• 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!

Iran's Khamenei says could accept fair nuclear compromise

ummm both the modern day problems in Iran and with Islamic radical militants/terrorists go back to terribly short-sighted and tragic decisions by 2 Republican Presidents.

You should try looking into some World History.....this way you can discover the problem began before Churchill opened up the M.E.
 
Last edited:
Iran was radicalised the moment the US using the CIA, covertly toppled the Iranian government in 1953. Then, arming Saddam Hussein who was at war with Iran was another nasty USFP in the Middle East. No president including and going forward from Mr. Carter is free of the guilt of radicalising portions of the Middle East.
 
No nation ever posed a direct significant threat to the US until they developed significant intercontinental ballistic missile capability. Believing that we should watch them enrich uranium for nuclear power and they will never construct weapons capable of turning Israel to glass or eventually go long range is the kind of short sighted and pro muslim thinking that I'd expect from the Obama administration. This is the way forward to mutually assured destruction.

Heya Sawdust. :2wave: The Iranians already stated there are no negotiations over Parchin. Which is why The EYEATOLDYA. Is talking about one side not getting all it wanted.
 
Then you should be aware the US is more concerned about Pakistan losing a nuke.
The levels of controls & fail safes Pakistan has on nukes.
The attacks on Nuke facilities in Pakistan.
That you have 4 differing tribal regions in Pakistan.
That Pakistan has been supportive of attacks on India, and in Afghanistan.
That Pakistan has caused more proliferation- N Korea- Iran, for starters.
That China laid the law down to Pakistan about shutting down Islamist's in order to receive aid.
Yep- Pakistan is more of a problem then Iran is.

Yep, said it myself. All the handwringing over Iran that hasn't been proven to have a nuclear problem, and yawns on the fact that Pakistan and Israel have them.
 
Yep, said it myself. All the handwringing over Iran that hasn't been proven to have a nuclear problem, and yawns on the fact that Pakistan and Israel have them.

Israel is not a problem. Pakistan is.
 
You correctly pointed out that MAD works, why don't you leave it at that?

Well, the Sunni are certainly upset and mad this last Decade. No doubt!

Which is why the Saud stated Iran gets their Nuke the Saud will have theirs and more.
 
No nation ever posed a direct significant threat to the US until they developed significant intercontinental ballistic missile capability. Believing that we should watch them enrich uranium for nuclear power and they will never construct weapons capable of turning Israel to glass or eventually go long range is the kind of short sighted and pro muslim thinking that I'd expect from the Obama administration. This is the way forward to mutually assured destruction.

Pro Muslim?????? Really? Expressing ones opinion that they don't think that Iran is a nuclear threat is pro Muslim. Come on man. Even if you could PROVE that Iran was a nuclear threat, he might be naive, but pro Muslim! That's ridiculous.
 
swing and a miss. try going back to 1953 . once you have learned that topic, you might read about later events such as the arming and training of the mujahadeen, etc. then we can even move on to other clusterf's like using iraq as a proxy against iran ... blah blah.

Ahh you got a Marx professor, it's okay, looking around and learning is hard. Continue feeling.
 
Well, the Sunni are certainly upset and mad this last Decade. No doubt!

Which is why the Saud stated Iran gets their Nuke the Saud will have theirs and more.

Hey, to be redundant here, my preference would be that nobody has nukes. I just don't see the hand wringing over Iran having them, which has not been proven, while being nonchalant about Israel and Pakistan having them. Which means essentially that the US facilitated it.
 
Ahh you got a Marx professor, it's okay, looking around and learning is hard. Continue feeling.

Marx new about the 1953 CIA coup, and Reagan's arming of the Iraqi military?
 
Iran was radicalised the moment the US using the CIA, covertly toppled the Iranian government in 1953. Then, arming Saddam Hussein who was at war with Iran was another nasty USFP in the Middle East. No president including and going forward from Mr. Carter is free of the guilt of radicalising portions of the Middle East.

Interesting theory. I guess that rests upon the idea that the ME would be a radical-free paradise without the big bad US around. Anything else you would like to blame the US for while you are here?
 
Is a nuclear Iran an existential threat to Israel?

Heya Janfu. :2wave: Yes it is.....without question.

Director of U.S. National Intelligence James Clapper testified on March 12, 2013, that Iran’s ballistic missiles were capable of delivering WMD.[149] According to some analysts, the liquid-fueled Shahab-3 missile and the solid-fueled Sejjil missile have the ability to carry a nuclear warhead.[150] Iran’s ballistic missile program is controlled by IRGC Air Force (AFAGIR), while Iran’s combat aircraft is under the command of the regular Iranian Air Force (IRIAF).[151]

Iranian Defense Minister Hossein Dehghan stated at a press conference on August 2014 that Iran’s missile capability issue was not included in the comprehensive talks with the P5+1 countries and "will by no means be negotiated with anyone".[156].....snip~

Comprehensive agreement on Iranian nuclear program - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Shahab-3_Range.jpg
 
Well, the Sunni are certainly upset and mad this last Decade. No doubt!

Which is why the Saud stated Iran gets their Nuke the Saud will have theirs and more.
The power struggle between those 2 should not draw the West in.
Saudi has always been the power broker in the ME.
 
Other than simple self appointment, the US has no authority to decide which countries do and which countries do not have nuclear weapons. And as the only country to date that has used nuclear weapons, and on two very civilian targets, the US should be the last to be deciding on this. But when you carry a big stick, you pretty much do as you wish. And this is why republicans in particular, never want to see the pentagon, that sacred cow, receive even the slightest budget cut, never mind that the size and scope of our military far surpasses defensive obligations.

Well, our military passes defensive obligation due to the very fact that it isn't meant for defense, but rather is meant for offensive actions around the globe.
 
Heya Janfu. :2wave: Yes it is.....without question.

Director of U.S. National Intelligence James Clapper testified on March 12, 2013, that Iran’s ballistic missiles were capable of delivering WMD.[149] According to some analysts, the liquid-fueled Shahab-3 missile and the solid-fueled Sejjil missile have the ability to carry a nuclear warhead.[150] Iran’s ballistic missile program is controlled by IRGC Air Force (AFAGIR), while Iran’s combat aircraft is under the command of the regular Iranian Air Force (IRIAF).[151]

Iranian Defense Minister Hossein Dehghan stated at a press conference on August 2014 that Iran’s missile capability issue was not included in the comprehensive talks with the P5+1 countries and "will by no means be negotiated with anyone".[156].....snip~

Comprehensive agreement on Iranian nuclear program - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Shahab-3_Range.jpg
What are the ranges of Israeli nukes?
And an Israeli response would not only target Iran.
If they are going down the **** hole they will wreak vengeance in the ME.
 
Israel is not a problem. Pakistan is.

Why isn't Israel as much of a threat as any other country that might use nukes or has used nukes. You think that Israel would never use a nuclear weapon if they felt it was necessary. And if you think that they never would, then why do they have them. Listen, no weapon has been created that hasn't been used, including nuclear weapons. It would be far better for humanity that no country had them, rather then letting the only country that ever used them, be the ones to decide who gets to haves them, and who doesn't.
 
Ahh you got a Marx professor, it's okay, looking around and learning is hard. Continue feeling.


what in the world does this have to do with my comment. ??


do you dispute the US role in Operation Ajax and the Iranian Coup of 1953?
do you dispute that the US helped build the Mujahadeen as an Anti-Soviet proxy at the end of the Cold War
do you dispute that the US armed Saddam in his war against Iran?

yes or no.




ps, whoever my professor was, at least I came out of school knowing that your "insult" should read "Marxist professor" (not that it would make anymore sense... but still...)
 
Well, our military passes defensive obligation due to the very fact that it isn't meant for defense, but rather is meant for offensive actions around the globe.

Right, that was my point precisely.
 
Hey, to be redundant here, my preference would be that nobody has nukes. I just don't see the hand wringing over Iran having them, which has not been proven, while being nonchalant about Israel and Pakistan having them. Which means essentially that the US facilitated it.


So, you think it is okay for Iran to up the game and cop 8 more Nuke reactors.....huh? All which they can delay Inspections and talks about them now, Right? Since none of them are on the table, so to speak.

Buying them Directly from Russia.....and BO peep with the Lost Sheep now all of a sudden believe Putin is about helping the Talks with Iran, Right?

Do you think BO will ever figure out. How he was outplayed and outwitted while being made to look like a fool?

Oh, and no one is being non-chalant over Pakistan. Why do you think they are Observed 24/7 365 days a week and by enough eyes to make sure the Pakistani don't ever screw up.
 
Last edited:
So, you think it is okay for Iran to up the game and cop 8 more Nuke reactors.....huh? All which they can delay Inspections and talks about them now, Right? Since none of them are on the table, so to speak.

Buying them Directly from Russia.....and BO peep with the Lost Sheep now all of a sudden believe Putin is about helping the Talks with Iran, Right?

Do you think BO will ever figure out. How he was outplayed and outwitted while being made to look like a fool?
War would only slow Iran's ability to have a nuke bomb. Slow, not stop.
 
So, you think it is okay for Iran to up the game and cop 8 more Nuke reactors.....huh? All which they can delay Inspections and talks about them now, Right? Since none of them are on the table, so to speak.

Buying them Directly from Russia.....and BO peep with the Lost Sheep now all of a sudden believe Putin is about helping the Talks with Iran, Right?

Do you think BO will ever figure out. How he was outplayed and outwitted while being made to look like a fool?

How many times, and in how many ways must I say that I would prefer that NOBODY had nukes, and that Iran having it is no more a threat than Israel or Pakistan having it, or the US for that matter!
 
Pro Muslim?????? Really? Expressing ones opinion that they don't think that Iran is a nuclear threat is pro Muslim. Come on man. Even if you could PROVE that Iran was a nuclear threat, he might be naive, but pro Muslim! That's ridiculous.

Obama is pro muslim in the totality of his foreign policy. He favored the Muslim brotherhood over Mubarak in Egypt, he also favored them in Lybia when Gadaffi was ousted. He favored The free Syrian army In Syria which had ties to Islamists. He's destroyed our relationship with Israel. He refuses to recognize that there is a violence problem within Islam. He grew up in Madarassas in Indonesia and has a deep respect for the religion. His bias toward Islam is obvious.
 
How many times, and in how many ways must I say that I would prefer that NOBODY had nukes, and that Iran having it is no more a threat than Israel or Pakistan having it, or the US for that matter!

Yes Iran having it is more of a threat than Israel or Pakistan or even the US and Russia......this comes from telling the entire Shia Nation that they will Wipe and entire Race of people off the planet.

That you prefer that none have Nukes.....doesn't change the reality at hand. Certain people have them. Certain people don't and shouldn't. Not until they at least have been neutered.
 
Obama is pro muslim in the totality of his foreign policy. He favored the Muslim brotherhood over Mubarak in Egypt, he also favored them in Lybia when Gadaffi was ousted. He favored The free Syrian army In Syria which had ties to Islamists. He's destroyed our relationship with Israel. He refuses to recognize that there is a violence problem within Islam. He grew up in Madarassas in Indonesia and has a deep respect for the religion. His bias toward Islam is obvious.

My apologies, the way it was worded I misinterpreted your comment to be about the poster you were quoting. I do agree with you that Obama has advanced policies in the Middle East that are having a beneficial effect, but, he's not doing this single handedly. You've got the entire chain of command implementing them, and in some cases, the overthrow of Gaddafi which has left Libya in chaos and empowered Islamic extremists there, as well as the arming of known terrorist groups in Syria, with much republican support. So there's a whole bunch of pro-Muslims in our government then on both sides of the isle.
 
Back
Top Bottom