http://bigstory.ap.org/article/a9f4e4080...-work-site Wrote:Iran will be allowed to use its own inspectors to investigate a site it has been accused of using to develop nuclear arms, operating under a secret agreement with the U.N. agency that normally carries out such work, according to a document seen by The Associated Press.
Approximately two people are waiting upon the results with no idea what the answer is. Word is that Barack Obama and John Kerry have set up a personal 24-hour vigil in the Oval Office, both eagerly monitoring the results, vowing to wake up the other one as soon as news comes in as to the results.
I'm still trying to figure out how The Onion managed to buy out the Associated Press.
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/a9f4e4080...-work-site Wrote:Iran will be allowed to use its own inspectors to investigate a site it has been accused of using to develop nuclear arms, operating under a secret agreement with the U.N. agency that normally carries out such work, according to a document seen by The Associated Press.
Approximately two people are waiting upon the results with no idea what the answer is. Word is that Barack Obama and John Kerry have set up a personal 24-hour vigil in the Oval Office, both eagerly monitoring the results, vowing to wake up the other one as soon as news comes in as to the results.
I'm still trying to figure out how The Onion managed to buy out the Associated Press.
Sorry sir, we are going to need you to provide better proof for our Chief Leftist Water Carrier and his minions around here than the AP. Until you can post some unbiased links from sources like MSNBCLOL, The Daily Kos, or the Daily Beast this is just right wing propaganda.
Waiting for the small print that says the USA is required to provide Iran with bombs, and delivery systems.
Maybe Obama bypasses Hawaii and moves the Tehran?
It has occurred to me that in normal negotiations - where there is some kind of provision for your opponent to back out after they sober up - it's a mistake to negotiate such that you win every single point of contention. For a sane adversary, it's clear they would take the opportunity to reset once they realize how badly they've been screwed.
However, in this case, Iran wins when the sober parties back out because it still results in what they really wanted - a complete removal of military and economic sanctions. Their patsies who never wanted sanctions will take the agreement as a cue to remove all sanctions, and their adversaries have no leverage to stop their nuclear activities.
Now, to be clear, by "patsies who never wanted tough sanctions", I include the likes of Russia, China, Norks, and the Obama Administration.
For those Obama supporters that say that he is the one that built up the sanctions regime and brought Iran to its knees, perhaps you'd care to read what Joe Lieberman says on the matter...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/...story.html Wrote:I was a member of the Senate when, between 2009 and 2012, Congress developed a series of bills that dramatically increased pressure on Tehran for its illicit nuclear activities, including adopting a measure in late 2011 that effectively banned Iran from selling oil — its economic lifeblood — on international markets. In every case, senior Obama administration officials worked to block congressional efforts, warning that they were unnecessary, counterproductive and even dangerous.
(08-19-2015 10:31 PM)I45owl Wrote: It has occurred to me that in normal negotiations - where there is some kind of provision for your opponent to back out after they sober up - it's a mistake to negotiate such that you win every single point of contention. For a sane adversary, it's clear they would take the opportunity to reset once they realize how badly they've been screwed.
However, in this case, Iran wins when the sober parties back out because it still results in what they really wanted - a complete removal of military and economic sanctions. Their patsies who never wanted sanctions will take the agreement as a cue to remove all sanctions, and their adversaries have no leverage to stop their nuclear activities.
Now, to be clear, by "patsies who never wanted tough sanctions", I include the likes of Russia, China, Norks, and the Obama Administration.
For those Obama supporters that say that he is the one that built up the sanctions regime and brought Iran to its knees, perhaps you'd care to read what Joe Lieberman says on the matter...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/...story.html Wrote:I was a member of the Senate when, between 2009 and 2012, Congress developed a series of bills that dramatically increased pressure on Tehran for its illicit nuclear activities, including adopting a measure in late 2011 that effectively banned Iran from selling oil — its economic lifeblood — on international markets. In every case, senior Obama administration officials worked to block congressional efforts, warning that they were unnecessary, counterproductive and even dangerous.
We can do all the sanctions we want, but if the allies don't go along with it, they're useless. It sounds like we got pushed through whatever sanctions we could get the allies to go along with.
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/a9f4e4080...-work-site Wrote:Iran will be allowed to use its own inspectors to investigate a site it has been accused of using to develop nuclear arms, operating under a secret agreement with the U.N. agency that normally carries out such work, according to a document seen by The Associated Press.
Approximately two people are waiting upon the results with no idea what the answer is. Word is that Barack Obama and John Kerry have set up a personal 24-hour vigil in the Oval Office, both eagerly monitoring the results, vowing to wake up the other one as soon as news comes in as to the results.
I'm still trying to figure out how The Onion managed to buy out the Associated Press.
Sorry sir, we are going to need you to provide better proof for our Chief Leftist Water Carrier and his minions around here than the AP. Until you can post some unbiased links from sources like MSNBCLOL, The Daily Kos, or the Daily Beast this is just right wing propaganda.
You mean like facts...like the AP is basically full of ****? Nah...just ignore those.
Quote:A key point here: The Parchin inspection is not part of the Iran nuclear deal that was negotiated by the US and other world powers with Iran. Rather, this is something the IAEA negotiates directly with the country it's inspecting, in this case Iran.
It is still related to the larger nuclear deal. The IAEA has to give the official thumbs-up on the PMD issue — the deadline is this fall — in order for the nuclear deal to go forward. But neither the US nor Obama are involved in this part — that's just not how these negotiations works.
...
This time, though, it was in the Associated Press. This is certainly not the first time that someone has placed a strategic leak in order to achieve a political objective. But it is disturbing that the AP allowed itself to be used in this way, that it exaggerated the story in a way that have likely misled large numbers of people, and that, having now scrubbed many of the details, it has appended no note or correction explaining the changes. It is not a proud moment for journalism.
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/a9f4e4080...-work-site Wrote:Iran will be allowed to use its own inspectors to investigate a site it has been accused of using to develop nuclear arms, operating under a secret agreement with the U.N. agency that normally carries out such work, according to a document seen by The Associated Press.
Approximately two people are waiting upon the results with no idea what the answer is. Word is that Barack Obama and John Kerry have set up a personal 24-hour vigil in the Oval Office, both eagerly monitoring the results, vowing to wake up the other one as soon as news comes in as to the results.
I'm still trying to figure out how The Onion managed to buy out the Associated Press.
Sorry sir, we are going to need you to provide better proof for our Chief Leftist Water Carrier and his minions around here than the AP. Until you can post some unbiased links from sources like MSNBCLOL, The Daily Kos, or the Daily Beast this is just right wing propaganda.
You mean like facts...like the AP is basically full of ****? Nah...just ignore those.
Quote:A key point here: The Parchin inspection is not part of the Iran nuclear deal that was negotiated by the US and other world powers with Iran. Rather, this is something the IAEA negotiates directly with the country it's inspecting, in this case Iran.
It is still related to the larger nuclear deal. The IAEA has to give the official thumbs-up on the PMD issue — the deadline is this fall — in order for the nuclear deal to go forward. But neither the US nor Obama are involved in this part — that's just not how these negotiations works.
...
This time, though, it was in the Associated Press. This is certainly not the first time that someone has placed a strategic leak in order to achieve a political objective. But it is disturbing that the AP allowed itself to be used in this way, that it exaggerated the story in a way that have likely misled large numbers of people, and that, having now scrubbed many of the details, it has appended no note or correction explaining the changes. It is not a proud moment for journalism.
Did someone mention The Onion?
It doesn't matter how many times you link it the fact is it's an article from the leftist propaganda rag Vox bashing the neutral AP.
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/a9f4e4080...-work-site Wrote:Iran will be allowed to use its own inspectors to investigate a site it has been accused of using to develop nuclear arms, operating under a secret agreement with the U.N. agency that normally carries out such work, according to a document seen by The Associated Press.
Approximately two people are waiting upon the results with no idea what the answer is. Word is that Barack Obama and John Kerry have set up a personal 24-hour vigil in the Oval Office, both eagerly monitoring the results, vowing to wake up the other one as soon as news comes in as to the results.
I'm still trying to figure out how The Onion managed to buy out the Associated Press.
Sorry sir, we are going to need you to provide better proof for our Chief Leftist Water Carrier and his minions around here than the AP. Until you can post some unbiased links from sources like MSNBCLOL, The Daily Kos, or the Daily Beast this is just right wing propaganda.
You mean like facts...like the AP is basically full of ****? Nah...just ignore those.
Quote:A key point here: The Parchin inspection is not part of the Iran nuclear deal that was negotiated by the US and other world powers with Iran. Rather, this is something the IAEA negotiates directly with the country it's inspecting, in this case Iran.
It is still related to the larger nuclear deal. The IAEA has to give the official thumbs-up on the PMD issue — the deadline is this fall — in order for the nuclear deal to go forward. But neither the US nor Obama are involved in this part — that's just not how these negotiations works.
...
This time, though, it was in the Associated Press. This is certainly not the first time that someone has placed a strategic leak in order to achieve a political objective. But it is disturbing that the AP allowed itself to be used in this way, that it exaggerated the story in a way that have likely misled large numbers of people, and that, having now scrubbed many of the details, it has appended no note or correction explaining the changes. It is not a proud moment for journalism.
Did someone mention The Onion?
It doesn't matter how many times you link it the fact is it's an article from the leftist propaganda rag Vox bashing the neutral AP.
Tote that water!
What was wrong in the article I posted? Be specific.
Deflect from the truth!
Quote:Eminent Iran and security expert Gary Sick pointed out in an email late Wednesday that the Associated Press just ran a shamefully inaccurate story alleging that under the UN Security Council deal with Iran, Iran would carry out some of the inspections of their own “sensitive sites.”
The accord actually provides for the inspectors of the International Atomic Energy Agency always to be present at such inspections. The reason for the presence of Iranian experts is that there is a long history of outside nuclear teams being sent in by the Great Powers for espionage. I.e., the Iranian inspectors are there to keep an eye on the UN inspectors, not to cover up Iranian activities (to which the IAEA will have full access). The 1990s UN inspections of Iraq were infiltrated, for instance, by US intelligence.
Quote:A senior State Department official said that the U.N. nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, would have "total oversight" of sampling and inspections of Parchin under the agreement between the agency and Iran over access to the site.
"Iran is not self-inspecting," the official said, though this official would not deny that Iranian inspectors will "play a role."
It seems likely that IAEA staff would either be present or watching via video camera when the Iranians take samples from the site, a practice that the international nuclear agency has used in previous inspections agreements.
A senior administration official, meanwhile, said that while Iranians may be taking the samples at Parchin, individuals from other countries will be a part of their analysis. The official noted that the arrangement satisfies the demands of the IAEA.
Approximately two people are waiting upon the results with no idea what the answer is. Word is that Barack Obama and John Kerry have set up a personal 24-hour vigil in the Oval Office, both eagerly monitoring the results, vowing to wake up the other one as soon as news comes in as to the results.
I'm still trying to figure out how The Onion managed to buy out the Associated Press.
Sorry sir, we are going to need you to provide better proof for our Chief Leftist Water Carrier and his minions around here than the AP. Until you can post some unbiased links from sources like MSNBCLOL, The Daily Kos, or the Daily Beast this is just right wing propaganda.
You mean like facts...like the AP is basically full of ****? Nah...just ignore those.
Quote:A key point here: The Parchin inspection is not part of the Iran nuclear deal that was negotiated by the US and other world powers with Iran. Rather, this is something the IAEA negotiates directly with the country it's inspecting, in this case Iran.
It is still related to the larger nuclear deal. The IAEA has to give the official thumbs-up on the PMD issue — the deadline is this fall — in order for the nuclear deal to go forward. But neither the US nor Obama are involved in this part — that's just not how these negotiations works.
...
This time, though, it was in the Associated Press. This is certainly not the first time that someone has placed a strategic leak in order to achieve a political objective. But it is disturbing that the AP allowed itself to be used in this way, that it exaggerated the story in a way that have likely misled large numbers of people, and that, having now scrubbed many of the details, it has appended no note or correction explaining the changes. It is not a proud moment for journalism.
Did someone mention The Onion?
It doesn't matter how many times you link it the fact is it's an article from the leftist propaganda rag Vox bashing the neutral AP.
Tote that water!
What was wrong in the article I posted? Be specific.
Deflect from the truth!
Quote:Eminent Iran and security expert Gary Sick pointed out in an email late Wednesday that the Associated Press just ran a shamefully inaccurate story alleging that under the UN Security Council deal with Iran, Iran would carry out some of the inspections of their own “sensitive sites.”
The accord actually provides for the inspectors of the International Atomic Energy Agency always to be present at such inspections. The reason for the presence of Iranian experts is that there is a long history of outside nuclear teams being sent in by the Great Powers for espionage. I.e., the Iranian inspectors are there to keep an eye on the UN inspectors, not to cover up Iranian activities (to which the IAEA will have full access). The 1990s UN inspections of Iraq were infiltrated, for instance, by US intelligence.
Quote:A senior State Department official said that the U.N. nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, would have "total oversight" of sampling and inspections of Parchin under the agreement between the agency and Iran over access to the site.
"Iran is not self-inspecting," the official said, though this official would not deny that Iranian inspectors will "play a role."
It seems likely that IAEA staff would either be present or watching via video camera when the Iranians take samples from the site, a practice that the international nuclear agency has used in previous inspections agreements.
A senior administration official, meanwhile, said that while Iranians may be taking the samples at Parchin, individuals from other countries will be a part of their analysis. The official noted that the arrangement satisfies the demands of the IAEA.
But by all means...keep your head buried to reality. It would probably upset me more to have you actually own up for a change.
The AP says it has seen documents stating what they claim. Your CNN link (not reading anything from the leftist/globalist Juan Cole, sorry) is based solely on the denial by Obama's State Department.
Who am I going to trust? The unbiased AP or the very State Department who "negotiated" this abortion of a treaty? Hmmmmm.
And EL OH EL @ you for talking about someone else burying their head to reality, Mr. "I don't click on any link that doesn't go to a leftist propaganda site". Hypocrisy is evidently a bedrock principal of you leftists.
(08-19-2015 10:31 PM)I45owl Wrote: It has occurred to me that in normal negotiations - where there is some kind of provision for your opponent to back out after they sober up - it's a mistake to negotiate such that you win every single point of contention. For a sane adversary, it's clear they would take the opportunity to reset once they realize how badly they've been screwed.
However, in this case, Iran wins when the sober parties back out because it still results in what they really wanted - a complete removal of military and economic sanctions. Their patsies who never wanted sanctions will take the agreement as a cue to remove all sanctions, and their adversaries have no leverage to stop their nuclear activities.
Now, to be clear, by "patsies who never wanted tough sanctions", I include the likes of Russia, China, Norks, and the Obama Administration.
For those Obama supporters that say that he is the one that built up the sanctions regime and brought Iran to its knees, perhaps you'd care to read what Joe Lieberman says on the matter...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/...story.html Wrote:I was a member of the Senate when, between 2009 and 2012, Congress developed a series of bills that dramatically increased pressure on Tehran for its illicit nuclear activities, including adopting a measure in late 2011 that effectively banned Iran from selling oil — its economic lifeblood — on international markets. In every case, senior Obama administration officials worked to block congressional efforts, warning that they were unnecessary, counterproductive and even dangerous.
We can do all the sanctions we want, but if the allies don't go along with it, they're useless. It sounds like we got pushed through whatever sanctions we could get the allies to go along with.
No, they aren't useless. We are the largest economy in the world. Use the leverage. The sanctions don't need to stop with Iran. We could stop importing German schit too. Bet they'd go along under that pressure.
We don't have an economy any more that has the kind of leverage we used to be able to exert.
There are lots of places that would probably just tell us to kiss off if we started trying to throw our weight around.
Sanctions don't work, never have, never will. So a treaty that depends on sanctions as its enforcement mechanism is extremely unlikely to work either.
I don't think we had much to work with here. My only problem is acting like this treaty actually accomplishes anything. It doesn't. So don't pretend that it does. It gives Obama a piece of paper, and that's about it.
![[Image: clip_17.jpg?w=477]](http://i2.wp.com/www.jewishpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/clip_17.jpg?w=477)
