UNITED NATIONS (CNN) - Findings in a recent U.N. report that Iran's nuclear program "has military dimensions" are "troubling," the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations said Tuesday.
"Iran also still refuses to respond constructively to IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency] questions about its past work to develop a nuclear weapons capability," the ambassador, Susan Rice, told a U.N. Security Council subcommittee that deals with ensuring sanctions against Iran are being enforced.
"The United States urges its fellow Security Council members not only to take note of the IAEA's serious findings but also to vigorously support the IAEA in its continuing investigations of these critical matters."
The IAEA is the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency that is charged with inspecting Iran's nuclear facilities.
Rice said Tuesday's meeting was "the Security Council's first session on Iran since the release of the IAEA director general's most recent report on Iran - a report that makes it clear that Iran is still not complying with its international nuclear obligations, including resolutions of this council."
From CNN Politics
© 2012 Cable News Network. Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
| Advertising practices | Advertise with us | About us | Work for us | Help
Iran remembers the first Carter and that is why Carter 2 has them drooling. Sadly though, I don't think the republicans will have a Reagan 2 to clean up Carter 2's mess.
All Obama has to do is send Hillary to talk to them, remember? No problem.
Oh my goodness.... Obama administration wants the Security Council to "take note" of the findings and to "vigorously" support the IAEA in it's continuing investigations.
WOW – Ahmadinejad must be quite upset with this harsh reaction!! Taking note and vigorous support .... I suspect Iran will immediately comply and stop all efforts towards obtaining nuclear material.
(eyes rolling)
Bash Bush all you like... at LEAST the world knew he was a man of action!! Obama is a worthless toad, verbose and impotent.
IRAN stop and desist or we'll send our new Secretary of State Hillary over to insult you too!
Reagan sold weapons to Iran ... maybe things would be different if he hadn't.
Have any of the weapons Ronald Reagan sold to Iran killed U.S. soldiers?
The War on Drugs that Reagan locked countless Americans up for continues to be a lost battle and the idiotic mantra of his wife is a miserable failure.
With regards to spending taxpayer dollars to do anything for Reagan now that he is dead and gone: JUST SAY NO. Our money could be much better spent elsewhere.
Jon, at least if Obama take action, he'll have positive result. Bush did nothing but waste time, weapons and money.
@Jon in CA
Man of action? What about our $5 trillion spent on a war that required no action (aka: no WMDs)! That is half our ENTIRE deficit.
What you fail to realize is why Iran has the hostilities it does towards the US, and western world in general. It was the US whom led a coup to overthrow a DEMOCRATICALLY elected leader, whom would not put up with western exploitation of Iran's oil reserves. This led to a brutal military regime that the populace of Iran remembers all to well. Hence, when the overthrow of this US sponsored dictatorship occurred by the Ayatollah, the populace of Iran did not look kindly upon US interests.
Do you think proclaiming aggression is going to change the policies of Iran? They yielded to US aggression 50 years ago, and paid the price.
Obama's strategy, on the other hand, is to have a fundamental policy shift of US interaction with Iran, thereby leading by example. Once the Iranians can trust that the US has their best interests, then Iran will come around.
Iran better clean up their act, or the UN might tell them to stop again!
You know the GOP want to bomb bomb bomb Iran...(eyes rolling)
I know you republicans think that Obama is going to be weak and not start killing willy-nilly like Bush, but showing restraint of force in dealing with Iran is good. Peace is better than war and if we can resolve this issue without force, all the better.
But if not, we should totally BOMB BOMB BOMB IRAN!!!
P.s. I am a liberal
Jon in CA – yeah Bush was a man of action – which must be why Iran paid no attention to him. Do you actually think that all Iran is doing started in the past 45 days?
The difference will be that Bush had to go it alone because everyone thought he was a clown. Obama has a chance to win broad support because he is a grown up in a world in serious need of adult supervision.
God help the leaders of this world because they sure aren't listening to your will.......get rid of all the nukes..everywhere!!!!
Don't scare me like that, for a second I thought they were talking about Condoleeza Rice.
Obama is the worst president since Carter and the economic numbers prove it. He won't get my vote for a second term.
Yep, Bush got real tough.....with Iraq. I'v enoticed how Bush didn't dare stand up to anyone that could possibly handle it. And even then, he went about things all wrong.
I truly believe that if Bush was gonna go into Iraq, the whole sorted affair should've taken about 1 month. And most of that for cleanup. I recall the words Bruce Willis said in of of his movies, that the military is not a precision tool, like a scalpel. It is more like a chain saw. In other words, if you are gonna go with the military option, expect things to get messy. So if we were to go into Iraq, the whole place should've been leveled and Mission Accomplished would actually mean just that.
all of you people have the right to criticize the adminstration's approach to Iran...however you need to understand that diplomacy and a respectful tone fully fleshed out is a better approach than sticking a gun in someones's face or haphazardly invading a country. Obama never ceeded the right to use military means whenever the U.S. & her interests are threatened. Be patient & lets see how the admin: responds. Give him a chance. The military briefing today said they are unsure if Iran plans to build a nuclear weapon..only that they have laid the groundwork for nuclear capabilities-(this could be benelovent or malevolent)
No, Iran remembers Bush II not being able to handle a small city-state the size of Utah beating us to a Viet Nam like standstill.
Here we go again...
Jon in CA: A little hyper to start uneccesary crap are we? People don't always have to go to war. We can be civil.
@Richard – I don't think Obama needs your vote.
I would feel more confidence if the Secretary of State and a separate team conducted their own investigation.
We don't want Susan Rice to take us into another Iraq situation......WAR TO NOWHERE
Not your problem anymore, Condy. Give it a rest and take a vacation.
Don't worry, the problem will work itself out if we sit and do nothing. Eventually Israel will take care of Iran with a nuclear EMP or destruction of the Kharg Island oil terminals, so we can go back to worrying about printing more money to fund for hog flatulence research.
Of course, the result is 30 million dead people from starvation, disease, dehydration, and gas is 6 dollars a gallon again, but our hands are clean, right? We didn't wage a pre-emptive war, and that makes us the good guys.
Right.
"Obama is the worst president since Carter and the economic numbers prove it. He won't get my vote for a second term."
Yeah, 6 weeks to clean up 8 years of Bush is little to ask.
So what else is new!! Details.. Details... let us know in detail what is troubling. Don't be like the Bush Administrations rhetoric they have WMD's.
Obama is the worst president since Carter and the economic numbers prove it. He won't get my vote for a second term.
And like the 8 years George Walker didn't have nothing to do with the economy. Obama has been in office for 7 weeks, George W was in office for 8 years. You do the math!