Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
2015/09/10 21:36:26
Subject: Re:So no ones talking about the Iran Nuke deal ?
They have to be on board for the negotiations to go anywhere.
Hardly, they are just looking for a reason they can break and start selling them stuff again.
Yes, and having them on board for the negotiations was the only way to choke off every alternative so Iran would *have* to negotiate. If the other powers feel they did their fair share only for the US to scuttle it for what they would inevitably see as a tertiary issue, will dramatically damage that will to continue to cooperate, and open avenues for Iran to get around US sanctions and then the US's only alternative regarding Iran's nuclear program will be war.
Inversely, they couldn't negotiate it without US either. No hostages, no one even shows up to talk.
This is assuming the issue is as relevant to these other nations as the US likes to make it. It's not. Russia and China certainly could have gone on happily not caring if there had never been sanctions or negotiations.
IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.
New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights! The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.
2015/09/10 21:39:26
Subject: Re:So no ones talking about the Iran Nuke deal ?
Ouze wrote: I think it's the best deal we're going to get, that it's not a bad deal, and that nearly anything I can do would be more productive than convincing anyone here of that. Clearly OP knows what he's going to think. If anyone else wants to tilt at that windmill, feel free, but I simply wanted to mention that it's not universally disapproved.
Ditto. It's not great, it's what we can expect to get, and throwing it away gaks on our allies that negotiated with us more than it would gak on Iran.
I'd argue the alternative is a repeat of the situation with Cuba, and come on... has that really worked out? For anyone?
They have to be on board for the negotiations to go anywhere.
Hardly, they are just looking for a reason they can break and start selling them stuff again.
Yes, and having them on board for the negotiations was the only way to choke off every alternative so Iran would *have* to negotiate. If the other powers feel they did their fair share only for the US to scuttle it for what they would inevitably see as a tertiary issue, will dramatically damage that will to continue to cooperate, and open avenues for Iran to get around US sanctions and then the US's only alternative regarding Iran's nuclear program will be war.
Inversely, they couldn't negotiate it without US either. No hostages, no one even shows up to talk.
This is assuming the issue is as relevant to these other nations as the US likes to make it. It's not. Russia and China certainly could have gone on happily not caring if there had never been sanctions or negotiations.
Right, so there no deal worthwhile to make. Keep the money.
understand, you think this is a tertiary issue. I think they holding our people is an act of war. Total War. So we're not going to agree ever. Thats fine.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/09/10 21:40:16
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
2015/09/10 21:40:26
Subject: Re:So no ones talking about the Iran Nuke deal ?
They have to be on board for the negotiations to go anywhere.
Hardly, they are just looking for a reason they can break and start selling them stuff again.
Yes, and having them on board for the negotiations was the only way to choke off every alternative so Iran would *have* to negotiate. If the other powers feel they did their fair share only for the US to scuttle it for what they would inevitably see as a tertiary issue, will dramatically damage that will to continue to cooperate, and open avenues for Iran to get around US sanctions and then the US's only alternative regarding Iran's nuclear program will be war.
Inversely, they couldn't negotiate it without US either. No hostages, no one even shows up to talk.
This is assuming the issue is as relevant to these other nations as the US likes to make it. It's not. Russia and China certainly could have gone on happily not caring if there had never been sanctions or negotiations.
Right, so there no deal worthwhile to make. Keep the money.
understand, you think this is a tertiary issue. I think they holding our people is an act of war. Total War. So we're not going to agree ever. Thats fine.
Fundamental differences in view, sure, and with such views we're never going to convince each other of anything.
I happen to think that the idea of holding, what like 4 people, is hardly an act of total war where every bit of strength and means at a state's disposal must be thrown into the effort to destroy and demolish an opposing state. It doesn't seem to be an appropriate use of resources, risk of lives, economic disruption, and I'm sure would not be so readily looked to if the military advantage were not so overwhelmingly one-sided in our favor. Besides, it's not like previous conflicts in the region we've been involved in have typically garnered great results. Additionally, it looks like at least one prisoner might possibly have been legitimately detained engaging in espionage activities.
And the Iranians have their own history and issues here. Four of the six powers negotiating this deal have either invaded and occupied Iran within living memory, worked to undermine and overthrow a democratically elected government, or actively supplied an invading neighbor with weapons and training.
IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.
New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights! The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.
2015/09/10 22:27:29
Subject: Re:So no ones talking about the Iran Nuke deal ?
This is a tactical error for Democrats politically long term.
Why? Because this Iranian "Deal" is Obamacare all over again. This deal is even MORE unpopular than Obamacare... Obama, and by extension the Democrats, owns it.
Fair or not, anything that Iran does now will be linked to this deal.
Kinda like, how Iraq is a disaster and Bush/Republicans are still being blamed for it... only 100x worst.
It's an interesting world you live in where access to healthcare for the first time ever to millions of Americans is "unpopular". It was unpopular with the Republican party, to be sure, but real Americans very strongly support it.
Let's be honest here, Whembly, why are such things unpopular? Is it because individual Americans are studying the actual details and checking the facts and researching the situation for themselves, and then using a reasoned and thoughtful approach to form their opinion? Or is it because they just blindly accept whatever rhetoric their politicians/favored news network is spewing at them and telling them to think?
I would bet real money that the majority fall under that second reason.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/09/10 23:20:24
"Through the darkness of future past, the magician longs to see.
One chants out between two worlds: Fire, walk with me." - Twin Peaks
"You listen to me. While I will admit to a certain cynicism, the fact is that I am a naysayer and hatchetman in the fight against violence. I pride myself in taking a punch and I'll gladly take another because I choose to live my life in the company of Gandhi and King. My concerns are global. I reject absolutely revenge, aggression, and retaliation. The foundation of such a method... is love. I love you Sheriff Truman." - Twin Peaks
2015/09/10 23:29:57
Subject: So no ones talking about the Iran Nuke deal ?
What are the details on inspections? I have heard a lot of conflicting information on this.
Also does anyone foresee this as the start of an arms race in the Middle East? Saudi Arabia, Jordan, UAE, and others are not fans of Iran. I can't see them accepting them as a potential nuclear power in the region unopposed.
2015/09/10 23:39:39
Subject: Re:So no ones talking about the Iran Nuke deal ?
This is a tactical error for Democrats politically long term.
Why? Because this Iranian "Deal" is Obamacare all over again. This deal is even MORE unpopular than Obamacare... Obama, and by extension the Democrats, owns it.
Fair or not, anything that Iran does now will be linked to this deal.
Kinda like, how Iraq is a disaster and Bush/Republicans are still being blamed for it... only 100x worst.
It's an interesting world you live in where access to healthcare for the first time ever to millions of Americans is "unpopular". It was unpopular with the Republican party, to be sure, but real Americans very strongly support it.
Let's be honest here, Whembly, why are such things unpopular?
Is it because individual Americans are studying the actual details and checking the facts and researching the situation for themselves, and then using a reasoned and thoughtful approach to form their opinion?
Or is it because they just blindly accept whatever rhetoric their politicians/favored news network is spewing at them and telling them to think?
I would bet real money that the majority fall under that second reason.
A) Doesn't matter... people's opinion do matter. Part of the reason why Trump is leading the polls now.
B) It's also condenscending as it smacks of... :pats pleebs on the head: "We know what's best for you... move along now".
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/09/11 00:01:27
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2015/09/11 00:33:00
Subject: Re:So no ones talking about the Iran Nuke deal ?
Simply stated, Obama/Kerry want any deal... results be damned.
Alternately, Non-proliferation is a pipe-dream. Pandora's box is open. Nuclear weapons have been made, and as a tool of international power and prestige, they will be sought consequences be damned and there is nothing anyone can do to stop it. North Korea is starving to death and that isn't enough to stop the North Korean state from developing nuclear power.
Isolating Iran over this issue has not helped anyone. It's driven Iran into being a rogue state, an international saber rattler, and arguably the most prolific exporter of terrorism in the middle east. We can continue playing the disasterous hand we've been attempting to play for the last 20 years, or we can simply accept that Iran is getting nuclear power one way or another, and unless we're willing to invade them and forcibly take that power away from them, we have to accept and live with a future where Iran is a member of the nuclear club.
I'm not really sure the deal changes much of anything. Say Iran announces tomorrow they have the bomb. The next day they have bombs falling on their heads. The difference being, with the deal, it won't likely just be the US's and Isreal's bombs.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/09/11 00:36:58
Help me, Rhonda. HA!
2015/09/11 01:14:17
Subject: Re:So no ones talking about the Iran Nuke deal ?
Simply stated, Obama/Kerry want any deal... results be damned.
Alternately, Non-proliferation is a pipe-dream. Pandora's box is open. Nuclear weapons have been made, and as a tool of international power and prestige, they will be sought consequences be damned and there is nothing anyone can do to stop it. North Korea is starving to death and that isn't enough to stop the North Korean state from developing nuclear power.
Isolating Iran over this issue has not helped anyone. It's driven Iran into being a rogue state, an international saber rattler, and arguably the most prolific exporter of terrorism in the middle east. We can continue playing the disasterous hand we've been attempting to play for the last 20 years, or we can simply accept that Iran is getting nuclear power one way or another, and unless we're willing to invade them and forcibly take that power away from them, we have to accept and live with a future where Iran is a member of the nuclear club.
Iran became a rogue state when the students took over the embassies. The U.S. and other powers screwed the pooch big time meddling in it's internal affairs prior to that.
2015/09/11 01:28:26
Subject: Re:So no ones talking about the Iran Nuke deal ?
I find it so weird that so many people are so concerned about Iranian leadership, but almost ambivalent to Saudi leadership. It produces this weird thing where Iran must be kept under lock and key so their leaders can't do anything bad, but the Saudi's are kept as regional allies, and no-one bats an eyelid at the absurdity of the situation.
Without the deal, there's a really high chance that we'd then stand there watching as a nuclear capable Iran's economy collapsed. I can write out a whole list of reasons that'd be bad, and the top two would be 1) gak explodes 2) people die.
Opening Iran up to trade while removing their capacity for nuclear weapons is a good thing. And probably the biggest strength is that long term, it actually makes the theocracy's hold on Iran much weaker. The J-Curve is a powerful predictor of regime stability, and if you haven't got time to go read about it, the short story is that despotic regimes are quite stable when closed off from the rest of the world, and actually become a lot less stable as they are opened up to the rest of the world.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Spetulhu wrote: Would someone perhaps prefer ANOTHER war in the Middle East? Iran is at least stable and, while it does fund some nasty groups, not engaged in open aggression anywhere. Their leaders talk tough but they are realists who know Iran is the old man on the block feebly shouting at the kids to get off his lawn.
Yep. Iran is engaged in three wars, backing the governments of Syria and Iraq against the rebel factions, and is backing the Houthis in their rebellion against the Yemeni government. All three proxy wars are long term money pits. And the economy Iran wants to keep funding those proxy wars is built around oil, and that's an industry with a pretty crappy medium term ahead of it (and maybe a crappy long term, depending on how things play out).
Automatically Appended Next Post:
gorgon wrote: The only real answer I see to Iran is gradual and eventual moderation among the country's leadership. If this deal buys a little time for that, so be it.
It doesn't just help it, it actively encourages moderation.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2015/09/11 01:44:09
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
2015/09/11 01:49:36
Subject: Re:So no ones talking about the Iran Nuke deal ?
Vaktathi wrote: And the Iranians have their own history and issues here. Four of the six powers negotiating this deal have either invaded and occupied Iran within living memory, worked to undermine and overthrow a democratically elected government, or actively supplied an invading neighbor with weapons and training.
Well, there's that part too. The Iranians actually negotiating with people that have heavily messed up their lives before (overthrowing a democratic government to prop up a despot instead) is actually a great victory in itself. And as was already pointed out, making a deal means you have justification for harsher measures - maybe even for war - if they break it. But in reality Iran is still the weakest BIG player around the Persian Gulf. Saudi-Arabia is much more powerful, Turkey is a NATO member and Israel is a special snowflake (and also very much more powerful, and already a nuke nation). Hell, global superpowers like Norway and North Korea have bigger military budgets and they are jokes compared to real spending!
Iran really is the old man on the block, shouting at the kids to get off his lawn. Telling him you'll talk to the kids will calm him down.
2015/09/11 01:58:49
Subject: Re:So no ones talking about the Iran Nuke deal ?
This is a tactical error for Democrats politically long term.
Why? Because this Iranian "Deal" is Obamacare all over again. This deal is even MORE unpopular than Obamacare... Obama, and by extension the Democrats, owns it.
It is the same as Obamacare, in that any deal, no matter the details, is a vote loser because voters get just as silly and negative about international negotiations as they do about changes to healthcare.
And it's the same, because in both cases the Republicans committed to absolutely opposing the bill long before the details of either were known.
But in both cases, the long term effects will be negligible. The foundations of both ACA and the Iran deal are solid, and ultimately neither will have any lasting effect on the electorate. In the short term it gets the Republican true believers excited, but that's hardly difficult to achieve these days. Those guys get excited over Obama letting Alaska change the name of one of its own mountains.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Relapse wrote: Iran became a rogue state when the students took over the embassies. The U.S. and other powers screwed the pooch big time meddling in it's internal affairs prior to that.
That's true, but once you realise 'rogue state' has no meaning beyond 'America doesn't like this country', it's also really meaningless.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2015/09/11 02:05:22
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
2015/09/11 02:58:35
Subject: Re:So no ones talking about the Iran Nuke deal ?
Hah, the Saudis are our "allies" like the Pakistanis are our "allies". I know it doesn't get mentioned much here as you say but it's definitely been mentioned at least a few times before.
lord_blackfang wrote: Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote: The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
2015/09/11 03:28:03
Subject: Re:So no ones talking about the Iran Nuke deal ?
Ouze wrote: Hah, the Saudis are our "allies" like the Pakistanis are our "allies". I know it doesn't get mentioned much here as you say but it's definitely been mentioned at least a few times before.
Yeah, 'allies'
But it's very funny that no-one bats an eyelid at those countries not just being allowed open trade with the rest of the world, but you build actual working military treaties with them. But then insist that Iran must be closed off from trade with the rest of the world, possibly forever.
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
2015/09/11 06:23:59
Subject: Re:So no ones talking about the Iran Nuke deal ?
sebster wrote: I find it so weird that so many people are so concerned about Iranian leadership, but almost ambivalent to Saudi leadership. It produces this weird thing where Iran must be kept under lock and key so their leaders can't do anything bad, but the Saudi's are kept as regional allies, and no-one bats an eyelid at the absurdity of the situation.
The Sauds didn't depose a Western puppet, and actively worked against movements sympathetic to the group that did depose a Western puppet. Specifically they made certain that oil producing regions remained under Saud, and therefore Aramco, control.
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
2015/09/11 07:31:33
Subject: Re:So no ones talking about the Iran Nuke deal ?
dogma wrote: The Sauds didn't depose a Western puppet, and actively worked against movements sympathetic to the group that did depose a Western puppet. Specifically they made certain that oil producing regions remained under Saud, and therefore Aramco, control.
Sure, I think the Iranian revolution is probably still the context most Americans view Iran through. But I really doubt the Saudi's support for and dependence on Aramco is really that much of an issue for most pundits in this thread. That kind of reality matters at the State dept, not so much on dakka.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/09/11 07:31:45
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
2015/09/11 08:02:39
Subject: Re:So no ones talking about the Iran Nuke deal ?
Sure, I think the Iranian revolution is probably still the context most Americans view Iran through. But I really doubt the Saudi's support for and dependence on Aramco is really that much of an issue for most pundits in this thread.
Maybe not directly, but it certainly influences how the Iranian state and the Saudi state are characterized. Iran essentially kicked out Westerners, while Saudi Arabia accepted them as customers.
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
2015/09/11 19:54:06
Subject: Re:So no ones talking about the Iran Nuke deal ?
sebster wrote: I find it so weird that so many people are so concerned about Iranian leadership, but almost ambivalent to Saudi leadership. It produces this weird thing where Iran must be kept under lock and key so their leaders can't do anything bad, but the Saudi's are kept as regional allies, and no-one bats an eyelid at the absurdity of the situation.
The Sauds didn't depose a Western puppet, and actively worked against movements sympathetic to the group that did depose a Western puppet. Specifically they made certain that oil producing regions remained under Saud, and therefore Aramco, control.
Most of the 9/11 Hijackers (15 of 19) were Saudi Arabians. Try again.
It is best to be a pessimist. You are usually right and, when you're wrong, you're pleasantly surprised.
2015/09/11 20:32:26
Subject: Re:So no ones talking about the Iran Nuke deal ?
sebster wrote: I find it so weird that so many people are so concerned about Iranian leadership, but almost ambivalent to Saudi leadership. It produces this weird thing where Iran must be kept under lock and key so their leaders can't do anything bad, but the Saudi's are kept as regional allies, and no-one bats an eyelid at the absurdity of the situation.
The Sauds didn't depose a Western puppet, and actively worked against movements sympathetic to the group that did depose a Western puppet. Specifically they made certain that oil producing regions remained under Saud, and therefore Aramco, control.
Most of the 9/11 Hijackers (15 of 19) were Saudi Arabians. Try again.
And? That doesn't mean that the Saudi government sponsored or supported their actions.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/09/11 20:32:50
The Laws of Thermodynamics:
1) You cannot win. 2) You cannot break even. 3) You cannot stop playing the game.
Colonel Flagg wrote:You think you're real smart. But you're not smart; you're dumb. Very dumb. But you've met your match in me.
2015/09/11 20:59:39
Subject: So no ones talking about the Iran Nuke deal ?
Well, considering that we attacked Iraq and wasted 5000 American and 1.5 million Iraqi lives on even less evidence, and with less justification, I think one should not consider "well, the Saudis didn't do X, Y and Z!" when our own nation is guilty of some/all of those things as anything to brag about. Or to even attempt to use as a serious point of debate.
It is best to be a pessimist. You are usually right and, when you're wrong, you're pleasantly surprised.
2015/09/11 21:01:21
Subject: Re:So no ones talking about the Iran Nuke deal ?
This is an interesting series of comments from Admiral Ace Lyons on the way we have missed several opportunities with Islamic fundamentalism over the years and a fairly scathing indictment of obama.
Relapse wrote: This is an interesting series of comments from Admiral Ace Lyons on the way we have missed several opportunities with Islamic fundamentalism over the years and a fairly scathing indictment of obama.
I could probably write a lengthy paper I why he is wrong but I will just sum it up.
1. Never trust somebody that stands to profit on their advice. Or in other words Mr. Lyons profits off the conflict between the U.S. and the Middle East and likely will say a do anything to keep that paycheck coming.
2. "Islam is a political movement disguised as a religion." Lol wut? If that doesn't smack of agenda I don't know what does.
3. The Neoconservative model for foreign policy needs to go and die in a hole somewhere. Perpetual war + perpetual fear = profit is not how I want my country ran.
