Results 1 to 15 of 127

Thread: US - Iran: Peace talks possible

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Global Moderator
    Military Professional
    Bandaid

    Join Date
    04 Oct 04
    Location
    India
    Posts
    5,001

    US - Iran: Peace talks possible

    The good news for middle-east peace (and for us in India), is that US and Iran seems to be willing to bury the hatchet.

    While Iran and the US talk of peace, the real war keeps going - Comment - Voices - The Independent

    Cracks suddenly appear in the ice of the deep-frozen relations between the US and Iran. President Hassan Rouhani emulates Vladimir Putin by writing an opinion piece in the American press oozing goodwill and willingness to co-operate with the US. He gives an interview on American television, repeating: "We have time and again said that in no circumstances would we seek any weapon of mass destruction, including nuclear weapons, nor will we ever.".....

    Cheers!...on the rocks!!

  2. #2
    In Memoriam Military Professional Minskaya's Avatar
    Join Date
    16 Aug 12
    Location
    Belarus•Ukraine•Israel
    Posts
    3,608
    This is the same Hassan Rouhani who previously had served as Iran's chief negotiator (October 2003 - August 2005) on nuclear issues. Clearly, he engaged in deceit.

  3. #3
    Senior Contributor Mihais's Avatar
    Join Date
    15 Apr 08
    Location
    Transylvania
    Posts
    5,172
    And the statesman or strategist who did not engaged in deceit is... ?

    Beside Iraq,the Iranians and Americans cooperated in 2001,in the taking of Herat.
    Good relations with Iran offer the West a lot more than the Arabs can offer.The oil of ME is largely in Shiastan.Iran has access to Central Asia's resources.Iran is Indo-European.Iranian population is closer to Western values and better educated than anything in the Arab world.In Iran radical islamism is on a descendent trend.Not so in the Arab world.
    Since the West decided not to change the regime in Tehran,it will be reformed from the inside.Those Iranian youth are the single greatest threat of the most radical Ayatollahs.
    So there are lots of reasons to end the cold war with the Iranians.
    Those who know don't speak
    He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

  4. #4
    In Memoriam Military Professional Minskaya's Avatar
    Join Date
    16 Aug 12
    Location
    Belarus•Ukraine•Israel
    Posts
    3,608
    Quote Originally Posted by Mihais View Post
    And the statesman or strategist who did not engaged in deceit is... ?


    Most people in the West (and probably on this board as well) are not at all familiar with Hassan Rouhani. I'll address that shortcoming. The new President of Iran should not be equated with some charismatic liberal western politician who just happened to win an election. For the past 3+ decades Rouhani has been intimately involved with the Iranian Revolution of Ayatollah Khomeini.

    Accolade of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and joined him in exile
    Helped purge the Iranian military of Shah loyalists and reformed the military (IRGC)
    Member of the Assembly of Experts
    Member of the Expediency Council
    Head of the Political, Defense, and Security Committee of the Expediency Council
    Member of the Supreme National Security Council
    Member of the High Council for Supporting War
    Deputy Commander during the Iran/Iraq War
    Deputy to Second-in-Command of Iran's Joint Chiefs of Staff (1988–1989)
    Commander of the Iran Air Defense Force (1986–1991)
    Head of the Center for Strategic Research
    Speaker of the Majlis
    Head of the Majlis Defense Committee
    Head of the Majlis Foreign Policy Committee
    Chief Iranian WMD Negotiator (2003-2005)
    Accolade of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei
    Member of the Assembly of Experts - Velayat-e Faqih
    Staunch supporter of Hezbollah and the Assad government in Syria

    Intelligent and articulate. Although Rouhani is perhaps more moderate than the hard-line Ahmadinejad, he has always been a vital cog in the Iranian clerical regime. When Mahmoud Ahmadinejad fell out of favor with Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei, Rouhani was given the nod the succeed him as president. Rouhani is deeply enmeshed in the Iranian nuclear programs. I would also say the Rouhani no doubt had a voice in the decision to inject sophisticated Iranian IEDs into Iraq which killed/maimed a significant number of US military personnel. Rouhani has copious amounts of blood on his little Persian hands, both internal and external.

  5. #5
    Senior Contributor Mihais's Avatar
    Join Date
    15 Apr 08
    Location
    Transylvania
    Posts
    5,172
    Quote Originally Posted by Minskaya View Post
    Most people in the West (and probably on this board as well) are not at all familiar with Hassan Rouhani. I'll address that shortcoming.
    Some are familiar with him(and others),but repetition is always good for learning.

    I'm quite sure he also had a say in not sending ATGM's or MANPADS to the Taliban or the Iraqi insurgents,which spared more lives than were lost due to their IED's.Including them in the Axis of Evil and repeatingly threatening an invasion might have led them to try to prevent said invasion.Nothing to do with morality,but everything with strategy.

    Hezbollah is not my problem.Right now is a problem for those we try to kill elsewhere.So until that situation changes,I don't care about them.They are a problem for Israel usually,but since I'm neutral in any Israeli war with its neighbours...
    The Iranian nuke is an itchy matter,but since there will be no war,we can as well start talking to them.NATO doesn't threatens them,they might not take the final steps to aquire it.

    So far you talked about the man,but not his points.
    Those who know don't speak
    He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

  6. #6
    In Memoriam Military Professional Minskaya's Avatar
    Join Date
    16 Aug 12
    Location
    Belarus•Ukraine•Israel
    Posts
    3,608
    Quote Originally Posted by Mihais View Post
    They are a problem for Israel usually,but since I'm neutral in any Israeli war with its neighbours...
    Gee whiz, color me surprised

    Quote Originally Posted by Mihais View Post
    So far you talked about the man,but not his points.
    If his regime history is any indicator, same program, different face.

  7. #7
    Military Enthusiast Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    15 Aug 03
    Posts
    5,349
    Quote Originally Posted by Minskaya View Post
    This is the same Hassan Rouhani who previously had served as Iran's chief negotiator (October 2003 - August 2005) on nuclear issues. Clearly, he engaged in deceit.
    And the other side did not engaged in deceit?

    I would also say the Rouhani no doubt had a voice in the decision to inject sophisticated Iranian IEDs into Iraq which killed/maimed a significant number of US military personnel. Rouhani has copious amounts of blood on his little Persian hands, both internal and external.
    So do US and Israelis leaders. Such is the way of geo-political leadership. Give us some credit, will ya?

  8. #8
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    11,288
    Quote Originally Posted by Minskaya View Post
    This is the same Hassan Rouhani who previously had served as Iran's chief negotiator (October 2003 - August 2005) on nuclear issues. Clearly, he engaged in deceit.
    Which was the time Khatami was in charge, a moderate and the best person to deal with.

    What did the west achieve with him ? nothing.

    The hardliners said Khatami was useless and Iran went hardline. The talks were stuck from 2005 onwards, no progress since other than loads of hot air.

    2005-2013 was enough time to see that direction was not working for the Iranians either. Recent elections produced a fair result, the hardliners lost.

    Now what is the west going to do about that ? are they going to play the same cards that got us no where up to 2005 or is there some fresh thinking here. Both sides have nothing to show for yet.

    Will american domestic politics trump national interests or not. That is the question.

    The clerics are going nowhere. Rouhani won't be ready to do anything till at least next summer, he's still new at the job.
    Last edited by Double Edge; 23 Sep 13, at 23:37.

  9. #9
    Defense Professional Dreadnought's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 May 05
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA.
    Posts
    14,728
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    Which was the time Khatami was in charge, a moderate and the best person to deal with.

    What did the west achieve with him ? nothing.

    The hardliners said Khatami was useless and Iran went hardline. The talks were stuck from 2005 onwards, no progress since other than loads of hot air.

    Recent elections produced a fair result, the hardliners lost.

    Now what is the west going to do about that ? are they going to play the same cards that got us no where up to 2005 or is there some fresh thinking here.

    Bottom line : is american domestic politics going to trump national interests or not. That is the question.

    The clerics are going nowhere whether anybody likes it or not.
    To ask another question, what will Iran achieve without concrete concessions? Nothing so the sanctions stay and perhaps get increased and that still doesnt take the Israeli's strike nor our own out of the equasion.

    IMO, If the Iranians see that no progress is being made and may perhaps worsen then they might start looking in the leaderships direction for the cause of failure and a dead economy.
    Last edited by Dreadnought; 23 Sep 13, at 23:38.
    Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.

  10. #10
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    11,288
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreadnought View Post
    To ask another question, what will Iran achieve without concrete concessions? Nothing so the sanctions stay and perhaps get increased
    Better offer more than peanuts this time.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dreadnought View Post
    and that still doesnt take the Israeli's strike nor our own out of the equasion.
    James Acton explained this 'zone of immunity' business a lot better than what i've read so far.

    it's to do with Arak. Arak is a heavy water reactor. Heavy water reactors produce plutonium. You can't hit a heavy water reactor once it goes into production beause it will be an environmental catastrophe. So you have to hit it before it goes on line. Any concrete signs to get Arak ready will be apparent months earlier.

    All the iranians have to do is drag their feet on Arak and your Israeli attack gets put off..

    Only actors that matter here are US & Iran. Reconciling all the baggage since the late 70s.

    Am an advocate of better US-Iran relations as this would do a great deal to improve stability in the ME

    Quote Originally Posted by Dreadnought View Post
    IMO, If the Iranians see that no progress is being made and may perhaps worsen then they might start looking in the leaderships direction for the cause of failure and a dead economy.
    They already have. So what is america going to do ?

    Take advantage of a new situation or rehash the old & tired in which case we put this off for yet another decade with yet more bla bla.

    Obama has a lot on his plate. He does not care about re-election, but he cares about legacy. That's about the same constraint if not more.
    Last edited by Double Edge; 23 Sep 13, at 23:59.

  11. #11
    Defense Professional Dreadnought's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 May 05
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA.
    Posts
    14,728
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    Better offer more than peanuts this time.


    James Acton explained this 'zone of immunity' business a lot better than what i've read so far.

    it's to do with Arak. Arak is a heavy water reactor. Heavy water reactors produce plutonium. You can't hit a heavy water reactor once it goes into production beause it will be an environmental catastrophe. So you have to hit it before it goes on line. Any concrete signs to get Arak ready will be apparent months earlier.

    All the iranians have to do is drag their feet on Arak and your Israeli attack gets put off..

    Only actors that matter here are US & Iran. Reconciling all the baggage since the late 70s.

    Am an advocate of better US-Iran relations as this would do a great deal to improve stability in the ME


    They already have. So what is america going to do ?

    Take advantage of a new situation or rehash the old & tired in which case we put this off for yet another decade with yet more bla bla.

    Obama has a lot on his plate. He does not care about re-election, but he cares about legacy. That's about the same constraint if not more.
    IMO, The bottom line is that Obama would not be the first US President to tell Iran piss off. Every US President since 1979 has done so. So the US has zero to loose but Iran does indeed have much to loose and I would attest to say that there is more then one way to stop the reactor and they know this to be true.

    Would the Israeli's see it that way? Who knows but one thing is for sure. The future US President has yet to emerge and you can bet if its within Obamas cabinet he will be looking to make US gains. Otherwise to the US public they are all lame ducks.

    The UK has already stated today in the Hague they are not budging one iotta without concrete evidence and IMO, I feel this is going to come without offering any consessions on sanctions.

    Theres plenty for them to talk about, but nothing is going to happen sanctions wise unless the Iranians start talking and make concrete progress on the nuclear issue.

    Obama and his cabinet would definately appear weak if they blinked first so chances are they are not going to and it will also have to do with the Israelis accepting the terms as well.
    Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.

  12. #12
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Aug 08
    Location
    UK/Europe
    Posts
    5,656
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    Which was the time Khatami was in charge, a moderate and the best person to deal with.

    What did the west achieve with him ? nothing.

    The hardliners said Khatami was useless and Iran went hardline. The talks were stuck from 2005 onwards, no progress since other than loads of hot air.

    2005-2013 was enough time to see that direction was not working for the Iranians either. Recent elections produced a fair result, the hardliners lost.

    Now what is the west going to do about that ? are they going to play the same cards that got us no where up to 2005 or is there some fresh thinking here. Both sides have nothing to show for yet.

    Will american domestic politics trump national interests or not. That is the question.

    The clerics are going nowhere. Rouhani won't be ready to do anything till at least next summer, he's still new at the job.

    Rouhani was appointed by Khatami and Khatami was the nearest we have ever come to a deal. As I understand the events of that time we thought a deal had been done but the Iranians then insisted on the some insane exception (may have been the 'medical enrichment' issue). I have long been 'hawkish' on Iran on the basis of prevention is safer and less costly in lives and money but if they say they want to talk you must be seen to agree to talk. One should also step up watching what they're doing with the other hand. If the lessons of the Khatami era talks are anything to go by the Ayatollah will stop any deal - whether Rouhani wants one or not but the success of all 'magic tricks' to keep the audiences attention where you want it and do the trick where they are not looking. While there may genuinely be more hope increased vigilance is called for.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Afghanistan's Karzai: US in peace talks with Taliban
    By notorious_eagle in forum Operation Enduring Freedom and Af-Pak
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 19 Jun 11,, 01:46
  2. Why peace talks in Uganda keep hitting a stone wall
    By Ray in forum International Politics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 20 May 08,, 17:41
  3. Israel, Syria in secret peace talks
    By troung in forum The Middle East and North Africa
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 30 Jan 07,, 04:53
  4. Colombia rebels reject peace talks
    By Ironduke in forum Europe and Russia
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 21 Oct 04,, 19:53
  5. S Ossetia peace talks falter
    By Ironduke in forum Europe and Russia
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02 Jul 04,, 03:09

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •