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.

 

House rejects Iran nuclear deal

page: 2
10
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 03:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: yuppa
Its funny i dont see th e U S invading Iran. they will just bomb them into submission if anything. AFter of course letting putin have crimea in exchange.


Totally agree
One the public won't want too many body bags coming back.Secondly the military gap between USA and Israel vs Iran/Syria is literally a couple of generations apart. If necessary they can wipe Iran from the face of the Earth without really getting their hands dirty, air power, 5th gen fighters, drones, cruise missiles from subs etc, plus new tech bought out for experimentation. Like you say, Putin will want something in exchange, he is a businessman, he can do the deal. I think he'll want more than Crimea................. Russia already has it and that's a done deal. Maybe half of Ukraine, plus the west of Syria coastal zone for giving Assad his mini kingdom plus Russia a warm water port in the Med. Russia will want part of the oil dividend in Iran too, look at what it just got in Iraq lol
It just got the lion share of oil and gas, cash back for letting the Yanks take out that other Gulf state Iraq.




posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 03:54 PM
link   
I don't see the US attacking Iran. Now I do see Iran attacking by proxy if they don't get their 100 billion released to them. So I wouldn't worry. Iran probably threatened Obama, Obama backed down, and Iran gets their money and gets to make their nukes.
It's not like anything congress does means anything anymore.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 04:06 PM
link   
Makes you wonder what would happen if a Bush was in control? What would a Bush do?



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 04:07 PM
link   
a reply to: haman10

Iran IS sending troops to Syria to help the Russians maintain stability in regards to Assad. Go look for yourself, pictures will be coming in soon from ever source imaginable to make the US(Obama) look stupid.

Syria and the energy pipeline is what this whole thing is about but Assad is in the way. I'm not going to go into detail for there are hundreds of threads here and elsewhere and I am at work, no time. The so called treaty was to buy time, but it looks like Russia's involvement in Syria sent things moving quicker.

This is not just a Jew vs. Muslim, Iran vs. Israeli event. Even the money involved in the 'deal' is going to buy arms. There are many on here that are well versed in this, hopefully one will drop by to post a much better synopsis of the whole mess.

Meanwhile everyone keep on fighting over whether political misdirection is a 'good' deal or a 'bad' one. It was fair behind the scenes, until the game changed.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 04:08 PM
link   
a reply to: haman10

It just amazes me how this whole Iranian Nuclear deal thing is being manipulated by all factions involved. And I mean from it's most basic understanding of what nuclear negotiations are predicated upon, and the various parties understanding of what's involved here.
Now I can understand that there is previous historical experience of supposedly how these negotiations are to be conducted.
When looking back as recent as the similar events having taken place with North Korea, Pakistan, and even India. Each situation demanded a certain amount of diplomacy based upon the relationships of each country and subsequent allies involved.
What I am amazed at, is that these supposed intelligent peoples do not fully grasp the full meaning of what is being negotiated here. Somehow we (the collective world body/UN/etc.) have gone from the aspect of controlling nuclear proliferation, through the threat of complete annihilation for non compliant parties, to starting a limited war with sanctions (which is a slap on the wrist) or a police action (with boots on the ground).
So basically with these other added options, violating countries can negotiate from a position of assumed power and control. And I guess this is the case because no one or group of countries wants to be looked at as a bully for intimidating new players to the nuclear game.
And sad as this may sound, I believe that this form of diplomacy or games-men-ship is going to eventually lead the world to EXACTLY WHAT IT WANTS TO AVOID...an all out nuclear exchange somewhere down the road. And the survivability of the whole human race is severely diminished, because way too many nations with way too many competing interest has just multiplied the possibilities for these nuclear devices to be used.
Therefore, I believe the buck must stop at Iran, and should have really stopped at North Korea. The inevitability of preemptive strike capability is a lesser option for the two nations that are threatening destruction upon others.
I won't say anymore because I feel like I'm becoming Commander Spock of the USS Enterprise (Star Trek) with all his logic.

Sometimes, the needs of the many outweigh the needs of a few.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 04:10 PM
link   
This was an international deal though. So after laughing at our do nothing congress from the safety of their own countries....how will other countries respond? Like Russia and China and the EU...I mean they are all in on the deal too. Basically it's a done deal and international deal...it's in place whether we do anything about it or not. Thoughts?



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 04:11 PM
link   
www.cnn.com... seems the reloloutions are non binding so did this do anything or was it more of a like politacal play? from what i have read the deal can still be implemented hence my confusion



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 04:27 PM
link   
a reply to: amazing
Not only is it a done deal (barring something outrageously stupid) Iran will be militarily untouchable in the very near future.

Unless the US is prepared to sacrifice NATO, they won't be bombing Iran. The Germans and the French (among smaller EU members) have already moved trade teams in.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 05:58 PM
link   
a reply to: haman10

It doesnt mean anything, deal or no deal Iran wants a nuke they will get one, they don't all you did was legitimize the trade businesses are looking for under the cover of establishing peace. It's posturing, one side wants to paint the other as war crazies, the other wants to paint the weak on national defense. The citizens argue, the politicians sit in back rooms laughing their collective a$$es off at us because they got paid from the lobbyist no matter what happens. If it passes then Obama claims victory, if not he can justify the increase drone strikes and involvement and pay off favors regardless.

The best thing however is that no matter what happens the politicians get to appeal to the masses, weak on defense or war crazies. Up their donations. Either they win on the issue or take in huge donations they keep after the loss and move to a high paying post political career. Win/ win for them and friends in the favor system. No benefit/no benefit to us but we sure will argue and get emotional about it.
edit on 11-9-2015 by Reallyfolks because: Spelling



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 08:13 PM
link   
I can’t help but think that most of the brave, patriotic, tough talking, arm chair warriors who like to sit around and talk big behind that keyboard would probably be scared sh*tless if a rifle got thrown in their hands and were told, “Learn to use that thing, Boy! Uncle Sam’s sendin’ you on a trip.” Talk’s cheap, and it comes easy when you have the luxury of sitting around in an easy chair, getting fat on cheese dip, while watching the war overseas on Fox/MSNBC/CNN Nightly News.

Quite obviously the Republican Party had planned to kill the Iran Deal well before the ink was even dry on the formal agreement. Most didn’t even bother to read it first. The leader of the party, Benjamin Netenyahu, demanded this be so. The party has become a vengeful, delusional, ruthless, self-serving pack of crybabies. When they don’t get their way they slander the President, attempt to assasinate his character, lie to the People, initiate taxpayer funded lawsuits, shut the government down, threaten to not pay the bills on obligations THEY already approved, and recklessly threaten impeachment proceedings. They no longer uphold the best interests of the People and the country they’ve sworn to serve, and they are damaging this nation, it’s principles and institutions. Deny it all you like, but it’s clear to anyone not in a coma that the Republican Party is so insanely intent on defying this President that it’s willing to sacrifice thousands of young, American lives in ANOTHER bloody war in the M.E. to do so. Any other president and at least a few would have bothered to read it first. It’s a disgrace that the architects of the senseless war in Iraq are so eager to put boots on the ground again in the region. What idiocy!

Republican Logic: Iraq whipped our ass for 10 years, costing us trillions, and we accomplished nothing. Iran is much tougher. We’ll have better luck there!

I’m not gonna argue the insanity behind killing the American support for this International agreement, and the fatal consequences that would result in doing so. I’ve done it already in several other posts, and I’m getting tired of wasting my breath and time on those intent on starting YET ANOTHER war in the M.E.

No wonder most of the rest of the world no longer respects the U.S. It’s sad...



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 08:40 PM
link   
a reply to: netbound

Of course they are unless of course they are working together on the little thing like fast track authority, tpp, patriot act extensions, ndaa, freedom bill, other than the little things they are totally against this president and democrat and republican politicians don't like each other.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 09:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: jimmyx
well of course the house (republican controlled) voted it down...it was Obama who orchestrated it....so what else is new


It was also another Obama POS which truly needed to be voted down and Obama never should have even tried to make the deal to a betrayer POS like Iran's leader, or what happens when one betrayer makes a deal with another betrayer? They betray each other, with Iran showing what they are immediately after accepting the deal.
It is like 2 big poop piles joining together, you still end up with a big pile of crap.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 09:25 PM
link   
I would like to know what the US and her allies got out of this agreement that we didn't already have with sanctions.

Then I want to know why we didn't start the 'agreement' with getting our hostages back.

Then I want to know what Iran did to deserve $150B, which represents 40% of their nominal annual GDP of $367B.

Then I want to know why we should trust Iran in the first place?



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 09:36 PM
link   
Outside of people who object to Iran deal do to political reasons or just confusion their really is not logical reason not support it. The other option would be a war that would have no global support, shut down the mid east oil, send gas to $5 a gallon, cost thousands of lives including Americans, and leave the mid east destabilized from the Mediterranean to China, remove on ISIS main adversaries, and possibly result in a nuclear exchange.

With the treaty Iran faces hundreds of inspectors on the ground, sensors and cameras and the enforcement of the entire planet. Iranian harder liners hate it because they also know it will mean the end of Iran's ruling party. And if Iran fails to come through the US then has the entire backing of the rest of the world. Where as the US refusing the deal would simply lead to the rest of the world blaming the US and ending sanctions on Iran anyway.

People seem to be under the illusion that is just a deal between the US and Iran. It is not. If the US walks out of the deal the other World powers will not, sanctions will be lifted if the US signs on or not. Failure to sign removes any credibility the US would have in trying to punish Iran alone. Anything it tried would be blocked by the rest of the world. Luckily the people who know about such things have spoken in support of the deal including retired US Generals and Admirals, a Dozen former Israeli Generals and Admirals, the nations top scientists, the former head of the Mossad, the independent non proliferation organizations and 100 nations.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 10:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: MrSpad
Outside of people who object to Iran deal do to political reasons or just confusion their really is not logical reason not support it. The other option would be a war that would have no global support, shut down the mid east oil, send gas to $5 a gallon, cost thousands of lives including Americans, and leave the mid east destabilized from the Mediterranean to China, remove on ISIS main adversaries, and possibly result in a nuclear exchange.

With the treaty Iran faces hundreds of inspectors on the ground, sensors and cameras and the enforcement of the entire planet. Iranian harder liners hate it because they also know it will mean the end of Iran's ruling party. And if Iran fails to come through the US then has the entire backing of the rest of the world. Where as the US refusing the deal would simply lead to the rest of the world blaming the US and ending sanctions on Iran anyway.

People seem to be under the illusion that is just a deal between the US and Iran. It is not. If the US walks out of the deal the other World powers will not, sanctions will be lifted if the US signs on or not. Failure to sign removes any credibility the US would have in trying to punish Iran alone. Anything it tried would be blocked by the rest of the world. Luckily the people who know about such things have spoken in support of the deal including retired US Generals and Admirals, a Dozen former Israeli Generals and Admirals, the nations top scientists, the former head of the Mossad, the independent non proliferation organizations and 100 nations.



Again this is all political theatre doesn't matter how it turns out. You can have inspectors all over the place and sensors or whatever else. If Iran wants a bomb they will get one, as worthless as it is there's a reason that the NPT covers three methods to a nuclear weapon. Does the deal? If they don't want one nothing was gained except to create an environment to up lobbyists payoffs. As I said it means nothing for us.

Dirty secret Iran and us have been fighting a war the last several years. You think just because you don't see bombs, troops, and guns ones not happening. You need none of them in this day and age and it will continue regardless.
edit on 11-9-2015 by Reallyfolks because: Spelling



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 10:14 PM
link   
I think if Iran truly wants nuclear weapons they will build them regardless of any deal and if they don't want them they won't build them regardless of any deal.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 10:16 PM
link   
a reply to: MrSpad

If the only option is war this is a blackmail deal then. its a ultimatum. I sense that there will be alot more dems not getting re elected this season. One way or another there will be another war soon.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 10:21 PM
link   
a reply to: haman10

It's going to get passed. The vote will be the same the next three times the Repubes want cross this bridge. Obama will sign the final deal in a couple of weeks.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 10:25 PM
link   
a reply to: yuppa

The only other option isn't war. Iran are terrible at fighting wars and who would they even attack given their capabilities? They aren't going to launch a war just because the US keeps sanctions on them and it's unlikely they could respond in a meaningful way to US or Israeli strikes on their nuke facilities. Any blackmail they could have regarding war only becomes real once they get nukes and even then it's unlikely but the risk of calling their bluff would be a lot higher than it is now.


edit on 11-9-2015 by PutinTheGreat because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 10:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: PutinTheGreat
I think if Iran truly wants nuclear weapons they will build them regardless of any deal and if they don't want them they won't build them regardless of any deal.


If they want one they don't have to build it. Again it's why the NPT covers three methods. This deal means nothing either way. But people will argue like it does. There are many options besides war? Wonder why that's the one being presented? A little self fulfilling prophecy? Democrats screaming we warned you, republicans screaming we had no choice, no one screaming why is that the only option?...love entertainment of politics, hate the results.




top topics



 
10
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join