# Iran Tests Long-Range Missile, Possibly Violating Nuclear Accord



## Alex. (Oct 11, 2015)

"Iran tested a new guided long-range ballistic missile on Sunday, hours before Parliament, in a rowdy session, approved the generalities of the nuclear agreement reached in July between Iran and world powers, the state news agency IRNA reported.

The missile launch may have violated the terms of the agreement, reached in Vienna with six world powers. According to some readings of the deal, it placed restrictions on Iran’s ambitious missile program.

Experts have been debating the interpretation of a United Nations Security Council resolution, adopted a few days after the accord was agreed upon, that bars Iran from developing missiles “designed to carry nuclear warheads.”

Hard-line Iranian officials had for months been demanding new missile tests, a common practice before the negotiations over the country’s nuclear program began in 2013."

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/12/w...e-possibly-violating-nuclear-accord.html?_r=0

Why am I not surprised, they cannot be trusted. Obama got exactly what he asked for with the treaty.


----------



## waltky (Oct 12, 2015)

Iran goes for nuclear deal...

*Iranian Parliament Approves Nuclear Deal*
_Monday, October 12, 2015 - Iran's parliament approved the outline of the bill on the nuclear deal with the United States and other world powers._


> The landmark agreement is meant to curb Iran's nuclear program in return for lifting international sanctions.  The measure also allows Iran's government to withdraw from implementing the agreement if sanctions aren't lifted.  Final approval of the deal is expected later this week.
> 
> Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has warned repeatedly the deal poses serious risks both to Israel and the United States. Now that it's passed, he says it's important to make sure Iran tows the line.  "Now that it's done, let's look forward," Netanyahu told CNN's Fareed Zakaria. "Let's keep Iran's feet to the fire. Let's make sure that they keep all their obligations under the nuclear deal. That's the first thing."
> 
> ...



See also:

Granny says, "Dat's right - dat was a bone-headed idea...

*Bolton: Excluding Ballistic Missiles from Iran Nuke Deal Was ‘Fundamental Flaw’*
_October 12, 2015 | Iran on Sunday test-fired a long-range ballistic missile with a claimed new precision guidance system, less than three months after the Obama administration pushed through a U.N. Security Council resolution that unshackled Iran from some previous restrictions on missile activity.  The reported range of the Emad (Pillar) surface-to-surface missile would include population centers in Israel, the Arab Gulf states and Turkey, as well as U.S. military assets in the Gulf._


> Iran already has missiles boasting that range, but this time claims that a new guidance system would enable the Emad, in the words of Defense Minister Brig. Gen. Hossein Dehqan, “to strike targets with a high level of precision and completely destroy them.”  “We don’t seek permission from anyone to strengthen our defense and missile capabilities,” he told Iranian state media after the launch – which he declared a success.  During the negotiations that produced the nuclear agreement known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), Iran resisted attempts by the U.S. and others to include ballistic missiles in the deal.  “I think it was a fundamental flaw of the entire approach to the negotiations by the Obama administration, not to consider issues like Iran’s ballistic missile program as part of the problem,” former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. John Bolton told Fox News on Sunday.  “This program is not designed to launch weather communication satellites,” said Bolton, also a former undersecretary of state for arms control and international security. “It’s designed to be a delivery system for nuclear warheads.”
> 
> Referring to the Emad, he said while the development was not new when it came to the missile’s range, “the big breakthrough may be – if it’s true – its guidance system, because the more accurate the missile is, obviously the greater devastation it can cause.”  After the JCPOA was finalized, it was enshrined in a resolution adopted by the U.N. Security Council on July 20.  That resolution effectively replaced six previous resolutions passed between 2006 and 2010, some of which had prohibited Iran from launches that use ballistic missile technology, and restricted other countries from transferring ballistic missile technology or assistance to Iran.  The new resolution weakened those limitations in several respects:
> 
> ...



Related:

*Iran Promoting Ayatollah’s Book: ‘Israel and America: Doomed to Annihilation’*
_October 9, 2015 | After Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu in a recent U.N. speech cited a book of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s sayings, the regime responded this week – not by defending what Netanyahu called “a 400-page screed detailing his plan to destroy the State of Israel,” but by promoting a free online version of it.  A Twitter account associated with Iran’s supreme leader posted a tweet this week reading, “Download the book which stirred Zionist regime’s reaction,” along with a link to an English translation of the e-book._


> Entitled, “Palestine: The Most Important Problem of the Islamic World,” the book is a compilation of speeches, sermons and statements, the most recent from mid-2011, and the earliest dated just weeks after Khamenei succeeded Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini as supreme leader in 1989.  Netanyahu in his Oct. 1 speech at the U.N. called it Khamenei’s “latest book” and said it had been released several days after the recent nuclear agreement was announced, although it appears in fact to be the latest reprint of a book first published several years ago. Taken together, the compiled statements argue that the Palestinian issue is the most important one in the world for Muslims. Muslims everywhere have a duty to support the holy war against the “fake state and nation” of Israel, which was established by Zionist conspiracy as “an anti-Islamic regime in the heart of the Islamic world.”
> 
> America, as Israel’s foremost backer, is also a target of the ayatollah’s vitriol: “The world of arrogance consists of America – which is more evil and wicked than the rest of them – and its followers.”  In a subsection entitled “Israel and America: doomed to annihilation,” Khamenei is quoted as saying in a 1991 speech: “We believe that annihilation of the Israeli regime is the solution to the issue of Palestine.”  The supreme leader chided his listeners not to say that such an outcome is not possible, pointing to the dramatic and unexpected disintegration of the Soviet Union.  “America’s power will decline as well,” Khamenei continued. “America will fall apart as well. This infernal power cannot be permanent. Israel will disappear as well.”
> 
> ...


----------



## waltky (Oct 12, 2015)

Obama puttin' himself over a barrel...

*Obama got his Iran deal and the rest of us got a bloody mess in the Middle East*
_ October 07, 2015 - Two reports on Syria, one on American efforts to bolster rebels and one on Russian efforts to protect Bashar al-Assad, combine to tell the whole story. It’s not a pretty picture._


> President Obama’s weak-tea plan is summarized in a Wall Street Journal article that says he authorized a covert CIA program in 2013. The aim, the Journal reports, was to “gradually build a moderate force strong enough to put military pressure on Mr. Assad.”  But instead of victory, Obama only wanted to “force the regime to accept a political solution.”  Contrast that limited objective with Vladimir Putin’s sweeping plan, as summarized by Frederick Kagan and Kimberly Kagan. Beyond protecting Assad, they say Putin “means to forge a counter-alliance consisting of Russia, Iran, Iraq, Syria, and Lebanese Hezbollah and demonstrate that his coalition is more effective than the West’s.”
> 
> In their intelligence update, they say Putin also aims “to establish a permanent foothold in the Middle East from which he can threaten NATO’s southern flank directly, project power into the Mediterranean and the Arab World, and generally re-create Russia’s aura as a global power.”  The Kagans also mock Obama’s reaction to Putin’s buildup as “inexplicably bewildered.” They cite Secretary of State John Kerry’s assertion late last month that he lacked “clarity” on Putin’s intent.  But as I wrote Sunday, there is no mystery. The White House deliberately downplayed the Russian buildup because it undercut central promises Obama made to Congress about the Iran nuke deal, which was then being debated.
> 
> ...



See also:

*How America can counter Putin's moves in Syria*
_Oct 8, 2015 - Condoleezza Rice was secretary of state from 2005 to 2009. Robert M. Gates was defense secretary from 2006 to 2011._


> One can hear the disbelief in capitals from Washington to London to Berlin to Ankara and beyond. How can Vladimir Putin, with a sinking economy and a second-rate military, continually dictate the course of geopolitical events? Whether it’s in Ukraine or Syria, the Russian president seems always to have the upper hand.  Sometimes the reaction is derision: This is a sign of weakness. Or smugness: He will regret the decision to intervene. Russia cannot possibly succeed. Or alarm: This will make an already bad situation worse. And, finally, resignation: Perhaps the Russians can be brought along to help stabilize the situation, and we could use help fighting the Islamic State.
> 
> The fact is that Putin is playing a weak hand extraordinarily well because he knows exactly what he wants to do. He is not stabilizing the situation according to our definition of stability. He is defending Russia’s interests by keeping Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in power. This is not about the Islamic State. Any insurgent group that opposes Russian interests is a terrorist organization to Moscow. We saw this behavior in Ukraine, and now we’re seeing it even more aggressively — with bombing runs and cruise missile strikes — in Syria.
> 
> ...


----------



## Mr. H. (Oct 12, 2015)

Thank goodness they only do tests and not testes.


----------



## Alex. (Oct 14, 2015)

Mr. H. said:


> Thank goodness they only do tests and not testes.


they already have Obama's


----------



## waltky (Oct 15, 2015)

Should work out about the same time they get the delivery system right...

*Deal Will Allow Iran to ‘Eventually Acquire' a Nuke*
_October 14, 2015 | The nuclear deal reached with Iran threatened to upset a delicate balance of power among Shi’ites, Sunnis and Israel in the Middle East, and encouraged Russia’s military involvement in the region, former Virginia Sen. Jim Webb said during Tuesday night’s Democratic presidential debate in Las Vegas._


> “I believe that the signal that we sent to the region when the Iran nuclear deal was concluded was that we are accepting Iran’s greater position in this very important balance of power, among our greatest ally Israel, and the Sunnis represented by the Saudi regime, and Iran,” Webb said.  “It was a position of weakness and I think it encouraged the acts that we’ve seen in the past several weeks,” he added, in reference to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s military intervention in support of the Assad regime in Syria, a key ally of both Russia and Iran.
> 
> Webb, who is languishing in the low single digits in opinion polls, also challenged directly the Obama administration’s contention that the nuclear deal will prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapons capability.  He described the agreement reached between Iran, the U.S. and five other powers as one “allowing Iran to move forward and eventually acquire a nuclear weapon.”  Moreover, he added, the deal had “sent bad signals, bad body language into the region about whether we are acquiescing in Iran becoming a stronger piece of the formula in that part of the world.”
> 
> ...


----------



## Alex. (Oct 15, 2015)

waltky said:


> Should work out about the same time they get the delivery system right...
> 
> *Deal Will Allow Iran to ‘Eventually Acquire' a Nuke*
> _October 14, 2015 | The nuclear deal reached with Iran threatened to upset a delicate balance of power among Shi’ites, Sunnis and Israel in the Middle East, and encouraged Russia’s military involvement in the region, former Virginia Sen. Jim Webb said during Tuesday night’s Democratic presidential debate in Las Vegas._
> ...


Never doubted they could no matter what the negotiators wanted the public to believe.


----------



## waltky (Dec 15, 2015)

Iran missile firing violated UN sanctions...

*UN experts say Iran missile firing violated UN sanctions*
_Dec 15,`15 -- Iran's firing of a medium-range ballistic missile in October violated U.N. sanctions banning the Islamic Republic from launches capable of delivering nuclear weapons, U.N. experts said in a new report._


> The report submitted to the U.N. Security Council and seen by The Associated Press on Tuesday said the launch used ballistic missile technology banned under a June 2010 resolution.  The Oct. 10 launch was the first test of a ballistic surface-to-surface missile after Iran and six world powers reached a landmark nuclear deal on July 14. The Security Council endorsed the deal in a resolution on July 20 that also called on Iran not to undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles capable of delivering nuclear weapons.  Iran says none of its missiles are designed to carry nuclear weapons.  The report said the missile had a range of at least 1,000 kilometers (620 miles) and up to 1,300 kilometers, and a payload of at least 1,000 kilograms (2,200 pounds) and up to 1,400 kilograms (3,086 pounds).
> 
> But the panel said a missile with a range of at least 300 kilometers (186 miles) and a payload of at least 500 kilograms (1,102 pounds) - far smaller than the one launched on Oct. 10 - is considered by expert guidelines to be capable of delivering weapons of mass destruction.  The United States, France, Britain and Germany asked the Security Council on Oct. 21 to investigate and take "appropriate action" against Iran for the Oct. 10 missile launch.  The Dec. 11 report by experts from the council committee monitoring sanctions against Iran supports the contention of the four countries that the firing violated U.N. sanctions.  Whether the Security Council takes any action remains to be seen.
> 
> ...


----------



## waltky (Dec 31, 2015)

Granny says, "Dat's right - sanction the schlitz outta `em...

*US preparing fresh Iran sanctions over ballistic missile test*
_Wednesday 30th December, 2015 | WASHINGTON - President Barack Obama's government is preparing fresh sanctions against Iran and some international companies and individuals over the Islamic republic's new ballistic program in violation of a United Nations resolution, sources in the United States Treasury Department said Wednesday._


> The proposed sanctions, which come months after Iran and the six world powers signed a nuclear deal, present a first test whether Tehran will stay committed to the agreement likely to be implemented next month.  Ballistic missiles are sensitive with Iran because they could provide the delivery system for a nuclear warhead.  Wall Street Journal, which first reported the news related to fresh sanctions, said that the Treasury Department plan is "directed at nearly a dozen companies and individuals in Iran, Hong Kong and the United Arab Emirates".  They, the sources said, have been allegedly found involved in developing Iran's ballistic-missile program. The Wall Street Journal said that the proposed sanctions concerned two Iran-linked networks involved in developing the country's missile program.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## waltky (Jan 1, 2016)

Impudent cuss, ain't he?...

*Rouhani expands Iran's missile program despite U.S. sanctions threat*
_Thu Dec 31, 2015 - President Hassan Rouhani ordered his defense minister on Thursday to expand Iran's missile program, in defiance of a U.S. threat to impose sanctions over a ballistic missile test Iran carried out in October._


> Under a landmark agreement it clinched with world powers in July, Iran is scaling back a nuclear program that the West feared was aimed at acquiring atomic weapons, in return for an easing of international sanctions. It hopes to see these lifted early in the new year.  But sources familiar with the situation said on Wednesday that Washington is preparing new sanctions against international companies and individuals over Iran's testing of a medium-range Emad rocket on Oct. 10.
> 
> The escalating dispute centers on the types of missile that the Islamic Republic is allowed to develop and whether they are capable of, or designed to, carry nuclear warheads.  "As the U.S. government is clearly still pursuing its hostile policies and illegal meddling ... the armed forces need to quickly and significantly increase their missile capability," Rouhani wrote in a letter to Defense Minister Hossein Dehghan, published by the state news agency, IRNA.  "The defense ministry, with the support of the armed forces, is tasked with putting in place new programs by all available means to increase the country's missile capability," he added.  U.S. officials have said the Treasury Department retains a right under the nuclear deal to blacklist Iranian entities suspected of involvement in missile development.
> 
> ...



See also:

* Report: US Delays Sanctions Against Iran's Missile Program*
_ January 01, 2016 - Iranian president Rouhani ordered his defense minister to expand the ballistic missile program as a response to the threatened US sanctions_


> The White House is delaying plans to impose sanctions targeting Iran's ballistic missile program, according to a U.S. media report.  U.S. officials had planned to announce earlier this week the sanctions against 12 people and companies in Iran, Hong Kong and the United Arab Emirates.  But The Wall Street Journal reported late Thursday the decision had been delayed. The sanctions "remain on the table," according to officials, but the paper said it is now not clear when or if they will move forward.  The officials also stressed that imposing such financial penalties would not violate the agreement reached this year to scale back Iran's nuclear program. Tehran disagrees, saying the new sanctions would void the nuclear deal.
> 
> Iran threatens expanded missile program
> 
> ...


----------



## irosie91 (Jan 2, 2016)

we need a man like  ROUHANI  in the white house-------of his general character----
not the specifics


----------



## waltky (Apr 12, 2016)

Iranian FM thumbs his nose at Kerry...

*Iran’s FM to Kerry: We Won’t Negotiate Over Our Missiles*
_April 11, 2016  – Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif hit back Sunday at his erstwhile nuclear negotiation partner Secretary of State John Kerry for suggesting that Iran may consider negotiating an end to its ballistic missile program._


> “Secretary Kerry and the U.S. State Department know well that Iran’s missile and defense capabilities are not open to negotiation,” state media quoted Zarif as saying during a joint press conference with his visiting Estonian counterpart – the latest in a series of European government representatives to visit Tehran after the lifting of sanctions under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) nuclear deal.  “There will be no JCPOA for defense issues,” Zarif declared.  During a visit to Bahrain last week, Kerry said in relation to concerns about Iran’s destabilizing behavior in the region and missile launches that the U.S. and its Arab Gulf allies were “prepared to work a new arrangement to find a peaceful solution to these issues.”
> 
> His words were interpreted in some media reporting as implying an offer to negotiate with Iran over its missile program, although State Department spokesman Mark Toner disputed Friday that Kerry that making any such suggestion.  Toner said Kerry was simply “emphasizing or underscoring the fact that if Iran chooses to act more constructively in the region, then we can have a different kind of relationship with Iran.”  Pointing to that denial, Zarif said Kerry knew full well the missiles were not up for negotiation, and that even the State Department had called the claims baseless.  At Iran’s insistence, its missile activities were left off the agenda in the talks that produced the JCPOA last summer. A series of provocative launches, last fall and again early last month, has prompted calls in Congress for new sanctions, a move not supported by the administration.
> 
> ...


----------



## irosie91 (Apr 12, 2016)

waltky said:


> Iranian FM thumbs his nose at Kerry...
> 
> *Iran’s FM to Kerry: We Won’t Negotiate Over Our Missiles*
> _April 11, 2016  – Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif hit back Sunday at his erstwhile nuclear negotiation partner Secretary of State John Kerry for suggesting that Iran may consider negotiating an end to its ballistic missile program._
> ...



did anyone expect  Imperialist Iran to give up its imperialist, fascist and genocidal TOOLS?


----------

