# Iran: More sanctions now or wait? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 19, 2013, 10:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300 "2013-11-19T22:23:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 35
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2013, 5:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/681 "2013-12-24T05:23:01Z")
It is apparent that those who believe that Obama is splitting hairs on enforcing or relieving Iranian sanctions have absolutely no argument to back up that belief with facts or reason. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2013, 5:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/682 "2013-12-24T05:40:33Z")
It is apparent that you have flip flopped on this issue yet again. Nobody can dispute that you said you supported my position, and everyone agrees that you are now disagreeing with me. The obvious answer is that you cannot deny not knowing if you are not in agreement with me, or if you are not not disagreeing with me. You cannot not NOT dispute this. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2013, 5:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/683 "2013-12-24T05:50:37Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > It is apparent that you have flip flopped on this issue yet again. If it is apparent - cite it. I have never agreed that Obama is splitting hairs on his policy toward Iranian sanctions. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2013, 5:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/684 "2013-12-24T05:53:15Z")
You cannot deny that you agreed with me earlier. Why don’t you cite the post where you didn’t agree with me, but you were able to deny it? ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2013, 6:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/685 "2013-12-24T06:30:18Z")
Its good to know that those who believe Obama is splitting hairs on Iranian sanctions don’t have a case or argument or point or anything to back up their belief. Obama is not splitting hairs. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2013, 6:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/686 "2013-12-24T06:36:51Z")
No one can deny that Obama is splitting hairs. This is a fact, and it can’t be denied. There is absolutely no argument that can be made against this fact. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2013, 6:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/687 "2013-12-24T06:54:33Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > No one can deny that Obama is splitting hairs. This is a fact, and it can’t be denied. There is absolutely no argument that can be made against this fact. Its an opinion that is apparently not based on any facts, reading of plain English, or reason. It is a flawed and unsupported opinion and no one here has bothered to write anything to support it other that it is what they believe. I have shown that enforcing existing sanctions is not the same thing as implementing new sanctions and then enforcing them. Are you saying there is no difference? Why not say something that has some substance on the issue? ---
**Author:** ![Riga\_Marole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riga_marole/32/7316_2.png) [@Riga\_Marole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riga_Marole)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2013, 7:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/688 "2013-12-24T07:20:33Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > … Since you said that the US has turned down Iran’s overtures “scores” of times, can you provide other instances? [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cf3fcoXx0pI](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cf3fcoXx0pI) > [@Ravenman](#): > > **elucidator** posted that the treaties were signed by a former (and perhaps not legitimate) government of Iran, and you responded: “Short, sharp and a nail hit upon its head.” > > If I misinterpreted your comment, what did you actually mean? That the validation of the former government is debatable for that very reason. Any road up, having your hands tied FOREVER simply because the document said “this” rather than “it” is not my idea of a fair deal. Nor is intimidating, badgering, and threatening someone whose hands you know to be legally tied. The military capabilities of vanquished Japan and Germany were designed by the victors, though those capabilities have since been tweeked. But I recon that’s alright, eh? > [@Ravenman](#): > > You made a vague statement about Iran defending against aggression, so I asked if you meant that Iran might respond to another Iraqi invasion by using a nuclear weapon. You then posted a link to a wikipedia page on the 1953 coup, and a comment about the general poor relations between the US and Iran. Since you brought up the coup and the poor relations, I was led to believe that Iran should threaten or actually use a nuclear weapons in response to the type of things you brought up. If that wasn’t your intention, that was not clear… and I’m also confused on why you raised them in response to my question. Employing superlative logic and absurd conclusions isn’t really getting you very far and falsely claiming that I posted some link isn’t putting you closer to me pressing the friend button either. > [@Ravenman](#): > > Seeing as how Russia, China, France, Germany, UK, and the US are all negotiating with Iran to try to find a peaceful end to the nuclear program, it is a mistake to imply that this issue is about only the US and Iran. It’s really an issue between Iran and most other countries in the world, as evidenced by the number of countries at the negotiating table and the UN resolutions on the matter. And … ? > [@Ravenman](#): > > So, while you can criticize the US for assassinations, bad TV shows, and faked moon landings, that really has little to do with Iran’s nuclear program and why so many different countries, and the UN, want it done away with. Really. If you drop the string of absurd statements we might have a better chance of carrying this subject forward. Or do you want me to respond to the part that ought already be obvious - that of America’s direct responsibility for Iran’s diplomat and nuclear situation. > [@Ravenman](#): > > Everyone who signs the NPT must be subject to it. Happy? No. Not happy at all. I will be happy when ALL nuclear weapons of the world are utterly destroyed. ---
**Author:** ![Riga\_Marole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riga_marole/32/7316_2.png) [@Riga\_Marole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riga_Marole)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2013, 7:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/689 "2013-12-24T07:32:52Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > When those threats occur, perhaps. They aren’t now, and probably never will. Note the 68 years without a nuclear attack, and those occured under circumstances that are unlikely to ever exist again. I don’t care how many times your pit bull snarls at me. I’m going to start packing a can of mace. > [@Human\_Action](#): > > 168 nations signed the NPT of their own free will. Why do you suppose they did that? The Geneva Convention Rules were ratified by 195 states of their own free will. I wonder why the U.S. signed it? ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2013, 7:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/690 "2013-12-24T07:45:35Z")
What is wrong with calling them what they are. They are extremists on Iran. I am talking about any US Senator from any Party who has dug in with an extreme position in opposition to the interim agreement with Iran that could very well lead to the achievement of the neocon goal of military force being the only option left if those negotiations fail. How would anyone refer to these Senators as moderates on Iran? > [@](#): > > Here Are The 15 Democratic Senators Bucking The White House And Threatening War With Iran > > Posted: 12/23/2013 3:07 pm EST | Updated: 12/23/2013 6:51 pm EST > WASHINGTON – As the United States finally puts a decade of war behind it, a group of senators, including 15 Democrats, is defying the White House and threatening to push the country into a fresh war with Iran. > > Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) is leading the charge to pass legislation in January that would impose tougher sanctions on Iran, despite dire warnings from the White House, Iranian leaders, 10 Democratic committee chairs and a host of liberal groups that such an effort could sink a delicate nuclear agreement already in place. Under that Nov. 24 deal, Tehran would curb its nuclear program in exchange for some relief from economic sanctions for a period of six months. > > The Senate bill, which has 19 Republican cosponsors, takes a hard line, levying new sanctions on Iran unless the country’s leaders agree to abandon all uranium enrichment – what some have called an “absurd” stance. In the past, both John Kerry, then a U.S. senator, and Mohamed ElBaradei, former head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, have said that Iran has the right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes. > > Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif said earlier this month that if the Senate moved forward with its bill, the current nuclear deal would be dead. A senior Obama administration official went further, telling The Huffington Post that Senate action makes it “far more likely that we’ll be left only with a military option” regarding Iran. > > Here are the 15 Democratic senators willing to risk a war with Iran rather than let White House and Iranian leaders continue negotiations. ---
**Author:** ![Riga\_Marole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riga_marole/32/7316_2.png) [@Riga\_Marole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riga_Marole)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2013, 9:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/691 "2013-12-24T09:00:55Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > What is wrong with calling them what they are. They are extremists on Iran. I am talking about any US Senator from any Party who has dug in with an extreme position in opposition to the interim agreement with Iran that could very well lead to the achievement of the neocon goal of military force being the only option left if those negotiations fail. > > How would anyone refer to these Senators as moderates on Iran? They could be playing either side for the fence. 1. They own lots of stock in the arms industry and lucrative, affiliate business possibilities … OIL! … or … 2. They’re playing good guy bad guy together with the government. My bet’s on number 1. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2013, 9:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/692 "2013-12-24T09:30:32Z")
> [@Riga\_Marole](#): > > Iran will get the bomb and there is nothing you can do about it. Make friends now. Meh, let 'em have it. The day after they use it, Iran as we know it will cease to exist. ---
**Author:** ![Riga\_Marole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riga_marole/32/7316_2.png) [@Riga\_Marole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riga_Marole)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2013, 11:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/693 "2013-12-24T11:16:13Z")
> [@Riga\_Marole](#): > > Iran will get the bomb and there is nothing you can do about it. Make friends now. > [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Meh, let 'em have it. The day after they use it, Iran as we know it will cease to exist. So … given the opportunity to make amends to a country (one that has a legitimate gripe against you) … you’d rather not make friends with them but wait till they lose patience, fire off a barrage of nukes, and take your chances that you will survive and have the honour of retaliating? What-sa matta’? Ain’t ya’ got no _ **loved ones** _? :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2013, 12:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/694 "2013-12-24T12:36:26Z")
Well, define “amends” and “friends”. Don’t the internal politics of Iran make mandatory a state of distrust of the West? Let’s see signs of rule of law, and not Shari’a law, either. I’d frankly love to see the day when we can trust Iran, because Iran trusts its own population. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2013, 12:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/695 "2013-12-24T12:46:25Z")
> [@Riga\_Marole](#): > > Any road up, having your hands tied FOREVER simply because the document said “this” rather than “it” is not my idea of a fair deal. Forever, eh? [Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty](http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Nuclear_Non-Proliferation_Treaty) > [@](#): > > 1. Each Party shall in exercising its national sovereignty have the right to withdraw from the Treaty if it decides that extraordinary events, related to the subject matter of this Treaty, have jeopardized the supreme interests of its country. It shall give notice of such withdrawal to all other Parties to the Treaty and to the United Nations Security Council three months in advance. Such notice shall include a statement of the extraordinary events it regards as having jeopardized its supreme interests. A national revolution surely qualifies as an extraordinary event. > [@Riga\_Marole](#): > > I don’t care how many times your pit bull snarls at me. I’m going to start packing a can of mace. And to hell with all the other signatories to an anti-mace treaty? ETA: I find this aspect fairly amusing…you and **elucidator** complain about the U.S. imposing its will, and how the U.S. acts like other countries only exist by its benefice. Meanwhile, you advocate a policy by which _only the U.S. matters_. Iran signed a treaty? Doesn’t count, the U.S. did them wrong once, and arguably broke a different treaty. Other nations want sanctions, through the UN? Doesn’t matter, the U.S. is mean. If you want the U.S. to be less of a bully, shouldn’t you act like you care what China, Russia, Germany, the UK, France, et al think? > [@Riga Marole](#): > > The Geneva Convention Rules were ratified by 195 states of their own free will. I wonder why the U.S. signed it? So you have no answer, then? ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2013, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/696 "2013-12-24T15:43:02Z")
Humpty Dumpty had a great fall. > [@Magiver](#): > > and you are unable to distinguish between calling for new sanctions and actually delivering new sanctions. > [@Ravenman](#): > > I never once said Obama instituted new sanctions. I don’t believe he did, and I don’t think that’s **Magiver** ’s point either. Ravenman said he agreed with Magiver in order to try to refute me. Then Ravenman came back with the excuse that he thinks Magiver meant something else when he used the clear phrase that Obama is currently ‘actually delivering \*\*new sanctions’ \*\* in an earlier reply to me. Why these points matter? First of all it is my view that the position of some US Senators, up to and including the present moment, are hell bent on disrupting the negotiations by calling for new tough sanctions that may excite and promote the hardliners in Iran to cast aside the moderates in Iran and get the negotiation path to a settlement derailed. These Senators are extremists on this issue and should not be given their way. Secondly these extremist Senators are unintentionally assisting the most extremist neocon movement in the US to weaken Obama as he tries to keep the interim deal moving forward to a place where military involvement can be taken off the table. They weaken him by helping to convince the public that Obama has not been ‘tough enough’ on Iran. The extremists have thus far according to the Fox News poll I cited been successful in that regard. 68 percent think Obama has not been tough enough on Iran. They have not convinced Americans however that a military strike is needed right now. But they are moving in a direction that could scuttle this deal and the potential for military action increases if the deal does fall apart. So bottom line is that Magiver’s belief that Obama is delivering \*\*\*new sanctions \*\*\* by enforcing existing sanctions is part of the attempt by extremists on Iran to dismiss Obama’s opposition to the actual \*\*‘new sanctions’ \*\* that the extremists want Obama to enforce. You see Magiver’s choice of phrasing makes Obama look hypocritical to oppose those extremist Senators on Iran, with many of them being Democrats. And then Ravenman’s murky endorsement of Magivers changes to the meanings of words here, puts some additional seasoning on the extremist recipe for military action prevailing on Iran. Ravenman’s ingredient has escalated to say that Obama is \*\*splitting hairs \*\*on \*\*enforcing old sanctions \*\*versus \*\*delivering new sanctions \*\*altogether. I think Ravenman is wrong to jump into bed with Magiver on this, because Magiver has written in support of regime change on Iran. Going to that extreme is a recipe for war not a recipe for a diplomatic resolution to this standoff. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2013, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/697 "2013-12-24T16:02:54Z")
So why do we even care about Iran getting nukes? Does anyone think they will use them? If the nutjobs over in North Korea don’t use their nukes (not even to threaten people with), then what makes us think that the significantly more sane regime in Iran will start blowing shit up? Would we even care if it wasn’t for Israel and oil? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2013, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/698 "2013-12-24T16:34:41Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > So why do we even care about Iran getting nukes? Does anyone think they will use them? > > If the nutjobs over in North Korea don’t use their nukes (not even to threaten people with), then what makes us think that the significantly more sane regime in Iran will start blowing shit up? > > Would we even care if it wasn’t for Israel and oil? Well, the fewer nukes, the better. Hence the NNPT. And if Iran gets them, there is an expectation that Saudi Arabia will, too. Then, maybe Egypt. Sort of like the Domino Theory (don’t laugh). NK has nothing to do with Israel or oil, and few countries wanted to see them get nukes. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2013, 4:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/699 "2013-12-24T16:48:59Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > I think Ravenman is wrong to jump into bed with Magiver on this, because Magiver has written in support of regime change on Iran. Going to that extreme is a recipe for war not a recipe for a diplomatic resolution to this standoff. Youve already said you agree with me, so I don’t know why you keep flip flopping. If you agree with me, which you do, you’re now making an argument that you agree with **Magiver**. Now you’re constructing an argument that we all agree with neocons. Then you deny that you agree with John Bolton. It just doesn’t make sense! But here’s something you cannot deny: you supported a war authorization in Iraq to bring Iraq’s WMD to an end. Now you’re saying that anyone who supports sanctions is an extremist. You can’t even be consistent with your policies toward countries whose names start with I in the Mideast! You were happy to threaten Iraq with an unjustified war, but lose your cool over a letter that isn’t very controversial at all. You cannot explain this. You can’t describe it. There is no reason here, only flailing, failing, fanning and fluxing. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2013, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/700 "2013-12-24T16:53:42Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > But here’s something you cannot deny: you supported a war authorization in Iraq to bring Iraq’s WMD to an end. Now you’re saying that anyone who supports sanctions is an extremist. You can’t even be consistent with your policies toward countries whose names start with I in the Mideast! You were happy to threaten Iraq with an unjustified war, but lose your cool over a letter that isn’t very controversial at all. It’s Christmas, and the Baby Jesus is going to weep if we get back into that subject. Please, let’s not send this thread down that path!!! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300.md?page=34) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300.md?page=36)