Obeezy cuts historic nuclear deal w/ Iran. Israel is ? !!!
Options
Swiffness!
Members Posts: 10,128 ✭✭✭✭✭
Geneva, Switzerland (CNN) -- The diplomatic gridlock between Iran and the West seemed immovable for decades. But on Sunday, diplomats made history when Iran and six world powers came together on an agreement over Iran's nuclear program.
The deal dials back Iran's ability to work toward a nuclear weapon and at the same time loosens the choke hold of international sanctions on Iran's economy.
Iran has stumbled from one economic crisis to the next under the sanctions, and unemployment currently runs over 24%.
The two sides now have six months to find out how historic the breakthrough really is. That's the duration of the preliminary agreement...
@abasinfo
#BREAKING Iran enrichment is recognized. Iran oil sanctions will be stopped. Iran can sell oil at the same level. Oil revenues released
@NegarMortazavi
Iranians are so happy it almost feels like when the football team made it to the World Cup. Social Media full of happy comments. #IranTalks
@GEsfandiari
Woman in Tehran tells me she's crying from joy over nuclear deal. #Iran #Irantalks
@SaeedKD
For the first time in a decade, Iran's opposition and pro-regime supporters are largely united and rejoicing over Geneva deal
@ZekeJMiller
WH puts total effect of sanctions easing at $6.1 billion for Iran.
@HassanRouhani
Iranian people's vote for #moderation & constructive engagement + tireless efforts by negotiating teams are to open new horizons. #IranTalks
@JeffreyGoldberg
Obama has achieved one of his main goals, preventing an Israeli strike on Iran's nuclear facilities.
“There is no doubt that Netanyahu is a big loser in the Iran deal,” said Gil Hoffman, political editor at the Jerusalem Post. “His whole political career is built on two things: number one is that he persuaded Israelis that only he could protect them from Iran, and number two is his image as someone who could speak to the world in his perfect English in a persuasive way better than any other Israelis. And here he failed.”
n political circles, the primary reaction to the pact in Israel was alarm, both for the technical realities of the pact, and the political realities that Israel – which did so much to make the Iranian nuclear program a matter of global concern – no longer feels it is driving. “I’m worried twice over,” said Finance Minister Yair Lapid, whose Yesh Atid party emerged as a centrist power in the January elections. “Once from the agreement and its implications and I am also worried because we’ve lost the world’s ear. We have six months, at the end of which we need to be in a situation in which the Americans listen to us the way they used to listen to us in the past.”
Geneva deal seals Netanyahu’s legacy: An ineffectual leader
The prime minister wanted to 'save Israel.' He winds up alienated from the international community - and from his own base.
Benjamin Netanyahu entered politics waving the banner of refusing to surrender to terrorism. In practical terms, the question has been on the agenda since the Jibril prisoner-exchange deal in 1985, when terrorists, including murderers, were released in exchange for Israeli hostages. To his chagrin, he became prime minister quickly and broke his vows wholesale. Murderers were allowed to go free, Yasser Arafat became his partner and Hebron was handed over to the Palestinians. His term from 1996 to 1999 had no effect on the progress of history: It was as though it had never happened.
When he ran out of Palestinian cards, he pulled out the Iranian card. Just as the Hanukkah song asks, “Who can recount Israel’s mighty acts,” who can recount the heroic deeds of Benjamin? He will save the nation in blood, fire and columns of fallout, whether it needs saving or not. The military and intelligence chiefs told him there was no need, not yet, but they did not understand Netanyahu, or perhaps, they understood him all too well. The means - the military operation - became the goal. To overcome the internal resistance to a war that is premature and unnecessary, he gave Ehud Barak, his defense minister, a former commanding officer, and the man who defeated him in the elections, absolute freedom to instigate quarrels in the military's upper echelon.
The facts prove that all along, Netanyahu erred in his assessments and his policy. Those who said Iran would not have nuclear weapons before 2014 were right, as were those who strived to stop Iranian nuclear armament through non-military means — a mixture of dialogue and sanctions. If Netanyahu and Barak's plans between spring 2010 and spring 2011 had succeeded, Israel would now be dealing with the wounds of the first Iranian war and preparing for the second, while Iran’s efforts to build a nuclear bomb would be about to finish restoring their nuclear program.
Netanyahu exposed Israel’s weakness in Washington and its weakness without Washington. His head-on conflict with U.S. President Barack Obama showed the world that at the decisive moment, the president chose American considerations, leaving Israel unable to act independently.
...an Israeli military option isn’t in play, at least not at this stage. As long as there is such sweeping international support for the interim agreement, bombing Iran’s nuclear facilities would be political and diplomatic suicide.
Israel’s reaction is, predictably, apoplectic. Naftali Bennett, Israel’s economic minister, said, “If five years from now a nuclear suitcase explodes in New York or Madrid, it will be because of the deal that was signed this morning.” But Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will have trouble playing that card for long, since Israel is drastically isolated from the rest of the world and risks an open break with Washington. Already, some Israel leaders, such as President Shimon Peres and the newly installed leader of the Israeli Labor Party, have issued mild to moderate statement that undermine Netanyahu’s bluster. And, ironically, though, the harsh reaction from Israel will help Rouhani and Zarif sell the deal in Iran, since they can point to Israel’s criticism of the deal as a sign that it was, indeed, a victory for Iran’s “nuclear rights.”
hahaha, Israelis blaming Netanyahu for ? off Obama by basically campaigning for Romney last year. (Remember that?) I talked to Israelis last year and they were assuring me that Netanyahu was scaring the hell outta them with his Iran policy. Like, huge petitions begging him not to attack Iran unilaterally and alienate the U.S any further. He's ? done politically after this. WOO, Ric Flair ? .
"Amazing what WH will do to distract attention from O-care" - kingblaze84 (lol) Republican Senator John Cornyn
Secretary of State John Kerry was less than surprised to see Republicans criticize the administration on the agreement.
“Gee, you mean the members of the other party are criticizing the president? I can't imagine that,” he deadpanned to reporters
LMFAO
The deal dials back Iran's ability to work toward a nuclear weapon and at the same time loosens the choke hold of international sanctions on Iran's economy.
Iran has stumbled from one economic crisis to the next under the sanctions, and unemployment currently runs over 24%.
The two sides now have six months to find out how historic the breakthrough really is. That's the duration of the preliminary agreement...
@abasinfo
#BREAKING Iran enrichment is recognized. Iran oil sanctions will be stopped. Iran can sell oil at the same level. Oil revenues released
@NegarMortazavi
Iranians are so happy it almost feels like when the football team made it to the World Cup. Social Media full of happy comments. #IranTalks
@GEsfandiari
Woman in Tehran tells me she's crying from joy over nuclear deal. #Iran #Irantalks
@SaeedKD
For the first time in a decade, Iran's opposition and pro-regime supporters are largely united and rejoicing over Geneva deal
@ZekeJMiller
WH puts total effect of sanctions easing at $6.1 billion for Iran.
@HassanRouhani
Iranian people's vote for #moderation & constructive engagement + tireless efforts by negotiating teams are to open new horizons. #IranTalks
@JeffreyGoldberg
Obama has achieved one of his main goals, preventing an Israeli strike on Iran's nuclear facilities.
“There is no doubt that Netanyahu is a big loser in the Iran deal,” said Gil Hoffman, political editor at the Jerusalem Post. “His whole political career is built on two things: number one is that he persuaded Israelis that only he could protect them from Iran, and number two is his image as someone who could speak to the world in his perfect English in a persuasive way better than any other Israelis. And here he failed.”
n political circles, the primary reaction to the pact in Israel was alarm, both for the technical realities of the pact, and the political realities that Israel – which did so much to make the Iranian nuclear program a matter of global concern – no longer feels it is driving. “I’m worried twice over,” said Finance Minister Yair Lapid, whose Yesh Atid party emerged as a centrist power in the January elections. “Once from the agreement and its implications and I am also worried because we’ve lost the world’s ear. We have six months, at the end of which we need to be in a situation in which the Americans listen to us the way they used to listen to us in the past.”
Geneva deal seals Netanyahu’s legacy: An ineffectual leader
The prime minister wanted to 'save Israel.' He winds up alienated from the international community - and from his own base.
Benjamin Netanyahu entered politics waving the banner of refusing to surrender to terrorism. In practical terms, the question has been on the agenda since the Jibril prisoner-exchange deal in 1985, when terrorists, including murderers, were released in exchange for Israeli hostages. To his chagrin, he became prime minister quickly and broke his vows wholesale. Murderers were allowed to go free, Yasser Arafat became his partner and Hebron was handed over to the Palestinians. His term from 1996 to 1999 had no effect on the progress of history: It was as though it had never happened.
When he ran out of Palestinian cards, he pulled out the Iranian card. Just as the Hanukkah song asks, “Who can recount Israel’s mighty acts,” who can recount the heroic deeds of Benjamin? He will save the nation in blood, fire and columns of fallout, whether it needs saving or not. The military and intelligence chiefs told him there was no need, not yet, but they did not understand Netanyahu, or perhaps, they understood him all too well. The means - the military operation - became the goal. To overcome the internal resistance to a war that is premature and unnecessary, he gave Ehud Barak, his defense minister, a former commanding officer, and the man who defeated him in the elections, absolute freedom to instigate quarrels in the military's upper echelon.
The facts prove that all along, Netanyahu erred in his assessments and his policy. Those who said Iran would not have nuclear weapons before 2014 were right, as were those who strived to stop Iranian nuclear armament through non-military means — a mixture of dialogue and sanctions. If Netanyahu and Barak's plans between spring 2010 and spring 2011 had succeeded, Israel would now be dealing with the wounds of the first Iranian war and preparing for the second, while Iran’s efforts to build a nuclear bomb would be about to finish restoring their nuclear program.
Netanyahu exposed Israel’s weakness in Washington and its weakness without Washington. His head-on conflict with U.S. President Barack Obama showed the world that at the decisive moment, the president chose American considerations, leaving Israel unable to act independently.
...an Israeli military option isn’t in play, at least not at this stage. As long as there is such sweeping international support for the interim agreement, bombing Iran’s nuclear facilities would be political and diplomatic suicide.
Israel’s reaction is, predictably, apoplectic. Naftali Bennett, Israel’s economic minister, said, “If five years from now a nuclear suitcase explodes in New York or Madrid, it will be because of the deal that was signed this morning.” But Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will have trouble playing that card for long, since Israel is drastically isolated from the rest of the world and risks an open break with Washington. Already, some Israel leaders, such as President Shimon Peres and the newly installed leader of the Israeli Labor Party, have issued mild to moderate statement that undermine Netanyahu’s bluster. And, ironically, though, the harsh reaction from Israel will help Rouhani and Zarif sell the deal in Iran, since they can point to Israel’s criticism of the deal as a sign that it was, indeed, a victory for Iran’s “nuclear rights.”
hahaha, Israelis blaming Netanyahu for ? off Obama by basically campaigning for Romney last year. (Remember that?) I talked to Israelis last year and they were assuring me that Netanyahu was scaring the hell outta them with his Iran policy. Like, huge petitions begging him not to attack Iran unilaterally and alienate the U.S any further. He's ? done politically after this. WOO, Ric Flair ? .
"Amazing what WH will do to distract attention from O-care" - kingblaze84 (lol) Republican Senator John Cornyn
Secretary of State John Kerry was less than surprised to see Republicans criticize the administration on the agreement.
“Gee, you mean the members of the other party are criticizing the president? I can't imagine that,” he deadpanned to reporters
LMFAO
Comments
-
? benjamin ol ? ass
-
Halting the Progress of Iran’s Program and Rolling Back Key Elements
Iran has committed to halt enrichment above 5%:
-Halt all enrichment above 5% and dismantle the technical connections required toenrich above 5%.
Iran has committed to neutralize its stockpile of near-20% uranium:
-Dilute below 5% or convert to a form not suitable for further enrichment its entirestockpile of near-20% enriched uranium before the end of the initial phase.
Iran has committed to halt progress on its enrichment capacity:
-Not install additional centrifuges of any type.
-Not install or use any next-generation centrifuges to enrich uranium.
-Leave inoperable roughly half of installed centrifuges at Natanz and three-quarters ofinstalled centrifuges at Fordow, so they cannot be used to enrich uranium.
-Limit its centrifuge production to those needed to replace damaged machines, so Irancannot use the six months to stockpile centrifuges.
-Not construct additional enrichment facilities.
Iran has committed to halt progress on the growth of its 3.5% stockpile:
-Not increase its stockpile of 3.5% low enriched uranium, so that the amount is notgreater at the end of the six months than it is at the beginning, and any newly enriched3.5% enriched uranium is converted into oxide.
Iran has committed to no further advances of its activities at Arak and to halt progress onits plutonium track. Iran has committed to:
-Not commission the Arak reactor.
-Not fuel the Arak reactor.
-Halt the production of fuel for the Arak reactor.
-No additional testing of fuel for the Arak reactor.
-Not install any additional reactor components at Arak.
-Not transfer fuel and heavy water to the reactor site.
-Not construct a facility capable of reprocessing. Without reprocessing, Iran cannotseparate plutonium from spent fuel.
Unprecedented transparency and intrusive monitoring of Iran’s nuclear program
Iran has committed to:
-Provide daily access by IAEA inspectors at Natanz and Fordow. This daily access willpermit inspectors to review surveillance camera footage to ensure comprehensive monitoring. This access will provide even greater transparency into enrichment atthese sites and shorten detection time for any non-compliance.
-Provide IAEA access to centrifuge assembly facilities.
-Provide IAEA access to centrifuge rotor component production and storage facilities.
-Provide IAEA access to uranium mines and mills.
-Provide long-sought design information for the Arak reactor. This will provide criticalinsight into the reactor that has not previously been available.
-Provide more frequent inspector access to the Arak reactor.
-Provide certain key data and information called for in the Additional Protocol to Iran’sIAEA Safeguards Agreement and Modified Code 3.1.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/186639570/P5-1-Fact-Sheet -
dope.
-
I give Obama props for this....anything that makes Israel ? off can't be a bad thing
-
I want to see what the spin machine will come up with...probably something simple like hes against the safety of Israel or something
-
well, the real question is, is this going to be an effective deal; wanting to praise Obama or ? off Israel doesn't make it so. i guess we'll see.
-
Don't know if this is good or bad but at least Israel is mad
-
The persian are some cool folk, they just want to be in the 21st century, but deemed as a murderous because they are muslim.
-
So, is gas goin back to 90's prices or what...?
-
Deemed as ? due to the fact they kidnapped and terrorized 52 citizens for a year and a half back in 1980-1981.
-
So gas bout to be 1.10 again or nah.
-
EmperorRises wrote: »The persian are some cool folk, they just want to be in the 21st century, but deemed as a murderous because they are muslim.
I just want a piece of dat persian ? is that to much to ask....they are all welcomed to the u.s. for all i care. -
EmperorRises wrote: »The persian are some cool folk, they just want to be in the 21st century, but deemed as a murderous because they are muslim.
I just want a piece of dat persian ? is that to much to ask....they are all welcomed to the u.s. for all i care.
move to la county, thank me later -
OK.. IS THIS GOOD OR BAD?
-
Not exactly sure how to respond to this. My knee-? reaction was to call the Iranians ? . And then to ask what happened to all that stupid let's-go-to-war-with-Iran drama that we all had to go through and why the hell did it take so long for this deal to happen, but I'm sure Ahmadinejad had everything to do with that.
Despite all the ? hype from the Republicans and the Democrats, Iran was never a threat to America, so this makes no difference to me. Is Iran a threat to Israel? Maybe. Maybe not. But that's neither my business or my concern. Shouldn't be as much America's business or concern as it has been either but meh.
Obama gets both praise and (justified) hate from me on this one, so he ends up at just about under .500 as far as I'm concerned. Regardless of everything, ? Israel. And maybe ? Iran too. Matter fact, ? everybody on this.
-
Honestly Iran is probably a bigger threat to the Saudi's but that is a whole different topic...
-
^^^ That's interesting. I think that I've heard this point from others as well, but honestly, I'm ignorant about it. Care to shed some knowledge? I know some stuff about Saudi Arabia but...
-
The user and all related content has been deleted.
-
They have a oldschool feud in the region(Sunni versus Shi'ite) in part if not primarily exasperated by the deposition of the former Monarchy in Iran and the state being essentially controlled by the Church. The Saudis are a oil rich old monarchy that subscribes to Islamic law but does not want give power to the church like Iran has and that is a major fear that they will be invaded and forced to give up their power and Iran has made many comments about them needing to do so over the years. Publicly the Saudi's and Israelis hate each other but behind closed doors they both pump us to keep Iran in check in uniformity with one another...^^^ That's interesting. I think that I've heard this point from others as well, but honestly, I'm ignorant about it. Care to shed some knowledge? I know some stuff about Saudi Arabia but...
Like I was saying they both got something to worry about but the rest of the world is more likely to look the other way if Iran goes after the Saudis on some Islamic Revolution type ? then they are on them going after Israel. If they become a power to the point that we do not choose to stop them any longer Bet they follow through with their Ideologies and consolidate regional power and Example with the Saudis before the build up to hit the Ashkenazi Nation...Black_Samson wrote: »
they are a danger to any country that is the size of rhode island.... two nukes can erase israel.Soloman the Wise wrote: »Honestly Iran is probably a bigger threat to the Saudi's but that is a whole different topic... -
You mean he cut a deal like Oliver North and The Enterprise.
-
Lol ah the idea of stabilizing the Mid East, gotta love it
-
i hope he stay safe....the mossad may be planning already.
also....if anything goes wrong...he can say he tried before he bombs them.
lastly...im sure white people will find something wrong with this -
IT SADDENS ME HOW FEW PEOPLE ACTUALLY UNDER STAND the ? going on there and only cheer either side based on the rhetoric fed to us by the media on behalf of either party. In all Honesty in the immediate this does not effect my life so I could careless but if one group gains enough power over there and it the one pushing the agenda of converts all by any means then it becomes a problem for me so lack of stability and peace is in everyone's best interest till the fundamentalists lose power on all sides over there..
-
Im indifferent how does stopping a Iranian nuke really help?
-
Soloman the Wise wrote: »IT SADDENS ME HOW FEW PEOPLE ACTUALLY UNDER STAND the ? going on there and only cheer either side based on the rhetoric fed to us by the media on behalf of either party. In all Honesty in the immediate this does not effect my life so I could careless but if one group gains enough power over there and it the one pushing the agenda of converts all by any means then it becomes a problem for me so lack of stability and peace is in everyone's best interest till the fundamentalists lose power on all sides over there..
So why did the United States step to Iraq over Kuwait? Iraq was ran by a non-fundamentalist leader and kuwait is ran by the old guard. Both were on good terms with the US with Iraq being backed against Iran. Things don't seem as clear cut and i don't think Iran could touch Saudi Arabia without US interference. I'm not saying i know everything and situations do change.
![[Deleted User]](https://w1.vanillicon.com/v2/15efd8efe08bb34aae25f1808aaf5018.svg)
