Iran nuclear deal could be reached in months: Kerry

[webfact]

Iran nuclear deal could be reached in months: Kerry

WASHINGTON: -- US Secretary of State John Kerry said Sunday a deal with Iran could be brokered within months if Tehran proves that its nuclear program was not being used to build atomic weapons.

In an interview with CBS's "60 Minutes" program, Kerry said the stated desire by Iranian President Hassan Rouhani for an agreement within three to six months could be met sooner if Iran satisfied certain conditions.
"It's possible to have a deal sooner than that -- depending on how forthcoming -- and clear Iran is prepared to be," Kerry said.

"We need to have a good deal here. And a good deal means that it is absolutely accountable, failsafe in its measures to make certain this is a peaceful program.

"If it is a peaceful program, and we can all see that -- the whole world sees that -- the relationship with Iran can change dramatically for the better and it can change fast," Kerry added.

The United States would not consider lifting sanctions against Iran until it was clear that a "verifiable, accountable, transparent process" was in place, the top US diplomat said.

He said opening up an underground nuclear enrichment facility in the mountains near the city of Qom for international inspection would demonstrate that Iran had no nuclear weapons ambitions.

"They could immediately open up the inspection of the Fordow facility, a secret facility underground in the mountains," Kerry said.

"They could immediately sign the protocols, the additional protocols of the international community regarding inspections.

"They could offer to cease voluntarily to take enrichment about a certain level, because there's no need to have it at a higher level for a peaceful program."

Kerry's comments came amid a marked improvement in relations between Washington and Tehran in recent months that culminated in a landmark telephone conversation between Rouhani and US President Barack Obama on Friday.

The nascent rapprochement has raised the prospect of an agreement being reached about Iran's nuclear program.

Western countries have long insisted Iran is secretly developing nuclear weapons; Iran insists the program is entirely peaceful in nature.


-- (c) Copyright AFP 2013-09-30

[DiamondKing]

And you believe them

My thought on it is lets get to the next step by getting to the point of having Nuclear Energy once we have that we are a BIG STEP CLOSER to developing a Nuclear Weapon or at least way ahead than they are now, once they have it they can just refuse to let inspectors but now the enrichment process is not too difficult to bring it up to weapons grade according to a Nuclear experts.

World War 3 is coming and best not give them any advantage

Edited September 30, 2013 by DiamondKing

[Scott]

I strongly suggest you stay on comment and not post inflammatory remarks. The topic is about Iran, so comments about Israel are off-topic.

[qdinthailand]

Obama - he'll do anything to avoid a war - even resolving the Iran Nuke Crisis using diplomacy. First Syrai, now Iran! Appeasement…bah humbug.

[midas]

And you believe them

My thought on it is lets get to the next step by getting to the point of having Nuclear Energy once we have that we are a BIG STEP CLOSER to developing a Nuclear Weapon or at least way ahead than they are now, once they have it they can just refuse to let inspectors but now the enrichment process is not too difficult to bring it up to weapons grade according to a Nuclear experts.

World War 3 is coming and best not give them any advantage

well if people think that way, Diamondking we are never going to get anywhere are we?

What more can Iran possibly offer to the world than to offer to adhere to the non-proliferation treaty? I think it shows a genuine willingness to search for a peaceful solution.

[hawker9000]

And you believe them

My thought on it is lets get to the next step by getting to the point of having Nuclear Energy once we have that we are a BIG STEP CLOSER to developing a Nuclear Weapon or at least way ahead than they are now, once they have it they can just refuse to let inspectors but now the enrichment process is not too difficult to bring it up to weapons grade according to a Nuclear experts.

World War 3 is coming and best not give them any advantage

well if people think that way, Diamondking we are never going to get anywhere are we?

What more can Iran possibly offer to the world than to offer to adhere to the non-proliferation treaty? I think it shows a genuine willingness to search for a peaceful solution.

(Yawn) Yet another "agreement" with Iran. Guess the mullahs must be weary of those pesky sanctions again. "I know. Let's play the Agreement card again; it's been awhile, they'll bite!"

Isn't it about time for some new "deal" with N. Korea again as well?

Silly westerners. You can sell 'em the same fake rolex over & over & over. They ALWAYS think THIS one's the real deal.

One thing I'll say for Obama's "transparent" administration though. Iran certainly sees right through him...

Edited September 30, 2013 by hawker9000

[Chicog]

Kerry is absolutely correct that it could be done that quickly - providing Iran accepts open and stringent monitoring from the IAEA.

Which I think is highly unlikely.

Iraq all over again.

[Jingthing]

I have mixed feelings about this. It's clear to me Iran is going to have the potential and/or reality of nuke weapons before very long ANYWAY and yes I think only fools don't see that, and I think Kerry and Obama see that too. So better that they are at least talking. They want to be an even greater power in their region and pretty much nothing can stop them. It may be possible to negotiate a scenario where they stay very close to weapons but no weapons because for their purposes that's almost as good.

The hope for a real peace between Iran and the west lies with the people of Iran. I think a good majority are in favor of more normalization but I still think the powers there will insist on the nuke capability at the least.

I also think it's unfair to demonize Obama about this being too soft. Why is the U.S. so relatively weak now? Because they are SPENT from Iraq which was done mistakenly by Bush, with the larger result basically being a massive strengthening of Iran.

Edited September 30, 2013 by Jingthing

[hawker9000]

I have mixed feelings about this. It's clear to me Iran is going to have the potential and/or reality of nuke weapons before very long ANYWAY and yes I think only fools don't see that, and I think Kerry and Obama see that too. So better that they are at least talking. They want to be an even greater power in their region and pretty much nothing can stop them. It may be possible to negotiate a scenario where they stay very close to weapons but no weapons because for their purposes that's almost as good.

The hope for a real peace between Iran and the west lies with the people of Iran. I think a good majority are in favor of more normalization but I still think the powers there will insist on the nuke capability at the least.

I also think it's unfair to demonize Obama about this being too soft. Why is the U.S. so relatively weak now? Because they are SPENT from Iraq which was done mistakenly by Bush, with the larger result basically being a massive strengthening of Iran.

...as opposed to what would've otherwise been a massive strengthening of Iraq. Life must be so simple for the Bush-bashers. Well, Obama certainly doesn't do much to complicate the lives of HIS critics... So I guess it must just be the whole career politician thing, eh?

[Jingthing]

Iran was always a greater threat than Iraq to the west. Now they have basically won the game. I can't predict how these negotiations will turn out but I'm sure it's a game from Iran. They aren't seriously willing to give anything. They just want the sanctions dropped.

Edited September 30, 2013 by Jingthing

[hawker9000]

Iran was always a greater threat than Iraq to the west. Now they have basically won the game. I can't predict how these negotiations will turn out but I'm sure it's a game from Iran. They aren't seriously willing to give anything. They just want the sanctions dropped.

Just your opinion. What country did Iran invade (in modern times) anyway?

[Chicog]

Iran was always a greater threat than Iraq to the west. Now they have basically won the game. I can't predict how these negotiations will turn out but I'm sure it's a game from Iran. They aren't seriously willing to give anything. They just want the sanctions dropped.

Just your opinion. What country did Iran invade (in modern times) anyway?

Well Iraq for one.

But then again Iran normally gets other people to do their dirty work for them, funding terrorist groups all over the world and sending Hizbollah bombers around the world, including Thailand.

[Jingthing]

Yeah, Iran plays the proxy game, that's for sure.

In any case Iran is quite powerful now but they've got a problem, the sanctions, so naturally they want it all.

Can't blame them for that, but hopefully the sanctions won't be lifted for nothing.

From the U.S. domestic political point of view, Obama is probably not the best chance of a meaningful deal with Iran. Being perceived as more leftist, he will be forced politically to be more hawkish. It would be easier for a republican to make such a deal, such as Nixon opening up relations in China. A liberal democrat could not have done that.

Edited September 30, 2013 by Jingthing

[chuckd]

When are sanctions really sanctions?

Whenever the current administration decides...is the answer.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

U.S. grants Iran sanctions exceptions to China

By Timothy Gardner and Arshad Mohammed

WASHINGTON | Thu Jun 28, 2012 7:05pm EDT

(Reuters) - The United States gave China a six-month reprieve from Iran financial sanctions on Thursday, avoiding a diplomatic spat with a country whose support it needs to try to quell violence in Syria and rein in Tehran's nuclear ambitions.

With Thursday's decision to grant exceptions to China, which buys up to a fifth of Iran's oil exports, and Singapore, which buys Iranian fuel oil, the Obama administration has now spared all 20 of Iran's major oil buyers from its unilateral sanctions.

The sanctions themselves are designed to pressure Iran to curb its nuclear program, which the West believes aims to develop nuclear weapons but which Tehran says is for peaceful purposes such as generating electricity and medical isotopes.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/28/us-usa-iran-sanctions-china-idUSBRE85R16L20120628

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

More current news, but you won't like the source

.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Obama gives Europe a mulligan on Iran oil sanctions

Associated Press | Posted on September 8, 2013 1:00 am

WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. said Friday it was granting six-month sanctions exemptions to 10 European countries so they can restart imports of Iranian crude oil after a year’s hiatus.

Japan received a similar exemption after the U.S. said the Asian nation had significantly reduced its oil imports from Iran — the main condition for such waivers.

American sanctions are designed to pressure Iran to curb its nuclear program, which Washington suspects is aimed at producing weapons. Iran has repeatedly insisted it is only for medical research and generating electricity.

http://rare.us/story/obama-gives-europe-a-mulligan-on-iran-oil-sanctions/

[hawker9000]

Iran was always a greater threat than Iraq to the west. Now they have basically won the game. I can't predict how these negotiations will turn out but I'm sure it's a game from Iran. They aren't seriously willing to give anything. They just want the sanctions dropped.

Just your opinion. What country did Iran invade (in modern times) anyway?

Well Iraq for one.

BS. Purely a Hatfields & McCoys bloodfeud. Iran was never going to occupy & annex Iraq the way Iraq invaded, occupied, and planned to annex Kuwait (beyond laughable to even suggest). Had the Saudis not been so worried about being next on the hit list, Schwarzkopf would never have been allowed to so massively stage from there.

So, ok, one more time, for real this time. Which of its neighbors did Iran ever invade, the way the not-so-dangerous Iraq successfully invaded Kuwait (until the intervention)?

[Chicog]

It made several invasions of Iraqi territory and each time was repelled, sometimes with the help of some WMDs with a US recipe.

It's also laid claim to territories like Syria and Bahrain.

Don't give me the "What has Iran invaded" crap, the US have had guns pointed at it since 1979, waiting for it to invade someone so they can kick its pathetic military's collective arse.

You're trying to paint Iran as a peaceful nation, well I'm afraid it's not. It's been responsible for lots of murderous terrorist attacks in the last few decades, and I suspect you know it, although you'll quite predictably play the "OK prove it" card next.

Just to save pages of pointless emails, can we just establish now that Hizbollah is the terrorist wing of the Iranian government?

Edited September 30, 2013 by Chicog

[rightlineman]

This is very good news for the Middle East, as long as President Rouhani and John Kerry can agree to getting ALL nuclear weapons out of the Whole Middle East, if that doesn't happen, I believe the the most Powerful Nation in the World, will be become the wounded Giant, AGAIN!

And like some TV Poster here, that are still fight the 60yr old Korean War, went home licking their wounds from Southeast Asia and, we are looked down at as arrogant capitalist bullies. I thought we invaded Iraq?? How's that Democracy going, after we cut and ran?? China's moving forward all over the World, as we (left and right) exhaust our resources over the last 2 decades fighting punk countries.

[Naam]

It made several invasions of Iraqi territory and each time was repelled, sometimes with the help of some WMDs with a US recipe.

your history knowledge matches your avatar

The Iran–Iraq War began when Iraq invaded Iran via air and land on 22 September 1980. It followed a long history of border disputes, and was motivated by fears that the Iranian Revolution in 1979 would inspire insurgency among Iraq's long-suppressed Shia majority as well as Iraq's desire to replace Iran as the dominant Persian Gulf state. Although Iraq hoped to take advantage of Iran's revolutionary chaos and attacked without formal warning, they made only limited progress into Iran and were quickly repelled; Iran regained virtually all lost territory by June 1982.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Iraq_War

[Jingthing]

In any case there are lots of people in the world who are comfortable with a super powerful Iran. So such people would be happy with a "peace" deal where Iran gets everything they want and gives nothing. In proxy war conflicts like this, of course, many people have a side.

[rotary]

Obama - he'll do anything to avoid a war - even resolving the Iran Nuke Crisis using diplomacy. First Syrai, now Iran! Appeasementbah humbug.

He did not avoid starting problems in Libya. Obama, Sarkozy, and Cameron should have a special place reserved for them for that.

[Chicog]

It made several invasions of Iraqi territory and each time was repelled, sometimes with the help of some WMDs with a US recipe.

your history knowledge matches your avatar

The Iran–Iraq War began when Iraq invaded Iran via air and land on 22 September 1980. It followed a long history of border disputes, and was motivated by fears that the Iranian Revolution in 1979 would inspire insurgency among Iraq's long-suppressed Shia majority as well as Iraq's desire to replace Iran as the dominant Persian Gulf state. Although Iraq hoped to take advantage of Iran's revolutionary chaos and attacked without formal warning, they made only limited progress into Iran and were quickly repelled; Iran regained virtually all lost territory by June 1982.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Iraq_War

If the extent of your contribution to the discussion involves you typing "border dispute iran iraq" and selecting the first Wiki entry you find, it's probably best you don't bother.

Maybe try "Iranian Incursion" + Iraq or Kurdistan and do a bit of reading. Then come back an edumacated man!

[Chicog]

In any case there are lots of people in the world who are comfortable with a super powerful Iran. So such people would be happy with a "peace" deal where Iran gets everything they want and gives nothing. In proxy war conflicts like this, of course, many people have a side.

I would be happy with a super powerful Iran if it didn't have the desire to topple every government in the Gulf bar two, and ironically one of those was handed to it on a plate by Bush Jr.

[chuckd]

In any case there are lots of people in the world who are comfortable with a super powerful Iran. So such people would be happy with a "peace" deal where Iran gets everything they want and gives nothing. In proxy war conflicts like this, of course, many people have a side.

I would be happy with a super powerful Iran if it didn't have the desire to topple every government in the Gulf bar two, and ironically one of those was handed to it on a plate by Bush Jr.

Anything like Iran being handed to the Mullahs by Carter?

[Chicog]

In any case there are lots of people in the world who are comfortable with a super powerful Iran. So such people would be happy with a "peace" deal where Iran gets everything they want and gives nothing. In proxy war conflicts like this, of course, many people have a side.

I would be happy with a super powerful Iran if it didn't have the desire to topple every government in the Gulf bar two, and ironically one of those was handed to it on a plate by Bush Jr.

Anything like Iran being handed to the Mullahs by Carter?

Would you rather he had propped up the Shah with military force against the Iranian people?

[Steely Dan]

WASHINGTON: -- US Secretary of State John Kerry said Sunday a deal with Iran could be brokered within months if Tehran proves that its nuclear program was not being used to build atomic weapons.

If.

[chuckd]

In any case there are lots of people in the world who are comfortable with a super powerful Iran. So such people would be happy with a "peace" deal where Iran gets everything they want and gives nothing. In proxy war conflicts like this, of course, many people have a side.

I would be happy with a super powerful Iran if it didn't have the desire to topple every government in the Gulf bar two, and ironically one of those was handed to it on a plate by Bush Jr.

Anything like Iran being handed to the Mullahs by Carter?

Would you rather he had propped up the Shah with military force against the Iranian people?

Yep.

I was there for the entire revolution and the people doing the rioting were the Islamic extremists, not the "Iranian people".

Spent the entire year of 1978 in Tehran, Kermanshah and Isfahan with the exception of three weeks in mainland China.

The Iranian people wanted things to remain as they had been for years.

[Steely Dan]

Would you rather he had propped up the Shah with military force against the Iranian people?

Yep.

I was there for the entire revolution and the people doing the rioting were the Islamic extremists, not the "Iranian people".

Spent the entire year of 1978 in Tehran, Kermanshah and Isfahan with the exception of three weeks in mainland China.

The Iranian people wanted things to remain as they had been for years.

Correct me if I'm mistaken, but didn't naive leftists form an alliance with the Islamists, only to find themselves swinging from lamp posts when the latter took power?

[Chicog]

 

 

 

In any case there are lots of people in the world who are comfortable with a super powerful Iran. So such people would be happy with a "peace" deal where Iran gets everything they want and gives nothing. In proxy war conflicts like this, of course, many people have a side. 

 

I would be happy with a super powerful Iran if it didn't have the desire to topple every government in the Gulf bar two, and ironically one of those was handed to it on a plate by Bush Jr.

 

 

Anything like Iran being handed to the Mullahs by Carter?

 

 

Would you rather he had propped up the Shah with military force against the Iranian people?

 

 

Yep.

 

I was there for the entire revolution and the people doing the rioting were the Islamic extremists, not the "Iranian people".

 

Spent the entire year of 1978 in Tehran, Kermanshah and Isfahan with the exception of three weeks in mainland China.

 

The  Iranian people wanted things to remain as they had been for years.

 

 

Interesting reply, considering one of your poster boys didn't mind deposing an avowed enemy of the Shi'a. How does that sit with you?

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Scott]

This topic is about Iran and a possible nuclear deal. If you wish to widen the scope of the discussion then you will need to be factual and civil to one another.

We do have posters with a fair amount of knowledge and experience in that part of the world. Hopefully, we will see this astute acumen instead of nasty remarks.

Thanks.

[NeverSure]

I'll make a statement, and expect no one to agree with me. But hey, you know what they say about opinions.

I like the main street Iranian people. I find them refreshingly different from many people in that area. I've pointed this out before, but Iranians aren't Arabs. They are Persians. It is hard, and debatable, to define their region, and to differentiate their ancient historical culture from the Muslim culture. I think of their region as S. Asia as do many others. But since the Middle East is also debatable as to borders, (some say it's a sub region of Europe, ignoring that some think Egypt is part of the ME.)

But the Persians' native culture is more like India if you subtract the Muslim encroachment in the leadership and among some of the people.

The Persians don't typically dress like Arab Muslims, but more like Westerners. They love all things Western. I think there is hope for the people.

Compared to Saudi Arabia where such is forbidden, Iranian women attend the universities, comprising 60% of the students, and they are allowed to

drive. BBC News

Iranians are poor, but if they can afford it they will have a satellite TV antennae, internet, car, and even Sony Playstations, etc. If I had to pick one country in that area that I guessed might do best if liberated, it would be Iran. It certainly isn't like Iraq in culture.

Just my $.02 and not worth that if you pay for it.