The Missile Impasse In the Iran Negotiations
Lasrick writes: Upon resuming talks to end the nuclear crisis with the P5+1 (the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, plus Germany) in 2013, Iran made it clear that its missile program was behind a redline and would not be negotiated away. The missile program, Tehran argued, was an entirely separate issue from the nuclear program, part of the country's conventional capabilities and not aimed at deploying non-conventional weapons such as nuclear warheads. Last week, Tehran's missile program arose—seemingly suddenly—as an obstacle with the potential to derail the process altogether. Ariane Tabatabai explores the fascinating history of Iran's missile program, the largest in the Middle East, and asks whether negotiators for countries that hold such diametrically opposed views of the Iranian missile program can reach a compromise. We should know the answer to that within the next day or two.
Or the entire middle east keeps giving Israel the free pass to bomb Iran's missile and nuclear programs back into the stone age, the rest of the world poo poos Israel for it while quietly making sure there's nothing left but rubble, and the status quo resumes.
A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
American style - if everyone had a gun, everyone would be safe right? So if everyone has nukes, world peace!
At least someone steps up to do the dirty work.
Do you think that a country that thinks it's progressive with it's recent legislation permitting woman to attend sports matches should be allowed to have nuclear capacity... in this day and age?
Think about this, woman got the right to vote in 1920 in the US, when the cutting edge was a biplane.
That's almost 100 years and they haven't even figured out how to be civil, much less have access to 70 year old technology.
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B - D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
It's hard to believe that Obama and Kerry are dumb enough to actually trust the Iranians to stick to a "deal" but .... the facts speak for themselves.
So why DO they want a "deal" at all costs? Do they think it will win political capital? Is this to be another of Obama's great "accomplishments"?
I'm not deluded enough to believe that any nation has the "right" to nuke another nation because they aren't as "progressive" they are
Starts out so well
And there is nothing "civil" about the state of Israel.
Then goes completely nuts. If you had nukes and people launching rockets at you 24/7 how long do you think you'd be able to stop from eliminating the problem ?
See the Israelis are likely a hell of a lot more civil than you are.
Israel has had nuclear weapons for over 30 years and have not used them or even threatened to use them. They don't hold weekly "Death to Iran" parades and their leaders don't make speeches aimed at the elimination of Iran. Granted Israel is certainly not afraid to employ their conventional weapons when threatened. And they don't waste time gathering a consensus or asking permission or approval from the US or any other country.
As of 2014, 44 people in TOTAL have died from rocket/mortar/explosive attacks launched at Israel (almost all from mortar attacks, btw, which is not the issue being discussed).
In 2012, 263 people died in car accidentsin Israel.
Perhaps Israel should also nuke Detroit?
For reference Israeli security forces (NOT the army) kill more Palestinians than that per year in 'security checks'
Last years 'summer offensive' by the Israeli army (you know, the one to protect themselves from the horrific bloodshed caused by the rockets) killed over 2300 Palestinians. many women and children.
Tell me, what exact definition of civil do you use, because that certainly doesnt look very civil to me.
Or perhaps you mean the version of civil where their navy turns away sanctioned food and medical aid to the Palestinians?
Or the one where the bulldoze Palestinian towns so they can move their own settlers in?
I'm confused, perhaps you can let me know which version of Civil they are.
It's hard to believe that Obama and Kerry are dumb enough to actually trust the Iranians to stick to a "deal" but .... the facts speak for themselves.
I never understood all the Iran bashing. Yes Iran is screwed up but so are a great number of Countries the US does business with regularly. What's the difference? Iran certainly isn't the worst.
For example If I had to pick between living in Saudi Arabia our dearest friend and Iran our worst enemy I would choose Iran in a heartbeat no contest not even close.
Saudi Arabia has more than its fair share of lazy inbred entitled fuckwits who export terror and religious fundamentalism (Wahhabi schools) while treating their women like total shit. 80% of 9/11 hijackers were Saudi citizens yet all the western media is full of nothing but Anti-Iran propaganda and Saudi ass-kissing because various geopolitical calculations disfavoring Persians (Oil and Mecca)
So why DO they want a "deal" at all costs? Do they think it will win political capital? Is this to be another of Obama's great "accomplishments"?
I don't know about "all costs" I think they really want a deal because it is better than any realistic alternative... Also I'm pretty sure making such deals with Iran costs them more political capitol than the Obama administration has left.