Iran nuclear agreement faces tough road ahead

[Brian_1349]

The framework nuclear agreement announced Thursday between world powers and Iran sets the stage for Congress and foreign nations to try to change — or kill — a final deal.

Iran nuclear agreement faces tough road ahead

Why does Obama always choose the worst decision possible? We had two options: help Israel secure peace and stability in the region or let Iran come to power and threaten American position in the Middle East. What's the right choice? The first one. What did our president decide to do? Exactly, let Iran loose and enjoy political instability and redistribution of power for another two or three decades.

America - loss, Israel - loss, Iran - win! Thank the president.

 

[August West]

American foreign policy should be dictated by Bibi? I don`t think so.

 

[Jantje_Smit]

Why does Obama always choose the worst decision possible? We had two options: help Israel secure peace and stability in the region or let Iran come to power and threaten American position in the Middle East. What's the right choice? The first one. What did our president decide to do? Exactly, let Iran loose and enjoy political instability and redistribution of power for another two or three decades.

America - loss, Israel - loss, Iran - win! Thank the president.

Don't worry, as the patriotic 47 said in their letter, Obama's choice will be reversed after the selections.

So all you have to do is to make sure that the Canadian messiah shows his long term birth certificate, gets 5 votes from the supreme court and you can start the liberation of the Iranian oil fields to keep the world save from WMD.

Cruz-Netanyahoo 2016!

 

[Brian_1349]

Why does Obama always choose the worst decision possible? We had two options: help Israel secure peace and stability in the region or let Iran come to power and threaten American position in the Middle East. What's the right choice? The first one. What did our president decide to do? Exactly, let Iran loose and enjoy political instability and redistribution of power for another two or three decades.

America - loss, Israel - loss, Iran - win! Thank the president.

Don't worry, as the patriotic 47 said in their letter, Obama's choice will be reversed after the selections.

So all you have to do is to make sure that the Canadian messiah shows his long term birth certificate, gets 5 votes from the supreme court and you can start the liberation of the Iranian oil fields to keep the world save from WMD.

Cruz-Netanyahoo 2016!

I guess your comment was supposed to be funny. You fail at jokes as you fail at common sense.
First, I didn't say anything about military intervention. there is no need to do so. All we have to do is to extend sanctions and watch Iran being isolated from the rest of civilized world.

 

[Jantje_Smit]

I guess your comment was supposed to be funny. You fail at jokes as you fail at common sense.

I try to be funny allthough I know it's a hopeless task when talking to people without a sense of humour

First, I didn't say anything about military intervention. there is no need to do so. All we have to do is to extend sanctions and watch Iran being isolated from the rest of civilized world.

I wouldn't call the part of the world that kills thousands of people with shock & awe, creates millions of refugees, tortures some folk etc. very civilized. But besides that, what's the point of isolating a country if you don't want them to build nukes? Did that work very well with North Korea?

 

[Maxx]

There are no easy options for dealing with the Iranians.

Their intentions for developing nuclear weapons are obvious. Clearly by caving in to Iran and getting virtually nothing in return, Obama chose to kick the can down the road and leave this mess for the next President to deal with.
That is if all hell doesn't break out in the Middle East before his term expires.

 

[dannyboys]

If you were a Mullah in charge of Iran's nuclear bomb making program who would you rather deal with? BOBO or a GOP President?
The Mullahs know they have got to have made a nuclear bomb before BOBO waddles back to the fucking sewer he crawled out of AKA Chicagoland.
That means less than two years. They can accomplish that easily.
Head Mullah to their negotiators: "Just tell the idiots we'll sign whatever they want. It won't mean fuck all. Kerry knows it and Kerry knows we know Kerry knows".

 

[Delta4Embassy]

The road ahead if we go to war with Iran:

The road ahead with diplomacy and verification checks for compliance

 

[Jantje_Smit]

If you were a Mullah in charge of Iran's nuclear bomb making program who would you rather deal with? BOBO or a GOP President?
The Mullahs know they have got to have made a nuclear bomb before BOBO waddles back to the fucking sewer he crawled out of AKA Chicagoland.
That means less than two years. They can accomplish that easily.
Head Mullah to their negotiators: "Just tell the idiots we'll sign whatever they want. It won't mean fuck all. Kerry knows it and Kerry knows we know Kerry knows".

If Iran really wanted nukes they would already them, if countries as Pakistan or North Korea can build nukes there's no reason why Iran couldn't do the same.

The CIA, Mossad, IAEA etc. all say the Iranians don't have a nuclear weapons program but somehow Netanyahoo and his AIPAC supporters know it's a lie and any deal has to be sabotaged.

Why is that exactly, still mad that the Iranians had the nerve to overthrow their USA approved puppet dictator and nationalize their oil fields?

 

[ESay]

Clearly by caving in to Iran and getting virtually nothing in return, Obama chose to kick the can down the road and leave this mess for the next President to deal with.

Why do you think so? I assume you have read or heard about the conditions which are due to be fulfilled by Iran. I am not an expert in nuclear weapons or atomic energy, unfortunately, so I can’t say whether these conditions can postpone the Iran’s nuclear programme or not. But Iran has agreed to lessen its nuclear stockpile and a number of centrifuges, to not build other hard water reactors, to allow the experts of IAEA to inspect its sites related to atomic researches, and so on. And I think that the sanctions may be returned in place if Iran doesn’t abide by the agreements.

Maybe the deal isn’t so bad?

 

[Roudy]

I guess your comment was supposed to be funny. You fail at jokes as you fail at common sense.

I try to be funny allthough I know it's a hopeless task when talking to people without a sense of humour

First, I didn't say anything about military intervention. there is no need to do so. All we have to do is to extend sanctions and watch Iran being isolated from the rest of civilized world.

I wouldn't call the part of the world that kills thousands of people with shock & awe, creates millions of refugees, tortures some folk etc. very civilized. But besides that, what's the point of isolating a country if you don't want them to build nukes? Did that work very well with North Korea?

Actually the reason the North Koreans have a nuke is because of a similar deal that was totally violated.

 

[August West]

The hardline religious types in Iran oppose the deal.
The hardline religious types in the U.S. oppose the deal.
Coincidence?

 

[Brian_1349]

The road ahead if we go to war with Iran:

The road ahead with diplomacy and verification checks for compliance

I didn't say we are going to war with Iran. Neither did I say we should be thinking about military intervention. It is not an option, especially now when American society is tired from war and conflicts.
What did we get from several consecutive wars in the Middle East? Nothing except for chaos and terrorist uprisings.

 

[Roudy]

Clearly by caving in to Iran and getting virtually nothing in return, Obama chose to kick the can down the road and leave this mess for the next President to deal with.

Why do you think so? I assume you have read or heard about the conditions which are due to be fulfilled by Iran. I am not an expert in nuclear weapons or atomic energy, unfortunately, so I can’t say whether these conditions can postpone the Iran’s nuclear programme or not. But Iran has agreed to lessen its nuclear stockpile and a number of centrifuges, to not build other hard water reactors, to allow the experts of IAEA to inspect its sites related to atomic researches, and so on. And I think that the sanctions may be returned in place if Iran doesn’t abide by the agreements.

Maybe the deal isn’t so bad?

This deal is bad because it puts money into the coffers of a corrupt, radical Islamic terrorist regime, which will then use the money to advance its goals. Western powers with shakes economies, are also desperate to remove the sanctions in order to be able to stsrt doing business with Iran. This shortsightedness, naivity, and greed will eventually cost much more and threaten the entire region and world. iran has shown

The hardline religious types in Iran oppose the deal.
The hardline religious types in the U.S. oppose the deal.
Coincidence?

Irrelevant.

 

[Sunni Man]

Iran - 1
Netanyahu - 0

 

[percysunshine]

I guess your comment was supposed to be funny. You fail at jokes as you fail at common sense.

I try to be funny allthough I know it's a hopeless task when talking to people without a sense of humour

First, I didn't say anything about military intervention. there is no need to do so. All we have to do is to extend sanctions and watch Iran being isolated from the rest of civilized world.

I wouldn't call the part of the world that kills thousands of people with shock & awe, creates millions of refugees, tortures some folk etc. very civilized. But besides that, what's the point of isolating a country if you don't want them to build nukes? Did that work very well with North Korea?

Actually the reason the North Koreans have a nuke is because of a similar deal that was totally violated.

.
I thought the French gave Pakistan the nuke technology and the Norks got it from either them or China. Did I miss something there?

.

 

[ESay]

This deal is bad because it puts money into the coffers of a corrupt, radical Islamic terrorist regime, which will then use the money to advance its goals. Western powers with shakes economies, are also desperate to remove the sanctions in order to be able to stsrt doing business with Iran. This shortsightedness, naivity, and greed will eventually cost much more and threaten the entire region and world. iran has shown

I see your point. Yes, maybe the Iran’s current regime is not the best option. But what would happen next without the deal? Iran is believed to have capabilities to create a so-called dirty bomb in the course of 2-3 months. It is easy to imagine a possible scenario when the deal has been failed and the regime announces its intention to create such a bomb.

What should America do in this case? Another war? Okay, let’s imagine that the US government and its allies have decided to increase economic pressure rather than using a military force. Owing to the pressure and low oil prices, the standard of living of the Iranians is drastically decreasing. People take to the streets, violent clashes begin. The regime responds by using force. The ordinary people take rifles in their hands and also respond by using force. And so on and so forth. I don’t think it is good to have another Syria in much greater sizes which has several dirty bombs. Isn’t it?

 

[Brian_1349]

This deal is bad because it puts money into the coffers of a corrupt, radical Islamic terrorist regime, which will then use the money to advance its goals. Western powers with shakes economies, are also desperate to remove the sanctions in order to be able to stsrt doing business with Iran. This shortsightedness, naivity, and greed will eventually cost much more and threaten the entire region and world. iran has shown

I see your point. Yes, maybe the Iran’s current regime is not the best option. But what would happen next without the deal? Iran is believed to have capabilities to create a so-called dirty bomb in the course of 2-3 months. It is easy to imagine a possible scenario when the deal has been failed and the regime announces its intention to create such a bomb.

What should America do in this case? Another war? Okay, let’s imagine that the US government and its allies have decided to increase economic pressure rather than using a military force. Owing to the pressure and low oil prices, the standard of living of the Iranians is drastically decreasing. People take to the streets, violent clashes begin. The regime responds by using force. The ordinary people take rifles in their hands and also respond by using force. And so on and so forth. I don’t think it is good to have another Syria in much greater sizes which has several dirty bombs. Isn’t it?

Iran, no matter how insane it seems to be from outside is still a pragmatic state that uses religion as a pretext for conflicts and propaganda tool. Under no conditions they are going to nuke any of their neighbors because regardless of the target the US will come and help them out. Iran understands that and therefore plays with us, showing the bomb and trying to persuade it can be dangerous. Now being a 'friend' of the US they are going to do what they want without being punished.

 

[Roadrunner]

The framework nuclear agreement announced Thursday between world powers and Iran sets the stage for Congress and foreign nations to try to change — or kill — a final deal.

Iran nuclear agreement faces tough road ahead

Why does Obama always choose the worst decision possible? We had two options: help Israel secure peace and stability in the region or let Iran come to power and threaten American position in the Middle East. What's the right choice? The first one. What did our president decide to do? Exactly, let Iran loose and enjoy political instability and redistribution of power for another two or three decades.

America - loss, Israel - loss, Iran - win! Thank the president.

Who is going to rein in Obama?

He has a pen, and a phone.

This will not be in the form of a written treaty subject to Senate confirmation.

It will all be done at Obama's whim.

 

[ESay]

Iran, no matter how insane it seems to be from outside is still a pragmatic state that uses religion as a pretext for conflicts and propaganda tool. Under no conditions they are going to nuke any of their neighbors because regardless of the target the US will come and help them out. Iran understands that and therefore plays with us, showing the bomb and trying to persuade it can be dangerous.

Yes, I think the same. They are not so stupid to wage a nuclear war and all their warlike rhetoric is only a tool in bargains. But anyway it is highly desirable to prevent them from having nuclear weapons. But I don’t think that a bullish tactic is a good one.

Now being a 'friend' of the US they are going to do what they want without being punished.

Why would this happen? They must strictly follow the agreement. If not, they must be punished.