Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Here’s what will happen if Iran cheats on the nuclear deal

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 2]

nadalfan


http://www.vox.com/2015/7/14/8963503/iran-nuclear-deal-violation

Guest


Guest
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/421166/iran-nuclear-deal-resist-inspection

The rules for access to suspicious sites can be found in Section Q of the first annex to the agreement. If inspectors have concerns about undeclared sites, they must submit to Iran a request in writing that explains their concerns. Iran may counter with a proposal for “alternative means” of resolving the issue without actually allowing inspectors to inspect anything. If the inspectors and the regime can’t agree to a solution within two weeks, the dispute gets kicked up to a higher level. In other words, Iran has a license to stall for two full weeks whenever it does something suspicious.

After two weeks, the problem gets handed over to the Joint Commission, a new body whose membership and responsibility is defined in Annex IV to the agreement. Basically, the commission has eight members, one for each of the countries who are party to the agreement, plus the EU. A majority of five commission members may “advise” Iran on how to resolve the inspectors’ concerns. The commission has seven days to address the inspectors’ concerns, after which Iran has three days to implement any recommended measures. So, at minimum, Iran will have 24 days to clean up any suspicious sites before inspectors get a first look.

Markle

Markle
PkrBum wrote:http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/421166/iran-nuclear-deal-resist-inspection

The rules for access to suspicious sites can be found in Section Q of the first annex to the agreement. If inspectors have concerns about undeclared sites, they must submit to Iran a request in writing that explains their concerns. Iran may counter with a proposal for “alternative means” of resolving the issue without actually allowing inspectors to inspect anything. If the inspectors and the regime can’t agree to a solution within two weeks, the dispute gets kicked up to a higher level. In other words, Iran has a license to stall for two full weeks whenever it does something suspicious.

After two weeks, the problem gets handed over to the Joint Commission, a new body whose membership and responsibility is defined in Annex IV to the agreement. Basically, the commission has eight members, one for each of the countries who are party to the agreement, plus the EU. A majority of five commission members may “advise” Iran on how to resolve the inspectors’ concerns. The commission has seven days to address the inspectors’ concerns, after which Iran has three days to implement any recommended measures. So, at minimum, Iran will have 24 days to clean up any suspicious sites before inspectors get a first look.

There won't be any response from the Progressives on this topic. Just as North Korea lied and produced nuclear weapons, Iran will as well lie, as they have always in the past.

Coming up, nuclear arms race in the Middle East. What could go wrong?

Guest


Guest
They would rather believe whatever comes out of obama's mouth... even if it's a revision only a few days old.

I wonder how they will do following hillary. I don't think it will be difficult considering how many 180s obama makes.

"But even if we do get such a deal, we will still have major problems from Iran,” Clinton said last week. “They are the world’s chief sponsor of terrorism, they use proxies like Hezbollah to sow discord and create insurgencies to destabilize governments."'

Guest


Guest
China and russia seem to have gained concessions on the iranian arms embargo too. I haven't seen anything on the signing bonus obama had promised yet either... some had it at 50b-150b tax dollars. Expect their ability to destabilize me govts to grow.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/07/15/world/middleeast/iran-nuclear-deal-is-reached-after-long-negotiations.html

A review of the 109-page text of the agreement,which includes five annexes,showed that the United States preserved —and in some cases extended —the nuclear restrictions it sketched out with Iran in early April in Lausanne,Switzerland.

Yet,it left open areas that are sure to raise fierce objections in Congress. It preserves Iran’s ability to produce as much nuclear fuel as it wishes after year 15 of the agreement,and allows it to conduct research on advanced centrifuges after the eighth year. Moreover, the Iranians won the eventual lifting of an embargo on the import and export of conventional arms and ballistic missiles —a step the departing chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,Gen. Martin E. Dempsey,warned about just last week.

nadalfan


PkrBum wrote:They would rather believe whatever comes out of obama's mouth... even if it's a revision only a few days old.

I wonder how they will do following hillary. I don't think it will be difficult considering how many 180s obama makes.

"But even if we do get such a deal, we will still have major problems from Iran,” Clinton said last week. “They are the world’s chief sponsor of terrorism, they use proxies like Hezbollah to sow discord and create insurgencies to destabilize governments."'

I trust President Obama over the fear mongering, war craving, Bibi worshiping, Obama hate obsessed right wing tools that have proven their foreign policy approach is not in the best interest of this country. Many even came out against the deal before they even read it. Politically motivated? nah, couldn't be

I trust a deal more because it involved, not just the United States, but several countries.

I trust the adults who realize that these kinds of agreements are not perfect, that they require compromises.

Guest


Guest
Nothing will happen when, and they already have, cheated, on the agreement. Iran watched the song and dance given to Iraq from the first Gulf War to the 2003 invasion. That guarantees Iran almost twelve more years of putting off inspectors, hemming, hawing, using the UN and the IAEA as proxies until they have a smorgasbord of multiple weapons to shoot at the entire world. In the meantime, they will take the just released funds held to further spread hate and discontent with their proxies Hezbollah and Hamas. Oh, and Assad in Syria will now be protected by their soon opened nuclear umbrella. Pandora's Box is now wide open for business. Awesome.

2seaoat


First, the biggest lie is that Iran does not already have the bomb....it may not be assembled, but the genie is out of the bottle.  Second, comparing this deal to the failures of the Bush Administration in Korea is hysterical.

The Six-Party talks (involving the U.S., North Korea, South Korea, China, Russia, and Japan) occurred repeatedly from 2003 to 2009, and aimed to dismantle North Korea's nuclear weapons program, but have been at a stalemate for several years. [24] Through the Joint Agreement in 2005, the DPRK agreed to abandon its nuclear program, return to the NPT, and restore IAEA safeguards. [25] This agreement fell through after the DPRKs missile and nuclear tests in 2006 and 2009, which brought tightened sanctions from the international community under UNSCRs 1718 and 1874. [26]

There were no verifications, there was no removable of the material which makes the bombs, and there was no purchasing all such material produced.  The  devil is in the detail, and the failure of Bush to lead the coalition to real controls over North Korea will in history prove to be a bigger mistake than his horrible mistakes in Iraq.  We can only hope before President Obama is done that he can once again undo a Bush mess in North Korea.

boards of FL

boards of FL
PkrBum wrote:http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/421166/iran-nuclear-deal-resist-inspection

The rules for access to suspicious sites can be found in Section Q of the first annex to the agreement. If inspectors have concerns about undeclared sites, they must submit to Iran a request in writing that explains their concerns. Iran may counter with a proposal for “alternative means” of resolving the issue without actually allowing inspectors to inspect anything. If the inspectors and the regime can’t agree to a solution within two weeks, the dispute gets kicked up to a higher level. In other words, Iran has a license to stall for two full weeks whenever it does something suspicious.

After two weeks, the problem gets handed over to the Joint Commission, a new body whose membership and responsibility is defined in Annex IV to the agreement. Basically, the commission has eight members, one for each of the countries who are party to the agreement, plus the EU. A majority of five commission members may “advise” Iran on how to resolve the inspectors’ concerns. The commission has seven days to address the inspectors’ concerns, after which Iran has three days to implement any recommended measures. So, at minimum, Iran will have 24 days to clean up any suspicious sites before inspectors get a first look.



So if the Iran deal is a bust, what policy is it exactly that you support with Iran?


_________________
I approve this message.

EmeraldGhost

EmeraldGhost
It will be interesting to see how many in the Senate will be willing to buck the pro-Israel lobby to approve this deal.  

They already signaled their willingness to do so with the passage of the Iran Nuclear Review Act last spring that limits their authority to kill it without a 2/3rd majority.   This will allow a lot of Senators (Democrat & Republican alike) to vote against the treaty and not face the wrath of their pro-Israel campaign donors.   I think the fix is already in ... the treaty will pass & it was approved to do so all along, by the Republican & Democrat Senate leaderships no-less!

In any case ... I don't think it will be the end of the world should Iran manage to acquire themselves a few nukes eventually. They are not a stupid people & I seriously doubt they would use them recklessly. Pakistan has had them for years and they are a much more unstable government than Iran. Iran just wants them to "up" their status as a regional power ... and because they can.

TEOTWAWKI

TEOTWAWKI
Oh no..Obama looks like he's finally earning his peace prize....what's the world coming to.....?

Floridatexan

Floridatexan
TEOTWAWKI wrote:Oh no..Obama looks like he's finally earning his peace prize....what's the world coming to.....?

A much better place than it was when Bush was POTUS.

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM
Demssuck wrote:Nothing will happen when, and they already have, cheated, on the agreement.  Iran watched the song and dance given to Iraq from the first Gulf War to the 2003 invasion. That guarantees Iran almost twelve more years of putting off inspectors, hemming, hawing, using the UN and the IAEA as proxies until they have a smorgasbord of multiple weapons to shoot at the entire world. In the meantime, they will take the just released funds held to further spread hate and discontent with their proxies Hezbollah and Hamas. Oh, and Assad in Syria will now be protected by their soon opened nuclear umbrella. Pandora's Box is now wide open for business. Awesome.

A new sock for PaceDog/KarlRove.

LOLOLOLOL!!!!!!

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

Markle

Markle
nadalfan wrote:
PkrBum wrote:They would rather believe whatever comes out of obama's mouth... even if it's a revision only a few days old.

I wonder how they will do following hillary. I don't think it will be difficult considering how many 180s obama makes.

"But even if we do get such a deal, we will still have major problems from Iran,” Clinton said last week. “They are the world’s chief sponsor of terrorism, they use proxies like Hezbollah to sow discord and create insurgencies to destabilize governments."'

I trust President Obama over the fear mongering, war craving, Bibi worshiping, Obama hate obsessed right wing tools that have proven their foreign policy approach is not in the best interest of this country.  Many even came out against the deal before they even read it.  Politically motivated? nah, couldn't be

I trust a deal more because it involved, not just the United States, but several countries.

I trust the adults who realize that these kinds of agreements are not perfect, that they require compromises.

How can you trust semi-retired President Obama when he has been crowned as LIAR OF THE YEAR. How can you trust Iran when historically they, like North Korea, have NEVER been truthful.

nadalfan


Markle wrote:
nadalfan wrote:
PkrBum wrote:They would rather believe whatever comes out of obama's mouth... even if it's a revision only a few days old.

I wonder how they will do following hillary. I don't think it will be difficult considering how many 180s obama makes.

"But even if we do get such a deal, we will still have major problems from Iran,” Clinton said last week. “They are the world’s chief sponsor of terrorism, they use proxies like Hezbollah to sow discord and create insurgencies to destabilize governments."'

I trust President Obama over the fear mongering, war craving, Bibi worshiping, Obama hate obsessed right wing tools that have proven their foreign policy approach is not in the best interest of this country.  Many even came out against the deal before they even read it.  Politically motivated? nah, couldn't be

I trust a deal more because it involved, not just the United States, but several countries.

I trust the adults who realize that these kinds of agreements are not perfect, that they require compromises.

How can you trust semi-retired President Obama when he has been crowned as LIAR OF THE YEAR.  How can you trust Iran when historically they, like North Korea, have NEVER been truthful.

I don't trust the fear mongering, war craving, Bibi worshiping, Obama hate obsessed right wing tools that have proven their foreign policy approach is not in the best interest of this country. Many even came out against the deal before they even read it. Politically motivated? nah, couldn't be

I trust a deal more because it involved, not just the United States, but several countries.

I trust the adults who realize that these kinds of agreements are not perfect, that they require.

ok, fixed it so you don't get caught up in that part of the comment

TEOTWAWKI

TEOTWAWKI
nadalfan wrote:
Markle wrote:
nadalfan wrote:
PkrBum wrote:They would rather believe whatever comes out of obama's mouth... even if it's a revision only a few days old.

I wonder how they will do following hillary. I don't think it will be difficult considering how many 180s obama makes.

"But even if we do get such a deal, we will still have major problems from Iran,” Clinton said last week. “They are the world’s chief sponsor of terrorism, they use proxies like Hezbollah to sow discord and create insurgencies to destabilize governments."'

I trust President Obama over the fear mongering, war craving, Bibi worshiping, Obama hate obsessed right wing tools that have proven their foreign policy approach is not in the best interest of this country.  Many even came out against the deal before they even read it.  Politically motivated? nah, couldn't be

I trust a deal more because it involved, not just the United States, but several countries.

I trust the adults who realize that these kinds of agreements are not perfect, that they require compromises.

How can you trust semi-retired President Obama when he has been crowned as LIAR OF THE YEAR.  How can you trust Iran when historically they, like North Korea, have NEVER been truthful.

I don't trust the fear mongering, war craving, Bibi worshiping, Obama hate obsessed right wing tools that have proven their foreign policy approach is not in the best interest of this country.  Many even came out against the deal before they even read it.  Politically motivated? nah, couldn't be

I trust a deal more because it involved, not just the United States, but several countries.

I trust the adults who realize that these kinds of agreements are not perfect, that they require.

ok, fixed it so you don't get caught up in that part of the comment


You just don't see the bigger picture ...Boeing, Grumman, McDonnell Douglas, G/E. , Raytheon, The Pentagon all need their blood money to pump up their swollen bottom lines or justify their bloated budgets.....it's just business.....

nadalfan


TEOTWAWKI wrote:
nadalfan wrote:
Markle wrote:
nadalfan wrote:
PkrBum wrote:They would rather believe whatever comes out of obama's mouth... even if it's a revision only a few days old.

I wonder how they will do following hillary. I don't think it will be difficult considering how many 180s obama makes.

"But even if we do get such a deal, we will still have major problems from Iran,” Clinton said last week. “They are the world’s chief sponsor of terrorism, they use proxies like Hezbollah to sow discord and create insurgencies to destabilize governments."'

I trust President Obama over the fear mongering, war craving, Bibi worshiping, Obama hate obsessed right wing tools that have proven their foreign policy approach is not in the best interest of this country.  Many even came out against the deal before they even read it.  Politically motivated? nah, couldn't be

I trust a deal more because it involved, not just the United States, but several countries.

I trust the adults who realize that these kinds of agreements are not perfect, that they require compromises.

How can you trust semi-retired President Obama when he has been crowned as LIAR OF THE YEAR.  How can you trust Iran when historically they, like North Korea, have NEVER been truthful.

I don't trust the fear mongering, war craving, Bibi worshiping, Obama hate obsessed right wing tools that have proven their foreign policy approach is not in the best interest of this country.  Many even came out against the deal before they even read it.  Politically motivated? nah, couldn't be

I trust a deal more because it involved, not just the United States, but several countries.

I trust the adults who realize that these kinds of agreements are not perfect, that they require.

ok, fixed it so you don't get caught up in that part of the comment


You just don't see the bigger picture ...Boeing, Grumman, McDonnell Douglas, G/E. , Raytheon, The Pentagon all need their blood money to pump up their swollen bottom lines or justify their bloated budgets.....it's just business.....

yep, I definitely understand that bigger picture

Guest


Guest
boards of FL wrote:
PkrBum wrote:http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/421166/iran-nuclear-deal-resist-inspection

The rules for access to suspicious sites can be found in Section Q of the first annex to the agreement. If inspectors have concerns about undeclared sites, they must submit to Iran a request in writing that explains their concerns. Iran may counter with a proposal for “alternative means” of resolving the issue without actually allowing inspectors to inspect anything. If the inspectors and the regime can’t agree to a solution within two weeks, the dispute gets kicked up to a higher level. In other words, Iran has a license to stall for two full weeks whenever it does something suspicious.

After two weeks, the problem gets handed over to the Joint Commission, a new body whose membership and responsibility is defined in Annex IV to the agreement. Basically, the commission has eight members, one for each of the countries who are party to the agreement, plus the EU. A majority of five commission members may “advise” Iran on how to resolve the inspectors’ concerns. The commission has seven days to address the inspectors’ concerns, after which Iran has three days to implement any recommended measures. So, at minimum, Iran will have 24 days to clean up any suspicious sites before inspectors get a first look.



So if the Iran deal is a bust, what policy is it exactly that you support with Iran?

Trading you, Sal, Dreams, and FT, in exchange for the prisoners.

*****BOARDS IS BALL LESS*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9IfHDi-2EA

Neutral

boards of FL

boards of FL
boards of FL wrote:
PkrBum wrote:http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/421166/iran-nuclear-deal-resist-inspection

The rules for access to suspicious sites can be found in Section Q of the first annex to the agreement. If inspectors have concerns about undeclared sites, they must submit to Iran a request in writing that explains their concerns. Iran may counter with a proposal for “alternative means” of resolving the issue without actually allowing inspectors to inspect anything. If the inspectors and the regime can’t agree to a solution within two weeks, the dispute gets kicked up to a higher level. In other words, Iran has a license to stall for two full weeks whenever it does something suspicious.

After two weeks, the problem gets handed over to the Joint Commission, a new body whose membership and responsibility is defined in Annex IV to the agreement. Basically, the commission has eight members, one for each of the countries who are party to the agreement, plus the EU. A majority of five commission members may “advise” Iran on how to resolve the inspectors’ concerns. The commission has seven days to address the inspectors’ concerns, after which Iran has three days to implement any recommended measures. So, at minimum, Iran will have 24 days to clean up any suspicious sites before inspectors get a first look.



So if the Iran deal is a bust, what policy is it exactly that you support with Iran?



Ya got nothing? If you don't know what the correct policy should be, how can you criticize any other policy?


_________________
I approve this message.

Guest


Guest
[quote="boards of FL"][quote="boards of FL"][quote="PkrBum"]http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/421166/iran-nuclear-deal-resist-inspection

The rules for access to suspicious sites can be found in Section Q of the first annex to the agreement. If inspectors have concerns about undeclared sites, they must submit to Iran a request in writing that explains their concerns. Iran may counter with a proposal for “alternative means” of resolving the issue without actually allowing inspectors to inspect anything. If the inspectors and the regime can’t agree to a solution within two weeks, the dispute gets kicked up to a higher level. In other words, Iran has a license to stall for two full weeks whenever it does something suspicious.

After two weeks, the problem gets handed over to the Joint Commission, a new body whose membership and responsibility is defined in Annex IV to the agreement. Basically, the commission has eight members, one for each of the countries who are party to the agreement, plus the EU. A majority of five commission members may “advise” Iran on how to resolve the inspectors’ concerns. The commission has seven days to address the inspectors’ concerns, after which Iran has three days to implement any recommended measures. So, at minimum, Iran will have 24 days to clean up any suspicious sites before inspectors get a first look.[/quote]



So if the Iran deal is a bust, what policy is it exactly that you support with Iran?[/quote]



Ya got nothing?  If you don't know what the correct policy should be, how can you criticize any other policy?[/quote]

Actually it's you who's got nothing. Even with Viagra. It's not advertised to increase brain size idiot.

*****BOARDS IS AN MORON*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9IfHDi-2EA

Neutral

Guest


Guest
Not to mention that at the end of that arbitration if no resolution is found it goes to the un security council...

where russia and china will veto the resolution. As they both will be making billions selling conventional weaponry.

boards of FL

boards of FL
PkrBum wrote:Not to mention that at the end of that arbitration if no resolution is found it goes to the un security council...

where russia and china will veto the resolution. As they both will be making billions selling conventional weaponry.


Here again, what is the optimal solution that you support? If not this one, what?


_________________
I approve this message.

nadalfan


PkrBum wrote:Not to mention that at the end of that arbitration if no resolution is found it goes to the un security council...

where russia and china will veto the resolution. As they both will be making billions selling conventional weaponry.

you keep posting that, but everything I'm reading says the opposite

from the guardian:
If there are allegations that Iran has not met its obligations, a joint commission will seek to resolve the dispute for 30 days. If that effort fails it would be referred to the UN security council, which would have to vote to continue sanctions relief. A veto by a permanent member would mean that sanctions are reimposed. The whole process would take 65 days.

http://thediplomat.com/2015/07/how-the-iran-deals-snap-back-mechanism-will-keep-tehran-compliant/

Where the United States preserved unique leverage–and immunity from a Russian or Chinese veto against resuming old UN Security Council sanctions–is the next step. If the Security Council doesn’t act in 30 days, all of the pre-JCPOA nuclear-related sanctions on Iran come back into place automatically. Basically, the U.S. and the EU states in the P5+1 can veto ongoing sanctions relief but Russia and China can’t veto a return to the status quo ante. A scenario where Iran is non-compliant with the JCPOA yet escapes the old sanctions simply won’t be possible.


are we talking about different things?

Guest


Guest
boards of FL wrote:
PkrBum wrote:Not to mention that at the end of that arbitration if no resolution is found it goes to the un security council...

where russia and china will veto the resolution. As they both will be making billions selling conventional weaponry.


Here again, what is the optimal solution that you support?  If not this one, what?

No one has to answer your rhetorical question moron.

*****BOARDS HAS THE MENTALITY OF A TURNIP*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9IfHDi-2EA

Neutral

nadalfan


here's another

http://www.stljewishlight.com/opinion/editorial/article_552acdac-2a8b-11e5-992d-1f53dfc0f4e5.html

But it appears that the final agreement sets up a scenario by which a majority of eight entities — the U.S., England, France, Germany, the European Union, Russia, China and Iran — determine the ability to reimpose sanctions.
Note the numbers, because they are all-important — neither China or Russia, which could exercise veto power in the Security Council, nor Iran, can block a snapback —they cannot comprise a majority, or even cause a 4-4 tie, to prevent sanction reinstatement without getting buy-in from one of the Western entities.

Sponsored content


Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 2]

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum