Iran has no interest in Obama's olive branch.

[Hayabusa Rider]

Good. Obama is doing precisely what he should do at this time and that is giving them fits. Iran could afford to offer talks because Bush was predictable and inflexable. Iran played him as they still do some here.

Nicely done.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: daniel49

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

You have to kill everybody who is crazy enough to harm innocent people because they are hateful and afraid and the first one on my list is YOU.

Direct threat to kill?

Is that grounds for banning?

Funny that you wish I were banned for mirroring you and your idiotic thinking.

 

[retrospooty]

Originally posted by: daniel49

Originally posted by: retrospooty

Originally posted by: daniel49

Its not Iran that most people with a brain worry about, its Iran 's potental to allow the technology to be used by Terrorists (in proxy). Thus allowing for no national Iranian fingerprint to retaliate against (and avoiding culpability in the event of a nuclear event).
The reason MAD worked with Russia is retaliation was a sure thing. How do you retaliate when the attacker is not a nation?

How does refusing to talk to Iran change that in any way, other than negative?

europe Has talked directly for years . US through the UN sanctions and resolutions and low level diplomats. Has Irans demeanor changed in any way?
Its not talking that is needed its talking to a rational Iranian govt that is needed.
T

Agreed, but irrelevant. Even if talks don't happen, if we are the ones offering, we have the higher position, than if we are refusing. If for nothing else than appearances sake.

 

[retrospooty]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: daniel49

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

You have to kill everybody who is crazy enough to harm innocent people because they are hateful and afraid and the first one on my list is YOU.

Direct threat to kill?

Is that grounds for banning?

Funny that you wish I were banned for mirroring you and your idiotic thinking.

Its not surprising, funny, yes, but not at all surprising.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: daniel49

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Iran's government is completely rational. It's silly to think that they aren't.

Then your in complete denial with the daily rhetoric of Admanawackjob. They thought Hitler was just pandering to the crowds also.

Ahmadinejad is not the leader of Iran.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: daniel49

your in elite company there lad. When you agree with moonbeam.
Its not Iran that most people with a brain worry about, its Iran 's potental to allow the technology to be used by Terrorists (in proxy). Thus allowing for no national Iranian fingerprint to retaliate against (and avoiding culpability in the event of a nuclear event).
The reason MAD worked with Russia is retaliation was a sure thing. How do you retaliate when the attacker is not a nation?

I don't think you understand how nuclear weapons work, or how the world works. When you detonate a nuclear weapon it is possible to figure out where that weapon came from, and we would most certainly do that with any bomb detonated in our country. So no, Iran would in no way be able to avoid responsibility for an Iranian nuclear weapon being detonated in the US (or anywhere else really) and so they would most certainly be retaliated against.

So no, most people with a brain do not worry about the Iranians developing and deploying a mystical and nonexistent nuclear device that is somehow untraceable. Care to revise your assessment?

I think you overestimate our capabilities in that department.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/re...08/02/080216142207.htm

Besides that, the material could potentially be stolen so it doesn't necessarily finger a culprit. I doubt that Iran would be stupid enough to use their own uranium if they wanted to use a terrorist proxy in a nuclear attack anyway.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: eskimospy


Iran's government is completely rational. It's silly to think that they aren't.

Anyone that allows Sharia law is not rational. Unless you are misogynistic.

So they are rational misogynists then. I'm not saying the guardian council is full of fabulous people, just that they act rationally, which they most certainly do.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: daniel49

Originally posted by: retrospooty

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

Originally posted by: daniel49

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
I see the Islamaphobes are all pissing in their pants. There is nothing more terrifying to psychopaths than reason.

Cowards die many times before their deaths, the valiant never taste of death but once.

are you speaking from personal experience?
If so you are either dead or have wet pants.

Actually daniel, Moonbeam is talking about people like you.
Moonbeam is 100% correct on that account!!

+1 :thumbsup:

your in elite company there lad. When you agree with moonbeam.
Its not Iran that most people with a brain worry about, its Iran 's potental to allow the technology to be used by Terrorists (in proxy). Thus allowing for no national Iranian fingerprint to retaliate against (and avoiding culpability in the event of a nuclear event).
The reason MAD worked with Russia is retaliation was a sure thing. How do you retaliate when the attacker is not a nation?

Ihave always agreed with Moonbeam.....sorry to burst your bubble...
So you are advocating not even trying perhaps even talk over and over talking with the other side?
You would rather go to war??

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

I think you overestimate our capabilities in that department.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/re...08/02/080216142207.htm

Besides that, the material could potentially be stolen so it doesn't necessarily finger a culprit. I doubt that Iran would be stupid enough to use their own uranium if they wanted to use a terrorist proxy in a nuclear attack anyway.

Nope, don't overestimate them at all. That paper is mostly concerned with the speed at which we could make the determination and a worry that this capability is deteriorating due to lack of funding and replacement personnel. While I would totally agree that we need to be able to make this determination quickly in the case of a nuclear attack in order to avoid acting rashly, it is highly unlikely that we would be unable to determine the source of a nuclear bomb.

The means by which a bomb is identified go far beyond where the uranium came from, there are also signs from the enrichment process, the non-nuclear components, the signature of the detonation, etc. So unless Iran is stealing someone else's enriched uranium along with someone else's bomb design, there will be quite a few clues. (and if they're stealing all that, stopping their nuclear program seems pretty pointless anyway doesn't it?)

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: daniel49

your in elite company there lad. When you agree with moonbeam.
Its not Iran that most people with a brain worry about, its Iran 's potental to allow the technology to be used by Terrorists (in proxy). Thus allowing for no national Iranian fingerprint to retaliate against (and avoiding culpability in the event of a nuclear event).
The reason MAD worked with Russia is retaliation was a sure thing. How do you retaliate when the attacker is not a nation?

I don't think you understand how nuclear weapons work, or how the world works. When you detonate a nuclear weapon it is possible to figure out where that weapon came from, and we would most certainly do that with any bomb detonated in our country. So no, Iran would in no way be able to avoid responsibility for an Iranian nuclear weapon being detonated in the US (or anywhere else really) and so they would most certainly be retaliated against.

So no, most people with a brain do not worry about the Iranians developing and deploying a mystical and nonexistent nuclear device that is somehow untraceable. Care to revise your assessment?

That is not comforting when Tel Aviv and Palestine are leveled/poisoned. The Palestinians are the dogs of the Arab world in other Arab's eyes. Dont think for a minute that some jihadis wouldnt sacrafice them for Allah-snackbar.

fearmongering again..lol

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

fearmongering again..lol

Yes, because it is so off-base.

Well, lets ask our (D) president what he thinks.

Text

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: daniel49

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

You have to kill everybody who is crazy enough to harm innocent people because they are hateful and afraid and the first one on my list is YOU.

Direct threat to kill?

Is that grounds for banning?

If it was grounds for banning they would also have to ban you for being an idiot....

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

That is not comforting when Tel Aviv and Palestine are leveled/poisoned. The Palestinians are the dogs of the Arab world in other Arab's eyes. Dont think for a minute that some jihadis wouldnt sacrafice them for Allah-snackbar.

fearmongering again..lol

Yes, because it is so off-base.

Well, lets ask our (D) president what he thinks.

Text

[/quote]

And if you read more into it you would realize that Obama is concerned about strategic implications, the alteration of the balance of power in the ME, not Tel Aviv being nuked.

 

[daniel49]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: daniel49

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

You have to kill everybody who is crazy enough to harm innocent people because they are hateful and afraid and the first one on my list is YOU.

Direct threat to kill?

Is that grounds for banning?

Funny that you wish I were banned for mirroring you and your idiotic thinking.

You wouldn't know how to mirror me , little man.

 

[daniel49]

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

Originally posted by: daniel49

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

You have to kill everybody who is crazy enough to harm innocent people because they are hateful and afraid and the first one on my list is YOU.

Direct threat to kill?

Is that grounds for banning?

If it was grounds for banning they would also have to ban you for being an idiot....

that can't be right. Your still here.

 

[Thump553]

It's amazingly superficial news analysis (to use the term very loosely) to conclude that the outreach gesture to Iran failed. But since this conclusion comes from Fox "News" and was reached within a few hours of Obama's video to the Iranian people, the analysis is bogus. One more example of the far right hoping that Obama fails.

Anyone halfway astute in negotiations of any sort (much less the big leagues of diplomatic negotiations) can tell you there are all sorts of nuances to every response. A loud no which sounds absolute may be just posturing. To conclude that either (a) the President of Iran speaks with an authoritative voice for Iran or (b) that the Iranian leaders are naive enough to irrevocably box themselves into a single strategy at this point is foolish, to put it mildly.

Give it some time and watch the big boys at work. Perhaps the effort will fail, perhaps it will not, but it almost certainly is nowhere near decided yet.

 

[tfcmasta97]

Wow great analysis. Olive branches tend to be questioned when it's from a country backing another one engaging in a holy war that executes women and children, while invading the place next door themselves.

 

[Vic]

The only reason Iran plays their little games is to keep oil prices up. Bush's policy was to assist them in that. Obama's policy is a bit more conducive to the interests of American people.

 

[chess9]

Originally posted by: wwswimming
Iran was a democracy until the United States deposed the democratically
elected Mossadegh in favor of the dictator Shah, in the 1950's.

the Shah was in power until about 1979.

Iran has very good reasons not to trust the US, based on experience.

True, but so do about 150 other nations! It's time to kiss and make up.

Iran is hopeless for the foreseeable future. Let's hope the Iranians and Israelis don't get into it, as all hell will break loose in the M.E. The best we can hope for with Iran is having to listen to them call us names. I think we'll bear up....

-Robert

 

[trenchfoot]

Originally posted by: Thump553
It's amazingly superficial news analysis (to use the term very loosely) to conclude that the outreach gesture to Iran failed. But since this conclusion comes from Fox "News" and was reached within a few hours of Obama's video to the Iranian people, the analysis is bogus. One more example of the far right hoping that Obama fails.

Anyone halfway astute in negotiations of any sort (much less the big leagues of diplomatic negotiations) can tell you there are all sorts of nuances to every response. A loud no which sounds absolute may be just posturing. To conclude that either (a) the President of Iran speaks with an authoritative voice for Iran or (b) that the Iranian leaders are naive enough to irrevocably box themselves into a single strategy at this point is foolish, to put it mildly.

Give it some time and watch the big boys at work. Perhaps the effort will fail, perhaps it will not, but it almost certainly is nowhere near decided yet.

Exactly my sentiment.:thumbsup:

I'd make a million $$ easy from selling bales of straw to Obama's failed-idelolgy-driven detractors in this forum.

 

[EagleKeeper]

There are four people here that are threatening to derail this thread due to tantrums.

If one fals into this category ,and the thread is locked as a result, there will be a need to recharge the ban stick.


Senior Anandtech Moderator
Common Courtesy

 

[Jiggz]

Originally posted by: retrospooty

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
Iran

Oops. Well, at least he 'tried' right? I guess we're back to Bush's policy on Iran now. Maybe Obama could up the offer of peace with a box of DVD's? Obama is so out of his league here its not funny.. I bet he really thought his offer would be accepted and peace and rainbows would rain from heaven.

We are dealing with international politics... You know absolutely shit. Your knee jerk reaction proves that. Leave it to the pro's and dont try to be smug about things that are miles over your head.

Huh? So you are now the self proclaimed guru of international politics? I guess birds of the same feather flocks together . . . BHO?

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

I think you overestimate our capabilities in that department.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/re...08/02/080216142207.htm

Besides that, the material could potentially be stolen so it doesn't necessarily finger a culprit. I doubt that Iran would be stupid enough to use their own uranium if they wanted to use a terrorist proxy in a nuclear attack anyway.

Nope, don't overestimate them at all. That paper is mostly concerned with the speed at which we could make the determination and a worry that this capability is deteriorating due to lack of funding and replacement personnel. While I would totally agree that we need to be able to make this determination quickly in the case of a nuclear attack in order to avoid acting rashly, it is highly unlikely that we would be unable to determine the source of a nuclear bomb.

The means by which a bomb is identified go far beyond where the uranium came from, there are also signs from the enrichment process, the non-nuclear components, the signature of the detonation, etc. So unless Iran is stealing someone else's enriched uranium along with someone else's bomb design, there will be quite a few clues. (and if they're stealing all that, stopping their nuclear program seems pretty pointless anyway doesn't it?)

The speed with which we can make such a determination and the lack of equipment to do so are already our capabilities in that department. Capabilities aren't what we could do, they are what we can do. Then there's this:

With the right mobile equipment, nuclear detectives could sift through the debris and the radioactive cloud of an attack in this country or elsewhere and quickly glean crucial information, the scientists argue in a 60-page report was discussed Feb. 16 at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in Boston.

Using radiochemistry techniques and access to proposed international databases that include actual samples of uranium and plutonium from around the world, the nuclear investigators might be able to tell the president--and the world--where the bomb fuel came from, or at least rule out some suspects.

iow, even if we had the equipment it's still not decisive regardless of the enrichment process, detonation signature, or other forensic determinations that can be made.

 

[Jiggz]

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
Iran

Oops. Well, at least he 'tried' right? I guess we're back to Bush's policy on Iran now. Maybe Obama could up the offer of peace with a box of DVD's? Obama is so out of his league here its not funny.. I bet he really thought his offer would be accepted and peace and rainbows would rain from heaven.

go read my thread from a couple after Obama got elected and iran recognized it actually would have to deal with the US and couldn't rely on Bush's obstinate "we don't talk to terror states" position as a means of deflecting criticism.

If Iran refuses the olive branch it makes them the assholes in the eyes of the world, not us. Maybe you think that's a small thing, but obama's position makes us the good guys and Iran the obstinate assholes. See how that works?

So Iran, despite of being isolated from the international community is now presently "saint-like" looking? And because it refused the BHO olive branch they now look a-hole to the world? Wow, where did you learn how to use logic like that? Or is that another BHO campaign line?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Welcome to the real world. Yes people who have an understanding realize how awkward this is for Iran.