The McConnell plan B on Iran? Thoughts?

[mneilmont]

Yes, I understand that part. But the rest of the deal is based on regular inspections and Iran meeting the conditions before the sanctions are lifted, and the sanctions can be put back in place at any point also. It isn't as if we are signing the deal and then just walking away and trusting them to do everything they said they'd do.

Do you really think those other countries are that flexible? They will set up industries based on trade with Iran who will have 100-150 billions of new money. You occasionally show more economic intelligence that what you are displaying here.

How long would it take them to acquire nuclear capacity with that kind of money? There is a military base that is off limits. US can watch all the activity from above and not respond because of clauses in the deal.

Israel is going to be in need of a lot of ear plugs if this is not stopped by someone - including them, IMO.

 

[TarHeelEer]

Well technically yes. I mean it is the originating basis of all of these off shoot "Bob's church of the new day and glory to his name by the river" faiths. So I guess in reality it is the purest form of Christianity. The rest are just offshoots and heretics to the true Christian faith of Catholicism.

I'm so glad Jesus formed the Catholic Church in Rome for us.

 

[WhiteTailEER]

How long would it take them to acquire nuclear capacity with that kind of money?
US can watch all the activity from above and not respond because of clauses in the deal.

1) Everybody is reporting that their break out period is 2-3 months now, without those billions, and under the deal they wouldn't even get the billions until they've proven compliance with the deal

2) The deal takes NO options off the table for us.

http://www.manchin.senate.gov/publi...BB5B6E527&SK=D9FF1F255369C26D666306EE7E8E909B

He has the full deal linked somewhere on his site as well. At least the deal as of July 14th

Here is the link to the deal:
http://www.manchin.senate.gov/publi...A4A737A77&SK=182D03B47BED3D3CEF26E80D1A2B396D

 

[mneilmont]

1) Everybody is reporting that their break out period is 2-3 months now, without those billions, and under the deal they wouldn't even get the billions until they've proven compliance with the deal

2) The deal takes NO options off the table for us.

http://www.manchin.senate.gov/publi...BB5B6E527&SK=D9FF1F255369C26D666306EE7E8E909B

He has the full deal linked somewhere on his site as well. At least the deal as of July 14th

Here is the link to the deal:
http://www.manchin.senate.gov/publi...A4A737A77&SK=182D03B47BED3D3CEF26E80D1A2B396D

And after all the crawfishing he has done, you expect him to invade Iran? "No options off the table" should be laughable to people honest with themselves.

 

[WhiteTailEER]

And after all the crawfishing he has done, you expect him to invade Iran? "No options off the table" should be laughable to people honest with themselves.

Now you are changing the argument/discussion. First you say that there is a clause saying we can do nothing, which isn't true.

Now you are changing the discussion to whether or not we think "he" (I assume Obama) would invade Iran. 1) I believe he would if he had to since he did go into Pakistan to get Bin Laden (but there is really no point in discussing it because it would be purely speculation on both of our parts, we may as well argue about whether or not it will rain in Charleston on some arbitrary date 2 years from now), and 2) it doesn't much matter anyway because unless Iran does that within the next year, he won't be in office anyway.

 

[WVPATX]

Libs are so naive. He claims Iran is 2-3 months from breaking out a nuke. So we are giving them access to $150B, they get to test ballistic missiles, they can acquire conventional arms, they can fund even more terrorism and they still get a nuke. The anytime, anywhere inspections have been replaced with 24 days notice, perhaps more if they contest the inspection. It includes the nuclear military site, Parchin, which the Iranians will self inspect. As for sanctions, there is ZERO chance of a snapback. That is a hoax. The language may state that provision exists, but no thinking person can believe other countries will snapback those sanctions. Finally, there is ZERO chance, and the Iranians know this, that Obama would attack or invade. This is not like a surgical strike to kill Bin Laden, the nuke sites are buried deep inside Iran and it would require a sustained war to destroy the sites.

We don't even get our hostages back. Sounds like a hell of a deal to me.

 

[moe]

And after all the crawfishing he has done, you expect him to invade Iran? "No options off the table" should be laughable to people honest with themselves.

If the U.S. or Israel took military action against Iran it won't be by invading them, try targeted bombing. This may come as a disappointment to those who clamor for U.S. boots on the ground. It will also depend on who is prez at the time.

 

[moe]

Libs are so naive. He claims Iran is 2-3 months from breaking out a nuke. So we are giving them access to $150B, they get to test ballistic missiles, they can acquire conventional arms, they can fund even more terrorism and they still get a nuke. The anytime, anywhere inspections have been replaced with 24 days notice, perhaps more if they contest the inspection. It includes the nuclear military site, Parchin, which the Iranians will self inspect. As for sanctions, there is ZERO chance of a snapback. That is a hoax. The language may state that provision exists, but no thinking person can believe other countries will snapback those sanctions. Finally, there is ZERO chance, and the Iranians know this, that Obama would attack or invade. This is not like a surgical strike to kill Bin Laden, the nuke sites are buried deep inside Iran and it would require a sustained war to destroy the sites.

We don't even get our hostages back. Sounds like a hell of a deal to me.

lol

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

I'm so glad Jesus formed the Catholic Church in Rome for us.

I figured that would be your response. Predictable.

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

lol

Not sure what you are LOLing about.

Does Iran get up self report? yes

Is the report from the IAEA on the current state of their Nuke program based on a 1 day round table where Iran self reports the baseline for all future inspections? Yes

Are they getting $150 billion from is based on that round table? Yes

Do they get to test ballistic missiles? Yes

Are they a state sponsor of terrorism? Yes

Are the rest of the countries going to get involved financially? Yes

Would that have an impact on their decision to snap backs sanctions? I think any reasonable person can assume it would.

I'm just not sure what it is you guys aren't seeing about this deal. The very basis of what should be the deciding factor on this deal won't be in place several months after the vote. It's crazy to me.

 

[mneilmont]

Now you are changing the argument/discussion. First you say that there is a clause saying we can do nothing, which isn't true.

Now you are changing the discussion to whether or not we think "he" (I assume Obama) would invade Iran. 1) I believe he would if he had to since he did go into Pakistan to get Bin Laden (but there is really no point in discussing it because it would be purely speculation on both of our parts, we may as well argue about whether or not it will rain in Charleston on some arbitrary date 2 years from now), and 2) it doesn't much matter anyway because unless Iran does that within the next year, he won't be in office anyway.

 

[WVPATX]

Not sure what you are LOLing about.

Does Iran get up self report? yes

Is the report from the IAEA on the current state of their Nuke program based on a 1 day round table where Iran self reports the baseline for all future inspections? Yes

Are they getting $150 billion from is based on that round table? Yes

Do they get to test ballistic missiles? Yes

Are they a state sponsor of terrorism? Yes

Are the rest of the countries going to get involved financially? Yes

Would that have an impact on their decision to snap backs sanctions? I think any reasonable person can assume it would.

I'm just not sure what it is you guys aren't seeing about this deal. The very basis of what should be the deciding factor on this deal won't be in place several months after the vote. It's crazy to me.

I'm actually stunned. Even ardent supporters of this deal have expressed reservations. Not so with most of this board's liberal members. I have yet to find one thing is this agreement that's a win for the U.S. Even Obama admitted Iran's break out period would be virtually zero when the deal expires, assuming they don't cheat, which is one HUGE assumption.

 

[mneilmont]

Now you are changing the argument/discussion. First you say that there is a clause saying we can do nothing, which isn't true.

Now you are changing the discussion to whether or not we think "he" (I assume Obama) would invade Iran. 1) I believe he would if he had to since he did go into Pakistan to get Bin Laden (but there is really no point in discussing it because it would be purely speculation on both of our parts, we may as well argue about whether or not it will rain in Charleston on some arbitrary date 2 years from now), and 2) it doesn't much matter anyway because unless Iran does that within the next year, he won't be in office anyway.

Don't think I am changing anything. We are discussing what a terrible deal the US reps are signing without knowing what the deal is. It was earlier pointed out that we could not engage to support our friend Israel. If that is what you refer to. And how can a reasonable person deny that everything the US originally demanded and omitted in final document presented to be signed. And you think the President would authorize attack on Iran? Amazing. You accuse me of changing subject and you bring up Bin Laden. Totally two different items, but you suggest a covert mission is the same as outright taking offensive against a country. Again, I ask if you are serious or just probing?

 

[moe]

Not sure what you are LOLing about.

Does Iran get up self report? yes

Is the report from the IAEA on the current state of their Nuke program based on a 1 day round table where Iran self reports the baseline for all future inspections? Yes

Are they getting $150 billion from is based on that round table? Yes

Do they get to test ballistic missiles? Yes

Are they a state sponsor of terrorism? Yes

Are the rest of the countries going to get involved financially? Yes

Would that have an impact on their decision to snap backs sanctions? I think any reasonable person can assume it would.

I'm just not sure what it is you guys aren't seeing about this deal. The very basis of what should be the deciding factor on this deal won't be in place several months after the vote. It's crazy to me.

Anything else to add? How about the proposed plan for the Fordow facility? or the Arak heavy water reactor? or the reduction of their uranium stockpile by 98% to 300 kg enriched at no more than 3.67 percent for the next 15 years? or the70% reduction in centrifuges and giving up their most advanced models while using only older models? Some here, maybe not you, ask what BO would do if things aren't honored though the next 2-3 presidents will oversee most of the agreement term. I see it as keeping them from getting a bomb for the next 10-15 years, kicking the can down the road until something better or continuing can be reached. If someone's argument against it is that agreement specifics won't be honored (despite continuous inspections) then why even talk about it? No one will change that person's mind that the agreement will be honored and it keeps the discussion mercifully simple for those people. There's a lot to the agreement that has taken decades to finally reach. Also this is a nuclear agreement, not an "everything that bugs you about Iran agreement" (prisoners, ballistic missiles, they say mean things about the U.S., etc.) so not everything is on the table and six nations were negotiating this with Iran, not just us.

 

[dave]

The prisoner release is a separate issue. Why is it that we insist on making the perfect the enemy of the good? With that as a prerequisite there would have been no deal, except that Russia and the EU countries would have made their own peace with Iran, and they would still have our people in prison while they continued working on building their bomb. What would we gain by walking away?

How on earth did our leaders negotiate us into this situation where america eats a big bag of **** or it eats the other large bag of ****. It is disturbing that people defend this nonesense.