Iran deal

[Michchamp]

You have it backwards - conservatives like when competition drives prices down. But even if you didn't get it completely wrong in yet another unhinged rant, they wouldn't be half as pissed as you climate alarmists are going to be when you see gas guzzling truck sales sky rocket.

not really.

 

[Spartanmack]

not really.

if by "not really" you mean "precisely" then yes, not really.

 

[Thumb]

I guess I just don't understand how this is a bad deal????

Iran is already pushing forward with their Nuclear program and we have absolutely nobody in that country to watch the progress. From all reports, they're past so called "red lines". Our sanctions have done nothing to stop them...really all it has done is hurt the Iranian people and their economy. You think anybody in the Iran Gov't is worrying about their money?

Why not get something out of this deal while we still can? 24/7 access to Nuclear sites, including surveillance cameras installed in the buildings is a very good deal. They pull an Iraq or North Korea and try to restrict access or push out inspectors, you immediately renew the sanctions...which is what I believe is in the agreement.

Unless there is some fine print in the agreement, I see this as a win/win. Without this agreement, they would eventually build their stock of Nukes.

I would like to see Obama get our prisoners out of Iran, though. Very disappointed it wasn't included in the deal.

The biggest complaint (argument against) I have seen about it so far is some people believe that once China and Russia are allowed to sell arms to Iran again, they wont want to stop even if the sanctions are put back in place.

All the talk about how this makes it easier for Iran to build a bomb are ridiculous nonsense. It clearly makes it harder, but the sanctions were not stopping them anyways.

 

[tinselwolverine]

I'm a little surprised that nobody yet has questioned the President's Constitutional authority to "veto" a treaty that hasn't been passed by Congress into law.

 

[Spartanmack]

Sounds familiar...

 

[Michchamp]

They're quotes, that's all I took from the piece. Are you saying Goldberg made them up?

And what have I said that is so hateful? Talk about smoke and mirrors. Are you going to call me a racist again and pretend like that means you've won an argument we're not having - again?

I notice you only managed to reply to a couple of the points I made; can I assume you're conceding the others?

 

[Spartanmack]

I notice you only managed to reply to a couple of the points I made; can I assume you're conceding the others?

No. Your other points weren't really worth replying to but if you'd like...

Your link was about a quote from ahmedinijad being mistranslated. There are no quotes from him in my post so it's kind of irrelevant unless your contention is that all of those quotes were also mistranslated even though it's not clear that the one you're saying was mistranslated was actually mistranslated. Apparently, according to the article the original quote from Khomeini translates as "This occupation regime over Jerusalem must vanish from the arena of time." While it doesn't exactly say "wiped off the face of the earth" you're kind of splitting hairs and it's clearly a lot more threatening than your fellow alum's translation that "it would collapse" or whatever he translated it to say. Even the article itself acknowledges Iran's open hostility to Israel in this paragraph.

"Some might question why Ahmadinejad’s precise words are important. Clearly, the Iranian government has unrelenting opposition to the state of Israel, so much so that it even rejects Palestinian efforts at statehood if that would result in Israel remaining in the Middle East. Indeed, Tehran has armed and funded Hamas, Hezbollah and other militant groups opposed to Israel. At the same time, the words allegedly uttered by Ahmadinejad have been used to suggest a change toward a more militaristic posture by Iran toward Israel."

As for your point about these quotes being all about Israel, that's true but the regime has been referring to the US as the Great Satan and calling for our demise since day 1 of the revolution. They are one of it not the largest State sponsor of terrorism and other than Al Qaeda, Iranian and Iranian sponsored terrorists have killed more Americans than anyone.

 

[Michchamp]

No. Your other points weren't really worth replying to but if you'd like...

Your link was about a quote from ahmedinijad being mistranslated. There are no quotes from him in my post so it's kind of irrelevant unless your contention is that all of those quotes were also mistranslated even though it's not clear that the one you're saying was mistranslated was actually mistranslated. Apparently, according to the article the original quote from Khomeini translates as "This occupation regime over Jerusalem must vanish from the arena of time." While it doesn't exactly say "wiped off the face of the earth" you're kind of splitting hairs and it's clearly a lot more threatening than your fellow alum's translation that "it would collapse" or whatever he translated it to say. Even the article itself acknowledges Iran's open hostility to Israel in this paragraph.

"Some might question why Ahmadinejad?s precise words are important. Clearly, the Iranian government has unrelenting opposition to the state of Israel, so much so that it even rejects Palestinian efforts at statehood if that would result in Israel remaining in the Middle East. Indeed, Tehran has armed and funded Hamas, Hezbollah and other militant groups opposed to Israel. At the same time, the words allegedly uttered by Ahmadinejad have been used to suggest a change toward a more militaristic posture by Iran toward Israel."

As for your point about these quotes being all about Israel, that's true but the regime has been referring to the US as the Great Satan and calling for our demise since day 1 of the revolution. They are one of it not the largest State sponsor of terrorism and other than Al Qaeda, Iranian and Iranian sponsored terrorists have killed more Americans than anyone.

I don't know if all those quotes were misquotes, but I do know Jeffrey Goldberg is a hack, and wouldn't cite him (of all people) on this issue, or any other.

Also, you (again) didn't acknowledge the part about how senior officials and prominent politicians in Israel, the USA, and Saudi Arabia have all called for attacks on or the destruction of Iran... yet you don't brand Israel, Saudia Arabia, or us as a "rogue nation" bent on "world domination" like you do Iran (although, given our recent history you could). There's a pretty big double standard here at work.

you also didn't address my longer post about the real reasons why Israel and Saudi Arabia oppose the deal with Iran, which make more sense given the above, namely that nothing Iran has done really justify the sanctions & what not.

 

[Spartanmack]

I don't know if all those quotes were misquotes, but I do know Jeffrey Goldberg is a hack, and wouldn't cite him (of all people) on this issue, or any other.

Also, you (again) didn't acknowledge the part about how senior officials and prominent politicians in Israel, the USA, and Saudi Arabia have all called for attacks on or the destruction of Iran... yet you don't brand Israel, Saudia Arabia, or us as a "rogue nation" bent on "world domination" like you do Iran (although, given our recent history you could). There's a pretty big double standard here at work.

you also didn't address my longer post about the real reasons why Israel and Saudi Arabia oppose the deal with Iran, which make more sense given the above, namely that nothing Iran has done really justify the sanctions & what not.

Again, I said nothing about the editorial piece of the article, my only reference was to the quotes themselves. My point doesn't rely on Jeffrey Goldberg in any way.

It's pretty arrogant of you to assume every point you post is worthy of a response, especially given your history of posting mostly nonsense and the fact that your only response to my posts are name calling and accusations of racism. But if it will stop you from whining or assuming you actually made good points or more accurately, regurgitated someone else's points you mistakenly think are good, here you go...

I never said Iran was bent on "world domination" or anything remotely close to that. And I'm not aware of any US or Israeli gov't officials calling for the destruction of Iran - if you're going to make those accusations and think them worthy of a response, you should at least provide some actual quotes. The only sabre rattling I've seen were calls for attacks on their nuclear facilities, which given the regime's ambitions and stated intentions aren't all that outrageous - even the most dovish politicians involved in the negotiations have acknowledged that the option of military strikes on those facilities was on the table. If I'm missing something other than some nutjob nobody pays any attention to calling for the destruction of Iran, post it.

Finally, I didn't respond to your longer post about SA and Israel's motivation being economic because it's laughably stupid. Only a fool would read that and not laugh out loud at the complete nonsense. Israel doesn't have oil and Iran driving oil prices down has no impact on them other than the oil they buy possibly getting cheaper which helps them. Iran is in the dark ages and Israel's economy is based on technology, far superior agriculture and tourism. Iran poses no threat to them economically. Israel's concern is 100% about security. Any economic concerns are 2nd order at best (same for SA) - if Iran gets rich, they can buy more weapons from the Russians and Chinese and possibly the US if our next President is as incompetent as this one - accusations of racism in 3, 2, 1...

 

[Michchamp]

I know Bush hasn't been president for 7 years now, but I love this pic:

those images of him with King Abdullah were like the epitome of the sort of "doublethink" George Orwell wrote about in 1984: we're at war with radical Islamic extremists, and tyranny, and yet a tyrannical regime founded by radical Islamic extremists - maybe the most extreme radical Islamic extremists - is a "staunch US ally."

we've always been at war with East Asia... I mean Iran.

 

[byco42]

... and it still is a "staunch U.S. ally."

 

[Michchamp]

I know. and it's always unbelievable to see. What happens if our Presidents don't genuflect for them? Do they burn all their oil in one big bonfire?

 

[byco42]

I know. and it's always unbelievable to see. What happens if our Presidents don't genuflect for them? Do they burn all their oil in one big bonfire?

They are all part of the same hypocrisy. We are the fodder.

 

[Michchamp]

They are all part of the same hypocrisy. We are the fodder.

Democracy is two political parties that agree on everything but abortion!

 

[byco42]

Democracy is two political parties that agree on everything but abortion!

Or slavery. Essentially the same issue. Why that is not a difference maker for more people is baffling.

 

[Gulo Blue]

I saw an article saying the key to this deal was being able to tell the US people the capability to build a nuke has been eliminated while telling the Iranians that the nuclear infrastructure and capabilities have been maintained. What they did was figure out what combinations of restrictions on stockpile sizes and centrifuges would leave Iran in a state where they would need a year to refine enough material to make a bomb. So they are left with a significant number of centrifuges, but inspections at all the stages in the pipeline will ensure there isn't enough material in the system to yield a bomb anytime soon.

I think I like it.

 

[Michchamp]

I saw an article saying the key to this deal was being able to tell the US people the capability to build a nuke has been eliminated while telling the Iranians that the nuclear infrastructure and capabilities have been maintained. What they did was figure out what combinations of restrictions on stockpile sizes and centrifuges would leave Iran in a state where they would need a year to refine enough material to make a bomb. So they are left with a significant number of centrifuges, but inspections at all the stages in the pipeline will ensure there isn't enough material in the system to yield a bomb anytime soon.

I think I like it.

I'm guessing the technology used to enrich enough U-238 or synthesize sufficient plutonium has improved since the Manhattan project, and is now a lot easier to conceal. It appears Israel successfully did that, more or less, although according to wikipedia French aid and nuclear cooperation was complicit in their ability to conceal it. This quote "U.S. President Richard Nixon in a meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir pressed Israel to "make no visible introduction of nuclear weapons or undertake a nuclear test program", so maintaining a policy of nuclear ambiguity." makes it sound like it was more or less an open secret though.

given that, I'd imagine these days it would still be tough for any nation to conceal a nuclear weapons program from the world's major intelligence agencies (CIA, Mossad, FSB, MI-6, etc.) unless this nation already had all the uranium & technology they needed so as to avoid shipping it across international borders, were geographically large enough to have secret bases hundreds of miles from scrutiny, and had a competent counter-intelligence agency of their own. Even then, we've got the Earth so ringed with intelligence satellites and drones, it seems like it would be easy to detect unusual activity... and all it would take is one mistake or sloppy procedures to tip the watchers off.

I don't know if it's realistic to think Iran could really get away with it, although after the Stuxnet thing, and the Israeli assassination of some of their scientists, maybe they've upped their security.

 

[tigermud]

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/u-disturbed-iranian-leaders-criticism-deal-121454843--finance.html

smh.. that's cuz Kerry is an idiot.

 

[byco42]

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/u-disturbed-iranian-leaders-criticism-deal-121454843--finance.html

smh.. that's cuz Kerry is an idiot.

Stole my thunder ... there is no negotiating with regimes like Iran. But at least the official reaction from the State Department is "disturbed."

And I'm gonna remind the board of this: http://detroitsportsforum.com/showpost.php?p=589512&postcount=32

 

[Gulo Blue]

I'm guessing the technology used to enrich enough U-238 or synthesize sufficient plutonium has improved since the Manhattan project, and is now a lot easier to conceal.

You'd think. If there's a way, I'm glad it's not common knowledge.