Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The Iran Deal
#1
Well, is it worth it? Spiteful
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"INSIDE EVERY PROGRESSIVE IS A TOTALITARIAN SCREAMING TO GET OUT" - David Horowitz

Reply
#2
First, the senate has to agree to it. I THINK. Let's assume they pass it.

The strategy is not as "different" as some think. It is based on the same exact stupidity GW Bush had in attacking Iraq. He assumed once the smoke had cleared that Iraqis would develop a westernized state.

That assumption underlies this deal. They assume Iran will desire to become westernized again after 36 years of Islamic rule and sanctions.

This is how secularists think. Personally, I think Iran does not desire to become an American/western adjunct, no matter what the paradigm is.

Unlike most here, I don't think Iran wants nukes. It's weird, but, to them, nuclear power is this huge national pride thing they developed back when the Shah ran Iran. Even back then, Iran was desiring nuclear power generation.

If they developed a nuke bomb program, it would suck so many assets out of their other military programs that are becoming fairly successful in their drive to become the regional hegemon.
Reply
#3
(07-14-2015, 12:28 PM)Palladin Wrote: Unlike most here, I don't think Iran wants nukes. It's weird, but, to them, nuclear power is this huge national pride thing they developed back when the Shah ran Iran. Even back then, Iran was desiring nuclear power generation.

If they developed a nuke bomb program, it would suck so many assets out of their other military programs that are becoming fairly successful in their drive to become the regional hegemon.

[Image: images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRCJ2fEIbI5rwO8XcQDoUO...Q-pMdxHWHh]


I'm wondering how many Mid-Eastern regimes will now obtain nuclear weapons as a counter balance?
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"INSIDE EVERY PROGRESSIVE IS A TOTALITARIAN SCREAMING TO GET OUT" - David Horowitz

Reply
#4
I know, no one agrees with me.

Nukes are useful, but, so expensive.

For example, I bet money that Pakistan and India do not maintain their's properly. Once they both exploded one in public, that serves their interests enough. They may not even work now, you have to re-furbish them on a consistent basis for X reasons. It is difficult as hell and very expensive to do.

Truthfully, I wouldn't be stunned if Israel doesn't maintain their's properly either. Just everyone assuming they have a nice deterrent serves it's role, IMO.
Reply
#5
Obama quite seriously would like to see Israel destroyed. He also would like to see Islamic nations elevated to the point where they could seriously challenge the Western nations. It will be hard for whatever president follows him to undo all the damage he has already done. That is, assuming Obama even allows there to be a new presidential election in 2016.
Reply
#6
(07-14-2015, 12:51 PM)Palladin Wrote: Truthfully, I wouldn't be stunned if Israel doesn't maintain their's properly either. Just everyone assuming they have a nice deterrent serves it's role, IMO.

Tell me, if your life, your immediate and extended family's, your friend's, your country's, very existance depended on vigilance, would you not take the necessary preventive measures to insure all of the above's existence?

Do you, for even an instant, believe that Dave Ramsey would not practice what he preaches, after having been stung by the effects of his past overindulgence?


(07-14-2015, 01:39 PM)Ron Lambert Wrote: Obama quite seriously would like to see Israel destroyed. He also would like to see Islamic nations elevated to the point where they could seriously challenge the Western nations. It will be hard for whatever president follows him to undo all the damage he has already done. That is, assuming Obama even allows there to be a new presidential election in 2016.

Ron, I don't believe he despises Israel so much that he would like to see it destroyed. However, I don't think he would shed any tears.

As for suspending the 2016 elections, it would be interesting to see the revolt that would follow. I don't think even the military would condone it.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"INSIDE EVERY PROGRESSIVE IS A TOTALITARIAN SCREAMING TO GET OUT" - David Horowitz

Reply
#7
David Horovitz of the Times of Israel, has the following to say: 16 reasons nuke deal is an Iranian victory and a Western catastrophe. Definitely written by a realist.

Now, lets be reminded by what a Utopian, "Pie-in-the-Sky" Ashkenazi had to say about this thing three years ago: Obama's Crystal-Clear Promise to Stop Iran From Getting a Nuclear Weapon: Obama has been consistent and clear in his opposition to an Iranian nuclear weapon.. I wonder what excuses he will be forced to make after today?

I'm forecasting that Christianity, especially Roman Catholics, are going to rue the day this deal was made. The odds of an Iranian terrorist proxy getting a nuclear device into Israel will be almost impossible. And all it will take is just one failed attempt.

But the single easiest way to get at the Western World, and all it represents is going to be to destroy the one symbol that has kept it going: Christianity. And like it or not, the public face if Christianity is ROME, and the Vatican. I contend that this is where the first Iranian bomb will most likely light up the sky in the future. And it won't be Iran that directly does it. It will be one of their proxy groups.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"INSIDE EVERY PROGRESSIVE IS A TOTALITARIAN SCREAMING TO GET OUT" - David Horowitz

Reply
#8
John,

I don't think Israel has to have actionable nukes, they just need their neighbors to worry they do.

Even with the USSR and the USA, we just needed each other to worry we might use them, it's the same difference. Both sides probably would not have done a MAD exchange, but, just the doubt one side might kept us off each other.

Maintaining nukes is very difficult and very expensive and Israel cannot do it unless someone else is paying for it and assisting with it. That would be like Chicago paying for a nuclear deterrent. Do some research John, just Y-12 alone is extremely expensive and extremely talented and a very rare thing on earth.

IMO, you have way unrealistic beliefs about what Israel is capable of. Its just the = of a large city.

Large nations struggle with their nuke facilities, we are right now struggling to upgrade the run down piece of crap Y-12 facilities and we're having a massive problem revamping this thing.

It's so expensive. Whatever nuke deterrent Israel owns is probably brought over here and refurbished for them. I can't prove it, but, no large city has the money or expertise to do it, IMO and Israel is = to one large city, not even a huge city. Nowhere near the size of Shanghai or NYC.

Concerning Ron's views on Obama and Israel. I think most US Presidents dislike Israel exactly for the same reason most dislike France. Both are friendlies that don't dance to our music enough. Most the west sucks our tit full time, these 2 occasionally tell us to piss off.

Obama is no anti semite if that is the accusation. Israel just doesn't go along enough with us, they often raise hell. Israel raised hell with Reagan selling good stuff to the Saudis, this is an old thing.

Their interests and our's don't always mesh.

Here's a view I guess most here agree with:

http://hotair.com/archives/2015/07/14/vi...hat-it-is/
Reply
#9
Who's side is Obama on, the U.S. to teach Iran how to protect its nuclear sites from attack. Source
Reply
#10
I, frankly can't make any judgement on this deal since it's impossible for me to know what's in it exactely. What Iran is required and forbidden to do is very technical and very politicaly variable. I'm sure that they must at least conform with the previous IEIA recomandations and agree with the inspections.
We can't tell and almost nobody on earth can tell except poeple with inside knowledge, wether the deal can prevent Iran from geting a nuke.
What I have read is that the goal of the deal is to keep Iran permanently (or all the time the deal is respected) one year away from a nuke, including secret illegal works.

I think that we should stick to this as a base for conversation.
Is one year away far enough? Maybe not. But it's better than no deal at all where Iranians would keep on doing the maximum possible.

There is also a huge benefit with this deal: The support of the pro-west Iranians.
Reply
#11
It's easy for either side to stop observing the treaty, so it is not a problem for either side long term regardless of what it is about.

I know what most here are thinking, Obama is selling out the USA. In order for that to be accurate, both the USA security apparatus and the US Senate must agree. IF that is fact based, then the USA wants to betray the USA and Israel and seriously, is that logical?

Some also think this is a signal that the USA is washing our hands of the region. I wish that was true, it is very unlikely, IMO. The oil there is still important enough to the global economy, I cannot imagine we would leave it to some other power like Iran or Russia or whomever.

Big nations like our's don't up and give up our ambitions w/o getting the snot knocked out of us first and we haven't seen anything remotely like that yet. At most, we've decided to be first among equals instead of the captain of the ship.
Reply
#12
(07-14-2015, 05:35 PM)WarBicycle Wrote: Who's side is Obama on, the U.S. to teach Iran how to protect its nuclear sites from attack. Source

Quote:The United States and other world powers will help to teach Iran how to thwart and detect threats to its nuclear program, according to the parameters of a deal reached Tuesday to rein in Iran’s contested nuclear program.

I'll have to read this more closely a bit later. But if what I put in bold is true, and not poor editing, I have little doubt that McDaddy is throwing Israel under the bus. And this will cause Israel to understand that they will have to take action very soon.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"INSIDE EVERY PROGRESSIVE IS A TOTALITARIAN SCREAMING TO GET OUT" - David Horowitz

Reply
#13
(07-14-2015, 04:52 PM)Palladin Wrote: John,

I don't think Israel has to have actionable nukes, they just need their neighbors to worry they do.

Interesting observation. Lets suppose you are living in a hostile neighborhood, in which all your neighbors want you gone, and some will go to almost anything to accomplish this. What would you do? Would you lie about your abilities, and hope nobody called your bluff? Or would you really get serious and prepare yourself with the means and ability to use necessary force in order to keep your hostile neighbors at bay?

I'm surprised you take some of the very moral absolutes that are part of the Ten Commandments so cavalierly. In this case "Lying". You do recognize that there are certain moral absolutes, correct?

Quote: Maintaining nukes is very difficult and very expensive and Israel cannot do it unless someone else is paying for it and assisting with it. That would be like Chicago paying for a nuclear deterrent. Do some research John, just Y-12 alone is extremely expensive and extremely talented and a very rare thing on earth.

IMO, you have way unrealistic beliefs about what Israel is capable of. Its just the = of a large city.

Which country has the highest portion of scientists? And which country has the highest number of hard science Nobel prizes? And which country has the highest education level? And which country is living in the most danger of annihilation? Do you see where I am going?

Quote: Large nations struggle with their nuke facilities, we are right now struggling to upgrade the run down piece of crap Y-12 facilities and we're having a massive problem revamping this thing.

It's so expensive. Whatever nuke deterrent Israel owns is probably brought over here and refurbished for them. I can't prove it, but, no large city has the money or expertise to do it, IMO and Israel is = to one large city, not even a huge city. Nowhere near the size of Shanghai or NYC.

Perhaps Israel is a great deal more efficient than a huge government entity? You are trying to apply how a sperm whale plies the ocean vs how a porpoise accomplishes the same with far less energy or effort.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"INSIDE EVERY PROGRESSIVE IS A TOTALITARIAN SCREAMING TO GET OUT" - David Horowitz

Reply
#14
(07-14-2015, 12:51 PM)Palladin Wrote: Nukes are useful, but, so expensive.

I'm pretty sure that Pakistan will give Saudi Arabia and Egypt a screaming discount. North Korea could afford to put nukes on line Palladin and they're not exactly the Daddy Warbucks of nations. You're over thinking this. Refurbishment and Maintenance are designed to ensure reliability in the high ninetieth percentile for a global MAD strategy. I don't really think the new nuclear powers will be all that hung up on absolute reliability. Sure everyone wants that, but these guys probably 'need' it less for their purposes. This will be about nuclear skirmishes ... not all out global warfare ... although it could turn into that easily enough the larger powers get involved in the exchanges. We'll have a nuclear war certainly enough. It just won't be the one we envisioned when we were taught to hide under our school desks 40-50 years ago. The world needs leadership to avoid what's coming and it simply doesn't exist right now.

Most of it will happen at least a continent away. As long as you can displace the bad stuff with Iodine when the cloud blows through, you can probably dodge thyroid cancer. I grew up in the Southwest within a couple hundred miles of the equivalent of about a dozen of these little atomic pissing matches. Do a google search on RECA. It's killed a few of my classmates over the years, but it's fairly survivable. Learn to live with it.

(07-14-2015, 11:20 AM)John L Wrote: Well, is it worth it? Spiteful

Ultimately, it probably doesn't matter John. They probably would have gotten the bomb anyway. But we're total idiots for enriching them, stabilizing their regime and facilitating it's efforts. They will continue to wreak havoc. They'd do that anyway ... but now they'll have more resources at their disposal. I wonder what the spin will be the next time these guys bring down a plane or blow up another dance club in Germany?
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard."
-- Henry Mencken
Reply
#15
John,

Nations lie all the time, you really need to stop assuming states are individual humans with a conscience, they are not. Nations are like self absorbed robots.

My guess is Israel's bureaucrats are better than our's, I think our's are the worst on earth. I realize Jews are really smart, but, a state the size of Israel has so many different needs and so little human potential due to size.

I think they probably get their nukes handled by us, I really do doubt they have the infrastructure to maintain them. I feel this way about India and Pakistan, too. Except we don't handle their's. I bet their programs are disastrously dangerous and ill managed/dysfunctional. In fact, I bet Russia's program is in tatters, too.
Reply
#16
Obama received a Nobel for doing nothing, what are the odds Kerry will receive a Nobel for putting together a deal that favors Iran?
Reply
#17
(07-14-2015, 10:45 PM)WarBicycle Wrote: Obama received a Nobel for doing nothing, what are the odds Kerry will receive a Nobel for putting together a deal that favors Iran?

Nobel Peace Prize is becoming the anthesis of Peace. All it garners these days is a good laugh and "Hearty Hi Ho Silver, Awaaaay".

Alfred Nobel is without a doubt rolling over in his grave.

[Image: avatar_1480.gif?dateline=1331226528]

Sorry "P", but your avatar is so appropriate. S22
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"INSIDE EVERY PROGRESSIVE IS A TOTALITARIAN SCREAMING TO GET OUT" - David Horowitz

Reply
#18
Here is perhaps the one positive thing to come out of all this.

Israel and Saudi Arabia present united front over Iran deal

And its all over worry of a destabilized Middle East.

I suspect that finally the chickens will be coming home to roost. In other words, The Semitic speaking world will finally unite against certain non-Semitic nations, such as Persia. Keep in mind that Jews are a Semite people, just as Arabs, and some other groups. They are all within the same family.

This relationship is a natural fit. Israel has already made peace with two of its neighbors, and with this current series of events, the number can only grow. AND, add the fact that Israel has much to offer in the way of mutual security to those neighbors who have yet to recognize her.

While the Saudis are almost certainly going to fork over the Big Bucks in order to acquire several Paki nukes, there will be only one entity that is capable of teaching the Saudis on how to take good care of them, and how to renew the tritium accelerator.

I will not be surprised if there is not a public treaty soon, and an alliance with her neighbors.

And make no mistake, there will be two truisms from this. One, the entire neighborhood will have their own nuclear play-pretties, IF they can afford it. And two, the Israeli will become the indispensable technician who can make it all work. Israeli stock just took a jump.

Take finger, and stick finger in eye of McDaddy
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"INSIDE EVERY PROGRESSIVE IS A TOTALITARIAN SCREAMING TO GET OUT" - David Horowitz

Reply
#19
The Iranians hate Sunnis every bit as much as they hate the Israeli; Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Israel will probably attack the Iranian nuclear plants within the next two years.
Reply
#20
Couple of other groups dislike this deal, ISIS among them.

What surprises me is what do you guys want instead of this deal? More of the old program that has failed?
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Woolsey Advice on How to Deal With Iran And Russia John L 4 973 07-22-2014, 12:35 PM
Last Post: Palladin
  Iran sanctions 'will not affect' Russia missile deal Kamil 25 4,352 09-25-2010, 08:20 AM
Last Post: John L
  What's The Deal in Iran? Palladin 0 493 05-14-2006, 07:33 PM
Last Post: Palladin
  Pakistan and Israel deal Iran a blow Kamil 3 1,032 09-07-2005, 11:45 AM
Last Post: ag

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)