Iran. It's a done deal


#1

After 20 months of negotiations diplomacy has prevailed and a Nuclear agreement /peace deal with Iran has been signed. Whether it will hold or not remains to be seen. The EU is looking forward to opening trade with Iran, Russia and Saudi Arabia are not so happy with the oil prices and Israel…well Bibi is flapping his gums and spewing out garbage as usual.

cnn.com/2015/07/14/politics/ … index.html

Former IAEA Inspector: Agreement Effectively Ends Iranian Breakout Capacity:

youtube.com/watch?v=5TEj8oeLe1U

Always a critic in the crowd:

youtube.com/watch?v=Mcd2_xj5wtA


#2

Not quite done. It still has to pass both chambers of Congress- which will reject it. Then Obama will veto the rejection, at which point it takes a two/thirds majority in both to overcome the veto. Obama has to get one/third support in either the House or the Senate, which he should be able to do. The only question would be how many Dems can AIPAC peel off.


#3

Obama’s been having a pretty good run of late.


#4

True but pissing off the EU when relations as of late are stressed might not be in the best interest of Israel. They could be the ones facing sanctions . Some have even suggested the EU might make their own deal with Iran if the deal does not go through. Israel could learn about diplomacy through this whole episode but I guess diplomacy has never really been Israels thing.


#5

:thumbsup:

Bringing Iran into the fold is a good thing. If sanctions are not meant to bring people to the table, then what is their point? If Iran is willing to prove they don’t want a bomb and give the international community inspection of its nuclear program, this is a good thing. It’s not like this deal takes more sanctions off the table; nor does it take an invasion off the table is they are lying and develop a bomb in the future. Israel’s mouth foaming is making them look more like extremists. British Foreign Secretary Hammond hit the nail on the head:

[quote]“The question you have to ask yourself is what kind of a deal would have been welcomed in Tel Aviv. The answer of course is that Israel doesn’t want any deal with Iran,” Hammond said in response to an opposition legislator who said he objected to the agreement and cited dismay in Tel Aviv.

“Israel wants a permanent state of stand-off and I don’t believe that’s in the interests of the region. I don’t believe it’s in our interest,” Hammond said.[/quote]

Obama was proclaimed a lame duck after the last congressional elections, but I think he’s already done more in these 6 or so months than Reagan, Clinton, or Bush Jr did combined in their last 2 years.

But just to correct something that was said above, this is not a deal between the US and Iran. [quote]Britain is one of the six world powers – along with China, France, Germany, Russia and the United States – that struck the agreement with Iran after a 13-year stand-off over its disputed nuclear programme.[/quote] So even if Congress gets the votes necessary to override a presidential veto, this deal could still go forward, it’s just that the US would be left out of it. The sanctions can be lifted at the UN and congress has zero say in the matter.


#6

But sanctions, threats of war, and virtually zero dialogue have worked so well over the past few decades…


#7

Now there are only threats of war so I guess 2/3 ain’t bad?


#8

My point was it can be argued that the past sanctions brought them to the table. Adding more or threatening war when they are willing to join the international community seems counterproductive. And if they violate the terms of this agreement, no big deal. The international community can add more sanctions.


#9

Canada has said it will keep sanctions. Idiotic Harper government.


#10

My point was it can be argued that the past sanctions brought them to the table. Adding more or threatening war when they are willing to join the international community seems counterproductive. And if they violate the terms of this agreement, no big deal. The international community can add more sanctions.[/quote]

I was pretty much just agreeing with you although I don’t think we should give too much credit to the sanctions. It could also be argued that decades of sanctions solidified extremist rule in Iran and postponed any progress that could have been made.

The opposition to this treaty is ridiculous because the only alternatives are more of the useless actions that have been going on for decades or war.


#11

A good way to counter extremism in Iran is to have the Iranian economy growing strongly. So let the trade flow!

Idiots.


#12

[quote=“antarcticbeech”]A good way to counter extremism in Iran is to have the Iranian economy growing strongly. So let the trade flow!

Idiots.[/quote]

Agreed, and the best way to grow an economy organically is to empower woman and minorities. Let’s see if they are up to the task :slight_smile:


#13

From what I have read, it appears that the Harper government has human rights concerns. Imagine that.


#14

Let’s just hope it’s not the same “human rights concerns” that led it to join the Coalition of the Willing to barrel bomb Iraq back into the Stone Age, causing the deaths of 500,000 men, women and children to date.

Meanwhile, the real evil in the Axis of Evil is right on schedule to make good on its numerous Youtube threats to wipe New Yotk City and Washington DC off the face of the earth:

[quote]A US research has institute predicted that North Korea could build as many as 100 nuclear weapons in the next five years.

The US special representative for North Korea Policy, Sung Kim, said that the US government was “deeply concerned” about North Korea’s growing nuclear might, following the report by the US -Korea Institute at Johns Hopkins University’s School of Advanced International Studies.

“Obviously we are deeply concerned about the fact that the North Koreans are continuing to advance their nuclear capabilities; we know that they are continuing to work on their nuclear program,” Kim told Reuters.

The report describes a “worst case scenario” in which Kim Jong-Un’s despotic government is able to build 100 nuclear warheads by 2020, with the country’s current nuclear stockpile believed to consist in about 16 nuclear missiles.

According to the report, Pyong yang has succeeded in miniaturising nuclear warheads, allowing them to be fitted to ballistic missiles.

“This is a pretty scary scenario,” report author Joel Wit said, adding that the more its nuclear arsenal grew, the more difficult it would be to persuade Pyonyang to roll back its nuclear programme.

“To me it’s a risky business trying to punish a country with so many nuclear weapons.”

The report added that North Korean missiles currently had the capacity to reach South Korea and Japan, and it was developing the taepodong 2 model capable of striking the US.

It warned the international community to take steps to tackle the growing danger, and said that as North Korea’s nuclear know-how grows, it will be in a position to export its expertise to other countries.[/quote]


#15

From what I have read, it appears that the Harper government has human rights concerns. Imagine that.[/quote]
The sanctions were not imposed because of human rights violations. Funny how human rights are only now becoming a concern. Most leaders are quite willing to go on walks holding hands with Saudi kings.


#16

[quote=“Winston Smith”]Let’s just hope it’s not the same “human rights concerns” that led it to join the Coalition of the Willing to barrel bomb Iraq back into the Stone Age,
[/quote]

Canada wasn’t part of the Coalition; luckily for us Stephen Harper didn’t get into power until 2006, or I’m sure he would have been charging ahead full froth as soon as he could find someone able to give us a lift over there.

He’s concerned about the right of Stephen Harper to get re-elected by shrieking “Terrorists!” every six seconds.


#17

The actual number is around 150,000 deaths over eight years of civil war. I think that Syria, where no one has gotten involved, has passed that number already. Point?


#18

The actual number is around 150,000 deaths over eight years of civil war. I think that Syria, where no one has gotten involved, has passed that number already. Point?[/quote]

My point, as usual, is who am I to question the credibility of The Coalition of the Willing and its imam when their trigger happy messiah complex and hallucinations of weapons of mass destruction start flaring up again.


#19

What some people are wondering is why the sudden change in US policy towards Iran? Some serious geopolitics going on behind the scenes me thinks.


#20

martinezperspective.com/2015/07/ … -sabotage/

nonalignedmedia.com/author/bmar999/