Iranian Agreement goes through

Originally posted by jaden101
There's also the fact that Iran are one of the few Shia controlled countries and most terrorist organisations are Sunni. Simply put, Iran hate ISIS and Al Qaeda as much as western countries do and are far less likely to sell or give or "lose" a weapon to those organizations than Pakistan whom are supposed allies.

Make a military ally of Iran and allow them more access to Iraq and they will do a far better job of dealing with them than Iraq or Syria will. Support them with air power on a larger scale than currently (US have already aided Hezbollah fighting ISIS in Syria.) and it's a far more desirable solution than sending in US or other western troops.

Right. Heck, one of the big reasons Iraq is beating Isis right now... is they pretty much have Iranian commanders running things.

And while I don't like Hezbollah at all, they're a sure sight better than Isis.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Lol, oh big difference.

I'd argue the current president is different enough from the former, he actually seems to approach the negotiations from a more practical standpoint.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Some things.

First of all, I can see Obama's point of view on not putting that in the deal.

I don't agree with the 24 day time frame and no snap inspections.

I don't agree with the 5 and 8 year stips on weapons.

There is also the fact that Iran could possibly get a bomb within a year and that less and half ago, it was already stated that Iran prolly had a bomb or at minimum be able to build them.

Well here's the thing about the weapons embargo: 5-8 years is quite a long time in foreign affairs, and there's always a chance that Iran could violate something which would give us a fair pretext to extend the embargo, perhaps indefinitely. We have plenty of options: more options at this point than Iran does.

Of course, but we're talking "within a year" versus "within a month" which was what we've been dealing with in the past and what we'd be looking at before this deal.

We haven't really lost anything yet: sanctions can be restored rather quickly if Iran doesn't play by the rules, and if anything we'd have an even stronger position than before because we could point to the international community that we tried our best to meet Iran half way and they were the ones at fault, not us.

Ok, this is funny

Short version: The Onion did a story about the US giving Israel some ballistic missiles to placate Israel.

The next day, Israeli paper Haaretz, broke a story about... the US offering to help upgrade it's 'offensive and defensive capability.'

Unlike the Onion story, Israel declined, but even Haaretz noted it and did a tweet about how the Onion broke their story ^^

Okay so about the whole warning time for inspections, it was said it would be 24 days, but that they could narrow it down to 3 if needed. However I just heard on the radio that due to certain things in the deal(they did not specify what) that Iran could potentially stall for up to 3 months prior to an inspection? As in, having a 3 month notice.

Anyone know if this is true?

The inspectors will not even be US inspectors. They will be UN inspectors which are in essence clueless. They can stall up to 3 months due to an Iranianin being placed on the Atomic Energy Council.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
They can stall up to 3 months due to an Iranianin being placed on the Atomic Energy Council.

Why would this allow them to stall for an extra 2 months?

Cause it's a complete bad deal.

There are side deals made that we are just finding out about and when Kerry has been questioned about them, Kerry said "I had no idea about this!?"

Google Iranian side deals. These deals are what is going to govern the inspections.

Googled it. Besides the fact that they exist, everything else is all speculation at this point. From what I've read, we don't really know the contents of the side-deals yet, so the Republican angst might be premature.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Cause it's a complete bad deal.

Unless you want Iran to not-have-nukes, then it's a good deal.

Again, the sanctions would eventually collapse on their own. Nuclear experts around the world think it's a good deal. Five world powers all think it's a good deal. The Iranian hard-liners *hate* the deal.

What about the no-deal bit is supposed to be superior?

Remember, right now there is zero, ze-ro inspections, we have never even had a first-hand look at what it looks like. Are you against an increase in inspections? How about the major reduction in their centrifuges, are you against that? The huge drop in their stockpiles of uranium? The getting close first-hand looks at their facilities?

We are getting *so much* from this deal, in exchange for stuff we can't hold off indefinitely anyway.

It only seems bad if one compares it to a hypothetical deal that there seems to be no actual realistic way of getting.

Yes there is none because we have crippled them so bad with sanctions we need not worry. And we have other ways to see what's going on. Counter Intel, Space. Spies, human Intel, double agents.

The $150 billion they will be getting that has been held up in scant ions is equivocal to $8 trillion in America.

I think it's worth noting though that if a country REALLY wants nuclear weapons, they can get them, no matter what adversity they face. North Korea is an example.

I was aware that Clinton let them get nukes.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
I was aware that Clinton let them get nukes.

there was nothing we could do to stop their program short of invading.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
I think it's worth noting though that if a country REALLY wants nuclear weapons, they can get them, no matter what adversity they face. North Korea is an example.

And note, Iran has literally thirty times as much money as North Korea and their break-out time while under sanctions was measured in months. NK is a joke and they managed it without sanctions ever dropping. Now we have a country that's 30 times North Korea.

As in, if they started making nukes now, they'd have bombs before the end of the year, while under sanctions.

And sanctions are going to fail eventually anyway...

Time-Immemorial
Yes there is none because we have crippled them so bad with sanctions we need not worry.

Hah, they can get nuclear weaponry really easily while under sanctions. They've continued to make centrifuges for decades, and have a gigantic stockpile of uranium.

That's part of the point, with this deal they will be much further from making nukes by reducing both centrifuge and amount of uranium.

They, so far, have not started the process of making a bomb, but if they wanted to, they could.

Also, what do you do about the fact that eventually Russia and China will drop their sanctions? Then they won't be hampered by sanctions and have no deals to prevent nukes.

What do you do for when- not if, when- the sanctions drop, we have no inspectors, and Iran still has full only-months-away-from-bomb capacity and no reason to deal?

The only reason for sanctions in the first place was to get a deal just like this, because sanctions don't work forever.

And we have other ways to see what's going on. Counter Intel, Space. Spies, human Intel, double agents.

Oh, good point, you're saying we have extra ways to verify they're following the deal in addition to the inspections, thus increasing the certainty of them following the deal. We aren't reliant on the inspectors- which nuclear weapon experts around the world think are enough- they're just a bonus.

Yet another reason this deal works.

Do you wanna take bets on bragging rights on if this deal blows up in Obamas face?

Doesn't it seem that President Obama faced facts that they can't prevent Iran getting a weapn so made a deal to make sure they never used them?
What more could be done about it?

On the radio I heard that at one point Obama said about this deal that we'd be able to do inspections right away or something, is that true? I'm not talking about after the deal was made, but before the deal went through did he say anything like that? Because it flies in the face of the reality of 24 days. They were talking about the biggest lies of Obama, they said his first term lie was about Obama care(something about "you can keep your insurance or something"😉 and for his 2nd term the big lie was about how quick we can go inspect.

I realize some are saying "any type of inspection is better then none at all but this is like if I was a cop and got a warrant to search someones house..so I call them up and say "I'll be there in 24 days, pinky swear you won't touch anything?"

I know, I know, the excuse is "arrangements need to be made to travel there, etc." but damn..do we lack the capability to do this on the sly? To get these arrangements set up without them knowing, so we can just show up at the front door so to speak? I mean if Iran had a problem with this..why would they?

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2015/07/25/iranian-leader-tweets-graphic-obama-gun-head/30667081/

Lets see everyone here spin this in to "Oh they are not serious, and how this is a good thing."