There's a deal with Iran

[lawgator1]

Basis for Iran nuclear deal reached - CNN.com

Interesting. Only one reactor can be used to enrich and to test. I guess the question will be whether it can be verified, and what happens if we catch them doing it somewhere else.

Any critic of this deal should have to, when bashing it, give a specific, feasible, alternative. Simply saying we could get a "better deal" is not enough. You have to say what the better deal would be and how it would be workable.

 

[Burhead]

Basis for Iran nuclear deal reached - CNN.com

Interesting. Only one reactor can be used to enrich and to test. I guess the question will be whether it can be verified, and what happens if we catch them doing it somewhere else.

Any critic of this deal should have to, when bashing it, give a specific, feasible, alternative. Simply saying we could get a "better deal" is not enough. You have to say what the better deal would be and how it would be workable.

What should concern everyone is the nuclear arms race it will trigger with Saudi...

 

[hog88]

So just what does this deal stop them from doing?

 

[Burhead]

So just what does this deal stop them from doing?

Also seeing where the Chinese and the Russians are against reimplementing sanctions should the Iranians break the deal.

 

[golfballs]

 

[hog88]

Also seeing where the Chinese and the Russians are against reimplementing sanctions should the Iranians break the deal.

Yeah, I don't see where this prevents them from developing nuclear weapons and what the consequences of doing so would be.

 

[myrobbins7]

I remember a guy named Chamberlain.

 

[JoeKyleVol]

Basis for Iran nuclear deal reached - CNN.com

Interesting. Only one reactor can be used to enrich and to test. I guess the question will be whether it can be verified, and what happens if we catch them doing it somewhere else.

Any critic of this deal should have to, when bashing it, give a specific, feasible, alternative. Simply saying we could get a "better deal" is not enough. You have to say what the better deal would be and how it would be workable.

The "better deal" to some will only be war with Iran.

The problem with nuclear weapons is that once that Pandora's Box was opened, there was no closing it again.

Even if all good nations wanted to give up their nukes, there would still be rogue states out there with nuclear weapons which would necessitate that free nations keep them.

Yet, how can those nations with nuclear weapons tell other nations they CAN'T have them either?

"Well, we can have nuclear weapons to protect us from confrontations with weaker nations and prevent a larger war by ensuring mutual destruction with our equally-powerful adversaries...but you can't."

But, it's too late. We can't get rid of nukes and there's no really good reason why we can tell other nations they can't have nukes, too.

 

[lawgator1]

What should concern everyone is the nuclear arms race it will trigger with Saudi...

Seems inevitable. Its really just a question of slowing it down.

 

[lawgator1]

So just what does this deal stop them from doing?

If I read correctly, it gives us a window into knowing exactly how much enriched weapons-grade uranium they have because they can only make it at one place. The goal was to know when they are a year away. Seems to me the plan was, that if they reached that point, well, it would get ugly for them real fast.

 

[Vol8188]

Yeah, I don't see where this prevents them from developing nuclear weapons and what the consequences of doing so would be.

The uranium theyre allowed to enrich isn't weapons grade, nor could they make it weapons grade in a short period of time (I'm not certain of the exact time frame, but I believe it's a couple of years).

 

[volinbham]

Basis for Iran nuclear deal reached - CNN.com

Interesting. Only one reactor can be used to enrich and to test. I guess the question will be whether it can be verified, and what happens if we catch them doing it somewhere else.

Any critic of this deal should have to, when bashing it, give a specific, feasible, alternative. Simply saying we could get a "better deal" is not enough. You have to say what the better deal would be and how it would be workable.

Can we hold you to this when you criticize anything a Republican proposes?

 

[lawgator1]

Can we hold you to this when you criticize anything a Republican proposes?

Not only can you hold me to it, I'd hold the Dem members of the Congress to it, too.

 

[BearCat204]

Can we hold you to this when you criticize anything a Republican proposes?

You already know the answer..................

 

[volinbham]

Not only can you hold me to it, I'd hold the Dem members of the Congress to it, too.

ost-4-1090547912:

 

[Burhead]

So the next question I assume will be will the Senate vote against ratification?

 

[volinbham]

Thread title is wrong - there is no deal yet, just a framework for a deal.

Also love this threat from POTUS

"If Congress kills this deal not based on expert analysis and without offering any reasonable alternative, then it's the United States that will be blamed for the failure of diplomacy," Obama said. "International unity will collapse."

international unity will collapse?

Congress is supposed to offer an alternative? How can they if they are not authorized to engage in negotiations?

Notice that instead of talking to Congress, explaining, trying to build consensus the tactic is threaten and prepare to shift blame.

Leadership at its finest.

 

[AirVol]

Does this deal include their secret sites as well? Didn't think so. Pakistan quietly emerged as a nuclear power using secret sites without the IAEA having a clue, and Iran has taken notice.

 

[lawgator1]

Can we hold you to this when you criticize anything a Republican proposes?

You already know the answer..................

ost-4-1090547912:

I neglected to point out that your question is implicated only if a Republican ever gets elected POTUS again, a condition the demographics suggest you might not ever be able to satisfy.

 

[lawgator1]

Thread title is wrong - there is no deal yet, just a framework for a deal.

Also love this threat from POTUS



international unity will collapse?

Congress is supposed to offer an alternative? How can they if they are not authorized to engage in negotiations?

Notice that instead of talking to Congress, explaining, trying to build consensus the tactic is threaten and prepare to shift blame.

Leadership at its finest.

Don't kill it without putting something feasible on the table.

The alternative is war, pure and simple.

I may buy me some defense stocks here shortly.

 

[tennvols77]

Yet, how can those nations with nuclear weapons tell other nations they CAN'T have them either?

there's no really good reason why we can tell other nations they can't have nukes, too.

Easy, the biggest, baddest, toughest guy on the block says so. You don't like it, too bad. This is reality.

This nuclear arms race CAN NOT happen.

Israel will make sure, and will tell Iran that it isn't a possibility.

The important question is how long until Israel levels every site and suspected site? Regardless of what anyone thinks, either for or against Israel's decision, Israel will not allow for a 0.00001% possibility of a nuke being active. The first inclination that there is one, will be the start of Israel reacting to that thought.

It is absolutely terrifying to think what this dumba** of a President has just done for any chance of stabilization in our world.

 

[IPleadInsanity]

What I don't understand is why we would lift sanctions on a country who is responsible for terrorism all over the area? Once sanctions are lifted their economy will flourish and money will flow like water. What will they do with those gains, how will they be spent? We all know the answer to that question. Can kicked down the road, lets let the kids fix it later.

 

[Vol737]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/interactive/2015/04/02-959146370/

More details on the agreement.

 

[DC_Vol]

What I don't understand is why we would lift sanctions on a country who is responsible for terrorism all over the area? Once sanctions are lifted their economy will flourish and money will flow like water. What will they do with those gains, how will they be spent? We all know the answer to that question. Can kicked down the road, lets let the kids fix it later.

It's honestly not worth discussing with some people.

When you hear reasoning that it's negotiate a new deal or go to war...or something is better than nothing, you are talking to the person on the losing side of the negotiating table.

 

[Vol737]

Don't kill it without putting something feasible on the table.

The alternative is war, pure and simple.

I may buy me some defense stocks here shortly.

But LG! That would be profiting in those evil Wall Street markets you guys on the left loathe! Have you lost your mind...or did someone hack LG's VN account?