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.

 

Obama seals Iran deal win as Senate Democrats find 34 votes

page: 5
11
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 3 2015 @ 07:32 PM
link   
Where in the "agreement" does it say who does the "inspections" and when?





posted on Sep, 3 2015 @ 07:53 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Loaded questions are loaded, just make your point.
edit on rdThu, 03 Sep 2015 19:54:32 -0500America/Chicago920153280 by Sremmos80 because: brain fart



posted on Sep, 3 2015 @ 08:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: yuppa

Not sure what you mean there.

What does jokes about rape have to do with anything and preventing inspections?


didnt say it did. i just like insulting Irans leader.



posted on Sep, 3 2015 @ 08:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: xuenchen

Loaded questions are loaded, just make your point.


Well surely somebody can quote the exact language ....

Never hurts to "clarify" does it.

Iran deal Text




posted on Sep, 3 2015 @ 08:18 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Don't pretend you don't know that answer already...

Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action



“The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) advances critical U.S. interests related to preventing the proliferation of nuclear weapons, strengthening global nuclear safety and security, and promoting the peaceful applications of nuclear energy. Founded in 1957, the IAEA is the global focal point for supporting the safe, secure, and peaceful development and use of nuclear science and technology. The IAEA contributes to a central U.S. national security objective: Preventing the proliferation of nuclear weapons. It applies nuclear safeguards — consisting of monitoring, inspection, information analysis, and other activities — to detect and deter the application of peaceful nuclear activities to weapons-related purposes.” 




“All spent fuel from the Arak reactor that could be reprocessed to recover plutonium will be sent out of the country, and all of this will be under a rigorous IAEA inspection regime.” — E.M.




“Much has been made about a possible 24-day delay before inspectors could gain access to suspected undeclared nuclear sites. The IAEA can request access to any suspicious location with 24 hours’ notice. This this deal also creates a new mechanism to ensure that the IAEA gets the required access and sets a firm time limit to resolve access issues within 24 days. We have very high confidence that nuclear material used for advancing a nuclear program will detected in this time frame.” — E.M.


www.whitehouse.gov...








edit on 3-9-2015 by Swills because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2015 @ 08:19 PM
link   
Israel is already in OPS lanning now.



posted on Sep, 3 2015 @ 08:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Swills

Here is the main issue with what Iran claims...

Their reprocessing facility was never disclosed as required by the IAEA. Only after western intelligence agencies disclosed it did Iran acknowledge its existence. If they are willing to do that for a reprocessing site why would we assume they wont do it for other parts of their program?

The IAEA has stated Iran has still not explained 12 outstanding questions about their program.

If their program is peaceful while all the cloak and dagger?


edit on 3-9-2015 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2015 @ 08:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Well, for one, it's pretty much Iran against the world so step into their perspective and try to understand why they aren't so quick to make full disclosures to their enemies, even allies. But they know they are being watched, spied on, by the entire world and they have few secrets. They have been cleared by Mossad and the CIA for not having a nuclear program and if Mossad says so then I believe it.

Logically speaking, if Iran was caught in the act creating or buying nukes then they know full well its game over for them. Israel, for the first time in a long time, would most likely strike first and hard. From there, all out war will probably ensue and in the long run Iran will lose that war. But with war, everyone loses.



posted on Sep, 4 2015 @ 12:12 AM
link   
a reply to: Swills

The "red line" for Iran's program is not them building a nuke. The red line is Iran acquiring the ability to make a nuke. The intelligence agencies all stated Iran had a nuclear weapons program and that program "stopped" in 2003. There is no need for Iran to enrich uranium to the levels it was considering NONE of their generating reactors required it. There was no need to have that many centrifuges for enrichment either. Having a secret hidden facility under a mountain was also a red flag.

I get what you are saying but there is a reason a lot of countries were/are concerned about what Iran is doing. The mindset of the region must be taken into account as well. For the US and Russia both sides understood the concept of MAD. I don't think it would take much for a nation like Iran to set one or 2 off while willfully sacrificing their own citizens in the process.

For an example research the number of school children who were murdered in Iran during the Iran Iraq war. Iran used school children to clear mine fields. Upwards of 80k+ children were killed during that war thanks to their mindset of martyrdom.

Iran doesn't need hundreds of warheads... They only need a couple and this is the point people seem to overlook or just not understand.


The west measures success in how many civilians we don't kill.
A country like Iran measures success in how many civilians they can kill.

Killing one person is a waste... The goal is as many as they can get.


edit on 4-9-2015 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 4 2015 @ 04:15 AM
link   
This has got to be the most ridiculous deal in history... Allowing Iran to inspect its own facilities? lol



posted on Sep, 4 2015 @ 04:49 AM
link   
Iran fought Iraq for 20 years and didn't win the war.

Let them have nukes if it makes them happy.

Iraqis couldn't figure out how to arm RPG's over half of the time and they won their war against Iran.

Nukes are far more complicated, so why worry?
edit on 4-9-2015 by 200Plus because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 4 2015 @ 06:16 AM
link   
So what now...the doomsday clock will be sent for ten years? Whatever happened to NOT negotiating with terrorists? Now we have a president that does everything for them including kissing their ass. And our "leaders" follow along saying behind the scenes..."awwww...he just wants something to call his legacy". Will the millions of dead Americans and our allies also be his legacy? Will Obama and gang be held responsible WHEN Iran passes a nuke to their terrorist friends?

I haven't said this in a long time, but I will repeat myself. While I don't believe Obama is a Muslim plant with the intent to destroy our country from within...he couldn't be doing much better if he was.



posted on Sep, 4 2015 @ 07:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

This deal would slow down any production to make a nuke significantly. Without a deal, Iran has nothing to hold them back except fear for getting caught. So either we accept this deal or we don't but despite what all the war hawks preach I think everyone will be better off with this deal than without it.



posted on Sep, 4 2015 @ 07:04 AM
link   
a reply to: Brainiac

Classic example of not knowing the facts because "news" outlets and politicians spread misinformation. Iran won't be inspecting its own nuclear sites, the IAEA will. The only site that Iran won't allow foreigners to inspect is a military base, it's not a nuclear site.



posted on Sep, 4 2015 @ 08:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: intrptr

So they have had them for almost 30 years and no nuclear attacks?

Only the US has ever "used" them.


Like already said, kinda throws a wrench in the "they will destroy everyone" once they get the nukes thought process.

We are trying something new in the ME, diplomacy over bombs.

The "Deal" the west wants is Iran disarmed just like every other country and claims of WMD before it. The 'threat' that needs to be neutralized. That part of the "diplomacy" is the ruse before the eventual goal of subjugation of Iran ,which won't work and hasn't worked in Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, Syria, etc.

Diplomacy as you put it is part of the over all lie preceding the war phase. The Iranians know this and thats why they haven't made a deal. They don't have to. Unlike the waste and the western main stream, the Iranians don't see a need to capitulate and conform to the US and NATO demands made upon it.



posted on Sep, 4 2015 @ 09:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra


If their program is peaceful while all the cloak and dagger?

Who says Iran doesn't have the right to defend itself? They are only surrounded and most of those countries have been bombed and invaded by NATO. You cry all day about the Russians doing that in Eastern Europe but see fit to complain Iran can't defend itself?

Double standard bifocals.




posted on Sep, 4 2015 @ 10:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Swills

Kool.

What pages of the agreement are those quotes from?

Sounds a little thin at best.




posted on Sep, 4 2015 @ 11:16 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Well, if you click the link you'll read the notes, it's the same link you posted above. Does it come as a surprise the IAEA is doing the inspections? It's not like they haven't done inspections of Iran in the past.



posted on Sep, 4 2015 @ 12:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE
So what now...the doomsday clock will be sent for ten years? Whatever happened to NOT negotiating with terrorists? Now we have a president that does everything for them including kissing their ass. And our "leaders" follow along saying behind the scenes..."awwww...he just wants something to call his legacy". Will the millions of dead Americans and our allies also be his legacy? Will Obama and gang be held responsible WHEN Iran passes a nuke to their terrorist friends?

I haven't said this in a long time, but I will repeat myself. While I don't believe Obama is a Muslim plant with the intent to destroy our country from within...he couldn't be doing much better if he was.


The US has always negotiated with terrorists, atleast since we became a superpower. Saying otherwise is just a slogan to make us feel good.



posted on Sep, 4 2015 @ 06:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
Diplomacy is better than war 99% of the time.

The Lindsay Graham style rhetoric is a danger to Earth 100% of the time.


We shall see how it pans out.
I have high hopes.

A deal of diplomacy with a known terrorist liar is a bad idea 100% of the time.




top topics



 
11
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join