Iran Deal, the reset..... and halt

Options
24567…69

Comments

  • BS44325
    BS44325 Posts: 6,124
    badbrains said:

    BS44325 said:

    mickeyrat said:

    BS44325 said:

    Do have you even read what the actual framework has been reported as being?

    I dont recall NK having EVER been a signatory to the non proliferation treaty.

    So really what is the point?

    THIS deal, why is THIS deal a bad one. Which the entire security council is on board with? Not to mention Germany?

    Iran will have a bomb. Some on here think that matters and some on here don't. But make no mistake they will have a bomb.
    Non answer.
    That isn't a non answer. Without arguing for the time being whether they should have a bomb, under this agreement they will certainly get one. They want one and they will get one. The agreement will prevent nothing. It will just be a paper to wave around to make us feel better.
    Again, people like you have been saying this for the past 30 fucken years. And guess what, the only country to get nuclear weapons in that time, your favorite human rights abusers Israel. Funny and sad at the same time.

    Right. And Pakistan and India and North Korea. Countries that want bombs get them.
  • mickeyrat
    mickeyrat Posts: 44,279
    BS44325 said:

    mickeyrat said:

    BS44325 said:

    Do have you even read what the actual framework has been reported as being?

    I dont recall NK having EVER been a signatory to the non proliferation treaty.

    So really what is the point?

    THIS deal, why is THIS deal a bad one. Which the entire security council is on board with? Not to mention Germany?

    Iran will have a bomb. Some on here think that matters and some on here don't. But make no mistake they will have a bomb.
    Non answer.
    That isn't a non answer. Without arguing for the time being whether they should have a bomb, under this agreement they will certainly get one. They want one and they will get one. The agreement will prevent nothing. It will just be a paper to wave around to make us feel better.

    Explain how?
    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
    you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
    memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
    another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
  • badbrains
    badbrains Posts: 10,255
    BS44325 said:

    badbrains said:

    BS44325 said:

    mickeyrat said:

    BS44325 said:

    Do have you even read what the actual framework has been reported as being?

    I dont recall NK having EVER been a signatory to the non proliferation treaty.

    So really what is the point?

    THIS deal, why is THIS deal a bad one. Which the entire security council is on board with? Not to mention Germany?

    Iran will have a bomb. Some on here think that matters and some on here don't. But make no mistake they will have a bomb.
    Non answer.
    That isn't a non answer. Without arguing for the time being whether they should have a bomb, under this agreement they will certainly get one. They want one and they will get one. The agreement will prevent nothing. It will just be a paper to wave around to make us feel better.
    Again, people like you have been saying this for the past 30 fucken years. And guess what, the only country to get nuclear weapons in that time, your favorite human rights abusers Israel. Funny and sad at the same time.
    Right. And Pakistan and India and North Korea. Countries that want bombs get them.

    And don't forget Israel. Mite as we'll include all countries.
  • brianlux
    brianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 43,640
    I'm not sure how this morphed into a nuke thread but on that subject, it's always concerned me far more that the US and Russia (and to a lesser degree, the others listed here) have so many nukes:

    Russia: 8,000
    U.S.A.: 7,315
    France: 300
    China: 250
    U.K.: 225
    Pakistan: 100-120
    India 90-110 (Don't 'cha love the uncertainty?)
    Israel: 80
    N.K.: <10 (And, oh how they want to use them!)

    So another nuke or two here or there? Whoopie!

    "It's a sad and beautiful world"
    -Roberto Benigni











  • badbrains
    badbrains Posts: 10,255
    brianlux said:

    I'm not sure how this morphed into a nuke thread but on that subject, it's always concerned me far more that the US and Russia (and to a lesser degree, the others listed here) have so many nukes:

    Russia: 8,000
    U.S.A.: 7,315
    France: 300
    China: 250
    U.K.: 225
    Pakistan: 100-120
    India 90-110 (Don't 'cha love the uncertainty?)
    Israel: 80
    N.K.:

    That list is wrong brian. Israel has over 200 nukes.
  • badbrains
    badbrains Posts: 10,255
    India: Between 90-110 nuclear warheads.
    Israel: Between 80-100 nuclear warheads, with fissile material for up to 200.
    Pakistan: Between 100 to 120 nuclear warheads.
  • brianlux
    brianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 43,640
    badbrains said:

    brianlux said:

    I'm not sure how this morphed into a nuke thread but on that subject, it's always concerned me far more that the US and Russia (and to a lesser degree, the others listed here) have so many nukes:

    Russia: 8,000
    U.S.A.: 7,315
    France: 300
    China: 250
    U.K.: 225
    Pakistan: 100-120
    India 90-110 (Don't 'cha love the uncertainty?)
    Israel: 80
    N.K.:

    That list is wrong brian. Israel has over 200 nukes.
    Fucking Google, haha!

    "It's a sad and beautiful world"
    -Roberto Benigni











  • BS44325
    BS44325 Posts: 6,124
    mickeyrat said:

    BS44325 said:

    mickeyrat said:

    BS44325 said:

    Do have you even read what the actual framework has been reported as being?

    I dont recall NK having EVER been a signatory to the non proliferation treaty.

    So really what is the point?

    THIS deal, why is THIS deal a bad one. Which the entire security council is on board with? Not to mention Germany?

    Iran will have a bomb. Some on here think that matters and some on here don't. But make no mistake they will have a bomb.
    Non answer.
    That isn't a non answer. Without arguing for the time being whether they should have a bomb, under this agreement they will certainly get one. They want one and they will get one. The agreement will prevent nothing. It will just be a paper to wave around to make us feel better.
    Explain how?

    It is all about intention. Ask yourself...does this Iranian regime want a bomb? The answer is yes. If they want one they will get one. They will not be beholden to a piece of paper. The agreement will just by them time.
  • rgambs
    rgambs Posts: 13,576
    BS44325 said:

    mickeyrat said:

    BS44325 said:

    mickeyrat said:

    BS44325 said:

    Do have you even read what the actual framework has been reported as being?

    I dont recall NK having EVER been a signatory to the non proliferation treaty.

    So really what is the point?

    THIS deal, why is THIS deal a bad one. Which the entire security council is on board with? Not to mention Germany?

    Iran will have a bomb. Some on here think that matters and some on here don't. But make no mistake they will have a bomb.
    Non answer.
    That isn't a non answer. Without arguing for the time being whether they should have a bomb, under this agreement they will certainly get one. They want one and they will get one. The agreement will prevent nothing. It will just be a paper to wave around to make us feel better.
    Explain how?
    It is all about intention. Ask yourself...does this Iranian regime want a bomb? The answer is yes. If they want one they will get one. They will not be beholden to a piece of paper. The agreement will just by them time.

    Ok, so how does no deal prevent them from getting the bomb? How does shutting down centrifuges and opening to inspection increase their potential to make the bomb?
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • BS44325
    BS44325 Posts: 6,124
    rgambs said:

    BS44325 said:

    mickeyrat said:

    BS44325 said:

    mickeyrat said:

    BS44325 said:

    Do have you even read what the actual framework has been reported as being?

    I dont recall NK having EVER been a signatory to the non proliferation treaty.

    So really what is the point?

    THIS deal, why is THIS deal a bad one. Which the entire security council is on board with? Not to mention Germany?

    Iran will have a bomb. Some on here think that matters and some on here don't. But make no mistake they will have a bomb.
    Non answer.
    That isn't a non answer. Without arguing for the time being whether they should have a bomb, under this agreement they will certainly get one. They want one and they will get one. The agreement will prevent nothing. It will just be a paper to wave around to make us feel better.
    Explain how?
    It is all about intention. Ask yourself...does this Iranian regime want a bomb? The answer is yes. If they want one they will get one. They will not be beholden to a piece of paper. The agreement will just by them time.
    Ok, so how does no deal prevent them from getting the bomb? How does shutting down centrifuges and opening to inspection increase their potential to make the bomb?

    It is currently the shutting down of a lot of centrifuges but not all. This just slows the process even if the agreement is adhered too. The inspection part of the deal has not been ironed out or even really agreed to yet so no one really knows how Iranian actions will be verified in the future. Again even with all this in place it comes down to Iranian intent. If they want a bomb they will have one.
  • badbrains
    badbrains Posts: 10,255
    Only reason you don't want Iran to have one is so Israel can be the only big dog in the region. Anyone else gets one, all the shit that government does mite come to a stop. And god forbid that happens.
  • BS44325
    BS44325 Posts: 6,124
    badbrains said:

    Only reason you don't want Iran to have one is so Israel can be the only big dog in the region. Anyone else gets one, all the shit that government does mite come to a stop. And god forbid that happens.

    I don't want Iran to have one because they are governed by a death cult
  • badbrains
    badbrains Posts: 10,255
    BS44325 said:

    badbrains said:

    Only reason you don't want Iran to have one is so Israel can be the only big dog in the region. Anyone else gets one, all the shit that government does mite come to a stop. And god forbid that happens.

    I don't want Iran to have one because they are governed by a death cult
    Wow, you could say that about EVERY leader or government. How many people have Iran killed in the last 20 years? Now how many people has the us and Israel killed in that same time? Who's the death cult? Oh ya, Iran.
  • mickeyrat
    mickeyrat Posts: 44,279
    well, IF they were so hellbent on acquiring one or more they surely could have done so well before now, if Bibi is to be believed these last 20 years.

    I for one will see where this takes us. Status Quo is doing nothing to move anything forward.

    Not naive but IF this framework comes to fruition then it seems to me that it has a real chance of working.

    Reduction in quantity on hand. reduction in enrichment level. centrifuge quantity reduced by 2/3 with 95% of the remaining their first gen., no sanctions relief until they have shown they are implementing and holding up their end. INCLUDING full co-operation with IAEA investigators as it relates to their weaponization program.

    It has the appearance of covering all of the bases.
    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
    you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
    memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
    another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
  • gimmesometruth27
    gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,990
    well well well what do you know? republicans favoring intransigence over a chance of peace. waging peace is a threat to america....

    sounds about right.

    if iran wants a bomb, they can simply buy one from pakistan.

    how anybody can say this is a bad deal is beyond me.
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • rgambs
    rgambs Posts: 13,576
    BS44325 said:

    rgambs said:

    BS44325 said:

    mickeyrat said:

    BS44325 said:

    mickeyrat said:

    BS44325 said:

    Do have you even read what the actual framework has been reported as being?

    I dont recall NK having EVER been a signatory to the non proliferation treaty.

    So really what is the point?

    THIS deal, why is THIS deal a bad one. Which the entire security council is on board with? Not to mention Germany?

    Iran will have a bomb. Some on here think that matters and some on here don't. But make no mistake they will have a bomb.
    Non answer.
    That isn't a non answer. Without arguing for the time being whether they should have a bomb, under this agreement they will certainly get one. They want one and they will get one. The agreement will prevent nothing. It will just be a paper to wave around to make us feel better.
    Explain how?
    It is all about intention. Ask yourself...does this Iranian regime want a bomb? The answer is yes. If they want one they will get one. They will not be beholden to a piece of paper. The agreement will just by them time.
    Ok, so how does no deal prevent them from getting the bomb? How does shutting down centrifuges and opening to inspection increase their potential to make the bomb?
    It is currently the shutting down of a lot of centrifuges but not all. This just slows the process even if the agreement is adhered too. The inspection part of the deal has not been ironed out or even really agreed to yet so no one really knows how Iranian actions will be verified in the future. Again even with all this in place it comes down to Iranian intent. If they want a bomb they will have one.

    I agree, if they want one they will have one.
    That being said, you still haven't answered the question of how this deal makes it easier for them to do so.
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • badbrains
    badbrains Posts: 10,255
    rgambs said:

    BS44325 said:

    rgambs said:

    BS44325 said:

    mickeyrat said:

    BS44325 said:

    mickeyrat said:

    BS44325 said:

    Do have you even read what the actual framework has been reported as being?

    I dont recall NK having EVER been a signatory to the non proliferation treaty.

    So really what is the point?

    THIS deal, why is THIS deal a bad one. Which the entire security council is on board with? Not to mention Germany?

    Iran will have a bomb. Some on here think that matters and some on here don't. But make no mistake they will have a bomb.
    Non answer.
    That isn't a non answer. Without arguing for the time being whether they should have a bomb, under this agreement they will certainly get one. They want one and they will get one. The agreement will prevent nothing. It will just be a paper to wave around to make us feel better.
    Explain how?
    It is all about intention. Ask yourself...does this Iranian regime want a bomb? The answer is yes. If they want one they will get one. They will not be beholden to a piece of paper. The agreement will just by them time.
    Ok, so how does no deal prevent them from getting the bomb? How does shutting down centrifuges and opening to inspection increase their potential to make the bomb?
    It is currently the shutting down of a lot of centrifuges but not all. This just slows the process even if the agreement is adhered too. The inspection part of the deal has not been ironed out or even really agreed to yet so no one really knows how Iranian actions will be verified in the future. Again even with all this in place it comes down to Iranian intent. If they want a bomb they will have one.
    I agree, if they want one they will have one.
    That being said, you still haven't answered the question of how this deal makes it easier for them to do so.

    And he won't. He'll post some lame ass article about Islam to justify his bigotry. And then pat himself on the back like he's some kind of mr wonderful.
  • josevolution
    josevolution Posts: 31,516
    Man the quote function if fucked I don't know who is quoting who , But god forbid Obama try's to open dialogue and get this deal done the war monger that is the GOP won't put up with ....
    jesus greets me looks just like me ....
  • BS44325
    BS44325 Posts: 6,124
    rgambs said:

    BS44325 said:

    rgambs said:

    BS44325 said:

    mickeyrat said:

    BS44325 said:

    mickeyrat said:

    BS44325 said:

    Do have you even read what the actual framework has been reported as being?

    I dont recall NK having EVER been a signatory to the non proliferation treaty.

    So really what is the point?

    THIS deal, why is THIS deal a bad one. Which the entire security council is on board with? Not to mention Germany?

    Iran will have a bomb. Some on here think that matters and some on here don't. But make no mistake they will have a bomb.
    Non answer.
    That isn't a non answer. Without arguing for the time being whether they should have a bomb, under this agreement they will certainly get one. They want one and they will get one. The agreement will prevent nothing. It will just be a paper to wave around to make us feel better.
    Explain how?
    It is all about intention. Ask yourself...does this Iranian regime want a bomb? The answer is yes. If they want one they will get one. They will not be beholden to a piece of paper. The agreement will just by them time.
    Ok, so how does no deal prevent them from getting the bomb? How does shutting down centrifuges and opening to inspection increase their potential to make the bomb?
    It is currently the shutting down of a lot of centrifuges but not all. This just slows the process even if the agreement is adhered too. The inspection part of the deal has not been ironed out or even really agreed to yet so no one really knows how Iranian actions will be verified in the future. Again even with all this in place it comes down to Iranian intent. If they want a bomb they will have one.
    I agree, if they want one they will have one.
    That being said, you still haven't answered the question of how this deal makes it easier for them to do so.

    First it will by them time and a degree of legitimacy. The inspection process hasn't been set-up yet and negotiations over that will be stretched out indefinitely. Arguments about what is actually in the deal will occur between Iran and the P5 on an ongoing basis. To prove this point Iran still has not conceded to already requested UN inspections of the Fordo plant. If they won't allow inspections of this now why would they in the future? Second if the deal results in the immediate lifting of sanctions then it will result in a huge financial windfall which can be used to increase research and development along with fortifying the current hardliners in the regime. As an aside this financial windfall will also fund increased Iranian expansionism across the region. All of the above are problematic and will not stop Iran from getting a bomb if they want one. Obama should walk away, tighten sanctions, and force Iran back to the table on the P5's terms.
  • BS44325
    BS44325 Posts: 6,124
    gimmesometruth27 said:

    well well well what do you know? republicans favoring intransigence over a chance of peace. waging peace is a threat to america....

    sounds about right.

    if iran wants a bomb, they can simply buy one from pakistan.

    how anybody can say this is a bad deal is beyond me.

    Pakistan will not sell Iran a bomb but they will sell one to Saudia Arabia as soon as Iran builds their own.
  • BS44325
    BS44325 Posts: 6,124
    badbrains said:

    rgambs said:

    BS44325 said:

    rgambs said:

    BS44325 said:

    mickeyrat said:

    BS44325 said:

    mickeyrat said:

    BS44325 said:

    Do have you even read what the actual framework has been reported as being?

    I dont recall NK having EVER been a signatory to the non proliferation treaty.

    So really what is the point?

    THIS deal, why is THIS deal a bad one. Which the entire security council is on board with? Not to mention Germany?

    Iran will have a bomb. Some on here think that matters and some on here don't. But make no mistake they will have a bomb.
    Non answer.
    That isn't a non answer. Without arguing for the time being whether they should have a bomb, under this agreement they will certainly get one. They want one and they will get one. The agreement will prevent nothing. It will just be a paper to wave around to make us feel better.
    Explain how?
    It is all about intention. Ask yourself...does this Iranian regime want a bomb? The answer is yes. If they want one they will get one. They will not be beholden to a piece of paper. The agreement will just by them time.
    Ok, so how does no deal prevent them from getting the bomb? How does shutting down centrifuges and opening to inspection increase their potential to make the bomb?
    It is currently the shutting down of a lot of centrifuges but not all. This just slows the process even if the agreement is adhered too. The inspection part of the deal has not been ironed out or even really agreed to yet so no one really knows how Iranian actions will be verified in the future. Again even with all this in place it comes down to Iranian intent. If they want a bomb they will have one.
    I agree, if they want one they will have one.
    That being said, you still haven't answered the question of how this deal makes it easier for them to do so.
    And he won't. He'll post some lame ass article about Islam to justify his bigotry. And then pat himself on the back like he's some kind of mr wonderful.

    I am more wonderul then you even know
  • mickeyrat
    mickeyrat Posts: 44,279
    First things first. They have benchmarks that must be met and verified BEFORE a phased in relief of sanctions begins.

    this is my understanding of the framework.
    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
    you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
    memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
    another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
  • BS44325
    BS44325 Posts: 6,124
    mickeyrat said:

    First things first. They have benchmarks that must be met and verified BEFORE a phased in relief of sanctions begins.

    this is my understanding of the framework.

    Except Iran is already telling their domestic audience the exact opposite.
  • badbrains
    badbrains Posts: 10,255
    BS44325 said:

    badbrains said:

    rgambs said:

    BS44325 said:

    rgambs said:

    BS44325 said:

    mickeyrat said:

    BS44325 said:

    mickeyrat said:

    BS44325 said:

    Do have you even read what the actual framework has been reported as being?

    I dont recall NK having EVER been a signatory to the non proliferation treaty.

    So really what is the point?

    THIS deal, why is THIS deal a bad one. Which the entire security council is on board with? Not to mention Germany?

    Iran will have a bomb. Some on here think that matters and some on here don't. But make no mistake they will have a bomb.
    Non answer.
    That isn't a non answer. Without arguing for the time being whether they should have a bomb, under this agreement they will certainly get one. They want one and they will get one. The agreement will prevent nothing. It will just be a paper to wave around to make us feel better.
    Explain how?
    It is all about intention. Ask yourself...does this Iranian regime want a bomb? The answer is yes. If they want one they will get one. They will not be beholden to a piece of paper. The agreement will just by them time.
    Ok, so how does no deal prevent them from getting the bomb? How does shutting down centrifuges and opening to inspection increase their potential to make the bomb?
    It is currently the shutting down of a lot of centrifuges but not all. This just slows the process even if the agreement is adhered too. The inspection part of the deal has not been ironed out or even really agreed to yet so no one really knows how Iranian actions will be verified in the future. Again even with all this in place it comes down to Iranian intent. If they want a bomb they will have one.
    I agree, if they want one they will have one.
    That being said, you still haven't answered the question of how this deal makes it easier for them to do so.
    And he won't. He'll post some lame ass article about Islam to justify his bigotry. And then pat himself on the back like he's some kind of mr wonderful.
    I am more wonderul then you even know

    Well, you are your own #1 fan. That's something to be proud of.

    Oh and it's "buy" not "by" mr knowitall.
  • badbrains
    badbrains Posts: 10,255
    edited April 2015
    BS44325 said:

    mickeyrat said:

    First things first. They have benchmarks that must be met and verified BEFORE a phased in relief of sanctions begins.

    this is my understanding of the framework.

    Except Iran is already telling their domestic audience the exact opposite.
    And you're hearing this from? O'reilly? Hannity? Wait, Limbaugh? Am I getting close? Ok, Ann Colture? Uncle Ted?

    Edit- Bibi???
  • BS44325
    BS44325 Posts: 6,124
    badbrains said:

    BS44325 said:

    mickeyrat said:

    First things first. They have benchmarks that must be met and verified BEFORE a phased in relief of sanctions begins.

    this is my understanding of the framework.

    Except Iran is already telling their domestic audience the exact opposite.
    And you're hearing this from? O'reilly? Hannity? Wait, Limbaugh? Am I getting close? Ok, Ann Colture? Uncle Ted?

    Edit- Bibi???
    Maybe this source is better for you...

    http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13940114000620

    Or maybe you would rather watch some video

    http://youtu.be/zI94MF9NdSo

    And I believe her name is Coulter not Colture
  • badbrains
    badbrains Posts: 10,255
    BS44325 said:

    badbrains said:

    BS44325 said:

    mickeyrat said:

    First things first. They have benchmarks that must be met and verified BEFORE a phased in relief of sanctions begins.

    this is my understanding of the framework.

    Except Iran is already telling their domestic audience the exact opposite.
    And you're hearing this from? O'reilly? Hannity? Wait, Limbaugh? Am I getting close? Ok, Ann Colture? Uncle Ted?

    Edit- Bibi???
    Maybe this source is better for you...

    http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13940114000620

    Or maybe you would rather watch some video

    http://youtu.be/zI94MF9NdSo

    And I believe her name is Coulter not Colture
    Ooooooooo burn. You burned me so bad. I need a hug from my mom.
  • badbrains
    badbrains Posts: 10,255
    Since we're showing videos, here's one of your favorite governments using some fucked up chemical weapons on people.

    http://youtu.be/eQWl_uQKxOI
  • badbrains
    badbrains Posts: 10,255
    You don't like that video. Here's one of IDF soldiers speaking out. BS I know you ain't gonna watch but maybe someone else will and it'll open some more eyes:

    http://youtu.be/37MFa7ZKQWo
  • badbrains
    badbrains Posts: 10,255
    Here's one from one of your own conservatives:

    http://youtu.be/L033M6wqNCI

Categories