• 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!

Something, I don't know what, just doesn't smell right about Bebe's address re: Iran

Moot said:
It's not a stretch at all to think Bibi was directing his message to Trump as well as an international audience. Especially considering that in less than two weeks Trump will decide on whether to pull out of the Iran nuclear deal.

Some people think that Bibi was trying to provide a justification for Trump should he decide to pull out of the Iran deal.
Click to expand...

So now, please posit an answer to the central implied question in the post to which your comment above is a reply.
 
Xelor said:
So now, please posit an answer to the central implied question in the post to which your comment above is a reply.
Click to expand...

How about you posit an answer to my response to your previous post, instead?
 
Another thing doesn't quite sit right with me regarding the content Netanyahu presented: the lack of unequivocal temporal context.

Netanyahu presents documents that describe the Iranian nuclear program; however, we already know Iran had a nuclear program and that they had it prior to the signing of the Iran nuclear deal.
  • Are the Iranian documents Bibi depicted one's from Iran's legacy (pre-deal) program?
  • Are the Iranian documents Bibi depicted one's from a resurrection of Iran's legacy program?
  • Are the Iranian documents Bibi depicted one's fromor from a new one?
I don't know, but I know Netanyahu doesn't say initially, but then around the eight-minute mark he makes clear that the content he described prior to that point is from Project Amad (sp?) which was a pre-deal program.

Next, Netanyahu attempts to draw the temporal context by citing a series of events:
  • 2003
    • Iran faces post-Gulf War pressure forcing a hold on Project Amad (PA).
    • Iran aims to retain the knowledgeware re: nuclear weapons
      • No surprise; who wouldn't?
    • Iran aims to later resume its nuclear weapons program
      • Well, we already know Iran resumed it's nuke program. That's why we wanted to get a solution whereby Iran'd desist with it.
    • The plan called had two parts -- overt and covert. (From Netan's slide, we see that the plan document to which Netan. refers comes from 2003.)
    • The plan calls for "special activities" that will be carried out under the title of scientific knowhow development.
  • Sometime after 2003 and before 2010
    • An Iranian DoD unit called SPND carried out the work.
      • We know that's so for SPND's activities to that effect were known in 2010 when the U.S. hacked the centrifuges used in that program. (Stuxnet)
Here (~10:30) Netan. makes the leap of saying the SPND weapons development activities are ongoing today. He just says they are. That's it.

He tells us:
  • The same scientist that ran PA ran the SPND unit/program.
    • Well, duh. Trump may appoint a non-scientist to run a scientific department or agency, but other leaders wouldn't.
  • He reiterates that after it shelved PA, Iran planned to resume it.
    • Well, yes, but he already noted this.
Next he says he's going to present another example of nuclear activities that continued after PA.
  • 2015 -- Netan. refers to Iran's attestations to the IAEA about their 2003 program, PA. Basically, Netan says they lied. Fine, but we knew that already.
    • He notes the Fordow facility, which he says was designed for PA.
      • Let's just take his word on that and that Fordow was for weapons development.
    • December -- Iran denied the existence of Project Amad and of weapons development.
    • He says the documents/files Israel has obtained show PA was by citing multiple elements -- MPI, metallurgical work, hemispherical geometry, etc. -- that show PA was doing weapons development.
      • Okay, but he's already established that fact above, plus we already knew Iran had a nuke program; we hacked it. Netan. has still not told us anything new, anything that shows a current nuclear program is taking place in Iran now.
Netan. summaries as follows:


  1. Iran lied about not having had a nuke program --> The U.S. gov't already knew that before his presentation, but members of the U.S. general public, in particular Trumpkins, may not have.
  2. After the Iran deal, Iran continued nuclear weapons development --> The "after" part of that statement is the temporal context that Netan. not once in the presentation provides. Not once.
  3. Iran lied again in 2015 about not having had a nuke program prior to 2015 (i.e., before the Iran nuclear deal) --> This is the same lie as number one just above. Telling the same lie at a later date doesn't, well, doesn't count, and it certainly doesn't establish that the nuke program persists to this day.
  4. The Iran deal is based on lies. --> Maybe, but that Iran lied about not having a nuke program before July 2015 doesn't show that conclusion to be so. When the deal was signed, nobody believed Iran didn't have a pre-deal nuclear weapons program. That they didn't is the reason for the deal itself.
In light of the above step-by-step analysis, what does Netanyahu's presentation tell us about the nature of the post-deal nuclear weapons program in Iran? Nothing!

All of it pertains to PA and SPND activity that predate the Iran deal.

 
Last edited:
Rogue Valley said:
I'm not sure if Trump has done the calculus [he rarely does], but pulling out of the JCPA will make any negotiations with Kim exponentially more difficult.
Click to expand...

You meant to say IMPOSSIBLE, I'm guessing.
Kim will see it as a guarantee that the United States cannot be trusted under any circumstances.
 
Moot said:
How about you posit an answer to my response to your previous post, instead?
Click to expand...

You have yet to address the central point of the post to which you first responded. Why would I respond to any inquiry from your first post before you address the central theme/question/concern of the post to which you replied? All that would do is move the conversation away from the thread topic.
 
Xelor said:
Does anyone besides me think it a bit odd that a foreign head of state delivered his presentation in English instead of in Hebrew? Who was the man's primary audience? His own people or the people of English-speaking nations, mainly the U.S. and the UK?

Sure seems the latter to me, and that it does makes me wonder why the hell is he delivering a message targeted at the American and British public. (It had to be the public because he didn't need to publicly make the presentation to present it to the governments of either nation, no matter the language in which he delivered it.) And he clearly didn't present the information "to the world;" were he doing so, he'd have done it at the U.N. Remember when we went to war against Iraq? Where did Powell deliver the U.S.' supposed evidence? At the U.N.

So, with that prologue, then, I wonder, why, if he weren't specifically appealing to the citizenry of various nations, didn't he simply pass the info to the POTUS/USIC, France, the UK, Germany, etc. whereafter they present the information to their own citizens? Which makes ask again, why the hell is a foreign head of state appealing to citizens of a nation other than his own?


Just to be clear:
  • Am I saying the man's data is false either in fact or contextually?
    • No, I'm not because I'm in no position to discern whether it is or it isn't.
  • Am I saying the Iranians should or should not be allowed access to nuclear weapons?
    • No, but I'd be happy to discuss that in a different thread, one where that is the topic of discussion.
I'm just saying that it's highly irregular to see Israel, and not a nation that is considered a so-called world leader, making an address of the sort he made. Hell, Israel isn't even a a party to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPA, aka "Iran nuclear deal"). So WTH is going on? Why is Israel "out front" on this announcement to the American and Western European people?
Click to expand...

Hm. Leading from the rear, maybe. Trump Nation would like nothing better than proof that Obama screwed up the Iran nuke situation, and Trump has shown he likes nothing better than to be seen to be leading a grassroots cause. Netanyahu has bragged in the past about controlling the US posture in the ME. Maybe he feels he can be more blatant about it with this administration.
Whatever his motivation is, it's an alternative to taking action on his own. Maybe he's just getting timid in his old age, maybe the embassy-to-Jerusalem thing inspires him to see how far he can push it, maybe he just likes to be read about in the news. Who knows.
 
When Bibi speaks theres a definite smell of deja moo. We've heard this BS before. It happened when the prosecutors were breathing down Bibi's neck the last time too. Coincidence?
 
Xelor said:
You have yet to address the central point of the post to which you first responded. Why would I respond to any inquiry from your first post before you address the central theme/question/concern of the post to which you replied? All that would do is move the conversation away from the thread topic.
Click to expand...

Mk...whatever. :roll:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom