Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 25 of 25

Thread: U.S. Says Shipping Uranium Out of Iran Is Still Part of Possible Nuclear Deal

  1. #21
    Sage


    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    SW Virginia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:34 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    18,264

    Re: U.S. Says Shipping Uranium Out of Iran Is Still Part of Possible Nuclear Deal

    Quote Originally Posted by MMC View Post
    It appears BO is in an 11th hour crunch and is now considering to deal with Congress.....just so he wont be embarrassed or humiliated. He even tried to play hardball with Purple state Demos if they don't ride with him. Seems it isn't working like he thought. Thanks to some Demos that are tired of him putting himself before country and his own party members.



    As negotiations with Iran on a nuclear deal come down to the wire, the White House is ramping up a yearlong campaign to persuade lawmakers and the public to support an agreement. In recent days, officials have tried to neutralize skeptical Democrats by arguing that opposing President Barack Obama would empower the new Republican majority, according to people familiar with the discussions.

    White House officials have encouraged liberal groups to put U.S. lawmakers on the spot with the question: “Are you for solving this diplomatically or being forced…to war?” Ben Rhodes, one of Mr. Obama’s closest foreign-policy advisers, used those words at a January 2014 meeting with dozens of representatives from liberal political organizations, according to a transcript reviewed by The Wall Street Journal.....snip~

    White House to Senate Dems: If you oppose us on this terrible Iran deal, the GOP wins « Hot Air
    It's not an either/or proposition despite the administration's assertion that such is the case. By framing any deal with Iran in that fashion, they assure war. What the administration is essentially selling is a deal that gets the US out of any near term conflict, but increases drastically the possibility that regional nations will be deeply involved in countering the Iranian threat, and that escalation will invariably draw us into it. Furthermore, cutting the American public out of this effort is another demonstration of this administration's disdain for the public. There is no deal to be had, and the assertion that something exists that demonstrably doesn't is just another case of this administration selling a fantasy.

  2. #22
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    56,981

    Re: U.S. Says Shipping Uranium Out of Iran Is Still Part of Possible Nuclear Deal

    Quote Originally Posted by humbolt View Post
    It's not an either/or proposition despite the administration's assertion that such is the case. By framing any deal with Iran in that fashion, they assure war. What the administration is essentially selling is a deal that gets the US out of any near term conflict, but increases drastically the possibility that regional nations will be deeply involved in countering the Iranian threat, and that escalation will invariably draw us into it. Furthermore, cutting the American public out of this effort is another demonstration of this administration's disdain for the public. There is no deal to be had, and the assertion that something exists that demonstrably doesn't is just another case of this administration selling a fantasy.

    Mornin HB. Lets not forget Rhoades was one of the Screw ups with Benghazi and Libya.....but now who was doing all that fear mongering? Who was leaning on Purple state Demos?

  3. #23
    A Man Without A Country
    Mr. Invisible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    New Jersey
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    4,960
    Blog Entries
    71

    Re: U.S. Says Shipping Uranium Out of Iran Is Still Part of Possible Nuclear Deal

    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    From today's edition of The New York Times:



    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/31/wo...ear-talks.html

    That narrative has some problems and it may well be intended to mask fundamental differences in order to announce a framework deal albeit what increasingly likely appears to be a weak one. If one goes back to last year, one finds that a tentative arrangement involving the shipment of uranium to Russia had been reached. Moreover in the days and weeks that followed, none of the U.S. team had denied such an arrangement.

    With regard to the tentative agreement, the November 3, 2014 issue of The New York Times reported:

    Iran has tentatively agreed to ship much of its huge stockpile of uranium to Russia if it reaches a broader nuclear deal with the West, according to officials and diplomats involved in the negotiations, potentially a major breakthrough in talks that have until now been deadlocked...

    The chief American negotiator, Wendy R. Sherman, alluded to this possible solution to the uranium issue in a recent speech in which she said that “we have made impressive progress on issues that originally seemed intractable.” But Ms. Sherman, who on Monday was named acting deputy secretary of state, has refused to discuss any details of the role Russia could play, saying that negotiations, like mushrooms, “do best in the dark.” As a result, the officials and diplomats would discuss the talks only on the condition of anonymity.


    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/04/wo...ble-boost.html

    In sum, Iran's apparent reversal is a potentially major development that undermines the possibility of a credible agreement. The absence of such a provision is a substantive setback and describing its being incorporated in a final agreement as a "possibility" doesn't materially change the nature of the setback.
    There was no reversal as there was never an agreement to begin with. You quoted the Times as saying

    "Iran has tentatively agreed to ship much of its huge stockpile of uranium to Russia if it reaches a broader nuclear deal with the West[.]"

    A "broader nuclear deal" has yet to be reached.
    "And in the end, we were all just humans, drunk on the idea that love, only love, could heal our brokenness."

  4. #24
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,691

    Re: U.S. Says Shipping Uranium Out of Iran Is Still Part of Possible Nuclear Deal

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Invisible View Post
    There was no reversal as there was never an agreement to begin with. You quoted the Times as saying

    "Iran has tentatively agreed to ship much of its huge stockpile of uranium to Russia if it reaches a broader nuclear deal with the West[.]"

    A "broader nuclear deal" has yet to be reached.
    There almost certainly was a tentative agreement, an agreement in principle on the aspect of shipping the enriched uranium to Russia. That element would only be binding subject to a final agreement's being reached, as it would be one of the components of that agreement. That area of tentative agreement did not constitute a stand-alone agreement. Iran backed away from its earlier position, a position Washington did not contest at the time it was reported. Now, Washington is trying to put the best face on Iran's reversing its position, but if that position had never been credible from the start, Washington would have shot it down earlier. It didn't. Even if a final deal is reached, it appears that Iran will not be shipping the uranium to Russia.

    IMO, this new Iranian position should be a deal breaker as the alternatives would be far weaker. However, political expediency, among other factors, may yet lead to a final agreement absent a provision where the enriched uranium would be shipped out of Iran.

  5. #25
    A Man Without A Country
    Mr. Invisible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    New Jersey
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    4,960
    Blog Entries
    71

    Re: U.S. Says Shipping Uranium Out of Iran Is Still Part of Possible Nuclear Deal

    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    There almost certainly was a tentative agreement, an agreement in principle on the aspect of shipping the enriched uranium to Russia. That element would only be binding subject to a final agreement's being reached, as it would be one of the components of that agreement. That area of tentative agreement did not constitute a stand-alone agreement. Iran backed away from its earlier position, a position Washington did not contest at the time it was reported. Now, Washington is trying to put the best face on Iran's reversing its position, but if that position had never been credible from the start, Washington would have shot it down earlier. It didn't. Even if a final deal is reached, it appears that Iran will not be shipping the uranium to Russia.

    IMO, this new Iranian position should be a deal breaker as the alternatives would be far weaker. However, political expediency, among other factors, may yet lead to a final agreement absent a provision where the enriched uranium would be shipped out of Iran.
    Really, we're arguing semantics to an extent, however, I personally wouldn't call it a reversal. In this world, nothing is really finalized until it's on paper and signed.

    But I do hear where you are coming from.

    We should still continue the talks I would argue because if we don't it will only lead to more unease and worry. Let's just settle the deal now.
    "And in the end, we were all just humans, drunk on the idea that love, only love, could heal our brokenness."

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

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