Page 38 of 53 FirstFirst ... 28363738394048 ... LastLast
Results 371 to 380 of 522

Thread: US, Iran nuclear deal spurs bipartisan concern in Congress

  1. #371
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,107

    Re: US, Iran nuclear deal spurs bipartisan concern in Congress

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    No, you're absolutely right. I meant the exact moment with the test. Yet, it didn't really have the intimidation factor that the regime had hoped for.
    Well, will any U.S. President sign off on attempting to topple the regime with the potential of even low-yield nukes going off?

  2. #372
    Angry Former GOP Voter
    Fiddytree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:59 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    25,690

    Re: US, Iran nuclear deal spurs bipartisan concern in Congress

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    Well, will any U.S. President sign off on attempting to topple the regime with the potential of even low-yield nukes going off?
    No, but I'm willing to bet it wasn't interested in toppling the regime either.
    Michael J Petrilli-"Is School Choice Enough?"-A response to the recent timidity of American conservatives toward education reform. https://nationalaffairs.com/publicat...-choice-enough

  3. #373
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Last Seen
    08-25-17 @ 02:13 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,127

    Re: BREAKING NEWS: Iran, 6 world powers reach deal on Iranian nuclear program

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    During the 6-Day War, Nassir publically claimed that American forces were directly involved, which was an obvious lie. So, no, they won't forget about us.
    Of course. Nassir had to. It was a political move at the end of the war. But the US did do spy plane fly overs and some how that intel got to the Israelis. And there were US ships force shipping lanes open for Israeli vessels.
    Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin to slit throats. It is inaccurate to say that I hate everything. I am strongly in favor of common sense, common honesty, and common decency. This makes me forever ineligible for public office. H.L Mencken

  4. #374
    Sage
    Fenton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,274

    Re: US, Iran nuclear deal spurs bipartisan concern in Congress

    Quote Originally Posted by Dittohead not! View Post
    The above does not
    in any way represent the opinions of mainstream Americans. The poster is speaking only for himself. Most of us, in fact, are embarrassed by this elitist attitude.
    He's 100% correct.

    I think its a bit pathetic to be embarrassed by someone else opinions.

  5. #375
    Sage
    Fenton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,274

    Re: US, Iran nuclear deal spurs bipartisan concern in Congress

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    He represented the United States in a
    1994 negotiation with North Korea.

    North Korea also tested a nuclear weapon in 2006, which became infamous for being a failure.
    They managed to, after making a "deal" with one failure of a ex-President, to procur enough highly enriched plutonium to build a atomic weapon.

    So what of it was a "fissile", they lied and theie next test wasn't a " failure"

  6. #376
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Last Seen
    08-25-17 @ 02:13 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,127

    Re: BREAKING NEWS: Iran, 6 world powers reach deal on Iranian nuclear program

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    All of it, no. But the majority of our IMINT is Five Eyes, and the HUMINT that we used was mostly via partner nations.
    Who runs the HUMINT in the middle east? Starts with an M ends with a D.. Mossad.

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    We absolutely took Israeli intelligence.
    So now you don't dispute it?


    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    They reinforced our own positions, they didn't alter anything that we didn't already think. Every major IC came to the same conclusion about Iraq, and they were all wrong.
    Yes, it's called confirmation bias. Israel knew the intel was wrong, could have corrected it and the US and UK (Australia as well) could avoided invading Iraq and finding absolutely nothing claimed in the conformation bias. But no, Israel acted in it's own selfish interest instead of the interest of it's ally. Like I said.. I will NEVER EVER trust Israeli intel after Iraq. Just like I don't trust Israeli intel the US is using to justify pressure on Syria and Iran.. neither are US's self interest as of now.



    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    ...... no comment.
    That's a solid, you are right.




    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    Curveball was a German source. And the Germans kept him, fed us his intelligence, and wouldn't let us talk to him (apparently they made up a story that the guy was virulently anti-American). I can't find anything that said that we were alerted to him as a source of information by the Israelis, but if that is so then you have one ally (Israel) telling us about a potential source of information and another ally (Germany) lying to us about that source of information in order to keep us from fully accessing it.
    Woah, Woah.. Germany coded him as "off limits" because BND thought he was anti-American but still fed his story to the US. When they learned he was pro-American, the US was given access to him. Both with access and without the US intel was warned he was a liar and crazy. BND and CIA's own people said this. It was ignored for political reasons (conformation bias).

    Curveball 's story was exactly what Mossad told the UN inspectors in 1994.

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    Can do our dirty work. If they were killed by the MEK... meh. Firstly, targeting requires collection, meaning that we had a pretty good picture of these guys, secondly, this was a pretty high-profile move; I would be surprised if Mossad just handed this off and didn't exercise overwatch and direction at the least.
    And that's the problem you fail to understand. Having MEK (a terrorist group) do the work with Mossad help only confirms the position Iran has been telling the world for the last 30 years. It also makes Iran victims of terrorism. It's a huge double standard. One I don't accept. You either fighting to get rid of all terrorism or you aren't fighting terror, rather you are selective hypocrites trying to justify a larger objective which nobody would support.



    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    On the contrary. Killing a couple of scientists and unleashing a cyber network attack is a far preferable method of slowing down Iran's nuclear advances.
    It's actually not. Opening a partnership with Iran either via Russia or ourselves is much much more preferable. Iran needs nuclear power, nuclear medicine and such. It was the plan laid out by the Shah starting in the 1970s. The goal was to build 22 Nuclear power plants by 2000. Iran's civilian power projects were halted until 1980s. Back in 1980s German intel was claiming Iran would have a nuke in 2 years, that never panned out. Iran was getting enriched material for years for scientific research and to help fuel some of the plants finished. IAEA were given full access in 1992. They found nothing.


    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    A normal relationship with Iran probably involves some measure of regime change in that country. Because the current regime is not going to give up its' nuclear program for anything other than a perceived existential threat.
    Iran made a huge gesture in 2003 to the US. That anybody in their right mind would have taken and Bush ignored it. Called the "Grand Bargain". Iran was offering the kitchen sink. Everything for stopping support of Hamas, pushing Hezbollah into a political org and accepting the "Two State" solution which all of the US's Middle Eastern allies held and granting 100% access. All Iran wanted was civilian tech and an formal relationship. When that was nixed Iran had only one option after Iraq. That was to try and get their hands on a nuke and was only confirmed as the right answer after North Korea tested and flaunted that premise.

    US-Iranian relations should have been opened up in 2003 publicly and directly instead of relying on the Swiss. Much like US relations with China opened up during Nixon admin and that didn't require a regime change nor China recognizing Taiwan. Rather it was just a mutual exchange based on trade. It's worked out well for the last 30 years for both parties.

    Now, I don't know what Obama and Kerry are playing at. But I wouldn't be surprised if it's close to the Grand Bargain proposed in 2003.
    Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin to slit throats. It is inaccurate to say that I hate everything. I am strongly in favor of common sense, common honesty, and common decency. This makes me forever ineligible for public office. H.L Mencken

  7. #377
    Guru
    brothern's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    3,175
    Blog Entries
    8

    Re: US, Iran nuclear deal spurs bipartisan concern in Congress

    I've said this before. We've been more far more successful in "Americanizing" other nations through trade and Hollywood than just about anything else. I'm actually encouraged by this new tactic. The Iranians have been isolated from the rest of the world (except the Russians) for almost four decades. That's almost two generations. Release the flood gates against Western culture.
    Help fight Zika, TB, HIV/AIDs and water pollution by donating your CPU's excess processing time to scientific research.
    A self-serving billionaire engaging in historically massive personal corruption #NotMyPresident

  8. #378
    Libertarian socialist

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Staffs, England
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    6,730

    Re: BREAKING NEWS: Iran, 6 world powers reach deal on Iranian nuclear program

    Quote Originally Posted by Slyhunter View Post
    You ever hear of a dirty bomb? They don't need weapons grade uranium for that.
    Then why have they not done that allready? , they have had the potential to do this since before the revolution. And a dirty bomb is hardly a 'nuke'.

  9. #379
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,418

    Re: BREAKING NEWS: Iran, 6 world powers reach deal on Iranian nuclear program

    Quote Originally Posted by austrianecon View Post
    Of course. Nassir had to. It was a political move at the end of the war. But the US did do spy plane fly overs and some how that intel got to the Israelis. And there were US ships force shipping lanes open for Israeli vessels.
    None of that evet happened.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  10. #380
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,107

    Re: BREAKING NEWS: Iran, 6 world powers reach deal on Iranian nuclear program

    Quote Originally Posted by austrianecon View Post
    Who runs the HUMINT in the middle east? Starts with an M ends with a D.. Mossad.
    They absolutely do quite a lot - which is one of many reasons why they are such an important intelligence partner. But they are hardly the only player involved.

    So now you don't dispute it?
    I never did - what I did point out (and still do) is that the evidence upon which we built our case was not FGI ISR in origin, but FIVEEYES or NOFORN. The Israelis (as your own source states) certainly confirmed our assessments of the Assad regime, which puts them in the exact same bucket as the Germans, the French, and the Russians.

    Yes, it's called confirmation bias. Israel knew the intel was wrong, could have corrected it and the US and UK (Australia as well) could avoided invading Iraq and finding absolutely nothing claimed in the conformation bias. But no, Israel acted in it's own selfish interest instead of the interest of it's ally. Like I said.. I will NEVER EVER trust Israeli intel after Iraq. Just like I don't trust Israeli intel the US is using to justify pressure on Syria and Iran.. neither are US's self interest as of now.
    Dude. The Israelis were hardly any kind of a tipping point. The intelligence that the U.S. used to justify their decision making did not come from them - at most you could make an argument that the Israelis had an indirect effect of increasing the levels of surety that the IC gave.... but you would need to really be able to back that up. If you want to get upset about intel due to Iraq, you need to be upset at the CIA, the DIA, the French, the Germans, the British....

    In order to set a bar that states "if a country stated X prior to our invasion of Iraq, their intel can no longer be trusted", you are going to have to set a bar that knocks over pretty much every ally we have. I think only the INR is left to you.

    If you don't like Israel that's your call. But you want to talk "confirmation bias"? Take a look at your own discordant reactions. The Germans are the ones that actually gave us Curveball's intel, and you aren't freaking out about them. The British are the ones that co-authored quite alot of what we put out to the world, and you're not pissed off about them. You are just freaking out about Israel because... because it came to the exact same conclusion that every other Western Intelligence Service did - that Saddam had maintained WMD production capacity.

    If you want an excellent (and fairly short, though meaty) breakdown, you might try Why Intelligence Fails, by a guy named Jervis. He was the guy the CIA brought in to do the Post-Mortem on the 1979 failure to anticipate the Iranian revolution, and the book focuses on both cases.

    Curveball 's story was exactly what Mossad told the UN inspectors in 1994.
    So can you demonstrate that A) the Israelis knew he was making it up and that B) they, not the Germans, were the ones that passed him along?

    And that's the problem you fail to understand. Having MEK (a terrorist group) do the work with Mossad help only confirms the position Iran has been telling the world for the last 30 years.
    That they are constantly under threat from invasion by the US and therefore need to become regional hegemon and reestablish the old Persian Empire as a zone of influence? Yeah. If the Israelis are working with the MEK that totally justifies all that.

    It also makes Iran victims of terrorism. It's a huge double standard. One I don't accept. You either fighting to get rid of all terrorism or you aren't fighting terror, rather you are selective hypocrites trying to justify a larger objective which nobody would support.
    What is your opinion of our alliance with Stalin to win WWII? Go pick a war - we've used the lesser evil to face off against the worser evil. Hell, that's half of what foreign policy is. Working for the lesser evil. As for the MEK.... well, let's just say that when I compare the MEK to Hezbollah, Qods, and all the rest, I'm not overly morally aghast about the ramifications of the Israelis using them to avoid having to bomb the Iranian nuclear program.

    As for me, I'm not worried about terrorism as an opponent - it's a strategy, not an opponent. The opponent is Violent Political Islam, and you've got to deal with the Theocracy in Iran just as assuredly as you've got to deal with the Wahhabists in the Sunni areas.

Page 38 of 53 FirstFirst ... 28363738394048 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •