...this... can never be unseen. :huh:

Thread derailment now at Defcon One. Launch.

http://31.media.tumblr.com/efe72f0bc...4kw5o1_500.gif

Launch approved.

If the deal included cutting back on the number of Iranian Cab drivers in the U.S.A.?

We got a good deal.
:D

No agreement stops anyone from doing anything.

The Munich Agreement/Accord didn't stop Hitler, for example.
The Treaty of Fontainebleau didn't stop Napoleon, either.

Agreements are only effective if both sides follow through with their respective responsibilities per the terms agreed to.

In this case - the agreement has 3 glaring flaws that I have found so far.

1) Sanctions reduction are to begin quickly with European countries. However, the major players there have indicated they are unwilling to ease sanctions until Iran has consistently demonstrated it is abiding by its responsibilities. This creates the "well the other guy didn't follow the rules so...." scenario. Regardless of who is truly at fault, it sets the stage for the entire framework to fall apart.

2) The terms dictate that Iran provides access to its nuclear program for inspection. However, its wording is things like all activities/locations/centerfuges/etc. "that are known". There is no requirement (that I see so far - not done researching) for Iran to declare all of its nuclear program assets. As such, this means that any non-discovered asset could continue research/production without being a violation of the accord. Thus, this means that to succeed in keeping Iran from developing and building a nuke covertly, the various intel agencies of the world have to identify EVERY facet of the Iranian nuke program. If they can, great - but that is a very BIG if - and the consequences of failure are severe.

3) The agreement requires the Iranians to uphold their end of the bargain. Sadly, they do not have a stellar record of doing so, thus the integrity of the agreement is.... highly suspect.

Issues 1 and 2 could be resolved by future negotiations to correct these flaws. Issue 3 simply can not be "negotiated" away - time will tell if the Iranians will keep their word - or if they have agreed to something and lied because its ok for them to do so to non-muslims - the policy of taqiyya and kitman. (Quran 9:3, 40:28, 2:225, 66:2, 3:54, Bukhari 52:269, 49:857, 84:64-65, etc...)

Ultimately - this is likely to go down as another "peace in our time" moment when viewed through the lens of history.

Maybe those Iranians would just be happy with a bit of Liebestraum, or is it the PLO that wants that? :rotfl2:

Me, I'd just settle for that right nipple that's showing in that derailment! Those are some firm assets!

I'm sorry, you guys were saying?

Possibly the funniest derailment of a thread here!:up:
http://i.imgur.com/mmHFj6d.jpg

Missile enabled!

https://heavyeditorial.files.wordpre...tajd.gif?w=780

What a number of people overlook is that while South Africa dismantled it's "ready to go" nuclear weaponry it still has the means of producing
"enough nuclear explosive to fuel half a dozen bombs".

Obama wants our govt to hand this over to the USA - he has even named the price the USA is willing to pay for it. Our government has given him the "finger" on his offer, claiming they make more money by keeping it. Never mind the leverage this could afford them down the road.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/...62d_story.html

I agree on the factual details but I also believe the US is most concerned in the possibility terrorists could steal it rather than the fact South Africa would become a nuclear weapons country.

Fully agree with you Jimbuna. SA has no intention of making up a bomb again. I understand Uncle Sam's concern - and there is some merit to them given that we cannot even protect our Rhinos from extinction from illiterates wielding AK47's.

My concern is from another angle. Is SA mature enough democratically speaking that when the present ruling liberation party loses at the polls - which it is on the road to doing - will it willingly hand over political power?

I would not want that stuff lying in a vault with it holding the keys if it chooses not to. And neither would the free world I would imagine.

However, it is a valuable asset to the country and I do think Obama needs to up his offer a tad or two :D

According to Danish news US military was and is ready if...


http://time.com/3771077/iran-nuclear...bunker-buster/

Markus

Well to be honest, the US military has plans to bomb pretty much anything in the world. That's what the military is good at... planning just in case. Having a plan is good sense but does not mean actual intent.

Naive to believe any deal made will be followed by Iran.Naive to believe it is okay for Iran to have any type of nuclear technology while they have wacko islamists running that nation. This is appeasement by an administration and it's President who has not a clue on the realities of the world.This is what happens when someone with strong muslim sympathies is elected, plain and simple.Repeat of the 30's with Hitler, except this time the wackos will have weapons capable of more destruction than Hitler could imagine.

I hope I am wrong but doubt it, pretty easy to see.Sadly, the seeds of the next big war are sewn and this may seal the deal.