Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a “troll” by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldn’t be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg “It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill,” is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points – Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

Obama negotiates "peace in his time"...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Re: Obama negotiates &quot;peace in his time&quot;...

    Originally posted by Jihad4Beer View Post
    lol....oh come on, don't pretend to care about foreign people dying in war.

    You're a Republican. Act like one.
    I am.

    And I am.

    It is YOU that choose to put the lives of millions in jeopardy just so your Lord and Master can boost his crappy poll numbers. I'm pointing out your hypocrisy...

    Again...

    מה מכילות החדשות?


    • #62
      Re: Obama negotiates &quot;peace in his time&quot;...

      Originally posted by eohrnberger View Post
      Well, I have to admit that I recall the press conference Chamberlin held at the airport, I believe it was, holding up a piece of paper and declaring that it was peace in our time, and the piece of paper turned out to be meaningless.



      You can believe that Iran is going to comply, but I don't believe it. I think that Iran is playing Obama like a patsy, from the perspective that Obama is so desperate right now to change the conversation away from his big lie ObamaCare, oh, excuse me, Un-Affordable-Try-To-Get-Care, that Obamas' in a weak position and is ready to bargain, ready to give in a bunch, which is clear he did, in that Israel is screaming as are the Saudis.

      Saudi's playing us, we play Saudis back. We buy a lot of their oil, they need a buyer, and our Navy keeps the straights clear for commercial shipping. So there's a co-dependance, buyer and seller, protector and protectorate. They after all, bought all the oil and fuel we needed for the first Gulf war. I think we have more common interests than disparate interests.
      Never said I believed that Iran was going to comply. I was pointing out the intelligence of putting Iran on notice. And yes, the agreement Chamberlin got was useless: how do you think the allies were convinced to be involved?

      מה מכילות החדשות?


      • #63
        Re: Obama negotiates &quot;peace in his time&quot;...

        Originally posted by reality View Post
        Sure cause that's what selling out the czechs was about. "making an offer" for form's sake because yall are distantly related. Riiiighhhhhhhhhhhhhhhht.

        We should just pull all foreign aid or government monies spent on nations that don't toe the line we set. "No ticky no laundry" to quote the departed.
        We shouldn't be supporting the israelis the saudis or the iranians. Let them handle their own shit.
        You're going to have to link the Czechs up. I know we got involved, but I've forgotten your reference.

        מה מכילות החדשות?


        • #64
          Re: Obama negotiates &quot;peace in his time&quot;...

          Originally posted by FearandLoathing View Post
          ...
          To say this will bring peace is like saying you can calm down a gun fight by adding bigger guns. There is no way in hell, Israel is not going to at least dramatically escalate its nuke program, or not do a run and gun raid on Tehran.

          Look at Israel's record. Does anyone actually believe they are going top simply sit there?
          Precisely because Israel won't simply sit there. They likely don't need to increase their nuke arsenal much, if at all. Better delivery system, faster ballistic missile? Maybe, but not more nukes. ...Unless you are claiming that Israel would need to take out more than 3 or 4 targets to disable Iran. Perhaps Israel would need to attack all the outraged neighbors of Iran?

          Oh wait, I just remembered, Iran's allies in the neighborhood could be counted on one hand, with a couple or three fingers missing.

          Here's the scenario, just in case Iran uses this treacherous 6 month break to develop nuclear warheads with all the bells and whistles to deliver them to it's infidel enemies:
          Bibi: (on the phone) "...No shit. Our sources confirm they have 3 warheads, but haven't yet mounted them on the missiles they stole last Wednesday from North Dakota?"
          (listens a minute, responds)..."OK, we'll try the sappers first, only use 2 strikes to take out all three if that doesn't work."
          (Goes back to eating his lunch. Gets a call 30 minutes later). "Uh huh...OK, good! Did they get out clean? ....Great! ....No, don't say shit to the press. I'll address it 3 hours from now." (Line 2 rings, Bibi picks up) "Yes, Sheik Yerbouti, how are you? ...Oh, you are more than welcome, it was a pleasure. ....No, no, I'd like to cut those bastards' throats more than you, but this will get our point across. ...You need to express concern about our attack on Iran on TV later, but will issue statements that indirectly back our actions within a week? ...OK, makes sense. Take care."

          Israel is in the best position to deal with Iran's violations, and they can do it from intel to execution, immediately. They already have proven that point. I understand the US requirement to posture as if we are the only ones who can save the world. So, by all means, the hawks should carry on... keep up the Hollywood image and all that.

          מה מכילות החדשות?


          • #65
            Re: Obama negotiates &quot;peace in his time&quot;...

            Originally posted by Jihad4Beer View Post
            Right. Israel needs America. America does not need Israel. The groveling for Israel and Bibi especially from Americans, especially those on the right is just embarassing.

            If anything makes America look like a laughing stock in the eyes of the world, it's how America grovels for this tiny little nation called Israel.
            We didn't need the British, or be involved in Europe in either world war.

            But it was still the right thing to do.

            מה מכילות החדשות?


            • #66
              Re: Obama negotiates &quot;peace in his time&quot;...

              Originally posted by tsquare View Post
              I am.

              And I am.

              It is YOU that choose to put the lives of millions in jeopardy just so your Lord and Master can boost his crappy poll numbers. I'm pointing out your hypocrisy...

              Again...
              Charming.....

              מה מכילות החדשות?


              • #67
                Re: Obama negotiates &quot;peace in his time&quot;...

                Originally posted by Commodore View Post
                We didn't need the British, or be involved in Europe in either world war.

                But it was still the right thing to do.
                Not remotely the same thing.

                מה מכילות החדשות?


                • #68
                  Re: Obama negotiates &quot;peace in his time&quot;...

                  Originally posted by Jihad4Beer View Post
                  Charming.....
                  Yes, that is most people's reaction.

                  But I find it unseemly to talk about it.

                  מה מכילות החדשות?


                  • #69
                    Re: Obama negotiates &quot;peace in his time&quot;...

                    Originally posted by Jihad4Beer View Post
                    Not remotely the same thing.
                    How is it different?

                    מה מכילות החדשות?


                    • #70
                      Re: Obama negotiates &quot;peace in his time&quot;...

                      Originally posted by Commodore View Post
                      How is it different?
                      well....

                      A) Iran is hardly Nazi Germany in terms of industrial and technological ability required to be a formiddable military.

                      B) This is not some pivotal moment in global history where two different ideologies are competing for global dominance.

                      מה מכילות החדשות?


                      • #71
                        Re: Obama negotiates &quot;peace in his time&quot;...

                        Originally posted by Jihad4Beer View Post
                        well....

                        A) Iran is hardly Nazi Germany in terms of industrial and technological ability required to be a formidable military.
                        Nazi Germany was never significantly more advanced than its neighbors. Hitler built his empire on tactics, and then promptly lost it when his foes figured them out. The Germans could produce very good stuff, but not in quantities that could make a lasting difference.

                        Iran's urban guerrilla tactics are battle proven all over the region, and we have yet to devise a politically effective counter.
                        Originally posted by Jihad4Beer View Post
                        B) This is not some pivotal moment in global history where two different ideologies are competing for global dominance.
                        At any moment a few well aimed Iranian missiles could bottle up the Persian Gulf for months, plunging the world into a new energy crisis and recession.

                        But neither actually address the real principles behind us supporting a free country in a sea of hostile and tyrannical neighbors.

                        מה מכילות החדשות?


                        • #72
                          Re: Obama negotiates &quot;peace in his time&quot;...

                          Originally posted by Commodore View Post
                          Nazi Germany was never significantly more advanced than its neighbors. Hitler built his empire on tactics, and then promptly lost it when his foes figured them out. The Germans could produce very good stuff, but not in quantities that could make a lasting difference.

                          Iran's urban guerrilla tactics are battle proven all over the region, and we have yet to devise a politically effective counter.

                          At any moment a few well aimed Iranian missiles could bottle up the Persian Gulf for months, plunging the world into a new energy crisis and recession.

                          But neither actually address the real principles behind us supporting a free country in a sea of hostile and tyrannical neighbors.
                          First you hyped the threat of Iran by comparing them to Nazi Germany.
                          And now you're downplaying the ability of Nazi Germany.

                          You sir are arguing to argue. But that's what most people do on here, so it's ok.

                          מה מכילות החדשות?


                          • #73
                            Re: Obama negotiates &quot;peace in his time&quot;...

                            Originally posted by Jihad4Beer View Post
                            First you hyped the threat of Iran by comparing them to Nazi Germany.
                            And now you're downplaying the ability of Nazi Germany.

                            You sir are arguing to argue. But that's what most people do on here, so it's ok.
                            Such people are known as contrarians.

                            מה מכילות החדשות?


                            • #74
                              Re: Obama negotiates &quot;peace in his time&quot;...

                              To inject a couple of facts in the discussion : The deal in question was negotiated by the so-called "5+ 1 group" (US, Britain, France, Russia (!), China (!), Germany) under the mediation of the EU´s foreign secretary, Catherine Ashton, in Geneva. Switzerland.
                              The deal brings on board nations that have most of the time acted as adversaries in the Near East ( which is part of the problem), and it became possible because Iran has a new president ( which some appear to have missed). Mr. Rouhani is quite clearly working on opening his country ( became f.e. the first iranian president to wish Jews worldwide a happy Rosh Hashana), wether he can stand up to the hardliners at home also depends on his success on the diplomatic front ( getting sanctions lifted that choke the iranian economy f.e.). Since his mainly young, middle class and urban voters care less about nukes or Israel than about jobs and more personal freedom. That means the West would have been silly not to at least accept the offer for negotiations. At least if we are interested in helping a success of those people in Teheran that openly talk about ending the countrys confrontation with the West after three decades. And some of them sit in the new governement.
                              Currently Iran has no complete nuclear fuel cycle ( a reprocessing plant is missing). Additionally the deal would stop them making uranium enriched above 5 %, put their 20 % enriched uranium under IAEA (the International Atomic Energy Association) control, not allow them to install more centrifuges, and freeze all construction ( and basically any activity except maintenance) on nuclear sites for an initial six months ( while negotiations about normalization continue).
                              While efforts to cheat can obviously never be ruled out, that would at least be very hard under the terms of the deal (and the Iranians have strong incentives not to do it). Since Iran grants international inspectors access not only to its nuclear sites, and does so DAILY, including uranium enrichment, centrifuge facilities etc., international inspectors would inevitably notice if any "sharp" uranium would dissappear, f.e. to a secret plant, since they are controlling the 20 % stickpile. That means to continue working on nuclear weapons would mean to be having to develop an entire secret nuclear cycle while the IAEA AND foreign intelligence services are watching ( and nuclear warheads aren´t exactly stuff that can be made in garages). And that is probably more unlikely than the contrary.
                              That the Israelis are unhappy with the deal has several reasons, and only one of them is scepticism related to security. Others include f.e. the generous military aid from the US. If the "iranian threat" could be settled, or at least considerably diluted, especially if non-bloody, the israeli "defence industry" looses billions. And israeli settlement of the West Bank may come back in western focus, if the evil mullahs cannot be used as a smokescreen anymore. The "naysayers" often rethorically reproduce the policy agenda of other players on the Near Eastern stage, such as Israel and/or Saudi Arabia. This deal might still fail for a variety of reasons, but it is most certainly better than endlessly prolonging a dissatisfactory status quo. Since those that profit from the current situation are neither the peoples of Iran nor US/Europe......

                              Iran nuclear agreement: Q&A | World news | theguardian.com

                              There are also israeli commentators supportive of the deal by the way :

                              http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomac...emium-1.559860
                              Last edited by Voland; 11-26-2013, 02:15 AM.

                              מה מכילות החדשות?


                              • #75
                                Re: Obama negotiates &quot;peace in his time&quot;...

                                Also the Jerusalem Post ( unsuspicious to have dovish leanings on security or military matters) doesn´t view the deal as bad in principle :

                                Deal on Iran sanctions relief strikes good balance, experts say | JPost | Israel News


                                The $7 billion of sanctions relief that Iran won in Sunday’s interim nuclear deal struck a good balance, offering Iranian President Hassan Rouhani a domestic win while leaving the Iranian economy in enough pain to keep them negotiating, according to several experts......“I personally found the sanctions relief to be extremely modest at this stage,” he said. “I’m even surprised Iran took the deal at all, because I see it as fairly one sided. Iran gave up a lot here.”....Meir Javedanfar, an Iranian- born scholar who teaches at the Interdisciplinary Center in Herzliya, said, “The amount of sanctions lifted as part of the interim deal are by no means sufficient to save the Iranian economy from the downward spiral that it’s been facing for the last year.”....“It’s just an interim deal,” Javendanfar said. “Will someone tell the prime minister to calm down?”

                                מה מכילות החדשות?

                                Working...
                                X