# 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:** 5
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2013, 1:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/81 "2013-11-24T13:51:13Z")
> [@Ibn\_Warraq](#): > > You mean the way the US used nukes in response to 911 or the way the US bombed Iran after the Iranian catspaw Hezbollah blew up 240 Marines? 9-11 wasn’t a nuclear attack. And besides, the Bush Administration was looking for an excuse to conquer Iraq, not nuke them or even the people actually responsible. And you are actually trying to compare killing some Marines to nuking a city? ---
**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:** [November 24, 2013, 2:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/82 "2013-11-24T14:29:50Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > Why would Democrat Poltician’s constituents be pissed about the Iran deal? Because it allows Iran to continue enrichment-- the same reason Eliot Engel (D-NY, the Ranking Member on the House Foreign Affairs Committee) is saying right now on CNN that he disappointed. ---
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2013, 2:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/83 "2013-11-24T14:46:07Z")
> [@Alessan](#): > > My take on the whole deal: > > Neither Obama nor Netanyahu were ever going to bomb Iran. It’s just not in their nature. I knew it, they knew it, the Iranians knew it. So instead, we got the only thing we could have expected to get - a face-saving agreement that will have no actual effect on the real world. So the U.S. gets to play peacemaker, Israel gets to play Cassandra, and Iran gets to be a nuclear power. I could have told you that a month ago. Disagree. If they continue going doŵn this route if going to be difficult if not impossible politically for Iran to take the last steps necessary. ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2013, 3:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/84 "2013-11-24T15:59:46Z")
What this agreement does, if complied with and properly enforced, is essentially put a freeze on the current program, get rid of their stockpile of 20% enriched uranium and only allows them to produce 5% enriched uranium. It’s a stop gap, and not a long term solution. But short term, I don’t think it is “that bad.” The devil will absolutely be in the details, and if there is any problem at all getting the required daily inspections and we see signs Iran is trying to continue enriching to 20% in secret then the full sanctions would need to come back immediately or this will just end up being like the Carter-brokered agreement in the 90s with Pyongyang that just resulted in them continuing to develop their nuclear weapons program in secret. The positive to this is, if Iran complies with it, the timeline for them “rapidly” enriching enough material to quickly throw together a bomb is extended by several months. With a stockpile of 20% enriched uranium they can relatively quickly get it to weapons grade and assemble a bomb. Limited in producing more, and being required to get rid of that stockpile then **if** the inspection regime works we would know months in advance if Iran was trying to go back to its old ways and presumably we’d be able to respond in some way. For the six month duration of the agreement that is probably a decent enough deal. Long term I suspect the willpower of the Western powers would wane and the Iranians would go back to their old ways, just more covertly. Then when they get caught, you’ll have dovish types saying “well, the evidence isn’t clear cut…” and the P5+1 will hand wrangle for months to year while Iran gets across the finish line with weapons development. That’s why for this agreement to have any real benefit long term it has to be converted into a real, enforceable and more broad permanent agreement during this six month window. If that doesn’t happen I see nothing long term that stops Iran from getting the bomb. ---
**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:** [November 24, 2013, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/85 "2013-11-24T16:16:23Z")
Definitely a kick the can down the road strategy. I guess we’ll see what really happens in 6 months. But it will be Congress, and not Obama, who will be The Decider as to whether or not Iran has lived up to its end of the bargain. Meanwhile, are the Sunday Talk Shows ever abuzz this morning! I usually hate to speculate about this type of shit, but how long before someone like Limbaugh accuses Obama of cutting a crappy deal in order to shift news off the ACA? ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2013, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/86 "2013-11-24T16:17:44Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Because it allows Iran to continue enrichment-- the same reason Eliot Engel (D-NY, the Ranking Member on the House Foreign Affairs Committee) is saying right now on CNN that he disappointed. Huge news :rolleyes: Yet another pro-Israel Am pol. Meanwhile, I say it’s is time for full sanctions against Israel until it allows full access/disclosure to its nuclear, chemical and biological weapons facilities. Hypocrisy thay name is Netanhayu and his extreme-wing cohorts. I’ve said for quite some time that Iran’s Gov would be quite irresponsible to its people if they didn’t follow the nuclear option – no stopping them – unless Israel wants to go at it _alone_…what are the odds of that? [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu attends the weekly cabinet meeting at his office in Jerusalem, Israel, Sunday, Nov. 24, 2013. After feverishly trying to derail the international community’s nuclear deal with Iran in recent weeks, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu now has little choice but to accept an agreement that he has derided as deeply flawed](http://bigstory.ap.org/article/israel-minister-iran-deal-based-deceit) – Fucking right wing nutter. Want to see a ‘flaw’? Look in the mirror. Or suck it. ---
**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:** [November 24, 2013, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/87 "2013-11-24T16:21:36Z")
Maybe it’s different in Europe, but it’s pretty amazing how little attention (that is, none) the Israeli nuclear program gets from the US media. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2013, 4:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/88 "2013-11-24T16:27:05Z")
Juan Cole’s take – always worth a look when it comes to US/Muslim relations: [**US-Iran War Averted by Agreement to Negotiate on Nuclear Enrichment**](http://www.juancole.com/2013/11/agreement-negotiate-enrichment.html) Not worth reading by extremists due to health issues. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2013, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/89 "2013-11-24T16:31:51Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Maybe it’s different in Europe, but it’s pretty amazing how little attention (that is, none) the Israeli nuclear program gets from the US media. Agreed. An although it is is mentioned more by some European Media, the result is the same – as much as some criticize, no one does anything about it. Hey, once you have nukes, the ‘respect’ comes right along with it. See N.K. ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2013, 4:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/90 "2013-11-24T16:35:49Z")
> [@AK84](#): > > Disagree. If they continue going doŵn this route if going to be difficult if not impossible politically for Iran to take the last steps necessary. Maybe I’m just used to temporary Middle Eastern agreements turning into de facto permanent agreements. ---
**Author:** ![Stratocaster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stratocaster/32/16393_2.png) [@Stratocaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stratocaster)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2013, 5:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/91 "2013-11-24T17:14:31Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Meanwhile, are the Sunday Talk Shows ever abuzz this morning! I usually hate to speculate about this type of shit, but how long before someone like Limbaugh accuses Obama of cutting a crappy deal in order to shift news off the ACA? From [Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), the second-ranking Senate Republican](http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/11/23/congressional-reaction-to-the-iran-nuclear-deal/?hpid=z1): > [@](#): > > Amazing what WH will do to distract attention from O-care So, not long. 😃 ---
**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:** [November 24, 2013, 6:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/92 "2013-11-24T18:22:41Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > It will be interesting to hear what [Senator Chuck Schumer](http://www.schumer.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=345784&) has to say about easing sanctions on Iran. > [@Stratocaster](#): > > From [Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), the second-ranking Senate Republican](http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/11/23/congressional-reaction-to-the-iran-nuclear-deal/?hpid=z1):So, not long. 😃 Well, now we know what Chuck Schumer is saying: > [@](#): > > As for additional sanctions, this disproportionality of this agreement makes it more likely that Democrats and Republicans will join together and pass additional sanctions when we return in December. I intend to discuss that possibility with my colleagues. ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2013, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/93 "2013-11-24T18:33:56Z")
> [@RedFury](#): > > I’ve said for quite some time that Iran’s Gov would be quite irresponsible to its people if they didn’t follow the nuclear option – no stopping them – unless Israel wants to go at it _alone_…what are the odds of that? The sanctions are crippling Iran’s economy, building a nuclear weapon does nothing to increase Iran’s safety. They will quickly see a Saudi bomb and now you have a mini-Cold War with both sides aiming nukes at each other and all it takes is a few mistakes and a nuclear exchange happens. So actually going nuclear is not at all to the benefit of the Iranian people. I actually do think the current Ayatollah doesn’t want to go full nuclear. I think he wants to have everything in place to assemble a bomb very rapidly if needed, but I don’t think he wants to have a stockpile of nuclear weapons. I should note developing nuclear weapons certainly hasn’t helped North Korea at all. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2013, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/94 "2013-11-24T19:00:06Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > I am worried about them detonating a nuclear device in a clandestine manner that makes it hard for us to retaliate. I should **hope** it would be hard for us to retaliate – at least, to retaliate in kind. Two wrongs, etc. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2013, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/95 "2013-11-24T19:01:33Z")
> [@Alessan](#): > > Maybe I’m just used to temporary Middle Eastern agreements turning into de facto permanent agreements. And so what if this one does? What matters is that the Iranians just agreed to IAEA monitoring. [Also:](http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/24/world/meast/iran-nuclear-deal/) > [@](#): > > **All about enrichment** > > The White House and Zarif both insist that the agreement meets their expectations on the issue of uranium enrichment. > > Iran has consistently said it is enriching uranium and building nuclear reactors only for peaceful civilian energy needs. Nuclear power plants use uranium that is enriched to 5%. It’s the fuel that the plants use to generate electricity. > > The White House has said Iran’s enrichment may not go above that. > > **Iran must also dilute, to at or below 5%, half of its stockpile of near-20% enriched uranium and convert the rest to a form not suitable for further enrichment before the end of the initial phase of the deal.** > > It may not turn on certain centrifuges, the devices used to enrich uranium, that have not yet been brought on line. > > This is in line with the terms of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, which Iran has signed onto. It requires Tehran not to create nuclear weapons or enable other countries to obtain them. > > Iran has also agreed to what Kerry described as “unprecedented international monitoring” of its nuclear program. Quite enough to keep Israel safe, I should think. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2013, 4:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/96 "2013-11-25T04:29:48Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Because it allows Iran to continue enrichment-- the same reason Eliot Engel (D-NY, the Ranking Member on the House Foreign Affairs Committee) is saying right now on CNN that he disappointed. The question addressed to you was “Why would Democrat Politician’s constituents be pissed about the Iran deal?” Eliot Engel is not a Democrat politician’s constituent? I see no reason to dismiss this poll: [http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/11/21/cnn-poll-more-than-half-back-iranian-nuclear-deal/](http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/11/21/cnn-poll-more-than-half-back-iranian-nuclear-deal/) > [@](#): > > CNN Poll: More than half back Iranian nuclear deal > > Posted by CNN Political Editor Paul Steinhauser > > Washington (CNN) - A majority of Americans support an interim deal with Iran that would ease some economic sanctions on that country in exchange for concessions on Iran’s nuclear program, according to a new national poll. > > A CNN/ORC International survey released Thursday indicates that 56% of the public would favor an international agreement that would impose major restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program but not end it completely, with 39% opposed to such an agreement. > > “Predictably, there is a partisan divide on that issue, with two-thirds of Democrats favoring a deal along those lines but only 45% of Republicans agreeing with that view,” CNN Polling Director Keating Holland said. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2013, 5:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/97 "2013-11-25T05:07:12Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > And so what if this one does? What matters is that the Iranians just agreed to IAEA monitoring. [Also:](http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/24/world/meast/iran-nuclear-deal/) > > Quite enough to keep Israel safe, I should think. Possibly. But they’re not giving up their allotment of 20% enriched uranium. 20% enrichment doesn’t mean they’re 1/5th the way to fissile material. It’s not a linear process. [They’re more like 2 weeks away from weapons grade if they so chose](http://www.businessinsider.com/most-important-part-of-iran-deal-2013-11). Assuming they don’t have another enrichment facility we’ve gained additional inspection frequencies. What this does is buy them time. Actually it pays them for their time with relaxed sanctions. So the question is time for what. They don’t need it to enrich to fissile strength. For all practical purposes they’ve arrived at that point. What they haven’t demonstrated is the detonation expertise. Once that’s complete they are a nuclear power. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2013, 6:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/98 "2013-11-25T06:20:30Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > No, the same thing that has stopped anyone from doing so since other nations acquired nuclear weapons; fear of retaliation. If your idea would actually work the Soviets would have smuggled nukes into America during the Cold War; they didn’t because they knew we’d launch on them whether we found evidence it was them or not. uh, what? a nuclear device goes off and we just assume it’s Iran? Really? ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2013, 6:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/99 "2013-11-25T06:47:01Z")
> [@Martin\_Hyde](#): > > That being said, the position you espouse here may in fact be the single worst policy proposal I’ve seen in the history of American international relations. It’s based on weak, unrealistic, emotional thinking that is totally divorced from how nations behave, would hurt the United States and its standing in the world and achieve none of the things you assert it would achieve. I’m struggling to think of a dumber policy proposal in American diplomacy. Oh you! 😛 Always with the crazy talk! > [@Magiver](#): > > There is one huge difference between the Soviets having nuclear weapons and Iran. Iran is subject to the whims of a religious leader who is all kinds of crazy. There’s no difference. I think the Soviets hated us as much or more than Iran does. Look, I’m the first one in line when it comes to any topic about how bad religion is, and while I don’t trust the Mullahs as much as I can throw them, they are no small time suicide bombers. They are in a position of power, wealth, and influence and will not risk that for some little personal tiff. Hell, the revolt put them in power so they might be secretly thankful the Shah happened so they could seize power. They’re not going to nuke anyone, guaranteed. If North Korea hasn’t, then Iran certainly wouldn’t, I would bet almost anything on that which is why I feel absolutely safe with them having nukes ---
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2013, 8:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/100 "2013-11-25T08:53:10Z")
> [@Martin\_Hyde](#): > > So actually going nuclear is not at all to the benefit of the Iranian people. I actually do think the current Ayatollah doesn’t want to go full nuclear. I think he wants to have everything in place to assemble a bomb very rapidly if needed, but I don’t think he wants to have a stockpile of nuclear weapons. Over here nuclear experts have been saying that Iran has not been able to make the brakthrough’s necessary as of yet. They said that getting HEU is only part of the deal, you still have a long way to go even when you have enriched to the amount necessary. > [@](#): > > I should note developing nuclear weapons certainly hasn’t helped North Korea at all. It has kept them US Army free. > [@Magiver](#): > > Possibly. But they’re not giving up their allotment of 20% enriched uranium. 20% enrichment doesn’t mean they’re 1/5th the way to fissile material. It’s not a linear process. [They’re more like 2 weeks away from weapons grade if they so chose](http://www.businessinsider.com/most-important-part-of-iran-deal-2013-11). > > . Debatable wrt to the time table. As it is, getting to 90% enriched does not mean that they gave a bomb. There still is lot of work after that. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300.md?page=6)