This might be Obama's biggest gamble - nope, contrary to GOP's hope, it's not Obamacare, but this deal. If Iran has no intention to honor this temporary deal and continues to pursue its ambition to develop nuclear weapons, Obama will go down in the history book as a facilitator to a nuclear arm race in the ME, the last thing the world needs, with the likely possibility that Israel might go it alone and strike Iran nuclear facilities, and a war expending throughout an already war-torn region.
So Israel is the real problem isn't it? They do have nuclear weapons and the support of the warmonger republicans. This is a road to peace not war. Solitary
Quote from: "josephpalazzo"This might be Obama's biggest gamble - nope, contrary to GOP's hope, it's not Obamacare, but this deal. If Iran has no intention to honor this temporary deal and continues to pursue its ambition to develop nuclear weapons, Obama will go down in the history book as a facilitator to a nuclear arm race in the ME, the last thing the world needs, with the likely possibility that Israel might go it alone and strike Iran nuclear facilities, and a war expending throughout an already war-torn region.
The "deal" as it sits is first the ending of nuclear capability BEFORE lifting any sanctions. I think it's a good start, and it nutralizes Isreal from striking and touching off a widening conflict.
It seems the only deal Israel wants is one with absolutely zero benefit to Iran and to call it negotiation. That sounds more like dictating terms of surrender than negotiation.
What would that do for Iran? Nothing.
If Israel wants to start a war they ought to be prepared to go it completely alone.
Now, is Iran playing the same old games? Perhaps, but unless the US AND Israel are prepared for yet more war then it's saber rattling and little more and I see utterly no benefit to yet another war.
I do, if they send all the Christian soldiers and republicans into it. :P :lol: Solitary
Quote from: "mykcob4"Quote from: "josephpalazzo"This might be Obama's biggest gamble - nope, contrary to GOP's hope, it's not Obamacare, but this deal. If Iran has no intention to honor this temporary deal and continues to pursue its ambition to develop nuclear weapons, Obama will go down in the history book as a facilitator to a nuclear arm race in the ME, the last thing the world needs, with the likely possibility that Israel might go it alone and strike Iran nuclear facilities, and a war expending throughout an already war-torn region.
The "deal" as it sits is first the ending of nuclear capability BEFORE lifting any sanctions. I think it's a good start, and it nutralizes Isreal from striking and touching off a widening conflict.
The devil is in the details. As I understand it, Iran over the next 6 months, will halt all enrichment above 5%, neutralize its stockpile of near-20% uranium, leave inoperable a certain number of installed centrifuges, not construct additional enrichment facilities, and unprecedented transparency and intrusive monitoring of Iran's nuclear program. In return, Iran gets limited and temporary, relief on sanctions (app. worth $7 billions), which Kerry said these can be put back into place should Iran fail on its obligations.
What I would like to see is that Obama should not ask Congress to withdraw its intentions to seek stronger sanctions. That way, Iran would know that if it doesn't play by the rules which they sign on, Obama would have no choice but to follow Congress lead. This would be a way of playing bad cop/ good cop.
Additional sanctions? For what? Iran is already nearly completely economically crippled and who pays for that? Certainly not the dictatorial regime. The people of Iran starve and the regime goes on about its business.
Quote from: "josephpalazzo"The devil is in the details. As I understand it, Iran over the next 6 months, will halt all enrichment above 5%, neutralize its stockpile of near-20% uranium, leave inoperable a certain number of installed centrifuges, not construct additional enrichment facilities, and unprecedented transparency and intrusive monitoring of Iran's nuclear program. In return, Iran gets limited and temporary, relief on sanctions (app. worth $7 billions), which Kerry said these can be put back into place should Iran fail on its obligations.
What I would like to see is that Obama should not ask Congress to withdraw its intentions to seek stronger sanctions. That way, Iran would know that if it doesn't play by the rules which they sign on, Obama would have no choice but to follow Congress lead. This would be a way of playing bad cop/ good cop.
I think what I bolded is the biggest part. Even if further negotiations fall through and this 6 month deal ends up being all that is agreed to, Iran's program should be set back more than just the 6 months of down time by the destruction of its previously (mid/highly) enriched uranium.
Iran is not starving. They come in 75th out of 195 countries on annual income per capita, and their GNP in the Middle East is right behind Saudi Arabia. They have some of the highest amounts of undeveloped resources including geothermal, natural gas and petroleum. If the rulers of Iran were to divvy up the potential profit from energy exports, Iran would become one of the wealthiest countries per capita.
I think Israel fears not only the possibility of nuclear weapons but also the potential economic clout the country could have. Israel is by comparison a "resource poor" country.
Quote from: "AllPurposeAtheist"Additional sanctions? For what? Iran is already nearly completely economically crippled and who pays for that? Certainly not the dictatorial regime. The people of Iran starve and the regime goes on about its business.
Part of that is true, but the sanctions are working, why Iran is more willing to talk this time then at any other time. Regrettably, it's the people that pays for their leaders foolishness. But what are the alternatives? This is not only about Israel, but the other Arab countries which have a majority of Sunnis. The war between Sunnis and Shiites has been going on for the last 1400 years. There's little we, in the West, can do about it, except to limit the damage. An Iran armed with nukes would precipitate all the other Sunni countries to get their hands on the nukes. That is a much bigger danger than to increase sanctions on Iran, with the hope that enough discontent in that country will force the leadership to stop their foolish enterprise.
I'd watch what the Saudis do to see how "real" the deal is.
Quote...why Iran is more willing to talk this time then at any other time.
New leader, massive protests, chances to become a world power in terms of resources and economy?
Quote from: "stromboli"Iran is not starving. They come in 75th out of 195 countries on annual income per capita, and their GNP in the Middle East is right behind Saudi Arabia. They have some of the highest amounts of undeveloped resources including geothermal, natural gas and petroleum. If the rulers of Iran were to divvy up the potential profit from energy exports, Iran would become one of the wealthiest countries per capita.
I think Israel fears not only the possibility of nuclear weapons but also the potential economic clout the country could have. Israel is by comparison a "resource poor" country.
Israel has near unlimited resources. It's called the US, the GOP in particular.
Quote from: "AllPurposeAtheist"Quote from: "stromboli"Iran is not starving. They come in 75th out of 195 countries on annual income per capita, and their GNP in the Middle East is right behind Saudi Arabia. They have some of the highest amounts of undeveloped resources including geothermal, natural gas and petroleum. If the rulers of Iran were to divvy up the potential profit from energy exports, Iran would become one of the wealthiest countries per capita.
I think Israel fears not only the possibility of nuclear weapons but also the potential economic clout the country could have. Israel is by comparison a "resource poor" country.
Israel has near unlimited resources. It's called the US, the GOP in particular.
Really? I'm the one that worked on Israel bound F-4s and F-16s, so no shit. I was talking about resources like oil and natural gas. Regardless of how much we pony up money to them and other aids-and they are considerably more than makes the news- they don't have house resources like Iran does. I have no doubt they take that into consideration, because if Iran becomes an unfettered free market player with abundant energy resources, they have the capability of matching Saudi Arabia and Kuwait as power players in the Mideast. That has got to be an issue with Israel.
I can understand Israel's fear in one respect, because Saudi Arabia produced Osama Bin Laden and funded him. Having a country under Shiite leadership with an open pocket book is a bit unsettling. My son in Iraq told me they weren't fighting Iraqis but Iranians. They were speaking Farsi when interrogated, not Arabic. Yeah, I can understand their fears.