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: 3
10
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 10:37 PM
link   
a reply to: haman10

Haman, it's business as usual in Congress as per the last seven years. Don't take it too seriously.
Stupidity + showy power struggles. It's how we roll these days. Both our countries worked long and hard on that deal, and I believe it will stand regardless how much Mr. Trump and his ponyboys criticize it.

If it's all we've got; it's what we've got. You do understand that Americans trust Iran about as much as Iranians trust us, so of course people will find objections to anything that remotely resembles relying on Iran to play fair.

Answer something for me. Exactly how much will the decisions and actions of Khomeini have to do with how the deal flies?

I'm off to bed, so logging off now. Have a good evening.




posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 10:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Reallyfolks

Yes it's all politics. Actually do something or shut up basically is my view on the situation. The Iran deal is good for business though so if we are heading towards nuclear war at least some money can be made before that day happens. I sincerely hope the Iranian government isn't crazy but only time will tell. If they are crazy inaction is the wrong choice, the deal whether it is upheld or scrapped is irrelevant if they truly are crazy enough to desire nukes and nuclear confrontation.



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



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 12:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Reallyfolks

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.


Building a bomb requires very specific type buildings and methods. You can not build one with 200 inspectors and every possible facility being monitored 24 hours a day. And two nations do not have to be at peace to make agreements on nukes. We made plenty with the Soviets through out the Cold War while fighting each other in proxy wars across the world. The deal is the only real possibility of avoiding war. Either Iran gets a nuke and becomes a real threat to the Gulf States, or the US attacks Iran and starts a shooting war in the middle of the worlds most vital source of oil or Israel starts its and same results. If someone makes a move on Iran they will hit the House of Sauds and the Gulf States oil production with missiles and mine the gulf. Airstrikes will not be enough for Iran, only invasion would see and end to things. Experts in 100 counties agree this is best move. It is the only one that makes any sense.



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 12:39 AM
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.
Well , mate fact is that we Iranians are desperate for peace . i doubt there is shame in that . we are very ready to beg for it , cause we know the taste of war . we were in a 8-year-long war with US-supported saddam and it took lives of 500,000 Innocent Iranians .

so we resent war . we hate it and we'll do anything possible to prevent it . we're ready to give up some of our inevitable rights for that - as we did in this deal for a period of 15 years .

but please , i beg you , don't interpret this as a sign of weakness . don't make anymore mistakes based on poor information .

bomb Iran into submission ? Iran will bomb you back bro , i promise you that . this ain't vietnam . you're talking about the most powerful muslim country mate . any poor judgement will result in the loss of innocent lives .

and those people are killed because of what ? politics ? money ?

let's all pray for peace to work out , i know i do . we all share the same God man , i'll pray for everyone tonight .

a reply to: ladyinwaiting

well sis , fact is that khomeini can indeed shape the deal before it's reached - as he did - and set some "red lines" which were not crossed during negotiations , cause if they did , Iranian team would walk out .

but now we're talking about a done deal . he cannot do anything about the deal now cause he'll lose any popularity he has just like that .

let me explain more ; Iranian politics is like this : President and parliament decide for EVERYTHING . but the "leader" has veto options , he can scrap the deal , he can make a deal , he can do everything he wants basically .

but that means using his capital every time he bypasses the Parliament and Gov't . so he seldom does that (very few times per decade) . basically Iran is a democracy until the "leader" decides to use his powers .



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 12:42 AM
link   
a reply to: haman10

So any perceived threat against Iran will be reciprocated with an attack on America?



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 12:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: haman10

So any perceived threat against Iran will be reciprocated with an attack on America?
huh ? when did i say that ?

quote me saying that .don't play this game with me please . i have little time

Fact #1 : US and it's puppet Israel have been threatening Iran will military action for 36 years now . it's not the other way around

Fact #2 : Iran has not attacked any country for 300 years , that number equals US whole history . we could , but we didn't .

Fact #3 : US has indeed been engaged in almost all big wars around the world since it's creation .

So spare me your trolling please , Tnx .



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 12:53 AM
link   
a reply to: haman10

People want to believe this but your leaders need to stop saying death to Israel and death to America. No one gains anything from a war with Iran but you need to understand how Israel could feel threatened by the rhetoric coming from your leaders. When it's less then a century from when you experienced a genocide you don't take threats against your people lightly ever again. Israel is perhaps a flawed state who is heavy handed but the less threatened they feel the more generous they will be and more willing to chance peace.


edit on 12-9-2015 by PutinTheGreat because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 12:53 AM
link   
a reply to: haman10

You were the one that said Iran would attack America if it was attacked.

Did you not?

You said,


bomb Iran into submission ? Iran will bomb you back bro , i promise you that . this ain't vietnam . you're talking about the most powerful muslim country mate . any poor judgement will result in the loss of innocent lives .


Since when is asking for clarification, "trolling"?



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 01:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: PutinTheGreat
a reply to: haman10

People want to believe this but your leaders need to stop saying death to Israel and death to America. No one gains anything from a war with Iran but you need to understand how Israel could feel threatened by the rhetoric coming from your leaders. When it's less then a century from when you experienced a genocide you don't take threats against your people lightly ever again. Israel is perhaps a flawed state who is heavy handed but the less threatened they feel the more generous they will be and more willing to chance peace.

Rhetoric coming from Iran is merely a response to rhetoric coming from Israel and US .

ON A DAILY BASIS , the officials in US and Israel threaten Iran with military action . seriously , on a daily basis .

now how do you want Iranians to respond ? of course they'll come up with rhetoric of their own , only with a sentence added to it :

"If Israel attacks Iran , we'll annihilate haifa and tel-aviv " thats one of the most renown phrases that the "leader" used . see the difference buddy ?

Don't get me wrong here , both sides are stupid bloodthirsty F-ing politicians .


originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: haman10

You were the one that said Iran would attack America if it was attacked.

Did you not?

You said,


bomb Iran into submission ? Iran will bomb you back bro , i promise you that . this ain't vietnam . you're talking about the most powerful muslim country mate . any poor judgement will result in the loss of innocent lives .


Since when is asking for clarification, "trolling"?
No man , you said the quote "So any perceived threat against Iran will be reciprocated with an attack on America?"

threat is different than military action . threat doesn't provoke military action when it comes to Iran . we try to overcome threats peacefully , everyone does .

but yes , if and only if US attacks Iran , we'll respond by attacking them back . i think thats a natural response isn't it ?



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 01:04 AM
link   
a reply to: haman10

Just to be clear, if the US destroys a nuclear manufacturing site in Iran, then Iran would feel compelled to attack America?



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 01:11 AM
link   
a reply to: haman10

I see your point. Iran feels threatened Israel feels threatened. It's a mess but someone is going to have to be the better man at some point and extend the olive branch. The US and other world powers I feel has done this to a degree with this deal and it is now time for Iran to reciprocate despite the noise from the neo-cons who by the way I feel have very legitimate concerns. No one knows what the leadership in Iran is thinking but when they say death to Israel and America you had better believe it is going to be taken seriously and at face value.



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 01:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: haman10

Just to be clear, if the US destroys a nuclear manufacturing site in Iran, then Iran would feel compelled to attack America?


Just to be clear, you do know that doing military strikes on another country's territory without its permission is an act of war, right? If Russia or any other country destroyed a nuclear manufacturing site in the US, the US would feel compelled to retaliate too, right?

Iran is a sovereign nation. They have just as much of a right and obligation to defend their territory & citizens as every other sovereign country does. It's called self defense.



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 01:16 AM
link   
a reply to: enlightenedservant

So America allows Iran to build a nuclear weapon or suffers an attack from Iran if it interferes.



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 01:24 AM
link   
Haman not caling for war im saying what they will do. they won tinvade Iran they will just embargoo suround it and bomb the infrastructure so bad they cant retaliate with weapons at all. iraq had a huge army and look how they were steamrolled.

And Iran coudnt even get a bomber anywhere near the US. Thats a pipe dream. Its totally unfair how one sided it would be.

Which is why id hope supreme leader will step down an d let the government run things itself instead of th e mullahs.



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 01:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: PutinTheGreat
a reply to: haman10

I see your point. Iran feels threatened Israel feels threatened. It's a mess but someone is going to have to be the better man at some point and extend the olive branch. The US and other world powers I feel has done this to a degree with this deal and it is now time for Iran to reciprocate despite the noise from the neo-cons who by the way I feel have very legitimate concerns. No one knows what the leadership in Iran is thinking but when they say death to Israel and America you had better believe it is going to be taken seriously and at face value.


But shouldn't the opposite also hold true? American lawmakers have threatened attacks on Iran for years. Netanyahu has threatened attacks on Iran for years, too. Israel & the US were responsible for the Stuxnet attacks on Iran several years ago & even assassinated Iranian nuclear scientists. There are even reports that Israeli Mossad agents posed as CIA agents to recruit members of the Jundallah terror group to fight against Iran.

And don't forget, both the US & Israel actually have nuclear weapons. Plus, the US has military bases all around Iran. Here's a basic image I found to illustrate the point (some of them might be restructured now). Iran's clearly not the one instigating hostilities here.



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 01:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: enlightenedservant

So America allows Iran to build a nuclear weapon or suffers an attack from Iran if it interferes.



Iran's not trying to build nuclear weapons. Iran's leader has said this & even Israel's Mossad have said this.

And no matter how you try to word it, it doesn't change the basic facts. Attacking another country's territory without its permission is an act of war. And yes, every country has the right to protect itself when it is attacked. It's not self defense when you attack someone else first. Even American civil law agrees with this.



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 01:33 AM
link   
a reply to: enlightenedservant

Its only instigating hostilities when you are attacking them actually.



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 01:42 AM
link   
a reply to: enlightenedservant

The opposite should hold true but lets be realistic. America will survive a war with Iran but Iran will not survive a war with America. The olive branch from America is being offered from a position of strength. Only a fool would reject it considering their terms are very reasonable and if anything the current administration has gone to great domestic risks to offer terms as good as they are. All that is being asked is Iran give up its nuclear ambitions and stop threatening America and its allies. It's a good deal and Iran won't get any better from a future President I assure you.



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 02:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: yuppa
a reply to: enlightenedservant

Its only instigating hostilities when you are attacking them actually.


How are the Stuxnet attacks and assassinating their scientists not attacking them? Also, the example the person gave was if the US attacked Iranian nuclear facilities. How is that not instigating hostilities?



posted on Sep, 12 2015 @ 02:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: PutinTheGreat
a reply to: enlightenedservant

The opposite should hold true but lets be realistic. America will survive a war with Iran but Iran will not survive a war with America. The olive branch from America is being offered from a position of strength. Only a fool would reject it considering their terms are very reasonable and if anything the current administration has gone to great domestic risks to offer terms as good as they are. All that is being asked is Iran give up its nuclear ambitions and stop threatening America and its allies. It's a good deal and Iran won't get any better from a future President I assure you.



Oh, I'm not doubting what you just posted. I just get irked when people keep characterizing it as if Iran's the aggressor when they're not. Even the billionaire Sheldon Adelson suggested nuking Iranian deserts as a warning to Iran, with the threat of the next nuke happening in Iran's capital Tehran (start at the 25 second mark).

And remember, Adelson isn't a lightweight. He reportedly spent $54 million to $150 million against Obama in the 2012 election (here) and he's a major financial backer of Netanyahu. His opinion carries a lot of weight. Yet people ignore this stuff while trying to demonize Iran.




top topics



 
10
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join