Page 3 of 14 FirstFirst 123456789101112 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 196

Thread: Geneva deal reached

  1. #31
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    15 Dec 06
    Posts
    1,004
    Quote Originally Posted by zraver View Post
    Not killing OBL, not obamacare, but rapprochement with Iran and lessening the risk of a Shia Islam-a-bomb and the Sunni response.
    Why is the "Shia Bomb" such a problem when the Sunnis already have the world's fastest growing arsenal?

  2. #32
    Staff Emeritus
    Military Professional
    Contrary by Nature.
    zraver's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Oct 06
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    14,528
    Quote Originally Posted by Firestorm View Post
    Why is the "Shia Bomb" such a problem when the Sunnis already have the world's fastest growing arsenal?
    Because I don't consider Pakistani's to be sunnis, not in the same way the Arab's are. The Pakistanis are their own form of insane, and yes I have a problem with their arsenal. Sadly they already have nukes and are also under China's wing and sit astride our supply lines to A-stan. In a perfect world Pakistan and Israel would be subjected to the sanctions that Iran has been.
    Last edited by zraver; 24 Nov 13, at 21:54.

  3. #33
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    5,972
    Quote Originally Posted by zraver View Post
    I think, even as much as I detest him that this is going to be Obama's master stroke and legacy. Not killing OBL, not obamacare, but rapprochement with Iran and lessening the risk of a Shia Islam-a-bomb and the Sunni response.
    He's also trying the Israel-Pal thing. He's got a few irons in there for the legacy stakes.

    About Iran, relations snapped when a democrat was in power so a democrat is best suited to fix them.

    It's early days though, very early still. Things can easily unravel back to square one

  4. #34
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    13 Nov 07
    Posts
    3,561
    It sounds like this might be an ok deal if there is follow through to dismantle and destroy Iran's enrichment infrastructure. This would be a bad deal if not.

    Obama's record on follow through, at present, is not admirable, to put it lightly.

  5. #35
    Senior Contributor GVChamp's Avatar
    Join Date
    26 Aug 06
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    1,267
    Quote Originally Posted by zraver View Post
    Sir, she could have our most advanced designs and they would not do her any good without fissile material. Iran traded any real long term hopes for a bomb for 11 billion dollars worth of her money and assets being free from the sanctions. I think, even as much as I detest him that this is going to be Obama's master stroke and legacy. Not killing OBL, not obamacare, but rapprochement with Iran and lessening the risk of a Shia Islam-a-bomb and the Sunni response.
    This is not a permanent deal. It is a six month arrangement prior to a more comprehensive agreement. I would definitely say that Iran took a big hit here, since they effectively gave up 3 years of HEU enrichment and have to dismantle their HEU enrichment equipment, but that's not effectively stopping Iran from getting a nuke in the long-term.

    I am not a mind reader and I am not a game theory expert. However, Iran does not have an operational weapon and therefore that HEU was presently useless. To me, Iran created a large amount of HEU specifically to use it as a bargaining chip in negotiations. The uranium is absolutely useless, however, if you go after the weapons program and shut that down. On the other hand, they can always make more HEU if they really, really want to. They gave up something that is non-essential.

    They are however, getting serious access to hard currency, from my understanding. And we are rolling back sanctions that, once rolled back, may be quite difficult to reimpose because it requires broad agreement among the P5.

    I don't really know. I shrug at my shoulders at the deal. We'll see where we go in six months. Bombing them is always an option.
    "The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood"-Otto Von Bismarck

  6. #36
    Global Moderator Defense Professional JAD_333's Avatar
    Join Date
    15 Apr 07
    Location
    Corpus Christi, Texas
    Posts
    11,198
    Quote Originally Posted by Minskaya View Post
    As I alluded to in other posts, the wild card...

    New US sanctions would spell 'end of deal' to limit nuclear program: Iran foreign minister
    24 November 2013

    GENEVA - Iran will not honor the nuclear agreement it just signed with the United States and other world powers if Congress imposes new sanctions, Iranís foreign minister told NBC News after the deal was announced. ďIf there are new sanctions, then there is no deal. Itís very clear. End of the deal. Because of the inability of one party to maintain their side of the bargain,Ē Foreign Minister Javad Zarif said during an exclusive interview with NBC News.
    Source

    He's just reiterating what the agreement says, probably for home consumption.

    - The U.S. Administration, acting consistent with the
    respective roles of the President and the
    Congress, will refrain from imposing new nuclear-re
    lated sanctions.

    But also, as you point out, he reiterated the position because the US Senate is due to vote soon on increased sanctions. I expect the Senate will either hold off, or vote for the sanctions to go into effect upon Iran's failure to come to an agreement within the 1 year timeframe specified in the agreement.
    To be Truly ignorant, Man requires an Education - Plato

  7. #37
    Global Moderator Defense Professional JAD_333's Avatar
    Join Date
    15 Apr 07
    Location
    Corpus Christi, Texas
    Posts
    11,198
    Quote Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
    The deal does nothing to stop nuclear weapons research. It only stops nuclear materials from being used but no intrusion into their weapons program. Suspected weapons labs are still out of bounds.
    Whether that will be a feature of the final agreement 1 year hence is not yet known.

    But say that Iran ultimately agrees to abandon its weapons program, how can that be enforced, considering that R&D of that nature can take place in small spaces anywhere in the country?

    What is the best guarantee of neutering their nuke building capability if not strict oversight of their fissionable stockpiles and fabricating facilities?
    To be Truly ignorant, Man requires an Education - Plato

  8. #38
    Global Moderator Defense Professional JAD_333's Avatar
    Join Date
    15 Apr 07
    Location
    Corpus Christi, Texas
    Posts
    11,198
    Who hasn't seen this before...

    To be Truly ignorant, Man requires an Education - Plato

  9. #39
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    5,972
    Quote Originally Posted by GVChamp View Post
    They are however, getting serious access to hard currency, from my understanding. And we are rolling back sanctions that, once rolled back, may be quite difficult to reimpose because it requires broad agreement among the P5.
    Sanctions are not being rolled back. They are getting access to some hard currency. It's an interim arrangement as you said, hopefully from which to build more substantively.

    The idea is cap for a cap, there won't be more sanctions for the next six months, if all goes well.
    Last edited by Double Edge; 25 Nov 13, at 15:42.

  10. #40
    Banned Contributor
    Join Date
    10 Nov 11
    Location
    God's own country
    Posts
    314
    Quote Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
    And allow Iran technology to further refine her designs.

    Iran signed away that reason. That is also history.
    The past is no reason, or a signed document is no reason for them to live under threat of a nuclear or sabotage their own future. They owe more than that to their people and their future

  11. #41
    Officer of Engineers
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by JAD_333 View Post
    What is the best guarantee of neutering their nuke building capability if not strict oversight of their fissionable stockpiles and fabricating facilities?
    Surrender of all documents and materials, including all fabs. The Ukraine, Georgia, all of Central Asia, South Africa, and Libya all did this and the IAEA is convinced that their programs are dead. The same cannot be said of Iran.

    Quote Originally Posted by Defcon5 View Post
    The past is no reason, or a signed document is no reason for them to live under threat of a nuclear or sabotage their own future. They owe more than that to their people and their future
    The honour of a country is worth everything to her people. They owe it more to their own people to show that their word is their bond both to her commitments to the treaty she sign as well to their own people. Iran's word is worth a hell of a lot more than nukes. Something everybody forgets when they start talking about nukes.
    Last edited by Officer of Engineers; 25 Nov 13, at 14:44.

  12. #42
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    5,972
    Quote Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
    Surrender of all documents and materials, including all fabs. The Ukraine, Georgia, all of Central Asia, South Africa, and Libya all did this and the IAEA is convinced that their programs are dead. The same cannot be said of Iran
    As of yet no, but those countries came clean. In doing so they did not attract more punishment, on the contrary it served as a confidence booster.

    What if Iran comes clean. The picture changes.

    The real question is whether Iran can be deterred or influenced to do just that.

    I suspect what the Iranian regime craves the most is legitimacy in the eyes of the world. They've never quite really achieved that on a worldwide basis. A deal and normalisation guarantees their longevity, something dissident Iranians are opposed to.

    So their intransigent behaviour upto now is more their way of giving the world the bird until a compromise that allows them to gain face comes through.
    Last edited by Double Edge; 25 Nov 13, at 15:52.

  13. #43
    Banned Contributor
    Join Date
    10 Nov 11
    Location
    God's own country
    Posts
    314
    Quote Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
    Surrender of all documents and materials, including all fabs. The Ukraine, Georgia, all of Central Asia, South Africa, and Libya all did this and the IAEA is convinced that their programs are dead. The same cannot be said of Iran.

    The honour of a country is worth everything to her people. They owe it more to their own people to show that their word is their bond both to her commitments to the treaty she sign as well to their own people. Iran's word is worth a hell of a lot more than nukes. Something everybody forgets when they start talking about nukes.
    I am sorry, that is a whole load of horse phuckey. The most important job of any government is to protect its people and its interest, not some 'honor' as decided by a western narrative, which is at best hypocritical in nature when they themselves have thousands of nukes, and intimidate the rest of the world with the same. Iranians security and interests are worth hell of a lot more than some word.

  14. #44
    Officer of Engineers
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Defcon5 View Post
    I am sorry, that is a whole load of horse phuckey. The most important job of any government is to protect its people and its interest, not some 'honor' as decided by a western narrative, which is at best hypocritical in nature when they themselves have thousands of nukes, and intimidate the rest of the world with the same. Iranians security and interests are worth hell of a lot more than some word.
    What part of keeping your word do you not understand? If your government cannot be trusted to keep her word in foreign treaties? Then what makes you trust her in obeying her own laws restricting her actions against you?

    The NPT allows you an out. Don't like it? Sign yourself out.

    Your position and those of you who argues for Iran to cheat on the NPT itself is complete horse puckey. If Iran does what you suggest she does, then we should declare war today. No, more than that, we are obligated to declare war today before she gets the nuke. While we may not win this war, I guarantee you that it would be the Iranian population would suffer a hell of a lot more than keeping nukes. We just pay higher costs for TVs and DVD players.
    Last edited by Officer of Engineers; 25 Nov 13, at 17:33.

  15. #45
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    15 Dec 06
    Posts
    1,004
    Colonel, would the international reaction have been any different if Iran had not been a part of the NPT? Would Israel's reaction be any different? Most of the world leaders involved seem to be inherently opposed to the idea of an Iranian nuke. They aren't making your point, that it shouldn't be allowed merely because Iran is cheating on the NPT.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Shotguns and the Geneva Convention
    By Ironduke in forum The Field Mess
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 06 Aug 17,, 19:43
  2. Iran @ Geneva
    By Minskaya in forum The Iranian Question
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 22 Nov 13,, 12:12
  3. New Deal on Bush tax cuts reached............
    By MIKEMUN in forum American Politics & Economy
    Replies: 60
    Last Post: 12 Dec 10,, 23:52
  4. Geneva Convention Turns 60
    By Merlin in forum International Politics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12 Aug 09,, 16:52
  5. US detainees to get Geneva rights
    By troung in forum American Politics & Economy
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 12 Jul 06,, 05:20

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
  •