Nuclear Deal With Iran

[Sam]

Obviously a big deal, here.

Now that we know the essential framework of the nuclear deal between Iran and the P5+1 countries, it's worth discussing the merits of the deal, as well as concerns. From my view:

Pros:

• Diplomatic victory to even get to this point
• Iran's nuclear weapons capability significantly (almost wholly) degraded
• Sanctions relief (citizens)
• Strong inspections ability (with caveat, see Cons)

Cons:

• Sanctions relief (weapons embargo lifted)
• Option for Iran to appeal on-the-spot inspections

anyshort video from Vox that focuses on the good aspects of the plan, for those who need a jump-start primer on the subject:

[seanD]

ISIS is sunni; Iran is Shia.

Unless I'm misinterpreting what you meant.

[seer]

Without spot inspection the plan is pretty much useless. It is not like Iran has been trustworthy in the past. For instance are we going to get to do inspections before we lift the arms embargo and release monies?

[seanD]

My question is, what if Israel attacks Iran anyway?

[seer]

my question is, what if israel attacks iran anyway?

ww3?

[seanD]

ww3?

I know what side Hillary and Bush will take, but what side will Obama take?

[seer]

I know what side Hillary and Bush will take, but what side will Obama take?

Ouch!

[Sam]

ISIS is sunni; Iran is Shia.

Unless I'm misinterpreting what you meant.

Yes, I wasn't terribly clear there: lifting the weapons embargo against Iran will be both good (it will allow Iran to better combat ISIS and US policy regarding ISIS leans heavily on Iran's help) and bad (it will allow Iran to escalate military/militia/terrorist operations in the Middle East, should it choose to do so).

Sorry for the confusion.

[One Bad Pig]

Yes, I wasn't terribly clear there: lifting the weapons embargo against Iran will be both good (it will allow Iran to better combat ISIS and US policy regarding ISIS leans heavily on Iran's help) and bad (it will allow Iran to escalate military/militia/terrorist operations in the Middle East, should it choose to do so).

Sorry for the confusion.

I don't see anything good there. I don't want Iran to be able to better combat ISIS; I want Iran to have to devote all its energy to combating ISIS so it has nothing to expend against the West in general or Israel in particular. If one of Iran or ISIS wipes out the other, GREAT! That's one less evil we have to worry about.

US policy of leaning heavily on the help of a country that calls us "the great Satan" and routinely chants "death to America" is mind-numbingly stupid.

[Jedidiah]

There is nothing good about the deal. I do not believe Obama ever intended to do more that stall for time for Iran.

[Starlight]

This deal seems to be amazingly good beyond what could have realistically been hoped or imagined. Iran pledges to never get a nuclear weapon, and agrees to an inspection regime so thorough and complete the likes of which have barely, if ever, been seen before. In exchange the other nations of the world basically do nothing... they just refrain from going out of their way to be nasty to Iran.

BEST DEAL EVER.


It's hilarious, however, how the lying warhawks like Netanyahu, Limbaugh, Linsey Graham, and Tom Cotton, are flipping out over this and doing their mindless rants about how endless war with Iran is the only possible solution to all the world's problems.

[seer]

This deal seems to be amazingly good beyond what could have realistically been hoped or imagined. Iran pledges to never get a nuclear weapon, and agrees to an inspection regime so thorough and complete the likes of which have barely, if ever, been seen before. In exchange the other nations of the world basically do nothing... they just refrain from going out of their way to be nasty to Iran.

Hey Starfish, how did that Kool Aid taste?

[Sam]

I don't see anything good there. I don't want Iran to be able to better combat ISIS; I want Iran to have to devote all its energy to combating ISIS so it has nothing to expend against the West in general or Israel in particular. If one of Iran or ISIS wipes out the other, GREAT! That's one less evil we have to worry about.

US policy of leaning heavily on the help of a country that calls us "the great Satan" and routinely chants "death to America" is mind-numbingly stupid.

The Iranian regime, for all of its sins, is not an irrational actor and treating it as equivalent to ISIS is a mistake, one we've frankly encountered before with Iraq. The idea of an ISIS (or Iran) that unilaterally wiped out the other is rather horrific, considering what that sort of ground war would look like through the region. Would we want the Iranian borders extending through northern Iraq and into Syria? Do we want an ISIS powerful enough to "wipe out" Iran, with is 2-3 times larger than Iraq?

I personally can't take that sort of comment seriously; it imagines the Iranian regime as not only inherently hostile but held back from a self-defeating war with the West (or Israel) by the lack of resources devoted to combating ISIS. That's not backed by history or reason.

(For those unfamiliar with the geography, map below)

middle_east.gif

[Sam]

Hey Starfish, how did that Kool Aid taste?

seer, be civil and keep on topic, please. More of that will result in a request to exit the thread.

[Sam]

There is nothing good about the deal. I do not believe Obama ever intended to do more that stall for time for Iran.

Part of the deal involves Iran reducing its nuclear stockpile by 98%. I'm uncertain what benefit you perceive was gained in "stalling for time".