Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Iran Nuclear Deal Reached

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 309 posts

Re: Iran Nuclear Deal Reached

#51

Post by bsaul »

lentil_soup wrote: post #27
bsaul wrote: post #5

Am i the only one amazed at the fact that we actually had to wait for iranians to accept to stop going toward nuclear weapons ? I mean, why did EU and US insist so much on wanting a deal ? It seemed to be that one side has all the leverage in the negociation and the other has none. We could have simply waited for the iranian regime to get so weakened that they'd simply surrender and accept every measure. So I don't u…

So you punish an entire group of people by weakening their economy until their government does what an external entity wants them to do?. Seems quite a violent approach.

That's only justified because trying to get a nuclear weapon has an impact on everyone's peace.

Especially for a country that's been at war with its neighbours for the last 50 years at least, in a chaotic region filled with international terrorists groups and active war zones right at the moment.

Re: Iran Nuclear Deal Reached

#52

Post by seivan »

skylan_q wrote: post #50
seivan wrote: post #46

My God, why didn't Roosevelt and Churchill think of giving billions in relief to the Third Reich. That would have solved everything. Chamberlain was a forgotten hero! Giving Mullahs access to create nuclear weapons. Taking their word for it that they won't. Yeah, this will end well. Just yesterday their Iranian proxies in Baghdad were burning American and Israeli flags. Vowing to destroy The Great Satan(s), why do we…

My God, why didn't Roosevelt and Churchill think of giving billions in relief to the Third Reich. That would have solved everything. Chamberlain was a forgotten hero! They would have, but they gave it to the Soviets instead.

Soviet sent 8,668,400 of their own to the grave for that. That should cover it, not that I am condoning the totalitarian communist regime. There weren't better alternatives back then. There are now.

Re: Iran Nuclear Deal Reached

#53

Post by lentil_soup »

bsaul wrote: post #51
lentil_soup wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you punish an entire group of people by weakening their economy until their government does what an external entity wants them to do?. Seems quite a violent approach.

That's only justified because trying to get a nuclear weapon has an impact on everyone's peace. Especially for a country that's been at war with its neighbours for the last 50 years at least, in a chaotic region filled with international terrorists groups and active war zones right at the moment.

And similar accusations can be made of the US/EU from the other side.

Scaling down the political violence is the only way to get out of that mess.

Re: Iran Nuclear Deal Reached

#54

Post by bsaul »

skylan_q wrote: post #41
bsaul wrote: post #5

Am i the only one amazed at the fact that we actually had to wait for iranians to accept to stop going toward nuclear weapons ? I mean, why did EU and US insist so much on wanting a deal ? It seemed to be that one side has all the leverage in the negociation and the other has none. We could have simply waited for the iranian regime to get so weakened that they'd simply surrender and accept every measure. So I don't u…

You have to realize that Iran is threatened by the US, Israel and Saudi Arabia. I won't be surprised when they break this deal and have their own nuclear weapons.

? Are you being sarcastic ? Since when did the US or Israel threatened Iran of anything ?

It seems to me you're inversing causes and consequences. Hopefully looking at events chronologically will help you get things back in order.

Re: Iran Nuclear Deal Reached

#55

Post by toyg »

bsaul wrote: post #40
colinplamondon wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right now, there's a lot of bubbling neutral-to-pro-US sentiment in the younger, wealthier segments of Iran. If we purposefully, wantonly destroy their economy without even negotiating, that disappears, and we turn potential allies into absolute enemies. The level of currency devastation they've had since the beginning of these sanctions, and resulting unemployment, have already pushed their finances to the brink. No…

"We may not like their government but at least they're rational" Well, a theocracy is almost by definition not rational, in the modern sense. It's based on divine laws, obedience, and absolute faith on an ideology. Not logic, provability, and the scientific method. Dealing with the iranian regime the same way you would deal with an occidental country is the greatest mistake i think. Thinking "sure, they apply shariah…

> a theocracy is almost by definition not rational

Neither it is a monarchy; shall we embargo the Dutch, the Spanish and the Swedes next? As a UK taxpayer, I wholly support your ideas and hope you will accord the same distrust to British governments, removing your NATO bases at once and stopping NSA/GCHQ cooperation.

> Thinking "sure, they apply shariah, and believe islam is the only true religion, and that god leads them, but deep inside they know things aren't that simple" is applying your own logic to them

I grew up in Italy, where the same mindset applies with Catholicism, word by word (down to and including "people with guns"). Please go ahead and embargo them, it worked so well in the the '20s.

Accepting Iranian sovereignty over their own matters would be the first rational move US diplomacy produced in the current millennium.

Re: Iran Nuclear Deal Reached

#56

Post by [deleted] »

skylan_q wrote: post #47
acjohnson55 wrote: post #38

I think the future of the Middle East is a tense balance between Saudi and Iranian poles, with both countries being normalized in the international community. The USA can't bring either country to heel, but it can hopefully prevent the stalemate from being nuclear along Sunni-Shia lines. But what's also changed is that the US needs a normalized partner in Iran to fully isolate ISIS, the Taliban, Al Qaeda and other fa…

Iran is a country much more aligned with the US in many more ways than Saudi Arabia is. It's really a "natural ally" for the US in the middle east.

[deleted]

Re: Iran Nuclear Deal Reached

#57

Post by threeseed »

seivan wrote: post #46

My God, why didn't Roosevelt and Churchill think of giving billions in relief to the Third Reich. That would have solved everything. Chamberlain was a forgotten hero! Giving Mullahs access to create nuclear weapons. Taking their word for it that they won't. Yeah, this will end well. Just yesterday their Iranian proxies in Baghdad were burning American and Israeli flags. Vowing to destroy The Great Satan(s), why do we…

There are plenty of countries in the world that have questionable human rights records. Many of whom the "West" has quite strong relationships with e.g. China, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Russia.

Putting a blindfold on and pretending you can just contain or ignore certain countries has failed as a strategy and will continue to fail. So unless you want to do something about Iran militarily (not feasible) then you are looking at diplomacy.

And let's face it. The US is not good at wars.

Re: Iran Nuclear Deal Reached

#58

Post by vasilipupkin »

adventured wrote: post #34
knowaveragejoe wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nevermind that it's a large step in that direction, I'm pretty sure it was his pen that signed it into law.

It was his pen, that was his biggest contribution to it. His involvement in crafting the legislation, and getting the necessary votes, was almost non-existent. It was the super majority Democratic Congress that was responsible for making the ACA happen. Both in terms of wrangling the votes together, and reaching the countless compromises necessary to get it through by the slim margin it ultimately passed by.

You are focused on the mechanics of how it got passed. But it was clearly his major priority and wouldn't have happened without him being in office. So, I apologize, but your statement seems at best completely inaccurate to me

Re: Iran Nuclear Deal Reached

#59

Post by gadders »

DiabloD3 wrote: post #3

If you had told me that would be today's headline at any point over the past decade, I'm not sure I would have believed you. If this works out, the President has another thing to add to his list of "things no President before me achieved".

On the negative side he can put Benghazi and the rise of ISIS.

Re: Iran Nuclear Deal Reached

#60

Post by dbcooper »

dbcooper wrote: post #43
dbcooper wrote: post #25

Some possible reasons to be sceptical: http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/06/23/opinion/the-iran-deals-...

There's a back-and-forth on that opinion piece, here [1] and here [2]. [1] http://iranmatters.belfercenter.org/blog/iran-op-eds-fatal-f... [2] http://iranmatters.belfercenter.org/blog/misleading-spin-cen...

On the key point of low enriched Uranium, here's the text from the agreement:

> During the 15 year period, and as Iran gradually moves to meet international qualification standards for nuclear fuel produced in Iran, it will keep its uranium stockpile under 300 kg of up to 3.67% enriched uranium hexafluoride (UF6) or the equivalent in other chemical forms. The excess quantities are to be sold based on international prices and delivered to the international buyer in return for natural uranium delivered to Iran, or are to be down-blended to natural uranium level. Enriched uranium in fabricated fuel assemblies from Russia or other sources for use in Iran's nuclear reactors will not be counted against the above stated 300 kg UF6 stockpile, if the criteria set out in Annex I are met with regard to other sources. The Joint Commission will support assistance to Iran, including through IAEA technical cooperation as appropriate, in meeting international qualification standards for nuclear fuel produced in Iran. All remaining uranium oxide enriched to between 5% and 20% will be fabricated into fuel for the Tehran Research Reactor (TRR). Any additional fuel needed for the TRR will be made available to Iran at international market prices.

Post reply on HN