• 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 says will quit nuclear deal if US walks away

hanger4 said:
I've already read that piece. You do understand what "for the most part" means, right ??

Again, is Huffington Post lying ??
Click to expand...

Everyone has an opinion, however no one has accused Iran of restarting a nuclear program, and that is what really matters.
 
Floridafan said:
The Iran nuclear agreement was formed by the US along with 7 other participating countries. It was NOT Obama's deal, you ignorant pissant.
Click to expand...

So, did or didn't Obama lie when he claimed Iran was only two months away from having a nuclear weapon?

Yes or no.
 
Simon W. Moon said:
:shrug:
I'm not exactly sure what Obama was doing in 2003.
Though I'm sure it's incredibly relevant to this discussion somehow.

It looks like Iran stopped not long after Obama was sworn in.
from your link

The IAEA judged that substantial work on nuclear weapons development ceased in 2003, and that there was no evidence of weapons research after 2009
​

Maybe it's all Killary's fault?
Click to expand...

What part of;

*Iranian leaders have breached both the resolutions and the nuclear agreement for the third time since the nuclear deal went into effect in January 2016.*

didn't you understand ??
 
HowardBThiname said:
So, did or didn't Obama lie when he claimed Iran was only two months away from having a nuclear weapon?

Yes or no.
Click to expand...

First, post those comments
Second, you you ever give a dam when Bush lied about WMD's?
 
Floridafan said:
Everyone has an opinion, however no one has accused Iran of restarting a nuclear program, and that is what really matters.
Click to expand...

So, an agreement was made but only parts need be adhered to ?? Who decides which parts ?? And why were these parts even included ??
 
hanger4 said:
So, an agreement was made but only parts need be adhered to ?? Who decides which parts ?? And why were these parts even included ??
Click to expand...

you go girl!
 
A question, What's the purpose of a ballistic missile that Iran continues to test in violation of the agreement ??
 
hanger4 said:
What part of;
*Iranian leaders have breached both the resolutions and the nuclear agreement for the third time since the nuclear deal went into effect in January 2016.*
didn't you understand ??
Click to expand...
Are you willing to take all HuffPo blog posts as gospel now?

Or just that one in particular?
 
Simon W. Moon said:
Are you willing to take all HuffPo blog posts as gospel now?

Or just that one in particular?
Click to expand...

I don't take any blog post or news source as complete gospel. And I do know if I had linked a "rightwing" blog or news source it would have been ignored. There are numerous newsies left and right that have reported Irans breaches of this agreement.
 
hanger4 said:
So, an agreement was made but only parts need be adhered to ?? Who decides which parts ?? And why were these parts even included ??
Click to expand...

Well, let’s translate this into something easily understood. You go to your local grocery store and ask for 1 pound of deli shrimp. The attendant grabs a handful of shrimp and places them in a bag on the scale. The weight is 1 pound and 2 ounces. Do you accept that deviation as within reason or do you scream and shout and make a scene swearing to never come back?
 
Praxas said:
I'm only defending the fact that why should Iran stay in an agreement that the US leaves from? You are the one making huge assumptions of Iran's intentions.
Click to expand...

Their intention is to leave an agreement that prohibits them from making something they professed no desire to make in the first place.



So, either they are lying, or, this is much ado about nothing.

A, or B.

Which do you think it is?
 
Napoleon said:
Well, let’s translate this into something easily understood. You go to your local grocery store and ask for 1 pound of deli shrimp. The attendant grabs a handful of shrimp and places them in a bag on the scale. The weight is 1 pound and 2 ounces. Do you accept that deviation as within reason or do you scream and shout and make a scene swearing to never come back?
Click to expand...

If that .2 pounds over causes instability in your budget, yes, you do.
 
KevinKohler said:
Their intention is to leave an agreement that prohibits them from making something they professed no desire to make in the first place.



So, either they are lying, or, this is much ado about nothing.

A, or B.

Which do you think it is?
Click to expand...

There’s always an option C when dual use materials are involved. Iran may have the capability to produce nuclear weapons without the intention of doing so and the treaty provides incentive for them to maintain that position.
 
Napoleon said:
Well, let’s translate this into something easily understood. You go to your local grocery store and ask for 1 pound of deli shrimp. The attendant grabs a handful of shrimp and places them in a bag on the scale. The weight is 1 pound and 2 ounces. Do you accept that deviation as within reason or do you scream and shout and make a scene swearing to never come back?
Click to expand...

Your analogy implies Iran is going above and beyond the terms of the agreement and we know this to be false via their ballistic missile tests.
 
Floridafan said:
The Iran nuclear agreement was formed by the US along with 7 other participating countries. It was NOT Obama's deal, you ignorant pissant.
Click to expand...

I suppose you think the U.N. is some well-intended bastion of equality and justice amongst nations, too?

The deal was driven by the U.S. Apart from Iran, other participants were unimportant apart from the additional leverage they provided during negotiations. The U.S. is the only one that would ever enforce it.

If you have a loan co-signed by 10 people, but only one has any money, guess who's paying?


hanger4 said:
A question, What's the purpose of a ballistic missile that Iran continues to test in violation of the agreement ??
Click to expand...

Force projection in their region. The ability to deliver a relatively precise non-nuclear strike is a legitimate deterrent.

Pretty clever, I wonder where they got the idea?
 
hanger4 said:
Your analogy implies Iran is going above and beyond the terms of the agreement and we know this to be false via their ballistic missile tests.
Click to expand...

Their ballistic missile tests are not in violation of the agreement. They may be in violation of the spirit of the agreement but not its letter. The analogy refers to actual violations involving the production of slightly more heavy water than they’re supposed to have but, similar to deli shrimp, it’s not an exact science.
 
KevinKohler said:
So....does this mean Iran WANTED to pursue nuclear armament all along, despite their claims, and that the only thing keeping them in check from doing this is they US?
Click to expand...

What about Obama's statement that Iran was months away from a bomb was unclear to you?
 
WillyPete said:
I suppose you think the U.N. is some well-intended bastion of equality and justice amongst nations, too?

The deal was driven by the U.S. Apart from Iran, other participants were unimportant apart from the additional leverage they provided during negotiations. The U.S. is the only one that would ever enforce it.

If you have a loan co-signed by 10 people, but only one has any money, guess who's paying?




Force projection in their region. The ability to deliver a relatively precise non-nuclear strike is a legitimate deterrent.

Pretty clever, I wonder where they got the idea?
Click to expand...

Actually the IAEA inspectors are in charge of verifying compliance with the agreement.
 
Floridafan said:
Obama did say that!
Click to expand...

So much for the great revelation from the Israeli's. We have known for years that the Iranians had a program to develop nuclear weapons. The agreement puts a stop to it too. If Trump backs out of it we will pay a dear price. The Chinese and Russians are just waiting to swoop in.
While Western European companies might prove to be not unwilling beneficiaries, Iran has also begun to look to even more eager partners. Last November, during a visit to Moscow, President Hasan Rouhani and President Putin signed agreements to collaborate on energy deals worth as much as $30 billion, while some $20 billion more in deals could be en route this year with some western firms, but especially with Rosneft, Lukoil, Gazprom and Zarubezhneft -- all Russian oil and gas companies.
China, another signatory of the Iran nuclear pact, along with Russia, France, Germany, Britain, and the EU, is also well-poised to take advantage of any Trump action withdrawing from the pact. "Reactivation of sanctions may cause Iran to export oil using the Chinese Yuan denominated contract, which launches on 18 January," Bjarne Schieldrop, Chief Commodities Analyst at SEB told OilPrice.com. "This may spark a move away from the present long-established US Dollar denominated oil trading regime."
Click to expand...
https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/11/opinions/ending-the-iran-deal-will-harm-american-interests-andelman-opinion/index.html
 
iguanaman said:
Actually the IAEA inspectors are in charge of verifying compliance with the agreement.
Click to expand...

Interesting!

What's their military like?

Seriously, that's like saying because the FBI is investigating something, the U.S government isn't involved.

These international agencies don't have any power but what is lent them by the nations they work for. In this case, that's the US.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom