• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Iran Nuclear Deal Is Reached After Long Negotiations [W: 990]

Henrin said:
Non interventionism is not isolationism. Learn the difference.
Click to expand...

Leading from behind isn't leading either.

You can either chose to be a leader, and have a hand in shaping coming events, at least to some extent.
Or you can chose to not be a leader, and not have a hand in shaping coming events only to be subjected to how others shape the coming events and their impact on you and your nation.

All things considered, I choose the former, to be the leader, and to have a hand in shaping the coming events. It's a better position to be in.
 
Last edited:
Re: CNN International has breaking news.

ocean515 said:
IMO, discussions should be centered on what happens when Iran gets the bomb, and decides to use it as a weapon, or a tool. Thinking they can be stopped from making one is a fools errand.

As a measure of their culture, expecting they will live up to any agreement is just wishful thinking. The only way to gain their respect is to earn it is through a clear and aggressive posture. Short of that, they have no respect, and it's clear how they view the United States under the current administration.

There is a reason Iran took hostages during the Carter Administration, but released them at the same moment Ronald Reagan took the oath of office.
Click to expand...

Indeed. Iran recognized far better than the electorate as to how weak Carter was, the same way they recognize that Obama is Carter II (in more ways than I wish to count!).
 
BobbyO said:
Admittedly, I have not read all the notes on this thread, nor other threads on the same issue.
So perhaps i restate: Do you have any objections to Iran having the bomb?
Click to expand...

Iran is gonna get the bomb?
 
Anthony60 said:
Now let ME get this straight... You think Iran is going to put a full hault to their nuclear bomb program? That's cute. How naive.
Click to expand...

Yea... Umm... They stopped their nuclear bomb program in 2003 (U.S. Finds That Iran Halted Nuclear Arms Bid in 2003 ) , and since then have not restarted it and shown no indication to restart it... (Reuters: U.S. Intelligence Agencies Confident That Iran Hasn't Restarted Nuclear Weapons Program | ThinkProgress )

But remember! We all gonna die now! :scared::scared:
 
TheDemSocialist said:
To pressure Iran to take a seat at the negotiating table....... Literally the whole reason.
Click to expand...

Why? You said they stopped their bomb program in 2003, 12 years ago. If that is the case, why did we need to negotiate with them? Why do we want to inspect a program that they don't have?
 
Juanita said:
Why would Iran try to nuke us, Israel or even Saudi Arabia? The second their nuke went airbourn, ours would be airbourn too, followed immediately by Israel and Pakistan. We all would suffer but Iran would no longer exist, and they know this.
Click to expand...

For one thing, they would nuke Israel because thay haven't got their ICBMs yet.
And despite our alleged agreement to defend Israel can you imagine Obama droppig one on the Ayatollah? And when he's gone it's questionable whether his Republican successor will want to either.
That leaves Israel and they may not even wait but I suspect they're more likely to do something through traditional methods or skulduggery.
Can you imagine Obama's reaction if Israel sent some serious missiles into Iran's nuclear development sites?
He'd freak out. Not so his successor.

Anyway, as I tried to explain earlier, here in the West it's difficult to comprehend that Iran and its Mullahs are working from a whole different playbook that says they're required to destroy Israel or die trying.
Sad to say, that's what we're dealing with and we should stop applying Western reason to Jihad logic.
 
Anthony60 said:
Why? You said they stopped their bomb program in 2003, 12 years ago. If that is the case, why did we need to negotiate with them?
Click to expand...
To open verification networks, and thus allowing international inspectors into their nuclear program to ensure it is specifically used for peaceful means, and continued to be used for those purposes only.

Why do we want to inspect a program that they don't have?
Click to expand...
A nuclear program≠nuclear weapons program.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
To open verification networks, and thus allowing international inspectors into their nuclear program to ensure it is specifically used for peaceful means, and continued to be used for those purposes only.


A nuclear program≠nuclear weapons program.
Click to expand...

Open verification networks for what? You just said they don't have a nuclear weapons program. You are going in circles here. Or do you mean to say that there is enough doubt to think that they are in fact pursuing a nuclear weapon, and have been lying about that for 12 years?
 
Henrin said:
Non interventionism is not isolationism. Learn the difference.
Click to expand...

Thank you I have. Yet I see Libertarians, well those that have that lean noted on their profile are quite willing to intervene in another State.
Call me confused?
 
WSUwarrior said:
No, they dont. We can and SHOULD be limiting uranium enrichment, ESPECIALLY THOSE COUNTRIES THAT WANT TO MURDER EVERYONE IN OUR COUNTRY.

What the **** does Iran need nuclear power or weapons for? How many people in that **** hole even have access to electricity? The fewer the better IMO. Screw Iran. Socialists sure hate America.
Click to expand...

I have been corrected on the difference between Non Intervention and Isolationist by Henrin- Yet as a Libertarian you want to intervene in another State? So what gives?
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Yea... Umm... They stopped their nuclear bomb program in 2003 (U.S. Finds That Iran Halted Nuclear Arms Bid in 2003 ) , and since then have not restarted it and shown no indication to restart it... (Reuters: U.S. Intelligence Agencies Confident That Iran Hasn't Restarted Nuclear Weapons Program | ThinkProgress )

But remember! We all gonna die now! :scared::scared:
Click to expand...




Well US won't be able to "find anything" now!


lolololo

US inspectors banned from all Iranian nuclear sites under deal | Daily Mail Online
 
Anthony60 said:
Open verification networks for what?
Click to expand...
Ummm... Their nuclear program.... You know... The whole subject of the deal......

You just said they don't have a nuclear weapons program.
Click to expand...
They dont. There is no evidence to show that they restarted their nuclear WEAPONS program. They have a nuclear program. But no evidence that shows a NUCLEAR WEAPONS program.

You are going in circles here.
Click to expand...
:lamo
Lets try this again, this isnt that difficult. A nuclear program≠nuclear weapons program.
 
JANFU said:
Is that a surprise?
There will be enough inspectors and monitoring equipment which will be the latest hi tech..
Not having US inspectors is not a concern.
Click to expand...



no biggie. I mean when Russia wanted to inspect ours Obama said yes.... so someone thinks inspections are important. I am still not understanding why this tyrannical murderous regieme is being given the benefit of the doubt by the left.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
no biggie. I mean when Russia wanted to inspect ours Obama said yes.... so someone thinks inspections are important. I am still not understanding why this tyrannical murderous regieme is being given the benefit of the doubt by the left.
Click to expand...

Is that not under a Treaty that originated with RR?
No benefit of the doubt and no one trusts them either- same way they do not trust the US- . The inspections are present.
Now any opinion on the snap back of sanctions in the event that Iran fails to comply?
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Do tell.
Click to expand...

Well if you watched the interview, its answered. For a state to partake as part of an IAEA inspection team, that state must have full diplomatic relations with the country who their inspectors will be inspecting. As you know, we dont have full diplomatic relations with Iran...

"BLITZER: Let's clarify a few points as far as this - this nuclear deal with Iran is concerned.
I take it that all of the IAEA inspection teams, all the inspectors who go in, will have to be from countries that have formal full diplomatic relations with Iran. As a result, no Americans will directly be involved in any on the ground inspections in Iran, is that right?
RICE: Wolf, yes, the IAEA, which is a highly respected international organization, will field an international team of inspectors. And those inspectors will, in all likelihood, come from IAEA member states, most of whom have diplomatic relations with Iran. We, of course, are a rare exception.
BLITZER: So no one...
RICE: The British have diplomatic relations...
BLITZER: - so no Americans...
RICE: - the French...
BLITZER: - will be - I just want to be precise on this. Sorry for interrupting.
No Americans will be on the ground in Iran actually inspecting?
RICE: No Americans will be part of the IAEA inspection teams.
BLITZER: Will Americans be outside of the IAEA inspection teams?
RICE: Well, there are Americans in Iran on a daily basis, Wolf, so I'm not - I'm not sure exactly what you're asking.
BLITZER: I'm talking about American government officials or military officials who could be inspecting.
RICE: We - there are not going to independent American inspectors separate from the IAEA. The IAEA will be doing inspections - the inspections on behalf of the United States and the rest of the international community.
BLITZER: Because I know there are American tourists and Americans who go visit family members in Iran. I'm talking about U.S. government sent people, diplomats or others, to go in there and see what's going on.
I take it they will not be doing that?
RICE: I don't anticipate that, no.
BLITZER: Because the president today said he does not anticipate restoring full diplomatic relations with Iran any time soon.
RICE: Exactly."
Does the deal restrict Iran's ability to buy weapons? – CNN Press Room - CNN.com Blogs

And this has been known ever since the negotiations have been going on... Since essentially day one.
 
WSUwarrior said:
Socialism is worse than Naziism.
Click to expand...

Really?

So...'splain to us exactly how it is that life in the mostly-socialized first-world democracies is worse than life under Nazism in Germany. After having been to fairly-well socialized Australia and Japan - oh yeah, almost forgot all the times I've been to Canada - this I gotta hear.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom