i don't get it, the last thing we want is for them to get a bomb. once done SA has said it will get the bomb. A Shi'ite nation and Sunni nation with the bomb will not be good. Discuss...
i don't get it, the last thing we want is for them to get a bomb. once done SA has said it will get the bomb. A Shi'ite nation and Sunni nation with the bomb will not be good. Discuss...
Everything progressives do is aimed at weakening democracy, capitalism and the social and cultural institutions that support those things...... They are about subjugating people and being a ruling class.
Not sure some folks want to hear a "real answer" or to engage in any serious discussion on the topic at hand. The debate has become partisan, vitriolic, and often ends in the gutter. But I'll give it a shot.
For starters, the policy of attempting to roll back Iran's nuclear program to zero capability is a pipe dream. It is the hardliners approach and all evidence over the last few decades points to how ineffective that has been, unless of course the ultimate objective is war. Twice in last decade and a half the Iranians have come to the table and have been rebuffed by maximalist demands. Twice the Iranians increased both centrifuge and enrichment capability. If the maximalist position is implemented Iran will walk again and continue to enhance their capabilities unfettered. Seems smart to try and get deal in place while the iron is hot.
To your point on Iran and SA, I'd offer up the example of Pakistan and India.
If we unilaterally bail, P5+1 could evaporate, the rest of the international community could easily end the sanctions regime, then what.
IMO, if a reasonable deal can be done that limits uranium measures, places heavy inspections on heavy water reactor and plutonium development, and the ability to monitor trigger mechanism and various other weapons related items, then it should be done.
Troll response:
The same fearmongers and war profiteers who sold this country up the river on the naive idea of whatever the hell it was in Iraq are the same clueless f*cks squawking now. With just how wrong they were then, I am baffled as to why they have any credibility now.
SP,
a serious question...
How willing will Iran be to ALLOW any of those inspections? be truthful in what they have? Even our own government has secrets...(which I agree sometimes needs to happen - another thread lol)
The Iranian stances on destroying other countries is pretty blatant.
Trusting Iran to allow those inspections and be truthful is not a guarantee. The argument is neither is life so ya just have to give it a shot or that the hardline stance isn't working either, so what's the best option...
How do you know if you get there, if you don't know where you are going?..oh and I had 1,713 post on the "other board"..I hate being a rookie again!
Nothing wrong with having discussions with the Iranians and see what they are willing to agree to "trade" for not making nukes.
Credibility for Obamas deal making capabilities should naturally be questioned after the Bo bergdahl trade. We didn't come out in Libya smelling like a rose or look very good with his line in the sand for Syria.
You don't have to be an interventionist to be concerned about what obama might trade away. Hell, he just committed the U.S. to reducing its CO2 while China wasn't required to do anything for the next 16 years. That's not exactly the guy I'd want playing my hand in poker.
Hmmm...I think the scorpion/frog story comes to mind.
OleVet Posse Instigator
Iran is currently the most heavily inspected nation under the IAEA.Originally Posted by Soonerjeepman
According to the Safeguards Implementation Report of 2013, Iran had a total of 17 nuclear facilities under safeguards. The number of inspections was 211. The total cost for this monitoring was 12.5 million euros ($14 million), or 12% of the total cost of IAEA safeguards allocated by the state.
In comparison, Japan, with 125 nuclear facilities under safeguards, underwent 314 inspections at a total cost of 17.7 million euros ($19.8 million). South Korea, with 44 facilities under safeguards, and a history of undeclared nuclear activities, underwent 77 inspections. And in South Africa — with a history of murky nuclear activities — the IAEA carried out 78 inspections of the country’s 17 facilities under safeguards.
While the system may not be perfect, it is the best we have.
Iranian rhetoric about Israel is a much discussed and debated topic. Politicians play to their base, we see it all the time, it is no different there, plenty of hate for the Great Satan. If you ask me it doesn't sound that much different from the bellicose boilerplate coming from Sen. Cotton.
You are right, ain't nothing guaranteed. I'll stand by my statement, if we can get a deal like I mentioned I'd think that is the best. Otherwise you are setting the nation up for war.
http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/orig...ent-iaea.html#
I can't argue against the fact that us diplomacy and foreign policy has been completely f*cked for the last several decades. Seems to me that would offer up the choice of continued stupidly or perhaps the option of trying something different.
Louie gohmert was quoted this week that we need to bomb Iran. They are not the only ones using poor rhetoric.
A little surprising McCain and graham haven't also demanded military intervention...or maybe I missed that.
I'm sure I'm not alone in being tired of the US police force mentality. Diplomacy should always be the preferred course IMO unless it follows the Neville Chamberlain type that ignores reality.
They lost me with "shock and awe". Horrible group at predicting outcomes. They did a good job of creating jihadists, though.
Still better at predictions than Bibi.
Glad you said jihadists and not terrorists...obama wouldn't have known who you were talking about.
SP, Appreciate the responses. Most of the time, I would let negotiating take its turn to see what happens. Here, I do not see it working. They have been very hard line since their Islamic fundamentalist revolution. I see that they think of themselves as the leader of a Pan-Persia, Pan-Arabia just like they did during WWII and the coutnry support of Nazi Germany. To that end, the bomb will help them become that. At least with the Shah, there was a Western style leader who had a secular country. Iran is dangerous now, see what they have done with sanctions in place. They will be more dangerous with the bomb.
I either see military action or a total embargo. Why Russia wants to help them, I have no clue. They would turn on them as well. Though Russia wouldn't blink to show retribution should they do something to them...
Everything progressives do is aimed at weakening democracy, capitalism and the social and cultural institutions that support those things...... They are about subjugating people and being a ruling class.
Bear is a twice over mistake made by the American people. Ratcheting back from all of his disgusting and chaotic acts will take a long time, and be painful, in who knows how many ways.
Put a lid on it! Kiss it goodbye. We gave it away, and apparently thought it made sense to do so.
i mean look at how many decades we wars going to have heal up over bush/Cheney.
A question that no one has the answer to is this: Exactly how devout are the Iranian Shiites in their belief of the return of the 12th Imam? If they truly believe Israel must be destroyed to usher in their savior, no amount of UN inspectors or sanctions will deter them from seeking a bomb. And the true believers won't be concerned with an existential threat either; that's what a savior is for, deliverance.
President Obama and John Kerry choose to try and find a secular solution. This is a bit of a twist to our usual Iran policy:
Sit on hands.
Now wring hands.
Repeat.
In the meantime, crowds in Tehran chant: DEATH TO AMERICA!
But, there is always the chance this will end well and we'll all live happily ever after.
yeah, that's really astute, and predictable haha
Put a lid on it! Kiss it goodbye. We gave it away, and apparently thought it made sense to do so.
Truth hurts doesn't it?
Its in the thread because it's true. Hindsight of course but Iraq has been a horrible morass. AQ's goal was to use 9/11 to draw us more fully into the Middle East. Knowing that doing so would generate people against us. They were playing chess. We were playing checkers. We need to start playing chess.
Posting Permissions
