• 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!

Iranians See Victory, Hope for New Image in Nuclear Agreement

That's fine, but let's be honest here, given the country's aggressive support for terrorism, and expanionsist pan-islamic goals, oppressive nature, and history of hostility towards UN inspectors.. That along with even negotiating anything other than opene and unmolested access for inspectors. That there goal is a nuclear weapon.
I've never said or thought differently. Intrusive inspections vis-a-vis Iran are a must and I consider this facet non-negotiable.

If you think we should let aggressive, violent, fascists regimes get nuclear weapons, then, you are on the right side of history my friend.
Personally, I would rather that no one have them. But that is not about to happen anytime soon so I insist that all 189 NPT nations honor their signed commitments.
 
Where did he suggest Iran should be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons, can you read? The P5+1 and all the rest of us want a non nuclear weapons powered Iran! Period. Toward that end, Diplomacy first and military action last! We're still in the diplomacy stage.


Your naivety and trust of a theocratic fascist regime, is intriguing. Do go on.
 
Simpleχity;1064500431 said:
I've never said or thought differently. Intrusive inspections vis-a-vis Iran are a must and I consider this facet non-negotiable.

We all know, by looking at history, ho well that works/.

Personally, I would rather that no one have them. But that is not about to happen anytime soon so I insist that all 189 NPT nations honor their signed commitments.


this is non responsive to my point, other than seemingly making excuses for iran.
 
Where did he suggest Iran should be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons, can you read? The P5+1 and all the rest of us want a non nuclear weapons powered Iran! Period. Toward that end, Diplomacy first and military action last! We're still in the diplomacy stage.

We have been in the diplomacy stage forever, all the while Iran is closer to having their nukes. The only reason we are at this point with Iran is because of sanctions and that is all going away with Iran agreeing to nothing. Then hundreds of billions flow back into Iran which will really boost their sorted behavior and their march to Nukes. Once the sanctions are gone, Iran is home free.
 
We all know, by looking at history, ho well that works/.
So far it has worked out well for 45 years. Only 1 signatory nation of 190 (NK withdrew in 2003) has acquired nuclear weapons.

this is non responsive to my point, other than seemingly making excuses for iran.
You have no point other than - no to anything - which isn't feasible.
 
Right, you trust Iran will let the inspectors have open access, you trust Iran is not looking to build a bomb, for starters.

You seem to be operating under the idea that Iran is not capable of acting in good faith. If that's the case, then isn't any negotiation doomed to fail? And if THAT'S the case, doesn't that pretty much reduce the options for a nuke-free Iran down to:

A. Crushing sanctions that would only accelerate Iran's belligerence; and/or
B. A pre-emptive military action?
 
Why do you guys keep talking about trust. Nobody is going to trust anybody.

You mean the inspectors are going to have free and immediate access anytime, anywhere they want to show up. Anytime anywhere...........
 
You seem to be operating under the idea that Iran is not capable of acting in good faith. If that's the case, then isn't any negotiation doomed to fail? And if THAT'S the case, doesn't that pretty much reduce the options for a nuke-free Iran down to:

A. Crushing sanctions that would only accelerate Iran's belligerence; and/or
B. A pre-emptive military action?

Generally. If I announce my intent to kill you and start to pull out a gun, usually your options are limited to A) fight back or B) try to run away. The third option wherein you try to help me understand that my rage is just mis-directed anger at my father, and get me to seek counseling for my alcoholism and drug abuse isn't whatcha might call "plausible".
 
You mean the inspectors are going to have free and immediate access anytime, anywhere they want to show up. Anytime anywhere...........

Oh. Except not. Iran's already announced that, too. :roll:
 
Simpleχity;1064500457 said:
So far it has worked out well for 45 years. Only 1 signatory nation of 190 (NK withdrew in 2003) has acquired nuclear weapons.

nice slight of hand attempt.

Iran, as we were talking about have been less than honest, and have been hostile to inspectors.


You have no point other than - no to anything - which isn't feasible.


not really, but lets say ok, still better than giving them the stuff they want to build bombas. *shrug*
 
That means nothing. Iran is still insisting on immediate sanctions relief and continued use of centrifuges. Unless the US completely caves and goes back on everything they have said there will be no final agreement.

The appearance of progress is illusory. The hope for progress is naive beyond stupidity.

The US will cave. Obama will be hailed as once again the saviour of the world, and Iran will continue building the bomb.
 
You seem to be operating under the idea that Iran is not capable of acting in good faith. If that's the case, then isn't any negotiation doomed to fail? And if THAT'S the case, doesn't that pretty much reduce the options for a nuke-free Iran down to:

A. Crushing sanctions that would only accelerate Iran's belligerence; and/or
B. A pre-emptive military action?

Of course, are you willing to take Iran at their word, give it up.

That is why you have inspectors to insure they are living up to their word according to the agreement. However unless inspectors are going to have free and immediate access anytime, anywhere they want to show up, there really is no deal.
 
Of course, are you willing to take Iran at their word, give it up.

That is why you have inspectors to insure they are living up to their word according to the agreement. However unless inspectors are going to have free and immediate access anytime, anywhere they want to show up, there really is no deal.

Well, if they renege on allowing inspectors access, then obviously the agreement is void.
 
You seem to be operating under the idea that Iran is not capable of acting in good faith. If that's the case, then isn't any negotiation doomed to fail? And if THAT'S the case, doesn't that pretty much reduce the options for a nuke-free Iran down to:

A. Crushing sanctions that would only accelerate Iran's belligerence; and/or
B. A pre-emptive military action?



As recently as 2012, they were plotting to assasinate American officials.

As recently as 2011 we've seen IED's marked "made in Iran" killing people, and a few years before that, specifically Americans.


so, yeah, I don't want to give this oppressive religious fascist regime access to technology, that at minimum will give them dirty bomb materials.
 
As recently as 2012, they were plotting to assasinate American officials.

As recently as 2011 we've seen IED's marked "made in Iran" killing people, and a few years before that, specifically Americans.


so, yeah, I don't want to give this oppressive religious fascist regime access to technology, that at minimum will give them dirty bomb materials.

You did not answer my question. If any negotiations are doomed to fail, what is your suggestion?
 
Well, if they renege on allowing inspectors access, then obviously the agreement is void.

I'm talking about inspectors are going to have free and immediate access anytime, anywhere they want to show up, if not there really is no deal. Is that how you see it.
 
Ordinary Iranians are hoping this means an end to sanctions. The White House has repeatedly said that sanctions don't come off until the Iranians prove themselves trustworthy and capable of adhering to the agreement, which is never going to happen.

The continued use of centrifuges for things like medicine and science, not for nukes. And it's to be monitored by outside parties.

I don't understand how people can seriously be under the impression that we are safer with an Iran that has no direct supervision over their activities than an Iran that is doing everything in complete privacy. How would an arrangement like this not be completely and utterly better than the current situation?
 
You did not answer my question. If any negotiations are doomed to fail, what is your suggestion?

Get the national community to shut Iran off from everything. The sanctions is what got Iran to the table in the first place.
 
You did not answer my question. If any negotiations are doomed to fail, what is your suggestion?

Lift all sanctions of non-dual use, non-military material. Let the Iranian people get some economic growth going.

And then severely degrade their nuclear development capability.
 
You did not answer my question. If any negotiations are doomed to fail, what is your suggestion?




I would like for my country to not have economic or other relations with that government until free and democratic elections are held for one. Two, I would like for our country to take it's past actions into consideration of it's nuclear ambitions and protect WE the People form any threats this may cause...


Handing them technology hoping they become nice, is stupid policy.
 
Get the national community to shut Iran off from everything. The sanctions is what got Iran to the table in the first place.

Sanctions don't stop, they merely slow, development. And in an autocracy, sanctions don't hurt the leadership, they hurt the people. I don't think their reinstatement is going to get Iran to give up it's program.
 
Back
Top Bottom