CDZ Iran Nuke Deal: Bottom Line Analysis

[theDoctorisIn]

Stoking anger and fear against America to keep the masses in line?

Again, seems pretty rational to me.

Rational? To a Liberal who claims the right "hates" Mexicans, blacks, gays and immigrants, I suppose it does.

I've never claimed any of those things.

Let's try to stay on topic, this is the CDZ.

 

[WelfareQueen]

The UN took a vote today. The sanctions are done. We completely capitulated to Iran. Is that clear enough?


http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/21/w...ran-nuclear-pact-votes-to-lift-sanctions.html

 

[Ernie S.]

U.S. Says Iran s Support of Terrorism Undiminished - WSJ

Got something that's not behind a paywall? I have no desire to pay for the Wall Street Journal.

I don't pay for it....

 

[theDoctorisIn]

U.S. Says Iran s Support of Terrorism Undiminished - WSJ

Got something that's not behind a paywall? I have no desire to pay for the Wall Street Journal.

I don't pay for it....

Thanks!

 

[Ernie S.]

CDZ debates with STAFF can be hazardous to your health.
You asked for examples, I provided 3. I won't respond the way I should and fall in that trap.

 

[Ernie S.]

You're welcome.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

CDZ debates with STAFF can be hazardous to your health.
You asked for examples, I provided 3. I won't respond the way I should and fall in that trap.

Don't try to use my status as staff as an excuse.

How do any of your examples show Iran to not be a rational actor?

 

[Ernie S.]

You're kidding?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

You're kidding?

Nope.

 

[Ernie S.]

irrational.

 

[WelfareQueen]

Iran says nuclear means nothing and vows death to the United States and to Israel.


The stupidity of Obama and Kerry is staggering. Truly.

"Ayatollah Khamenei told supporters on Saturday that U.S. policies in the region were "180 degrees" opposed to Iran's, at a speech in a Tehran mosque punctuated by chants of "Death to America" and "Death to Israel".

"Even after this deal our policy toward the arrogant U.S. will not change," Khamenei said."


Kerry says Iran vow to defy U.S. is very disturbing - Yahoo News

 

[Ernie S.]

But that seems rational to some here. The problem is that radical Islam does not share our values and sensibilities. They are commanded by their "religion" to be disingenuous to non believers. A written agreement with them will only restrict us. They will use the koran to justify violating it. Yes, there may be repercussions for them if they do resume their nuclear ambitions, but, #1, they don't think obama would do anything but reimpose sanctions and #2, they don't much care about their citizens.

 

[RoshanNair]

Obama's nuke deal is an albatross. It should've been contingent on the Persians abandoning Pisslam and (re)-converting back to their ancestral faith of Zoroastrianism.

Hey, since Muslims are so intent on returning the world to the 7th century, shouldn't it be kosher to demand that they re-write their collective histories from the sixth?

 

[Derideo_Te]

Thank you for disqualifying yourself from the OP topic.

Have a nice day.

I think I adequately covered the "onus" you placed. It's extremely dishonest for you to demand I prove a peripheral statement, then claim I went off topic. I expect that from FakeSmarmy, Guanno and rdean, but I thought you more intelligent. Fuck! Day is young. I'll probably get something else wrong today too.
Thank you for being so easy to embarrass.
Have whatever kind of day you wish.

You disqualified yourself because you refuse to admit that it was a rabid extremist rightwinger who blew up the Murrah building in Oklahoma city killing 168 people including 19 children and 3 pregnant women.

If you cannot be honest enough to admit that the crazies here are no different to the crazies in Iran then it is a complete and utter waste of time discussing the OP topic with you.

That was 2 crazy anarchists. While farther right than most, they were neither Repblicans OR republicans. AND there were 2.... Just 2. There are thousands, TENS of thousands of Islamic terrorists willing to die for Allah and a bunch of virgins when they martyr themselves.
A great many don't care if they live or die and long as Sunnis kill Shiites and Sunnis and Shiites kill Jews and Americans. McVeigh and Nichols did not martyr themselves. They didn't expect 72 virgins when they died, Their countrymen didn't celebrate thier feat in the streets.
In short, they were rational humans who engaged in one horrendous irrational act.
Islamic extremists are irrational, barely human zealots engaged in multiple horrendous acts.
If you can't see the difference, there will be no further purpose in engaging with you.

You make excuses for the extremist rightwing crazies and pretend that their anti-government motivation wasn't identical to that driving the entire GOP these days.

No one is buying that BS anymore.

There is no separation between the extremist rightwingers who walk around carrying long guns in public and those that commit acts of violent domestic terrorism when it comes to their beliefs.

They exposed themselves on Bundy's ranch and when they gunned down those cops having coffee.

They are in your midst and you condone them while hypocritically condemning every Iranian as being somehow "worse".

The reality is that the Iranian zealots are no different to your extemist rightwing zealots right here in the USA.

The only significant difference is that the FBI keeps close tabs on our domestic extremist rightwing terrorists and manages to stop most of them before they kill innocent civilians.

Now you can continue to destroy your own credibility by denying reality and that it is your choice or you can be honest enough to admit that crazy is crazy irrespective of which side you happen to be on.

I'll address one of your strawman "points" only:
....while hypocritically condemning every Iranian as being somehow "worse". I never condemned EVERY IRANIAN. I pointed out that there are many times as many Islamic terrorists as there are "rightwing extremist" terrorists.

You use strong words indiscriminately for effect; "extemist rightwing zealots" seems, in your world to encompass every citizen to the right of barack obama. Anyone who voices concern for the 2nd Amendment is a "right wing wacko".
You and your Progressive comrades keep claiming Conservatives "hate" blacks, gays women, Mexicans, immigrants, etc.
Nothing could be further from the truth. WORDS have meaning, sir. Surely one who's very screen name translates to "I despise you" should know better.
The rest of your post deserves no response. Should you desire further discussion with me, you will need to develop some intellectual honesty before I will address anything but your lack of it. Capisce?

I'll address one of your strawman "points" only:
....while hypocritically condemning every Iranian as being somehow "worse". I never condemned EVERY IRANIAN. I pointed out that there are many times as many Islamic terrorists as there are "rightwing extremist" terrorists.

The OP topic is Iran. Your deflection to "many times as many Islamic terrorists" in order to mitigate the dramatic increase in extremist rightwing domestic terrorists is because you don't want to admit the truth.

http://www.splcenter.org/get-inform...es/2012/spring/the-year-in-hate-and-extremism

The number of hate groups operating in the United States continued to rise in 2008 and has grown by 54 percent since 2000 — an increase fueled last year by immigration fears, a failing economy and the successful campaign of Barack Obama, according to the "Year in Hate" issue of the SPLC's Intelligence Report released today.

The SPLC identified 926 hate groups active in 2008, up more than 4 percent from the 888 groups in 2007 and far above the 602 groups documented in 2000. A list and interactive, state-by-state map of these groups can be viewed here.

The swelling of the Patriot movement since that time has been astounding. From 149 groups in 2008, the number of Patriot organizations skyrocketed to 512 in 2009, shot up again in 2010 to 824, and then, last year, jumped to 1,274. That works out to a staggering 755% growth in the three years ending last Dec. 31. Last year’s total was more than 400 groups higher than the prior all-time high, in 1996.​

You use strong words indiscriminately for effect; "extemist rightwing zealots" seems, in your world to encompass every citizen to the right of barack obama.

Kindly refrain from fallacious mischaracterizations of what I am posting.

Anyone who voices concern for the 2nd Amendment is a "right wing wacko".

Assumes facts not in evidence.

You and your Progressive comrades keep claiming Conservatives "hate" blacks, gays women, Mexicans, immigrants, etc.
Nothing could be further from the truth.

Assumes facts not in evidence.

WORDS have meaning, sir. Surely one who's very screen name translates to "I despise you" should know better.

Why not actually use the tools available to you instead of posting falsehoods?

Google Translate

Since you chose to open that door what does your avi image say about who you despise?

The rest of your post deserves no response. Should you desire further discussion with me, you will need to develop some intellectual honesty before I will address anything but your lack of it. Capisce?

How ironic!

Iran is behaving in a rational manner by signing this treaty.

You are irrationally casting unwarranted aspersions on my character which is a violation of the CDZ rules.

 

[WelfareQueen]

Oy vey.

 

[I amso IR]

Here's my two cents.

I believe Obama is a ninocmpoop, and John Kerry is a dullard. But I still think this deal is a good deal for the US and for Iran.

The misinformation and outright lies by the warmongering Neo-Cons and Israel is sickening. Iran does not have a nuclear weapons program. Iran has never had nuclear weapons. Back in 2007, combined US intelligence concluded that Iran was NOT working on a nuclear weapons program. Israel’s intelligence services came to the same conclusion. Read that again- THEY WERE NOT WORKING ON A NUCLEAR WEAPONS PROGRAM. Even George W Bush conceded in his biography that - Iran was not working on a nuclear program, which is why he could not not justify bombing/invading them.

But let's pretend they did.....If Iran actual had nuclear weapons and could deliver them (that's a tricky part that North Korea is still struggling with) why would they attack Israel? Israel would obliterate them! The Israeli's have nuclear weapons, submarines, aircraft, rockets, etc.... If Iran attacked Israel, its nuclear forces would wipe Iran and it's 70 million people off the map!!

At any rate, this deal ensures that Iran will not have a nuclear weapon for at least 10 years.

Bottom line- IMHO, Iran is a natural ally that will control/confront/defeat ISIS and help stabilize the region. Israel is in no danger and they never were.

The deal is a winner for all parties.

NEXT!!

As Iran is in a position to defeat ISIS and in doing so would be of benefit to all concerned, will they do it? Remains to be seen. To do so they must cross certain international borders, Iraq, Syria, etc. Will they turn the Republican Guard loose, remains to be seen. How ever, if Iran is willing to do so and after they have accomplished that goal, it puts them into much closer proximity of Israel. What does that mean? Not sure, but should they then suddenly have the support of Iraq and Syria, I have to feel "Katy needs to bar the door"! Or stated another way, "Pandora's box may be opened to the world" and the blitzkrieg I mentioned elsewhere may become reality. The statement "Read that again- they were not working on a nuclear weapons program" is in no way applicable to what they are doing now, some 8 years later, as they continue to refuse to allow inspections which will or will not verify the opinion. Iran has continued to state they wish to eliminate the U.S. and Israel, to virtually today. Iran is willing to play in the sandbox of the world but only on their terms and conditions. That seems somewhat one sided and now they have 15 years more,of playtime, should the U.S. Congress allow the negotiations to become law. That is simply nothing more than a "continue to march". I do trust the Iranian leadership, period. Not that it matters.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Here's my two cents.

I believe Obama is a ninocmpoop, and John Kerry is a dullard. But I still think this deal is a good deal for the US and for Iran.

The misinformation and outright lies by the warmongering Neo-Cons and Israel is sickening. Iran does not have a nuclear weapons program. Iran has never had nuclear weapons. Back in 2007, combined US intelligence concluded that Iran was NOT working on a nuclear weapons program. Israel’s intelligence services came to the same conclusion. Read that again- THEY WERE NOT WORKING ON A NUCLEAR WEAPONS PROGRAM. Even George W Bush conceded in his biography that - Iran was not working on a nuclear program, which is why he could not not justify bombing/invading them.

But let's pretend they did.....If Iran actual had nuclear weapons and could deliver them (that's a tricky part that North Korea is still struggling with) why would they attack Israel? Israel would obliterate them! The Israeli's have nuclear weapons, submarines, aircraft, rockets, etc.... If Iran attacked Israel, its nuclear forces would wipe Iran and it's 70 million people off the map!!

At any rate, this deal ensures that Iran will not have a nuclear weapon for at least 10 years.

Bottom line- IMHO, Iran is a natural ally that will control/confront/defeat ISIS and help stabilize the region. Israel is in no danger and they never were.

The deal is a winner for all parties.

NEXT!!

As Iran is in a position to defeat ISIS and in doing so would be of benefit to all concerned, will they do it? Remains to be seen. To do so they must cross certain international borders, Iraq, Syria, etc. Will they turn the Republican Guard loose, remains to be seen. How ever, if Iran is willing to do so and after they have accomplished that goal, it puts them into much closer proximity of Israel. What does that mean? Not sure, but should they then suddenly have the support of Iraq and Syria, I have to feel "Katy needs to bar the door"! Or stated another way, "Pandora's box may be opened to the world" and the blitzkrieg I mentioned elsewhere may become reality. The statement "Read that again- they were not working on a nuclear weapons program" is in no way applicable to what they are doing now, some 8 years later, as they continue to refuse to allow inspections which will or will not verify the opinion. Iran has continued to state they wish to eliminate the U.S. and Israel, to virtually today. Iran is willing to play in the sandbox of the world but only on their terms and conditions. That seems somewhat one sided and now they have 15 years more,of playtime, should the U.S. Congress allow the negotiations to become law. That is simply nothing more than a "continue to march". I do trust the Iranian leadership, period. Not that it matters.

From Iran's perspective what do they see?

America has been responsible for destabilizing nations on both their eastern and western borders.

Why wouldn't Iran side with whichever group is likely to bring about some kind of stable government to it's borders in the future?

Why would they trust the West to do it given that they are responsible for the current situations?

Self interest is what is driving Iran.

The same self interest that works right here in the USA.

Both nations have their share of extremist rightwingers willing to commit atrocities.

Both nations have a vested interest in a peaceful future in the middle east.

The nuke deal offers both nations a path towards that future.

The alternative is a far worse option and both nations know it.

 

[Ernie S.]

I think I adequately covered the "onus" you placed. It's extremely dishonest for you to demand I prove a peripheral statement, then claim I went off topic. I expect that from FakeSmarmy, Guanno and rdean, but I thought you more intelligent. Fuck! Day is young. I'll probably get something else wrong today too.
Thank you for being so easy to embarrass.
Have whatever kind of day you wish.

You disqualified yourself because you refuse to admit that it was a rabid extremist rightwinger who blew up the Murrah building in Oklahoma city killing 168 people including 19 children and 3 pregnant women.

If you cannot be honest enough to admit that the crazies here are no different to the crazies in Iran then it is a complete and utter waste of time discussing the OP topic with you.

That was 2 crazy anarchists. While farther right than most, they were neither Repblicans OR republicans. AND there were 2.... Just 2. There are thousands, TENS of thousands of Islamic terrorists willing to die for Allah and a bunch of virgins when they martyr themselves.
A great many don't care if they live or die and long as Sunnis kill Shiites and Sunnis and Shiites kill Jews and Americans. McVeigh and Nichols did not martyr themselves. They didn't expect 72 virgins when they died, Their countrymen didn't celebrate thier feat in the streets.
In short, they were rational humans who engaged in one horrendous irrational act.
Islamic extremists are irrational, barely human zealots engaged in multiple horrendous acts.
If you can't see the difference, there will be no further purpose in engaging with you.

You make excuses for the extremist rightwing crazies and pretend that their anti-government motivation wasn't identical to that driving the entire GOP these days.

No one is buying that BS anymore.

There is no separation between the extremist rightwingers who walk around carrying long guns in public and those that commit acts of violent domestic terrorism when it comes to their beliefs.

They exposed themselves on Bundy's ranch and when they gunned down those cops having coffee.

They are in your midst and you condone them while hypocritically condemning every Iranian as being somehow "worse".

The reality is that the Iranian zealots are no different to your extemist rightwing zealots right here in the USA.

The only significant difference is that the FBI keeps close tabs on our domestic extremist rightwing terrorists and manages to stop most of them before they kill innocent civilians.

Now you can continue to destroy your own credibility by denying reality and that it is your choice or you can be honest enough to admit that crazy is crazy irrespective of which side you happen to be on.

I'll address one of your strawman "points" only:
....while hypocritically condemning every Iranian as being somehow "worse". I never condemned EVERY IRANIAN. I pointed out that there are many times as many Islamic terrorists as there are "rightwing extremist" terrorists.

You use strong words indiscriminately for effect; "extemist rightwing zealots" seems, in your world to encompass every citizen to the right of barack obama. Anyone who voices concern for the 2nd Amendment is a "right wing wacko".
You and your Progressive comrades keep claiming Conservatives "hate" blacks, gays women, Mexicans, immigrants, etc.
Nothing could be further from the truth. WORDS have meaning, sir. Surely one who's very screen name translates to "I despise you" should know better.
The rest of your post deserves no response. Should you desire further discussion with me, you will need to develop some intellectual honesty before I will address anything but your lack of it. Capisce?

I'll address one of your strawman "points" only:
....while hypocritically condemning every Iranian as being somehow "worse". I never condemned EVERY IRANIAN. I pointed out that there are many times as many Islamic terrorists as there are "rightwing extremist" terrorists.

The OP topic is Iran. Your deflection to "many times as many Islamic terrorists" in order to mitigate the dramatic increase in extremist rightwing domestic terrorists is because you don't want to admit the truth.

http://www.splcenter.org/get-inform...es/2012/spring/the-year-in-hate-and-extremism

The number of hate groups operating in the United States continued to rise in 2008 and has grown by 54 percent since 2000 — an increase fueled last year by immigration fears, a failing economy and the successful campaign of Barack Obama, according to the "Year in Hate" issue of the SPLC's Intelligence Report released today.

The SPLC identified 926 hate groups active in 2008, up more than 4 percent from the 888 groups in 2007 and far above the 602 groups documented in 2000. A list and interactive, state-by-state map of these groups can be viewed here.

The swelling of the Patriot movement since that time has been astounding. From 149 groups in 2008, the number of Patriot organizations skyrocketed to 512 in 2009, shot up again in 2010 to 824, and then, last year, jumped to 1,274. That works out to a staggering 755% growth in the three years ending last Dec. 31. Last year’s total was more than 400 groups higher than the prior all-time high, in 1996.​

You use strong words indiscriminately for effect; "extemist rightwing zealots" seems, in your world to encompass every citizen to the right of barack obama.

Kindly refrain from fallacious mischaracterizations of what I am posting.

Anyone who voices concern for the 2nd Amendment is a "right wing wacko".

Assumes facts not in evidence.

You and your Progressive comrades keep claiming Conservatives "hate" blacks, gays women, Mexicans, immigrants, etc.
Nothing could be further from the truth.

Assumes facts not in evidence.

WORDS have meaning, sir. Surely one who's very screen name translates to "I despise you" should know better.

Why not actually use the tools available to you instead of posting falsehoods?

Google Translate

View attachment 45179​

Since you chose to open that door what does your avi image say about who you despise?

The rest of your post deserves no response. Should you desire further discussion with me, you will need to develop some intellectual honesty before I will address anything but your lack of it. Capisce?

How ironic!

Iran is behaving in a rational manner by signing this treaty.

You are irrationally casting unwarranted aspersions on my character which is a violation of the CDZ rules.

Bullshit! If you think my opinion off you and your Liberal comrades is casting unwarranted aspersions on your character, you should report my post and argue the point with STAFF

I made my point. You ignore it for the 7th time and find my comments "ironic"

I agree in this instance, Iran IS being rational by signing this agreement. I can hear them laughing from here. Anyone would agree to giving up practically nothing in return for their demands from a superior power.

 

[jwoodie]

That level of ignorance is usually only found amongst inanimate objects.

Is this your contribution to the Clean Debate Zone? I must have accidentally unignored you, but have now corrected that oversight.

 

[I amso IR]

Here's my two cents.

I believe Obama is a ninocmpoop, and John Kerry is a dullard. But I still think this deal is a good deal for the US and for Iran.

The misinformation and outright lies by the warmongering Neo-Cons and Israel is sickening. Iran does not have a nuclear weapons program. Iran has never had nuclear weapons. Back in 2007, combined US intelligence concluded that Iran was NOT working on a nuclear weapons program. Israel’s intelligence services came to the same conclusion. Read that again- THEY WERE NOT WORKING ON A NUCLEAR WEAPONS PROGRAM. Even George W Bush conceded in his biography that - Iran was not working on a nuclear program, which is why he could not not justify bombing/invading them.

But let's pretend they did.....If Iran actual had nuclear weapons and could deliver them (that's a tricky part that North Korea is still struggling with) why would they attack Israel? Israel would obliterate them! The Israeli's have nuclear weapons, submarines, aircraft, rockets, etc.... If Iran attacked Israel, its nuclear forces would wipe Iran and it's 70 million people off the map!!

At any rate, this deal ensures that Iran will not have a nuclear weapon for at least 10 years.

Bottom line- IMHO, Iran is a natural ally that will control/confront/defeat ISIS and help stabilize the region. Israel is in no danger and they never were.

The deal is a winner for all parties.

NEXT!!

As Iran is in a position to defeat ISIS and in doing so would be of benefit to all concerned, will they do it? Remains to be seen. To do so they must cross certain international borders, Iraq, Syria, etc. Will they turn the Republican Guard loose, remains to be seen. How ever, if Iran is willing to do so and after they have accomplished that goal, it puts them into much closer proximity of Israel. What does that mean? Not sure, but should they then suddenly have the support of Iraq and Syria, I have to feel "Katy needs to bar the door"! Or stated another way, "Pandora's box may be opened to the world" and the blitzkrieg I mentioned elsewhere may become reality. The statement "Read that again- they were not working on a nuclear weapons program" is in no way applicable to what they are doing now, some 8 years later, as they continue to refuse to allow inspections which will or will not verify the opinion. Iran has continued to state they wish to eliminate the U.S. and Israel, to virtually today. Iran is willing to play in the sandbox of the world but only on their terms and conditions. That seems somewhat one sided and now they have 15 years more,of playtime, should the U.S. Congress allow the negotiations to become law. That is simply nothing more than a "continue to march". I do trust the Iranian leadership, period. Not that it matters.

From Iran's perspective what do they see?

View attachment 45190

America has been responsible for destabilizing nations on both their eastern and western borders.

Why wouldn't Iran side with whichever group is likely to bring about some kind of stable government to it's borders in the future?

Why would they trust the West to do it given that they are responsible for the current situations?

Self interest is what is driving Iran.

The same self interest that works right here in the USA.

Both nations have their share of extremist rightwingers willing to commit atrocities.

Both nations have a vested interest in a peaceful future in the middle east.

The nuke deal offers both nations a path towards that future.

The alternative is a far worse option and both nations know it.

For, I Am Charlie, (Chuck, Chuck'umz , Chucky):
.
Point #1 Agreed, as stated.

Point #2 Were Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Afghanistan reliable partners, that might be feasible. Pakistan wants no part in this in that they have other fish to fry, namely India and all of the areas terrorists. Iraq and Syria have their hands full with ISIS, and the fight for Syria, and as a result, not much help there. Saudi Arabia and Jordan are with the U.S. Turkey is simply standing by with their forces on alerted status and should push come to shove, with the U.S. Iran is in the middle of this mess and content on being antagonistic, however they may. They stay busy sinking aircraft carrier mock ups and hoping against hope for the opportunity to do so. Perhaps we could appease them by towing one of our retired carriers to the Persian Gulf and set it adrift.

Point #3 Why would they trust the West to do what? Bring peace to the area? Ask your main squeeze, Mr. Obama, about that. Perhaps it it easier to leave all concerned in the mess they are in. I truthfully cannot answer that question. It is far above my title and pay grade.

Point #4 To be certain, self interest is Iran's motive. Is this something new?

Point #5 The same self interest as here in the U.S? Not exactly, we already have the nukes. A sack full of them, big one's, small one's and a few intermediates. Israel also has a couple laying around which is exactly why Iran so desperately wants one of their own. Monkey see, monkey do. Not to mention they are too arrogant and primitive to realize that they cannot rely on the atom to save their defunct culture. Perhaps they have become climate aware?

Point #6 Surely ye jest! In terms of "share" the U.S. is roughly 6 times the population of Iran. In terms of being more realistic, the U.S. has many times fewer numbers of terrorists than Iran. I have not checked but would be willing to bet we have fewer American terrorists than we have Iranian terrorists living here in the U.S. That you classify any "Right Winger" as terrorist does not cut the mustard, Chuck, Je Suis. By your own standards, Chucky was a disrespectful terrorist who deserved to die.

Point #7 True as stated.

Point #8 Perhaps, perhaps not. Should both parties honor the intent of the accord, yes. Should one or the other violate the accord, no. To continue calling for death to Israel and the United States violates the spirit of said accord, in that such ranting and raving may incite violence upon either Israel or the United States or Iran itself, from within. Not that would be a bad thing.

Point #9 True as stated.

I have taken the time to address the concerns and questions you have stated. With exception of a couple of mild barbs, in the interest of latent humor, I expect the same in return. Feel free to jab and enjoy your wit while doing so. But I beg of you, try not to go personal. If you feel that I have done that, I apologize in advance. Should that be the case, please do not lower yourself to my standards.