Same as the RIAA / MPAA

Post #267,378 by drewk 9/12/06 5:38:53 PM Reply	Same as the RIAA / MPAA I was reading an article recently -- I think it was linked here -- about how the *AA get what they want. Make ridiculous requests, then when they get shot down they offer as a compromise to let us keep doing something that is already legal in exchange for which we agree to give up just some* of what they originally asked for. Specifically, they agree to allow fair-use copying in exchange for us paying a tax on blank media. Anyone who refuses their compromise position is painted as the ones not willing to meet them halfway. And by accepting the deal, we reinforce the notion that fair-use was not really a right to begin with -- which it was -- but is instead something they have granted. (Which can therefor be taken back later.) Iran is doing the same. Stake out an unacceptable position -- claiming it is their right to develop nukes -- then offer as a compromise to only enrich the uranium. Just a little, really. By accepting the deal, we'd be implicitly accepting the proposition that their developing nukes is a negotiable item. === Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link\|http://DocHope.com\|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats]. [link\|http://DocHope.com\|http://DocHope.com]
Post #267,395 by Andrew Grygus 9/12/06 9:46:45 PM Reply	Shouldn't that be ??AA ? [link\|http://www.aaxnet.com\|AAx]
Post #267,403 by JayMehaffey 9/12/06 11:46:35 PM Reply	Analogy doesn't hold That analogy doesn't really hold, because Iran does have the right to refine nuclear fuel for civilan powerplant use under the nuclear non-poliferation treaty. Thus it the US that is making the extreme demand, not Iran. You might ask, if that is the case, then why did they keep it secret so long? Israel, with US backing, bombed their previous nuclear facility. So even if you don't think they are trying to build a nuclear bomb* they had darn good reasons to keep it secret as long as possible. The US (and Europe) want Iran to abandon all enrichment, and in exchange the US will sell them fuel at a reduced price and promise* never to use their massive control over Iran's internal power supply as a threat against the country. My personal feeling is that this is a case where the US's history and Bush's diplomatic hamfisted methods have backed the US into a bad situation. We are demanding something both humiliating and economically destructive of Iran, and the only threat we hold over them is a war that everybody knows the US is not in a posistion to fight. The only edge we have is that Europe and Iran understand that Bush is crazy enough to launch the war, no matter how destructive it will be to Iran, the US and other bystanders. Jay * I'm pretty sure they want to now, and I'm convinced that even if the don't right now if we let them enrich nuclear material they will eventually. Or some other party, Russia has shown a lot of interest in this job. cross-the-heart and hope to die
Post #267,484 by boxley 9/13/06 5:58:41 PM Reply	Nit, Israel has never bombed Iran Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 50 years. meep
Post #267,522 by JayMehaffey 9/14/06 9:23:23 AM Reply	Your right, got my history a bit confused. Iran's nuclear plant was bombed by Iraq, Israel bombed Iraq's nuclear plant. Both events happened during the Iran/Iraq war. Jay

Welcome to IWETHEY!