Nuke deal relies inspections... but Iran has already been blocking those for years

[Little-Acorn]

Has there ever been a "deal" more guaranteed to fail, than this one?

The deal basically removes sanctions from Iran. Which were the only things that even brought Iran to the negotiating table in the first place. And as an extra bennie, it lets them enrich all the uranium they want, later on. (WTF???)

And it says that, if we find they are violating their promises to limit enrichment right now, we will put the sanctions back on.

But how do we find that? With inspections, of course.

And Iran already has a long record of blocking inspections, ignoring requests for information, and generally telling the world they'll do whatever they damned well please regardless of treaties, agreements, or laws.

They are basically a 13th-century version of the Democrat Party.

How can we possibly make an "agreement" with people who have violated that same agreement endlessly in the past?

Can "adults" possibly be that naïve and self-deluded? All for the sake of crafting an "achievement" they can later point to as part of their "legacy"... even as it falls apart faster than a sand castle at high tide? A tide that comes again and again, every time, as reliably as clockwork?

--------------------------------------------

Examples of Iran blocking and ignoring agreed-to inspections:

2015:
Iran isn t providing needed access or information nuclear watchdog says - The Washington Post

2014:
Iran Blocks Inspections Hobbling Nuclear Deal - WSJ

2013:
Iran Country Profiles NTI

2012:
UN nuclear inspectors declare Iran mission a disappointment World news The Guardian

2011:
Iran International Atomic Energy Agency chief to meet in Tehran on resuming nuclear inspections - CBS News

 

[Little-Acorn]

Would you agree to lend money to a guy whom you had lent it to previously, year after year, when that guy has broken his promise to pay it back every time?

Because he promised that this time he will?

Obama would. And just did, in fact.

 

[Staidhup]

A treaty is only as good as the verification process employed to validate compliance. It will be interesting to see what materializes between now and June 30th that addresses this key focal issue.

 

[Little-Acorn]

A treaty is only as good as the verification process employed to validate compliance. It will be interesting to see what materializes between now and June 30th that addresses this key focal issue.

If the issue is even addressed at all.

Or will the media simply keep howling, "Obama, the peacemaker, has brought stability to the Middle East at last!!!"

While ignoring that Iran is still enriching all the uranium they want, while blocking inspectors from finding out for the umpteenth year in a row?

 

[Little-Acorn]

Obama said in his press conference on this glorious nuke deal: "If we see something suspicious, we will inspect it."

How close are we to the anniversary of his similar announcement, "If you like your health plan, you can keep your health plan"?

 

[Little-Acorn]

Looks like the liberals are still running like rabbits from this issue. They cannot reply to it at all.

The fact that it means the country is headed for major trouble, as Iran freely develops a Bomb and cows the entire region with it, doesn't bother them at all.

 

[Little-Acorn]

Obama has gotten a nuke deal with Iran, that will fall apart almost before the ink is dry and lead to that terrorist nation having a nuclear Bomb, for the reasons listed above.

No liberal cares?

 

[Little-Acorn]