What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

EU Spokesman: Iran Nuclear Deal Reached (1 Viewer)

Christo

Footballguy
An agreement has been reached on Iran and its nuclear program following intense talks in Geneva, European Union spokesman Michael Mann tweeted early Sunday.

[Original story published at 5:48 p.m. PT]

Efforts to hammer out an agreement between Iran and six world powers over Tehran’s nuclear program stretched into the early morning hours Sunday as negotiators struggled to overcome differences.

The sticking point, according to Iran’s deputy foreign minister, is over the wording of an initial agreement that would temporarily halt Iran’s nuclear development program and lift some sanctions while a more formal deal between the two sides is worked out.

The assessment by Abbas Araqchi, carried by Iran’s Fars News Agency, came during a marathon fourth day of negotiations.

Both sides have hinted that a deal is close.

“Work is still ongoing as we speak here and now. There are still meetings going on of different types. A deal has not been done,” a European Union diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue, told CNN.

The two sides are having tough debate over the wording of the deal, specifically over details that would provide short-term relief from sanctions that Iran has been under, Araqchi told FARS.

Araqchi told Iranian state-run Press TV early Sunday that “98% of the nuclear issues” have been resolved.

The negotiations initially scheduled for two days were extended to four days with the hopes of reaching an agreement.

Extended negotiations

It’s unclear whether they will continue into a fifth day on Sunday. U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry is scheduled to travel to London on Sunday to meet with his British counterpart, William Hague.

Kerry has been joined in the talks in Geneva by Hague, German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle, French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi and their Russian counterpart, Sergey Lavrov.

Together, these diplomats represent the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council plus Germany — together known as the P5+1 — which has been negotiating with Iran on its nuclear program.

The P5+1 believe Iran is intent on developing nuclear weaponry, an allegation Iran denies. Iran wants to ease the sanctions imposed upon it, and seeks explicit permission to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes.

Tehran wants that written into the deal, which would likely cover a period of six months and ideally be a precursor to a more sweeping pact, diplomats said.

On the other side of the negotiating table, the world powers want assurances that Iran will not build nuclear weaponry, and offer transparency at its nuclear facilities.

Washington and its allies also only want to lift only some of the sanctions, and leave some tough ones in place for now.

In a sign of advancing talks, Kerry, European Union foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton and Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif held two separate meetings on Saturday, including a more than 30-minute meeting that began shortly before 10 p.m. local time.

Details of the meeting were not immediately disclosed.

Curbing the enthusiasm

“It’s not a done deal,” said Germany’s Westerwelle, who walked out of the negotiation venue to give the statement to journalists.

Significant differences still stand in the way, and the world’s most powerful diplomats have come to do their best to work them out.

“We think there is a realistic chance, but there is still a lot of work to do,” he said, before turning away from the microphones.

Hague echoed Westerwelle’s caution.

“We’re not here because things are necessarily finished. We’re here because they’re difficult,” he said.

Iran’s foreign minister, Zarif, said Friday there is wide agreement except for a couple of points, the semiofficial Iranian Students News Agency (ISNA) reported.

“Numerically speaking, perhaps 90% of progress has been made, but there (are) one or two issues which are of great significance,” he said, according to ISNA.

Change in tone

For years, Iran and Western powers have left negotiating tables in disagreement, frustration and at times open animosity.

But the diplomatic tone changed with the transfer of power after Iran’s election this year, which saw President Hassan Rouhani replace Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Caustic jabs at the United States and bellicose threats toward Israel were a hallmark of Ahmadinejad’s foreign policy rhetoric.

He lambasted the West over the economic sanctions crippling Iran’s economy and at the same time, pushed the advancement of nuclear technology in Iran.

Rouhani has struck up a more conciliatory tone and made the lifting sanctions against his country a priority.

Despite the sanctions, Iran today has 19,000 centrifuges and is building more advanced ones, according to Mark Hibbs, a nuclear policy expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

Most world powers believe that Iran could not realistically build a usable bomb in less than a year, Hibbs said.

And Iran recently signed a deal with the International Atomic Energy Agency that agrees to give the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency access to long-unseen nuclear sites, including a heavy-water reactor in Arak.

Tehran is also a party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, which requires it not to create nuclear weapons or enable other countries to obtain them.

Lingering distrust

Key U.S. allies in the Middle East and some Washington lawmakers still don’t trust Iran.

They believe that by making concessions on sanctions, the United States and its allies are giving up important leverage against Tehran.

Saudi Arabia, Iran’s neighbor across the Persian Gulf, has lasting tensions with Tehran and has publicly derided the Obama administration’s negotiating stance.

Israeli leaders, as well, would like to see the heat turned up on Tehran, not down. Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon reiterated the point after a meeting with U.S. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel on Saturday in Israel.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been adamant in his distrust of Tehran and his belief that sanctions are working and should get tougher.

But President Barack Obama said that sanctions put in place during his administration had forced Iran to the negotiating table and easing them some could help move things forward.

The proposed deal would only “open up the spigot a little bit” on frozen revenue, while leaving in place the bulk of the most effective sanctions involving Iranian oil exports and banking.

The President also stressed that all options, including military strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities, remained on the table as far as the United States was concerned.
Read more: http://ktla.com/2013/11/23/eu-spokesman-iran-nuclear-deal-reached/#ixzz2lWhE5kXP

:scared:

 

DiStefano

Footballguy
An agreement has been reached on Iran and its nuclear program following intense talks in Geneva, European Union spokesman Michael Mann tweeted early Sunday.

[Original story published at 5:48 p.m. PT]

Efforts to hammer out an agreement between Iran and six world powers over Tehran’s nuclear program stretched into the early morning hours Sunday as negotiators struggled to overcome differences.

The sticking point, according to Iran’s deputy foreign minister, is over the wording of an initial agreement that would temporarily halt Iran’s nuclear development program and lift some sanctions while a more formal deal between the two sides is worked out.

The assessment by Abbas Araqchi, carried by Iran’s Fars News Agency, came during a marathon fourth day of negotiations.

Both sides have hinted that a deal is close.

“Work is still ongoing as we speak here and now. There are still meetings going on of different types. A deal has not been done,” a European Union diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue, told CNN.

The two sides are having tough debate over the wording of the deal, specifically over details that would provide short-term relief from sanctions that Iran has been under, Araqchi told FARS.

Araqchi told Iranian state-run Press TV early Sunday that “98% of the nuclear issues” have been resolved.

The negotiations initially scheduled for two days were extended to four days with the hopes of reaching an agreement.

Extended negotiations

It’s unclear whether they will continue into a fifth day on Sunday. U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry is scheduled to travel to London on Sunday to meet with his British counterpart, William Hague.

Kerry has been joined in the talks in Geneva by Hague, German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle, French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi and their Russian counterpart, Sergey Lavrov.

Together, these diplomats represent the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council plus Germany — together known as the P5+1 — which has been negotiating with Iran on its nuclear program.

The P5+1 believe Iran is intent on developing nuclear weaponry, an allegation Iran denies. Iran wants to ease the sanctions imposed upon it, and seeks explicit permission to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes.

Tehran wants that written into the deal, which would likely cover a period of six months and ideally be a precursor to a more sweeping pact, diplomats said.

On the other side of the negotiating table, the world powers want assurances that Iran will not build nuclear weaponry, and offer transparency at its nuclear facilities.

Washington and its allies also only want to lift only some of the sanctions, and leave some tough ones in place for now.

In a sign of advancing talks, Kerry, European Union foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton and Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif held two separate meetings on Saturday, including a more than 30-minute meeting that began shortly before 10 p.m. local time.

Details of the meeting were not immediately disclosed.

Curbing the enthusiasm

“It’s not a done deal,” said Germany’s Westerwelle, who walked out of the negotiation venue to give the statement to journalists.

Significant differences still stand in the way, and the world’s most powerful diplomats have come to do their best to work them out.

“We think there is a realistic chance, but there is still a lot of work to do,” he said, before turning away from the microphones.

Hague echoed Westerwelle’s caution.

“We’re not here because things are necessarily finished. We’re here because they’re difficult,” he said.

Iran’s foreign minister, Zarif, said Friday there is wide agreement except for a couple of points, the semiofficial Iranian Students News Agency (ISNA) reported.

“Numerically speaking, perhaps 90% of progress has been made, but there (are) one or two issues which are of great significance,” he said, according to ISNA.

Change in tone

For years, Iran and Western powers have left negotiating tables in disagreement, frustration and at times open animosity.

But the diplomatic tone changed with the transfer of power after Iran’s election this year, which saw President Hassan Rouhani replace Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Caustic jabs at the United States and bellicose threats toward Israel were a hallmark of Ahmadinejad’s foreign policy rhetoric.

He lambasted the West over the economic sanctions crippling Iran’s economy and at the same time, pushed the advancement of nuclear technology in Iran.

Rouhani has struck up a more conciliatory tone and made the lifting sanctions against his country a priority.

Despite the sanctions, Iran today has 19,000 centrifuges and is building more advanced ones, according to Mark Hibbs, a nuclear policy expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

Most world powers believe that Iran could not realistically build a usable bomb in less than a year, Hibbs said.

And Iran recently signed a deal with the International Atomic Energy Agency that agrees to give the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency access to long-unseen nuclear sites, including a heavy-water reactor in Arak.

Tehran is also a party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, which requires it not to create nuclear weapons or enable other countries to obtain them.

Lingering distrust

Key U.S. allies in the Middle East and some Washington lawmakers still don’t trust Iran.

They believe that by making concessions on sanctions, the United States and its allies are giving up important leverage against Tehran.

Saudi Arabia, Iran’s neighbor across the Persian Gulf, has lasting tensions with Tehran and has publicly derided the Obama administration’s negotiating stance.

Israeli leaders, as well, would like to see the heat turned up on Tehran, not down. Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon reiterated the point after a meeting with U.S. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel on Saturday in Israel.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been adamant in his distrust of Tehran and his belief that sanctions are working and should get tougher.

But President Barack Obama said that sanctions put in place during his administration had forced Iran to the negotiating table and easing them some could help move things forward.

The proposed deal would only “open up the spigot a little bit” on frozen revenue, while leaving in place the bulk of the most effective sanctions involving Iranian oil exports and banking.

The President also stressed that all options, including military strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities, remained on the table as far as the United States was concerned.
Read more: http://ktla.com/2013/11/23/eu-spokesman-iran-nuclear-deal-reached/#ixzz2lWhE5kXP

:scared:
Yeah, I'll bet Obama has drawn a red line in the sand.

 

Hilts

Footballguy
Pretty sure my opinion is an extreme minority, but Iran having nukes neither scares or bothers me.

:shrug:

 

TPW

Footballguy
Pretty sure my opinion is an extreme minority, but Iran having nukes neither scares or bothers me.

:shrug:
Evidently you're not familiar with prophecies surrounding Muhammad al-Mahdi, the 12th Imam, and what Iran's leadership might be willing to do in order to fulfill them.

In any event, just like the Clinton administration's deal with North Korea, this is a farce. Iran shall continue to develop their nuclear weapons program in secret in violation of the agreement until such time the world learns they have tested a functional device. Then the entire region will go nuclear.

Interesting times...

 

whoknew

Footballguy
Pretty sure my opinion is an extreme minority, but Iran having nukes neither scares or bothers me. :shrug:
Evidently you're not familiar with prophecies surrounding Muhammad al-Mahdi, the 12th Imam, and what Iran's leadership might be willing to do in order to fulfill them.

In any event, just like the Clinton administration's deal with North Korea, this is a farce. Iran shall continue to develop their nuclear weapons program in secret in violation of the agreement until such time the world learns they have tested a functional device. Then the entire region will go nuclear.

Interesting times...
Why do you automatically assume that Iran will break the agreement? They want the aid and relief from sanctions.

 

Christo

Footballguy
whoknew said:
TPW said:
Hilts said:
Pretty sure my opinion is an extreme minority, but Iran having nukes neither scares or bothers me. :shrug:
Evidently you're not familiar with prophecies surrounding Muhammad al-Mahdi, the 12th Imam, and what Iran's leadership might be willing to do in order to fulfill them.

In any event, just like the Clinton administration's deal with North Korea, this is a farce. Iran shall continue to develop their nuclear weapons program in secret in violation of the agreement until such time the world learns they have tested a functional device. Then the entire region will go nuclear.

Interesting times...
Why do you automatically assume that Iran will break the agreement? They want the aid and relief from sanctions.
Have you ever heard about the scorpion and the frog?

 

higgins

Footballguy
TPW said:
Hilts said:
Pretty sure my opinion is an extreme minority, but Iran having nukes neither scares or bothers me.

:shrug:
Evidently you're not familiar with prophecies surrounding Muhammad al-Mahdi, the 12th Imam, and what Iran's leadership might be willing to do in order to fulfill them.

In any event, just like the Clinton administration's deal with North Korea, this is a farce. Iran shall continue to develop their nuclear weapons program in secret in violation of the agreement until such time the world learns they have tested a functional device. Then the entire region will go nuclear.

Interesting times...
Not everyone in the Israeli administration agrees with a single thing you typed.

link

 

timschochet

Footballguy
Heard a lot of talk about Munich today. It's absolutely ridiculous. As usual Fareed Zakeria gets to the heart of the matter:

http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2013/11/24/what-critics-are-getting-wrong-about-the-iran-deal/

This is not like the opening to China – it’s more like an arms control deal with the Soviet Union, with two wary adversaries trying to find some common ground.

Read the whole article, but that was one of the more illuminating points. Zakeria also points out that all of the embargoes that Bush started and Obama continued have failed to produce the results we wanted. Maybe this will.

 

Homer J Simpson

I don't push
TPW said:
Hilts said:
Pretty sure my opinion is an extreme minority, but Iran having nukes neither scares or bothers me.

:shrug:
Evidently you're not familiar with prophecies surrounding Muhammad al-Mahdi, the 12th Imam, and what Iran's leadership might be willing to do in order to fulfill them.

In any event, just like the Clinton administration's deal with North Korea, this is a farce. Iran shall continue to develop their nuclear weapons program in secret in violation of the agreement until such time the world learns they have tested a functional device. Then the entire region will go nuclear.

Interesting times...
So in your mind, the only solution is what, a full-blown invasion?

 

timschochet

Footballguy
Homer J Simpson said:
Good work, fellas. :thumbup:

Anything that gets Netanyahu and Texas Senators riled up is A-OK in my book.
Add New York Senators to your list...

Chuck Schumer: I’m “disappointed” by the Iran nuclear deal

Then again, Schumer has wildly disagreed with the Democrats and Obama on matters pertaining to Israel before. I wonder why?
You know why.

Jews in this country, especially those over the age of 50, see all issues even remotely regarding Israel with funnel vision- you're either for us or you're against us. Though Israel has been victorious in several wars and armed struggles, and though the Israelis are certainly capable of defending themselves against anything other than a suicidal nuclear madman (which is indefensible for any nation), older Jews in this country are unable to see Jews as anything other than victims- this is the legacy of the Holocaust and 2000 years of mistreatment.

 

timschochet

Footballguy
Obama is getting trashed for this all over the place. His main problem is that he's from the wrong political party for this sort of agreement. I feel certain that no Democratic President could have gone to China the way Nixon did- he would have been threatened with impeachment. And remember Reagan's agreement with Gorbachev in Iceland? That might have been impossible for a Democrat.

 

Sand

Footballguy
Hopefully they are negotiating in good faith.
Seriously. We've seen these plays before.

Also, the admin is getting lambasted over their refusal to secure US citizen hostages that Iran is holding. Wouldn't the first step of something this big be to secure our political prisoners?

Why does this administration hate its own citizens? I can't express the amount of disgust that I feel over this.

 

Homer J Simpson

I don't push
Hopefully they are negotiating in good faith.
Seriously. We've seen these plays before.

Also, the admin is getting lambasted over their refusal to secure US citizen hostages that Iran is holding. Wouldn't the first step of something this big be to secure our political prisoners?

Why does this administration hate its own citizens? I can't express the amount of disgust that I feel over this.
Yes, it's disgusting.

WHY DOES OBAMA HATE AMERICA?!?

 

shader

Footballguy
Hopefully they are negotiating in good faith.
Seriously. We've seen these plays before.

Also, the admin is getting lambasted over their refusal to secure US citizen hostages that Iran is holding. Wouldn't the first step of something this big be to secure our political prisoners?

Why does this administration hate its own citizens? I can't express the amount of disgust that I feel over this.
Probably because Obama is a closet muslim who is trying to get Iran a secret nuclear weapon so that the Islamic nations can take over the world.

 

Jewell

Footballguy
Obama is getting trashed for this all over the place. His main problem is that he's from the wrong political party for this sort of agreement. I feel certain that no Democratic President could have gone to China the way Nixon did- he would have been threatened with impeachment. And remember Reagan's agreement with Gorbachev in Iceland? That might have been impossible for a Democrat.
Democrat international leadership was obviously well respected during WWII and even up through Kennedy during the Cuban Missile Crisis. When do you think the American public began seeing Democrat Presidents as weak on foreign diplomacy?

 

Hang 10

Footballguy
Obama is getting trashed for this all over the place. His main problem is that he's from the wrong political party for this sort of agreement. I feel certain that no Democratic President could have gone to China the way Nixon did- he would have been threatened with impeachment. And remember Reagan's agreement with Gorbachev in Iceland? That might have been impossible for a Democrat.
Democrat international leadership was obviously well respected during WWII and even up through Kennedy during the Cuban Missile Crisis. When do you think the American public began seeing Democrat Presidents as weak on foreign diplomacy?
Jimmy Carter

 

Fennis

Footballguy
Sand said:
SacramentoBob said:
Hopefully they are negotiating in good faith.
Seriously. We've seen these plays before.

Also, the admin is getting lambasted over their refusal to secure US citizen hostages that Iran is holding. Wouldn't the first step of something this big be to secure our political prisoners?

Why does this administration hate its own citizens? I can't express the amount of disgust that I feel over this.
What US citizens is Iran holding you would like to see released?

 

timschochet

Footballguy
Hang 10 said:
Jewell said:
Obama is getting trashed for this all over the place. His main problem is that he's from the wrong political party for this sort of agreement. I feel certain that no Democratic President could have gone to China the way Nixon did- he would have been threatened with impeachment. And remember Reagan's agreement with Gorbachev in Iceland? That might have been impossible for a Democrat.
Democrat international leadership was obviously well respected during WWII and even up through Kennedy during the Cuban Missile Crisis. When do you think the American public began seeing Democrat Presidents as weak on foreign diplomacy?
Jimmy Carter
No, before that. It started with Yalta, and the Republican accusation that FDR gave Eastern Europe to Stalin. Then Algier Hiss, a liberal New Dealer who turned out to be a Soviet Spy. Then the peace movement of the 1960s, and the nomination of George McGovern in 1972, By the time the mid 70s came around, it was a generally accepted political theme that Republicans were generally tougher on foreign policy than Democrats were- and that's lasted ever since.

 

Sand

Footballguy
Sand said:
SacramentoBob said:
Hopefully they are negotiating in good faith.
Seriously. We've seen these plays before.

Also, the admin is getting lambasted over their refusal to secure US citizen hostages that Iran is holding. Wouldn't the first step of something this big be to secure our political prisoners?

Why does this administration hate its own citizens? I can't express the amount of disgust that I feel over this.
What US citizens is Iran holding you would like to see released?
Saeed Abedini.

Edit: And Robert Levinson.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Tackling Dummies

Footballguy
"Saying 'Death to America' is easy. We need to express 'Death to America' with action. Saying it is easy"

Hasson Rouhani, May 8, 2013 remarks at a campaign speech in the city of Karaj

What could go wrong here?
Oh well, I guess that means we can never have diplomatic relations with them.

:rolleyes:
Not with the direct comments from them.

In 95, he was also quoted "The beautiful cry of 'Death to America' unites our nation."

“Today, the time has come for the disappearance of the West and the Zionist regime (Israel) - which are two dark spots in the present era - from the face of the universe,” said Ali Larijani in a Thursday conference in Tehran commemorating the birth anniversary of Shia Islam’s 12th Imam Mahdi.

 

Fennis

Footballguy
Sand said:
SacramentoBob said:
Hopefully they are negotiating in good faith.
Seriously. We've seen these plays before.

Also, the admin is getting lambasted over their refusal to secure US citizen hostages that Iran is holding. Wouldn't the first step of something this big be to secure our political prisoners?

Why does this administration hate its own citizens? I can't express the amount of disgust that I feel over this.
What US citizens is Iran holding you would like to see released?
Saeed Abedini.

Edit: And Robert Levinson.
Thanks. Although my knowledge of them is admittedly very limited I personally see zero issue with the interim or a long term nuclear deal without any change in either of their status.

 

SaintsInDome2006

Footballguy
I'm looking for the word "inspections" here. It's not turning up in the linked news story.

>>> Do we, the west, EU, UN, USA, whoever, have the right to inspections to ensure compliance?

Yes or No?

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Sand

Footballguy
Saeed Abedini.Edit: And Robert Levinson.
Thanks. Although my knowledge of them is admittedly very limited I personally see zero issue with the interim or a long term nuclear deal without any change in either of their status.
That's just awesome. You're a peach.


I'm looking for the word "inspections" here. It's not turning up in the linked news story.

>>> Do we, the west, EU, UN, USA, whoever, have the right to inspections to ensure compliance?

Yes or No?
Iran claims that the agreement gives them full rights to continue to enrich uranium. Why, if so, are inspections needed?

 

Sarnoff

Footballguy
Some are calling this "appeasement", but, it's time someone in the region finally knocked Israel down a few pegs. A rich, tiny little country has been oppressing the rest of the Middle East for far too long.

 

Sarnoff

Footballguy
I'm more surprised that the Secretary of State announcing "The Monroe Doctrine is Dead" did not get more play in the press.

 

Schlzm

Footballguy
SaintsInDome2006 said:
I'm looking for the word "inspections" here. It's not turning up in the linked news story.

>>> Do we, the west, EU, UN, USA, whoever, have the right to inspections to ensure compliance?

Yes or No?
It's kind of a might makes right issue. Get enough of people on board and the USA could probably be forced to do random crap to appease, well almost literally, the rest of the world. Schlzm

 

Homer J Simpson

I don't push
SaintsInDome2006 said:
I'm looking for the word "inspections" here. It's not turning up in the linked news story.

>>> Do we, the west, EU, UN, USA, whoever, have the right to inspections to ensure compliance?

Yes or No?
Yes.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top