What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Iran -- Deal Reached! (1 Viewer)

GroveDiesel said:
Well, Iran has now test fired ballistic missiles twice in violation of the agreement. Oh, and it turns out that the IAEA no longer is allowed to publicly disclose incidents where Iran may have violated the agreement.

But, you know, it's great other than that.
Click to expand...
If we hadn't had an agreement there would be nothing for them to be in violation of! 

Thanks a lot, Obama.

 
BigSteelThrill said:
That's exactly the type of idiocy they are trying to avoid.
Click to expand...
Here's some other major headlines:

 - The University of Washington used federal grant funding to buy thousands of dollars worth of custom embroidered Snuggies.

-  Lady-Ghostbusters Trailer Drops, Looks … Kinda ‘Meh’?

- New York Times, Washington Post Celebrate Nancy Reagan’s Death

- Feds Spent $412,930 Studying ‘Relationship Between Gender and Glaciers’

- Bernie Sanders OK With Abortion in All Cases at All Times

 
Iranians don't hate Americans as much as Saudis or some of the other ME countries.  Iranians in general are fairly open-minded and moderate, not everyone is an Ayatollah. 

Good deal IMO, a foreign affairs boon for the Obama Administration.  The only people thinking differently are those who have no idea what the scope of the agreement includes (keep in mind the international support the agreement has).  Israel is pissed for obvious reasons, but we can't make every foreign affairs agreement based on our relationship with a specific country.  Especially a country who spies on us as much as China probably does. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
GroveDiesel said:
Well, Iran has now test fired ballistic missiles twice in violation of the agreement. Oh, and it turns out that the IAEA no longer is allowed to publicly disclose incidents where Iran may have violated the agreement.

But, you know, it's great other than that.
Click to expand...
This has turned out wonderfully, hasn't it? 

I don't care about the rhetoric from the schochets and Detroits on the board, this was a bad deal from the moment. Bad deal. 

Was there another deal to be had? No. Best to not make a farce deal; however, and wait two years when the political climate might have changed.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
bananafish said:
The rest of the negotiating powers were moving on with or without us. There was no waiting, two years or otherwise.
Click to expand...
We didn't have to put our name on a bad deal. That might have given us leverage later on with the signers of the West to renegotiate or enforce the deal more strictly. 

Simply sit in the distance after not signing the deal and come in as bad cop like we always do. 

Anyway, this is not an area of expertise, but as reported, this was always going to lead to enrichment and launching of missiles and saber-rattling. 

As a matter of fact, we've been having the left/right argument about enrichment and allowing them to do this for a long time. I have no idea how the left has dropped the ball on national security more than on this issue. Iran wants nuclear weapons. It's simple. They can excuse their program as a source of power, but it's ridiculous and naive to think they were ever going to do anything else. 

 
It's a great deal...with the deal their missile says "Israel must be wiped out"...without the deal the missile would have said "Israel will be wiped out"...that's progress in the Obama administration...

 
rockaction said:
We didn't have to put our name on a bad deal. That might have given us leverage later on with the signers of the West to renegotiate or enforce the deal more strictly. 

Simply sit in the distance after not signing the deal and come in as bad cop like we always do. 

Anyway, this is not an area of expertise, but as reported, this was always going to lead to enrichment and launching of missiles and saber-rattling. 

As a matter of fact, we've been having the left/right argument about enrichment and allowing them to do this for a long time. I have no idea how the left has dropped the ball on national security more than on this issue. Iran wants nuclear weapons. It's simple. They can excuse their program as a source of power, but it's ridiculous and naive to think they were ever going to do anything else. 
Click to expand...
So let them have them.

 
The deal was nothing more than a publicity stunt for Obama and the Dems.  This was a way to try to secure future votes for the Dems.  Anyone actually think Iran had any intentions of sticking to this deal?  And what is Obama going to do now anyway?  Draw another line in the sand? 

 
Iran's uranium stockpile will also be reduced by 98% to 300kg (660lbs) for 15 years. It must also keep its level of enrichment at 3.67%.

By January 2016, Iran had drastically reduced the number of centrifuges installed at Natanz and Fordo, and shipped tonnes of low-enriched uranium to Russia.

In addition, research and development will take place only at Natanz and be limited for eight years. No enrichment will be permitted at Fordo for 15 years, and the underground facility will be converted into a nuclear, physics and technology centre. The 1,044 centrifuges at the site will produce radioisotopes for use in medicine, agriculture, industry and science.

Iran has been building a heavy-water nuclear facility near the town of Arak. Spent fuel from a heavy-water reactor contains plutonium suitable for a nuclear bomb.

World powers had originally wanted Arak dismantled because of the proliferation risk. Under an interim nuclear deal agreed in November 2013, Iran agreed not to commission or fuel the reactor.

Iran has agreed to redesign the reactor so it cannot produce any weapons-grade plutonium. All spent fuel will be sent out of the country as long as the modified reactor exists.

Most of the 20 tonnes of heavy water the Arak facility is expected to produce will be shipped to the US via a third country, according to Iranian officials. About 6 tonnes will be retained to make medical isotopes

Should Iran violate any aspect of the deal, the UN sanctions will automatically "snap back" into place for 10 years, with the possibility of a five-year extension.

If the Joint Commission cannot resolve a dispute, it will be referred to the UN Security Council.

Iran has also agreed to the continuation of the UN arms embargo on the country for up to five years, although it could end earlier if the IAEA is satisfied that its nuclear program is entirely peaceful. A UN ban on the import of ballistic missile technology will also remain in place for up to eight years.
Click to expand...
This was agreed upon by Russia, China, Germany, France, and the UK.  So the other option was leave sanctions in place and then bomb them into submission at some point, an unknown point to which they have fully developed nuclear weapons. 

People not liking the deal:  Israel, Saudi Arabia, and the GOP /end of list

 
I think I have noticed a few different things going on in the US-Iran track:

- The deal itself - has Iran demonstrably lowered its nuke stockpiles?

- The Iranian status post deal - what is Iran doing militarily?

- The Iran/US relationship - is the US gaining a foothold in Iran?

- The internal Iran - is Iran developing democratically and global markets?

- What are Iran's rivals especially SA doing with regard to their own nuke weapon development?

It seems to me the arguments for are on the first point. The arguments against are on the last four points. I think the first point is relevant solely on the assumption that 10 years from now Iran continues to comply with the agreement in some way. What happens on the other four points might greatly affect what happens on the first though.

 
Come for the rugs, stay for the kebabs

Iran’s media said on Thursday that an agreement has been signed with Britain that would allow the country’s flag carrier airline British Airways to resume flights to Iran after a hiatus of six years.

Air France-KLM said in December that it will resume direct flights to Iran after a seven-year gap.

German airliner Lufthansa and its subsidiary Austrian Airlines have already said they planned to launch new flights to Iran.

 
Sinn Fein said:
Obama: Iran not following 'spirit' of deal
Click to expand...
“Iran so far has followed the letter of the agreement, but the spirit of the agreement involves Iran also sending signals to the world community and businesses that it is not going to be engaging in a range of provocative actions that are going to scare businesses off,” Obama said at a press conference.

“When they launch ballistic missiles with slogans calling for the destruction of Israel, that makes businesses nervous.”

“Iran has to understand what every country in the world understands, which is businesses want to go where they feel safe, where they don’t see massive controversy, where they can be confident that transactions are going to operate normally,” he added. “And that’s an adjustment that Iran’s going to have to make as well.”
Click to expand...


- It's like Iran is acting almost as if....

 
Last edited by a moderator:
AP Exclusive: Confidential text eases Iran nuke constraints


VIENNA (AP) — Key restrictions on Iran's nuclear program imposed under an internationally negotiated deal will start to ease years before the 15-year accord expires, advancing Tehran's ability to build a bomb even before the end the pact, according to a document obtained Monday by The Associated Press.

The document is the only text linked to last year's deal between Iran and six foreign powers that hasn't been made public, although U.S. officials say members of Congress have been able to see it. It was given to the AP by a diplomat whose work has focused on Iran's nuclear program for more than a decade, and its authenticity was confirmed by another diplomat who possesses the same document.

The diplomat who shared the document with the AP described it as an add-on agreement to the nuclear deal. But while formally separate from that accord, he said that it was in effect an integral part of the deal and had been approved by the U.S., Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany, the six powers that negotiated the deal with Tehran.

Details published earlier outline most restraints on Iran's nuclear program meant to reduce the threat that Tehran will turn nuclear activities it says are peaceful to making weapons.

But while some of the constraints extend for 15 years, documents in the public domain are short on details of what happens with Iran's most proliferation-prone nuclear activity — its uranium enrichment — beyond the first 10 years of the agreement.

The document obtained by the AP fills in the gap. It says that as of January 2027 — 11 years after the deal was implemented — Iran can start replacing its mainstay centrifuges with thousands of advanced machines.

Centrifuges churn out uranium to levels that can range from use as reactor fuel and for medical and research purposes to much higher levels for the core of a nuclear warhead. From year 11 to 13, says the document, Iran can install centrifuges up to five times as efficient as the 5,060 machines it is now restricted to using.

Those new models will number less than those being used now, ranging between 2,500 and 3,500, depending on their efficiency, according to the document. But because they are more effective, they will allow Iran to enrich at more than twice the rate it is doing now.

The U.S. says the Iran nuclear agreement is tailored to ensure that Iran would need at least 12 months to "break out" and make enough weapons grade uranium for at least one weapon.

But based on a comparison of outputs between the old and newer machines, if the enrichment rate doubles, that breakout time would be reduced to six months, or even less if the efficiency is more than double, a possibility the document allows for.

The document also allows Iran to greatly expand its work with centrifuges that are even more advanced, including large-scale testing in preparation for the deal's expiry 15 years after its implementation on Jan. 18.

A senior U.S. official noted, however, that the limit on the amount of enriched uranium Iran will be allowed to store will remain at 300 kilograms (660 pounds) for the full 15 years, significantly below the amount needed for a bomb. As well, it will remain restricted to a level used for reactor fuel that is well below weapons grade. Like the diplomats, the official demanded anonymity in exchange for discussing the document.

"We have ensured that Iran's breakout time comes down gradually after year 10 in large part because of restrictions on its uranium stockpile until year 15," the official said. "As for breakout times after the initial 10 years of the deal, the breakout time does not go off a cliff nor do we believe that it would be immediately cut in half, to six months."

The official said the document wasn't made public because it was part of Iran's long-term enrichment plan submitted to the IAEA. Such submissions are confidential, but the text was "closely reviewed" by Washington and the other five powers that negotiated the nuclear deal, said the official.

Still the easing of restrictions on the number and kind of centrifuges means that once the deal expires, Tehran will be positioned to quickly make enough highly enriched uranium to bring up its stockpile to a level that would allow it to make a bomb in half a year, should it choose to do so.

The document doesn't say what happens with enrichment past year 13. That indicates a possible end to all restrictions on the number and kind of centrifuges even while constraints on other, less-proliferation prone nuclear activities remain until year 15.

Iran insists it is not interested in nuclear weapons, and the pact is being closely monitored by the International Atomic Energy Agency. The IAEA says Tehran has essentially kept to its commitments since the agreement was implemented, a little more than six months after Iran and the six powers finalized it on July 14, 2015.

Marking the agreement's anniversary Thursday, President Barack Obama said it has succeeded in rolling back Iran's nuclear program, "avoiding further conflict and making us safer." But opposition from U.S. Republicans could increase with the revelation that Iran's potential breakout time would be more than halved over the last few years of the pact.

Also opposed is Israel, which in the past has threatened to strike Iran if it deems that Tehran is close to making a nuclear weapon. Alluding to that possibility, David Albright, whose Washington-based Institute for Science and International Security is a U.S. government go-to resource on Iran's nuclear program, said the plan outlined in the document "will create a great deal of instability and possibly even lead to war, if regional tensions have not subsided."

The deal provides Iran with sanctions relief in exchange for its nuclear constraints. But before going into recess, U.S. Congress last week approved a bill to impose new sanctions for Tehran's continuing development and testing of ballistic missiles, a program the White House says is meant to carry atomic warheads even if it is not part of the nuclear agreement.

It also approved a measure that calls for prohibiting the Obama administration from buying more of Iran's heavy water, a key component in certain nuclear reactors.

The White House has said removing the country's surplus heavy water denies Tehran access to a material that may be stored for potential nuclear weapons production. But critics note that the purchase was made only after Iran exceeded heavy water limits proscribed by the nuclear deal and assert it rewarded Tehran for violating the agreement.
Click to expand...
http://www.bigstory.ap.org/article/140ca41aba7a42cda13792f07df4b8d3/ap-exclusive-secret-document-lifts-iran-nuke-constraints

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Obama can't tell the truth on anything. No one should be surprised by this report. He can't negotiate. He has no interpersonal skills. If he can't be the dictator, he doesn't know what to do so he lies because he thinks he knows what is best for the world.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Phil Elliott said:
Obama can't tell the truth an anything. No one should be surprised by this report. He can't negotiate. He has no interpersonal skills. If he can't be the dictator, he doesn't know what to do so he lies because he thinks he knows what is best for the world.
Click to expand...
What did he lie about from this?

Did you read the whole thing?

 
sho nuff said:
What did he lie about from this?

Did you read the whole thing?
Click to expand...
People should not be surprised by anything that comes out about this deal.   I believe this is the deal where inspectors were to have anytime/anywhere access? Obama indicated even if they violated the agreement "Iran would need at least 12 months to "break out" and make enough weapons grade uranium for at least one weapon."  Its actually  only 6 months. Probably not a big deal. I am sure the agreement will be enforced by all parties.

 
Phil Elliott said:
People should not be surprised by anything that comes out about this deal.   I believe this is the deal where inspectors were to have anytime/anywhere access? Obama indicated even if they violated the agreement "Iran would need at least 12 months to "break out" and make enough weapons grade uranium for at least one weapon."  Its actually  only 6 months. Probably not a big deal. I am sure the agreement will be enforced by all parties.
Click to expand...
If they violate they wont be able to in 6 months...that was after 10 years they may get better equipment that would make that possible.  Not if they break the deal today.

 
Alluding to that possibility, David Albright, whose Washington-based Institute for Science and International Security is a U.S. government go-to resource on Iran's nuclear program, said the plan outlined in the document "will create a great deal of instability and possibly even lead to war, if regional tensions have not subsided."
Click to expand...


- This is the problem. It creates an extremely short window for a president, maybe the president after this next one to react. If you go alllll the way back to the beginning of this thread that was the point of the OP, Iran was a ticking pressure point but we had lots of time to prepare, like years, like 6 years IIRC.

Now when we come out of this thing Iran may 'poof' have nukes.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
avoiding injuries said:
Deserving of its own thread, IMO. 
Click to expand...


It is not like they were exchanging arms for hostages like that evil Reagan did in the biggest scandal evah.  In this case we were just supplying the money so the Iranians could buy Russian arms in exchange for hostages in a secret deal.  

 
Sinn Fein said:
Not sure when I was last on Drudge, gotta be a few years though. No idea who Tom Cotton is...

I saw this story on nbc news: http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/iran-nuclear-talks/iran-executes-nuclear-scientist-who-gave-secrets-u-s-n624756
Click to expand...
Even worse.  Your thinking and worldview is mirroring right wing conspiracy websites and crazy Republican Tea Partiers, without you even knowing it.

Looking forward to you coming back home to liberalism Sinn.  I've always been a fan up until the conspiracy theory stuff this year.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

rockaction
Politeness, Courtesy, and Personal Happiness
Replies
22
Views
898
El Floppo
El Floppo
Joe Bryant
Loneliness - A Big Deal
2
Replies
64
Views
2K
Sammy3469
Sammy3469
Joe Bryant
  • Poll Poll
Clickbaity vs Boring Subject Lines - What do you think?
Replies
32
Views
685
Phil Elliott
Phil Elliott

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top