What's new

AP Exclusive: Draft agreement cuts Iran's nuclear hardware

Don't sign this sh!t. Who cares about sanctions. When India tested her nukes in 74 with Smiling Buddha the west but crippling sanctions. You know what we did? We tested it again in 98. They want to keep you down one way or another. All Iran has to do is grow her economy and they will be forced to drop their sanctions. Remember if you give an inch, they will take a mile.
 
.
Don't sign this sh!t. Who cares about sanctions. When India tested her nukes in 74 with Smiling Buddha the west but crippling sanctions. You know what we did? We tested it again in 98. They want to keep you down one way or another. All Iran has to do is grow her economy and they will be forced to drop their sanctions. Remember if you give an inch, they will take a mile.
The sheer ignorance in this post is staggering. India never had it as bad as Iran does today. Our sanctions are much more severe. On the other hand the mullahs aren't looking for nukes and that coupled with Iran's relatively small population means we don't have much weight to throw around. India, a country with a billion plus people and nuclear weapons, was able to throw its weight around. The sanctions were also much less severe.

Apples and oranges.
 
.
The sheer ignorance in this post is staggering. India never had it as bad as Iran does today. Our sanctions are much more severe. On the other hand the mullahs aren't looking for nukes and that coupled with Iran's relatively small population means we don't have much weight to throw around. India, a country with a billion plus people and nuclear weapons, was able to throw its weight around. The sanctions were also much less severe.

Apples and oranges.

Sorry if I offended you I was just trying to give support...
 
. .
I guess you did not read the article carefully. It says 100 kSWU is needed for fueling of Arak and Bushehr. @rahi2357 was not talking about fueling the reactors.


The bone of contention here is pivoting on the "Capacity" of the IR-1 centrifuge, which is under dispute. And not fueling of Arak & Bushehr.



[[[[[[[[Also Iran's most advanced centrifuge the IR-6 has actually the capacity of 24 SWU. Whether it will be permitted to become operational (at least for research purposes) under this deal, is yet to be seen.]]]]]]]]


Iran has a history of exaggerating its nuclear accomplishments and the nomenclature it uses for its advanced centrifuges provides no indication of the relative enrichment capacity of a particular centrifuge. The IR-6 is reportedly the same size as the IR-2m but wider in diameter and would be expected to have roughly the same enrichment output as the IR-2m centrifuge. But what is the enrichment output of the IR-8? Is the claim credible about it being 16 times more capable than the IR-1?

Based on this preliminary analysis, the IR-8 centrifuge is likely far less capable than implied by a literal reading of Iranian statements about enrichment outputs. Nevertheless, its size—both longer than the IR-1 and wider than the IR-2m centrifuge—would imply a capacity far in excess of the IR-1 centrifuge, at least theoretically. If Iran’s past experience in developing and deploying centrifuges is a guide, Iran may not be able to deploy this machine on a production-scale for many years. Moreover, this line of centrifuge development may not function well and could be abandoned.
 
.
Sorry if I offended you I was just trying to give support...
You didn't offend me. I know your heart was in the right place and you're just trying to be polite. But you gotta remember that Iran at the end of the day is a brutal dictatorship. As much of a bully as the Americans are, the Iranian regime currently brutalizing the people are even worse. Who to support is complicated. In this case signing a deal is a positive thing for the people of Iran.
 
.
Sorry if I offended you I was just trying to give support...
why you apologising you said your point view








===========================================================================
Big Bank’s Analyst Worries That Iran Deal Could Depress Weapons Sales

Could a deal to normalize Western relations with Iran and set limits on Iran’s development of nuclear technology lead to a more peaceful and less-weaponized Middle East?

That’s what supporters of the Iran negotiations certainly hope to achieve. But the prospect of stability has at least one financial analyst concerned about its impact on one of the world’s biggest defense contractors.

The possibility of an Iran nuclear deal depressing weapons sales was raised by Myles Walton, an analyst from Germany’s Deutsche Bank, during a Lockheed earnings call this past January 27th. Walton asked Marillyn Hewson, the chief executive of Lockheed Martin, if an Iran agreement could “impede what you see as progress in foreign military sales.” Financial industry analysts such as Walton use earnings calls as an opportunity to ask publicly-traded corporations like Lockheed about issues that might harm profitability.

Hewson replied that “that really isn’t coming up,” but stressed that “volatility all around the region” should continue to bring in new business. According to Hewson, “A lot of volatility, a lot of instability, a lot of things that are happening” in both the Middle East and the Asia-Pacific region means both are “growth areas” for Lockheed Martin.

The Deutsche Bank-Lockheed exchange “underscores a longstanding truism of the weapons trade: war — or the threat of war — is good for the arms business,” says William Hartung, director of the Arms & Security Project at the Center for International Policy. Hartung observed that Hewson described the normalization of relations with Iran not as a positive development for the future, but as an “impediment.” “And Hewson’s response,” Hartung adds, “which in essence is ‘don’t worry, there’s plenty of instability to go around,’ shows the perverse incentive structure that is at the heart of the international arms market.”
Rising tensions in the Middle East have prompted governments to go on a shopping spree for American lobbyists and weapons. DefenseOne reports that over the next five years, “Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Qatar and Jordan are expected to spend more $165 billion on arms.” And in the U.S., concerns over ISIS and Iran have prompted calls for an increase in the defense budget.

During the call, Hewson proudly noted that 20% of Lockheed’s sales in 2014 were “international” — meaning, to non-American customers. “So we’re pleased with that,” she said, adding that Lockheed has set a goal “to get to 25% over the next few years.”

Lockheed Martin’s trademarked slogan is “We never forget who we’re working for,” which Lockheed likes to suggest means Americans in general and military veterans in particular. The January earnings call indicates that Lockheed in fact answers to very different constituencies.

Big Bank's Analyst Worries That Iran Deal Could Depress Weapons Sales - The Intercept
 
. .
Iran's supreme leader specified some red lines.
So if there is a deal, which I still doubt, these will be applied:
1.Instant removal of sanctions must be part of the deal, not the result of it or other side decision.
2.No irreversible actions.
 
.
Iran's supreme leader specified some red lines.
So if there is a deal, which I still doubt, these will be applied:
1.Instant removal of sanctions must be part of the deal, not the result of it or other side decision.
2.No irreversible actions.
does he said Instant removal ? or he said removal .

as I was aware western countries didn't want to put forward a clear time-frame for removing the sanction and Iran had said there would be no agreement unless there be a clear and definite time-frame for removing the sanctions.

and after north Korea I wonder who ever gonna do accept any irreversible action while dealing with western countries , I don't think they are naive to the extent to ask Iran accept any sort of irreversible action .
 
.
does he said Instant removal ? or he said removal .

as I was aware western countries didn't want to put forward a clear time-frame for removing the sanction and Iran had said there would be no agreement unless there be a clear and definite time-frame for removing the sanctions.

and after north Korea I wonder who ever gonna do accept any irreversible action while dealing with western countries , I don't think they are naive to the extent to ask Iran accept any sort of irreversible action .
Instant removal:
رهبر معظم انقلاب در اجتماع عظیم زائران و مجاوران حرم رضوی(ع): رفع تحریم‌ها باید بلافاصله بعد از توافق انجام شود/ اقدامات برگشت‌ناپذیر در صنعت هسته‌ای را نمی‌پذیریم/ لزوم سعه صدر مسئولان در مقابل انتقادهای منطقی
 
.
Baba, sanctions won't be removed instantly. The West isn't some crackpot oil dictatorship with a grand ayatollah king that can decide something with a stroke of a pen. It'll take time. And why would they remove the sanctions instantly to begin with? Iran has to stick to its part of the deal first and sanctions will be removed with time. The only reason akhoonds are sitting at the negotiation table is b/c of the sanctions. Take the stick away and the animals will be back to their old ways.
 
. .
I dont think the sanctions can practically be removed instantly.
These sanctions took several years to build up. Its going to take years before Iran's nuclear program is "normalized" and will be treated as any other NPT member. And hence it will take years before sanctions are truly out of the picture.
Besides, not ALL sanctions are going to be lifted. Only the international nuclear-related sanctions, like the sanctions against the central bank, oil-sanctions and UN security council sanctions.
US is still going to have its sanctions in place, which prohibits trade between the US and Iran and US companies to enter Iranian market. For those kind of sanctions to be lifted is going to take another decade or two.
 
.
I dont think the sanctions can practically be removed instantly.
These sanctions took several years to build up. Its going to take years before Iran's nuclear program is "normalized" and will be treated as any other NPT member. And hence it will take years before sanctions are truly out of the picture.
Besides, not ALL sanctions are going to be lifted. Only the international nuclear-related sanctions, like the sanctions against the central bank, oil-sanctions and UN security council sanctions.
US is still going to have its sanctions in place, which prohibits trade between the US and Iran and US companies to enter Iranian market. For those kind of sanctions to be lifted is going to take another decade or two.

It seems the sanctions are actually to increase even if Iran reaches a deal: CIA Director: Sanctions Will Continue Even After a Nuclear Deal

It is sanctions either way. With the deal or without it.

I guess it is better to pull out of NPT and build nukes. The Americans are not serious about negotiations.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom