• 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!

US-led nuke negotiators allowed inspections loopholes for Iran

Mycroft said:
Oh? In your pathetic, sarcastic way, is it your contention that the UN prevented Saddam from acquiring nukes?

Perhaps that's why you think the UN can prevent Iran from acquiring nukes as well.
Click to expand...

Sarcastic? Yes. Pathetic? No. Did they prevent Saddam from having nukes? Looks that way to me. He didn't have them, and no doubt would have liked to have had them . Yes, U.N. inspectors can make it darned difficult to have a successful nuclear program.
 
humbolt said:
It doesn't matter what I think. It does matter what Iran thinks, and they think that testing such missiles is great regardless the west's opinion. They don't give a damn what our constructive aspirations might be. If that isn't clear yet for some, it will become clear in time.
Click to expand...

It also matters what is written in the agreement.

Of course the Iranian government doesn't care what our aspirations may be. They do care about getting their money back, of course. Since their most powerful enemy no longer is a threat to them, they're willing to give up their nuclear ambitions to get it back.
 
Dittohead not! said:
It also matters what is written in the agreement.

Of course the Iranian government doesn't care what our aspirations may be. They do care about getting their money back, of course. Since their most powerful enemy no longer is a threat to them, they're willing to give up their nuclear ambitions to get it back.
Click to expand...

They've given up nothing in my view. Delayed some things perhaps, but their objectives remain the same, and they've given every sign that they are pursuing them regardless of an agreement. We are ostensibly working toward a stable and secure ME with nations maintaining their individual sovereignty. Iran's objectives are decidedly different, and they've stated exactly that.
 
humbolt said:
They've given up nothing in my view. Delayed some things perhaps, but their objectives remain the same, and they've given every sign that they are pursuing them regardless of an agreement. We are ostensibly working toward a stable and secure ME with nations maintaining their individual sovereignty. Iran's objectives are decidedly different, and they've stated exactly that.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure just what that means. Is it Iran's objective to take over the rest of the Middle East, then? Or is it their objective to continue having an unstable Middle East?
 
natsb said:
I say we thank Obama. His continual effort to dethrone Carter as the worst President ever may prove to be successful.
Click to expand...

Carter will always have a place in my heart. He allowed for the people to home brew beer legally. It was a great move for freedom.
 
Dittohead not! said:
Sarcastic? Yes. Pathetic? No. Did they prevent Saddam from having nukes? Looks that way to me. He didn't have them, and no doubt would have liked to have had them . Yes, U.N. inspectors can make it darned difficult to have a successful nuclear program.
Click to expand...

No...it wasn't the UN that prevented Iraq from getting nukes. It was getting knocked on their ass two times by Americans.
 
Dittohead not! said:
I'm not sure just what that means. Is it Iran's objective to take over the rest of the Middle East, then? Or is it their objective to continue having an unstable Middle East?
Click to expand...

Iran's objective is to expand their influence throughout the ME, and eventually beyond. No, it's not my imagination. It's what they say their objectives are. I believe them, and not without foundation. Their actions demonstrate that they fully intend to achieve their objectives regardless of any agreement with any western nation. They have already demonstrated that they'll exploit any regional instability to expand their influence. The nature of the Iranian regime should make such events very troubling.
 
Dittohead not! said:
It also matters what is written in the agreement.

Of course the Iranian government doesn't care what our aspirations may be. They do care about getting their money back, of course. Since their most powerful enemy no longer is a threat to them, they're willing to give up their nuclear ambitions to get it back.
Click to expand...

Well, guess what...

Iran got their money.

What incentive do they have now to pretending to follow that useless agreement?
 
Mycroft said:
No...it wasn't the UN that prevented Iraq from getting nukes. It was getting knocked on their ass two times by Americans.
Click to expand...

That's more like what inspired them to want nukes in the first place.
 
Dittohead not! said:
Re application of sanctions.
Click to expand...

Not likely to happen unless we get more hardline leaders in more countries. Especially if you are counting on UN sanctions.
 
Mycroft said:
Not likely to happen unless we get more hardline leaders in more countries. Especially if you are counting on UN sanctions.
Click to expand...

The leaders that count are the presidents' or prime ministers and congresses/parliaments of Britain, France, Russia, China, the US and Germany. So, you don't think any of the signatory countries have strong leadership?
 
Dittohead not! said:
The leaders that count are the presidents' or prime ministers and congresses/parliaments of Britain, France, Russia, China, the US and Germany. So, you don't think any of the signatory countries have strong leadership?
Click to expand...

Russia for one will veto any hint of returning sanctions....Face it Ditto, Obama was as the world knows, the utter weakest failure, and they took full advantage of that fact.
 
j-mac said:
Russia for one will veto any hint of returning sanctions....Face it Ditto, Obama was as the world knows, the utter weakest failure, and they took full advantage of that fact.
Click to expand...

Obama is leading Russia now? Who knew!

What makes you think Russia wants Iran to have a nuke?
 
Dittohead not! said:
It's playing dumb to think that Russia wants Iran to have a nuke.
Click to expand...

I think Iran and Russia are colluding to stick it to us, and it is the "dumb" thinking just like the Russian 'reset' to think that Russia won't aid Iran in their quest to obtain Nukes if it runs counter to what we want....Obama and company are weak, and Russia, and Iran are exploiting that....
 
j-mac said:
I think Iran and Russia are colluding to stick it to us, and it is the "dumb" thinking just like the Russian 'reset' to think that Russia won't aid Iran in their quest to obtain Nukes if it runs counter to what we want....Obama and company are weak, and Russia, and Iran are exploiting that....
Click to expand...

Why?
Why would Putin want Iran to have a nuke? If he did want them to have a nuke, he could easily have given them one, or given them the technology. Instead, he signed the nuclear agreement to keep them from getting one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom