Originally posted by Zinja
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
The Iran Deal
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View PostOh hell yeah, the US will respond.
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View PostIran crossed the nuclear threshold.
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View PostWhat makes you think they wouldn't try the same with a freighter in NY Harbour?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Zinja View PostYou are assuming that the US has an obligation to respond on behalf of KSA, i would argue it doesn't. Its neither there in paper nor even verbally. If you think that US will risk Israel, Turkey, other gulf states, etc to an Iran nuclear retaliation for KSA, then you have more faith than i do.
Militarily, the US MUST stop Iran from even being capable of launching another attack since Israel might be the next target and the only thing in all our arsenals that can immediately degrade Iran within hours are nukes. Every suspected nuclear weapons development, storage, C4ISR site would be nuked. If it stores, flies, launch, or even make a nuke, it's going up in a mushroom cloud.
We would be idiots to allow Tehran to try again.
When one flies, they all fly.Last edited by Officer of Engineers; 18 Jul 15,, 19:40.Chimo
Comment
-
Well, you've got me convinced, though I do still see expediency for KSA to have conventional alliances with Israel, Egypt, Pakistan and even Turkey if they can get any or all of them to sit at a table. But it's in the U.S. Interest to nuke Iran no matter what, if Iran hits The KSA. The problem I still have, is Iran convinced of that?In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.
Leibniz
Comment
-
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View PostYou've got me there. I had strong doubts that Obama got the guts to retalliate with a nuke even if Washington DC was hit. We had no such doubts under both Bushes.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Parihaka View PostWell, you've got me convinced, though I do still see expediency for KSA to have conventional alliances with Israel, Egypt, Pakistan and even Turkey if they can get any or all of them to sit at a table.
Originally posted by Parihaka View PostBut it's in the U.S. Interest to nuke Iran no matter what, if Iran hits The KSA. The problem I still have, is Iran convinced of that?
Originally posted by citanon View PostHere's the key problem for US allies around the world: Obama proved that the constancy of US response is fundamentally compromised by the inconstant political will of the US leadership. KSA, Israel and everyone else have to ask themselves, what if our enemies strike when the next Obama is in power?
Strong powers will always have weak leaders at some point.Chimo
Comment
-
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View PostStrong powers will always have weak leaders at some point.
Let's say that KSA decides still not wise to bet on Pakistan instead of US by importing weapons technology (a wise choice I'd agree), but maybe contributing $,$$$,$$$,$$$ towards the Pakistani program starts to look wise.
Comment
-
Originally posted by citanon View PostYeah, but with that in mind, and prime example #1 still in office, how much dependence on the US do you want to have going forward for your security architecture? Perhaps KSA, Israel, and others will want to hedge their bets.
Originally posted by citanon View PostLet's say that KSA decides still not wise to bet on Pakistan instead of US by importing weapons technology (a wise choice I'd agree), but maybe contributing $,$$$,$$$,$$$ towards the Pakistani program starts to look wise.Chimo
Comment
-
col yu,
You've got me there. I had strong doubts that Obama got the guts to retalliate with a nuke even if Washington DC was hit. We had no such doubts under both Bushes.
but if you're talking about nukes...if DC or for that matter any american city of any size was hit with a nuke, there would -have- to be a nuclear response no matter who was president. even if one assumed Obama didn't care a fig for the US's international alliances, not responding that way would suddenly open up very real charges of impeachment and shortly thereafter a permanent minority party.There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov
Comment
-
"Today, after 16 months of intense and difficult negotiations with North Korea, we have completed an agreement that will make the United States, the Korean Peninsula, and the world safer. Under the agreement, North Korea has agreed to freeze its existing nuclear program and to accept international inspection of all existing facilities." Bill Clinton October 18, 1994
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/in...orth+korea&st1
What's that American saying about being fooled once etc...?
Comment
-
So those of you that aren't fans of the deal with Iran, what's your prefered alternative?
So far I consider the deal a good one for the following reasons, and while I've seen criticism of it, I haven't really heard many good alternatives.
- Sanctions and previous efforts to isolate Iran obviously didn't stop them from developing the infrastructure to build a nuclear weapon.
- Most of that infrastructure will be dismantled as a result of the deal even though they will be allowed to keep some token show pieces to save face.
- The ability of a US coalition to militarily crush Iran in the event they do something particularly stupid remains unchanged regardless of diplomatic deals.
While Iran may have a couple of bombs squirreled away somewhere, the deal disrupts their ability to start any kind of mass production. It will also allow the West to get a good first hand look at the Iranian facilities involved, which should make dismantling them via airstrikes that much easier in the future should it come to that.
As I've noted previously, sanctions relief will give will give Iran access to greater resources (which isn't necessarily bad if it ends up killing IS bastards faster) but more importantly, it will give the Iranian moderates a win and cut into the power base of many of the hardliners who rely on their ability to skirt sanctions for their influence.Last edited by SteveDaPirate; 20 Jul 15,, 17:17.
Comment
- Sanctions and previous efforts to isolate Iran obviously didn't stop them from developing the infrastructure to build a nuclear weapon.
-
Originally posted by snapper View Post"Today, after 16 months of intense and difficult negotiations with North Korea, we have completed an agreement that will make the United States, the Korean Peninsula, and the world safer. Under the agreement, North Korea has agreed to freeze its existing nuclear program and to accept international inspection of all existing facilities." Bill Clinton October 18, 1994
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/in...orth+korea&st1
What's that American saying about being fooled once etc...?
That being the case, it wasn't that the deal itself that was ineffective, but the diplomacy that followed, derailing relations and leading to open hostility and a subsequent breakdown of the deal.
I'm not trying to say that the US was solely responsible for the breakdown in relations, as the Nork's were clearly fishing for additional aid in exchange for halting ballistic missile development and they got sanctions for their troubles. Yet I don't see any indications that their nuclear program would have resumed if relations and thus the deal had continued to hold.Last edited by SteveDaPirate; 20 Jul 15,, 17:29.
Comment
-
Originally posted by SteveDaPirate View PostSo those of you that aren't fans of the deal with Iran, what's your prefered alternative?
Originally posted by SteveDaPirate View Post[*]Sanctions and previous efforts to isolate Iran obviously didn't stop them from developing the infrastructure to build a nuclear weapon.
Originally posted by SteveDaPirate View PostMost of that infrastructure will be dismantled as a result of the deal even though they will be allowed to keep some token show pieces to save face.
Originally posted by SteveDaPirate View Post[*]The ability of a US coalition to militarily crush Iran in the event they do something particularly stupid remains unchanged regardless of diplomatic deals.Last edited by Officer of Engineers; 20 Jul 15,, 17:57.Chimo
Comment
Comment