How are we better off post Iran deal?

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by robini123, Jun 21, 2019.

  1. ronv

    ronv Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2018
    Messages:
    20,312
    Likes Received:
    8,774
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Really? They can inspect the major facilities continuously, but your worried about the ones that would take years to build?
    Even then 24 days notice for a new facility doesn't seem like a game changer.
     
  2. FAW

    FAW Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2008
    Messages:
    12,975
    Likes Received:
    3,835
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I am correctly pointing out that unless you can inspect anywhere, at any time, the inspection process is wholly meaningless and ineffective. Exempting military facilities specifically creates an enormous sanctuary for clandestine nuclear weapons work.

    You clearly cannot grasp what is a very common sense concept when considering an inspection process negotiated by the Obama administration. If however, Trump negotiated the same agreement with North Korea with the exact same terms, you all of a sudden would see all kinds of problems with such an arrangement. If you find it difficult to be honest with the board, at LEAST be honest with yourself.
     
    Last edited: Jun 24, 2019
  3. ronv

    ronv Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2018
    Messages:
    20,312
    Likes Received:
    8,774
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Please stop. Your embarrassing yourself.

    The IAEA has the authority to request access to facilities in Iran, including military ones, if there are new and credible indications of banned nuclear activities there, according to officials from the agency and signatories to the deal.

    But they said Washington has not provided such indications to back up its pressure on the IAEA to make such a request.

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-iran-nuclear-inspections-idUSKCN1BB1JC

    The deal was not a blank check for us to run willy nilly around Iran.
     
    Last edited: Jun 24, 2019
  4. FAW

    FAW Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2008
    Messages:
    12,975
    Likes Received:
    3,835
    Trophy Points:
    113
    LOL.....They have the authority to REQUEST access to facilities?......They cannot demand, but they can REQUEST? ....and you think this makes sense?

    I too found a Reuters article on this subject, and it looks like we made that REQUEST.....

    "NKARA (Reuters) - Iran has dismissed a U.S. demand for United Nations nuclear inspectors to visit its military bases as “merely a dream”. "
    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...for-u-n-visit-to-military-sites-idUSKCN1B918E

    I am correctly pointing out that unless you can inspect anywhere, at any time, the inspection process is wholly meaningless and ineffective. Exempting military facilities specifically creates an enormous sanctuary for clandestine nuclear weapons work.

    You clearly cannot grasp what is a very common sense concept when considering an inspection process negotiated by the Obama administration. If however, Trump negotiated the same agreement with North Korea with the exact same terms, you all of a sudden would see all kinds of problems with such an arrangement. If you find it difficult to be honest with the board, at LEAST be honest with yourself.
     
  5. ronv

    ronv Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2018
    Messages:
    20,312
    Likes Received:
    8,774
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    From your link. The same hypothetical.

    It also said the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) was unlikely to agree anyway.

    But be serious for a moment. Do you honestly think they could duplicate all those facilities without anyone knowing it?
     
  6. FAW

    FAW Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2008
    Messages:
    12,975
    Likes Received:
    3,835
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Also from my link......



    {Iranian government spokesman Mohammad Baqer Nobakht responded at a weekly news conference broadcast on state television on Tuesday. “Iran’s military sites are off limits,” he said. “All information about these sites are classified. Iran will never allow such visits. Don’t pay attention to such remarks that are only a dream.”}
    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...for-u-n-visit-to-military-sites-idUSKCN1B918E




    I have no desire to change the subject. Military sites are off limits. Unless you can inspect anywhere, at any time, the inspection process is wholly meaningless and ineffective. Exempting military facilities specifically creates an enormous sanctuary for clandestine nuclear weapons. There is no way to credibly claim that the agreement was a legitimate means of verifying that they were not advancing their nuclear ambitions. If Trump negotiated that agreement you would agree 100% that it is meaningless. Since it was the Obama admin however, you all of a sudden become a blind lemming.
     
    Last edited: Jun 24, 2019
  7. Vernan89188

    Vernan89188 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2014
    Messages:
    8,685
    Likes Received:
    2,069
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well 10 years would have been long enough to install political plants, and get who we want to be incharge of the whole situation. Or even have their ability to maintain a reactor dissolved by replacing them completely, or not letting them cause another chynobol (should watch that series its pretty good)..

    But nooo, Trump screwed it all up, with his incompetence.
     
    Last edited: Jun 24, 2019
    ronv likes this.
  8. ronv

    ronv Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2018
    Messages:
    20,312
    Likes Received:
    8,774
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The US never presented a formal request to the regulators that showed cause to inspect new sites.. We also agreed Iran was in compliance.
    Your bogyman makes no sense. None of the US Russian treaties allow military site inspections.
    It's not like you are hiding a needle in a haystack.
    There is also a thread on the forum where the righties are trying to claim no insurance is better than gov't insurance. Doesn't make it so. But you would fit in over there.
     
  9. FAW

    FAW Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2008
    Messages:
    12,975
    Likes Received:
    3,835
    Trophy Points:
    113
    On numerous occassionas, they openly and brazenly bragged that their military facilities are off limits. Unless you can inspect anywhere, at any time, the inspection process is wholly meaningless and ineffective. Exempting military facilities specifically creates an enormous sanctuary for clandestine nuclear activities.

    This is nothing like the US Russian Treaties. If anything it is analogous to the Clinton North Korea deal in the 90s that accomplished absolutely nothing other than a photo op. I would say that is a nice try at changing the subject, but in truth it is not a nice try because it is far too obvious that you are trying to once again change the subject. Changing the subject is not the domain of those with a winning argument.
     
  10. Robert E Allen

    Robert E Allen Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2018
    Messages:
    12,041
    Likes Received:
    5,750
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Not really just a pointless observation
     
  11. ronv

    ronv Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2018
    Messages:
    20,312
    Likes Received:
    8,774
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Yep, there you have it. No deal is better than a deal that allows inspections.
    It's that new rightie math.
    upload_2019-6-24_17-12-12.jpeg
     
  12. Robert E Allen

    Robert E Allen Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2018
    Messages:
    12,041
    Likes Received:
    5,750
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Furthermore I'll admit that it seems as though it would be very difficult to hide large scale uranium enrichment from inspectors without a large amount of subterfuge. Possibly more than they'd be capable of.
     
  13. FAW

    FAW Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2008
    Messages:
    12,975
    Likes Received:
    3,835
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Which takes us full circle to where this conversation began......

    Iran is the largest state supporter of terrorism. Iran has vowed to wipe Israel off the face of the map. This deal removed all sanctions, which took their crippled economy and made it healthy and robust. This deal did not give us any real means of inspecting their facilities in order to ensure compliance.

    The net result was that we got nothing out of this deal, and Iran receive $150 billion and a healthy economy due to the lifting of all sanctions. A healthy economy gave the largest state supporter of terrorism the means to more effectively create chaos throughout the middle east, and it gave them more capital to invest in long range missile systems etc.

    Pulling out of this deal served our interests because it financially hampers Iran's ability to create chaos and to fund its missile program. Pulling out of this deal dropped the facade that Iran was a nation in good standing with the world body.



    ....so yes.....no deal IS better than the prior (phony) deal.
     
    Last edited: Jun 24, 2019
  14. Polydectes

    Polydectes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2010
    Messages:
    53,251
    Likes Received:
    18,015
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Well the deal costs the United States billions of dollars. If we need to we will obliterate Iran. We shouldn't pay them not to develop uranium, just if you do we'll turn you into ash.
     
  15. garyd

    garyd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    56,566
    Likes Received:
    16,654
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Hell they're the ones that provided the information and it was the Germans that Sold Saddam nerve agents in the eighties.
     
  16. ronv

    ronv Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2018
    Messages:
    20,312
    Likes Received:
    8,774
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Iran's terrorism was not a part of the deal. They are still the running around the Mid-East after we got out of the deal.
    We could inspect their facilities we just couldn't find your imaginary ones.

    It was not 150 billion and what it was, was Iran's money we were holding for them. Notice I didn't say we stole it.

    We could have done the same thing while staying in the deal and forcing them to break it. I don't think anyone thought Iran was squeeky clean.
    Did they shoot down a drone before? Nope.... Not better off.
     
  17. Sandy Shanks

    Sandy Shanks Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2016
    Messages:
    26,679
    Likes Received:
    6,470
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Trump sides with Iran!

    “China gets 91% of its Oil from the Straight, Japan 62%, & many other countries likewise. So why are we protecting the shipping lanes for other countries (many years) for zero compensation,” Trump wrote on Twitter.

    All of these countries should be protecting their own ships on what has always been … a dangerous journey,” Trump continued. “We don’t even need to be there in that the U.S. has just become (by far) the largest producer of Energy anywhere in the world!

    Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei totally agrees with Trump. He says the American navy has no business in the Strait of Hormuz.
     
  18. FAW

    FAW Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2008
    Messages:
    12,975
    Likes Received:
    3,835
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Did somebody say that Iran's terrorism was part of the deal? No. Why then are you responding as if that was said? You are arguing against a point that has not been raised. This is a textbook example of a strawman argument.

    The net result was that they received money that had been frozen since the 70's, hence giving them greater ability to create even more havoc in the middle east.



    Iran is the largest state supporter of terrorism. Iran has vowed to wipe Israel off the face of the map. This deal removed all sanctions, which took their crippled economy and made it healthy and robust. This deal did not give us any real means of inspecting their facilities in order to ensure compliance.

    The net result was that we got nothing out of this deal, and Iran receive $150 billion and a healthy economy due to the lifting of all sanctions. A healthy economy gave the largest state supporter of terrorism the means to more effectively create chaos throughout the middle east, and it gave them more capital to invest in long range missile systems etc.

    Pulling out of this deal served our interests because it financially hampers Iran's ability to create chaos and to fund its missile program. Pulling out of this deal dropped the facade that Iran was a nation in good standing with the world body.



    ....so yes.....no deal IS better than the prior (phony) deal.
     
    Last edited: Jun 24, 2019
  19. Sandy Shanks

    Sandy Shanks Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2016
    Messages:
    26,679
    Likes Received:
    6,470
    Trophy Points:
    113
    "I look forward to the day when sanctions can be finally lifted and Iran can become a peaceful, prosperous and productive nation. That can go very quickly. It can be tomorrow. It can also be in years from now," Trump said, adding, "So I look forward to discussing whatever I have to discuss with anybody that wants to speak."

    This is how Trump thinks he can get Iran to the negotiating table.

    "We will continue to increase pressure on Tehran until the regime abandons its dangerous activities and aspirations, including the pursuit of nuclear weapons, increased enrichment of uranium, engagement in and support for terrorism, fueling of foreign conflicts, and belligerent acts directed against the United States and its allies," Trump said.

    Over the past year, that approach hasn't worked on China.

    Over the past year, that approach hasn't worked on Iran.

    In the 30 months that Trump has been President, that approach hasn't worked on anyone, not North Korea, not Venezuela, not anyone. In each case Trump has made matters worse.

    Take, for example, this statement from Trump. "I can only tell that you we can not ever let Iran have a nuclear weapon. And it won’t happen."

    We had a working agreement that did that very thing. Trump destroyed it.

    So we find ourselves in the situation where Iran attacked and destroyed a very expensive American airplane, or UAV, and Trump takes the Neville Chamberlain approach to placing sanctions on the Ayatollah and his generals.

    The Ayatollah and his generals are laughing at Trump's impotence.

    They are laughing at our President!
     
  20. Sandy Shanks

    Sandy Shanks Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2016
    Messages:
    26,679
    Likes Received:
    6,470
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We all know Iran is a bad actor. Does that give Trump the right to provoke another Middle East war, a war that would be ten times worse than Iraq because of Iran's military capabilities?

    The shootdown of the RQ-4 surveillance drone did not happen in a vacuum. Other events preceded this event, including Trump's foolish mistakes and his high risk attempts to provoke Iran.

    After foolishly withdrawing from the nuclear deal with Tehran struck by the Obama administration, which permanently barred Iran from making a nuclear weapon, Trump ratcheted up sanctions — including, in April, a move to shut down Iran’s remaining oil exports.

    The only peaceful avenue that Trump offered out of this economic vise was the acceptance of a dozen draconian U.S. dictates that would completely reverse its foreign policy, essentially calling for regime change.

    On May 5th, Trump ordered a battleship-carrier strike group (CBG), led by the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln, and a bomber task force, including B-52s, deployed off Iran’s coast.

    Five days later, on May 10th, the Pentagon announced a second display of force: the U.S.S. Arlington and a battery of Patriot missile systems would join the Abraham Lincoln. The Arlington carries U.S. Marines and an array of aircraft, landing craft, and weapons systems to support an amphibious assault.

    Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and National Security Advisor John Bolton are both war hawks when it comes to Iran, and both have called for regime change. Iran assumes the two are speaking for Trump, despite Trump's statements to the contrary. Trump's penchant for wanting it both ways is well known to the Iranian leadership. Since actions speak louder than words. They take his rhetoric with a grain of salt.

    The surveillance capability of the RQ-4 drone include high-resolution radar and long-range sensors with long loiter times over target areas. It can survey as much as 40,000 square miles (100,000 km2) of terrain a day, an area the size of South Korea.

    The Pentagon says the Global Hawk was a little more than 20 miles off the coast of Iran. It does not matter if it was 50 miles. The drone's mission was to spy on Iranian military facilities, and that is what it was doing when Iran shot it down. Ordering up that UAV was a clear act of provocation. In other words, it was stupid, and the Commander-in-Chief is fully responsible.

    Iran's territorial waters extend out twelve miles from the coast. That is a distance of eight miles between the territorial limit and the point of attack according to the Pentagon. At such a small distance, miscalculations can easily be made.

    Iran called Trump's bluff, and Trump went into his Neville Chamberlain mode. His incompetence and stupidity is showing.
     
  21. ronv

    ronv Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2018
    Messages:
    20,312
    Likes Received:
    8,774
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I'm not sure what to think about Iran. Their beef seems to be with Israel. They helped Iraq in their fight against ISIS and they helped Assad do the same.
     
  22. ronv

    ronv Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2018
    Messages:
    20,312
    Likes Received:
    8,774
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Yet here you are again bringing up Iran's actions as being a part of why Trump is doing the right thing. Why is that?
    So you think we had a right to steal their money after they agreed not to build a bomb?
    That sounds a bit like Trump not paying his contractors. :)
    PS
    The nuclear sanctions started in 2006.
     
  23. 61falcon

    61falcon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2018
    Messages:
    21,436
    Likes Received:
    12,227
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    WE AND THE REST OF THE OIL CONSUMING WORLD ARE FAR WORSE OFF!!!Today's news is reporting that Dirty Donalds dustup with Iran has raised the cost of a tanker entering the Straits of Hormuz by $500,000 for insurance on it.So the entire oil consuming world is now suffering from Dirty Donalds stupidity.
     
  24. Pro_Line_FL

    Pro_Line_FL Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2018
    Messages:
    25,617
    Likes Received:
    13,908
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Maybe because Saddam still had them in the 80s.
     
  25. FAW

    FAW Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2008
    Messages:
    12,975
    Likes Received:
    3,835
    Trophy Points:
    113
    -I bring up Iran's actions SOLELY for the purpose of establishing why it is that it is vitally important that the mullah's vision be stopped dead in its tracks at any cost. The fact that you even have to ask is puzzling indeed.

    -You only freeze their assets once. Much of that was assets that belonged to the Shah, and it is unclear whether or not the revolutionaries even have a legal claim to his money. As far as saying after they "agreed to not build a bomb".......Do you remember that North Korea made the same promise? So you know that words can be hollow right? How do we get around words being hollow? We put in place a process to verify that their words match their actions. That didnt happen because they exempted military facilities from being inspected. Welcome to the topic. Hopefully, you are taking notes and finally learning something, because you are asking questions that indicate you dont understand this issue even a little bit.

    -
     

Share This Page