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.

 

Why Is Obama's Fact Sheet Different From Iran's Fact Sheet?

page: 2
16
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 10:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

What monkey wrenches are being thrown in by Russia and China in your opinion?

Where do they benefit?




posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 10:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Ultralight

Either one translates to "IRAN WILL GET NUKES". He has to sell this to Congress and needs to dazzle them with b.s..


Nothing wrong with "Iran Having Nukes" . At least they signed the NPT unlike some other countries that does have them.



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 10:44 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

I don't know. I suspect Russia would want Iran to pressure Turkmenistan (Russia uses the *stans to the south as buffer states from aggression, but likes them weak) and to not allow the trans Asian trading routes being proposed. Russia currently acts as the trading route but China has been trying to recreate the Silk Road which either has to go through Iran or the Caspian Sea (which would be through Turkmenistan). Seeing that as part of the deal wouldn't surprise me.

The thing is though outside of any demands Iran meets an Iran that can't develop nuclear weapons is in the interests of China and Russia as it gives them a lot more leverage over the buffer states between their nations. Note that an Iran without sanctions would also likely be a very strong market for Russian and Chinese goods.

Russia and China often act as a counterweight to US interests but in the case of Iran it's in the interests of everyone that we establish a program that calls their bluff on only wanting peaceful nuclear energy, and then lays down conditions that prevent them from developing weapons.



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 10:51 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

I know I'll get slammed for this...

Iran has nothing to gain by lying.. Obama does. I know which version of the deal I believe, and I hope the Israelis do what needs to be done before Obama gets them wiped off of the map for good.



posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 04:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: Ultralight
a reply to: ATF1886

Mr. Obama is not my President; I impeached him with a scintilla of reasons to do so.


On what legal grounds did you do such a thing? What law did he break? When you impeached him, did you find him guilty?


More importantly - when this guy impeached him.....did anyone notice??



posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 05:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: EvilBat

originally posted by: Ultralight

Either one translates to "IRAN WILL GET NUKES". He has to sell this to Congress and needs to dazzle them with b.s..


Nothing wrong with "Iran Having Nukes" . At least they signed the NPT unlike some other countries that does have them.



Setting aside the non-existent representation that the US has been enjoying since we seem to have sent Iranian negotiators.

They will get nuclear weapons somehow eventually, I believe that is true.

I suppose I have to hope that you are correct that they will not use them in anger, tactically or strategically but, I don't believe that is true.

It may be that, if they are going to use them as soon as they get them, we benefit from establishing that before they amass a large arsenal.
edit on 7-4-2015 by greencmp because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 07:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

He is MY employee, MY taxes pay his salary. I do not believe he has America's interest in mind as he unilaterally uses his phone and his pen. His position is NOT one to create laws, he is to uphold laws passed by Congress. He also cannot pick and choose which of his own laws he can avoid or change. He utilizes others to do his bidding and take the fall...such as Harry Reid. To Obama, Presidency is merely a game, one of immense power, and he should be impeached. As this won't happen on a national level, I will no longer refer to him other than Mr. Obama. I love my country. My father lost his legs fighting in a war defending the freedom and honor that is my America.

I do not hate Obama. I hate no one. I simply refuse to accept his unlawful ways and the honored title of he has made into a meaningless word...President.



posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 08:00 AM
link   
a reply to: EvilBat

Only the naive or truly inept believe Iran won't use those Nukes against the USA, its interests, allies, and citizens.



posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 08:41 AM
link   
I said before that the moment this agreement goes into effect Iran will have nukes within 1 year. This will be why - the sanctions will drop immediately when the deal goes into effect. This was one thing that congress didn't want to budge on, but it seems Obama and Kerry caved in on. It took a lot of political wrangling to get Russia and China to agree to these sanctions in the first place, but now with relations strained the way they are there is no way Russia and China would get back on board with implementing sanctions again in the future. Basically this gives Iran a free pass - once the sanctions drop they can wipe their butt with the agreement and start buying more centrifuges and ramping up their nuclear program with no fear of any future sanctions ever again.

And that's not the only major issue with the proposed deal. It's so full of logical fallacies that no sane person would ever expect it to happen as planned. I read today that Obama doesn't expect Iran to have a nuke for another 13 years - absolutely ridiculous. Does anyone really think Iran would honor any agreement for longer than a decade? Really?

"You can have your nuclear material and centrifuges and nuclear program and we are dropping sanctions against you, but you can't build any nukes for 13 years, okay? We are being really stern right now. This is our stern face. Don't build any nukes."



posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 08:56 AM
link   
Cuckoo in the nest


When you don't trust either side, it's always best to err on the side of caution. If it will damage the US it's probably in the deal. We should know that by now based on the "deals" signed by the last three Presidents.
edit on 7-4-2015 by 200Plus because: added missing word "it



posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 08:56 AM
link   
a reply to: M5xaz

SO true. And remember the Senator that stood up and told Obama "You lie" ? Remember how he was reprimanded for speaking his mind on the Senate floor ? He should have received some form of medal of honor.



posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 12:00 PM
link   
Omg you deserve an effin applause for that the reason they havent impeached also would be they would have to impeach two back to back that would definitely tarnish what's left of our name... reply to: johnwick



posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 12:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
I suspect this entire "negotiating" is really being done by the Corporations with vested interests.

Many people think corporations and banks run the world trade scenarios.

Why would this be any different?

Maybe that's why we are seeing all the conflicting information on this very important topic.

Don't forget Russian and Chinese corporations are involved along with the "Western" corporations.





I think the corporations are possibly behind the confusion of what is or is not happening because there is a deal going on without them and they don't quite know what to do about it except use their magic to trick people into believing there is no deal till they (corporations) can come up with some way to control the situation.



posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 04:19 PM
link   
Name one thing that wasn't a lie coming out of Obama's mouth.



posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 05:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: LOSTinAMERICA

Name one thing that wasn't a lie coming out of Obama's mouth.


When he said "Uh Uh Uh But But But".




posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 05:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: MALBOSIA

originally posted by: xuenchen
I suspect this entire "negotiating" is really being done by the Corporations with vested interests.

Many people think corporations and banks run the world trade scenarios.

Why would this be any different?

Maybe that's why we are seeing all the conflicting information on this very important topic.

Don't forget Russian and Chinese corporations are involved along with the "Western" corporations.





I think the corporations are possibly behind the confusion of what is or is not happening because there is a deal going on without them and they don't quite know what to do about it except use their magic to trick people into believing there is no deal till they (corporations) can come up with some way to control the situation.



But But then the governments should be on the same page with the press releases right?





posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 07:36 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Any vote for removing of sanctions will probably go along party lines with a few weak-kneed republicans bending over backwards to appease the emperor.

Like obamacare, let the left own this foreign policy.



posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 10:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: xuenchen

Any vote for removing of sanctions will probably go along party lines with a few weak-kneed republicans bending over backwards to appease the emperor.

Like obamacare, let the left own this foreign policy.



Removing sanctions is a good thing. Sanctions are a bit of a last resort diplomatic option. Once you use sanctions you lose any possible trade leverage you may have had. The only possible foreign policy options from that point on are removing sanctions or war. On the other hand, when you're a trading partner with a nation you have a lot of nuance available to you. You have corporate trade, government contracts, currency holdings, debt financing, arms deals and more. All of this comes down to one simple fact, money makes politics function, and when you sanction a nation you remove the ability to use money as a negotiation tool.

Here's an example of this in action. If we sanction Iran they can't trade with us or anyone else who goes along with our sanctions. Russia and China however aren't going to go along with us. So by sanctioning Iran we strengthen their ties with rival nations while weakening our own. How does such a move benefit us?



posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 10:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

If memory serves, there have been sanctions on Iran for the past 12 years.

Has the past 12 years been devastating because of it?



posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 10:26 PM
link   
What's really funny is that, mostly, but not all of this, is American Republican.

What many of them fail to realize is this...These negotiations among Iran and the P5+1 — United States, Russia, China, France, United Kingdom and Germany — plus the European Union regarding Iran's nuclear program.

that's what this is. International negotiations with all the worlds superpowers and the European Union, yet the American Republicans think it's Obama's deal somehow? LOL

These fools crack me up.



new topics

top topics



 
16
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join