• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Iranian official on nuke deal: 'We did not agree to dismantle anything'

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well, they haven't been at war with anybody in over 20 years, and they did agree to the deal that would stop their nuclear program, so yeah.

They specifically haven't. Their proxies have been waging war.
 
This is another example of the dangers of government operating in the dark. Politicians brokering deals in the dark is never a good idea, in my view.

Should be easy to solve, particularly with Obama heading "the most transparent administration in US history". Release the written agreement.
 
Probably just him appeasing hard line people in Iran.

That's what it looks like. There does seem to be a rather large discrepancy between what they do and what they scream in public.

Gee, I wonder who that sounds like?
 
What makes it obvious that they don't? Their refusal to halt nuke production, or sending naval cruise into the Atlantic?

Their nuke card is the one card they have. I honestly doubt they'd trade it away for nothing less than what they want in the lifting of sanctions.
 
The lower the IQ, the quicker one resorts to violence as a tool for conflict resolution.

Says the man who knows he will lose the fight.

The higher you think your intelligence is above the other guy the more you want to deal with the problem by routs which depend on intelligence.
 
Well, they haven't been at war with anybody in over 20 years, and they did agree to the deal that would stop their nuclear program, so yeah.

They fund Hezbollah, that killed Americans in the Khobar Towers bombing.
 
I don't, but why wouldn't they want to brag they reached agreement with the West if they could. They wanted the agreement didn't....to reduce sanctions. If they advertised they ****ed us over, why would then reduce sanctions?

I find it somewhat puzzling, and a little amusing, that no one seems to know yet just what they all agreed to! Didn't they put anything in writing? ..tsk..tsk..tsk Such carelessness!

Greetings, American. :2wave:
 
Iran on nuke deal: 'We did not agree to dismantle anything' - CNN.com


Israel was right. It looks like force is the only thing these ****ers respect. I predict there's going to be a war eventually. Obama either lied to us, or is a fool.


Obama fed us a bunch of hooey.

Not aware of any lying. And no revelations here.

This is the proposal that Kerry and crew agreed to. It didn't include dismantling of anything that i am aware of. Only that Iran would stop expanding the uranium processing.

In return the US would start lifting sanctions. But all the while those existing centifuges will just keep on spinning. All night. All day. Week after week after week.

Confess that it never seemed like great plan in the first place. Kerry is a bit of a doofus.....
 
Going to war has proven to be so effective in the past, right? Look at the outstanding success we had in Iraq and Afghanistan. I'm sure bombing a few hundred thousand more civilians and increasing hatred towards the U.S even more will do wonders for our credibility. We've gotta keep the military-industrial complex rolling in cash, too. God forbid we go a couple of decades without war.
 

Says the man who knows he will lose the fight.

The higher you think your intelligence is above the other guy the more you want to deal with the problem by routs which depend on intelligence.

Stated another way???
 
Obama fed us a bunch of hooey.

To be fair, I think Obama needed a distraction and Iran was all too willing to rope-a-dope Obama and Kerry. It's laughable as I called it as soon as it happened (I think DP search will confirm it). Iran knows all they need to do is delay and negotiate long enough to create the nuclear warhead - then they win.
 
Your quite the deal. You measure Iran's interest to run to war as a first resort, rather than last, by pointing to them sending a ship/ships into the Atlantic, when US ships are in most all waters!!

Iran supplied and trained insurgents in Iraq. Real peaceful country Iran is.
 
Going to war has proven to be so effective in the past, right? Look at the outstanding success we had in Iraq and Afghanistan. I'm sure bombing a few hundred thousand more civilians and increasing hatred towards the U.S even more will do wonders for our credibility. We've gotta keep the military-industrial complex rolling in cash, too. God forbid we go a couple of decades without war.

Iran supplied and trained insurgents in Iraq. Real peaceful country Iran is.

If Iran's having trained and supplied insurgents in Iraq demonstrates that they are not a peaceful nation, then the US having supplied and trained insurgents in Syria would demonstrate that the US is no peaceful nation either.
 
To be fair, I think Obama needed a distraction and Iran was all too willing to rope-a-dope Obama and Kerry. It's laughable as I called it as soon as it happened (I think DP search will confirm it). Iran knows all they need to do is delay and negotiate long enough to create the nuclear warhead - then they win.

If (IF!) Iran were to come up with a nuclear warhead, what exactly is it that they win, besides a little security that the other heavy hitters may think twice about hitting them?
 
If (IF!) Iran were to come up with a nuclear warhead, what exactly is it that they win, besides a little security that the other heavy hitters may think twice about hitting them?


It would give them the ability to keep Israeli security on high alert forever. That would kind of suck...
 
Going to war has proven to be so effective in the past, right? Look at the outstanding success we had in Iraq and Afghanistan. I'm sure bombing a few hundred thousand more civilians and increasing hatred towards the U.S even more will do wonders for our credibility. We've gotta keep the military-industrial complex rolling in cash, too. God forbid we go a couple of decades without war.

We were very successful in fighting WW2.
 
If (IF!) Iran were to come up with a nuclear warhead, what exactly is it that they win, besides a little security that the other heavy hitters may think twice about hitting them?

They get a place at the nuclear table and a virtual guarantee that the US nor any other western power would not be able to take military action against it for any reason. They also become the defacto leader in the region especially in the ME. They can no project power whereas before a nuclear weapon, they could try but the risk of backlash would be too high. They also would then be the power to equalize Israel in the region, as well as have the ability to by threat of force, get much more of what they would want or need.

It doesn't take much imagination to see the benefits does it? If there were people with baseball bats who are getting their way and you don't have a baseball bat, they get to push you around because you don't have a baseball bat. Get a baseball bat and now you won't get pushed around as easily as the threat of them getting injured is now higher than before.
 
It would give them the ability to keep Israeli security on high alert forever. That would kind of suck...

But given the fact that Israel already has nuclear weapons, its perfectly fine with you that Iran remain on high alert, forever?
 
They get a place at the nuclear table and a virtual guarantee that the US nor any other western power would not be able to take military action against it for any reason. They also become the defacto leader in the region especially in the ME. They can no project power whereas before a nuclear weapon, they could try but the risk of backlash would be too high. They also would then be the power to equalize Israel in the region, as well as have the ability to by threat of force, get much more of what they would want or need.

It doesn't take much imagination to see the benefits does it? If there were people with baseball bats who are getting their way and you don't have a baseball bat, they get to push you around because you don't have a baseball bat. Get a baseball bat and now you won't get pushed around as easily as the threat of them getting injured is now higher than before.

Ok, I'm thinking but not certain?? That we agree that it would make sense for Iran to want a nuclear weapon as a deterrent, which is pretty much the reason that others now have them. Nuclear weapons are a deterrent, not an option. As I've stated many times around here. Either everybody gets them, or nobody has them, and preferably, nobody has them.
 
I find it somewhat puzzling, and a little amusing, that no one seems to know yet just what they all agreed to! Didn't they put anything in writing? ..tsk..tsk..tsk Such carelessness!

Greetings, American. :2wave:

You have to vote for it before you know what's in it.
 
Eh, you just wanna see it that way. I'm all for any peaceful options on the table. A war should always be the last resort.

so Iran nukes you and your family..is that "the last resort"...?..

PS: Youre cute.. so I pray they dont.. you might be the only cute liberal girl in the USA...: )
 
But given the fact that Israel already has nuclear weapons, its perfectly fine with you that Iran remain on high alert, forever?

OMG.. has Israel ever threatened to wipe Iran offr the map? or any other country?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom