• 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!

Britain says no Iran deal 'better than a bad deal'

Simpleχity;1064764096 said:
Britain says no Iran deal 'better than a bad deal'



Agreed. No deal is indeed preferable to a bad deal. Two days remain until the 30 June deadline. My greatest fears remain red-line concessions to Tehran, and a final product that is laced with language deficiency and inexactitude.

Obama extended the deadline again, he is begging Iran to take the deal full of goodies like money and technology, he wants to help them. What a guy! He is so nice...
 
..... and do what?

Continue with isolation and bottom up punishments? (What is the alternative, as a bad deal where Iran gets all they want does nothing for us.)
 
Simpleχity;1064764096 said:
Britain says no Iran deal 'better than a bad deal'



Agreed. No deal is indeed preferable to a bad deal. Two days remain until the 30 June deadline. My greatest fears remain red-line concessions to Tehran, and a final product that is laced with language deficiency and inexactitude.

It seems they wont meet the deadline: Nuclear talks seem to miss June 30 deadline
They say it will only be a couple deals past the June 30th deadline will either a deal or no final deal will be announced. Im gonna keep my fingers crossed for a deal.
 
Britain says no Iran deal 'better than a bad deal'

really?

then there will be two results:
1. continued sanctions; and
2. continued nuclear development without the west having an opportunity to curb/monitor those developments*

*unless the west proposes to go to war. are we willing to incur the very substantial costs of a war in iran, recognizing that anything but a toppling of the government will only delay the development of a nuclear capacity ... if iran truly seeks that objective. a war would assure it

do we want a proxy war with the russians in the background, supplying arms and intelligence ... and a nuclear umbrella to iran? especially when the iranians are very pro-western and well educated with respect to the balance of the region. why push them into putin's sphere of influence

such a war would also drive up the price of oil. that would not be a good thing for a fragile world economy on the mend

let's examine the house of saud's self interests. that sunni state certainly does not want a shiite adversary to acquire nuclear weapons capacity. it would have to do the same ... would we then oppose such a development?
and certainly, during this time of surplus oil on the international market, the saudis must oppose the prospect that the international embargo against iran would be ended, allowing freshly available iranian oil to push the price of oil even lower, while also acquiring a significant portion of saudi arabia's market share

why would iran want nuclear arms? to establish parity with an always threatening nuclear equipped israel. require israel to relinquish its nuclear arsenal and the justification for iran's nuclear weapons development evaporates. of course, israel enjoys its present hegemony in the region and will not willingly relinquish it. only the USA has the means to effect that change. that is the negotiation we should now be pursuing

Military Strike Analysis | Iran Intelligence

Iran Military Strength
 
Unfortunately, Britain is probably right. Although, ISIS is certainly the primary concern in the Middle East right now, and having a strong anti-ISIS coalition certainly should be the top priority. It concerns me that a rift in Iranian relations could get in the way of that.
 
Iran's foreign minister Javad Zarif has left Vienna to consult with Iran's ruling clerics in Tehran. There is leeway to extend the negotiations to July 9, but anything beyond this doubles the amount of time (from 30 days to 60 days) the US Congress has to examine any proposed agreement.

The critical core concerns remain -

- breakout time
- sanctions relief schedule
- sanctions "snap back" procedures
- intrusive inspections on demand
- a thorough IAEA examination of ballistics and warhead research (PMDs)
- interviewing Iranian scientists and technicians
- a freeze on HEU nuclear research
- designated centrifuge model allowed
- diluting/exporting highly enriched uranium stocks
- reprocessing of spent reactor fissile materials
 
Simpleχity;1064767835 said:
Iran's foreign minister Javad Zarif has left Vienna to consult with Iran's ruling clerics in Tehran. There is leeway to extend the negotiations to July 9, but anything beyond this doubles the amount of time (from 30 days to 60 days) the US Congress has to examine any proposed agreement.

The critical core concerns remain -

- breakout time
- sanctions relief schedule
- sanctions "snap back" procedures
- intrusive inspections on demand
- a thorough IAEA examination of ballistics and warhead research (PMDs)
- interviewing Iranian scientists and technicians
- a freeze on HEU nuclear research
- designated centrifuge model allowed
- diluting/exporting highly enriched uranium stocks
- reprocessing of spent reactor fissile materials



Mornin' Simplexity. :2wave: What was the one Nuke Expert saying? Something to the effect that Iran is about a couple of months to break out already.

Another deadline missed. Team BO must want the slowwalk to do most of the talking. Despite what Iran has said.
 
I would go further. I think no deal is better than any deal at all. We shouldn't be negotiating anything. We should be explaining to Iran what it needs to do to have us remove the sanctions. Then we should wait until they comply and prove the compliance. I would also harden the sanctions to provide added incentive. I don't understand the concept of unnecessary negotiations with enemies. We have no advantage in lifting sanctions. When Iran provides such an advantage, then we should lift them.
 
Possible military aspects of Iran's atomic past

Possible Military Dimension (PMD) questions raised by the IAEA, but never responded to by Iran. It is vital that the IAEA understand these aspects of the Iranian nuclear program(s).


- Using cover companies for the procurement of dual-use equipment and material usable in a nuclear bomb but with civilian applications as well. This includes high-speed electronic switches, high-speed cameras and radiation measurement equipment.

- The acquisition of nuclear material, for example a uranium source for enrichment, and efforts to conceal activities involving such material.

- Possession of documents detailing how to convert uranium ore into metal and how to produce hemispherical enriched uranium metallic components which can be used in a bomb.

- The development of exploding bridge wire detonators, whose explosion times can be set to a very high degree of precision. Such precision detonators are crucial for timing the explosion of a nuclear weapon. Iran has said it needed such technology for its oil sector, according to diplomats, who also say there is no peaceful application for the degree of precision of this kind of detonator.

- Design information for a "multi-point initiation system," technology to synchronize detonators used in some atomic bombs.

- Hydrodynamic experiments to assess how specific materials react under high pressure as in a nuclear blast. According to some information given to the IAEA by member states, an explosives chamber for such experiments might have been located at the Parchin complex near Tehran, a military site the agency has repeatedly urged Iran to grant it access to.

- Calculations on neutron behavior that the IAEA has said has no clear civilian application. Iran has provided some fresh information on these calculations in recent weeks, but not enough to allow a breakthrough in the probe.

- Neutron initiator technology which the IAEA has said "could produce a burst of neutrons suitable for initiating a fission chain reaction," as would be needed for an atomic bomb detonation.

- Tests to see whether high-tech detonators worked when triggered remotely from a long distance, also potentially relevant to a nuclear weapon.

- Engineering studies into missile payloads and their behavior when launched. The IAEA has described these studies as "highly relevant to a nuclear weapon program."

- Work on the development of a firing system that would enable a missile payload to explode both in the air or upon impact.

- Indications that all the above mentioned areas were organized by a structured management and command chain under the Ministry of Defense Armed Forces Logistics (MODAFL).


Note: For the IAEA's full technical annex on these issues, click on:
Implementation of the NPT Safeguards Agreement and relevant provisions of Security Council resolutions in the Islamic Republic of Iran
 
Obama extended the deadline again, he is begging Iran to take the deal full of goodies like money and technology, he wants to help them. What a guy! He is so nice...

Obama is legacy hunting. Good deal? Bad deal? No matter! It's the legacy of a deal that motivates him.
 
Let Israel bomb them into the stone age.

....would you like to run with that thought and tell us how the rest of the Arab world responds to that move or Iran, with its Army of 400,000 men, for that matter....
 
....would you like to run with that thought and tell us how the rest of the Arab world responds to that move or Iran, with its Army of 400,000 men, for that matter....


Well the some of that.....rest of the Arab World. Has offered assistance to Israel, if they decide to make that move.

Oh and Iran and their 400k Army, what can they do about it, besides not much!
 
Let Israel bomb them into the stone age.

that nuclear ability of a warlike israel is the very reason iran - justifiably - believes it needs nukes, too
 
....would you like to run with that thought and tell us how the rest of the Arab world responds to that move or Iran, with its Army of 400,000 men, for that matter....

I didn't know Iran had that big of an army.

Why don't they use it to go and get rid of ISIS?
 
Obama is legacy hunting. Good deal? Bad deal? No matter! It's the legacy of a deal that motivates him.

Yeah, he wants to make his legacy even worse than what it is now. Even Carter says that 0bama is a dumb*ss.

Legacy first and the hell with this country and us.
 
Yeah, he wants to make his legacy even worse than what it is now. Even Carter says that 0bama is a dumb*ss.

Legacy first and the hell with this country and us.


cite please
 
....would you like to run with that thought and tell us how the rest of the Arab world responds to that move or Iran, with its Army of 400,000 men, for that matter....

Publicly they would condemn it. Privately with the exception of Syria, most of them would express great relief.
 
that nuclear ability of a warlike israel is the very reason iran - justifiably - believes it needs nukes, too

You do not have the foggiest clue about the middle east.
 
Yeah, he wants to make his legacy even worse than what it is now. Even Carter says that 0bama is a dumb*ss.

Legacy first and the hell with this country and us.

Obama is the junior varsity.
 
Obama's a fool. Most people with any understanding of the gangsters who run Iran know that talking and talking is exactly what Iran wants. As long as Obama's talking then Iran keeps building. Obama's a fool.
 
The President? Not sure that there is any deal he would find unacceptable. Same is true of most democrats in congress.

He's all about his legacy, the ****ing moron sends an amateur walking robot like Lurch out to Iran, who reams his ass and sends him home.
 
You do not have the foggiest clue about the middle east.

just another unsubstantiated opinion from you

try something different. offer us something factual and pertinent when discussing this topic
 
Back
Top Bottom