The Nuclear Iran Situation

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Kutnupe14

    Troll Emeritus
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 13, 2011
    40,294
    149
    Time to sink that ship. I doubt Trump is going to let the military stand idol will they buzz our ships with planes and let boats run circles around our ships taunting them. I thing Iran is gonna get a wake up call in the near future.

    They're getting it from Russia too. However, 1911, I think if you check other sources, that shipment does not appear to be prohibited. I looked, and it says that it was already sanctioned. That article is pretty light on details. Purposefully, I'm sure.
     

    T.Lex

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    15   0   0
    Mar 30, 2011
    25,859
    113
    Isn't that sort of not conducive to breathing?

    Usually.

    This has all the marks of a power play, secular at that. Ahmadinejad is still popular, supposedly. Certainly high profile. He says he's putting his name in to support his VP, but even that seems strange.

    The next step is for all of the "candidates" to be vetted by TPTB. That'll be a real test. They can't necessarily find him unworthy of the post. But, they also can't really allow him to run. He may be doing this for internal leverage, and then withdraw.

    We don't have much (public) transparency into their inner workings. At this point, it simply registers as peculiar.
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    62,321
    113
    Gtown-ish
    Usually.

    This has all the marks of a power play, secular at that. Ahmadinejad is still popular, supposedly. Certainly high profile. He says he's putting his name in to support his VP, but even that seems strange.

    The next step is for all of the "candidates" to be vetted by TPTB. That'll be a real test. They can't necessarily find him unworthy of the post. But, they also can't really allow him to run. He may be doing this for internal leverage, and then withdraw.

    We don't have much (public) transparency into their inner workings. At this point, it simply registers as peculiar.

    I'm not necessarily opposed to the idea of him not breathing.
     

    ArcadiaGP

    Wanderer
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    11   0   0
    Jun 15, 2009
    31,729
    113
    Indianapolis
    Uhm... ****ing what?


    BREAKING: Trump administration certifies Iran complying with nuclear deal, extends sanctions relief but says review underway.
     

    ghitch75

    livin' in the sticks
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    119   0   0
    Dec 21, 2009
    13,532
    113
    Greene County
    Media reporting that Trump may will seek to decertify Iran Nuclear deal on the grounds that it is not in the US's best interests. James Maddis holds the opinion that this deal is in the US's best interests. Iran say that if the US pulls out, it will make the entire deal void (even those with other nations).
    Trump to ?decertify? Iran nuclear deal next week: report | TheHill

    Seems like a bad idea.


    but there not complying with the deal......they won't let inspectors in.......

    "Iran’s top authorities have rejected giving international inspectors access to their military sites and officials have told Reuters any such move would trigger harsh consequences."

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ss-to-iran-military-bases-haley-idUSKCN1B524I
     

    T.Lex

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    15   0   0
    Mar 30, 2011
    25,859
    113
    I'm reading that Trump will say that Iran is in compliance, but that the whole deal should be scrapped.

    That's (usually) a tough row to hoe.

    If they haven't let certain inspectors into some sites, but are "technically" in compliance, it makes me think that the inspectors don't have the right to go to those sites.
     

    Kutnupe14

    Troll Emeritus
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 13, 2011
    40,294
    149
    Well more idiocracy coming out of the White House. Mere days after Sec Maddis tells congress that it's a bad idea to to leave the agreement, the president today starts us down the path to "decertify" the agreement, and then punts it to congress to review for 60 days. The president says that Iran, despite being in compliance with the agreement, is living up to the "spirit" of the deal. And more sanctions are forthcoming. The hardliners in Iran are probably overjoyed, because if the US does pull out completely, they can point their fingers at us and say "we held up our end of the bargain, it's the US that messed up this agreement" ....and they'd be totally right.
    And of course the possibility of there ever being an agreement with North Korea, went to slightly below nil. Why would the North Koreans ever enter into a deal with a nation who doesn't keep it's agreement.
     

    Kutnupe14

    Troll Emeritus
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 13, 2011
    40,294
    149
    I'm reading that Trump will say that Iran is in compliance, but that the whole deal should be scrapped.

    That's (usually) a tough row to hoe.

    If they haven't let certain inspectors into some sites, but are "technically" in compliance, it makes me think that the inspectors don't have the right to go to those sites.

    According to the agreement, inspectors are allowed to those sites, and if they are prevent from doing so, then the US can bring it up at the security council, and at that time withdraw. Given how long the president has been in office, and that recertification must occur ever 60 days(?) one would ask if this administration has followed such protocols.
     

    T.Lex

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    15   0   0
    Mar 30, 2011
    25,859
    113
    According to the agreement, inspectors are allowed to those sites, and if they are prevent from doing so, then the US can bring it up at the security council, and at that time withdraw. Given how long the president has been in office, and that recertification must occur ever 60 days(?) one would ask if this administration has followed such protocols.
    Well, he's not a politician, so procedures aren't really a big deal.
     

    KittySlayer

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Jan 29, 2013
    6,487
    77
    Northeast IN
    ...{Trump} punts it to congress to review for 60 days...

    Perhaps the Treaty should have been voted on by the Senate in the first place?

    WH {Obama} says if nuke deal is reached with Iran it won't be a treaty subject to Senate ratification.




    money.jpg
     

    BugI02

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 4, 2013
    32,557
    149
    Columbus, OH
    Well, he's not a politician, so procedures aren't really a big deal.

    Well, there is this, lolz:

    What these two constitutional provisions mean is that we will consider any agreement regarding your nuclear-weapons program that is not approved by the Congress as nothing more than an executive agreement between President Obama and Ayatollah Khamenei. The next president could revoke such an executive agreement with the stroke of a pen and future Congresses could modify the terms of the agreement at any time.

    View attachment 59905
     

    IndyDave1776

    Grandmaster
    Emeritus
    Rating - 100%
    12   0   0
    Jan 12, 2012
    27,286
    113
    I don't think any of us liked John Roberts and the 'tax that isn't a tax except when it's a tax', so why should we have any respect for the treaty that isn't a treaty except when the usual suspects want to consider it a binding treaty?
     

    Kutnupe14

    Troll Emeritus
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 13, 2011
    40,294
    149
    I don't think any of us liked John Roberts and the 'tax that isn't a tax except when it's a tax', so why should we have any respect for the treaty that isn't a treaty except when the usual suspects want to consider it a binding treaty?

    I don't think anyone said it is binding, nor that the president doesn't have the power to rescind this agreement. I can't speak for anybody, but for me, I question the logic of such a move. Especially the signal it sends to North Korea, given that it was an agreement that Iran upheld it's end, and the US is in the process of pulling out of it.
     

    IndyDave1776

    Grandmaster
    Emeritus
    Rating - 100%
    12   0   0
    Jan 12, 2012
    27,286
    113
    I don't think anyone said it is binding, nor that the president doesn't have the power to rescind this agreement. I can't speak for anybody, but for me, I question the logic of such a move. Especially the signal it sends to North Korea, given that it was an agreement that Iran upheld it's end, and the US is in the process of pulling out of it.

    The only signal sent to NK is that we had a president who was apparently born with his brain up his ass and sh*t it out followed by one who is disinclined to continue with an absolutely worthless nonbinding agreement.
     
    Top Bottom