Iran nuclear deal: Enriched uranium limit will be breached on 27 June

There is no more deal thanks to Trump. FYI, what makes you think that because someone stops doing something, that they also forget.

Now Saudi Arabia is going to build nukes, and guess what, Israel is going to be on an even higher alert.

All due to RW hatred of Obama.

 

Exactly there isn't a deal because the deal was BS and pouring cash into the largest terrorist funding country in the world. Everyone says it was a bad deal, we couldn't even inspect the known sites they were producing weapons grade uranium. It would be like Trump sending NK about 600 billion with promises of dismantling but us not being able to check if they were being dismantled. You guys would be going crazy, now youre still going crazy because he won't do a deal with teeth but still talking nice, hoping to get a deal with teeth done.

 

No ... I think Iran is evil enough to pack a SCUD missile full of radioactive material and launch it into Israel from Palestine. Or perhaps tunnel into Israel and detonate a few dirty suicide vests. Iran isn't in the "business" of selling weapons to terrorists. Iran recruits, trains and arms terrorists, and compensates "martyrs" families. You're not coming across as being to bright, but I'd like to hear your theory on why the whole world wanted an agreement to try and prevent Iran from developing nukes to begin with. Iran too sensible, and peace loving?

 

"Everyone"? Who, besides RW pundits and Trump's twitter feed?

 

There was a deal and Iran was adhering to it until Trump cancelled it. This is his bed, he made it, now he has to ly in it.

 

No it was the dumbest deal ever, it had no teeth and IRAN immediately violated it..
https://www.fdd.org/analysis/2018/0...ation-to-inspect-military-facilities-in-iran/

And has been the problem since day one, Obama administration says it's in the agreement and Iran giving us the bird.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/a...ry_bases_off-limits_to_inspection_128007.html

by the way this deal also gave the IAEA big big money to inspect and they don't want that money train to stop.

 

Except they weren't, see post 40.

 

So... Iran wasn't following the letter of the deal based on a few statements from Iranian hardliners and a story that the IAEA immediately rebuffed? Sounds pretty damn spurious and reaching to me.

 

The last time Iran itself attacked ... 40 yrs ago ... Israel kicked their arse. :: Trump's suggested Japan develope their own nuke program, has the UN drawn up a deal to prevent that from happening? Of all the uranium enrichment capable countries, only 2 are being bribed or pressured to stop. Why is that?

 

Uh, I think you're talking about Iraq. Iran has never been at war with Israel, so I think you might be a bit ignorant on your history, bub.

Yeah, I wonder why the country which was decimated by nuclear weapons during WWII and has shown zero interest in producing a nuclear weapon isn't creating worry about producing nuclear weapons.

 

In an agreement, not everything agreed to is beneficial to the every country that signs the agreement. Concessions are made and all parties that sign the agreement are expected to still hold up their end of the agreement even when that agreement is no longer in the best interest of the country. Those that believe agreements can or should be broken by countries when that agreement is no longer in the best interest of that country is the truly naive person.

 

The United States broke the deal by unilaterally snapping sanctions back into place. Why in the world would Iran continue to follow the deal when it was already broken by the Trump Administration? No rational country would continue to follow the letter of the deal if the deal was broken.

 

The US should have never signed it in the first place. All treaties or agreements between countries are suppose to be ratified by Congress. The only argument to allow the US to enter into this agreement is because the agreement was not with the US, but was made between the UN and Iran. The US was just signatory to the agreement. The US did not cancel the agreement, we just withdrew from being signatory. The agreement is still in place. Now if the UN wants to punish the US for no longer participating in the agreement, I say "good luck with that".

 

Not confused. After the 1979 revolution Iran aligned itself with the PLO. Israel's kicked their arses in assorted skirmishes in the 80's.

 

You claimed that Iran ITSELF attacked Israel, bub. Nice try, you don't know jack about jack.

 

Lolz ... whatever you need to believe. Your avatar sorta looks like a peaceful Iranian tourist "vacationing" in Palestine.

 

Ah hem, yes they were.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...lear-limits-under-2015-deal-with-world-powers

 

What is with you guy and things are "inevitable"? If Hillary wins it's "inevitable" that we will be at war (with no evidence what-so-ever). It's "inevitable" that we will nuke NK. Now it's "inevitable" that we didn't bomb Iran. For people that love to say Dems love war it's the right that keeps taking us to the brink or starting them.

 

Nonsense, it means that they only intended to honor it with the US might behind it. Now, do you think the other signatories will help if it hits the fan......I think not.

 

So you agree the Obama treaty benefited both countries. That would be correct.

 

Your posts are showing they can be very naive. Treaties are always give and take.

 

Yeah funding the building of the weapons is a better way to go.

Otherwise the people who want to kill us will get angry and want to kill us.

 

So....like NK I guess.

 

31 yrs ago.

 

What country did they attack in 1988?