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.

 

Israel says Iran Breaking Nuclear Deal

page: 3
13
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 30 2018 @ 01:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Allaroundyou
a reply to: mightmight

Ahh yes the Iran playing a crooked game card. Would you like me to point out all of Americas cards? Iran may be playing others for a fool but America has them beat ten fold. It would be unwise to think that wasn’t happening.



In every post about Iran, Russia and a few other countries your type of post is quickly seen and I just do not understand everyone's point in these posts. I get the evil America message, but we must all understand that EVERY country does what best meets that countries' agenda. There is no evil America, Iran, Russia etc all are the same as they are going to work on their best interests, or what they see as their best interests.

We in America should understand that what is important to us is OUR best interest, and if you or anyone disagrees with that 100% maybe you are in the wrong country.




posted on Apr, 30 2018 @ 01:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
Ok so here is a part I have questions about.


Did the US or iran claim that iran never had a program, or that they once did and it had been scrapped?


The official US position was that Iran halted is nuclear weapons program in the fall of 2003 and didnt resume it since.
This was covered by a (heavily politicized) National Intelligence Estimate in 2007. That estimation effectivley killed all atempts to contain the Iranian nuclear program during the later Bush years and provided a foundation for Obama negotiating the nuclear deal.
Keep in mind, the nuclear deal is just about enriching uranium. The Military side of the issue - building the bomb with enriched uranium - was never on the table since Iran has always denied any ambitions towards it.
The deal was supposed to prevent a runaway enrichment capability for the next decade or so while ensuring a Iranian breakout would be detected by the IAEA.

It looks liked todays relevations show that the military part of the program went on for much longer and was much more advanced than previously thought. This is not really surprising and in line with the Israeli position on the issue.

To get real here for a second, this is actually not that difficult to understand.
Obviously Iran has had a military nuclear program. Obviously they gotten all their research done long ago. Its not that difficult to design and build a nuclear bomb and they got everything they needed from Pakistan and North Korea anyway.
The entire disucssion whether or not they currentely BUILDING THE BOMB !!!11!! is pretty useless.
No matter what, basically all thats left for them do to is enriche enough uranium and build the thing. Currently the nuclear deal prevents that. But the deal will sunset within 10 to 15 after which the Iranians are free to enrich all the Uranium they want. And if they really wanted to, there are - and always will be - enough loopholes to do it in secret and get away with it. If nothing dramatic is done until 2025 - as in full scale, unlimited airstrikes, literally bombing them back a hundreds years - they'll build the bomb just like North Korea did. And since there wont be a full scale war against Iran under Trump or anyone else really, thats the way its going.
A nice nuclear war torward the turn of the century included.



posted on Apr, 30 2018 @ 01:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero

While I agree with you 100% and can also agree that I may live in the wrong country. I would prefer Madagascar but we all want things. I will say that a country looks out for the standing government way before its own people. A sad but true reality.

Also thanks for taking notice of me. Although I don’t know if for good reason lol



posted on Apr, 30 2018 @ 02:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

From what I'm reading, part of Operation Merlin took place around 2003. So it might have been the Clinton administration and Bush administration instead of the Bush & Obama administration. From the top of my head I just remembered that both a Democratic administration and the Bush administration were involved in it. So I may have to edit my other post on that part.

Also, the money sent to Iran after the nuclear deal took affect was Iran's own money. It had had been frozen during the sanctions. Suppose that a bank froze your account while you were under investigation for something, and then unfroze your account when the investigation was over. Was the bank giving you money or were oyu simply able to withdraw what was already yours?

As for the constant BS allegations that Iran wants nuclear weapons, Ayatollah Khomeini issued a fatwa in the 1980s saying that nuclear weapons were against Islam. And their current leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, reiterated this position on his personal website. Looking back at my posting history, I apparently wrote a detailed post about it just last month, so I'll just link that post if you want more context(HERE). That post even has the link to the article in question from the current Ayatollah's website.

I'm pointing this out because people always say that Iran is a dictatorship, a religious theocracy, etc. But when the actual words, fatwas, and rulings of Iran's "dictators" and "supreme religious leaders" go against the narrative of Iran wanting nukes, we're now supposed to believe that those religious leaders and their rulings don't actually matter.



posted on Apr, 30 2018 @ 02:08 PM
link   
About the Obama-Iran Cash issue ...

(From LA Times)



The Obama administration is acknowledging its transfer of $1.7 billion to Iran earlier this year was made entirely in cash, using non-U.S. currency, as Republican critics of the transaction continued to denounce the payments. Treasury Department spokeswoman Dawn Selak said in a statement late Tuesday that the cash payments were necessary because of the "effectiveness of U.S. and international sanctions," which isolated Iran from the international finance system. The $1.7 billion was the settlement of a decades-old arbitration claim between the U.S. and Iran. An initial $400 million of euros, Swiss francs and other foreign currency was delivered on pallets Jan. 17, the same day Tehran agreed to release four American prisoners.




AP weighing in

In other words, we returned money which already belonged to Iran.


(There are multiple sources, including those outside of the US, confirming this information. Should I include more?)


(Help a girl out here ... I'm new. Ish. Sort of)



posted on Apr, 30 2018 @ 02:12 PM
link   
a reply to: AnnaThema

But the idea of returning money that already belonged to them is a small comfort if they used it to help with their nuclear weapons program (thats a big if I dont know if its true)

If it comes out that bibi is right about his claims, and Obama or people defending him fall back on "well it was irans money anyways" they will be crushed for it.


edit on 30-4-2018 by Grambler because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 30 2018 @ 02:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: AnnaThema

But the idea of returning money that already belonged to them is a small comfort if they used it to help with their nuclear weapons program (thats a big if I dont know if its true)

If it comes out that bibi is right about his claims, and Obama or people defending him fall back on "well it was irans money anyways" they will be crushed for it.



But if that turns out to be the case, it would also place some very key Republicans in a very uncomfortable position and, given that they have both the House and Senate, is there not a very good chance that there would be no legal repercussions for any of 'em?



posted on Apr, 30 2018 @ 02:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: AnnaThema

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: AnnaThema

But the idea of returning money that already belonged to them is a small comfort if they used it to help with their nuclear weapons program (thats a big if I dont know if its true)

If it comes out that bibi is right about his claims, and Obama or people defending him fall back on "well it was irans money anyways" they will be crushed for it.



But if that turns out to be the case, it would also place some very key Republicans in a very uncomfortable position and, given that they have both the House and Senate, is there not a very good chance that there would be no legal repercussions for any of 'em?


Did republicans vote for the iran deal as well?

Man I shoiuld know more abbout this.

But yeah, sure, anyone, regardless of party, that supported giving iran 1.7 billion that may have gone to a nuclear weapons program would have a lot to answer for.

Again, thats IF this tory is true, which I have not seen any proof of yet.



posted on Apr, 30 2018 @ 02:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: AnnaThema
But the idea of returning money that already belonged to them is a small comfort if they used it to help with their nuclear weapons program (thats a big if I dont know if its true)

If it comes out that bibi is right about his claims, and Obama or people defending him fall back on "well it was irans money anyways" they will be crushed for it.

But if that turns out to be the case, it would also place some very key Republicans in a very uncomfortable position and, given that they have both the House and Senate, is there not a very good chance that there would be no legal repercussions for any of 'em?



I was under the impression the money transfer from Obama to Iran was done outside of Congress's control by claiming it was simply money the US owed Iran from a weapons deal prior to the fall of the shaw.

The other concern is that money also went to terror groups, like hamas, hezzbolah and the Houtis in Yemen.
edit on 30-4-2018 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 30 2018 @ 02:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: Allaroundyou
a reply to: Xtrozero

While I agree with you 100% and can also agree that I may live in the wrong country. I would prefer Madagascar but we all want things. I will say that a country looks out for the standing government way before its own people. A sad but true reality.

Also thanks for taking notice of me. Although I don’t know if for good reason lol


NP, I didn't reply to be negative and your post was not really aggressive, but it gave me a platform to explain that ALL countries are out for what they see as their best interest. If the Government is not doing what the people want then that is one the people to elect those that are right for office. Anytime the Government does something We The People do not agree with then We The People just need to look in the mirror as to who is to blame.



posted on Apr, 30 2018 @ 02:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero

The point you conveyed in your post was one that doesn’t really get thought about too much. I do like that you responded in the way you did. It was a thought provoking post and needed to be said. Well done.



posted on Apr, 30 2018 @ 02:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler

Did republicans vote for the iran deal as well?


fun fact
The Iran Deal was never voted upon by the Senate or approved by Congress as a whole . It would have failed if they tried, with all Republican Senators and 4 Democrats opposing the deal.
An attempt for a outright disapproval resolution failed in the House because the Democrats got enough votes for a veto proof minority, with all Republicans and 25 Democrats voting in favor of disapproval.
As per usual Obama didnt care and the deal went forward regardless. Technically this violates Article II Section 2 Clause 2 of the US Constitution, but it was Obama so noone cared.



posted on Apr, 30 2018 @ 02:46 PM
link   
Isn´t Israel the last state on earth to critize others because of owning nukes.
Everybody knows they have them but they don´t officially admit that they have them. They own them only to have the power to terrorize the surrounding states, to keep their apartheid state alive.



posted on Apr, 30 2018 @ 02:47 PM
link   
a reply to: mightmight

Obama bypassed Congress by making the Iran deal an Executive agreement.

Executive agreements are politically binding where actual treaties are legally binding. Because its an executive agreement between heads of states it can be modified by the current executive.



posted on Apr, 30 2018 @ 02:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: DerBeobachter
Isn´t Israel the last state on earth to critize others because of owning nukes.
Everybody knows they have them but they don´t officially admit that they have them. They own them only to have the power to terrorize the surrounding states, to keep their apartheid state alive.

Does Israeli leadership go to mass rallies shouting death to Iran or claim every other day we are going to wipe Iran off the map?

Nope.



posted on Apr, 30 2018 @ 02:58 PM
link   
It seems to me that if Congress was in agreement with the money deal, they would have lifted the ban on the transfer of US dollars to Iran rather than the $400 million having to be first converted to other currencies:


“Normally you’d use a bank transfer,” says Sick. “But Congress banned dollar transfers to Iran, so the government had to find another way. So they bought foreign currency, and transferred it in cash.”


5 Things You Need to Know About the $400 Million America Sent to Iran - Fortune

Politifact Fact Check:


It is not known how the remaining $1.3 billion made its way to Iran. Given the isolation of Iran’s banking system, it is possible that the payment was made in cash and flown to Iran, but neither we nor Handel’s staff could point to any report that said that definitely took place.

...

Handel said the Obama administration admitted that nearly $2 billion flown to Iran is being used to fund terrorism and various supporting activities. She is more specific than the record supports. One way or another, the United States transferred $1.7 billion owed to Iran. As for what the administration admitted, Kerry said it was likely that some portion of any money Iran received would go to its top security organization and some of that money would end up advancing terrorism.


Source

So, we have no idea how $1.7 billion dollars was moved?

Really?

I mean, really?

We know that hundreds of millions of dollars worth of cash in the form of pallet loads of non-US currency was delivered to Iran, but not how or where the other billion plus went?

Not to mention John Kerry admitting the fact that the knew it was likely some of the money would end up supporting terrorism.



posted on Apr, 30 2018 @ 03:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
So, we have no idea how $1.7 billion dollars was moved?

Really?

I mean, really?

We know that hundreds of millions of dollars worth of cash in the form of pallet loads of non-US currency was delivered to Iran, but not how or where the other billion plus went?

Not to mention John Kerry admitting the fact that the knew it was likely some of the money would end up supporting terrorism.


and we have the reason the left panicked when Trump won and Clinton lost.

I would not be surprised if money was sent thru the Clinton Foundation to Iran.
edit on 30-4-2018 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 30 2018 @ 03:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: mightmight

Obama bypassed Congress by making the Iran deal an Executive agreement.
Yes sure. But Executive Agreements are limited in scope. Technical stuff like SOFA statues for example.
Presidents dont have the power to make long term major policy agreements with foreign nations on their own authority. Just calling it an agreement instead of treaty doesnt change that.
You can read about it here:
originalismblog.typepad.com...



posted on Apr, 30 2018 @ 03:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: mightmight

originally posted by: Grambler

Did republicans vote for the iran deal as well?


fun fact
The Iran Deal was never voted upon by the Senate or approved by Congress as a whole . It would have failed if they tried, with all Republican Senators and 4 Democrats opposing the deal.
An attempt for a outright disapproval resolution failed in the House because the Democrats got enough votes for a veto proof minority, with all Republicans and 25 Democrats voting in favor of disapproval.
As per usual Obama didnt care and the deal went forward regardless. Technically this violates Article II Section 2 Clause 2 of the US Constitution, but it was Obama so noone cared.



i thought that is what happened, but I didnt want to make claims I couldnt back up at the time.

Thanks for the info.



posted on Apr, 30 2018 @ 03:23 PM
link   
US is now claiming they have confirmed netenyahu's claims.



Senior Trump administration officials confirmed the findings as authentic and praised Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's for disclosing thousands of secret documents proving Iran lied about its past work on a nuclear warhead, telling the Free Beacon the revelation was a "powerful presentation" by Israel outlining why the Iran deal must be fixed or killed.

U.S. officials who reviewed the secret documents confirmed their authenticity and said that Israel has shared the information fully with the United States, most likely to help build the case for Trump to abandon the nuclear deal, rather than try to fix what the White House views as a series of insurmountable flaws.


freebeacon.com...

I wonder if this is the same US intel that had "proof" assad gassed his people?

What a mess.

Who knows what to believe.

I jut hope bloodshed can be avoided, though I know that this is very unlikely.



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join