What's new

US and IRAN...reach NUKE deal !

Status
Not open for further replies.
We are certainly a good ally to Israel

No question

Are they one to us?

Certainly, when it suits them

Otherwise, they are all to happy to conspire to undermine our interests

Or attack them
 
No meds
No need for them

Just carrying your radical right bs to its logical conclusion

The extremist Christian right wet dream

Wiping Islam off the face of the earth, installing a "Judeo-Christian" ( whatever that contradiction means...) Caliphate

Install Bibi, whom you already adore, and The Anointed Red as some sort of co-popes of the Judaic Christian Dominion

Isn't that about the goal?
 
 
As reported by the Jerusalem Post:
Iran is beginning to reap the fruits of its nuclear deal with the world powers.
 
According to a report in the Taiwanese press, China is set to provide the Islamic Republic with 24 J-10 fighter jets.
In exchange, Iran will permit China access to its largest oilfield for the next 20 years. The total estimated value of the deal is $1 billion.
 
The J-10, which is known by the moniker “Vigorous Dragon,” is an advanced combat aircraft which foreign sources say is based on the original designs of the Lavi, the Israeli prototype whose manufacturing was canceled in the 1980s.
The Lavi was built and developed by Israel Aircraft Industries, though the government eventually decided to terminate the program due to the high costs of production and after the US offered to sell Israel F-16s as an alternative. After the cancellation, the Israeli government resolved to sell the plans to China.
The J-10 is a single-engine aircraft that has a flight range of 2,900 kilometers. Iran is believed to be interested in procuring the jet in order to defend its skies as well as to attack targets throughout the Persian Gulf.
 
Don't forget the fleet of aerial refueling tankers coming from Russia.
 

 
Allen West:
 
And so it begins. The United Nations weapons embargo against conventional weapons is not supposed to end for five years according to the JCPOA; apparently, Iran and China — or for that matter, Russia — didn’t get the memo.
 
 
just remember what a great deal this is dude...........at least according to the board liberals, car salesmen at their local dealership must fight to get to them when they come in
 
Scott Walker shows his myopic and distorted understanding of world affairs.
 
http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/07/14/scott-walker-says-he-would-kill-iran-deal-and-seek-crippling-sanctions/?_r=0
 
“I will terminate that deal,” Mr. Walker said in a speech. “I will put in place crippling economic sanctions on Iran, and I will convince our allies to do the same.”
 
Does he not understand that there are other countries out there who do not share our views?  Iran has oil.  A very desirable commodity.  
 
China does not have much in the way of oil reserves.  What do you want to bet that if the US were to impose sanctions on Iran that they would step in to trade goods for oil?  I would not be surprised to see if they do it regardless of the nuke deal.  They have a growing economy and need oil.  
 
Then there is Russia.  I'd bet good money that Russia would love to increase their influence in the area and some how I doubt Puttin has any qualms about aligning with a dictatorship like Iran.  
 
I bet N Korea would not mind trading ideas with Iran as well.
 
The UN does not have any enforcement powers unless the security council says so.  That will not happen with Russia and China.  The US cannot tell China and Russia who to have relationships and trade with.
 
The deal may not be great, but it is better than nothing which is what we have had for the past several decades.
 
delldude said:
 
Don't forget the fleet of aerial refueling tankers coming from Russia.
 
 
Is there any proof that this will happen within the next five years.  Because the article did not say that the aircraft will be delivered before the five years is up.  Or for that matter there is an actual sale.  And what are they supposedly selling them?  Twenty four single engine aircraft.  Compare that to what not only Israel has but the other countries in the region.  The 2900 kilometer range, maybe loaded down with drop tanks.
 
Where's the evidence that Russia is going to be providing them with a fleet of tankers within the next five years?
 
Ms Tree said:
Scott Walker shows his myopic and distorted understanding of world affairs.
 
http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/07/14/scott-walker-says-he-would-kill-iran-deal-and-seek-crippling-sanctions/?_r=0
 
“I will terminate that deal,” Mr. Walker said in a speech. “I will put in place crippling economic sanctions on Iran, and I will convince our allies to do the same.”
 
Does he not understand that there are other countries out there who do not share our views?  
 
I'm guessing that Scott Walker is playing to the reactionary crowd that he feels that he has to pander to.
 
Seems there are a few here who seem to buy into that mentality as well. So the deal is not perfect. The alternative is no deal and Russia and China step in to trade nukes for oil.
 
I'm just wondering...but if a republican is elected in 2016, will they still care about my grandkids?  I mean, for the past 7 years I've heard nothing but concern about my grandkids and all the debt we are leaving them with.  But the GOP wants tax cuts and war.  So the debts gonna rise even more.  I guess if their dream comes true, there won't be a world anymore, so my grandkids won't have to worry about the debt. 
 
And like the Demorats are concerned with your grandkids....pfft...
 
777 fixer said:
 
Is there any proof that this will happen within the next five years.  Because the article did not say that the aircraft will be delivered before the five years is up.  Or for that matter there is an actual sale.  And what are they supposedly selling them?  Twenty four single engine aircraft.  Compare that to what not only Israel has but the other countries in the region.  The 2900 kilometer range, maybe loaded down with drop tanks.
 
Where's the evidence that Russia is going to be providing them with a fleet of tankers within the next five years?
 
What was it one the finest Presidents to come along said?
'Trust, but verify'
Hows that float in the Persian Gulf?
 
I tend to favor diplomacy as opposed to "Boots on the ground" military action to resolve open issues. The concept of working out a deal with Iran is a good one. The details of what was negotiated are less favorable to the US.
 
We have bleeped around in the internal affairs of a sovereign nation since the 1953 CIA led overthrow of the democratically elected government of Iran. After 20 years of brutal dictatorship under the Shah does anyone really think they'd roll over this go around?
 
The deal in and of itself almost doesn't matter, it's the fact there is a deal at all matters. If we are smart we build on this deal and trade heavily with Iran wherever possible. When both parties are making money, most don't want to fight. You get the money flowing and watch Iran put an end to ISIS and the like. I don't care if you're Islam, Christian, Hindu or atheist, Money talks and cash screams.
 
Thank You Sparrow

Now stand by to be pilloried for makimg sense and contradicting the borg
 
delldude said:
 
What was it one the finest Presidents to come along said?
'Trust, but verify'
Hows that float in the Persian Gulf?
 
Don't know if I would be using the quotes of a president who sold arms to the Iranians in a subject concerning Iran.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top