President Backs Out of Iran Deal - will post sanctions

[Dashinka 24,765]

30 minutes ago, bcking said:

Unfortunately I don't think the nuclear deal said we can change our minds if we decided there was "more to tackle".

 

The only people we know with 100% certainty that broke the nuclear deal is the USA.

Was it a real deal approved through Congress, or just a deal for imagery?

[bcking 3,157]

1 minute ago, Bill & Katya said:

Was it a real deal approved through Congress, or just a deal for imagery?

On our end it was clearly imagery.

 

On the Iranian end I've yet to see any proof that they violated the terms.

 

That makes us look irresponsible and unprofessional.

 

I  sincerely hope Jong Un doesn't pay attention to this. A person in his position may think twice about dealing with the US of we show that we can't keep to agreements. This isn't the first international agreement we've pulled out of either.

[Dashinka 24,765]

19 minutes ago, bcking said:

On our end it was clearly imagery.

 

On the Iranian end I've yet to see any proof that they violated the terms.

 

That makes us look irresponsible and unprofessional.

 

I  sincerely hope Jong Un doesn't pay attention to this. A person in his position may think twice about dealing with the US of we show that we can't keep to agreements. This isn't the first international agreement we've pulled out of either.

Sure, the previous administration agreed to a deal that is almost impossible to prove if the other side has violated it.  That is why we need to rely on Israel to do the confirmation.

[bcking 3,157]

1 minute ago, Bill & Katya said:

Sure, the previous administration agreed to a deal that is almost impossible to prove if the other side has violated it.  That is why we need to rely on Israel to do the confirmation.

Which Israel hasn't done yet. They proved that they were storing documents. Oh no! We proved that they had good reason to.

 

Impossible to prove? They have been monitored since the deal was made. Every other country agrees that they are abiding by the terms.

[Dashinka 24,765]

12 minutes ago, bcking said:

Which Israel hasn't done yet. They proved that they were storing documents. Oh no! We proved that they had good reason to.

 

Impossible to prove? They have been monitored since the deal was made. Every other country agrees that they are abiding by the terms.

Yep, monitored.  Iran is a very big country, I am sure the monitors had access to go wherever they wanted to go.

[bcking 3,157]

8 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

Yep, monitored.  Iran is a very big country, I am sure the monitors had access to go wherever they wanted to go.

They did actually. 24/7 surveillance of any site, and a 24 hour notice for anywhere else. If Iran refuses, it can take up to 24 days to get access. Up to - but as short as a few days.

 

You can't hide evidence of nuclear weapons research within the 24.

 

Claim 10 - not going to reprint it all here.

https://armscontrolcenter.org/the-real-facts-on-the-iran-nuclear-negotiations/

 

[Dashinka 24,765]

16 minutes ago, bcking said:

They did actually. 24/7 surveillance of any site, and a 24 hour notice for anywhere else. If Iran refuses, it can take up to 24 days to get access. Up to - but as short as a few days.

 

You can't hide evidence of nuclear weapons research within the 24.

 

Claim 10 - not going to reprint it all here.

https://armscontrolcenter.org/the-real-facts-on-the-iran-nuclear-negotiations/

 

Interesting, this piece mentions Congress approving the deal as well as providing funding for the IAEA, were either of these ever done?

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

1 hour ago, bcking said:

On our end it was clearly imagery.

 

On the Iranian end I've yet to see any proof that they violated the terms.

 

That makes us look irresponsible and unprofessional.

 

I  sincerely hope Jong Un doesn't pay attention to this. A person in his position may think twice about dealing with the US of we show that we can't keep to agreements. This isn't the first international agreement we've pulled out of either.

I know right. I hope Trump dosent make us look like a fool, like he did with North Korea, after 16 years of Bush and Obama getting it right 

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

31 minutes ago, bcking said:

They did actually. 24/7 surveillance of any site, and a 24 hour notice for anywhere else. If Iran refuses, it can take up to 24 days to get access. Up to - but as short as a few days.

 

You can't hide evidence of nuclear weapons research within the 24.

 

Claim 10 - not going to reprint it all here.

https://armscontrolcenter.org/the-real-facts-on-the-iran-nuclear-negotiations/

 

Hmmm yup. Not.  I have seen a whole infantry division completely  relocate 60 miles in 24 hours. 16K men and 1000's and 1000's of pieces of equipment 

 

 

do you have anything to back up that claim ?

[bcking 3,157]

8 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

Hmmm yup. Not.  I have seen a whole infantry division completely  relocate 60 miles in 24 hours. 16K men and 1000's and 1000's of pieces of equipment 

 

 

do you have anything to back up that claim ?

During the 24 day period there would be external surveillance. If they tried moving things (bringing in trucks) we would know about it.

 

You would see an entire infantry division relocate with external surveillance.

 

The 24 day notice would only be for entry into the site.

 

Not to mention infantry don't leave residuals that have half-lives on the order of years.

[bcking 3,157]

15 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

I know right. I hope Trump dosent make us look like a fool, like he did with North Korea, after 16 years of Bush and Obama getting it right 

The North Korea issue isn't over yet. I certainly also hope it works out, but this still hurts our credibility.

 

If we do come to an agreement with NK you can be sure they will try to save as much as they can. They'll have good reason. They'll know the US will back out if an agreement as soon as they "feel like it".

[Dashinka 24,765]

3 minutes ago, bcking said:

The North Korea issue isn't over yet. I certainly also hope it works out, but this still hurts our credibility.

 

If we do come to an agreement with NK you can be sure they will try to save as much as they can. They'll have good reason. They'll know the US will back out if an agreement as soon as they "feel like it".

Wasn't part of the Iran agreement that Iran had never pursued nuclear weapons?

[bcking 3,157]

1 minute ago, Bill & Katya said:

Wasn't part of the Iran agreement that Iran had never pursued nuclear weapons?

Not to my knowledge. Go ahead and find it if you'd like:

 

https://www.state.gov/e/eb/tfs/spi/iran/jcpoa/

[Dashinka 24,765]

3 minutes ago, bcking said:

Not to my knowledge. Go ahead and find it if you'd like:

 

https://www.state.gov/e/eb/tfs/spi/iran/jcpoa/

Item iii in the preamble.  The wording is interesting, but what Israel has showed us is that Iran has been pursuing nuclear weapons before and after the deal was made by Obama.  I am sure they have more information that hasn’t been shared publicly as unlike the Mueller investigation, this really does involve state secrets and not just CYA activities.

[bcking 3,157]

I just got back from a conference this weekend and need to catch up on work so I'm hoping to close my browser and not be enticed back to respond for at least a few hours. 

 

I sincerely hope we can end up with a "better deal" but given how hard that last one was to put together I don't see that happening. But maybe I'm being overly negative and I will be wrong. I will be happy to be proven wrong in this case.

 

I also sincerely hope that our plans with North Korea go through, but again I see this decision right now as something that hurts our chances with North Korea. Perhaps things have already moved far enough along that it won't matter. Again I hope I will be wrong in this case and maybe I'm just being overly negative.

 

I think reputation on the world stage matters a lot and this hurts our reputation when it comes to making international agreements. It hurts the Office of President for every current and future office holder because it continues to confirm that all decisions made in the past are "up to discussion" every 4-8 years. That makes it harder for countries to want to work with us when they aren't sure what we will decide after the next election. Perhaps our overall international strength (mostly militarily) will continue to be our dominating negotiating power and this won't matter. We can still try to bully people into agreeing with us. Hopefully that can continue to work in our favour.

 

3 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

Item iii in the preamble.  The wording is interesting, but what Israel has showed us is that Iran has been pursuing nuclear weapons before and after the deal was made by Obama.  I am sure they have more information that hasn’t been shared publicly as unlike the Mueller investigation, this really does involve state secrets and not just CYA activities.

"Iran reaffirms that under no circumstances will Iran ever seek, develop or acquire any nuclear weapons."

 

I agree the wording is interesting, but ultimately what Iran is "reaffirming" is that that they will never seek, develop or acquire. All three of those verbs are PRESENT tense, not past tense. So they didn't reaffirm that they never sought it. They only are reaffirming as part of the agreement that they never will in the present and future.

 

The deal was about future actions. If their past decisions were a factor it would have read "Iran reaffirms that they have never sought to develop or acquire any nuclear weapons, and under no circumstances will they ever seek to do so in the future". Something like that. Likely written better