The Iran Nuclear Deal

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Status
Not open for further replies.

FollowTheMoney

ASA Member
10+ Year Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2010
Messages
560
Reaction score
278
What a historic mistake! Obama is either the biggest fool on the face of the planet or is bent on the destruction of the United States and Israel. Since when does the United States negotiate with the biggest state sponsor of terrorism? He says he will veto any objection from Congress so our dictator in chief is saying that he doesn't care what the American people want. Nice democracy we have here... good thing the Congress can override the veto.

Members don't see this ad.
 
Last edited:
Any major world power who takes Iran's word seriously is a fool. Period. Interestingly, Israel was not even invited to that meeting... Netanyahu has been right about everything he has said. He was right about Hamas, Iran, and the Palestinians. He has stabilized and empowered Israel in a region where everyone hates them. He has been a great leader. Is there something he said that you disagree with?
 
Members don't see this ad :)
What a historic mistake! Obama is either the biggest fool on the face of the planet or is bent on the destruction of the United States and Israel. Since when does the United States negotiate with the biggest state sponsor of terrorism? He says he will veto any objection from Congress so our dictator in chief is saying that he doesn't care what the American people want. Nice democracy we have here... good thing the Congress can override the veto.

I agree 100%. Obama just became the largest donor to terrorism in world history - funneling 100s of billions to a state that openly sponsors major terrorist organizations, openly states they will wipe Israel off the face of the earth, bombs us marine bases and regularly holds us citizens hostage.

In exchange, Iran doesn't even need to dismantle many of their centrifuges or uranium stockpile (you are a fool if you think they want a peaceful nuclear program when less than 0.1% of projected energy would come from it). We get a few weak "scheduled" inspections. They are laughing all the way to the bank.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Let's just hope that we did not misjudge the Iranians as the British and Neville Chamberlain did with Hitler in 1938.
 
Let's just hope that we did not misjudge the Iranians as the British and Neville Chamberlain did with Hitler in 1938.


Of course Obama and Kerry are just like Chamberlain: You need to understand your enemy before making any deals with them.

Iran is just using the "deal" to free up hundreds of billions of dollars in assets plus relieve any pressure on the home front due to the sanctions. Iran will have ICBMs and Nuclear weapons by 2025. I guarantee it.

The wost part is we are helping to fuel terrorism in the Middle East and assuring that parts of Iraq will essentially become a nation state of Iran.
 
Trump: :nono::sendoff::bullcrap::annoyed:

By the end of the day...

Iran: :scared: :bow::help:
Trump: :banana::lol::soexcited:

Heh.

So, he'd go to war with Iran?



All the same things that have been said, and are being said, about a nuclear Iran were said about the Soviet Union post WWII. Maybe hotter heads should've prevailed then, and we should've kept going east through Berlin and west through Japan and crushed the Russians (maybe dropping a couple more bombs of our own in the process). Maybe we could've avoided the Cold War entirely, with no proxy wars in southeast Asia or the Middle East. Or maybe things would've been worse. The world lived with MAD for about 4 decades, and it mostly kept the peace. Worse things could've happened.

The Soviets were rational. So are the Iranians. That's not Netanyahu's line, but it's true. Their leaders want to remain in their positions of power, influence, and prestige. They're not going to hand a bomb to Hamas and level Tel Aviv. (They don't even want Israel gone, not really, because then they wouldn't have the Palestinian problem to exploit.)

I have greater concern about Russia losing track of nuclear material than I have of Iran creating it and then using it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Heh.

So, he'd go to war with Iran?



All the same things that have been said, and are being said, about a nuclear Iran were said about the Soviet Union post WWII. Maybe hotter heads should've prevailed then, and we should've kept going east through Berlin and west through Japan and crushed the Russians (maybe dropping a couple more bombs of our own in the process). Maybe we could've avoided the Cold War entirely, with no proxy wars in southeast Asia or the Middle East. Or maybe things would've been worse. The world lived with MAD for about 4 decades, and it mostly kept the peace. Worse things could've happened.

The Soviets were rational. So are the Iranians. That's not Netanyahu's line, but it's true. Their leaders want to remain in their positions of power, influence, and prestige. They're not going to hand a bomb to Hamas and level Tel Aviv. (They don't even want Israel gone, not really, because then they wouldn't have the Palestinian problem to exploit.)

I have greater concern about Russia losing track of nuclear material than I have of Iran creating it and then using it.


You are wrong here. You don't understand the Religious fervor here concerning Israel and other nations who stand in the way. Iran won't directly bomb Israel but their proxy terrorist groups will and now there are billions of dollars available to these terror groups via Iran. This means more Israeli's will die as a result of this deal.

Second, Iran wants the Nuclear Bomb in a suitcase variety so it can convince a lone terrorist or terrorist cell to destroy NYC or Washington D.C. This type of terrorism fits with the deniability of the Mullahs while at the same time striking back at the "devil of the west." Obama has allowed the genie out of the bottle with this deal and he is going to wreak havoc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Iran's Quds Day: Death to America, Death to Israel
by Lawrence A. Franklin
July 14, 2015 at 4:00 am


http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/6160/iran-quds-day-death-america-israel



71




Comment

  • The ritualistic rally-cries of "Death to America" and "Death to Israel" -- and the burning in effigy of the leaders of Israel, America, and Saudi Arabia -- underscore the basic lie that underpins Quds Day: the Iranian regime is focused on Iran's revolutionary extremist agenda, not on the welfare of Palestinian Arabs.

  • Quds Day has become a day in which Iran and protestors in other societies attack the legitimacy of the state of Israel ("The Little Satan") and continue to threaten the United States ("The Big Satan").

  • "Another advantage of Al Quds Day 2015 was that it coincided with the final hours of Iran's nuclear talks because these talks are in fact the confrontation between the Islamic Revolution of Iran and world arrogant powers." — Ayatollah Mohsen Araki, Secretary General of the World Forum of Islamic Schools of Thought.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Members don't see this ad :)
Heh.

So, he'd go to war with Iran?



All the same things that have been said, and are being said, about a nuclear Iran were said about the Soviet Union post WWII. Maybe hotter heads should've prevailed then, and we should've kept going east through Berlin and west through Japan and crushed the Russians (maybe dropping a couple more bombs of our own in the process). Maybe we could've avoided the Cold War entirely, with no proxy wars in southeast Asia or the Middle East. Or maybe things would've been worse. The world lived with MAD for about 4 decades, and it mostly kept the peace. Worse things could've happened.

The Soviets were rational. So are the Iranians. That's not Netanyahu's line, but it's true. Their leaders want to remain in their positions of power, influence, and prestige. They're not going to hand a bomb to Hamas and level Tel Aviv. (They don't even want Israel gone, not really, because then they wouldn't have the Palestinian problem to exploit.)

I have greater concern about Russia losing track of nuclear material than I have of Iran creating it and then using it.


Just like Chamberlain you don't understand your enemy and you assume a certain sanity that doesn't exist.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
"The nuclear agreement announced by the Obama administration today is a dangerous, deeply flawed, and short sighted deal,” Bush said. “A comprehensive agreement should require Iran to verifiably abandon -- not simply delay -- its pursuit of a nuclear weapons capability."

South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham said the deal could be a “death sentence for the state of Israel,” while Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker said it would be remembered as “one of America’s worst diplomatic failures.”
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Jeb Bush: "This isn't diplomacy - it is appeasement."
Ted Cruz: This is a "fundamental betrayal of the security of the United States."
Ben Carson: "A historic mistake with potentially deadly consequences."
Scott Walker: "Will be remembered as one of America's worst diplomatic failures."
Marco Rubio: The president made "concession after concession to a regime that has American blood on its hands."
Mike Huckabee: "Shame on the Obama administration..."

Donald Trump: "Iran gets everything and loses nothing."
Chris Christie: President Obama "should have walked away."
Bobby Jindal: Congress, Hillary Clinton should "oppose this dangerous deal."
Lindsey Graham: This guarantees Iran will become a "nuclear nation."
Carly Fiorina: "Bad behavior for 30 years" from Iran.
 
I feel like I am reliving the Carter administration. What a joke. We all know what happened after that... Mr. Patriot himself came on the scene!
 
Any major world power who takes Iran's word seriously is a fool. Period. Interestingly, Israel was not even invited to that meeting... Netanyahu has been right about everything he has said. He was right about Hamas, Iran, and the Palestinians. He has stabilized and empowered Israel in a region where everyone hates them. He has been a great leader. Is there something he said that you disagree with?
1) In 1992, then-member of parliament Netanyahu warned that Iran was 3-5 years from assembling a nuclear weapon, a threat that must be " uprooted by an international front headed by the U.S. "

2) In his 1995 book Fighting Terrorism, Netanyahu warned that Iran was "five to seven years at most" from assembling a nuclear weapon.

3) In an address to a joint session of Congress in 1996, Netanyahu warned that the "nuclearization" of Iran was "getting extremely close," and only the U.S. could stop it.

4) In 2009, Netanyahu warned a Congressional delegation visiting Israel that, according to "our experts," Iran was 1-2 years from assembling a nuclear weapon.

5) In an address to the United Nations General Assembly in 2012, Netanyahu warned that Iran was likely less than a year from assembling a nuclear weapon. (Recently Al Jazeera reported that Israel's intelligence service sharply disagreed with this assessment at the time.)


I don't know enough about the deal yet to decide if it was worth it. I do know that hard economic times don't stop totalitarians from nuclear efforts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
You are wrong here. You don't understand the Religious fervor here concerning Israel and other nations who stand in the way.

If you think the "religious fervor" extends to the corrupt real leadership of Iran, take a deep breath. Khamenei has been in power for over 30 years. If he was going to lash out in a fiery suicidal end of religious fervor, he'd have done it by now. He is the very definition of a rational actor.

Don't get me wrong, Iran is not our friend. They support our enemies in small ways that they know they can get away with. They won't do so in ways that demand a strategic response from either Israel or the US.

Again, the risk is proliferation and loss of control of weapons. To be a more efficient handwringer, you should be looking at Russia, which can't keep track of its weapons today, rather than Iran, which doesn't even have any such weapons today.


Iran won't directly bomb Israel but their proxy terrorist groups will and now there are billions of dollars available to these terror groups via Iran. This means more Israeli's will die as a result of this deal.

That's a bold statement. Israel seems to be doing OK - and good for them, I'm glad to see that island of mostly-secular democracy flourish in that general toilet-like armpit of the earth.


Second, Iran wants the Nuclear Bomb in a suitcase variety so it can convince a lone terrorist or terrorist cell to destroy NYC or Washington D.C.

It must be exhausting being so afraid all the time.

1) Do you have any idea how hard it is to miniaturize a fission bomb? It's about eleventeen steps beyond making a truck-sized bomb that will go boom instead of fizz, and that's not easy either.

2) Do you have any idea what kind of yield "suitcase" bombs have? The best the US and USSR ever produced were roughly a tenth the yield of the Hiroshima bomb, and most were more like a fiftieth. Granted, that's a lot of boom in TNT terms, but it's not a nation-ending or even city-ending nuclear bomb.

3) Nuclear bombs have signatures. There'd be no doubt where any such bomb came from. About 45 minutes after the producer of the 0.1-kiloton bomb used by a terrorist was identified, megatons would be heading in the other direction.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Just like Chamberlain you don't understand your enemy and you assume a certain sanity that doesn't exist.
Ooh, you're going to hurt my feelings. :)

Chamberlain sold out Czechoslovakia. Are you really arguing that Obama sold out Israel? Really?

Exactly what has Khamenei done in the last, oh, 30 years that you regard as insane or at least irrational? Be specific. Avoid cut-paste, use your own words. :)

He's a dickbag, an enemy, an adversary ... but a pretty rational one to me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
07142015_israel-booted_khameni.jpg

The photo was accompanied by this caption, originally written in Farsi:

"The Zionist regime is a regime with very shaky pillars. The Zionist regime is doomed. The Zionist regime is an imposed regime and was created with intimidation. Nothing created with intimidation can last long and this one will not last long either."
 
Ooh, you're going to hurt my feelings. :)

Chamberlain sold out Czechoslovakia. Are you really arguing that Obama sold out Israel? Really?

Exactly what has Khamenei done in the last, oh, 30 years that you regard as insane or at least irrational? Be specific. Avoid cut-paste, use your own words. :)

He's a dickbag, an enemy, an adversary ... but a pretty rational one to me.

Australia warns Islamic State is working to develop dirty bomb
Foreign minister says terror group likely to have technical expertise and material for chemical or radioactive bombs

These Adversaries from ISIS to IRAN are anything but rational people.
 
Logically, anyone in favor of this deal has to be Anti-Semitic.

http://time.com/3957788/iranian-nuclear-deal-anti-semitism/


I am an ardent Zionist, (search my posts) but I think that this argument is full of ****. There are plenty of Americans who don't care a bit about Israel or who think that Israel is just a bad citizen or that the Israeli-American relationship is a bad deal for Americans and that is just fine, as is their right and a perfectly reasonable point of view. That is not the same as antisemitism.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Ooh, you're going to hurt my feelings. :)

Chamberlain sold out Czechoslovakia. Are you really arguing that Obama sold out Israel? Really?

Exactly what has Khamenei done in the last, oh, 30 years that you regard as insane or at least irrational? Be specific. Avoid cut-paste, use your own words. :)

He's a dickbag, an enemy, an adversary ... but a pretty rational one to me.


Israel: Iran steps up arms shipments to Hezbollah, Hamas
Jerusalem sources say Tehran upping support for terror groups, express fear it will have billions more to spend under nuke deal

http://www.timesofisrael.com/israel-iran-steps-up-arms-shipments-to-hezbollah-hamas/
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Ooh, you're going to hurt my feelings. :)

Chamberlain sold out Czechoslovakia. Are you really arguing that Obama sold out Israel? Really?

Exactly what has Khamenei done in the last, oh, 30 years that you regard as insane or at least irrational? Be specific. Avoid cut-paste, use your own words. :)

He's a dickbag, an enemy, an adversary ... but a pretty rational one to me.


1. Obama did sell out Israel. I believe Obama is an Anti-Semite with no love for Israel.
2. The Nuclear deal isn't a deal at all but rather a way to look good to the ignorant public. It does nothing to stop Iran's nuclear program.
3. Once Iran gets Nuclear weapons circa 2020 Khamenei can act as irrational as he wants and President Clinton can't touch him.

You won't be the first WESTERNER to fail to understand the Middle East. Bush Junior didn't get it either which cost us a trillion dollars and thousands of lives.

Kerry and Obama showed weakness at the table resulting in the worst treaty in modern history. Instead, we needed tougher sanctions and covert military operations to undermine the Khamenei regime.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
“Bottom line is we haven’t dismantled Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, we’ve largely preserved it.”

Senator Bob Menendez

Liberal Democrat from NJ
 
Iran Deal Leaves U.S. Republicans Short of Votes to Stop Obama


Republicans in the U.S. Congress will have a tough job coming up with enough votes to kill a nuclear arms deal with Iran, even with many Democrats expressing skepticism about the accord.

President Barack Obama said Tuesday he would veto any measure blocking the agreement.

Congress would need a two-thirds vote to override a veto, requiring at least 13 Senate Democrats and 44 in the House to vote against their party’s leader -- if all members voted and all Republicans backed an override.
 
1) In 1992, then-member of parliament Netanyahu warned that Iran was 3-5 years from assembling a nuclear weapon, a threat that must be " uprooted by an international front headed by the U.S. "

2) In his 1995 book Fighting Terrorism, Netanyahu warned that Iran was "five to seven years at most" from assembling a nuclear weapon.

3) In an address to a joint session of Congress in 1996, Netanyahu warned that the "nuclearization" of Iran was "getting extremely close," and only the U.S. could stop it.

4) In 2009, Netanyahu warned a Congressional delegation visiting Israel that, according to "our experts," Iran was 1-2 years from assembling a nuclear weapon.

5) In an address to the United Nations General Assembly in 2012, Netanyahu warned that Iran was likely less than a year from assembling a nuclear weapon. (Recently Al Jazeera reported that Israel's intelligence service sharply disagreed with this assessment at the time.)


I don't know enough about the deal yet to decide if it was worth it. I do know that hard economic times don't stop totalitarians from nuclear efforts.


If I told the Jews in Germany what Hitler was going to do to them in 1934 they wouldn't have believed me. Netanyahu's time table was off but he will be proven correct about Iran in the end. Unfortunately, just like Nazi Germany by the time you realize Netanyahu was right it will be too late to do anything to stop them.

Under Obama the USA sold out Israel for Obama's legacy which will be seen for what it is down the road. May the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob save the Jewish people of Israel because the Israeli's can't count on anyone else.
 
The Jews can always count on exactly one thing: worldwide anti-semitism. One cannot beat twenty centuries of indoctrination and human stupidity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
How do you guys propose we fix our relationship with Iran?

The status quo is childish. Why can't we all get along?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
How do you guys propose we fix our relationship with Iran?

The status quo is childish. Why can't we all get along?

I wanted a real deal with Iran as did Netanyahu. Forsake nuclear weapons for aide and infrastructure development. Instead, we lifted the sanctions and got nothing for it.

Iranians understand pressure from their people. The sanctions were working and what we needed to do was double down on them to bring real negotiations to the table. This deal is a disaster of epic proportions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
If you think the "religious fervor" extends to the corrupt real leadership of Iran, take a deep breath. Khamenei has been in power for over 30 years. If he was going to lash out in a fiery suicidal end of religious fervor, he'd have done it by now. He is the very definition of a rational actor.

Don't get me wrong, Iran is not our friend. They support our enemies in small ways that they know they can get away with. They won't do so in ways that demand a strategic response from either Israel or the US.

Again, the risk is proliferation and loss of control of weapons. To be a more efficient handwringer, you should be looking at Russia, which can't keep track of its weapons today, rather than Iran, which doesn't even have any such weapons today.




That's a bold statement. Israel seems to be doing OK - and good for them, I'm glad to see that island of mostly-secular democracy flourish in that general toilet-like armpit of the earth.




It must be exhausting being so afraid all the time.

1) Do you have any idea how hard it is to miniaturize a fission bomb? It's about eleventeen steps beyond making a truck-sized bomb that will go boom instead of fizz, and that's not easy either.

2) Do you have any idea what kind of yield "suitcase" bombs have? The best the US and USSR ever produced were roughly a tenth the yield of the Hiroshima bomb, and most were more like a fiftieth. Granted, that's a lot of boom in TNT terms, but it's not a nation-ending or even city-ending nuclear bomb.

3) Nuclear bombs have signatures. There'd be no doubt where any such bomb came from. About 45 minutes after the producer of the 0.1-kiloton bomb used by a terrorist was identified, megatons would be heading in the other direction.


Be strong and courageous. Do not be afraid or terrified because of them, for the Lord your God goes with you; he will never leave you nor forsake you. (Deuteronomy 31:6)

I am not afraid of the Iranians, ISIS, Putin, etc. because I believe in my lord Jesus Christ. He has a plan for the world and each one of us. He has not forsaken His people in Israel either and He will be there for them in their hour of need.
 
Last edited:
I'll give you this much. Once things turned in the east Obama should have quit backing Hitler. Although hindsight is 20/20 as they say.
 
I wanted a real deal with Iran as did Netanyahu. Forsake nuclear weapons for aide and infrastructure development. Instead, we lifted the sanctions and got nothing for it.

Iranians understand pressure from their people. The sanctions were working and what we needed to do was double down on them to bring real negotiations to the table. This deal is a disaster of epic proportions.
The sanctions were a smashing success. I guess that's why Iran will be bombing Tel Aviv next week.

I think we should have made Iran the 51st state. I don't know why all the focus is on Puerto Rico. I'm sure China and Russia would have been ok with that, since they see things our way.
 
I'll give you this much. Once things turned in the east Obama should have quit backing Hitler. Although hindsight is 20/20 as they say.

Learn from history so we don't repeat it. One doesn't make stupid deals with dictators and lunatics. For example, how did our deal with North Korea work out?
 
The sanctions were a smashing success. I guess that's why Iran will be bombing Tel Aviv next week.

I think we should have made Iran the 51st state. I don't know why all the focus is on Puerto Rico. I'm sure China and Russia would have been ok with that, since they see things our way.

Geopolitical negotiations are fun! And easy!

The sanctions were working and should have been ratcheted up a notch.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
The sanctions were working and should have been ratcheted up a notch.
Learn from the present first. When large industrial countries with struggling economies want to end sanctions, they are unlikely to "ratchet it up."

Reality can be a real pain in the ass. Although it's amazing how many conservative commentators are able to ignore it.
 
Learn from the present first. When large industrial countries with struggling economies want to end sanctions, they are unlikely to "ratchet it up."

Reality can be a real pain in the ass. Although it's amazing how many conservative commentators are able to ignore it.

It's too bad you can't see the failure in this deal which resembles the deal with North Korea. I give this nuclear deal 6-10 years until the Iranians openly violate it.

So, a bad deal is worse than no deal at all where we show support for Israel and our allies.
 
I think Iran will eventually get nukes. Technology is moving to fast for containment to keep up. I just hope their hardliners are marginalized by then.

There is no right answer. I know someone doesn't know what they're talking about the second they say they know exactly what to do.
 
Blame Bush... Again. I'm sure you will blame the next GOP president as well when the Mullahs violate the treaty and make no mistake about it they will violate the treaty probably before the ink is even dry.
?? Did you not just blame Clinton? Good god.
 
Blame Bush... Again. I'm sure you will blame the next GOP president as well when the Mullahs violate the treaty and make no mistake about it they will violate the treaty probably before the ink is even dry.
The Iranians will say whatever we want to hear, and do whatever they want to do. Typical of banana countries.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I wanted a real deal with Iran as did Netanyahu. Forsake nuclear weapons for aide and infrastructure development. Instead, we lifted the sanctions and got nothing for it.

Iranians understand pressure from their people. The sanctions were working and what we needed to do was double down on them to bring real negotiations to the table. This deal is a disaster of epic proportions.
The sanctions were working? News to me. The Iranians I've known all painted them as painful for the common people, but not the sort of thing that led to general unrest, as they knew it was as much to blame on their leaders as it was on the United States. Basically we're punishing the citizens and getting no net political traction on the ground, because they're as frustrated with us as they are with their own government.

The nuclear end of things was handled well enough in the deal. The quality of uranium they are being provided with is virtually worthless for weapons manufacture on any reasonable timescale, particularly with the low number of centrifuges the deal allows. Furthermore, their most robust nuclear facility is going to be put in a state where it would take years to get it back to the sort of facility where enrichment could occur. Our inspectors have the right to inspect any facility they are suspicious of, and if Iran tries to hide things, the deal is off. Their nuclear program isn't completely dismantled, but it is, at the least, frozen. The real problem is the expiration of the ballistic missile embargo in 8 years- that would allow their program to rapidly accelerate if not renewed, and will allow them to be nuclear-ready within a couple years of the program being discontinued.

What really concerns me is the massive cash influx with little to no oversight in regard to Iran's funding of terrorism. We should have given the money back in graded fashion over the course of the deal, with future transactions dependent upon Iran ceasing all funding of terrorist organizations and activities. One slip up, and the cash stays frozen.

As to suitcase nukes and the like- for such devices, plutonium is required. Iran doesn't really have the capacity at current, and certainly will not be able to construct a facility for creating such devices under the current deal. They could in the future, but this deal limits them to 200 kg of nuclear material. To make even a rudimentary portable nuclear device would require roughly 11-15 kg of pure plutonium, which would take damn near forever with such a small stockpile of starting uranium and such a low number of centrifuges. Even making a Little Boy-style WW II nuclear device would require 64 kgs of pure uranium, an amount they could hardly spare for a test given their minimal allotted stockpile already.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
The sanctions were working? News to me. The Iranians I've known all painted them as painful for the common people, but not the sort of thing that led to general unrest, as they knew it was as much to blame on their leaders as it was on the United States. Basically we're punishing the citizens and getting no net political traction on the ground, because they're as frustrated with us as they are with their own government.

The nuclear end of things was handled well enough in the deal. The quality of uranium they are being provided with is virtually worthless for weapons manufacture on any reasonable timescale, particularly with the low number of centrifuges the deal allows. Furthermore, their most robust nuclear facility is going to be put in a state where it would take years to get it back to the sort of facility where enrichment could occur. Our inspectors have the right to inspect any facility they are suspicious of, and if Iran tries to hide things, the deal is off. Their nuclear program isn't completely dismantled, but it is, at the least, frozen. The real problem is the expiration of the ballistic missile embargo in 8 years- that would allow their program to rapidly accelerate if not renewed, and will allow them to be nuclear-ready within a couple years of the program being discontinued.

What really concerns me is the massive cash influx with little to no oversight in regard to Iran's funding of terrorism. We should have given the money back in graded fashion over the course of the deal, with future transactions dependent upon Iran ceasing all funding of terrorist organizations and activities. One slip up, and the cash stays frozen.

As to suitcase nukes and the like- for such devices, plutonium is required. Iran doesn't really have the capacity at current, and certainly will not be able to construct a facility for creating such devices under the current deal. They could in the future, but this deal limits them to 200 kg of nuclear material. To make even a rudimentary portable nuclear device would require roughly 11-15 kg of pure plutonium, which would take damn near forever with such a small stockpile of starting uranium and such a low number of centrifuges. Even making a Little Boy-style WW II nuclear device would require 64 kgs of pure uranium, an amount they could hardly spare for a test given their minimal allotted stockpile already.
I don't get it. Why is it ok for the US, Israel, and Russia to have nukes, but not ok for Iran? Seems only fair.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top