In Nuclear Talks, Iran Seeks to Avoid Specifics

jmotivator said:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/25/w...-deal-while-iran-favors-general-one.html?_r=1

"If an agreement to limit Iran’s nuclear capability is reached by deadline in the next seven days, one thing may be missing: an actual written accord, signed by the Iranians."

An agreement that wouldn't be worth the paper it's written on...

I still hold out hope that the President isn't so stupid that he would accept such an agreement.

Click to expand...

An agreement is only worth the commitment to it that the parties demonstrate.

It's been reported that Iran has yet to fulfill and honor a single one of it's commitments that have been agreed to.
It's also been reported that the UN's IAEA has been thwarted from it's inspections on a number of fronts and at a number of known locations.

OrphanSlug said:

Iran does not want to come clean on their intentions and be specific in a "deal?" I'm completely shocked, anyone else?

Click to expand...

I guess Iran's leaders must not be taking Obama, Kerry and the UN very seriously. The overall impression that I get is that Iran is playing for time and lifting of sanctions. It's little wonder that Obama's being so easily taken in by Iran. They sense how desperate he is for a foreign policy achievement for his legacy, and are playing him for all it's worth; for all they can get. Obama, the international and diplomatic neophyte, is just way out of his depth, severely over-matched and extremely vulnerable, and the Iranian leaders know it.

A bad deal is worse than no deal. At least it'll have to go to the Senate to become binding on the US. Hope they recognize whether it's a good deal or a bad deal. Seems like they are already doing so.

face said:

What ever you say sport, provide the quote where he in seriousness called for bombing Iran. :roll: Your comparison of a bad joke to serious calls for the annihilation of the United States is laughable.

Click to expand...

If the fact that the war mongering hawk isn't joking..........

Even before he was caught playing poker on his iPhone at a Senate hearing on Wednesday, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) had already sent a message: Anything less than an extensive aerial assault on the Syrian regime by American forces would be an unacceptable approach to the conflict in the Middle East. This was hardly surprising. Over the last two decades, McCain has rarely missed an opportunity to call for the escalation of an international conflict. Since the mid-1990s, he's pushed for regime change in more than a half-dozen countries—occasionally with disastrous consequences.

Has escaped you,

Here's a quick review of McCain's eagerness for military action and foreign entanglements.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/09/john-mccain-world-attack-map-syria

joG said:

Thing is, that the Head of IAEA said the other day that Iran was not cooperating and that the IAEA cannot determine whether or not it is developing military capability. As there have been a number of things they were doing that IAEA said were only compatible with a weapons program, it sounds as though we are where we were 5 years ago.

Click to expand...

No one except fear mongers have said that Iran is trying to develop a nuclear weapon. There is no credible evidence that is taking place.

face said:

There motivation is to get the sanctions lifted while achieving their objective of obtaining the bomb, nobody is fooled by the genocidal thecorats who speak out of both sides of their mouths, claiming to want peaceful negotiations while demanding death to America, ****ing spare us.

Click to expand...

Even if you think that they are trying to get one, the best way to keep them from doing it is to get them to agree to inspections so that what they are doing can be observed closely.

Ironfist said:

No one except fear mongers have said that Iran is trying to develop a nuclear weapon. There is no credible evidence that is taking place.

Click to expand...

I am afraid you are wrong. But I am unwilling to look up the literature, because it is so irrefutable that anyone willing to be open minded would know.

Ironfist said:

Even if you think that they are trying to get one, the best way to keep them from doing it is to get them to agree to inspections so that what they are doing can be observed closely.

Click to expand...

That would be just about exactly, what everyone has been trying to convince the Iranians of. They have been willing to accept enormous pain for their population to avoid it.

I wonder how Obama's publishing Israel's nuclear capability will play into this.

joG said:

I am afraid you are wrong. But I am unwilling to look up the literature, because it is so irrefutable that anyone willing to be open minded would know.

Click to expand...

No I am not wrong. Even Israel's intelligence agency concluded that Iran was not engaged in the type of activity necessary to produce nuclear weapons. Unless you want to say that the fact that they are enriching uranium means that they are trying to develop nuclear weapons. If that is the case then Brazil and Japan are trying to develop nuclear weapons.

joG said:

That would be just about exactly, what everyone has been trying to convince the Iranians of. They have been willing to accept enormous pain for their population to avoid it.

I wonder how Obama's publishing Israel's nuclear capability will play into this.

Click to expand...

Actually the main problem is not inspections, it is the number of centrifuges.

Montecresto said:

If the fact that the war mongering hawk isn't joking..........

Even before he was caught playing poker on his iPhone at a Senate hearing on Wednesday, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) had already sent a message: Anything less than an extensive aerial assault on the Syrian regime by American forces would be an unacceptable approach to the conflict in the Middle East. This was hardly surprising. Over the last two decades, McCain has rarely missed an opportunity to call for the escalation of an international conflict. Since the mid-1990s, he's pushed for regime change in more than a half-dozen countries—occasionally with disastrous consequences.

Has escaped you,

Here's a quick review of McCain's eagerness for military action and foreign entanglements.

Map: All the Countries John McCain Has Wanted to Attack | Mother Jones

Click to expand...

No quotes, no evidence, no nothing save for far left propaganda from "motherjones", once again your comparison between serious calls for the extermination of the United States and a national holiday dedicated to that prospect and a bad recital of a 30 year old parody is ****ing laughable. Provide a quote from McCain where he actually in seriousness called for immediate military action against Iran rather than negotiation, and no saying that military action would not be taken off the table if all else fails is not the same thing as calling for the bombing of Iran.

Ironfist said:

Even if you think that they are trying to get one, the best way to keep them from doing it is to get them to agree to inspections so that what they are doing can be observed closely.

Click to expand...

Not if it means lifting the sanctions on account of nuclear blackmail.

Ironfist said:

No I am not wrong. Even Israel's intelligence agency concluded that Iran was not engaged in the type of activity necessary to produce nuclear weapons.

Click to expand...

No, no they didn't. Provide the Mossad report stating this, I'll be waiting with baited breath.