• 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!

What's in the Iran nuclear deal? 7 key points

That explains nothing. And you can support this **** till you're blue in the face, the fact of the matter is there's disagreement already about what is merely said publically and that bothers me.
Firstly, what was negotiated so far is a mutually negotiated "framework". A framework is neither final nor binding. Whatever transpires between now and 30 June will determine if a signed document becomes reality.
 
It only took 3 posts to return to that comfort zone of baseless speculation. Why discuss facts when baseless speculation is so much more interesting...

The whole thing has been kept secret. "we need to pass this to know what's in it" -esk. We may never know exactly what or wasn't agreed to.

Your facts are useless speculation.
 
Simpleχity;1064497690 said:
Firstly, what was negotiated so far is a mutually negotiated "framework". A framework is neither final nor binding. Whatever transpires between now and 30 June will determine if a signed document becomes reality.

Sure, you believe that. It's for the consumption of the critics. Oh yeah, nothing's in concrete............that's why they haggled for a bunch of extra time over nothing important at all. Who are you trying to kid?
 
What doofus would believe Iran would have any intention of adhering to anything? Has said doofus paid attention to the past 40 years?
 
Iran cannot destroy Isreal so that argument is moot. NK has repeatedly stated that it wants a war of annihilation and they have brainwashed their people for that. I have met Iranians overseas who are studying for medical degrees and they are not fanatics, they are a democracy.

Even the UN knows Iran is the worlds #1 state sponsor/financial support for terrorism around the globe. So what you are saying is that the 'democracy' (all your 'moderate' Iranian buddies) in Iran votes to support Iran's sponsorship of terrorism?

When a nation is an ardent supporter of terrorism the way Iran is, they have to be somewhat guarded not to provoke the worlds action to stop it. AFTER Iran gets a nuke, will the world be more or less likely or effective to be able to reduce or stop Iran's sponsorship of terrorism? I agree Iran knows the use of a nuke would be an end of days action, but since the 40s, nukes have been nothing more than tools of leverage.
 
Over/under on how long before someone claims you're an anti-semite for saying this?

I tend to not agree with you, by the way.

Right, because criticism of destabilising and heavy handed Israeli foreign policy is anti-Semitic. I think they've already said it.
 
Even the UN knows Iran is the worlds #1 state sponsor/financial support for terrorism around the globe. So what you are saying is that the 'democracy' (all your 'moderate' Iranian buddies) in Iran votes to support Iran's sponsorship of terrorism?
Isreal, North Korea and the US are also supporting terror groups so that line of argument is pretty silly and hypocritical.
 
Sure, you believe that. It's for the consumption of the critics. Oh yeah, nothing's in concrete............that's why they haggled for a bunch of extra time over nothing important at all. Who are you trying to kid?
Lol. I think you misunderstand. I *strongly oppose* Iran obtaining any nuclear-weapon capability. That is why I've educated myself on the subject ... I wanted to be sure that I fairly well understood both mechanics and implications. Personally, I have grave doubts that a mutual accord will be reached primarily; 1) due to the sanctions-relief issue and 2) due to the obligatory intrusive-inspections regimen. I also highly doubt Iran will accept a comprehensive and thorough accounting of PMDs (Possible Military Dimensions).
 
LOL!!

So...in your attempt to excuse Obama for bad negotiating you try to blame:

1. Other countries.
2. Republicans, if they don't ratify the crap deal Obama gives Iran.
3. "Bubbi".
4. Treasonous Republicans.
5. Politics.


I think you forgot to blame Bush this time around.

actually, the shrub, and his (in)actions relative to the north koreans developing the bomb, were quite instructional in what NOT to do with respect to iran's nuclear program
 
He's not an anti-Semite, not if we judge by his posts, but he's certainly an anti-Israeli buffoon.

I appreciate the first part and in the interest of peace I have no comment about the second part.
 
Last edited:
When has Israel ever said they were to going to wipe Iran off the map? Whereas Iran has repeatedly said they were going to wipe Israel off the map.

Have you heard Iran say that. Or are you accepting one translation over another?
 
Isreal, North Korea and the US are also supporting terror groups so that line of argument is pretty silly and hypocritical.

Besides the Muslim Brotherhood that Obama supports and finances...........there is no doubt, THAT is a terrorist organization.
 
Besides the Muslim Brotherhood that Obama supports and finances...........there is no doubt, THAT is a terrorist organization.

The Muslim Brotherhood is not listed as a terrorist organization by a single Western government or body.
 
The Muslim Brotherhood is not listed as a terrorist organization by a single Western government or body.

Oh suuuuuurrrrrre, neither is Hezbollah. How has Obama's supported MB worked out in Egypt, Libya, Syria
 
Does that tell you they are not a terrorist organization?

Certainly not that alone, Israel and the US isn't on the list either. I'm sure if Iran used Hezbollah to assassinate Israeli scientists in the streets of Tel Aviv, people would view that differently then Israel doing the same in Tehran.
 
Oh suuuuuurrrrrre, neither is Hezbollah. How has Obama's supported MB worked out in Egypt, Libya, Syria

As bad as that was, it worked out a whole lot better then Reagan's backing of the Mujahideen and bin laden way back when.
 

That's not the same thing. That list was from the National Intelligence director's office and is an outline of direct, current threats to U.S. assets.

The U.S. State Department has had Hezbollah listed as a terrorist organization since 1997, when it first started listing terrorist organizations.

Foreign Terrorist Organizations
 
That's not the same thing. That list was from the National Intelligence director's office and is an outline of direct, current threats to U.S. assets.

The U.S. State Department has had Hezbollah listed as a terrorist organization since 1997, when it first started listing terrorist organizations.

Foreign Terrorist Organizations

You mean to say that Clapper and Obama are at odds with the State Department?
 
No, I mean those are two entirely different lists/assessments.

You seem to be interested in diminishing the significance of this White House removing Iran and Hezbollah from their terrorist list.
 
You seem to be interested in diminishing the significance of this White House removing Iran and Hezbollah from their terrorist list.

Because there really isn't any significance to it.

For starters, Iran is still highlighted several times in Clapper's assessment, especially in regards to its nuclear ambitions. However, neither at this time is considered a direct threat to U.S. interests. The state department list is simply a list of terrorist organizations around the world, whether they are a threat to U.S. interests or not.

As I said, they are two entirely different lists and assessments. That's not "diminishing" anything, that's simply stating fact.
 
Back
Top Bottom