You know the world is in trouble when France is the one taking a hard line on Iran

The world is upside down.

The fact is, Obama wants to do this deal with Iran so bad it's just dangerous. He wants to do it to show Bibi and and Republicans that they can't stop him. He's desperate to do a deal with Iran and Iran knows this.

Obama has America in such a position of weakness, top officials from Iran have come out and said the White House is begging us to do a deal. This is just dangerous on so many levels. When you're negotiating with Iran, you don't want to give them the upperhand where they know your desperate. Here's more:

France Takes Toughest Line at Iran Nuclear Talks

LAUSANNE, Switzerland—France is again adopting the toughest line against Iran in negotiations aimed at curbing Tehran’s nuclear program, potentially placing Paris at odds with the Obama administration as a diplomatic deadline to forge an agreement approaches at month-end.

President Barack Obama called French President François Hollande on Friday to discuss the Iran diplomacy and try to unify their positions. The presidents “reaffirmed their commitment” to a deal “while noting that Iran must take steps to resolve several remaining issues,” the White House said.

JUST LOOK AT THE DESPERATION!!

“Making the end of March an absolute deadline is counterproductive and dangerous,” France’s ambassador to the U.S., Gérard Araud, said via Twitter after the latest round of negotiations in Switzerland concluded Friday.

Paris is demanding Tehran address evidence that it has conducted research into the development of nuclear weapons to get those U.N. penalties relaxed. Iran has for years denied the allegations and some officials fear that forcing Tehran to publicly reverse itself could break the diplomacy.

www.wsj.com...

UNBELIEVABLE!!

So, forget getting Iran to admit it has conducted research into nuclear weapons and what that research entails because Tehran might get it's feelings hurt and it could break diplomacy. This is just pure weakness.

It's mind boggling that Obama is so determined to appease Iran to get a deal. Now the talking points is, if we don't do "this" a deal then it's war. This is just idiotic on so many levels.

If Iran is happy with this deal then it's a good deal for Iran and a bad deal for everyone else but Iran. If these "diplomats" are so worried that they don't even want to offend Tehran with questions about their research into nuclear weapons then France is our only hope.

I just don't understand the lefts disdain for Israel. When Arafat got just about everything he wanted, he walked away and the left still blames Israel for everything.

Arafat died a billionaire and at one point he was richer than Jeff Bezos from Amazon. There's no incentive for those in power in Palestine to do a deal. They can spit billions of dollars, allow their people to live like it's 2,000 B.C. and just blame Israel and get billions more. Why would the people in power in Palestine ever make a deal? Arafat's wife was going on shopping sprees in France.

Obama and the White House have indignation and venom for Bibi and they want to appease Iran in the FACE A FRANCE TAKING A HARD LINE!!

a reply to: neoholographic

Insanity. How do even die hard liberals support this? Are they so brainwashed that they choose to deal with those who want you us dead?


Iranian Crowd Chants ‘Death to America’ at Huge Revolution Rally
Feb 11, 2015, 3:13 PM ET
BY ALEXANDER MALLIN and PAT O'GARA via World News

abcnews.go.com...

On Iran's Streets, 'Death To America' ... And Hope For A Nuclear Deal

www.npr.org...

Sounds like France got their orders from Benny. To see that France is taking the hard line against Iran have nuclear energy is pretty funny seeing how they pretty much told JFK to go screw himself and helped Israel set up their illegal nuclear program.
Even though France doesn't like it Iran has every right to develop nuclear energy for peaceful proposes but they want Iran to say that they have been looking into building weapons Iran isn't as stupid as France thinks they are.

a reply to: neoholographic

I just don't understand the lefts disdain for Israel.

You are joking right? The politicians from the left kisses Israel's butt almost as much as the right does. Don't forget AIPAC gives money to both sides they make sure Israels bets are covered. One really can't blame Obama for not liking Benny how often does a person go out of their way to act like they are best buds with someone that has insulted you as much as Benny has insulted Obama.

This whole Iran fear mongering has reached parody levels.

a reply to: neoholographic

Near as I can tell the Palestinians just get used as fodder for the Arab Israeli conflict by both sides.

There are more than a few who see their predicament.

Iran is going to do what it is going to do, we shouldn't be legitimizing what we do not have confirmation of nor should we be "resetting" anything.

a reply to: neoholographic

You do realize that this deal is a good thing right? France isn't even taking a hard line against it, basically they just want public admission of how far Iran's progress has come. If anything that actually backs Obama's deal because it creates a situation where we have proof that the tactic of obstructing Iran's nuclear program isn't working.

If we get this deal, rather than having to rely on the CIA and covert means which can be circumvented in order to obtain our information, and then rely on cyber weapons like Stuxnet that are eventually going to backfire on us, and economic sanctions that effectively only push Russia/Iran/China closer together as regional trading partners we instead get Iran to make a treaty saying they will only create a peaceful nuclear program, and then we get inspectors in the area that get to monitor the amount of nuclear material created, the plants, and their progress. Furthermore, we get accountability as to the amount of spent fuel they have, which means it can be delivered to other nations rather than refined into nuclear weapons.

This deal is great for a west that's opposed to a nuclear armed Iran. Why do you think Iran is so hesitant? This deal effectively permanently halts any nuclear weapons program they ever wish to have. Remember what happened to Iraq when they kicked out the inspectors? The moment Iran backs out of the deal after it's struck, there will be ample political motivation to force regime change.

I find it funny that Iran, and the group whose supposedly anti Iran are the ones who are against this deal. Ever think you might have picked the wrong side of the argument here?

originally posted by: buster2010
a reply to: neoholographic

I just don't understand the lefts disdain for Israel.

You are joking right? The politicians from the left kisses Israel's butt almost as much as the right does. Don't forget AIPAC gives money to both sides they make sure Israels bets are covered. One really can't blame Obama for not liking Benny how often does a person go out of their way to act like they are best buds with someone that has insulted you as much as Benny has insulted Obama.

Where is Israel getting all their money from? Buying a multiple standing ovation from your 3rd trip to US Congress cannot be cheap.

I hope they go broke soon. Unless they have an unlimited fountain. I have been hearing on the radio lately here in Canada they are advertising "Israel bonds" on the radio. "Get in while you can" type stuff. I pass for ethical reasons but a more astute person might think that there is not a lot standing in Israel's way.

Obama wants to make history so bad he is willing to make a deal with anyone.

a reply to: Ancient Champion

It really might be that simple. I sure hope so.

a reply to: Aazadan

You actually *believe* all that malarkey?



You must realize that no "agreement" will ever come true.

a reply to: Aazadan

then we get inspectors in the area that get to monitor the amount of nuclear material created, the plants, and their progress

ha, ha, that's a good one.

this from last year, and no reports of things have changed.

International inspectors have seen evidence that Iran has studied how to build a bomb. But to get proof, they need access to military facilities. And like those other buildings in Natanz, Iran won't let them in.
Nuclear Inspectors Enter Iran, With Eyes Peeled For Cheating

a reply to: xuenchen

Why wouldn't I believe it? I may not know all the details of the plan, but that's the basics. Iran gets to develop nuclear energy, in exchange the west gets inspectors to monitor the number of plants and the amount of waste fuel they generate, then someone in the west (likely a conglomeration of nuclear powers) will buy the spent fuel from Iran in order to ensure they can't stockpile any for weapons development.

This would show a commitment from Iran to peaceful nuclear power. It would also give the west eyes on the ground with direct intelligence assets to ensure nuclear weapons aren't being developed, and that all nuclear fuel is accounted for. If/when Iran were to renege on the deal it would mean they want nuclear weapons and concerned nations would have ample reason to attack.

That seems like a pretty good deal to me. Contrast that with the current situation where Israel is living in constant fear of nuclear attacks because we don't know what Iran is doing. Where Mossad has to risk war in order to assassinate nuclear scientists. Where the CIA doesn't know how much nuclear material is being created or where it is going. Where weapons like Stuxnet have to be deployed (which gives enemies a chance to reverse engineer them and build defenses). Where Iran and North Korea can work together on nuclear weapons. Where terrorists can find a sympathizing state to provide them with nuclear material.

A deal stops all of that. It is very much in our interests to make. It is not in Iran's interest which is why they haven't yet made one. Such a deal will ultimately probably require some economic concessions on our part but it is well worth it.

a reply to: hounddoghowlie

Why would they let them in right now? We currently have no deal with them. At best we have a loose arrangement that says they can't develop weapons, but we have no way to enforce it and everyone knows they are developing weapons behind the backs of inspectors that can't actually do their jobs.

What France is essentially pushing for here is an admission from Iran that the US's current methods are completely ineffective. If they don't give one, it implies they're building weapons. If they do give one it gives Obama more political backing that we need to make a deal.

a reply to: buster2010

Google "ayatollah komenie fatwa against nukes".

You won't find much, Obama, John Kerry arWashinton Post article on fatwae quoted repeatedly over six years saying "he signed a fatwa forbidding nukes"


Any explaination?

a reply to: Aazadan


what do you call the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons they signed. or have you forgotten that or this.

Iran: Iran and weapons of mass destruction and Nuclear program of Iran Iran is a party to the NPT but was found in non-compliance with its NPT safeguards agreement and the status of its nuclear program remains in dispute. In November 2003 IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei reported that Iran had repeatedly and over an extended period failed to meet its safeguards obligations, including by failing to declare its uranium enrichment program.[22] After about two years of EU3-led diplomatic efforts and Iran temporarily suspending its enrichment program,[69] the IAEA Board of Governors, acting under Article XII.C of the IAEA Statute, found in a rare non-consensus decision with 12 abstentions that these failures constituted non-compliance with the IAEA safeguards agreement.[23] This was reported to the UN Security Council in 2006,[70] after which the Security Council passed a resolution demanding that Iran suspend its enrichment.[71] Instead, Iran resumed its enrichment program.[72]
Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons

if a deal is made it will be the same old thing,just like in the past. it's a little game they play, they will continue to do it until they get one and then just watch.

a reply to: Aazadan

This is just wrong. First off, Iran has broken just about every deal they have made. Secondly, Iran knows Obama is desperate to do a deal just to defy those who disagree with him. Because it's a sin to disagree with Dear Leader. The same thing happened after the 2014 elections. Obama was determined to show everyone that he wont be stopped and he's still talking about that and that's why he mentioned mandatory elections.

IT'S A VERY DISTURBING PATTERN.

Here's more from the AP:

A draft nuclear accord now being negotiated between the United States and Iran would force Iran to cut hardware it could use to make an atomic bomb by about 40 percent for at least a decade, while offering the Iranians immediate relief from sanctions that have crippled their economy, officials told The Associated Press on Thursday. As an added enticement, elements of a U.N. arms embargo against Iran could be rolled back...Officials said the tentative deal imposes new limits on the number of centrifuges Iran can operate to enrich uranium, a process that can lead to nuclear weapons-grade material. The sides are zeroing in on a cap of 6,000 centrifuges, officials said, down from the 6,500 they spoke of in recent weeks. That's also less than the 10,000 such machines Tehran now runs, yet substantially more than the 500 to 1,500 that Washington originally wanted as a ceiling. Only a year ago, U.S. officials floated 4,000 as a possible compromise...Washington believes it can extend the time Tehran would need to produce a nuclear weapon to at least a year for the 10 years it is under the moratorium. Right now, Iran would require only two to three months to amass enough material if it covertly seeks to "break out" toward the bomb. The one-year breakout time has become a point the Obama administration is reluctant to cross in the set of highly technical talks, and that bare minimum would be maintained for 10 years as part of the draft deal. After that, the restrictions would be slowly eased...Any March framework agreement is unlikely to constrain Iran's missile program, which the United States believes may ultimately be aimed at creating delivery systems for nuclear warheads. Diplomats say that as the talks move to deadline, the Iranians continue to insist that missile curbs are not up for discussion.

Already a bad deal. The U.S. wanted 500-1500, then 4,000 now they're up to 6,000. There's a reason the U.S. only started out wanting between 500-1500.

THE U.S. BELIEVES IRAN'S MISSILE PROGRAM IS AIMED AT CREATING DELIVERY SYSTEMS FOR NUCLEAR WARHEADS!!!

Iranians insist that any curbs on their missile programs are not even up for discussion.

Of course liberals will swear Iran just want peaceful nuclear energy and there's not an evil bone in anyone's body in Tehran. GIVE ME A BREAK!!

sometimes i envy those with their head in the sand.
the entire globe is rife with crisis,and its all about to "pop" at once.
its a world of madness led by madmen.
where is the voice of reason? sadly i dont hear it.

originally posted by: buster2010
One really can't blame Obama for not liking Benny how often does a person go out of their way to act like they are best buds with someone that has insulted you as much as Benny has insulted Obama.

Let's be honest, Zionism and that mess aside, Obama hasn't been very subtle about crushing any criticism he gets be it through policy or his surrogates at home or abroad.

Why is anyone still defending him or anything he does?

He's a liar. If he's against Israel it has nothing to do with justice or fairness. He has his own agenda. Demonize Israel all you want but let's not forget that we, by no account, absolved ourselves of guilt with Obama as president. I wonder what might happen if all the people he insulted didn't like him... oh, nevermind, already happened. The most transparent administration in history. That claim was an insult to every person that listened to it. Disgusting.

a reply to: Aazadan

You are aware that the IAEA is the outfit that has historically had problems with enforcement right?

Why is there even any new "negotiations" going on?

... It must be something else.

Maybe like the sanctions and maybe the vested interests by at least 3 separate power groups in the pending natural gas pipelines.

Monitoring and Verification in Iran