Official Iran Thread

Here it is then. Who'd have thought it would "already" happen in 2015?

A nuclear deal with Iran.

Not on the basis of trust, but control! UN-inspectors will have unlimited and complete access to all nuclear installations in Iran.
 
If everything Iran promises comes to pass (a big if) and the sanctions are lifted at the slowed rate promised, it could lead to Iran becoming a regional power in a true form. It could also lead to a further moderation of Iran, and opening to the west. It could even mean that @Perun gets to go see the sites he has studied.

And they could go hardline and get nukes once the agreement has expired. Which would, I believe, probably trigger the start of the process again. But could result in them getting nukes, sure. At which point we'd probably regret the whole thing. I find it unlikely this will happen, but I admit the possibility.

In the end, I think this is a good deal as long as all parties enforce it hard.
 
I don't know what to think about this....Obama being diplomatic with a religious dictatorship and one of the Middle Easts biggest terror sponsors. Because what, that they promise they will fight Islamism? (Ha!)

On the other hand... It could if it actually work mean a moderation of Iran like LC said...And where everything is I guess the whole idea is to re-establish the balance of power. Which is to the benefit of the US and the West the way the deal is looking right now....
 
Last edited:
SixesAlltheway said:
Obama being diplomatic with a religious dictatorship and one of the Middle Easts biggest terror sponsors. Because what, that they promise they will fight Islamism?
Click to expand...
We either convince them to back down from a nuke, or we attack them and force them to not have nukes. I really don't like option #2.
 
No, me neither and it's not a solution either to keep Iran totally isolated. The deal provides the US some control and some foothold on the power balance again, which they strongly needed. Doesn't take away from the fact that it's shameful when you know what kind of country that's run in Iran.
 
Bloody hell, one of their (and hence, our) main allies in the Middle East is a religious dictatorship. Making an agreement with a different one can not be worse.
 
bearfan said:
We have peace in our time
Click to expand...
This is an assumption I don't understand - of course I understand the reference, but the assumption, I do not.

In 10 years time, does anyone seriously think that the USA/Russia/other powers will suddenly welcome Iran into the nuclear weapons-holding world? No, of course not. In 10 years the governments will continue the process of stopping Iran from getting nuclear weapons.

Meanwhile Iran gets to prove they belong as a responsible member of the world of nations with 0 chance to develop a nuclear weapon. This agreement not only stops them for 10 years, it undoes 12+ years of Iranian research and development, and dismantles their infrastructure already built. If there is a hint they are breaking the agreement, then the sanctions return within 2 months. It seems like a very, very good deal.

Of course, there is the chance that they are going to lie, cheat and steal during this period. To which I say: if they are skilled enough to pull it off without being caught by the CIA/other intelligence agencies/UN inspectors, then we'd never have stopped them from getting a nuke anyway.

Finally, this is my thought: an unstable, poor Iran is a prime place for a terrorist network to obtain nuclear materials for any purpose. A more healthy and successful Iran is one that is more likely to keep their nuclear material, even what they are allowed, safeguarded against Al Qaeda or other terrorist groups.

Iran has been treated as an illegitimate member of nations for a long time, politically isolated and forced to operate through underground networks, whereas Hitler was treated as a legitimate government. The more appropriate parallel is when Egypt and Jordan opened talks with Israel - because Israel was treated the same way. It should be noted that the reason Iran wants nukes is because Israel has them, and they want to deter a possible Israeli nuclear strike. Neither of these nations should have nukes, but one does.

And finally, Bibi will drop his own bombs on Iran if he gets a whiff they're trying to pull this off.
 
Guys... the references - please explain. It's a foreign language to me.
 
I am not sure where any trust in either Iran or the UN inspections program possibly comes from. It seems as if we took a position of strength and turned it into negotiation from weakness.

I guess on the good news side, cheap gas, here we come.

Peace in our time

chamberlain.jpg
 
bearfan said:
I am not sure where any trust in either Iran or the UN inspections program possibly comes from.
Click to expand...
I don't believe there is trust in either. There is an attempt to verify.

UN weapons inspection programs worked. They successfully called Iraq, after all. No WMD.
 
Did they really work there when they were not allowed to inspect over and over again. What is going to happen the first time Iran turns the inspectors away .. and you know they will at a point that makes sense for them (ie when they have plenty of foreign currency from selling off oil)
 
I got the Chamberlain reference now. I still don't know who Bibi is.

But guys, aren't we being a bit dramatic here?
 
Perun said:
I still don't know who Bibi is.
Click to expand...
Netanyahu
bearfan said:
What is going to happen the first time Iran turns the inspectors away .. and you know they will at a point that makes sense for them
Click to expand...
Then we freeze their assets again and stop them from trading cash outside of the country. It'll hurt just as much as it did 12 years ago. Or we go in and blow their shit up.
 
LooseCannon said:
Netanyahu

Then we freeze their assets again and stop them from trading cash outside of the country. It'll hurt just as much as it did 12 years ago. Or we go in and blow their shit up.
Click to expand...


That seems unlikely .... blowing their shit up. Unless Isreal goes into do it.

It is not like there was much support for blowing Iraq's shit up when they turned the inspectors away. I tend to think there will be less with Iran when they do it in a few years.

Poor timing on this sanctions were having an effect and we let them off the hook.
 
bearfan said:
That seems unlikely .... blowing their shit up. Unless Isreal goes into do it.
Click to expand...
Depends on who is in power.

bearfan said:
It is not like there was much support for blowing Iraq's shit up when they turned the inspectors away. I tend to think there will be less with Iran when they do it in a few years.
Click to expand...
Iraq turned the inspectors away. US threatened to attack. Iraq said let the inspectors come back. US said too bad, attack time. That is why the world did not support the attack. That, and the fact that the inspectors were pretty sure there were no WMD in Iraq - most of the world saw through the Bush administration's lies. And they were lies.

In Iran, they have said they are going for nukes. The world's powers - including China and Russia - have agreed that Iran was going for nukes. the UN has said they are going for nukes. There is a global consensus on this, where in 2003 many countries said the US was full of shit.

When there is consensus, the world will move. If you are suggesting that what happened in Iraq means that nothing will occur, then you are assuming that most of the world believed the Bush administration's bullshit - which it didn't.
 
It was years of crap with Iraq playing cat and mouse with the inspectors and other regimes set up after the Gulf War back to the Clinton who bombed them several times ....at least whenever Lewinsky news came out.


We are in for the same here
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top