Nuclear Deal Reached With Iran

Of course you are, you lot put him in power and supported him all the way thru his reign supply him with arms and training for his forces who were going around murdering people.

 

Sorry I got the dates wrong. I should have remembered that Khomeini seized power in 1979 and began immediate hostilities with the US. I was 29 then and keenly aware of what was going on. Again my apologies for the lapse.

Your posts on this subject have been admirable for the most. I would point you to the Iranian articles I linked. Iran seems to expect rather more than most Americans have been led to believe, including oil revenues.

- - - Updated - - -

Please read the rest of my post for your response. The majority of Iranians are still being harmed by other Iranians. Who's responsible now?

 

this is what i call racism.Why America and western countries` nuclear weapon are justifiable, while for some reason , if Iran or any Muslim country hold nuclear program it is a disaster and it should tackle it seriously?? I don't understand how this mentality is working. shame on racism.

 

Iran is a known terrorist harboring/aiding State. I'm not talking about Iran launching missiles at the U.S. Nukes can be very small and, concealable by any terrorist. Letting Iran loose with nuclear development is just asking for trouble IMO.

 

We are not talking about now so stop trying to change the subject. America is responsible for putting the Shah in power in Iran and training his brutal secret security police who went around murdering people and America armed them as well.

- - - Updated - - -

Is it? Is that by stupid Americans by any chance? What you say about nukes and Iran is total bollocks. Delusional

 

"In 1995, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard held a conference with worldwide organizations accused of engaging in terrorism including the Japanese Red Army, the Armenian Secret Army, the Kurdistan Workers' Party, the Iraqi Da'wah Party, the Islamic Front for the Liberation of Bahrain and Hezbollah in Beirut for the sole purpose of providing training to these organizations supposedly to help in the destabilization of Gulf States and aid assistance to militants in these countries to replace the existing governments with Iran-like regimes."

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

 

This is the trouble with people quoting wikipedia and not checking the sources. The source for this claim is globalsecurity.org which is run by a bunch of ex American FBI, government wankers...Sorry not good enough source for me and so so very biased.

 

Iran has a history...

"Thirty years ago today, on Oct. 23, 1983, a delivery van filled with 18,000 pounds of explosives slammed into the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut. Seconds later, another car bomb hit a French military building four miles away. A total of 241 American and 58 French soldiers lost their lives, all members of the Multi-National Forces in Lebanon.

The attack on the Marine barracks was not only the single-largest nonnuclear explosion since World War II, it was also the deadliest terrorist attack against Americans up to that time.

And the legacy of that moment haunts us to this day.

The attacks, perpetrated by Hezbollah under orders from Iran, announced the arrival of the Lebanese Shiite group as a potent, anti-Western terrorist force supported and directed by Tehran. Today, despite warming relations between the United States and Iran, Hezbollah remains a weapon in Iran’s arsenal, a means to pursue the agenda of the Islamic Revolution in Syria and in terrorist operations around the world."

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/30-years-terror-sponsored-iran-article-1.1493410#ixzz2m5fQ8OMp

 

I Can Only Wonder
Why the Marines let it happen. I mean we aren't talking the Army. Marines!


Moi

 

That was Islamic Jihad, don't believe everything you read in the paper and terrorism is not blowing up soldiers whose navy and army had dropped down on the side of Israeli invaders of the Lebanon. Get your facts right.

 

Israel had reactors, technology and more than likely nuclear weapons prior to NPT.

 

Article Not Such a Great Deal for Iran by Eric Margolis, imho a relatively "fair and balanced" reporter.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/2013/11/eric-margolis/there-is-no-bad-peace-and-no-good-war/

 

First, it's a great deal if Iran plans on doing the same thing they've been doing for the past ten years which is continue to break the conditions of the NPT and second, they wouldn't be in this fix to begin with if they had simply kept their agreements. Nobody has forced them to violate the NPT, they did it all on their own with no help from the US, Israel or the Man from Mars.

Eric is well known for his left wing slant and tunnel vision.

 

The US and UK bear responsibility for installing the Shah, and therefore are partly to blame for what followed. However, you are entirely correct that the Shah acted on his own in committing his abuses of power. When something like that occurs, it is very rare for anyone involved to walk away with entirely clean hands, and by extension it's very rare that all of the blame can be clearly assigned to one party. The US made a foolish, short sighted, and selfish mistake in installing the Shah that had very bad but unintended consequences.

Actually, Hillary Clinton apologized for the US's role in the 1953 coup as Secretary of State in 2011, which arguably contributed to the fact that we're even in a position to negotiate a deal with Iran at all. Remember that it's been over a decade since Iran accepted any restrictions on its nuclear program at all.

Do you have numbers on the political prisoners, torture, etc., under the Shah as compared to under the Islamic Republic? I have no idea what the numbers really are.

It's as unfair to say that anything anti-American is automatically embraced by the left as it is to say that the right thinks America can do no wrong and are incapable of apologizing for anything.

I've seen very few posters in this thread actually defending the Islamic Republic as a good form of government. There's a huge difference between saying that a regime is not so pathological that it needs to be treated like a rabid dog and saying that a regime is an enlightened government serving its people selflessly and leading them into a golden age.

No worries, we all slip up sometimes. ^_^ I remember one time I confused John Adams with James Madison while discussing the Constitution. Very embarrassing.

I'm not sure what exactly you think is in the agreement, or what you consider to be what most Americans have been led to believe. You might want to take a look at the fact sheet put out by the White House, it has a pretty detailed explanation of the deal.

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

The ISNA news articles you linked seemed pretty straightforward and factual to me. Iran has been saying for a long time that it regards enriching uranium to low levels as a sovereign right that it will not give up. But we're talking about low enriched uranium, not weapons grade. For some context, natural uranium is about 0.7% U235, with almost all of the rest being U238, which is not fissile. Fuel for civilian power reactors is typically enriched to 3% - 5%, while research reactors use 12% - 19.75% Weapons grade uranium is typically enriched to 85% or more. The bomb used on Hiroshima used 80% enriched uranium. It is possible to make a crude bomb with uranium enriched to as little as 20%, however, the lower the enrichment the less efficient the bomb will be, which means a lower explosive yield and a larger critical mass. The amount of uranium required to achieve critical mass approaches infinity at around 6% enrichment, so it's physically impossible to make a bomb out of reactor grade fuel. The Iranians have currently been enriching up to about 20%, and in this deal they've agreed to stop all enrichment above 5% and to dilute their stockpile of 20% down to 5%.

The sanctions relief totals about $7 billion, although I'm not entirely clear on how exactly that number was arrived at. In any event, it's a tiny fraction of the sanctions that are currently in place. Iran has almost $100 billion in frozen foreign assets, and the oil sanctions alone are costing them about $4 billion every month.

 

Miko Peled has some excellent insights into Bibi's position on Iran and why..

 

If anyone is blind to the very obvious chain of political events which led from Ajax to the current issues America has with the theocracy it helped to establish, they need a reality check.

 

The Iranians have mistrusted America-and with good cause-since the CIA's monumental stupidity of the overthrow of Mossadeghs democratically-elected government. The installation of a murderous, US-sponsored dictator isn't going to elicit geniality either. You evidently do not understand cause and effect.
Iran is also surrounded by US military bases; another reason they are not exactly enamoured with America.

 

Miko Peled's book is a piece of trash, the man is a turncoat to his Patrimony, I am pratically sure this book was written for vendication... What exactly, I fail to put my firger on it. But in my position I will eventually find out.

 

How could you possibly know unless you watch the video or read the book?

A two state solution is impossible.. Has been since the mid 1990s.

I know its hard to face... It was hard for Americans to Face Jim Crow.

 

Not worth responding in kind... Thinkers like you will react when it is too late... When a device will explode in Trafalgar Square, or New York... You are thinking they are the underdog suffering at the hands of the Europeans, and you are Mr Superman coming to their rescue.
Me think a nuclear device in the hands of Iran would signal the end of the Free world as we know it... Every Arab and Terrorist organization working/sympathetic to the Iranian cause will be able to sneak anywhere and make the life of Europeans uneasy... People will start emigrating to Chile perhaps to avoid a new nuclear hollocaust..

 

We will not lock horns on this one... I do not believe in <Two States> for the Arabs never lost one in the first place as there was NEVER a so called Palestinian State, exactly like there was never a Jordanian State and there was never and Iraqi State... These were inventions made by the UK and the whole region is instable now... look at the FRENCH Mandate for the Levant (Syria-Lebanon) as an example.

I agree with you again here... One State is the solution where Israel reigns supreme on its <Ancient Land>.

The Arab Towns would have to be self governed and COMPLETELY DISARMED!

 

Arabs have ruled Palestine for 2000 years far longer than Israel existed.. so to claim there never was a Palestine is pretty silly..

Will you also disarm the settlers?

 

Gee, nothing like a good, analytical argument...

 

Your parents bore and raised you. Does that mean they're responsible for everything you do, or are you responsible for your own behavior? The US put the Shah in power and helped him. What he did with his power is entirely on him and those who worked for him. The US has allies all over the world. They, not the US, are responsible for their own actions. The US did NOT put the mullahs in power, yet their rule has been far worse than the Shah's. Who will you blame?

 

This is not about parents and their children, this is about the Americans overthrowing the democratically elected government in Iran and then installing a dictator,they then trained his brutal secret police and supported the Shah thru out his reign as he tortured and murdered his own people. So yes America is responsible and nothing you say will change that fact because without America there would have been no coup, no shah and no secret police.Its as easy as that.