Netanyahu: Iran Nuke Deal ‘Will Bring War’

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: buster2010
America did not give Iran billions we returned money that belonged to them.

Are you talking now or 32 years ago?

I wonder if they got any interest on the money held while it was sanctioned?

Bookkeeping will take care of that. You missed a point. Check out the Iran/Contra "scandal".

Yeah I know all about that. That's when Reagan (pbuh) funded terrorist.

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: buster2010
America did not give Iran billions we returned money that belonged to them.

Are you talking now or 32 years ago?

I wonder if they got any interest on the money held while it was sanctioned?

Bookkeeping will take care of that. You missed a point. Check out the Iran/Contra "scandal".

Yeah I know all about that. That's when Reagan (pbuh) funded terrorist.

You really should research that. Sold arms to one "terrorist" to provide funds for another "terrorist", because Congress wouldn't allow any further funds to Iran.

originally posted by: intrepid
"I just know crap."

I totally agree

originally posted by: FamCore
a reply to: Cygnis

What did the US get out of such a deal? I haven't been able to understand this from the getgo

Mainly, the US got a say on how often inspections can take place, where they can inspect, and how many centrifuges Iran can keep. In exchange we freed up money in frozen accounts and are lifting sanctions. Other nations involved got other things. This deal was negotiated by much more than the US and has been in the works since 2006.

a reply to: Aazadan

Meanwhile, they continue with their program.

Meanwhile we actually agreed to notify them 24 days prior to an inspection. (Thats almost like a test being taken during high school and the teacher announcing at the start that he is leaving the room and wont be back for an hour.........)

Meanwhile, we have no idea how much fissionable material they have already produced.

Theoretically we will be monitoring their production.... See 24 day notice prior to an inspection.

Bottom line: we do not know how much material they have already produced and we cannot truly find out how much they are making after implementation of the treaty since in 24 DAYS! Not hours, DAYS! they can move a considerable amount of material to avoid our inspection.

Therefore the treaty is worthless. Not worth the toilet tissue you use to wipe yourself with.

a reply to: bbracken677

KILL THEM ALL!!!! Oh wait, that was a Metallica album. I'm kinda curious to see what's going to happen in 10 years. America usually casts off allies about on a 10 year schedule. With a little funkiness.

Eta: Israel has a pass. Canada a little one.

a reply to: intrepid

What ally are you referring to?

originally posted by: bbracken677
a reply to: Aazadan

Therefore the treaty is worthless. Not worth the toilet tissue you use to wipe yourself with.

To be fair, toilet tissue is priceless in the right circumstances.

Also, are you just as fearful of Israel's actual nukes as you seem to be of Iran's imaginary ones? You know Israel actually pulled them out & threatened to use them before, right? And they won't let anyone inspect them or their other nuclear facilities, either.

originally posted by: bbracken677
a reply to: crazyewok

LOL Crazyewok...you are indeed crazy!

Just an FYI.. there is not a single line in my post that deserved the silly response you wrote.

I did not advocate war. Please re-read my post.

My point was rather simple: the 24 day inspection notice is stupid. I presented my argument precisely about that and the reasons why it was stupid. Your reply was...well...I have no words to describe it. I really don't.

Negotiations have seldom, if ever, achieved the desired results as determined by the stronger of the 2 parties. AT the very least, the US have not dropped their pants in virtually every negotiation in which they have participated. Oh...wait, yes they have.

Claiming that the US sucks at negotiations is hardly advocating war. How bout...for a hoot... we just consider that we alter our method of negotiating? Perhaps we could actually negotiate for a win for a change???

We obviously negotiate from a position of strength, both economically as well as militarily. Going to tell me that we couldn't actually beat Iran in negotiations? Are you going to tell me that we exercised our economic influence to it's extreme? Really?

okie dokie......

Well when you put it like that I retract my statement.

I'm just used to the chicken hawks on ATS.


As for the 24 hour thing you do have a point. It's something that should have been negotiated on.

Remember though it was not just the US and Iran on these talks. You had the UK, France and Germany from the EU and China and Russia.

On its own the USA has the most clout economical. UK, France and Germany though control the EU economy and that exceeds the US at the moment so they could drive a hard bargin if they worked together. China and Russia also could bring some clout if the worked together two.

Not to mention all those powers would be offering some little secret back doors deals.

If it was straight up US and Iran talks then yeah the US has the high ground, add the other powers it becomes more muddled.

I don't think it was the EU side that caused the trouble as from what I hear France and Germany wanted it stricter! Almost to the point Iran nearly walked, UK and US had to rein them in !

I think the trouble came from the China and Russian side.

originally posted by: bbracken677
a reply to: intrepid

What ally are you referring to?

Pretty much anyone that won't blow Uncle Sam. Iran wasn't an ally. Then an ally(Shah) then not an ally. Did the same with Iraq. Central America, etc. This is not sustainable. Rome fell. America is already. Go with grace please. And don't try to diss my country. We never tried to rule the world. Mom did though.

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: bbracken677
a reply to: intrepid

What ally are you referring to?

Pretty much anyone that won't blow Uncle Sam. Iran wasn't an ally. Then an ally(Shah) then not an ally. Did the same with Iraq. Central America, etc. This is not sustainable. Rome fell. America is already. Go with grace please. And don't try to diss my country. We never tried to rule the world. Mom did though.

Hey we didn't try we did rule the world!

Then Germany came and ruined our fun

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: bbracken677
a reply to: intrepid

What ally are you referring to?

Pretty much anyone that won't blow Uncle Sam. Iran wasn't an ally. Then an ally(Shah) then not an ally. Did the same with Iraq. Central America, etc. This is not sustainable. Rome fell. America is already. Go with grace please. And don't try to diss my country. We never tried to rule the world. Mom did though.

Hey we didn't try we did rule the world!

BS. England ruled the world for a fair time. Not long. Compared to the RE. IF you believe biblical history the statue that Daniel foresaw was the Roman empire. Legs of iron. Then the feet of clay. The Brit/US empire. It's crumbling.

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: bbracken677
a reply to: intrepid

What ally are you referring to?

Pretty much anyone that won't blow Uncle Sam. Iran wasn't an ally. Then an ally(Shah) then not an ally. Did the same with Iraq. Central America, etc. This is not sustainable. Rome fell. America is already. Go with grace please. And don't try to diss my country. We never tried to rule the world. Mom did though.

Hey we didn't try we did rule the world!

BS. England ruled the world for a fair time. Not long. Compared to the RE. IF you believe biblical history the statue that Daniel foresaw was the Roman empire. Legs of iron. Then the feet of clay. The Brit/US empire. It's crumbling.

Well still longer than Macedonia which was the copper bits

Anyway we did rule the world even if it was just a couple of century's

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: bbracken677
a reply to: intrepid

What ally are you referring to?

Pretty much anyone that won't blow Uncle Sam. Iran wasn't an ally. Then an ally(Shah) then not an ally. Did the same with Iraq. Central America, etc. This is not sustainable. Rome fell. America is already. Go with grace please. And don't try to diss my country. We never tried to rule the world. Mom did though.

Hey we didn't try we did rule the world!

BS. England ruled the world for a fair time. Not long. Compared to the RE. IF you believe biblical history the statue that Daniel foresaw was the Roman empire. Legs of iron. Then the feet of clay. The Brit/US empire. It's crumbling.

Well still longer than Macedonia which was the copper bits

Greece? They are the basis of western culture. Including Rome.

Anyway we did rule the world even if it was just a couple of century's

I hope Mom will be as graceful as Rome has been.

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: Aloysius the Gaul

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: neoholographic

So you're not denying that Israel is a "country run by a religious zealot"?

I will deny that.

IMO Netanyahu is not a religious zealot.

He is a political zealot.

So why would a non-religious zealot take advice from & agree with a Rabbi telling him to hasten the coming of the Jewish Messiah? How is that political but not religious? I'm not saying he's an Orthodox Jew. But that video makes it seem like he's a Messianic Jew, which is still religious.

so he can get re-elected - there are a significant number of votes in those religious parties!

a reply to: crazyewok

You may have a point, but no matter how you look at it, Iran wanted a long pre-inspection period for a reason. There is only one reason that I can reasonably consider that the Iranians would want such a long warning.

Therefore, they are continuing their push to produce weapons... what other reason for enrichment?

We think we know how many centrifuges they have.... Who is to say they have not taken one apart and started building their own. That is quite possible seeing as reproducing a piece of machinery is not hard if you have the equipment, and I am sure Iran has the equipment.

Put those 2 problems together and you have a situation where we do not know (realistically) how much enriched material they have produced, how much they are able to produce between inspections nor how close to a nuke they are.

You may doubt that a nuke from Iran would not wind up in terrorists hands, you may doubt that Iran would send a missile Israel's way, but one thing you cannot doubt: There is a reason Iran wants a large pre inspection warning. This is not a good thing.

a reply to: bbracken677

Im not 100% sure.

I'm not a expert on handling radioactive material.

But i am a expert on handling hazardous chemicals and biological samples of cat 3.

Moving such things around are not easy. The safety procedures in place for the bare minimum safety are a nightmare.

In fact one piece of equipment we used did use radioactive material, only a small amount and that took hours to move fro one building to another!

Plus plutonium and other radioactive material leave marker were they have been, in fact you can even trace were they are if you are quick enough. In 24 hours the storage room will light up like a Christmas tree and You could likely track were they have taken it.

I'm not saying your wrong. But I don't think radioactive material is that easy to move or hide. It's why chemical weapons have been a favourite for rogue states.

If there are any experts on radioactive material here then chime in.

a reply to: bbracken677

IDK but wouldn't residual nuclear particles be evident? I'm not a physicist.

a reply to: crazyewok

i agree, im sure we could track anything they tried to move around. maybe thats why we agreed to 24 days.

originally posted by: autopat51
a reply to: crazyewok

i agree, im sure we could track anything they tried to move around. maybe thats why we agreed to 24 days.

Yeah I may be wrong but I do t think 24 hours is enough for it to clear. It should be hot for a few weeks.

Hell they manged to track the trial of polonium after that assination in the UK weeks after it happened.