference between book smart and common sense. Gee, think you'd want to leave yourself more than 1 year of 8 to salvage your reputation from notoriety after being so fiercely loyal to a corrupt and overreaching man-child president, Condi?
Not to mention, her role (or lack of it) early on as National Security Advisor will loom very large in the history books no matter what she does. She and Tenent coordinated before, during, and after 9/11 to determine intelligence. Very, very flawed and often manufactured intelligence. She certainly OKed what were known to be lies about "yellow cake" in Bush's state of the union speech. Then of course she spread her own lies trying to justify moving up the invasion by the only 3 months it would have taken to get full U.N. support. Remember the "we don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud!" crap? Hmm... I don't know about you, but it sure as hell looks like we could have used U.N. support in Iraq.
Heck of a job, Condi.
Bet you ten-to-one Merkel carried a message to Bush in Crawford from her meeting with Putin. And I'll bet Putin laid it on the line. Germany has no defensive borders. It's a living fear in every German that they will be involved in another world war. It's in their bones, now. They go squirrely at the thought and who can blame them.
Need to find out if Cheney was at the Merkel/Bush meeting. That will say a lot.
Wondering @ 22:
DNC may grow a spine . . .
GOP might defend the Constitution . . .
The US Congress might oppose the President . . .
. . . and I may find oil reserves in my backyard!
Iran doesn't need nuclear weapons. It has Russia on its side. Putin declared that if Iran is attacked, he will come to the aid of Iran. Merkel was there to tell Bush the only way he's going to get European support is if he says OK to nuke power; that he has to differentiate between the two. That's what this was about. Probably why Brown finally relented.
You can get the same effect of listening to a Leezzaa speech, without having to look at the ugly visual, by eating lots of 7-bean salad and jamming a stethoscope up your ass the next morning.
i have heard rice say this on other occasions recently...others in the administration too...
did her lips move? than she LIED!
Condi is not saying anything the Bush regime has not said before. Nuclear power has never been the issue. Iran, however, wants to be independent of America and Russia with regard to fuel for its nuclear plants. For some reason, probably having to do with several generations of imposed hegemony, they are not satisfied with dependence on us for nuclear fuel.
The issue, the only issue, is that the Neocon/Israeli line is that it is impossible to have your own fuel cycle without having weapons, a la Eric in Ottawa above. What Condi did today was to try to make that position sound reasonable. What she will not say is that it assumes that Iran will not agree to inspections, and that inspections would be ineffective anyway.
Iran does not need nukes, it needs long term energy independence (i.e. after the oil runs out). As long as they don't have it, they are dependent on the first world countries that have screwed them so badly for a long time.
That's the bottom line. Bushco would rather start a whole new war than negotiate with Iran as an equal, or on the basis that a stable government with a clear and demonstrated interest in energy independence could be negotiated with.
I'm looking at more comments, and I misread Eric in Ottawa. My apologies.
OK - first off, drop the foaming at the mouth - the States can't do shit to the Bush Junta. Why?
Because it would get challenged right to the Supreme Court, and I am absolutely convinced the Supremes would side with the Feds against the states, saying the states have no jurisdiction.
So, get over it - it isn't going to happen.
Robin @ 35:
Those Freudian slips will get you every time.
why are we being feed this crap about Iran having nook-u-lar weapons , so f*****g what , it really worries me that Is-real has them . I say nuke Is-real and end the wars in the ME let the jews bask in the glow .
David N @ 53 -
First of all, "Jews" aren't the problem. Zionists are the problem and the two are not synonymous. The majority of Jews in the United States oppose the policies of the Zionists and their neo-con partners in crime.
Second, there is a large population of Palestinians and other groups living within the borders of Israel (AKA "Occupied Palestine"). Nuking Israel kills people indiscriminately.
Third, using nuclear weapons against civilians is a war crime (ought to be a war crime to use them under any circumstances, frankly), so you might as well book a flight to the Hague now while you can get the lower fares before the dollar sinks even further vs. the euro.
Fourth, the Zionists are doomed to failure anyway. History and birth rates are completely against them. Sooner or later non-Jews will outnumber Jews in the state of Israel and a "Jewish State" will be unsustainable. Israel will be, as it were, wiped from the pages of history, as one notable foreign leader put it, somewhat controversially.
Frankly, that day cannot come too soon, in my opinion. Nobody who believes in democracy and freedom can support a "Jewish State" or a "White State" or a "Mormon State" or a "Christian State" and so forth and so on. Anyone who attempts to defend such an apartheid position cannot be also support democracy and freedom.
Wake up folks Bush has no allies and he would have to go it alone. Germany has deals with Iran and France says Iran has a right to have nuclear plants. Notice the Bush/Cheney been told by all the countries they will not help. Now China and Russia have said they will protect Iran at all cost. Israel is pushing for the US to attack Iran but Israel will not join in. Look Israel never sent any soldiers in to Iraq/Afghanistan to help their friends the US. Israel will continue to get nukes/ money from the US but will never help in any of the Bush/Cheney invasions, smart people. Iran is making deals with countries around the world with oil deals as we see the White House is doing nothing. Our oil prices will go over 100 dollars and Americans can thank the White House. As Americans don't have oil for heating this winter and freeze to death we can thank the White House. While Americans sit back and let the White House continue their crimes look for the Stock Market to go down lower, more we lose homes and jobs then maybe just maybe Americans will stand up. As of now we continue to give lip service to our troops but we do buy ribbons for our cars and flags but nothing said or done about these soldiers dying in Iraq/Afghanistan.
Y'know, I think the tone of this interview might have been caused by the current situation in Pakistan. The Bush administration was (again) caught flat-footed by the sudden decrease of stability in Iran's neighborhood, so maybe they have decided to keep down the flames until the political situation in Pakistan improves a bit?
The offer that was made to Iran caused independent analysts to fall on the floor laughing so hard.
"a lot of gift wrapping around a pretty empty box"
-undisclosed EU diplomat, quoted in Reuters, 27 July 2005
The administration has actually been saying this all along until Bush made that stupid crack about not letting Iran have the knowledge or we would have WWIII.
There's really no point paying any attention to anything the administration says. IMPEACH!
CounterSicilian @ 3:
To really know what's going on, one needs to examine the results of the Israeli/American meeting between the heads of the respective intelligence and military branches which took place last week in Washington, DC.. Unfortunately I haven't much info. Does anyone have any details?
Wondering @ 28:
So true. I'm sorry but I have been reading a lot and I know Iran has gone a very long way to make a deal with the President. I mean a VERY long way. The President just keeps snubbing them. Cheney is dying to go to war with Iran, Bush is behind him and our congress is hopeless. I feel sorry for Iran. Even if they were seeking nuclear weapons who could blame them with our nutcase administration. I don't want to start killing another group of citizens.
in regards to iran, nuclear power, and cheney
http://tofubo.blogspot.com/2007/09/will-they-just-stop-about-iran-and.html
gratuitous, self-referential post
I think she said that in order to lay the foundation for any future attacks on Iran's nuclear program. First you say you can't have nukes, then you say you can have nukes, then you attack them and say "we told you - you CAN'T have nukes!!"
This is the type of insane, dictatorial bullshit our government has been doing and will continue to do. When in the future people point out that Condi said US policy didn't have any problems with a civil nuclear program in Iran, it will all be denied and lied about.
more at my blog...
See "Blast from the Past" at IranAffairs.com about how the US encouraged and supported Iran's nuclear program precisely because it makes economic sense.
There are other ways to deal with the situation in Iraq. If an internal revolution was fomented a further conflict may be able to be averted. This is not necessarily how it might play out, but something like Estonia’s Singing Revolution may be a way to deal with this. I just saw a website about it – http://singingrevolution.com
th'rev @ 6:
Maybe Aunt Jemima...?
As the first commenter stated, doubletalk.
Nuke weapons and power are too tied together. It's an all or nothing deal.
Well if I remember right.... Iran did have help from many countries including the U.S. in their nuclear field. As in we gave them fuel for nuclear power reactors. The problem was that for political reasons we stopped doing this, how ever Iran still needed some fuel for power. Even when IAEA had done their investigations, a U.N. organization. Now Iran's going we tried it your way, we got screwed, so now we are going to build it ourselves. Honestly the U.S.A. doesn't have a leg to stand on this issue, other then saying the we are the only nation that has the right to approve of a country making a nuclear program of any kind, which is ludicrous. We will accuse any nation trying to stand up against our policy, of what ever we can in order to stay on top of the world because the U.S. sees that their place at the top may not be forever....And we don't have to look far to see a empire that was on top and fell, Iran is what's left of one of the greatest empires the world has ever seen, The Persian Empire! I find the policy we have in the middle east completely ignores the history of our own countries involvement and the history of the peoples and cultures of the area, we just believe in liberty, freedom, and equality, very fine principals but just that principal believed by us not things that should be force and arguable can be forced on some other cultures especially when people don't want church and state to be separate which is their choice to make. Iran is what is left of one of the greatest empires the world has seen ever!
Login or Register to post comments.