Lessons not learned for Iraq.

[rusty]

Its plain to see these people could care less for humanity.They could care less of what happened in Iraq in March of 03.

These people have no regard for the Western World.NONE! I say we take em out before its to late.

Im sure Isreal would not mind participating.Just do it.There is no dialogue with these animals.

Iran flexes muscle ahead of talks with major powers


TEHRAN (Reuters) ? Iran test-fired missiles on Monday which a commander said could reach any regional target, flexing its military muscle before crucial talks this week with major powers worried about Tehran's nuclear ambitions.

The missile drills of the elite Revolutionary Guards coincide with escalating tension in Iran's nuclear dispute with the West, after last week's disclosure by Tehran that it is building a second uranium enrichment plant.

News of the nuclear fuel facility south of Tehran added urgency to the rare meeting in Geneva on Thursday between Iranian officials and representatives of six major powers, including the United States, China and Russia.

The White House called the missile tests "provocative" and reiterated demands by President Barack Obama at the Group of 20 summit in Pittsburgh last week that Iran come clean on its disputed nuclear program.

"They can agree to immediate unfettered access (to the newly disclosed nuclear facility)," White House spokesman Robert Gibbs told reporters when asked what Washington wants from the talks. "That would be the least that they could do."

"There has never been a stronger international consensus to address Iran and its nuclear program than there is right now," he added.

Iran's Foreign Ministry said there was no link between the missile maneuvers and the nuclear activities.

"This is a military drill which is deterrent in nature," spokesman Hassan Qashqavi told a news conference. "There is no connection whatsoever with the nuclear program."

Press TV said the Shahab 3 surface-to-surface missile, with a range of up to 2,000 km (1,250 miles), was "successfully" test-fired on the second day of an exercise that began on Sunday, when short and medium-range missiles were launched.

Such a range would put Israel and U.S. bases in the region within striking distance. Television footage of the launches showed missiles soaring into the sky in desert-like terrain, to shouts of Allahu Akbar (God is Greatest).

"All targets within the region, no matter where they are, will be within the range of these missiles," General Hossein Salami, commander of the Guards' air force, was quoting as saying on the Guards website.

Salami later told Iranian state television: "All of our enemies must know that we constantly envision ourselves to be in an atmosphere of threat. And we have prepared ourselves for the worst case scenario."

WIDE CONDEMNATION

British Foreign Secretary David Miliband said the missile test was "part of an annual provocation" by Iran and should not distract from the pending Geneva talks.

"On Thursday (Iran will) need to ... show that they are serious about ensuring that their civilian nuclear power program does not leak into a military program," Miliband told Britain's Sky News.

Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman called the tests "troublesome."

"You combine these show-of-force type missile tests along with the other revelations that have been brought to light over the last couple of days with their continued development of a nuclear program, and you put all those together, and it paints a picture of ... a pattern of deception," Whitman said.

He added that the United States and other nations were focused on the talks "to see if there is a way forward diplomatically and, if not, then what the next steps might be."

European foreign policy chief Javier Solana, who will head the Western delegation in Geneva, said the aim of Thursday's talks was to engage Iran in a "real discussion" and get a commitment to continue talks in a "dynamic manner."

"Failure is clear -- if there is no more meetings it's failure -- that would be very obvious to notice. Success is more difficult to judge," Solana said on the sidelines of an EU defense ministers' meeting in Sweden.

France called on Iran "to choose the path of cooperation and not that of confrontation by immediately ending these profoundly destabilizing activities and by immediately responding to the requests of the international community in order to reach a negotiated solution on the nuclear dossier."

Russia, meanwhile, urged restraint.

"Of course, it is worrisome when missile launches happen against the backdrop of unresolved situation concerning Iran's nuclear program," Russian news agencies quoted Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov as saying after a meeting with his Iranian counterpart Manouchehr Mottaki in New York.

"I am convinced restraint is needed," Lavrov said, adding that he told Mottaki that Iran should cooperate with the International Atomic Energy Agency in investigating the construction of the new nuclear plant.

The reports did not specify whether Lavrov meant restraint by Iran or the West.

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said on Friday that if Iran does not cooperate at the meeting, then "other mechanisms" should be used to deal with Tehran's nuclear program. Medvedev did not explicitly say whether Russia would support Western calls for sanctions against Iran.

The United States and its Western allies have made clear they will focus on Iran's nuclear program at the Geneva meeting. Iran has offered wide-ranging security talks but says it will not discuss its nuclear "rights."

Washington suspects Iran is trying to develop nuclear bomb capability and has previously expressed concern about Tehran's missile program. Iran, a major oil producer, says its nuclear work is solely for generating peaceful electricity.

ADDITIONAL SANCTIONS

U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who says any military action against Iran would only "buy time" and stresses the need for diplomacy, mentioned possible new sanctions on banking and equipment and technology for Iran's oil and gas industry.

Gates told CNN he hoped the disclosure of the second facility would force Tehran to make concessions. "The Iranians are in a very bad spot now because of this deception, in terms of all of the great powers," he said.

"There obviously is the opportunity for severe additional sanctions. I think we have the time to make that work."

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Iran must present "convincing evidence" at the Geneva meeting.

"We are going to put them to the test on October 1," Clinton told CBS' "Face the Nation."

Both interviews were taped before Iran started the two-day missile exercise, designed to show it is prepared to head off military attacks by foes like Israel or the United States.

Iran's state broadcaster IRIB said "upgraded" versions of Shahab 3 and another missile, Sejil, had been tested. Officials have earlier said Sejil has a range of close to 2,000 km (1,250 miles). They were powered by solid fuel, IRIB said.

Neither the United States nor its ally Israel have ruled out military action if diplomacy fails to resolve the issue.

Iran has said it would respond to any attack by targeting U.S. interests in the region and Israel, as well as closing the Strait of Hormuz, a vital route for world oil supplies.

Iran's defense minister warned Israel on Monday against launching any attack on the Islamic Republic, saying it would only speed up the Jewish state's own demise.

"If this happens, which of course we do not foresee, its ultimate result would be that it expedites the Zionist regime's last breath," Ahmad Vahidi said on state television.

Obama said on Saturday the discovery of a secret nuclear plant in Iran showed a "disturbing pattern" of evasion by Tehran. He warned Iran on Friday it could face "sanctions that bite" if it did not comply with demands for disclosure.

Iran has rejected Western accusations that the plant was meant to be secret because it did not inform the U.N. nuclear watchdog as soon as plans were drawn up, saying the facility near the holy city of Qom is legal and can be inspected.

 

[Trampled Underfoot]

 

[Lumi]

Ironic when you remember back during the campaign season that it was Hilary who was the one who was strong on going after Iran and O'bama was the Dove. This has the makings of a GALACTIC DOTFA, especially following General McChrystral's interview on 60 Minutes. Our troops are spread out and tired and we are building up a National Draft.

Rusty,

This just isn't a "Dick Measuring" contest with a country who has almost 3 times the population of Iraq. We need to get out of the 9/12/01 mindset and quit talking about turning countiries into the Mediterranean Disneyland. It didn't work in Iraq, Afghanistan for us and the United Soviet States, so why do you think a Joint Airstrike between us and and the Israelis will be any different ?

The only reason Iraq took the war to Iran in the 80's was because we armed Saddam, all the more reason the Iranians want to kick the shit out of us and Israel ? Need I say more ?

I'm fairly familiar with combat, and not just the ass in the grass stuff. Division Level Ops, Command and Control, so I was well aware of the amount of body bag req. orders. The smell never leaves, trust me.

Think twice, maybe 3 times before you post something like that, because it could get very hot.
Possibly in the 100,000 + dead if the balloon goes up in Iran

 

[kcwolf]

Well said illuminati. Our childrens' lives are precious. Manipulating governments, how has that worked out for the US?

 

[Lumi]

Our own Government is manipulated
The Dick, Cheney that is, is on tape saying that our Government is in place if I or the POTUS are killed

 

[rusty]

Ironic when you remember back during the campaign season that it was Hilary who was the one who was strong on going after Iran and O'bama was the Dove. This has the makings of a GALACTIC DOTFA, especially following General McChrystral's interview on 60 Minutes. Our troops are spread out and tired and we are building up a National Draft.

Rusty,

This just isn't a "Dick Measuring" contest with a country who has almost 3 times the population of Iraq. We need to get out of the 9/12/01 mindset and quit talking about turning countiries into the Mediterranean Disneyland. It didn't work in Iraq, Afghanistan for us and the United Soviet States, so why do you think a Joint Airstrike between us and and the Israelis will be any different ?

The only reason Iraq took the war to Iran in the 80's was because we armed Saddam, all the more reason the Iranians want to kick the shit out of us and Israel ? Need I say more ?

I'm fairly familiar with combat, and not just the ass in the grass stuff. Division Level Ops, Command and Control, so I was well aware of the amount of body bag req. orders. The smell never leaves, trust me.

Think twice, maybe 3 times before you post something like that, because it could get very hot.
Possibly in the 100,000 + dead if the balloon goes up in Iran

Beg to differ on your opinion on Iraq.The bottom line is there is a established gov't.As far as Afganastan?With a little balls O could make it happen,but we all know the passive O's ways.

You can't reason with these people.Whats so hard to understand????Liberals,no need to worry thou.O's passive ways will try santions,which in return will have 0 effect!

Which will leave Isreal to have no other option but to destroy the nuclear site. Would not be the first time they have done something in that nature.

And you all know if Isreal feels threatened they will in there best interest take out that site.

What would you do if a nation stated that it would only speed up the process of your non-excistance if you attacked??Shake in your shoes!!

In my mind thats already being provoked!

 

[rusty]

Thinking ahead of a possible attack the 3rd Reich,I mean Iran draws out plan.

Thinking ahead of a possible attack the 3rd Reich,I mean Iran draws out plan.

Iran put nuclear site near base in case of attack

TEHRAN, Iran ? Iran's nuclear chief said Tuesday his country built its newly revealed uranium enrichment facility inside a mountain and next to a military site to ensure continuity of its nuclear activities in case of an attack.

Vice President Ali Akbar Salehi, who also heads the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, said the site near the holy city of Qom is next to an ammunition depot controlled by the elite Revolutionary Guard, Iran's most powerful military force. He said the only connection between the Qom nuclear facility and the Guard is the Guard would protect it against possible attacks.

"This site is at the base of a mountain and was selected on purpose in a place that would be protected against aerial attack. That's why the site was chosen adjacent to a military site," Salehi told a news conference. "It was intended to safeguard our nuclear facilities and reduce the cost of active defense system. If we had chosen another site, we would have had to set up another aerial defense system."

Details about the newly revealed site and the fact that Iran kept its construction secret for years have raised more suspicion among experts and Western governments that Iran's nuclear program is aimed at producing weapons ? something Tehran has long denied. The U.S. and its allies have strongly condemned Iran over the site and demanded it immediately come clean on its nuclear activities or face harsher international sanctions.

Salehi said the site was selected after a careful study by the authorities and will be open to inspections by the U.N. nuclear watchdog. He said Iran is in talks with the International Atomic Energy Agency to set a timetable "soon" for a visit.

He gave the location of the site as about 60 miles (100 kilometers) south of capital Tehran on the road leading to Qom. That is about 20 miles (30 kilometers) north of Qom. He dismissed a statement by Iran's Foreign Ministry spokesman on Monday that the facility was near the village of Fordo, which is about 30 miles south of Qom.

A satellite image provided by DigitalGlobe and GeoEye shows a well-fortified facility built into a mountain about 20 miles northeast of Qom, with ventilation shafts and a nearby surface-to-air missile site, according to defense consultancy IHS Jane's, which did the analysis of the imagery. The image was taken in September.

GlobalSecurity.org analyzed images from 2005 and January 2009 when the site was in an earlier phase of construction and believes the facility is not underground but was instead cut into a mountain. It is constructed of heavily reinforced concrete and is about the size of a football field ? large enough to house 3,000 centrifuges used to refine uranium.

 

[Lumi]

Why don't you do some research on the history, the Military background on BB Netanyahu. You won't like what you find when it comes to human rights violations. I do know what I speak of, yet I will not mention the group he commanded.

 

[rusty]

Why don't you do some research on the history, the Military background on BB Netanyahu. You won't like what you find when it comes to human rights violations. I do know what I speak of, yet I will not mention the group he commanded.

A heads up .The Iran/Iraq war was a 8yr.(80-88) where there was no clear cut winner.

I will make a deal with you.You research the Iran/Iraq war and I will do the same with BB Netanyahu,Deal?

 

[Lumi]

I was serving during that war, do you not think I am not up to speed on that conflict ? Do you not think I didn't train in that region?

 

[rusty]

I was serving during that war, do you not think I am not up to speed on that conflict ? Do you not think I didn't train in that region?

With all do respect ,How do I know that?
I dont care who signed a resolution.

it was a ceasefire,the reasons that Saddam went to war were not changed after 88.It was a stalemate politically and Iran til this day is the superpower in that region,just like they were in the 80's.

Why do you think Saddam invaded Iran.The answer is simple.

Four major battles were fought from April to August 1988, in which the Iraqis routed or defeated the Iranians. In the first offensive, named Blessed Ramadhan, Iraqi Republican Guard and regular Army units recaptured the Al-Faw peninsula. The 36-hour battle was conducted in a militarily sophisticated manner with two main thrusts, supported by heliborne and amphibious landings, and low-level fixed-wing attack sorties. In this battle, the Iraqis effectively used chemical weapons (CW), using nerve and blister agents against Iranian command and control facilities, artillery positions, and logistics points. Three subsequent operations followed much the same pattern, although they were somewhat less complex. After rehearsals, the Iraqis launched successful attacks on Iranian forces in the Fish Lake and Shalamjah areas near Al-Basrah and recaptured the oil-rich Majnun Islands. Farther to the north, in the last major engagement before the August 1988 cease-fire, Iraqi armored and mechanized forces penetrated deep into Iran, defeating Iranian forces and capturing huge amounts of armor and artillery.

In the fall of 1988, the Iraqis displayed in Baghdad captured Iranian weapons amounting to more than three-quarters of the Iranian armor inventory and almost half of its artillery pieces and armored personnel carriers.

The Iran-Iraq war lasted nearly eight years, from September of 1980 until August of 1988. It ended when Iran accepted United Nations (UN) Security Council Resolution 598, leading to a 20 August 1988 cease-fire.

Casualty figures are highly uncertain, though estimates suggest more than one and a half million war and war-related casualties -- perhaps as many as a million people died, many more were wounded, and millions were made refugees. Iran acknowledged that nearly 300,000 people died in the war; estimates of the Iraqi dead range from 160,000 to 240,000. Iraq suffered an estimated 375,000 casualties, the equivalent of 5.6 million for a population the size of the United States. Another 60,000 were taken prisoner by the Iranians. Iran's losses may have included more than 1 million people killed or maimed.

Without diminishing the horror of either war, Iranian losses in the eight-year Iran-Iraq war appear modest compared with those of the European contestants in the four years of World War I, shedding some light on the limits of the Iranian tolerance for martyrdom. The war claimed at least 300,000 Iranian lives and injured more than 500,000, out of a total population which by the war's end was nearly 60 million. During the Great War, German losses were over 1,700,000 killed and over 4,200,000 wounded [out of a total population of over 65 million]. Germany's losses, relative to total national population, were at least five times higher than Iran. France suffered over 1,300,000 deaths and over 4,200,000 wounded. The percentages of pre-war population killed or wounded were 9% of Germany, 11% of France, and 8% of Great Britain.

At the end, virtually none of the issues which are usually blamed for the war had been resolved. When it was over, the conditions which existed at the beginning of the war remained virtually unchanged. Although Iraq won the war militarily, and possessed a significant military advantage over Iran in 1989, the 1991 Persian Gulf War reduced Iraq's capabilities to a point where a rough parity existed between Iran and Iraq-conditions similar to those found in 1980. The UN-arranged cease-fire merely put an end to the fighting, leaving two isolated states to pursue an arms race with each other, and with the other countries in the region. The Iraqi military machine -- numbering more than a million men with an extensive arsenal of CW, extended range Scud missiles, a large air force and one of the world's larger armies -- emerged as the premier armed force in the Persian Gulf region. In the Middle East, only the Israel Defense Force had superior capability.

The Ayatollah Khomeini died on 03 June 1989. The Assembly of Experts--an elected body of senior clerics--chose the outgoing president of the republic, Ali Khamenei, to be his successor as national religious leader in what proved to be a smooth transition. In August 1989, Ali Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani, the speaker of the National Assembly, was elected President by an overwhelming majority. The new clerical regime gave Iranian national interests primacy over Islamic doctrine.

A variety of unresolved humanitarian issues from the Iran-Iraq war include a failure to identify combatants killed in action and to exchange information on those killed or missing. Iran agreed to the release of 5,584 Iraqi POW's in April 1998, and news organizations reported intermittent meetings throughout the remainder of the year between Iranian and Iraqi government officials toward reaching a final agreement on the remaining POW's held by each side. The Iranian government pledged to settle the remaining POW issues with Iraq in 1999. And joint Iran-Iraq search operations were initiated to identify remains of those missing in action.

 

[Lumi]

How about because I said I did

US Army and CA NAtional Guard 1986-1990
Med Ret SFC/E7

And here is a solution for you buttercup, since you have such a hard on for war. No more paint ball for you. I will come to your city, hold your hand and escort you to your nearest recruiter and get you in most ricky ticky. Let's make sure it's combat arms so your ears are fucked as well as your nerves and just about everytime a car backfires you hit the ground, roll and draw. Then we will se how much you and your pink pencil will be up for full scale war under the MAD DOCTRINE

BTW,

I lie about 3 things, my height, weight and how many times I have slept with Jessica Alba

 

[Lumi]

Now it's off to physical therapy

 

[rusty]

How about because I said I did

US Army and CA NAtional Guard 1986-1990
Med Ret SFC/E7

And here is a solution for you buttercup, since you have such a hard on for war. No more paint ball for you. I will come to your city, hold your hand and escort you to your nearest recruiter and get you in most ricky ticky. Let's make sure it's combat arms so your ears are fucked as well as your nerves and just about everytime a car backfires you hit the ground, roll and draw. Then we will se how much you and your pink pencil will be up for full scale war under the MAD DOCTRINE

BTW,

I lie about 3 things, my height, weight and how many times I have slept with Jessica Alba

Sorry if I offended you.I dont glorify war.I was in National Guard myself.Im thankful I never saw combat.

People like to blame USA as the problem for our military conflicts.In most cases its just not true.

Lettn. Iran built nukes would be a grave mistake.
Thats all Im saying.How can anyone argue with that.

Thats my point to this thread and nothing else.

 

[kcwolf]

I think it is important to note who is pulling the strings in Iran. Forget the two in the public eye, Khamenei and Ahmadinejad. The Revolutionary Guard controls things. Their leaders fought in the Iraq war and have a different mentality to say the least. Ahmad Vihidi seems to have the most control, former leader of the elite Al Quds and Defense Minister. He likes blowing shit up & teasing civilized nations by raising some hell. It buys him time until he goes for the big prize, Iraq.

He is also another holocaust denying flake, who would kill Israelis given the chance. If Israel remains checked, I say give the Iran protester movement a chance to play out. Iran really, really wants to be a world player. The protesters would too by advancements in technology and improvements in their everyday lives. I think too much aggresion by Nato may be counter-productive to their movement.

My 2 pennies worth.

 

[rusty]

Talking With Iran: Chances for a Breakthrough Are Low
In Qom, Iran. ? By TONY KARON Tony Karon ? 1 hr 49 mins ago
The drama of last week's revelation that Iran has been secretly building an underground uranium enrichment facility may have raised expectations that this week's Geneva talks would be a kind of high-noon showdown. Instead, Thursday's meeting between Iran's nuclear negotiator and representatives of the Western powers, Russia and China is more likely to be the opening exchange of a tortuous conversation that will continue for months.


The renewal of talks with Tehran follows President Barack Obama's warning to Iran that it must discuss Western concerns over its nuclear program or else face a new round of sanctions. But Iran has hardly been in an accommodating mood. A week ago it wrote to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to reveal it was building a uranium enrichment facility in the mountains near Qom. (President Obama announced the existence of the hitherto secret facility four days later, and U.S. officials claimed that Tehran had preempted him only because it was aware that it had been caught red-handed.) (See pictures of people protesting Iran's election around the world.)


The U.S. and its allies point to signs in the Qom facility of what they say is Iran's military intent: first, the project's secrecy and partially underground location on a military base, and second, the fact that its limited capacity (3,000 centrifuges) makes it unsuitable for supplying reactor fuel but potentially capable of slowly amassing weapons-grade material. Iran continues to insist that it is simply exercising its right to develop nuclear energy infrastructure as a party to the Non-Proliferation Treaty. But on Monday, Tehran also test-fired a medium-range missile capable of reaching Israel and U.S. military bases in the Gulf, underscoring its threat to retaliate for any attack on its nuclear facilities. And Iranian officials have insisted that they will not even negotiate over Iran's "nuclear rights."


But Iran's approach to Thursday's talks is unlikely to be uniformly defiant or belligerent. Its response to demands from the U.S. and other international players to open the Qom enrichment site to inspection may be indicative of its broader approach. While declaring its refusal even to discuss the Qom plant at Geneva, Tehran has indicated that it will open the site to IAEA inspectors "in the near future." The Iranians are likely hoping for a repeat of the experience of its main enrichment facility at Natanz - which was also constructed in secret, but then subjected to an ongoing IAEA inspection regime. The result is that Natanz, which gives Iran the capacity to produce fissile material, has become an increasingly intractable fact on the ground, although IAEA oversight prevents such material from being diverted for covert weapons work.


Tehran's approach has been to try and deal with the nuclear issue exclusively through the IAEA, and to reject U.N. Security Council demands that it freeze uranium enrichment. Its insistence on its nuclear "rights" is a statement of its rejection of the demand from Western countries that it give up the right to enrich uranium, even for peaceful purposes, because of concerns over its intentions. Washington and its allies are currently debating whether the West can sustain that demand, or could accept continued enrichment in Iran but under stricter safeguards against weaponization. Iran is making clear where it plans to start the discussion. As Iran's foreign minister Manoucher Mottaki told the New York Times on Tuesday, Iran sees the talks as a "two-way street" rather than simply a last chance to respond to a series of Western ultimatums. (See pictures of the turbulent aftermath of Iran's election.)


Iran's track record, and the regime's precarious domestic political position, suggests Tehran's strategy will be to engage in a way that offers hope of progress, but ambiguously and on terms more limited than that sought by the West. Its goal will be to avert confrontation and to divide the Western powers from Russia and China. As Ray Takeyh, former adviser to Obama Iran point man Dennis Ross, wrote in Sunday's Washington Post, "At this week's talks, Iran's representatives are likely to subtly hint of cooperation to come - but only if talks continue. However, such gestures do not mean Iran is prepared to offer meaningful concessions and impose any restraints on its nuclear ambitions." And the most distasteful aspect of the process may be that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad uses the talks to burnish the legitimacy of a regime at odds with millions of its own people.


But the Administration may have little option but to play the diplomatic game, because its "or else" options are so limited. Russia and China remain deeply skeptical of the case for sanctions, and are unlikely to approve measures with significant bite. What's more, Israeli and American hawks have long argued that no sanctions will prompt a regime that has invested so much in developing a nuclear program to simply reverse course; rather, they see the choice as boiling down to one between military strikes and accepting a nuclear-warmed Iran. But military strikes are opposed by the Pentagon for two reasons: even in the best case they would simply delay Iran's nuclear progress, and they would prompt a backlash that could dramatically destabilize the region. Indeed, as a result, Iran could even move from its current ambiguous policy towards a clearly enunciated and accelerated nuclear weapons program.


That leaves only the diplomatic game, which is unlikely to produce quick or satisfactory results - and may force Western powers to accept more limited goals. But the U.S. and its allies will insist that Iran demonstrate a credible commitment to answer concerns over the intent of its program, and agree to mechanisms to safeguard against its nuclear infrastructure being used to create weapons. On Sept. 25, President Obama warned, "At [the Geneva] meeting, Iran must be prepared to cooperate fully and comprehensively with the IAEA to take concrete steps to create confidence and transparency in its nuclear program and to demonstrate that it is committed to establishing its peaceful intentions through meaningful dialogue and concrete actions."


But U.S. officials won't judge Thursday's meeting in Geneva a one-off indicator of Iran's intentions. Administration officials have indicated that they will decide by the end of year whether Iran is cooperating in good faith. European officials suggest that the metric for success in Geneva may simply be the tone of the meeting. The last time the same parties sat around the table, Iran's negotiator, Saeed Jalili, subjected his interlocutors to lengthy philosophical harangues in a kind of diplomatic filibuster. This time, they'll be looking for signs that Iran is ready to cooperate in addressing international concerns - even if such cooperation will be viewed with suspicion, and comes at a sometimes unpalatable price.