• 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.
ecofarm said:
Your position is that Israel is doomed to be nuked by Iran? That's stupid.
Click to expand...
You can't prevent any group (terrorist group) like Hezbollah from getting nuclear material. You can literally bomb Iran into glass and it won't chance the risk Israel still has.
 
austrianecon said:
You can't prevent any group (terrorist group) like Hezbollah from getting nuclear material. You can literally bomb Iran into glass and it won't chance the risk Israel still has.
Click to expand...

Of course it would change the risk. The Iranian terrorist regime openly and directly supports Hamas and Hez. The greatest risk to Israel will have been eliminated.

We might note, no one wants to bomb Iran into glass.
 
American said:
True, but people of the ME seem to be very treacherous, and sometimes I worry that people like Kerry are too eager to claim victory by making foolish concessions. Reagan adopted a Russian saying, "Trust but verify". Never completely trust these bastards, because they've seen the North Koreans get away with things.
Click to expand...
Frankly, I don't get the impression they take this negotiating bit seriously. Or the US for that matter.
 
ecofarm said:
Of course it would change the risk. The Iranian terrorist regime openly and directly supports Hamas and Hez. The greatest risk to Israel will have been eliminated.

We might note, no one wants to bomb Iran into glass.
Click to expand...
No one except those equally as nutty.
 
ecofarm said:
Of course it would change the risk. The Iranian terrorist regime openly and directly supports Hamas and Hez. The greatest risk to Israel will have been eliminated.

We might note, no one wants to bomb Iran into glass.
Click to expand...


No, it would not change the risk. For every action there is a reaction. Bombing Iran for whatever reason will spring more groups who will seek the ability to use a nuke. Iran left alone is more stable then creating 20 or 30 groups seeking nuclear material on the black market.

Think Iraq post-invasion.
 
austrianecon said:
No, it would not change the risk. For every action there is a reaction. Bombing Iran for whatever reason will spring more groups who will seek the ability to use a nuke.
Click to expand...

Iran has thousands of centrifuges enriching uranium. Iran has major oil reserves. Iran openly and directly supports Hamas and Hez. If Iran ceased to exist (as you propose) or otherwise ceased enriching and support of Hamas and Hez, the number one threat to Israel will have been eliminated. To presume that 20 (or 30!) more Irans will spring up is utter nonsense. One could bring BS fantasy future as a counter to any proposed change - it means nothing and, in your case, is particularly disconnected from real world possibilities.

Iran left alone is more stable then creating 20 or 30 groups seeking nuclear material on the black market.
Click to expand...

Iran left alone is the greatest threat to regional and global stability the world has ever seen. No nukes for Iran, the entire Western world agrees.
 
Last edited:
ecofarm said:
Iran has thousands of centrifuges enriching uranium. Iran has major oil reserves. Iran openly and directly supports Hamas and Hez. If Iran ceased to exist (as you propose) or otherwise ceased enriching and support of Hamas and Hez, the number one threat to Israel will have been eliminated. To presume that 20 (or 30!) more Irans will spring up is utter nonsense. One could bring BS fantasy future as a counter to any proposed change - it means nothing and, in your case, is particularly disconnected from real world possibilities.



Iran left alone is the greatest threat to regional and global stability the world has ever seen. No nukes for Iran, the entire Western world agrees.
Click to expand...
Seems like we aren't doing much about it though.
 
apdst said:
That's all fine and good, unless your opponent sees war as a first resort.
Click to expand...

Unfounded fear. It seems to be ruling you.
 
The Mark said:
Seems like we aren't doing much about it though.
Click to expand...

I think we're doing pretty well. I'd prefer a diplomatic solution to invasion and nation building. If the Iranian regime is willing to play ball, we should do everything in our power to push them towards development. War should only be a last resort and only in the most dire circumstances. The deal Obama brokered is being monitored closely and I think it's fine to give it a chance and see if this can be resolved peacefully.
 
Cardinal said:
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?
Click to expand...

Seeing how these righties are speculating about us going to war with Iran or Israel going to war with Iran... I'll speculate. I believe there is going to be a massive change in Iran soon where the split is with the President and the people on one side and the ruling mullahs on the other side. And the people will win. I don't think it will be a bloody revolution or anything like that. I just think the mullah's are about to be done with. They will be ousted from political power. Especially if they try to make hay against the U.S. You heard it here first.

It all depends on what side the Iranian military goes with. The President? Or the mullahs? I'm thinking the Iranian military will choose to back the one who won't get them killed going to war with the world's preeminent military superpower.
 
Last edited:
ecofarm said:
I think we're doing pretty well. I'd prefer a diplomatic solution to invasion and nation building. If the Iranian regime is willing to play ball, we should do everything in our power to push them towards development. War should only be a last resort and only in the most dire circumstances. The deal Obama brokered is being monitored closely and I think it's fine to give it a chance and see if this can be resolved peacefully.
Click to expand...
Well, yes. It just doesn't seem as if many countries are willing to deal with what happens if Iran DOESN'T play ball. Possibly an incorrect impression though.
 
ecofarm said:
Iran has thousands of centrifuges enriching uranium. Iran has major oil reserves. Iran openly and directly supports Hamas and Hez. If Iran ceased to exist (as you propose) or otherwise ceased enriching and support of Hamas and Hez, the number one threat to Israel will have been eliminated. To presume that 20 (or 30!) more Irans will spring up is utter nonsense. One could bring BS fantasy future as a counter to any proposed change - it means nothing and, in your case, is particularly disconnected from real world possibilities.
Click to expand...

Let me walk you through this.

1) Knock off Iran. 2) Iran's nuclear material goes missing. 3) Can't track missing material. 4) Groups pop up in Syria, ex-Iranian military, Iraq, Egypt, Libya or wherever. 5) These groups get funding from some Oil country who is a "ally". 6) $$$ = nuclear material. 7) Game over.

So explain to me oh wise one.. how is that not creating equal risk? Having a central authority in control (Iranian Government) we know who to listen to and who to spy on. It's much much harder tracking those in the dark when you don't know who they are. It's not like a group (terrorist) flat out says these members are in charge of our nuclear program. On the other hand... our years of spying on Iran (and Israels) gives us about 90% idea on what's going on there. Rather know what's going on, then knowing **** all and then bam! We have another "9/11".

ecofarm said:
Iran left alone is the greatest threat to regional and global stability the world has ever seen. No nukes for Iran, the entire Western world agrees.
Click to expand...

Yep, so much so American companies, German Companies, French Companies, British Companies and whoever the hell else sold Nuclear Tech to Iran and has violate sanctions all the time. We are so "tough" and agree all so much.;)
 
Last edited:
The Mark said:
Well, yes. It just doesn't seem as if many countries are willing to deal with what happens if Iran DOESN'T play ball. Possibly an incorrect impression though.
Click to expand...

Your impression might be correct, to the effect that various levels of commitment have been expressed. Still, I think Obama's current course of action will strengthen a coalition of the willing should such a need arise. It's good that Obama is doing what he can to illustrate US willingness to negotiate and pursue a peaceful resolution.
 
austrianecon said:
Let me walk you through this.

1) Knock off Iran. 2) Iran's nuclear material goes missing. 3) Can't track missing material. 4) Groups pop up in Syria, ex-Iranian military, Iraq, Egypt, Libya or wherever. 5) These groups get funding from some Oil country who is a "ally". 6) $$$ = nuclear material. 7) Game over.
Click to expand...

You said Iran turns to glass. There's no nuclear material to go missing.


Yep, so much so American companies, German Companies, French Companies, British Companies and whoever the hell else sold Nuclear Tech to Iran and has violate sanctions all the time.
Click to expand...

Citation? I think you're just making this up.
 
ecofarm said:
You said Iran turns to glass. There's no nuclear material to go missing.
Click to expand...

Nuclear material doesn't just disappear by bombing to the stone age.. that whole area becomes nuclear material. It's all radioactive.
 
austrianecon said:
Nuclear material doesn't just disappear by bombing to the stone age.. that whole area becomes nuclear material. It's all radioactive.
Click to expand...

Now you're just being silly.
 
Can anyone think of anything in our historical relationship with Iran that would cause them to trust us for a single second?

I can come up with several reasons why they should not trust us at all.
 
ecofarm said:
Now you're just being silly.
Click to expand...
I suppose you could make a really poor dirty bomb out of radioactive rubble? Be damned unwieldy though.
 
The Mark said:
Frankly, I don't get the impression they take this negotiating bit seriously. Or the US for that matter.
Click to expand...

Maybe an H-bomb on Tehran would change their level of serious. I know it sounds worse than insane, but I wouldn't get to upset we set off about 10 of those over there. Frankly I'm tired of hearing from those idiots. They have been killing their own people for thousands of years.
 
American said:
Maybe an H-bomb on Tehran would change their level of serious. I know it sounds worse than insane, but I wouldn't get to upset we set off about 10 of those over there. Frankly I'm tired of hearing from those idiots. They have been killing their own people for thousands of years.
Click to expand...

Drunken callousness will get us nowhere.
 
American said:
You don't go negotiating with those people with a Western mindset.
Click to expand...

Negotiating will strengthen the coalition of the willing should such be necessary.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom