This_person
Well-Known Member
BTW, #6 is about the only one with which I have some agreement. While sanctions could theoretically be returned in 30 days, logistically they cannot. It is absurd to think they could.
BTW, #6 is about the only one with which I have some agreement. While sanctions could theoretically be returned in 30 days, logistically they cannot. It is absurd to think they could.
What was skewed?Please provide where I said they have the bomb tomorrow.
Please provide where this agreement gives us oversight over anything Iran doesn't want us to look at.
Please provide where the other parties involved have said, "we're gonna lift sanctions whether the US agrees or not".
Please provide where giving them hundreds of billions of dollars and sanctions relief will help keep and military armaments trading will improve our posture with them to help see the error of their ways in building a bomb.
I'm guessing you can't do any of those things. And, you'll tell me that you're bored with me, that I'm stupid, and then you'll put the yawn emoji up instead of thinking it through, but I could be wrong about that.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/08/28/us-iran-nuclear-russia-idUSKBN0GS0D620140828Russia's Foreign Ministry said it still hoped a deal was possible no later than November.
"Despite the difficult course of the negotiating process, a possibility is emerging to satisfy in full all integral rights of Iran as a member state of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, including the right to enrich uranium and lifting the sanctions regime," it said.
"We presume all parties in the talks will show political will to reach a final, mutually acceptable agreement that would allow to fully restore the international community's trust in the exclusively peaceful character of Iran's nuclear program."
BTW, #6 is about the only one with which I have some agreement. While sanctions could theoretically be returned in 30 days, logistically they cannot. It is absurd to think they could.
This is very much like the Hillary e-mail deal. We will get to look at the ones to which they grant us access. That is all, and no more. That is like asking a drug dealer to give us access to search his car, and he says, "sure, but don't go in the trunk" and so you are forbidden to go into the trunk. Give him 24 days, and he'll let you in the trunk if you can show a good reason why.You obviously haven't been paying attention.
1)we will now have oversight over their mines, their mills, their production sites, their centrifuges, their fuel, their reactors, and their waste. They don't want us to look at any of that.
That lift is based on the negotiations, no in spite of. Would they lift anyway? We'll never know for sure now, but it seems unlikely.2) all of the other parties to the deal are lifting sanctions, russia in particular wanted to lift sanctions
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/08/28/us-iran-nuclear-russia-idUSKBN0GS0D620140828
That's just it, we won't. We'll get to see what they want us to see when they want us to see it.3)it appears Iran decided on their own to not pursue the bomb. We will be able to tell if they do. :shrug:
why does an country awash in OIL need Nuclear Energy
This shows how little you understand about the situation. The things were are talking about can't be hidden in three weeks. We are talking about mines, reactors, and enrichment facilities. Go back and read my post to tilted again...This is very much like the Hillary e-mail deal. We will get to look at the ones to which they grant us access. That is all, and no more. That is like asking a drug dealer to give us access to search his car, and he says, "sure, but don't go in the trunk" and so you are forbidden to go into the trunk. Give him 24 days, and he'll let you in the trunk if you can show a good reason why.
if Russia was saying that publicly what do you think their real opinion was? And that was in 2014 when they were pushing for a dealThat lift is based on the negotiations, no in spite of. Would they lift anyway? We'll never know for sure now, but it seems unlikely.That's just it, we won't. We'll get to see what they want us to see when they want us to see it.
Because they like being in control in the Mideast :shrug:Why do you think Saudi Arabia and Israel agree with each other that this is a bad deal?
the Iranians have no intention of obeying any of it. It isn't worth the paper it is written on.
Got any proof? Links? Anything to support your assertion? Or is this what your years of experience in geopolitics and international diplomacy tell you?
:snicker:
Duh... they want a clean energy source so they don't contribute to global warming. Or is that global cooling? Oh anyway, they want to be environmentally responsible. Yeah... that's it.
![]()
Do you really believe that an enrichment facility can't be hidden in 3 weeks? We built portable Reactors in the 1950s, do you think Reactors that are not full-scale energy producers but rather just breeders can't be moved in the 21st century in 3 weeks? If you believe these things, you are as naive as our negotiators.This shows how little you understand about the situation. The things were are talking about can't be hidden in three weeks. We are talking about mines, reactors, and enrichment facilities. Go back and read my post to tilted again.
And given that we've been so militarily aggressive towards them and used our nukes in every conflict we've been in from Korea to Afghanistan it makes sense for them to believe our nukes are a threat.Having nuke power is intelligent and never mind the environmental pros and cons. It is completely understandable that a nation would want the technological advances that comes with pursuing it and it is completely understandable that any nation would, at the very least, think about acquiring nuclear weapons. Especially when a very larger, rich, US backed nation is filled with people who are you natural enemies, Sunni dominated Saudi.
Had our latest war in their neighborhood worked, stabilized Iraq, created peace and prosperity, they would have far less motivation. As things are, they have all the motivation they need to want more conventional weapons as well as working towards nukes.
Our failure in Iraq gave them the money to be able to afford the bomb and the mess we left gave them even more motivation than they naturally had before. It's frankly rather odd that we send over 100's of thousands of troops every so many years, speak in and treat them fairly harshly and yet we think they're the irrational ones.
Will they nuke Israel the second they can? They say they will. I doubt it because suicide is not a Shia trait. However, it would certainly become a possibility. That said, Israel nuking them has been a possibility for 50 years. not to mention us.
Well they don't have that technology, nor are they close. For them to move an enrichment facility in 3 weeks is impossible. The best they could do is move some of the stuff while we watch via satellite. They wont be able to move the infrastructure, which would be extensive, or hide the contamination.Do you really believe that an enrichment facility can't be hidden in 3 weeks? We built portable Reactors in the 1950s, do you think Reactors that are not full-scale energy producers but rather just breeders can't be moved in the 21st century in 3 weeks? If you believe these things, you are as naive as our negotiators.
Look up SL1 and imagine how much further technology has gotten in 65 years.
Well they don't have that technology, nor are they close.
oh so you are on the Iranian Inspection teams ?
you know where all the facilities are ?
Priceless.
They have already done it, in about two weeks.Well they don't have that technology, nor are they close. For them to move an enrichment facility in 3 weeks is impossible. The best they could do is move some of the stuff while we watch via satellite. They wont be able to move the infrastructure, which would be extensive, or hide the contamination.
But lets assume they can build a reactor they can move. Where are they going to get the fissile material? Are they going to have mines they can move too? How about production facilities?