Except that Iran currently does not have that capability.
Look. This “deal” is only an interim step to buy some bargaining time for both sides. It’s not the final deal. We will know in 6 months what the landscape looks like, and Congress is going to come down hard on Obama if he tries and let this go beyond 6 months without getting what they feel we need to get. Say what you will about Obama, but Congress is extremely tough on Iran. They are not going to let things slide.
That’s one of my biggest concerns. Sometimes in negotiation it makes sense to give the other side breathing room. But only if either (1) you yourself will get something of equal or greater value; or (2) you are satisfied that the other side will use its breathing room in good faith.
I don’t see what the West is getting out of this interim deal which is so valuable compared to what Iran is getting out of it. Nor do I see solid evidence that Iran is serious about giving up its aim to develop nuclear weapons.
It isn’t our system to bring down, its theirs. I think it would be good if we got that through our heads. Woulda have even better if we had figured it out fifty years ago.
Which is US neocon-driven hype and fearmongering in hopes of convincing Americans to support the idea of bombing Iran over nuclear power.
What you do not appear to deal with is that a neocon driven campaign to bomb Iran out of having even a peaceful nuclear power program and capability is terrible policy because of the moderates in Iran support for it.
But if you do not wish to discuss this part of the issue because you oddly support the neocon side of it I understand your dilemma.
How on earth you got that out of my post I can only guess. You would do best to stick to what I post, and not what you imagine I might be thinking since, in most cases, you will be wrong.
However, if this is another attempt to get everyone to not only agree with you on the issue, but also agree on some unique “reasoning” you have used to get to your position, I’ll decline to play that game.
Once again, you can’t have it both ways. Either IAEA inspections have been sufficient, or they don’t know what the Iranians are up to. Since the agreement specifically increases IAEA access to nuclear sites (including inspector access to existing facilities, new declarations regarding the Arak reactor which could be used to produce plutonium, and new access centrifuge production sites, among other things), surely the P5 did not insist than Iran agree to things that were already happening.
But again, I’m sure you’re not here to argue the substance. It’s just another episode in the “adopt any line of argument that is critical of Obama” road show.
What you think about unique reasoning has nothing to do with what I’m telling you. There is nothing unique about it. When the deal was announced it was two thirds were in favor of diplomacy - I just saw a poll today that favoring diplomacy is now an even split with a bunch of undecideds.
And since you and Magiver prefer to knock the diplomacy as a sideshow by Iran then we must thank you in part for spreading the neocon war hype.
You said, and I quote: “In the absence of the agreement, there would be no substantive IAEA inspections to confirm what Iran has.”
This was a patently false statement on your part. There IAEA has been inspecting them all along. The agreement does nothing but give a cash strapped government money to forward their weapons program. It’s North Korea all over again on. When they succeed in the other components there is nothing stopping them from kicking out the inspectors and making weapons grade material. All they need is time and money and we’ve given them both which cancels out the internal economic leverage the sanctions created.
So when you said we don’t know what Iran has, you weren’t actually trying to make a serious point.
This is such a joke. We have $100 billion in frozen Iranian assets, a total that’s going up all the time. Iran has a budget deficit of $35 billion with no means to finance it due to the sanctions. Under this agreement, they get about a billion dollars per month. That’s not “canceling out” internal economic leverage. It’s also pretty lame to suggest that $500 million in sanctions relief to buy auto parts is going to be diverted to their nuclear program, because the last time I checked you don’t need brake lights and catalytic converters for enrichment activities.
I’ll put my record of partisanship against yours any single fucking day of the week. Seriously.
We don’t know if they’re hiding anything and the increased inspections won’t change that.
I didn’t say it canceled it out. Another strawman on your part. A billion dollars a month is money they didn’t have before. They can continue on their present course and they now have 12 billion dollars more per year to make the trains run on time.
Ah, yes. Didn’t you say the same thing about Saddam?
I had no idea that quoting you constitutes a straw man: “All they need is time and money and we’ve given them both which cancels out the internal economic leverage the sanctions created.” What’s next, I use your name in a post and you call it an ad hominem?
I think you need to read the newspapers, because the deal expires in six months and the total sanctions relief is $7 billion parceled out over that time. Again I must wonder if you’re just not familiar with these basic facts of the agreement and choosing to ignore them in favor of this $12 billion nonsense, or if you’re throwing out these figures knowing that they are bullshit.
Anytime. Seriously. Go ahead and open up a thread about your non partisan bona fides. I suggest doing it in the Pit, because that’s where parody threads go.
As you should already be aware the 6 month timeline is linked to the next agreement. So there are 2 possibilities, they continue the monitoring (which they were already doing anyway) and the flow of money continues or they don’t.
They are either working on a weapon or they’re not. If they’re not we’re supporting their economy and Hezbollah. If they are we’re supporting an atomic weapon and Hezbollah.