Iran agrees to curb some of its nuclear activities

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by jnpy!$4g3cwk, Nov 24, 2013.

  1. jnpy!$4g3cwk macrumors 65816

    jnpy!$4g3cwk

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2010
    #1
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-25074729

    Rouhani seems to be motivated to come to an agreement with world powers about it. Skeptics point out that once economic conditions in Iran improve, Rouhani can be replaced any time, at will.
     
  2. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #2
    Haven't had a chance to read much on this yet but when I see all the neo-cons lined up to pan the deal, not to mention the warmonger Netanyahu, I have to come down on the side of the deal. They're only interested in having American troops fight a war for Israel.
     
  3. Happybunny macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2010
    #3
    I put this one down to common sense.

    This is far more than was expected just months ago.

    I do think that having the UN security council members on side helped to broker a deal.
     
  4. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #4
    Do we trust Iran to just shut off their weapons program. There is a 6 month window. I don't know if this is anything other than a feel good deal and in a year nothing changes.
     
  5. ucfgrad93 macrumors P6

    ucfgrad93

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Location:
    Colorado
    #5
    Pretty much echos my thoughts as well.
     
  6. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #6
    I would like to see this deal work I am just skeptical about it happening.
     
  7. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #7

    I'm skeptical as well but you need a deal in place to start.

    I see Senator Schumer (D-Israel) doesn't like it either. Another plus as far as I'm concerned.
     
  8. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #8
    Iran is agreeing because they want the sanctions dropped. But that doesn't mean they are not stopping their weapons program just like that. Who knows what they have hidden where or if they can trick the inspectors into thinking they have stopped. I think it is wishful thinking on Kerry's part to think this won't blow up in his face.
     
  9. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #9
    We've had almost a decade of harsh sanctions and all we've had is talk of us bombing them to show for it.


    http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/24/world/meast/iran-nuclear-deal-qa/index.html?hpt=hp_t1
     
  10. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #10
  11. jnpy!$4g3cwk thread starter macrumors 65816

    jnpy!$4g3cwk

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2010
    #11
  12. BigHonkingDeal macrumors 6502a

    BigHonkingDeal

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2009
    Location:
    Miami, FLA
    #12
    I'm with John Lennon on this one..... "Give Peace a Chance"
     
  13. Happybunny macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2010
    #13
    I also think that this agreement is a turning point, for the US, it is going to find it's self in these positions more often. The US is no longer seen as the keeper of moral actions, it will more and more be forced to work within the UN to achieve it's aims.

    The invasion of Iraq in 2003 was the end of US lone actions. Today the US cannot even mobilise the western countries to any degree, just look at Syria. China and Russia are both starting to flex their muscles, and the inter dependancy of the worlds financial markets makes war a very dim prospect.

    This whole agreement was made possible by far more than just the US. After four days of negotiations, representatives of the so-called P5+1 group of nations - the US, the UK, Russia, China, France and Germany - reached the agreement with Iran in the early hours of Sunday.
     
  14. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #14
    Good news!
     
  15. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #15

    Don't worry, Obama is creating a web site to track all the Iranian nuclear materials.
     
  16. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #16
    It would be more effective to just track their Google history.
     
  17. lannister80 macrumors 6502

    lannister80

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2009
    Location:
    Chicagoland
    #17
    I love how we (the US), the only people to actually use a nuclear weapon in war on 2 civilian populations, are somehow the arbiter of who should and shouldn't have nukes.
     
  18. Renzatic Suspended

    Renzatic

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Location:
    Gramps, what the hell am I paying you for?
    #18
    Hey. Experience. We're the only country to know how bad dropping a couple of nukes makes you feel afterwards.

    edit: though if you want to get scary about it, Fat Man and Little Boy only meet the barest minimum standards of being classified as nuclear weapons these days. In a way, we've been vindicated by the Cold War's continued *******ry.
     
  19. obeygiant macrumors 68040

    obeygiant

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Location:
    totally cool
    #19
    Who else should be the arbiter then?
     
  20. Renzatic Suspended

    Renzatic

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Location:
    Gramps, what the hell am I paying you for?
    #20
    Mike.
     
  21. G51989 macrumors 68030

    G51989

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2012
    Location:
    NYC NY/Pittsburgh PA
    #21
    You can tell if it was Romney who pulled this off, the right would be kneeling down in Prayer over what a strong strange republicans have on foreign policy.
     
  22. localoid macrumors 68020

    localoid

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2007
    Location:
    America's Third World
    #22
    It seems to have taken a few decades before the US began to feel very guilty.

    Judging solely from reading a few news magazines and papers articles published right after the bombs were dropped, there doesn't seem to have been a huge outpouring of regret about two cities being nearly virtually blown off the face of the planet.

    Most articles focused primarily on how big, powerful, and badass the bomb was vs. ethical conundrums/moral dilemmas.
     
  23. quagmire macrumors 603

    quagmire

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2004
    #23
    Carpet bombing was just as destructive though( due to everything burning down). It just didn't have the harmful radiation effects.

    As much as those effects were horrific, I'm still for the use of them back then. An all out invasion of Japan was going to be costly to both sides.

    Little boy and Fat Man were the only atomic bombs the US had and the suggested test on a small island observable by the Japanese was a bigger gamble than dropping them in quick succession on the two cities. Dropped Little Boy on an island, then only had Fat Man to use on a Japanese city. Then what if the Japanese still didn't surrender? The Japanese military was ready to call our bluff after Nagasaki before the emperor told them to surrender….
     
  24. localoid macrumors 68020

    localoid

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2007
    Location:
    America's Third World
    #24
    Historian Elaine Tyler May's comments on the American reaction to Hiroshima and Nagasaki:

     
  25. Renzatic Suspended

    Renzatic

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Location:
    Gramps, what the hell am I paying you for?
    #25
    You have to think of the attitudes of the time, the oft abused, and rarely ever correctly used zeitgeist. The entire global economy was crippled during the 30's, which became directly responsible for the rise of all the horrific things that came about in the 40's. The world basically went ******* crazy for 15 years.

    People saw more concentrated horrors during that time than just about any other point in history. America, while left relatively unscathed, still felt the same pressure everyone else did. They had the Nazi's on one side, the Japanese Empire on the other, and the enigma that was the Soviets floating around somewhere behind them. It seemed that at the drop of a hat, the lives of every person in an entire nation could be drastically changed from something they considered good, to something considerably worse. I could imagine it was fairly stressful time to live.

    When the bombs dropped, and Japan surrendered, I doubt any one single person in the US even briefly considered the human cost. All things considered, you can't really blame them. They were more thrilled about the most terrible war the world had ever seen had finally come to an end, and they were finally, for at least a little while, safe and secure.

    That all but explains the fervent nationalism, and the braggadocio over who had the biggest, bestests, fastest whatever. It was only later, after we've had a two generations disconnect from it, that we were able to impartially judge the morality and implications of everything that happened.

    ...and the sad thing is we can't really judge it. Not fairly.
     

Share This Page