Iran, six world powers clinch breakthrough nuclear deal

[EagleKeeper]

Link

GENEVA (Reuters) - Iran and six world powers reached a breakthrough agreement early on Sunday to curb Tehran's nuclear program in exchange for limited sanctions relief, in a first step towards resolving a dangerous decade-old standoff.

The deal between the Islamic state and the United States, France, Germany, Britain, China and Russia was nailed down after more than four days of negotiations

On paper is one thing;

To be actually honored without waffling will be another.

However, at present; no details are out there

 

[compuwiz1]

I wouldn't trust it. The Iranians are probably laughing their asses off, chanting "death to America", while enjoying the additional time they have just been granted. I have a prediction..........

We may not need to STOA....we may be blown to smithereens before then.

 

[Texashiker]

Rumors have it the obama administration brokered the deal.

Everything else was for show.

Its just matter of time before iran develops the bomb.

 

[compuwiz1]

Rumors have it the obama administration brokered the deal.

Everything else was for show.

Its just matter of time before iran develops the bomb.

John "ketchup" Kerry's finest hour.

 

[Screech]

I wouldn't trust it. The Iranians are probably laughing their asses off, chanting "death to America", while enjoying the additional time they have just been granted. I have a prediction..........

We may not need to STOA....we may be blown to smithereens before then.

Rather funny you would take this position, given that Iran in terms of opposing al qaeda (ie supporting hezbollah in syria) should be more of an ally of ours in the region than.....certain other powers (saudi arabia lol). Granted, I suppose screwing them over directly for decades might have left a bad taste in their mouth so to speak, but the current government certainly seems to be promising.

 

[Jaskalas]

We made similar agreements with North Korea. Guess the United States wants a nuclear armed Iran.

 

[woolfe9998]

We made similar agreements with North Korea. Guess the United States wants a nuclear armed Iran.

What else would you have us do? Bomb them?

I see zero downside to negotiations.

 

[Racan]

Good news,

Full factsheet of the deal:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press...standings-regarding-islamic-republic-iran-s-n

 

[rudeguy]

They get to keep enriching?
We recognize their "nuclear rights"?
They promise to be good boys for six months?

Kick the can folks...kick the can.

 

[rudeguy]

What else would you have us do? Bomb them?

I see zero downside to negotiations.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Opera

Worked before....

And why would we negotiate with someone who holds yearly celebrations of hating us?
Why would we negotiate with someone who has sworn destruction of one of our closest allies?
Why would we negotiate with someone who has sworn our destruction?

This is not going to end well...

 

[irishScott]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Opera

Worked before....

And why would we negotiate with someone who holds yearly celebrations of hating us?
Why would we negotiate with someone who has sworn destruction of one of our closest allies?
Why would we negotiate with someone who has sworn our destruction?

This is not going to end well...

Worked on an above-ground nuclear facility with outmatched air defenses. Multiple facilities, some of which are embedded in mountainsides are a whole different ballgame. Current analysis says we'd need nuclear bunker-busters to do it reliably, you don't release nuclear ordnance lightly.

 

[irishScott]

What else would you have us do? Bomb them?

I see zero downside to negotiations.

Assuming they follow through on their part. Wouldn't be the first time someone signed a treaty and just got more secretive about whatever they were doing.

 

[Jaskalas]

What else would you have us do? Bomb them?

I see zero downside to negotiations.

Those who seek nuclear weapons agree, there is no downside to talking.

We've been down this road before with an Iranian trading partner. They know how the game is played. What else would I have us do? If we were intelligent and nation building off the table, my answer would be clear. Given present realities of our incompetence in Iraq and Afghanistan, I guess it's better to wait for a nuclear explosion before we act.

The world needs a military response to nuclear proliferation before winter, not after the bombs have fallen. You cannot realistically expect that for anyone who wants a nuke that peace and stability will follow. The Cold War with Russia was only successfully adverted by rationale players. So long as nuclear proliferation exists it shall one day find a player who is not rationale, and then MAD will fail us.

So long as we are resolved to talking, that day will come.

 

[michal1980]

no destruction of centrifuges = fail.

 

[fskimospy]

Lol. This thread is entirely unsurprising.

Your choices are massive attack/invasion of Iran or negotiation and deals like this and what it may lead to. If your opinion is that we need to conduct a nuclear attack on Iran or invade them just say so. If you don't, provide a realistic alternative. No, a quick bombing campaign won't do it.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Looks like Benji Yahoo isn't too happy with this deal. Must be that it ties his hands for a while.

 

[EagleKeeper]

They have 6 months to hammer out the details and for Iran to show that it is serious about complying.

 

[rudeguy]

They have 6 months to hammer out the details and for Iran to show that it is serious about complying.

You mean Iran has six months to finish their bomb

 

[ivwshane]

Wow! Iran is such a scary country, I'm surprised we negotiated with such an evil country.

-says people who are utterly clueless on Iran-US history and Irans power structure.



It just goes to show you, Obama could cure cancer and you guys would find a way to shit on the discovery.

Hacks going to hack!

 

[EagleKeeper]

They have 6 months to hammer out the details and for Iran to show that it is serious about complying.

You mean Iran has six months to finish their bomb

No, Iran has 6 months to figure out if can they transfer and hide what is needed to get to that point.

Or they could cherry pick out some of the agreement and beg for more time.

Or the sanctions are finally working to the point that they are wising up.

In 6 months, we will know that status of a shell game.

At least they have know acknowledged that there is some type of pea under the shell instead of the absolute denial that we have heard for years.

 

[Pneumothorax]

No, Iran has 6 months to figure out if can they transfer and hide what is needed to get to that point.

Or they could cherry pick out some of the agreement and beg for more time.

Or the sanctions are finally working to the point that they are wising up.

In 6 months, we will know that status of a shell game.

At least they have know acknowledged that there is some type of pea under the shell instead of the absolute denial that we have heard for years.

Not only do I see the above coming true, but do you guys honestly believe China and Russia would honor reapplying the sanctions removed with this deal even if the Iranians don't hold their side of the bargain? Happens every fricken time with these pricks.

 

[monovillage]

All treaties need to be approved by a 2/3rd majority in the Senate. After the Democrats nuked the Republicans in the Senate what are the odds that this treaty will be approved?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_Clause

Just by calling it a "deal" doesn't change the fact it's still a treaty.

 

[drebo]

IMO, the current US administration has proven itself to be completely spineless and useless. For Iran, this is a win-win situation. It gets us off their back, and they know that they can break the agreement without suffering consequences.

 

[Jaskalas]

All treaties need to be approved by a 2/3rd majority in the Senate. After the Democrats nuked the Republicans in the Senate what are the odds that this treaty will be approved?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_Clause

Just by calling it a "deal" doesn't change the fact it's still a treaty.

I wonder if the rules apply. UN or NATO could simply be the holder of this "treaty".

Do not expect things to work out the way you think.

 

[fskimospy]

All treaties need to be approved by a 2/3rd majority in the Senate. After the Democrats nuked the Republicans in the Senate what are the odds that this treaty will be approved?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_Clause

Just by calling it a "deal" doesn't change the fact it's still a treaty.

Actually it does.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty#United_States_law