- Joined
- Mar 11, 2006
- Messages
- 96,116
- Reaction score
- 33,462
- Location
- SE Virginia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
And what about a testosterone-filled mullah?
This is clearly just chest-pumping for the locals.
What the generals say means nothing...now if the negotiators (who say what they are told from the leaders) say this, then it's something.
Maybe they will, I dunno.
But what some testosterone-filled Iranian general says means as much as what a testosterone-filled American General says on these matters...next to nothing.
Until we make all Nations in that neighborhood play by the same rules, and that would be Israel, then I support the Guard position. Iran has attacked noone and has not tested a nuclear weapon, whereas Israel actually helped South Africa develop their Nuclear weapons. South Africa shed its' nukes and perhaps Israel should also. Your "ifs" and Mights' on the issue are just the stenographer viewpoints from the internal propaganda machine.not for regional security or for USA National Security interests.It has been conclusively proven that the USA created the sham nuke threat by Iran for political reasons,death and destruction in Iran yet, but hey, there's still time to bomb and kill Iranians. Demon's seed, don't ya' know. Probably related to Putin.At least we haven't used our smooth talking Libya intervention that spreads chaos,
Can we see that "conclusive proof" by any chance?
Until we make all Nations in that neighborhood play by the same rules, and that would be Israel, then I support the Guard position. Iran has attacked noone and has not tested a nuclear weapon, whereas Israel actually helped South Africa develop their Nuclear weapons. South Africa shed its' nukes and perhaps Israel should also. Your "ifs" and Mights' on the issue are just the stenographer viewpoints from the internal propaganda machine. It has been conclusively proven that the USA created the sham nuke threat by Iran for political reasons, not for regional security or for USA National Security interests. At least we haven't used our smooth talking Libya intervention that spreads chaos, death and destruction in Iran yet, but hey, there's still time to bomb and kill Iranians. Demon's seed, don't ya' know. Probably related to Putin.
Good morning, F & L. :2wave:
On the other hand, we have proof that N Korea is helping Iran with their nuclear dreams of grandeur, probably with China's okay. Does that count in the nuclear arena?
Did you know ValJar was born in Iran?
Yes Yes Yes, it was long ago, but curious nonetheless.
And completely in keeping with the coterie Obama has always seemed to prefer associating with.
Of course not!
Everyone should have nukes in Obama's world.
But, damn!, if NK allegedly hacks a movie company it's "WAR Mother****er! only we can hack computers"
I've considered getting one myself, but I understand I might have to wait since they're backlogged big time, with everyone in the world ordering at the same time! :mrgreen:
So ValJar and BHO were both influenced by Islam during their formative years. That's an interesting coincidence.Yes, she spent her formative years there, if psychologists are correct in their belief that up to age six is the learning time for children, and she does speak Farsi. I never heard how they met, though, since BHO grew up in Hawaii, raised by his grandparents.
Simpleχity;1064556431 said:Sen. Graham lists conditions for 'yes' vote on Iran nuclear deal
Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) has outlined eight conditions to obtain his vote when Congress debates any Iran final agreement.
— Reject any nuclear deal with Iran that doesn't allow for inspections of the country's military facilities.
— Allow Iran to enrich only enough uranium to supply one commercial nuclear power reactor.
— Close all nuclear sites in Iran not related to its nuclear power program.
— Require that inspectors certify Iran's compliance over time before any sanctions are lifted and any money held in escrow is released to Iran.
— Provide a clear process for sanctions to be reinstated if Iran violates the deal.
— Ban Iran from conducting research and development on advanced centrifuges.
— Remove all enriched uranium from Iran.
— Require President Obama to certify that Iran is no longer a state sponsor of terrorism before restrictions on Iran's nuclear program are lifted.
I can't disagree with any of the above. I would further add:
— All active centrifuge units shall be of the IR-1 model.
— Iran must satisfy all 20 pre-negotiation IAEA demands.
— The IAEA shall have the power to inspect any declared or suspect nuclear facility immediately and without constraints. This shall also apply to related housed-documents and data-networks.
this would kill any agreement
then when iran completes the business of building a nuke, it will be the neocons in congress we can look to for causing the proliferation
Simpleχity;1064545890 said:Iran's powerful Guard rejects inspection of military sites
As far as I am concerned, if this is Tehran's official position, then it is a deal breaker.
Nuclear weapons are under the custody and supervision of the military in every nation that has declared itself to be a nuclear-weapon nation. Iran has long been suspected of running two parallel nuclear programs ... one program for the purpose of generating energy and another separate military program to fabricate nuclear warheads and ballistic delivery systems.
The P5+1 nations are negotiating with Iran for the express purpose of guaranteeing that an Iranian military program to acquire nuclear weapons is impossible under strict parameters and an intrusive inspections regimen for the duration of any mutually accepted deal. This lofty goal however, cannot be achieved without the capability of the IAEA to inspect military facilities suspected of nuclear weapons research or uranium enrichment.
Contrary to what is imagined or purported by some, such inspections are not requested on a whim. The IAEA has many highly sophisticated tools to detect possible activity without entering a facility. They would only request access to a military facility if unequivocal technical/documentary evidence exists which demands an in-depth examination to either verify or dismiss suspicions.
Without this critical capability, any P5+1 deal with Iran is illusion and a sham.
this would kill any agreement
then when iran completes the business of building a nuke, it will be the neocons in congress we can look to for causing the proliferation
meanwhile, the other major nations that participated in the agreement will resume trade with iran in recognition it acted in good faith
net result, iran has THE bomb and we lost a potential long term partner in extinguishing isis
that sissy, graham, will have accomplished a lot
this would kill any agreement
then when iran completes the business of building a nuke, it will be the neocons in congress we can look to for causing the proliferation
meanwhile, the other major nations that participated in the agreement will resume trade with iran in recognition it acted in good faith
net result, iran has THE bomb and we lost a potential long term partner in extinguishing isis
that sissy, graham, will have accomplished a lot
Well thankfully you're not the deal maker! No nation is going to submit to inspections of all their military installations. It's counter to national security. The inspections should be to nuclear energy program installations.
The free world may have to rely on Israel again, despite the rebukes it received at the time, and the French are the same as ever. Operation Opera - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaOnly the completely delusional would assert that not allowing inspections of military sites is "acting in good faith", the plan is dead the sanctions will continue and Iran remains an assbackwards pariah nation living in the 5th century.
No one said all military bases. "Suspect" military bases.No nation is going to submit to inspections of all their military installations.
Simpleχity;1064562899 said:No one said all military bases. "Suspect" military bases.
Suspected by the IAEA ... the UN authority tasked with investigating NPT compliance issues.Suspect by whom. Suspicions have placed us in unnecessary wars before.
Iran >placed itself< in this awkward position by hiding Fordow from the IAEA for three years.this would kill any agreement
Simpleχity;1064565054 said:Suspected by the IAEA ... the UN authority tasked with investigating NPT compliance issues.
If the IAEA cannot investigate a suspicious facility ... then NPT compliance is unobtainable.
Failure to be nuclear-transparent is one of the many reasons Iran is currently under international sanctions.
Seems to me the last time the IAEA was doing its job, they were forced to leave because war was preferred to peace.
Mornin Cresto. :2wave: Is there a link to that that states the IAEA was forced to leave because War is preferred to peace?
Morning MMC. Bush kicked the IAEA out of Iraq because he wasn't interested in peace that would be the result of the agency not finding the fabled WMD. In favor of his prearranged war. Common knowledge.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?