A peace for our time or a great deal?

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by gnadfly

BTW, tell an Iranian that he's an Arab and see what kinda reaction you get.

Or a Spaniard .. a Mexican!

I'm still waiting for a link to the "signed, sealed, and delivered" paper work.

These idiots, for whom many on here voted, can't even put up a working website at home....

... the Iranians are laughing all the way back to their labs, centrifuges, and test sites....

Have they found all the chemicals in Syria yet?

If you Obaminablits think the Iranians don't monitor the U.S. press, then you really are addicted to the snake oil .... they are laughing their asses off at this administration and most of all ...

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

If you Obaminablits think the Iranians don't monitor the U.S. press, then you really are addicted to the snake oil .... they are laughing their asses off at this administration and most of all ...

Remember how, during the Revolution, all of the "student" protestors carried signs printed in English for the benefit of Western journalists and audiences?

[BJerk]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Persian, Arabs, Afghans, etc. the important point is do you really think you can make peace with them? They have a religion that says its okay to lie to infidels (thats us) and even sign treaties. They mean nothing to them because we are infidels. Like World War II, we can probably tolerate Germans but not Nazis. We can live with some muslims but if they turn out to be Islamofascists then the best thing is to kill them. Iran is the center of terrorism in the middle east, they've killed our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan, they've taken British sailors off the high seas, they've kidnapped American tourists and held them without cause, they hold an American cleric whose family is from Iran, and they are threatening to create a nuclear weapon in which they can attack Israel or the US forces in the theater or blackmail Saudi Arabia. Obama just didn't kiss Iranian ass, he rimmed the asshole.

I'm not sure if we can make peace with them, but if they are no longer given a reason to hate us, I understand they hate each other enough to occupy themselves. Once the oil under the desert runs out, or everyone drives electric Teslas (if they don't catch on fire and can charge faster) they will be of no consequence to us because why do we care about what happens in the desert. We don't want their land or their lifestyle. They somehow manage to survive there- they can live there.

[gnadfly]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Or a Spaniard .. a Mexican!

I'm still waiting for a link to the "signed, sealed, and delivered" paper work.

LOL!

Originally Posted by LexusLover

... the Iranians are laughing all the way back to their labs, centrifuges, and test sites....

The Iranians don't do much of the intellectual or physical heavy lifting...that's what the Russians are for.

The Russians are going to find another revenue stream when the Sauds want a nuke and the Americans won't give them the tech. MAD: Mohammed Assured Destruction. Hopefully our "green energy" programs will have paid off by then! Otherwise we'll just have to use our domestically produced petroleum. So guess what we'll be using.

[i'va biggen]

The right wing has all the answers except they have no answers.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

. Like World War II, we can probably tolerate Germans but not Nazis. .

What an idiot!

[WTF]

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Why did Obama abandon sanctions?

They were the best chance fir peaceful regime. And policy change in Iran.

Because of sanctions after WWI...we had WWII.

We built up an alliance with Germany and Japan thru trade.

Something I thought you boys were for!

[SD2011]

I only ask that those who are on either side of this equation (for or against) the lifting of Iran sanctions without any real concessions by them regarding their program go on record as saying they believe the Iranians will or will not have a bomb manufactured within say: 36-48 months?

For me: I think they're closer than that

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by gnadfly

Sadly, this graphic is the only summarizing points of the signed agreement I am seeing. The pro-agreement articles just repeatedly state how great the agreement is with no specifics of what the agreement entails.

Apparently there is no enforcement mechanisms, penalties or "red lines."

The more you learn about this agreement, the more you want to puke. I think Congress will refuse to ratify it. Odumbo just wants to make sure if Iran goes nuclear, it doesn't happen on his watch. He doesn't want to have to consider a military strike. The Iranians already watched him slink away from punishing Syria, so they aren't worried anymore.

This is like watching Germany re-arm prior to WWII. We all know we are going to have to deal with the problem sooner or later.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by lustylad

This is like watching Germany re-arm prior to WWII. We all know we are going to have to deal with the problem sooner or later.

They re-armed because of the harsh sanctions you dumb fuck.

[SD2011]

Originally Posted by WTF

They re-armed because of the harsh sanctions you dumb fuck.

From our friends in the UK. Make sure you click and read the treaty itself regarding the "sanctions" and do try to equate them with the economic sanctions on Iran (just to keep focus).

http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk...rearmament.htm
Germany and rearmament

When Nazi Germany openly started re-armament in 1935, few should have been surprised as Hitler had made it very clear both in his speeches and in "Mein Kampf" that he would break the "unjust" terms of the Treaty of Versailles.

Hitler had made it plain what the basis of his foreign policy would be. He had clearly stated that he would undo what had been imposed on Germany by the Treaty of Versailles re-unite all Germans into one nation re-arm Germany "Mein Kampf" also clearly stated what he thought of east Europeans and the Jews. Both groups were the "untermenschen" - the sub-humans of Europe who had no place in the Europe Hitler dreamed of. Eastern Europe, in the mind of Hitler, would be where Germans would find the space to live - lebensraum - where they would use the land in a modern and productive manner, thus fulfilling the belief that Hitler held that all good Germans would work off the land and produce the food that the state would need.

Hitler saw Nazi Germany as being at the centre of Europe and as the great power of Europe, the nation needed a strong military. Throughout the 1920’s, Germany had been technically keeping to the terms of the Treaty of Versailles but in reality she had been bending the rules regarding training. Versialles had not stated that Germany could not train submarine crews abroad or that pilots for the banned German Air Force could train on civilian planes. Therefore, on paper Hitler inherited a weak military but this was not in reality the case. However, Hitler knew that publicly Nazi Germany was still seen within Europe as being held to the terms of Versailles and he was determined to openly break these terms and re-assert Germany’s right to control its own military.

In 1933, Hitler ordered his army generals to prepare to treble the size of the army to 300,000 men. He ordered the Air Ministry to plan to build 1,000 war planes. Military buildings such as barracks were built. He withdrew from the Geneva Disarmament Conference when the French refused to accept his plan that the French should disarm to the level of the Germans or that the Germans should re-arm to the level of the French. Either way, the two main powers of Europe would be balanced. Hitler knew that the French would not accept his plan and therefore when he withdrew from the conference, he was seen by some as the politician who had a more realistic approach to foreign policy and the French were seen as the nation that had caused Nazi Germany to withdraw.

For two years, the German military expanded in secret. By March 1935, Hitler felt strong enough to go public on Nazi Germany's military expansion - which broke the terms of the Versailles Treaty. Europe learned that the Nazis had 2,500 war planes in its Luftwaffe and an army of 300,000 men in its Wehrmacht. Hitler felt confident enough to publicly announce that there would be compulsory military conscription in Nazi Germany and that the army would be increased to 550,000 men.

How did Europe react to this flagrant violation of Versailles?

Essentially, the French and British did nothing. Britain was still recovering from the Depression which had devastated her economy. She could not afford a conflict. The French preferred a defensive policy against a potential German threat and she spent time and money building the vast Maginot Line - a series of vast forts on the French and German border. The most Britain, France and Italy did (at this time, Italy did not view German as a potential ally as the above was pre-Abyssinia) was to form the Stresa Front which issued a protest against Hitler's rearmament policy but did nothing else.

It seemed that Britain was even supporting Germany’s breaking of the Treaty of Versailles. This treaty had clearly stated what Germany’s navy should be - no submarines and only six warships over 10,000 tons. In June 1935 the Anglo-German Naval Agreement was signed. This allowed Germany to have one third of the tonnage of the British navy’s surface fleet (probably the largest in the world at this time) and an equal tonnage of submarines.

Why did Britain agree that Nazi Germany could break the terms of Versailles?

This event saw the start of what was to be called appeasement. It was believed that Nazi Germany would develop her navy regardless and that an official agreement between Nazi Germany and Britain would do much to foster relations between both countries. There was also a feeling in some quarters in Britain, that the Treaty of Versailles had been too harsh on Germany and that the time was right to loosen the terms as time had moved on and Europe had to live together. It was felt that this approach would satisfy Hitler and that Europe would benefit from this approach as Nazi Germany would have no reason to be angered or feel cornered by the old terms of Versailles. Such an approach would do much to stabilise Europe and end the anger felt by Germans at the terms of Versailles. Above all else, if Nazi Germany kept the1935 Agreement, Britain would have a very good idea of the size of Germany’s navy as she would know how big her navy was and could work on a third of that figure equalling the German’s navy.

However, if this agreement served any purpose it was to confuse the British public. Only two months earlier, Britain had signed the Stresa Front which had condemned Germany’s military build up. Now, Britain was agreeing that Germany could do exactly what Britain had condemned !! It also showed Hitler that he could push Britain and get away with it. Were there other aspects of Versailles he could challenge ?

[CJ7]

HARI SREENIVASAN: World leaders will be arriving here in New York for the start of next week's U.N. General Assembly meeting.
Speculation is already rampant that President Obama will meet with the new Iranian president in an effort to resolve the long stalemate over Iran’s nuclear program. Yesterday, a deputy national security adviser told reporters, "We do believe there is time and space for diplomacy," something the Israeli government is much more skeptical about. How soon could Iran produce nuclear weapons? For more about this we’re joined now from Boston by David Albright, a physicist and founder and president of the non-profit Institute for Science and International Security, so David, my first question is, what is the state of Iran's nuclear program today?





DAVID ALBRIGHT: Iran's program is quite advanced. I mean, if Iran decided today to make a nuclear weapon, it could probably do so. It would probably take many months and --and they’d probably run in to problems. Now that effort would be detected by the inspectors, because the first thing they’d have to do is make what we call weapon grade uranium, the key nuclear explosive material and it would take long enough that-- that production would be detected long before it goes. And in fact, that's really the key thing right now, is that we believe at ISIS that even though Iran could make a nuclear weapon if it wanted to, it's deterred from doing that now because of its fear of military strikes by either Israel or the United States or both if Iran took steps to make the bomb.
HARI SREENIVASAN: So if they can make a bomb, can they deliver it?
DAVID ALBRIGHT: Well there it’s trickier. There isn’t a lot of information. The International Atomic Energy Agency- the inspectors that are regularly in Iran have published information suggesting that Iran knows how to make a crude nuclear explosive, but it may not have learned enough to make a weapon that can be delivered by missile and they need considerable amount of time, a year, two years more to be able to master that process. So if Iran did decide to make a bomb, then it could do so, or it could deliver that by truck, or plane. But unlikely to be deliverable by missile unless it takes that additional year or so to master the warhead technology.
HARI SREENIVASAN: In an op-ed the Iranian president wrote in the Washington Post, they said their pursuit of nuclear is for energy interests only, does the country have an infrastructure to take this in?
DAVID ALBRIGHT: Certainly Iran has a legitimate reason to pursue nuclear power and they bought a nuclear power reactor from Russia in order to produce electricity for civilian use. The question is, why do they need all these other facilities that enrich uranium, a reactor that really looks more designed to make plutonium than to do anything else- and plutonium again is a nuclear explosive material that can be used to make the bomb. So there's a lot of questions, there’s also a lot of evidence that Iran did seek nuclear weapons. The U.S. intelligence community, judged with high confidence that prior to 2004, Iran had a nuclear weapons program. That assessment is shared by our closest allies Britain, France and Germany and also Israel, the International Atomic Energy Agency has additional evidence suggesting that Iran's work on nuclear weapons continued after 2003, so, there's evidence that Iran has worked a great deal on nuclear weapons and that – when it says it never did, it’s simply not telling the truth. And so there is a lot of suspicion that they will try to do so again in the future.
HARI SREENIVASAN: So is there time for diplomacy here or is this the opportune window?
DAVID ALBRIGHT: I think there's time for diplomacy, but, Iran has to stop increasing its capabilities, particularly the number of gas centrifuges that can enrich uranium, it's installing them at a rapid rate and at some point next year, at ISIS we have assessed that by mid-2014, they would reach appear capability, if not stopped, that they could actually break out and make enough weapon-grade uranium for a bomb and it very likely would not be detected by the inspectors or western intelligence agencies.
HARI SREENIVASAN: David Albright thanks so much for your time.
DAVID ALBRIGHT: Thank you.

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by WTF

They re-armed because of the harsh sanctions you dumb fuck.

Wow, WTFuckhead is quite a historian, able to reduce all of the root causes of WWII to a single factor - "sanctions". What economic sanctions were imposed on Germany prior to 1939, when and by whom? (War reparations are not the same as sanctions, you dickhead.) And how did re-arming allow Hitler to evade sanctions, since you claim that's why he was forced to do it?

[WTF]

Name me the last two trading partners that went to war... lustyladyboy go fuck yourself. Haven't you heard you neocons are out of favor.

[JD Barleycorn]

Originally Posted by Bert Jones

I'm not sure if we can make peace with them, but if they are no longer given a reason to hate us, I understand they hate each other enough to occupy themselves. Once the oil under the desert runs out, or everyone drives electric Teslas (if they don't catch on fire and can charge faster) they will be of no consequence to us because why do we care about what happens in the desert. We don't want their land or their lifestyle. They somehow manage to survive there- they can live there.

They are trying to kill us now and we have to respond in turn. Why did they do 9/11? Because they said we were in Saudi Arabia. So why did they try to blow up the World Trade Center in 1993? Why did they try to blow up our embassies in 1996? Why did they attack Spain of all places? They were not in Saudi Arabia. Face it, they want to kill us because the mullahs have told them for years that the west is the devil. Think about what things will be like with people like Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and the Reverend Wright preaching hate and violence for another 30-50 years.