Do you feel comfortable with the Iran Nuke negotiations?

[BoilerMadness]

Obama is negotiating to stop the development of Nuclear weapons in Iran. He's been assuring us that Iran would NOT be able to develop Nuclear weapons, based on these negotiations. His lead negotiator is Wendy Sherman.

In case the name sounds familiar, she was also the lead negotiator with North Korea for the Clinton Administration in 1994. I saw a clip of Clinton giving us the same assurances, that N.Korea would not get Nuclear weapons, that we're getting from Obama. Amazingly, the wording was almost identical.

Critics of Wendy Sherman said that she was much more an appeaser, than a negotiator. Why am I afraid this is true?

Why do I believe that the most important aspect of this Nuclear weapons deal is that Iran will not be able to announce that they have Nuclear weapons until Obama has been out of office for over 6 months? Then it happened on the next guys watch and Obama can wash his hands of it.

Do any of you hard core Liberals believe that the world is a better, safer place since Obama took office? Why?

 

[Boiler20]

You are doing a wholesale discount of the benefits of other nations 'liking' us! We will be incredibly 'well-liked'.

 

[BoilerMadness]

Originally posted by Boiler20:
You are doing a wholesale discount of the benefits of other nations 'liking' us! We will be incredibly 'well-liked'.

We'll probably also get a discount on Farsi lessons.

 

[tantalum]

This nuclear proliferation has been building since the end of WWII. More and more countries getting the bomb. The world leaders have not had the political will or unanimity to stop the spread. More and more countries are getting the bomb. Its like the old game where you would put stick after stick in the camels back until finally you broke the back. Sooner or later all hell is going to brake loose then only God knows what will happen next. People have sort of forgotten about this threat but it is just getting worse. I certainly do not feel safer with Obama at the helm.

 

[gr8indoorsman]

Originally posted by tantalum:
This nuclear proliferation has been building since the end of WWII. More and more countries getting the bomb. The world leaders have not had the political will or unanimity to stop the spread. More and more countries are getting the bomb.

So it is with every weapon ever. You can't stop it, you can only hope to contain it. Seriously. People view nuclear weapons as a relatively direct path to regional and international legitimacy and power. But a country getting nuclear weapons doesn't mean they will necessarily USE them. I mean, India and Pakistan has to be the most tense nuclear twosome in the world until Iran gets them (and they will someday), and Pakistan is loaded with people who are sympathetic to ISIS, Al Qaeda, the Taliban, etc., and their government is infiltrated with those types (how do you think OBL lived in shouting distance of their version of the Army Staff College for a decade?).

This doesn't mean we shouldn't delay, deter, prevent proliferation, I just think it is inevitable over time. It is not in our best interest for Iran to procure a weapon right now, and the negotiations to this point have done nothing but reward Iran for coming to the table and create a "framework for future negotiations", whatever the F that means...

 

[BoilerMadness]

Originally posted by gr8indoorsman:

Originally posted by tantalum:
This nuclear proliferation has been building since the end of WWII. More and more countries getting the bomb. The world leaders have not had the political will or unanimity to stop the spread. More and more countries are getting the bomb.

So it is with every weapon ever. You can't stop it, you can only hope to contain it. Seriously. People view nuclear weapons as a relatively direct path to regional and international legitimacy and power. But a country getting nuclear weapons doesn't mean they will necessarily USE them. I mean, India and Pakistan has to be the most tense nuclear twosome in the world until Iran gets them (and they will someday), and Pakistan is loaded with people who are sympathetic to ISIS, Al Qaeda, the Taliban, etc., and their government is infiltrated with those types (how do you think OBL lived in shouting distance of their version of the Army Staff College for a decade?).

This doesn't mean we shouldn't delay, deter, prevent proliferation, I just think it is inevitable over time. It is not in our best interest for Iran to procure a weapon right now, and the negotiations to this point have done nothing but reward Iran for coming to the table and create a "framework for future negotiations", whatever the F that means...

Sadly, the greater the proliferation, the greater the probability that a Nuke will be used, especially as more radical, unstable national leaders acquire them.

Create a "framework for future negotiations" means we'll be working up another list of concessions to keep Iran talking with us, so our politicians can try to make us believe that they're actually doing something worthwhile. Unfortunately, the only nation deriving any benefit from the discussions will be Iran.

 

[Purdue97]

-No, I do not feel comfortable with much of anything the Obama Admin does with foreign affairs

-I think he came out the other day and said all this negotiating would do at the best is delay Iran getting Nukes

Then basically added that future Presidents could take action or negotiate as they please. Not really sure what all of this negotiation is really even about.

Obama is trying to handle it politically at home, by presenting it as it is this agreement or war. Which do you prefer? Like there is no other option of real heavy sanctions.

The real issue, if one has the ability to forward think, is that Iran gets nuclear weapons lets say 10 years from now. Does anyone really think that at that time or leading up to that time that Israel will not bomb or attack them to prevent this from happening? Israel does not want Iran with nuclear technology, and neither does the rest of the middle east outside of Hezbolah.

Israel bombs Iran and reality is a large regional war explodes. If one thinks about it, might just be better if other countries do this.

Passing the buck

 

[qazplm]

Iran was and is

3 months away from a nuke by EVERYONE's estimate.

That's WITH sanctions and BEFORE we "rewarded them" with anything.

They've been at that point for years. Again, no one really disputes that fact.

This deal, if it holds, puts them at a year away.

If the deal fails, then we have no inspectors, no vision, and we can continue sanctions. Great.

Of course, the fact remains they are 3 months away, and if they REALLY want the bomb, there is nothing we can do to stop them. Bombing them only hardens their resolve to do it. Sanctions are also only as effective as the rest of the world agreeing. If other parts of the world aren't on board, then our sanctions are meaningless.

I agree with you it is inevitable. Then again, Iran has been sitting at months away for years. Why haven't they gone the last few steps if they are so dead set on getting them? If they are going to use them or give them away, why the reticence to go the last three months.

Heck, it's been over three months since we've been talking to them, they could have done it while everyone was at the negotiating table. Why haven't they?

Once they get nukes, most nations are going to back off sanctions because, what's the point at that point?

 

[BoilerJS]

Re: Iran was and is


Heck, it's been over three months since we've been talking to them, they could have done it while everyone was at the negotiating table. Why haven't they?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How do we know they already don't have it. It isn't like 1944 where nobody knew if it would work or not. Just because they haven't tested one under ground doesn't mean they don't have one. Why would they be working on intercontinental bollistic missles if they didn't have or at least expected to get 'THE BOMB'.

 

[BoilerMadness]

Really??

Originally posted by qazplm:
3 months away from a nuke by EVERYONE's estimate.

That's WITH sanctions and BEFORE we "rewarded them" with anything.

They've been at that point for years. Again, no one really disputes that fact.

This deal, if it holds, puts them at a year away.

If the deal fails, then we have no inspectors, no vision, and we can continue sanctions. Great.

Of course, the fact remains they are 3 months away, and if they REALLY want the bomb, there is nothing we can do to stop them. Bombing them only hardens their resolve to do it. Sanctions are also only as effective as the rest of the world agreeing. If other parts of the world aren't on board, then our sanctions are meaningless.

I agree with you it is inevitable. Then again, Iran has been sitting at months away for years. Why haven't they gone the last few steps if they are so dead set on getting them? If they are going to use them or give them away, why the reticence to go the last three months.

Heck, it's been over three months since we've been talking to them, they could have done it while everyone was at the negotiating table. Why haven't they?

Once they get nukes, most nations are going to back off sanctions because, what's the point at that point?

What you're saying makes less than NO SENSE.

The reason that Iran has been 3 months away from getting nukes for so long is that they are NOT ALLOWING IAEA to truly inspect their facilities, so we really don't know how close they are, or if they've had nukes for a while and they didn't announce it, since they wanted to stockpile more. Or perhaps they are stalling, so they can perfect their delivery systems. This whole negotiation by Obama has been nothing but political theater. intended to show us that his foreign policy is successful. Is there anyone left, who is naïve enough to believe it is?

The first clue that the negotiations were going to be a failure was that Obama eased the sanctions BEFORE he started negotiating. Who, in their right mind, lessens their leverage going INTO a negotiation? A smarter move would have been to tighten the sanctions, to give them a taste of what was to come, if they didn't dismantle their nuke program. Obama still hasn't figured out that they've been playing him the whole time, so they could further advance their program under the noses of their watchdog.

Perhaps, if the empty suit and the empty pantsuit had ratcheted up the sanctions 4 - 6 years ago, they may have headed off the problem. Perhaps, if Obama hadn't felt compelled to spike the football, by leaking that we had planted a Trojan horse in their centrifuge software, we could have delayed their nuke program even longer. Perhaps, if the world perceived he had a spine, they would be less inclined to blow Obama off, as if he were inconsequential.

Nero fiddled, while Rome burned, and Obama golfed, while the world burned. He should be the star of the next "Clueless" movie.

This post was edited on 4/9 11:37 PM by BigE23

 

[buygreekbonds]

Re: Really??

Does this scuttle the entire deal?

Sanctions lifted Day One

 

[qazplm]

If they'd done it

why not announce it?

The whole point of joining the nuclear club is the prestige and power that comes with being a member of said club.
Why would they hide in the coat check room?

No one believes they have done it. Israel doesn't even believe they have done it, and their intelligence would know.

They've been 3 months away for a long time...something has kept them from going any farther, and it certainly isn't sanctions.

 

[gr8indoorsman]

Re: Iran was and is


There is absolutely stuff we can do to stop them and I'd be your next paycheck that Israel will do it if we don't.

That said, I'm not advocating that action... but it is going to happen eventually as well, IMO.

 

[qazplm]

Yes, really!!

The "reason" Iran is 3 months away is because they have pretty much all of the tech they need ALREADY to make a nuke. They'd simply need to push through the final way in production.

From the Economist in 2013:

"In order to create a nuclear weapon, Iran would need to convert highly
enriched uranium into a metal sphere and make a detonator small enough
to fit in the warhead of a ballistic missile. That is not beyond its
technological capability.

David Albright, a former UN weapons inspector who is president of the
Institute for Science and International Security, thinks that by
mid-2014 Iran will have the capacity to produce enough fissile material
for a single bomb in one or two weeks, should it choose to do so."

Here, let me cite a source I know you'll love...worldnetdaily:

http://www.wnd.com/2014/01/iran-2-to-3-weeks-from-nuclear-bomb/


"If Iran breaks its deal with the West
tomorrow, the country would be only two to three weeks away from
producing enough highly enriched uranium to assemble a nuclear weapon,
according to Olli Heinonen, former deputy director of the International
Atomic Energy Agency.


Heinonen explained that as time elapses
and Iran converts more of its 20-percent enriched uranium to five
percent, as is required by the U.S.-backed deal, the two to three week
timeframe to produce a nuclear weapon will expand."

This all happened with the toughest sanctions anyone has placed on Iran. So if you want to blame Obama for not tough enough sanctions, then you should blame Bush, and Clinton, and Bush, and Reagan. None of them placed tougher sanctions on Iran. Heck, Reagan gave them arms.

Your "solution" is to play hardball with a country when hardball has led them to be months away from a nuke. Your "solution" is to play hardball when other countries don't want to play hardball and might negotiate their own deal with Iran without our input, making "hardball" useless.

 

[qazplm]

Israel doing it

will do nothing but spur them to get it come heck or high water.

You can bet your retirement check on that one.

Nothing will be more likely to guarantee Iran getting nukes than an Israeli attack.

 

[qazplm]

if that's their final position then yes probably

not just the US but France and other countries were pretty adamant that the sanctions were not going to go away at the beginning...IIRC France wanted it to be something like two decades.

 

[BoilerMadness]

Again,


what makes you think they aren't there yet? They're not allowing inspections, so how do we know what the status of their nuke program is?

The point of the sanctions is to dry up their money supply. They're supporting their nuclear program, as well as all their surrogate terrorist programs in the region. This costs MONEY. Easing the sanctions gives them cash flow, which enhances their ability to support terrorist activities and develop the delivery system for the nukes.

 

[BoilerMadness]

Re: Really??

Originally posted by buygreekbonds:
Does this scuttle the entire deal?

It certainly should. I believe Germany and France have already left the negotiations some time ago, but they weren't desperate to make a bad deal.

It's interesting to hear the disparate views of what's contained in this deal. The Iranian version sounds nothing like the Obama version. It's sad that I tend to believe the Ayatollah, more than Obama, since the Ayatollah has lied to me much less.

Iran is using Obama as a media foil, taking advantage of his desperation. Iran is speaking as if they are negotiating from a position of strength and Obama is kowtowing to them. The right move is to walk out, leaving them with a threat of further sanctions and potential military action. Unfortunately, a threat only works, if you think the guy making the threat is serious. Obama is still looking for his Red Line in Syria, so no one takes him seriously......

 

[BoilerMadness]

Re: if that's their final position then yes probably

Originally posted by qazplm:
not just the US but France and other countries were pretty adamant that the sanctions were not going to go away at the beginning...IIRC France wanted it to be something like two decades.

Germany and France had enough of our pathetic negotiations and left a week or two ago.

 

[BoilerMadness]

Perhaps,

Originally posted by qazplm:
why not announce it?

The whole point of joining the nuclear club is the prestige and power that comes with being a member of said club.
Why would they hide in the coat check room?

No one believes they have done it. Israel doesn't even believe they have done it, and their intelligence would know.

They've been 3 months away for a long time...something has kept them from going any farther, and it certainly isn't sanctions.

they want to have the delivery system in hand, before they announce it. It does NO GOOD to have a nuke, that you can't deploy, unless you want to blow up your own facility.

Perhaps they want to stockpile several weapons before the announcement, rather than be like Barney Fife, with his one bullet in his shirt pocket.

 

[gr8indoorsman]

Originally posted by qazplm:
will do nothing but spur them to get it come heck or high water.

You can bet your retirement check on that one.

Nothing will be more likely to guarantee Iran getting nukes than an Israeli attack.

I agree, but I think Israel will prevent it at the cost of conventional war if need be. They won't stop it forever, but as I said, I think Iran will get there eventually anyway. We just need to slow, stall, delay, etc., as much as possible.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[qazplm]

this is comical

I'm sorry but it is.

You complain that we don't know and there are no inspectors.

The current sanctions are there because they DONT HAVE INSPECTORS. You continually assert they may very well have them now. You certainly haven't taken issue with my point that they've been months away for a long time now. WITH SANCTIONS.

You moved it from nukes to "delivery systems." Which is an interesting goal-post move.

So, you'd think a plan that makes it harder to actually have the nuke part, requires them to give up almost all of their high level enriched uranium, 3/4ths of their centrifuges leaving them with only the oldest kind, and requiring inspections would meet with your approval. But of course it doesn't, because...Obama.

If Bush had won this deal, you'd have been just fine with it.

 

[qazplm]

lol

As usual, incorrect.

France and Germany joined the process on 28 March 2015.

They remained part of the process until the understanding was agreed to, then they left since, you know, there was an agreement, "a week or two ago."