Netanyahu assails Iran deal, touts US-Israel ties

[mania]

Over one quarter of Netanyahu’s speech to Congress consisted of applause and standing ovations

Well yes hence the dog & pony show

But when the camera turned

[jazzyfrosty]

When Netanyahu undermines the entire foreign policy process of the United States by crashing into Congress like the Kool-Aid Man to tell the clapping seals of Congress that he doesn’t like the negotiations that are currently underway, he isn’t just seeking to co-opt the Republican Party, he isn’t just trying to kneecap the President, what he really wants is the Pentagon. Iranian power in the Middle East is trending upward, while Israel’s is static. This is mostly because Bush’s invasion of Iraq allowed Iran to largely fill the horrendous power vacuum it created. Obama applied sanctions to arrest Iran’s progress. This brought the mullahs to the table. The US, and much of the world have agreed to ease sanctions if it will shelve an Iranian bomb. If Iran can be held to its promises through carrots and sticks, then even a relatively short breakout time to an assembled bomb of more than a year and a half, would leave the world enough time to catch the Ayatollah and threaten him to stop. This should be viewed as an acceptable compromise that avoids a bloodbath. Iran will never be powerful enough to directly threaten the US. And as long as Israel maintains normal relations with the US, Iran will never be able to threaten Israel without inviting its own destruction. But this isn’t good enough for Netanyahu. He wants to maintain Israel’s regional hegemony. Israel is not powerful enough to peg Iran back by itself, but the US is, albeit at great cost. Netanyahu wants America to punch Iran in the face so that he will hold greater power in the region than the Ayatollah. That Iran can punch right back is meaningless to him.

This is a profound insult to the American people. We pay taxes, we vote, we protest, we bleed and die, to maintain, restrain, and, when called upon, support the world’s most powerful military. But it is a legitimate military only insomuch as it is our democratically controlled military. It is hard enough to rein in our own elected leaders from the temptations to excess of power that the Pentagon presents. Netanyahu came into our house uninvited, at least by protocol, lectured us with old news about how scary the Iranian government is, just like Bush did to gin up fear about Saddam, and presumed to tell us that he knows what our military is for better than we do. To be told by a foreign leader that we should prepare to use our military, sacrifice our sons and daughters, at his behest, before exhausting all the diplomatic and peaceful alternatives that we voted for, is an astounding, and I dare say, unprecedented, slap in the face of the American people. The Israeli people may be an ally to the American people. But by insulting our intelligence, Benjamin Netanyahu has proven unequivocally that he is anything but an ally.

[mania]

When Netanyahu undermines the entire foreign policy process of the United States by crashing into Congress like the Kool-Aid Man to tell the clapping seals of Congress that he doesn’t like the negotiations that are currently underway, he isn’t just seeking to co-opt the Republican Party, he isn’t just trying to kneecap the President, what he really wants is the Pentagon. Iranian power in the Middle East is trending upward, while Israel’s is static. This is mostly because Bush’s invasion of Iraq allowed Iran to largely fill the horrendous power vacuum it created. Obama applied sanctions to arrest Iran’s progress. This brought the mullahs to the table. The US, and much of the world have agreed to ease sanctions if it will shelve an Iranian bomb. If Iran can be held to its promises through carrots and sticks, then even a relatively short breakout time to an assembled bomb of more than a year and a half, would leave the world enough time to catch the Ayatollah and threaten him to stop. This should be viewed as an acceptable compromise that avoids a bloodbath. Iran will never be powerful enough to directly threaten the US. And as long as Israel maintains normal relations with the US, Iran will never be able to threaten Israel without inviting its own destruction. But this isn’t good enough for Netanyahu. He wants to maintain Israel’s regional hegemony. Israel is not powerful enough to peg Iran back by itself, but the US is, albeit at great cost. Netanyahu wants America to punch Iran in the face so that he will hold greater power in the region than the Ayatollah. That Iran can punch right back is meaningless to him.

This is a profound insult to the American people. We pay taxes, we vote, we protest, we bleed and die, to maintain, restrain, and, when called upon, support the world’s most powerful military. But it is a legitimate military only insomuch as it is our democratically controlled military. It is hard enough to rein in our own elected leaders from the temptations to excess of power that the Pentagon presents. Netanyahu came into our house uninvited, at least by protocol, lectured us with old news about how scary the Iranian government is, just like Bush did to gin up fear about Saddam, and presumed to tell us that he knows what our military is for better than we do. To be told by a foreign leader that we should prepare to use our military, sacrifice our sons and daughters, at his behest, before exhausting all the diplomatic and peaceful alternatives that we voted for, is an astounding, and I dare say, unprecedented, slap in the face of the American people. The Israeli people may be an ally to the American people. But by insulting our intelligence, Benjamin Netanyahu has proven unequivocally that he is anything but an ally.

Hear Hear !

[DaddyWarbucks]

When Netanyahu undermines the entire foreign policy process of the United States by crashing into Congress like the Kool-Aid Man to tell the clapping seals of Congress that he doesn’t like the negotiations that are currently underway, he isn’t just seeking to co-opt the Republican Party, he isn’t just trying to kneecap the President, what he really wants is the Pentagon. Iranian power in the Middle East is trending upward, while Israel’s is static. This is mostly because Bush’s invasion of Iraq allowed Iran to largely fill the horrendous power vacuum it created. Obama applied sanctions to arrest Iran’s progress. This brought the mullahs to the table. The US, and much of the world have agreed to ease sanctions if it will shelve an Iranian bomb. If Iran can be held to its promises through carrots and sticks, then even a relatively short breakout time to an assembled bomb of more than a year and a half, would leave the world enough time to catch the Ayatollah and threaten him to stop. This should be viewed as an acceptable compromise that avoids a bloodbath. Iran will never be powerful enough to directly threaten the US. And as long as Israel maintains normal relations with the US, Iran will never be able to threaten Israel without inviting its own destruction. But this isn’t good enough for Netanyahu. He wants to maintain Israel’s regional hegemony. Israel is not powerful enough to peg Iran back by itself, but the US is, albeit at great cost. Netanyahu wants America to punch Iran in the face so that he will hold greater power in the region than the Ayatollah. That Iran can punch right back is meaningless to him.

This is a profound insult to the American people. We pay taxes, we vote, we protest, we bleed and die, to maintain, restrain, and, when called upon, support the world’s most powerful military. But it is a legitimate military only insomuch as it is our democratically controlled military. It is hard enough to rein in our own elected leaders from the temptations to excess of power that the Pentagon presents. Netanyahu came into our house uninvited, at least by protocol, lectured us with old news about how scary the Iranian government is, just like Bush did to gin up fear about Saddam, and presumed to tell us that he knows what our military is for better than we do. To be told by a foreign leader that we should prepare to use our military, sacrifice our sons and daughters, at his behest, before exhausting all the diplomatic and peaceful alternatives that we voted for, is an astounding, and I dare say, unprecedented, slap in the face of the American people. The Israeli people may be an ally to the American people. But by insulting our intelligence, Benjamin Netanyahu has proven unequivocally that he is anything but an ally.

Hear Hear !

Answer that with something other than insults and accusations of racism.

[Publicus]

Netanyahu gave a great speech lat night. The man is real statesman. He gave Obama lots of room to save face after his childish hissy fit. It will be interesting to see if the good will is reciprocated.

Delusional.

There were no statesmen in the hall while Benjamin Netanyahu was present and streaming his militant provocations against the president and the P5+1 countries in their efforts representing the world of nations to attain a peaceful resolution to the Iran nuclear issues. His presence was an insult to the president and to the United States.

Netanyahu contributes nothing and aggravates sensitive matters in the extreme. The Republican controlled Congress is out of control.

It's a good thing the ayatollahs have more sense than Bibi does, ever has had, ever could or will have. They are about to make an agreement which for better and for worse the world can live with. Bibi needs to catch up but all he does is fall further behind.

Shameful.

[jazzyfrosty]

Seems the the message is finally getting through, this is Rabin Square in Tel Aviv now:

[jazzyfrosty]

Over 10,000 rallying against @netanyahu

[Scott]

Inflammatory post with profanity removed.

[Pakboong]

The "camel's back" is closer than ever. Not a bad thing really.

[Jingthing]

Over 10,000 rallying against @netanyahu

Another sign Israel really is a strong democracy with free speech and healthy dissent. It will be an interesting election there, that's for sure. Don't assume anything yet.

It's a messy, complex, parliamentary system. Bibi may or may not end up as PM again.

Edited March 7, 2015 by Jingthing

[JDGRUEN]

say what you will, Obama is going to have a very difficult time forcing his BAD DEAL down America's throat, after Netanyahu exposed some of it's details to the world.

You keep posting this again and again on various threads but you never provide specifics on how this is supposedly going to happen.

What is it going to take for you to provide step-by-step details to support your claim?

Every bit of opinion posted on this board and others does not have to be proved by links to news reports, university research, or opinion polls... a life time of personal study, innate intelligence, observation and even gut feelings are valid forms of forming an opinion. He is just spreading his well informed opinion around.,.. Much the same as hundreds of others do on this forum.

[Ulysses G.]

Indeed. As Scott keeps saying, don't feed the trolls and I am not going to bother providing "step-by-step details" over and over again, to someone who has no intention other than to bait posters that he disagrees with.

Edited March 8, 2015 by Ulysses G.

[Seastallion]

say what you will, Obama is going to have a very difficult time forcing his BAD DEAL down America's throat, after Netanyahu exposed some of it's details to the world.

You keep posting this again and again on various threads but you never provide specifics on how this is supposedly going to happen.

What is it going to take for you to provide step-by-step details to support your claim?

Every bit of opinion posted on this board and others does not have to be proved by links to news reports, university research, or opinion polls... a life time of personal study, innate intelligence, observation and even gut feelings are valid forms of forming an opinion. He is just spreading his well informed opinion around.,.. Much the same as hundreds of others do on this forum.

You're quite right that opinion doesn't have to be backed up with links etc.

But it helps discussion and understanding if opinions are supported with reason. (And hopefully rational, logical reason).

[NeverSure]

say what you will, Obama is going to have a very difficult time forcing his BAD DEAL down America's throat, after Netanyahu exposed some of it's details to the world.

You keep posting this again and again on various threads but you never provide specifics on how this is supposedly going to happen.

What is it going to take for you to provide step-by-step details to support your claim?

I'm not sure what you're getting at. I don't know what people on here think that Netanyahu wants. I don't know if they listened to or read his speech. He never asked the US to go to war. He want's tough sanctions on Iran as they were before.

The sanctions which were on Iran collapsed its currency and caused huge inflation. Merchants were protesting, which is what caused the fall of the Shah. Congress and Bibi want that and more. The collapse of the Shah was during $100 oil so imagine how much weaker Iran is now. Its economy could collapse under sanctions.

Iran loves "talks" with an accompanying ease of sanctions because it buys time. Ten years. Obama and other appeasers are too (insert your reason here - I have mine) to see it or do anything about it.

[Credo]

So, how many people here think that the US should bomb Iran's nuclear program?

[Ulysses G.]

say what you will, Obama is going to have a very difficult time forcing his BAD DEAL down America's throat, after Netanyahu exposed some of it's details to the world.

You keep posting this again and again on various threads but you never provide specifics on how this is supposedly going to happen.

What is it going to take for you to provide step-by-step details to support your claim?

Every bit of opinion posted on this board and others does not have to be proved by links to news reports, university research, or opinion polls... a life time of personal study, innate intelligence, observation and even gut feelings are valid forms of forming an opinion. He is just spreading his well informed opinion around.,.. Much the same as hundreds of others do on this forum.

You're quite right that opinion doesn't have to be backed up with links etc.

But it helps discussion and understanding if opinions are supported with reason. (And hopefully rational, logical reason).

It is pretty self explanatory really and I have already pointed out why numerous times with links. Most people did not know about the Sunset clause until Netanyahu spread the word. Once the public knows about such a stupid move, it is a lot harder to get away with.

The news from the nuclear talks with Iran was already troubling.

Then it got worse: News leaked of the "sunset clause." President Obama had accepted the Iranian demand that any restrictions on its nuclear program be time-limited. After which, the mullahs can crank up their nuclear program at will and produce as much enriched uranium as they want.

Sanctions lifted. Restrictions gone. Nuclear development legitimized.

http://www.scsun-news.com/silver_city-opinion/ci_27652341

[NeverSure]

So, how many people here think that the US should bomb Iran's nuclear program?

I don't. I think the sanctions should go back into effect against Iran and only then, from a position of strength, should there be any talks. Right now Iran is under no pressure to do anything.

Let's wait until after elections to see who the PM is and then get back to me about what Israel might do.

[up-country_sinclair]

It is pretty self explanatory really and I have already pointed out why numerous times with links. Most people did not know about the Sunset clause until Netanyahu spread the word. Once the public knows about such a stupid move, it is a lot harder to get away with.

What should be self explanatory to anyone who is familiar with US politics is that the Republicans don't have enough votes to stop a filibuster much less override a presidential veto.

But OK, the public now knows about the proposed sunset clause. Has the polling data moved to such a significant degree that it could possibly warrant a change of course in US policy? Are tens of thousands in the streets protesting? Are hundreds of thousands calling their congressman and jamming the White House telecommunications office? Of course not.

Thus, despite your repeated posts, it is not "a lot harder to get away with". The P5+1 negotiations move forward as if this campaign speech never happened.

Edited March 8, 2015 by up-country_sinclair

[NeverSure]

It is pretty self explanatory really and I have already pointed out why numerous times with links. Most people did not know about the Sunset clause until Netanyahu spread the word. Once the public knows about such a stupid move, it is a lot harder to get away with.

What should be self explanatory to anyone who is familiar with US politics is that the Republicans don't have enough votes to stop a filibuster much less override a presidential veto.

But OK, the public now knows about the proposed sunset clause. Has the polling data moved to such a significant degree that it could possibly warrant a change of course in US policy? Are tens of thousands in the streets protesting? Are hundreds of thousands calling their congressman and jamming the White House telecommunications office? Of course not.

Thus, despite your repeated posts, it is not "a lot harder to get away with". The P5+1 negotiations move forward as if this campaign speech never happened.

OK, here's what concerns me. Netanyahu "probably" will be able to form a coalition and be PM. Israel isn't about majorities in polls or in elections although it's a democracy. Like some other countries, it's about coalitions of several parties to form a majority in Parliament. Right now it's a tossup, but Bibi's coalition probably has an edge. We'll have to wait a few days.

There are some pretty smart people who think the Bibi didn't speak to Congress for the reason most might think he did. Those people think he was looking for backing against Obama if he decides to strike Iran. Those people agree with you that the P5+1 talks will go ahead but they don't bind Israel. I know the talks will go ahead.

So what now if Israel feels so deserted by Obama that it hits Iran and you wake up in the morning to pictures on your TV and your computer of a bombed out Iran? Israel has certainly not hesitated to bomb others before when it felt it necessary and I think even you would agree with that?

The US and Israel have always been allies. Obama will be in deep doodoo with the American people if Israel is at war and Obama (US military) interferes. That you can believe.

[Asiantravel]

Ex-Mossad chief calls Netanyahu's Congress speech 'bulls---'

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/234927-ex-mossad-chief-calls-netanyahus-congress-speech-bulls-t

[Ulysses G.]

Thus, despite your repeated posts, it is not "a lot harder to get away with". The P5+1 negotiations move forward as if this campaign speech never happened.

Wrong as usual. The negotiations will move forward, but the cat is out of the bag as far as the Sunset clause and if Obama tries to commit to it now to it, that is when the trouble for him will start in earnest, The public is just now waking up to how they have been betrayed.

Obama is such a captive of his own illusions about Iran that he has been unable to be straight with the American people. In reporting belatedly on the November 2013 interim agreement, he boasted it had “halted” Iran’s nuclear program. In fact, major American concessions were traded for Iranian gestures of temporary restraint, concessions that will likely never be reversed. Instead of halting the Iranian program, the agreement froze only American actions. Iranian nuclear engineers continued their work to improve the efficiency of their centrifuges and to master the use of more effective centrifuges. No nuclear plant is being dismantled.

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2015/03/06/obama-misleads-the-public-about-irans-nuclear-program

Why have the negotiations between the Obama administration and Iran become such a critical national security issue? Look at the record of betrayals of trust that have enabled Iran to operate 19,000 centrifuges and another 1,008 IR2M machines that can produce bomb-grade, fissionable material five times faster than the other centrifuges. Back in 2005, the West was saying to Iran “zero centrifuges.” Let me repeat: zero. Next we were talking of a compromise at 5,000 centrifuges. The negotiations from 2005 and 2013 can be summed up in one word: retreat. A series of capitulations have left Iran with “the right” to enrich uranium, so now it has thousands of kilograms of enriched uranium. That’s enough to produce a bomb, contrary to the Obama administration’s commitment to Congress that it would not allow Iran to have nuclear weapons.

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2015/03/06/obama-misleads-the-public-about-irans-nuclear-program

[NeverSure]

Ex-Mossad chief calls Netanyahu's Congress speech 'bulls---'

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/234927-ex-mossad-chief-calls-netanyahus-congress-speech-bulls-t

We know that. That's old news already, but he called the idea that Iran could produce a nuke within a year BS. Obama's new deal would give Iran ten years. I didn't see where, as you say, he called the speech BS, but have it your way.

Your Ex-Massad chief gets one vote. There will soon be an election.

[BKKBobby]

It is pretty self explanatory really and I have already pointed out why numerous times with links. Most people did not know about the Sunset clause until Netanyahu spread the word. Once the public knows about such a stupid move, it is a lot harder to get away with.

What should be self explanatory to anyone who is familiar with US politics is that the Republicans don't have enough votes to stop a filibuster much less override a presidential veto.

But OK, the public now knows about the proposed sunset clause. Has the polling data moved to such a significant degree that it could possibly warrant a change of course in US policy? Are tens of thousands in the streets protesting? Are hundreds of thousands calling their congressman and jamming the White House telecommunications office? Of course not.

Thus, despite your repeated posts, it is not "a lot harder to get away with". The P5+1 negotiations move forward as if this campaign speech never happened.

OK, here's what concerns me. Netanyahu "probably" will be able to form a coalition and be PM. Israel isn't about majorities in polls or in elections although it's a democracy. Like some other countries, it's about coalitions of several parties to form a majority in Parliament. Right now it's a tossup, but Bibi's coalition probably has an edge. We'll have to wait a few days.

There are some pretty smart people who think the Bibi didn't speak to Congress for the reason most might think he did. Those people think he was looking for backing against Obama if he decides to strike Iran. Those people agree with you that the P5+1 talks will go ahead but they don't bind Israel. I know the talks will go ahead.

So what now if Israel feels so deserted by Obama that it hits Iran and you wake up in the morning to pictures on your TV and your computer of a bombed out Iran? Israel has certainly not hesitated to bomb others before when it felt it necessary and I think even you would agree with that?

The US and Israel have always been allies. Obama will be in deep doodoo with the American people if Israel is at war and Obama (US military) interferes. That you can believe.

Israel isnt going to strike Iran.

Israels PM would not mind if the US military striked Iran.

Israel and USA has had a lot of time to strike Iran.

The mullahs have been ruling Iran since 1979.

During that amount of time USA has been acting worldpolice and Israel has been busy with crossborder ventures.

Iran is talked about in a way by some politicans and media that make the country seem like officially being the worlds boogeyman for so many years but seems to be the only country in the ME+West Centralasia+North Africa that USA and Israel are reluctant to strike.

A little bit of funding to Baluchi terrorists is hardly a proxy war, doesnt lead anywhere and doesnt make a difference, its petty stuff. Its pointless waste of a little bit of dollars, if USA actually has done that of course.

If USA would contemplate to do military strikes on Iran my guess is that USA only would go thru with it if it was considered legitimate by the UN.

The suggestion that Israel might go solo and would do military strikes on Iran. No, wont happen.

The consequences of military strikes on Iran would be a disaster either way.

Edited March 8, 2015 by BKKBobby

[phrodan]

Thus, despite your repeated posts, it is not "a lot harder to get away with". The P5+1 negotiations move forward as if this campaign speech never happened.

Wrong as usual. The negotiations will move forward, but the cat is out of the bag as far as the Sunset clause and if Obama tries to commit to it now to it, that is when the trouble for him will start in earnest, The public is just now waking up to how they have been betrayed.

Obama is such a captive of his own illusions about Iran that he has been unable to be straight with the American people. In reporting belatedly on the November 2013 interim agreement, he boasted it had “halted” Iran’s nuclear program. In fact, major American concessions were traded for Iranian gestures of temporary restraint, concessions that will likely never be reversed. Instead of halting the Iranian program, the agreement froze only American actions. Iranian nuclear engineers continued their work to improve the efficiency of their centrifuges and to master the use of more effective centrifuges. No nuclear plant is being dismantled.

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2015/03/06/obama-misleads-the-public-about-irans-nuclear-program

Why have the negotiations between the Obama administration and Iran become such a critical national security issue? Look at the record of betrayals of trust that have enabled Iran to operate 19,000 centrifuges and another 1,008 IR2M machines that can produce bomb-grade, fissionable material five times faster than the other centrifuges. Back in 2005, the West was saying to Iran “zero centrifuges.” Let me repeat: zero. Next we were talking of a compromise at 5,000 centrifuges. The negotiations from 2005 and 2013 can be summed up in one word: retreat. A series of capitulations have left Iran with “the right” to enrich uranium, so now it has thousands of kilograms of enriched uranium. That’s enough to produce a bomb, contrary to the Obama administration’s commitment to Congress that it would not allow Iran to have nuclear weapons.

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2015/03/06/obama-misleads-the-public-about-irans-nuclear-program

There's two fundamental faults with your argument - and you will either see them/accept them, or you won't.

You seem to be overly delighted by the "revelation," that there is a sunset clause in this proposal. There was no way that Iran was going to sign up for a forever and a day deal. Your attitude no doubt, is that they should have been forced into agreeing a forever deal and well - that would have been the end of that negotiation, huh?

And then, the reality.

The US can't prevent Iran from building nukes.

Just the same way as they couldn't prevent them from building 19,000 centrifuges and 1,008 IRM2 machines.

And with collusion from either the Chinese, or Russians, or both - and right now, the Russians are looking to build another anti-US bloc, the Iranians could have the weapons within ten years.

What say you to that?

[phrodan]

Ex-Mossad chief calls Netanyahu's Congress speech 'bulls---'

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/234927-ex-mossad-chief-calls-netanyahus-congress-speech-bulls-t

We know that. That's old news already, but he called the idea that Iran could produce a nuke within a year BS. Obama's new deal would give Iran ten years. I didn't see where, as you say, he called the speech BS, but have it your way.

Your Ex-Massad chief gets one vote. There will soon be an election.

One of these guys has devoted his life to the security of Israel, and the other is a politician.

I know who I'd be listening to.

[Chicog]

The sanctions which were on Iran collapsed its currency and caused huge inflation. Merchants were protesting, which is what caused the fall of the Shah. Congress and Bibi want that and more. The collapse of the Shah was during $100 oil so imagine how much weaker Iran is now. Its economy could collapse under sanctions.

The collapse of the Shah was down to his own greed and corruption. The oil price never got over $40 during the Shah's reign, but that was still at a time when loads of money was rolling into Iran - and him and his cronies were stealing it. That was why there were demonstrations and civil disobedience up and down the country, and why Khomeini was able to become the focal point of the revolution.

But more importantly, after the monumental screw ups we've seen Bush's America make when attempting to restore "democracy" to Iraq and Afghanistan, I think it's much better that they find a negotiated solution. The forced collapse of Iran is not in America's interests.

The US needs them to fight Sunni extremists.

[chuckd]

"The collapse of the Shah was down to his own greed and corruption."

Mostly incorrect but off topic.

[Grouse]

Ever since the Suez crisis, American "diplomacy" in the middle east has been, er, less than satisfactory.

In fact, the whole area is less stable now than at any time probably since the crusades!

Please rely go through the history and stop shooting from the hip. Talk about a bull in a china shop!

For my money, Persia could be a great counter balance to Saudi if not an actual ally. But that would require a rather more delicate hand at diplomacy.

And Isreal? What a pain in ar*se! Give them a country and they want to rule the world........

[DaddyWarbucks]

Thus, despite your repeated posts, it is not "a lot harder to get away with". The P5+1 negotiations move forward as if this campaign speech never happened.

Wrong as usual. The negotiations will move forward, but the cat is out of the bag as far as the Sunset clause and if Obama tries to commit to it now to it, that is when the trouble for him will start in earnest, The public is just now waking up to how they have been betrayed.

Obama is such a captive of his own illusions about Iran that he has been unable to be straight with the American people. In reporting belatedly on the November 2013 interim agreement, he boasted it had “halted” Iran’s nuclear program. In fact, major American concessions were traded for Iranian gestures of temporary restraint, concessions that will likely never be reversed. Instead of halting the Iranian program, the agreement froze only American actions. Iranian nuclear engineers continued their work to improve the efficiency of their centrifuges and to master the use of more effective centrifuges. No nuclear plant is being dismantled.

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2015/03/06/obama-misleads-the-public-about-irans-nuclear-program

Why have the negotiations between the Obama administration and Iran become such a critical national security issue? Look at the record of betrayals of trust that have enabled Iran to operate 19,000 centrifuges and another 1,008 IR2M machines that can produce bomb-grade, fissionable material five times faster than the other centrifuges. Back in 2005, the West was saying to Iran “zero centrifuges.” Let me repeat: zero. Next we were talking of a compromise at 5,000 centrifuges. The negotiations from 2005 and 2013 can be summed up in one word: retreat. A series of capitulations have left Iran with “the right” to enrich uranium, so now it has thousands of kilograms of enriched uranium. That’s enough to produce a bomb, contrary to the Obama administration’s commitment to Congress that it would not allow Iran to have nuclear weapons.

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2015/03/06/obama-misleads-the-public-about-irans-nuclear-program

There's two fundamental faults with your argument - and you will either see them/accept them, or you won't.

You seem to be overly delighted by the "revelation," that there is a sunset clause in this proposal. There was no way that Iran was going to sign up for a forever and a day deal. Your attitude no doubt, is that they should have been forced into agreeing a forever deal and well - that would have been the end of that negotiation, huh?

And then, the reality.

The US can't prevent Iran from building nukes.

Just the same way as they couldn't prevent them from building 19,000 centrifuges and 1,008 IRM2 machines.

And with collusion from either the Chinese, or Russians, or both - and right now, the Russians are looking to build another anti-US bloc, the Iranians could have the weapons within ten years.

What say you to that?

Your last point is excellent.

Israeli provoked belligerence against Iran by the US will make them a part of a new Russian bloc.

[JDGRUEN]

say what you will, Obama is going to have a very difficult time forcing his BAD DEAL down America's throat, after Netanyahu exposed some of it's details to the world.

You keep posting this again and again on various threads but you never provide specifics on how this is supposedly going to happen.

What is it going to take for you to provide step-by-step details to support your claim?

Every bit of opinion posted on this board and others does not have to be proved by links to news reports, university research, or opinion polls... a life time of personal study, innate intelligence, observation and even gut feelings are valid forms of forming an opinion. He is just spreading his well informed opinion around.,.. Much the same as hundreds of others do on this forum.

You're quite right that opinion doesn't have to be backed up with links etc.

But it helps discussion and understanding if opinions are supported with reason. (And hopefully rational, logical reason).

Citations used as backup on TVF are often not shining forms of reason ... except that the one posting thinks they are...

Edited March 8, 2015 by JDGRUEN