iran

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Danzig

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...st_option.html

Take note that sanctions for humanitarian and other reasons will remain.

There are two sides to every story. Websites like Slate are very positive on the deal. The deal didn't sound bad the way Obama described it. But others have described the deal totally differently.

Even Iran says Obama is lying about the deal. Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Sarif accused the Obama administration of misleading the American people and Congress about the deal. He says that the United States has tentatively agreed to let Iran continue the enrichment of uranium, the key component in a nuclear bomb, as well as key nuclear research. In addition, he says Iran would have all nuclear-related sanctions lifted once a final deal is signed and that the country would not be forced to shut down any of its currently operating nuclear installations.

http://freebeacon.com/national-secur...uke-agreement/

Politico is another site that is very cautious on the deal:

"Both President Barack Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry have suggested that a nuclear deal with Iran could be a step towards thawed relations between Washington and Tehran. But experts and even some senior administration officials are more skeptical, warning that a deal might not moderate Iran’s clerical regime and could even embolden it."

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/0...#ixzz3WKisokoc

Here is another article about the gray areas of the deal: "In the dead of night Wednesday night in Lausanne, Switzerland, Energy Secretary Ernie Moniz and his Iranian counterpart haggled over one of the last issues holding up a nuclear agreement with world powers: Iran’s future research into next-generation new centrifuge designs that can accelerate its path to a nuclear weapon."

"But how that key issue was resolved remains fuzzy. An Obama administration fact sheet on the deal says only that Iran will be able to conduct “limited research and development” into the centrifuges — which are far more efficient than the relatively crude devices Iran now operates — “according to a schedule and parameters which have been agreed to” by Iran, the United States, and five other world powers."

"Although Iran will be barred for a decade from enriching uranium with the advanced devices, that schedule and those parameters remain otherwise unknown."

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/0...al-116641.html

[richard burch]

nobody is "nuking" anybody anyway. this is just pissing more time and money away on b.s. that we can't control anyway.

i lived through the 60's and 70's. i spent every morning saying the pledge of allegiance and practicing "duck and cover" moves under my 3rd period desk. what a waste of time having a 4'6" nun scaring the shlt out of us by yelling " get down! the bombs are coming!"

just give everyone a nuke and then i guarantee they will never be used. you cant nuke your neighbor. they are too fn close! iran cant nuke iraq! if we should nuke mexico we would also nuke ourselves! I would be more worried about a small dirty bomb that a missile flying thousands of miles to kill us.

oh BTW the last and only nukes used were by the USA in 1945.