More talk. Meanwhile a USCSG departs the Med, and heads for the Persian gulf. The claim is "show of strength", nevermind that there are already TWO carriers there, and moving the third carrier is an abandonment of Israel on the day before the Iranian confrontation arrives. Are we supposed to believe the UN is going to *help* Israel? Would you like to purchase some foxes, which have been trained to "guard" your hens?

The Mullahs do not want to talk with you, they want to nuke you. Is this so difficult to understand?

I thought he was thougher then his European counterparts, I was dead wrong...

Time to bring out the vuvuzelas and blow them during the meeting...they make a better sound

An irrational nuclear Iran in the region is not conceivable. A stable nuclear balance of power/balance of terror in the Middle East would be out of the question (nuclear proliferation in the M.E. could never create the same sort of stable equilibrium that was once obtained between the USA and USSR). ISRAEL MUST REMAIN THE REGION’S ONLY NUCLEAR POWER. Moreover, Iran’s program should not become a powerful proliferation driver, building on regional rivalry security concerns and one-upmanship. More at : http://xrl.us/bemedo

Bombing would only delay and backlash would be bad, to truly stop Iran's nukes you would have to invade. Talks could work but not easy with current Iranian Gov., also Iran would have to be able to keep and add reactors for any deal to work but lose control over fuel rods and uranium refinement.

This lunatic talks about a nuclear-free world, but does anything he can that even the last mutton thief in the Middle East gets his own nukes. Impeachment now.