It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

SURPRISE: Iran Rejects Obama’s 10-Year Nuke Deal

page: 3
25
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 06:34 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

The same ones telling you they have troops in Syria and Iraq??

Please teach me how to have my cake and eat it too




posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 06:37 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko



Yes, and they also want this land they are fighting on.


What, and 'we' don't?

I'm absolutely certain that the USA / UK want control of Iraq and its oilfields etc either directly or more likely by proxy.



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 06:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Freeborn

I thought the U.K. and France took control after defeating the Ottoman Empire?

Now I'm *Really* confused.




posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 06:41 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

Yes and if it was just Obama I'd have the same reservations as you...

But it involves China, Russia & the UK as well...


There is a lot of people with a vested interest in seeing this go the right way...

& Middle East stability relies on this.




Like you said, Sunni Pakistan are on one side, Zionist Israel are on the other side...

That's like having your neighbours armed to the teeth, while people from 2 streets away try to tell you, that you should relenquish your weapons...




For Iran to even agree to this is a good sign...

If I was them, I'd tell them all to swivel, unless they plan on disarming Israel, Pakistan, and most likely Saudi Arabia too.
edit on 3-3-2015 by CharlieSpeirs because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 06:41 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

How long ago?

We are talking about the here and now and not some agreement signed a hundred years or so ago and that is completely irrelevant in todays world.



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 06:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: ketsuko



Yes, and they also want this land they are fighting on.


What, and 'we' don't?

I'm absolutely certain that the USA / UK want control of Iraq and its oilfields etc either directly or more likely by proxy.



Okay, Iran has it, and then what?



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 06:41 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

They are only bombing ISIS in Iraq near their own border...who can blame them from keeping these madmen away from their own country? I am confused as to why you would question this and assume the only reason is they want more territory. Iran is massive and very self-sufficient..why would they want to invade Iraq?



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 06:43 PM
link   
originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
a reply to: AboveBoard

CharlieSpeirs] (if that is your "real" name): You think that's bad...
Check this out...

Well thanks a lot Obama.


The founding fathers should have had some foresight and called it "America, The United States Of". In case any other country were to claim "America", as first word, should have called it (AAA-America) as would appear as the FIRST entry in any phone books business yellow pages.






edit on 3-3-2015 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 06:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
a reply to: ketsuko

Yes and if it was just Obama I'd have the same reservations as you...

But it involves China, Russia & the UK as well...


There is a lot of people with a vested interest in seeing this go the right way...

& Middle East stability relies on this.




Like you said, Sunni Pakistan are on one side, Zionist Israel are on the other side...

That's like having your neighbours armed to the teeth, while people from 2 streets away try to tell you you should relenquish your weapons...




For Iran to even agree to this is a good sign...

If I was them, I'd tell them all to swivel, unless they plan on disarming Israel, Pakistan, and most likely Saudi Arabia too.


Well if there are a lot of people who want the ME to be stable. Why, on why, are they letting Obama anywhere near this negotiation? He doesn't have a track record of anything good in the ME or have they not been keeping score?



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 06:49 PM
link   
Can someone tell me the threat that Iran faces to where they need nukes?



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 06:50 PM
link   
So Iran knows how to negotiate and not just do what the US says. Thats crazy talk. Anyway this will get done. The US and Iran have been unofficialy working together since 911 against common eneymies AlQuada, the Taliban and ISIS. Of course Russias collapse as a world power also plays a role here. As done Irans pro western and near rebellious population. Add to that Irans massive natural gas reserves to under cut Russia and Irans oil to keep prices down. The only problem is Iran and Israel hate each other but, that was the same problem that existed between Israel and Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, UAE, Oman, Egypt, Morrocco, Algeria, Tunsia etc. and the US still went through with those. With Afganistan, Pakistan and Iraq so unstable Iran is going end up being a prime source of stabalization in the region.



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 06:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xtrozero
Can someone tell me the threat that Iran faces to where they need nukes?

They don't at all, so begs the question why would they want them? (to aggressively use them as a threat against others).
edit on 3-3-2015 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 06:54 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

You mean pelosi wasted her fake tears and staged photo op for nothing?!?



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 06:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
a reply to: ketsuko

Why, on why, are they letting Obama anywhere near this negotiation? He doesn't have a track record of anything good in the ME or have they not been keeping score?


It probably has something to do with Iranian-born, Obama chief adviser, Valerie Jarrett telling Obama that Iran needs nukes in order to have nuclear parity in the M.E. with Israel.



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 06:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: ATF1886
Hey chen when you goinng to stop trolling ATS with the same Anti Obama Rhetoric??? Its getting a bit old.. a reply to: xuenchen



Gotcha QWAHAHAHHAHAHA


That shot sums up this truthful,honest and transparent administration perfectly.



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 06:59 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko



Okay, Iran has it, and then what?


I'm not saying 'they' should have it, but I understand why they may covet it.
And I'm pointing out the hypocrisy in criticising them for that when its the exact same motivations driving USA / UK policies in the region.

And Iran probably has more legitimate reason at present in defeating IS - it is hard to put into words the depth of the hatred IS feels for Shia Iran - if I was them I'd be wanting to eradicate them as quickly as possible.

But we are digressing slightly.

Iran's desire to have a functional nuclear development programme is twofold;
Firstly to develop a domestic nuclear power programme.
And secondly to develop nuclear weapon capability.

Personally I think 'the west' or 'we' should offer every encouragement in this and for the life of me I don't see how anyone can morally or legally deny them that right.

As for the secondary reason - I'm no fan of the Iranian regime and would feel uncomfortable as hell if they ever gained nuclear weapon capability.
But I understand why they want it - surrounded by increasingly fanatical Sunni nations who despise Iran nearly as much as they do Israel, possibly even more.
And then they have Israel and their hatred of Iran......and yes, I can understand Israel's stance to a point.

When all is said and done I think its impossible not to agree that the whole region is a powder keg.
And military intervention has only made the situation worse.
The current policy of sanctions has forced Iran to the negotiating table - as long as they are willing to talk I personally believe its infinitely better to do so rather than entering into yet another military confrontation that will only result in death and untold suffering for so many.

And a key part of any negotiations is a willingness to try and look at things from the other sides perspective - something neither side appear to be doing at present.



edit on 3/3/15 by Freeborn because: typo, grammar and clarity



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 07:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Freeborn

Wait ... "we" barely tolerate nuclear power for ourselves, but we are all over some other nation having it? I find that hard to believe. Shouldn't we be instead encouraging them to build solar plants?



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 07:02 PM
link   
a reply to: purplemer




peaceful nations 


To which are you referring to? The one that funds Hezbollah or the one that runs the earths largest open air prison or the one that owns one of the largest and advanced military machines on the planet.



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 07:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xtrozero
Can someone tell me the threat that Iran faces to where they need nukes?

Good question.Im sure some socialist,lets light up the crematoria again Ats member will be along about"the evil zionist plan"to answer that.



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 07:07 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

I guess that's a personal point of view.

I don't see the problem with nuclear power as long as its safe and correctly regulated and monitored.
Surely we have the knowledge and technology to do that nowadays, don't we?




top topics



 
25
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join