Ayatollah Khamenei Derides Republicans’ Letter on Iran Nuclear Talks

[fskimospy]

With Dr. Strangelove airing the other day I'm reminded of the quote
"Of course, the whole point of a Doomsday Machine is lost, if you *keep* it a *secret*! Why didn't you tell the world, EH?"

I also think you're very much misunderstanding the situation by saying "the sanctions regime". It's not about punishing Iran for the sake of building up their own ego. The whole goal is to prevent the creation of nuclear weapon tech. And any and every deal that fails on that goal is bad. So, what is this deal, what are Iran's intentions (both publicly and privately), and what will the future hold?

I personally don't know what the best approach is, I just know that if the choice is between higher European gas prices and Iranian nuclear weaponry, higher gas prices is the better deal.

Can you explain how you think continuing current sanctions or increasing sanctions will prevent Iran from creating nuclear weapons tech? They certainly were failing at that in the past.

 

[werepossum]

What the hell is a "proggie". Is that a nickname for a customer of the car insurance company, or someone who eats alot of Proggresso soup or some shit.

Short for "progressive".

It's like a comment flag in programming. Whenever you see Werepossum use it in a sentence you can basically guarantee the text following it will be stupid or looney-bin crazy.

lol +1

Can you explain how you think continuing current sanctions or increasing sanctions will prevent Iran from creating nuclear weapons tech? They certainly were failing at that in the past.

I agree that sanctions cannot keep an industrialized nation like Iran from developing nuclear weapons, but they can make that process slower, more painful, and more expensive. At some point, Iran might well have decided that nuclear weapons weren't worth the price. But when you give your adversary what he wants as a condition of negotiating, there's no possible way you win the negotiations. You're only negotiating by how much he wins.

I do think it's possible for Obama to gain something here, maybe even something worth speeding up Iran's march to become a nuclear power. I'm certainly not satisfied that this is a given though, particularly with those of his bent convinced that any deal is better than no deal and that the real enemy in the Middle East is Israel.

 

[fskimospy]

I agree that sanctions cannot keep an industrialized nation like Iran from developing nuclear weapons, but they can make that process slower, more painful, and more expensive. At some point, Iran might well have decided that nuclear weapons weren't worth the price. But when you give your adversary what he wants as a condition of negotiating, there's no possible way you win the negotiations. You're only negotiating by how much he wins.

You keep saying that we have given into Iran as a condition of negotiating. Where are you getting that from?

I do think it's possible for Obama to gain something here, maybe even something worth speeding up Iran's march to become a nuclear power. I'm certainly not satisfied that this is a given though, particularly with those of his bent convinced that any deal is better than no deal and that the real enemy in the Middle East is Israel.

Where did you get the idea that they view the real enemy in the Middle East as Israel? That's again, loony-bin nuts. It does show the effectiveness of that lobby in the US though, where any US president doing any less than giving Israel everything it wants is somehow equivalent to viewing it as the enemy.

 

[werepossum]

You keep saying that we have given into Iran as a condition of negotiating. Where are you getting that from?

Where did you get the idea that they view the real enemy in the Middle East as Israel? That's again, loony-bin nuts. It does show the effectiveness of that lobby in the US though, where any US president doing any less than giving Israel everything it wants is somehow equivalent to viewing it as the enemy.

For the former, it began at least back in 2013. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...-ease-iran-sanctions-on-laptops-mobile-phones

http://www.politisite.com/2014/01/20/obama-kerry-lift-oil-sanctions-against-iran/

http://www.algemeiner.com/2014/02/1...-broadcaster-involved-in-human-rights-abuses/

For the latter, it's apparent in the left's posts here, in their blogs, in their OpEds. Solidarity with Iran is as widespread among the left as is hatred for Israel. (And yes, I know how much you love the Jews, you just hate everything that they do.) It's hardly by accident that Obama is doing for Iran what Clinton did for Red China.

 

[senseamp]

With Dr. Strangelove airing the other day I'm reminded of the quote
"Of course, the whole point of a Doomsday Machine is lost, if you *keep* it a *secret*! Why didn't you tell the world, EH?"


I also think you're very much misunderstanding the situation by saying "the sanctions regime". It's not about punishing Iran for the sake of building up their own ego. The whole goal is to prevent the creation of nuclear weapon tech. And any and every deal that fails on that goal is bad. So, what is this deal, what are Iran's intentions (both publicly and privately), and what will the future hold?

I personally don't know what the best approach is, I just know that if the choice is between higher European gas prices and Iranian nuclear weaponry, higher gas prices is the better deal.

I don't think that's what the Europeans think. They see energy dependence on Russia as a geopolitical threat to them, but they don't see Iranian nukes that way. They are also not as beholden to Israel politically as the US is, so Bibi can't do his song and dance over there.

 

[fskimospy]

For the former, it began at least back in 2013. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...-ease-iran-sanctions-on-laptops-mobile-phones

Do you even bother to read your own links?

The P5+1 negotiations far predate that.

http://www.armscontrol.org/factsheet/Timeline-of-Nuclear-Diplomacy-With-Iran#2013

Additionally, the article clearly states it has nothing to do with concessions to the government, if anything it is framed in your article as a way to combat the Iranian government.

http://www.politisite.com/2014/01/20/obama-kerry-lift-oil-sanctions-against-iran/

Your own link says that was in exchange for Iran shutting down parts of its nuclear development, not as a condition to begin talks.

It seems like you got some really bad information somewhere. Or, more likely, you're crazy/full of shit.

For the latter, it's apparent in the left's posts here, in their blogs, in their OpEds. Solidarity with Iran is as widespread among the left as is hatred for Israel. (And yes, I know how much you love the Jews, you just hate everything that they do.) It's hardly by accident that Obama is doing for Iran what Clinton did for Red China.

Oh good, more frothing insanity from werepossum. I know you said normal people don't see therapists. Well after saying things like that it seems like you're probably not normal, so you might want to reconsider.

1. There is no solidarity with Iran. That's delusional lunacy on your part.
2. Not only do I and other not hate everything Israel does, Israel does not equal 'the Jews'. Your attempt to smear people as anti-semites for criticizing Israel is pathetic.
3. Comparing Iran to China is baffling.

 

[werepossum]

Do you even bother to read your own links?

The P5+1 negotiations far predate that.

http://www.armscontrol.org/factsheet/Timeline-of-Nuclear-Diplomacy-With-Iran#2013

Additionally, the article clearly states it has nothing to do with concessions to the government, if anything it is framed in your article as a way to combat the Iranian government.



Your own link says that was in exchange for Iran shutting down parts of its nuclear development, not as a condition to begin talks.

It seems like you got some really bad information somewhere. Or, more likely, you're crazy/full of shit.



Oh good, more frothing insanity from werepossum. I know you said normal people don't see therapists. Well after saying things like that it seems like you're probably not normal, so you might want to reconsider.

1. There is no solidarity with Iran. That's delusional lunacy on your part.
2. Not only do I and other not hate everything Israel does, Israel does not equal 'the Jews'. Your attempt to smear people as anti-semites for criticizing Israel is pathetic.
3. Comparing Iran to China is baffling.

I disagree that we've gotten anything concrete in return for our concessions.
http://www.ncr-iran.org/en/news/nuc...clear-inspectors-not-allowed-to-visit-parchin

NCRI – A Senior Iranian cleric told a group of members of the Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) that United Nations nuclear inspectors are not allowed to visit Parchin military camp where the Iranian regime has conducted research related to nuclear weapon production.

Ahmad Khatami, a leading member of the Assembly of Experts and a close ally of Ali Khamenei, said on Thursday that "the Islamic Republic of Iran would not allow access to its military centers".

"In the nuclear negotiations, the West is murmuring little by little that it wants to visit the Parchin military site and the missiles in addition to the nuclear energy sites. But, Iran will never allow this because their lack of knowledge about our military might have mislead them."

He said if the regime opens up its military sites and they become subject of talks it will be 'crushed'.

Ahmad Khatami's remarks come as the six powers nuclear talks with the regime aimed at blocking its nuclear-weapons drive move towards a showdown in November.

A spectacular explosion on the night of October 6, deep inside the Parchin military base located 15 miles south of Tehran, raised new questions about the activities on the site.

The explosion and resulting fire, which the Iranian regime's news organizations have described in only the most general terms, could be seen from Tehran.

The explosion, whether accidental or not, came at a key moment in the Iranian regime's confrontations with the six world powers.

The regime has resisted a series of efforts by the International Atomic Energy Agency to get answers on approximately a dozen separate issues, one of which (and among the less sensitive) was the activities at Parchin a decade ago.

The head of the UN nuclear watchdog, as recently as October 20, cautioned about the Iranian regime's claims that it is not interested in nuclear arms, saying he cannot guarantee that all the atomic activities of Tehran are civilian in nature.

 

[fskimospy]

I disagree that we've gotten anything concrete in return for our concessions.
http://www.ncr-iran.org/en/news/nuc...clear-inspectors-not-allowed-to-visit-parchin

Your link doesn't even reference your previous ones, nor does it describe something that predated negotiations.

 

[IGBT]

ted kennedy and all the rest of the liberal inch worms did the same thing when the shoe was on the other foot..nothing new to see here.

 

[werepossum]

Your link doesn't even reference your previous ones, nor does it describe something that predated negotiations.

Um, no, it doesn't. My link was about Iran not allowing inspectors into their military bases where their military nuclear research is based. You know, the areas where we know they will be developing the bomb and its deployment systems. You claim we're getting concessions in return for removing restrictions; I'm pointing out that we aren't getting anything we need, only lip service. Were you perhaps under the impression that our goal with these negotiations was a nice fruit basket?

If it makes you feel better, please feel free to read "begin negotiating in earnest" wherever I type "begin negotiating".

 

[fskimospy]

Um, no, it doesn't. My link was about Iran not allowing inspectors into their military bases where their military nuclear research is based. You know, the areas where we know they will be developing the bomb and its deployment systems. You claim we're getting concessions in return for removing restrictions; I'm pointing out that we aren't getting anything we need, only lip service. Were you perhaps under the impression that our goal with these negotiations was a nice fruit basket?

If it makes you feel better, please feel free to read "begin negotiating in earnest" wherever I type "begin negotiating".

Better idea: I'll change it from "concessions to begin negotiating" to "concessions to meet up with whatever arbitrary point werepossum will declare things real in order to avoid admitting he was full of shit."

That seems to sum it up better, don't you think?

 

[werepossum]

Better idea: I'll change it from "concessions to begin negotiating" to "concessions to meet up with whatever arbitrary point werepossum will declare things real in order to avoid admitting he was full of shit."

That seems to sum it up better, don't you think?

lol Whatever you need to believe, dude.

 

[Sonikku]

He can complain all he wants, but the World of Warcraft sanctions won't get lifted until he cuts a deal.

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2012/aug/29/world-of-warcraft-iran-us-sanctions

 

[Jhhnn]

What's happening is that the usual ravers & nay sayers are going right past the science, charging deeply into Glenbeckistan.

Nuclear weapons cannot exist without weapons grade material. It's really just that simple. The rest is immaterial.

The IAEA assures us that they can detect production of HEU in Iran's centrifuge farms should the Iranians attempt it. They have not, nor likely will they so long as the IAEA is watching over them. If they'll agree to limit the capacity of those farms to the point that it would take a year or so to produce enough HEU for a single weapon, we'd have time to act should they go that way. I'm sure that the IAEA can create protocols that would also prevent undetected reprocessing of spent fuel rods to produce weapons grade plutonium, as well. That's really all we need to create an effective deterrent to weapons production. The rest is bullshit.

 

[chucky2]

"The IAEA assures us that they can detect production of HEU in Iran's centrifuge farms should the Iranians attempt it. They have not, nor likely will they so long as the IAEA is watching over them."

Hahhahahahahaha! Triple down on comedy! Good Friday joke! :thumbsup:

 

[Jhhnn]

"The IAEA assures us that they can detect production of HEU in Iran's centrifuge farms should the Iranians attempt it. They have not, nor likely will they so long as the IAEA is watching over them."

Hahhahahahahaha! Triple down on comedy! Good Friday joke! :thumbsup:

Believing only what you want to believe is standard fare on the Right, no doubt about it.

If the IAEA can't do what I offered, then the whole exercise is pointless. I'm certainly no expert & neither are you. They are-

https://www.google.com/search?q=iaea+safeguards&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

Yeh, I know, the next phase in the conspiracy theory is secret facilities & nothing short of invasion & occupation can verify that they exist or not, kinda like Iraqi WMD's.

How'd that work out? Well, other than for the half of Repubs who still believe in the lies of the Bush Afmin?

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

Does anyone care what the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has to say about anything? Iran is a pissant country that exists on the sufferance of the rest of the regions' four way tie for last place. They can't even feed their own people and don't care.

 

[MongGrel]

Thinks are just getting too odd.

The fact the whole 47 Ronins, yes that was the first thing that lept to my mind, signed the thing from a Freshman Tea Bagger to begin with reminded me of having some new worker do something dumb and just backing it because he's "that new guy".

It's all pretty stupid and just makes the US look more dysfunctional is all I can think of.

BTW, Netanyahu turned right around and stuck his speech before Congress straight into his re election adds apparently, after stating it had nothing to do with it.

But even then.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way...ands-in-israel-gather-in-anti-netanyahu-rally

 

[Mxylplyx]

Believing only what you want to believe is standard fare on the Right, no doubt about it.

If the IAEA can't do what I offered, then the whole exercise is pointless. I'm certainly no expert & neither are you. They are-

https://www.google.com/search?q=iaea+safeguards&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

Yeh, I know, the next phase in the conspiracy theory is secret facilities & nothing short of invasion & occupation can verify that they exist or not, kinda like Iraqi WMD's.

How'd that work out? Well, other than for the half of Repubs who still believe in the lies of the Bush Afmin?

Invade and occupy just to be sure. Not my kids though. Other kids should die for their country while mine go to college.

 

[werepossum]

Does anyone care what the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has to say about anything? Iran is a pissant country that exists on the sufferance of the rest of the regions' four way tie for last place. They can't even feed their own people and don't care.

Because Iran is going to be the region's first Islamic nuclear power and he's the top nut on Iran's very crunchy sundae.

 

[Jhhnn]

Does anyone care what the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has to say about anything? Iran is a pissant country that exists on the sufferance of the rest of the regions' four way tie for last place. They can't even feed their own people and don't care.

Hogwash-

There have been major improvements over the last three decades in reducing food insecurity in Iran. Since the 1990s, the number of people suffering from hunger has steadily declined. The Global Hunger Index (GHI), measured by the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), shows a steady and encouraging downward trend. Iran’s GHI score is now under five, down from a ranking of 8.5 in the 1990s. Iran has had the greatest reduction in GHI ranking in the Middle East.

See more at: http://www.futuredirections.org.au/...ran-s-food-security.html#sthash.PscnnioJ.dpuf

And-

http://www.ifpri.org/tools/2013-ghi-map

Might want to consider that some of the other things you believe aren't true, either.

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

Hogwash-



See more at: http://www.futuredirections.org.au/...ran-s-food-security.html#sthash.PscnnioJ.dpuf

And-

http://www.ifpri.org/tools/2013-ghi-map

Might want to consider that some of the other things you believe aren't true, either.

Doing better when you're at the bottom isn't hard. Next time you're hungry, try eating a statistic. Iran is a backwater hell hole that it's own people don't give a damn about. The elite love to claim moral superiority while people starve, society is crippled by power hungry Ayatollahs who think they have a divine right to tell their starving people how much better off they are than the decadent West. Their historical indifference to their own country's suffering is indefensible. The entire country is a lost cause so damaged by it's "leadership" that losing a war against the first world is their "best" hope.

 

[Fern]

Originally Posted by eskimospy
You keep saying that we have given into Iran as a condition of negotiating. Where are you getting that from?

Where did you get the idea that they view the real enemy in the Middle East as Israel? That's again, loony-bin nuts. It does show the effectiveness of that lobby in the US though, where any US president doing any less than giving Israel everything it wants is somehow equivalent to viewing it as the enemy.

For the former, it began at least back in 2013. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...-ease-iran-sanctions-on-laptops-mobile-phones

http://www.politisite.com/2014/01/20/obama-kerry-lift-oil-sanctions-against-iran/

http://www.algemeiner.com/2014/02/1...-broadcaster-involved-in-human-rights-abuses/

For the latter, it's apparent in the left's posts here, in their blogs, in their OpEds. Solidarity with Iran is as widespread among the left as is hatred for Israel. (And yes, I know how much you love the Jews, you just hate everything that they do.) It's hardly by accident that Obama is doing for Iran what Clinton did for Red China.

Obama began making concessions, i.e., rolling back US sanctions back in 2009 in an effort to get Iran to the table. I'm pretty sure this can easily be found with google, as well as even Dem objections like those of Senator Menedez. Objections to how Obama has been proceeding have not been limited to repubs. Senator Tom Kaine, usually a staunch Obama ally, has also been voicing objections.

------------------------

Despite the Libs' assertions to the contrary, there is widespread concern that Obama is unilaterally attempting to shift our favor away from Israel and the Sunni nations toward Iran (and I suppose by extension to the Shia).

You won't see much of this in the US media. Having lived and worked abroad, and still married to a non-American, my perspective seems to be a bit different than the Dems and most Americans. The US media and (most) Americans seem to see this whole event as a Dem versus Repub thing. IMO, that's far too self absorbed and completely misses the global implications. You know, the important ones.

The 'Community Organizer' appears to be on the path of providing the the last huge shove to destabilize the region, as well as our relations with our Euro partners. It's not the talks with Iran that are delicate, what's delicate is the existing balance of strategic interests and power that currently defines the M.E. He seems hellbent on 'fundamentally changing" that too.

BTW: If anyone wants to see posts from Dems viewing Israel as "the enemy' just look at those in threads about Israeli settlements.

Fern

 

[Fern]

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/13/w...n-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

“All countries, according to the international norms, remain faithful to their commitments even after their governments change, but the American senators are officially announcing that at the end of the term of their current government, their commitments will be considered null and void,” Mr. Khamenei wrote. He said the letter was a “sign of declining political ethics.”

Congratulations Republicans. You now have a dictator in Iran making a criticism of America that is impossible to disagree with. We've all become accustomed to these ass hats making fools of themselves on fox news or town hall meetings, but now these simpletons have shown their ass on the world stage and America's standing in the world is suffering for it. Why would ANY country trust America to keep it's word in tough negotiations anymore? I guess if you can get a momentary bump in your straw poll ratings then fuck America, right?

Hmmm. The Ayatollah's remarks would seem to validate the purpose of the Senators' letter.

Obama knows that he can't repeal the US sanctions enacted by Congress.

Everyone, well except for Iran, knows that Exec Agreements can be overturned easily and immediately by the next President.

Didn't Iran already know this? Has Obama hidden these facts from the Iranians? Has he made promises he can't keep, that are outside his authority?

Geez, I hope not. Why would he want to do that? That would be bad for the USA, no?

Maybe it's good that the senators sent the letters; Iran cannot now claim to have been lied to by the USA.

(I won't mention the fustercluck type shit grenade Obama is concocting for the U.N. Western Europe and the US Congress should he be successful in excluding Congress.)
------------------------

The other parties in this, the other P5 members and Germany have been very quiet. I've seen no support for Obama, no criticism either. Nor have I seen any criticism regarding the letter. Perhaps they'll act to avoid this coming train wreck. I also suppose there's an outside chance that the Senate will manage to overturn Obama's veto on the legislation mandating Congressional approval on any deal Iran deal.

Fern

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

Why does Iran acquiring nuclear capability suddenly make them a legitimate government capable of negotiating in good faith? What does it matter what anyone says to them? Does a rabid dog suddenly become more dangerous because it has a spiked collar? Does anyone think saying "good doggy" will change it's behavior? When has Iran shown in it's dealings with any other country in the last forty years that it has an interest in peaceful coexistence?