velvtacheeze
Gold Member
- Mar 10, 2013
- 1,959
- 299
- 130
What should the US do instead?
Iran Nuclear Deal Reached At Geneva Talks
- Thread starter J.E.D
- Start date
What should the US do instead?
You guys seem to love living in a fantasy world.
Nothing in this agreement says "Historic" or even effective.
This is another case of a mouse farting in the middle of a hurricane and the left calling it an explosion of epic proportions. It's a total exaggeration of the truth.
What???? Kerry was very clear about that!
The liberals on the other thread are once again talking about an Obama sellout agreement like it was the Camp David Accords.
R.C. Christian
Gold Member
A war with Iran is inevitable. This temporary foreign policy change won't last.
blackhawk
Diamond Member
People keep saying this is a great deal as I hear it Iran has agreed to put a hold on it's nuke program for six months and we have agreed t ease up on some of the sanctions for six months Iran has not agreed to give up it's pursuit of nukes for good and we have not agreed to end all sanctions for good as far as I can tell not much has really changed. Now maybe I'm missing something if so someone fill in the gaps to show why this is such a great deal.
Abject Surrender by the United States
What does Israel do now?
8:50 AM, Nov 24, 2013 By JOHN BOLTON
Negotiations for an interim arrangement over Irans nuclear weapons program finally succeeded this past weekend, as Security Council foreign ministers (plus Germany) flew to Geneva to meet their Iranian counterpart. After raising expectations of a deal by first convening on November 8-10, it would have been beyond humiliating to gather again without result. So agreement was struck despite solemn incantations earlier that no deal is better than a bad deal.
This interim agreement is badly skewed from Americas perspective. Iran retains its full capacity to enrich uranium, thus abandoning a decade of Western insistence and Security Council resolutions that Iran stop all uranium-enrichment activities. Allowing Iran to continue enriching, and despite modest (indeed, utterly inadequate) measures to prevent it from increasing its enriched-uranium stockpiles and its overall nuclear infrastructure, lays the predicate for Iran fully enjoying its right to enrichment in any final agreement. Indeed, the interim agreement itself acknowledges that a comprehensive solution will involve a mutually defined enrichment program. This is not, as the Obama administration leaked before the deal became public, a compromise on Irans claimed right to enrichment. This is abject surrender by the United States.
In exchange for superficial concessions, Iran achieved three critical breakthroughs. First, it bought time to continue all aspects of its nuclear-weapons program the agreement does not cover (centrifuge manufacturing and testing; weaponization research and fabrication; and its entire ballistic missile program). Indeed, given that the interim agreement contemplates periodic renewals, Iran may have gained all of the time it needs to achieve weaponization not of simply a handful of nuclear weapons, but of dozens or more.
Abject Surrender by the United States | The Weekly Standard
This is the kind of deal that is designed to help liberals breathe a sigh of relief after the weeks of negative press their fearless leader has gotten over his massive screw ups.
Abject Surrender by the United States
What does Israel do now?
8:50 AM, Nov 24, 2013 • By JOHN BOLTON
Negotiations for an “interim” arrangement over Iran’s nuclear weapons program finally succeeded this past weekend, as Security Council foreign ministers (plus Germany) flew to Geneva to meet their Iranian counterpart. After raising expectations of a deal by first convening on November 8-10, it would have been beyond humiliating to gather again without result. So agreement was struck despite solemn incantations earlier that “no deal is better than a bad deal.”
This interim agreement is badly skewed from America’s perspective. Iran retains its full capacity to enrich uranium, thus abandoning a decade of Western insistence and Security Council resolutions that Iran stop all uranium-enrichment activities. Allowing Iran to continue enriching, and despite modest (indeed, utterly inadequate) measures to prevent it from increasing its enriched-uranium stockpiles and its overall nuclear infrastructure, lays the predicate for Iran fully enjoying its “right” to enrichment in any “final” agreement. Indeed, the interim agreement itself acknowledges that a “comprehensive solution” will “involve a mutually defined enrichment program.” This is not, as the Obama administration leaked before the deal became public, a “compromise” on Iran’s claimed “right” to enrichment. This is abject surrender by the United States.
In exchange for superficial concessions, Iran achieved three critical breakthroughs. First, it bought time to continue all aspects of its nuclear-weapons program the agreement does not cover (centrifuge manufacturing and testing; weaponization research and fabrication; and its entire ballistic missile program). Indeed, given that the interim agreement contemplates periodic renewals, Iran may have gained all of the time it needs to achieve weaponization not of simply a handful of nuclear weapons, but of dozens or more.
Abject Surrender by the United States | The Weekly Standard
Abject Surrender by the United States
What does Israel do now?
8:50 AM, Nov 24, 2013 • By JOHN BOLTON
Negotiations for an “interim” arrangement over Iran’s nuclear weapons program finally succeeded this past weekend, as Security Council foreign ministers (plus Germany) flew to Geneva to meet their Iranian counterpart. After raising expectations of a deal by first convening on November 8-10, it would have been beyond humiliating to gather again without result. So agreement was struck despite solemn incantations earlier that “no deal is better than a bad deal.”
This interim agreement is badly skewed from America’s perspective. Iran retains its full capacity to enrich uranium, thus abandoning a decade of Western insistence and Security Council resolutions that Iran stop all uranium-enrichment activities. Allowing Iran to continue enriching, and despite modest (indeed, utterly inadequate) measures to prevent it from increasing its enriched-uranium stockpiles and its overall nuclear infrastructure, lays the predicate for Iran fully enjoying its “right” to enrichment in any “final” agreement. Indeed, the interim agreement itself acknowledges that a “comprehensive solution” will “involve a mutually defined enrichment program.” This is not, as the Obama administration leaked before the deal became public, a “compromise” on Iran’s claimed “right” to enrichment. This is abject surrender by the United States.
In exchange for superficial concessions, Iran achieved three critical breakthroughs. First, it bought time to continue all aspects of its nuclear-weapons program the agreement does not cover (centrifuge manufacturing and testing; weaponization research and fabrication; and its entire ballistic missile program). Indeed, given that the interim agreement contemplates periodic renewals, Iran may have gained all of the time it needs to achieve weaponization not of simply a handful of nuclear weapons, but of dozens or more.
Abject Surrender by the United States | The Weekly Standard
Last edited:
birddog
Silver Member
The Obama buttbuddies around here are misinformed, just plain wrong, and totally sickening!
R.C. Christian
Gold Member
WWIII is once again delayed so the president can get back to transforming America into a quasi-socialist, authoritarian state.
kiwiman127
Comfortably Moderate
People do realize that the Iran/nuclear agreement was not just US involvement but also the European Union was as involved?
European Union Leadership On The Agreement On Iran's Nuclear Programme
European Union Leadership On The Agreement On Iran's Nuclear Programme - TheStreet
European Union Leadership On The Agreement On Iran's Nuclear Programme
European Union Leadership On The Agreement On Iran's Nuclear Programme - TheStreet
Kerry thought he was clear. The Iranians say it's very clear that they are free to enrich as much uranium as they want. When are they getting the aid they were promised?
Instead of fighting over development of the bomb, they will argue over what the agreement says. Meanwhile, like North Korea, Iran will be demanding their payment.
The agreement, however, does not require Iran to stop enriching uranium to a low level of 3.5 percent, or to dismantle any of its existing centrifuges.
In return for the initial agreement, the United States agreed to provide $6 billion to $7 billion in sanctions relief. Of this, roughly $4.2 billion would be oil revenue that has been frozen in foreign banks.
This limited sanctions relief can be accomplished by executive order, allowing the Obama administration to make the deal without having to appeal to Congress, where there is strong criticism of any agreement that does not fully dismantle Irans nuclear program.
The fact that the accord would only pause the Iranian program was seized on by critics who said it would reward Iran for institutionalizing the status quo.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/24/w...ran-on-nuclear-deal-hang-in-balance.html?_r=0
This isn't much of a deal. Iran is smiling and the US appears as weak negotiators because we are.
Did the timing have something to do with it (Actually being a distraction to the failure of Obamacare) or is Obama - Kerry a failing team when it comes to negotiating?
In return for the initial agreement, the United States agreed to provide $6 billion to $7 billion in sanctions relief. Of this, roughly $4.2 billion would be oil revenue that has been frozen in foreign banks.
This limited sanctions relief can be accomplished by executive order, allowing the Obama administration to make the deal without having to appeal to Congress, where there is strong criticism of any agreement that does not fully dismantle Irans nuclear program.
The fact that the accord would only pause the Iranian program was seized on by critics who said it would reward Iran for institutionalizing the status quo.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/24/w...ran-on-nuclear-deal-hang-in-balance.html?_r=0
This isn't much of a deal. Iran is smiling and the US appears as weak negotiators because we are.
Did the timing have something to do with it (Actually being a distraction to the failure of Obamacare) or is Obama - Kerry a failing team when it comes to negotiating?
usmcstinger
Gold Member
- Dec 31, 2011
- 1,433
- 476
- 200
Can you read what Senator Reid intends to do?
well cry us riva
We don't all fall and grovel at Obama's feet
Strawman...who said anything about falling and groveling at President Obama's feet?
No one had to say anything. The libs' response here is "You oppose the agreement only because Obama is black."
That is a non starter of an argument.
It can't do anything. Obama is working off an Executive Order. He bypassed Congress again. Unless, Congress worked together and passed a law that Obama could not enter into an agreement with Iran for three years!.. LOL
Last edited:
AceRothstein
Gold Member
- Sep 8, 2012
- 5,978
- 1,441
- 245
well cry us riva
We don't all fall and grovel at Obama's feet
Strawman...who said anything about falling and groveling at President Obama's feet?
No one had to say anything. The libs' response here is "You oppose the agreement only because Obama is black."
That is a non starter of an argument.
It has nothing to do with Obama being black, you oppose everything he does because you hate him with the fire of 1,000 suns.
No, its because everything he does is wrong and stupid and detrimental to America.
"If you like your health insurance, you can keep it. Period."
AceRothstein
Gold Member
- Sep 8, 2012
- 5,978
- 1,441
- 245
This is the kind of deal that is designed to help liberals breathe a sigh of relief after the weeks of negative press their fearless leader has gotten over his massive screw ups.
Abject Surrender by the United States
What does Israel do now?
8:50 AM, Nov 24, 2013 By JOHN BOLTON
Negotiations for an interim arrangement over Irans nuclear weapons program finally succeeded this past weekend, as Security Council foreign ministers (plus Germany) flew to Geneva to meet their Iranian counterpart. After raising expectations of a deal by first convening on November 8-10, it would have been beyond humiliating to gather again without result. So agreement was struck despite solemn incantations earlier that no deal is better than a bad deal.
This interim agreement is badly skewed from Americas perspective. Iran retains its full capacity to enrich uranium, thus abandoning a decade of Western insistence and Security Council resolutions that Iran stop all uranium-enrichment activities. Allowing Iran to continue enriching, and despite modest (indeed, utterly inadequate) measures to prevent it from increasing its enriched-uranium stockpiles and its overall nuclear infrastructure, lays the predicate for Iran fully enjoying its right to enrichment in any final agreement. Indeed, the interim agreement itself acknowledges that a comprehensive solution will involve a mutually defined enrichment program. This is not, as the Obama administration leaked before the deal became public, a compromise on Irans claimed right to enrichment. This is abject surrender by the United States.
In exchange for superficial concessions, Iran achieved three critical breakthroughs. First, it bought time to continue all aspects of its nuclear-weapons program the agreement does not cover (centrifuge manufacturing and testing; weaponization research and fabrication; and its entire ballistic missile program). Indeed, given that the interim agreement contemplates periodic renewals, Iran may have gained all of the time it needs to achieve weaponization not of simply a handful of nuclear weapons, but of dozens or more.
Abject Surrender by the United States | The Weekly Standard
LOL, John "shoot first and ask questions later" Bolton
If he's against it then it must be good.
Similar threads
New Topics
-
-
-
[Columbia U] Mahmoud Khalil/Joseph Massad's "bibol" of 'balestine'- Started by Sayaras
- Replies: 0
-
-
