Iranian Nuc Deal

[bertramhall]

Obama enthusiastically advocates Iranian deal while there are still many opponents to the agreement. It seems to me that Iran wins its strategic game bargaining concessions for Iranian detainees in the US and continuing its nuc program on slightly restricted conditions.

On the one hand the US disapproval would have been a blow to the US reputation as a negotiator. The denial of an agreement always shows unreliability of a partner given that the other world power agreed to the conditions of the treaty. Moreover, the disapproval would have marked Democrat`s incapability for carrying on their political line in the run up for the elections.

On the other hand an approval of the deal means that Iran could proceed their nuclear program almost without any obstacle as it is for Tehran to authorize monitoring commissions. Long-lasted negotiations finally resulted with the Iran`s main intention not to eliminate uranium production. As a consequence Iran achieved its goal and benefit the agreement.

In my opinion the US lose more than gains in both situations. What would you chose? Which one of two evils is lesser for you?

 

[Jantje_Smit]

In my opinion the US lose more than gains in both situations. What would you chose? Which one of two evils is lesser for you?

Eh, the only ones who lose are Netanyahoo and his AIPAC puppets.

What has the US "lost" exactly?

 

[Statistikhengst]

Good morning, bertramhall - you present an interesting argument. Thanks for actually taking time to expatiate upon /or believe. However, you write:

"On the other hand an approval of the deal means that Iran could proceed their nuclear program almost without any obstacle as it is for Tehran to authorize monitoring commissions."

Question: have you actually read the deal? Because if you read it, you see that this is not so.

Also, what is a "nuc"?

 

[Statistikhengst]

In my opinion the US lose more than gains in both situations. What would you chose? Which one of two evils is lesser for you?

Eh, the only ones who lose are Netanyahoo and his AIPAC puppets.

What has the US "lost" exactly?

AIPAC is not a puppet, This is not true.

 

[SuperDemocrat]

Obama enthusiastically advocates Iranian deal while there are still many opponents to the agreement. It seems to me that Iran wins its strategic game bargaining concessions for Iranian detainees in the US and continuing its nuc program on slightly restricted conditions.

On the one hand the US disapproval would have been a blow to the US reputation as a negotiator. The denial of an agreement always shows unreliability of a partner given that the other world power agreed to the conditions of the treaty. Moreover, the disapproval would have marked Democrat`s incapability for carrying on their political line in the run up for the elections.

On the other hand an approval of the deal means that Iran could proceed their nuclear program almost without any obstacle as it is for Tehran to authorize monitoring commissions. Long-lasted negotiations finally resulted with the Iran`s main intention not to eliminate uranium production. As a consequence Iran achieved its goal and benefit the agreement.

In my opinion the US lose more than gains in both situations. What would you chose? Which one of two evils is lesser for you?

I honestly think it would be just if Iran nuked some blue state.

 

[bertramhall]

The terms of the agreement are more favorable for Iran because there are restrictions for international committees to proceed control over suspicious sites where uranium could be produced. Due to this other countries will think that they may get more concessions from the US during negotiation process.

 

[Jantje_Smit]

AIPAC is not a puppet, This is not true.

You're right, my bad.

I should have said AIPAC controlled puppets, but I think the meaning is clear enough.

 

[Bleipriester]

Every initial situation suggesting a sovereign country has not the right to use nuclear energy has to be rejected.

 

[Jantje_Smit]

The terms of the agreement are more favorable for Iran because there are restrictions for international committees to proceed control over suspicious sites where uranium could be produced. Due to this other countries will think that they may get more concessions from the US during negotiation process.

What other countries would that be, North Korea?

Insane Kim already has nukes and he got them while sanctions were in place btw. That's why a deal with Iran is good news, now they can focus on lucrative contracts and oil $$$ instead of worrying wether they need nukes to defend themselves against some peace & democracy bombing.

As I said, the only ones who lose are the warmongers.

 

[bertramhall]

Good morning, bertramhall - you present an interesting argument. Thanks for actually taking time to expatiate upon /or believe. However, you write:

"On the other hand an approval of the deal means that Iran could proceed their nuclear program almost without any obstacle as it is for Tehran to authorize monitoring commissions."

Question: have you actually read the deal? Because if you read it, you see that this is not so.

Also, what is a "nuc"?

There are 15 days for Iran to conceal their projects and then let a commission check the site they wanted to. Full text of the Iran nuclear deal - The Washington Post

 

[tyroneweaver]

Iran nuke deal is just a head fake
100 billion in free money to expand terror war and kill more americans
icbm's capable of hitting the USA
Inspectors have to meet Iran standards or they can't enter the country, let alone the 24 day notice

...and who's to say that if Iran has a disagreement with the inspectors they won't put em on trial and stick em in the same hole as the other 4 americans

 

[tyroneweaver]

Good morning, bertramhall - you present an interesting argument. Thanks for actually taking time to expatiate upon /or believe. However, you write:

"On the other hand an approval of the deal means that Iran could proceed their nuclear program almost without any obstacle as it is for Tehran to authorize monitoring commissions."

Question: have you actually read the deal? Because if you read it, you see that this is not so.

Also, what is a "nuc"?

...and you're the treaty expert around here....right????

 

[RadicalRedneck]

In my opinion the US lose more than gains in both situations. What would you chose? Which one of two evils is lesser for you?

Eh, the only ones who lose are Netanyahoo and his AIPAC puppets.

What has the US "lost" exactly?

AIPAC is not a puppet, This is not true.

Good morning, bertramhall - you present an interesting argument. Thanks for actually taking time to expatiate upon /or believe. However, you write:

"On the other hand an approval of the deal means that Iran could proceed their nuclear program almost without any obstacle as it is for Tehran to authorize monitoring commissions."

Question: have you actually read the deal? Because if you read it, you see that this is not so.

Also, what is a "nuc"?

There are 15 days for Iran to conceal their projects and then let a commission check the site they wanted to. Full text of the Iran nuclear deal - The Washington Post

Benjamin Netanyahu ... For President of the United States of America. Barack Obama for Dog Catcher...

 

[xdangerousxdavex]

icbm's capable of hitting the USA

Haha, don't worry, the US have military bases with interceptor missiles and aircrafts abroad. The distance from Tehran to NY is about 6,000 miles.