Iran sanctions lifted as atomic authorities say Iran has fulfilled its obligations

[rooster59]

Iran sanctions lifted as atomic authorities say Iran has fulfilled its obligations



Iran is back on the world economic stage with the lifting of sanctions imposed by the US, UN and EU – the reward for the Islamic Republic drastically shrinking its nuclear programme in line with last year’s landmark deal with six world powers.

Flanked by Iran’s foreign minister, the EU’s Foreign Policy chief, Federica Mogherini, made the announcement in Vienna:

“Today almost exactly six months after the finalisation of this historic deal, the International Atomic Energy Agency has verified that Iran has implemented its nuclear-related commitments under the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action), is in the offing. As Iran has fulfilled its commitments today multilateral and national economic and financial sanctions related to Iran’s nuclear programme are lifted.”

Iran’s emergence from economic isolation is not only a matter of trade. Analysts say it could also shift the geopolitical balance of the Middle East.

-- (c) Copyright Euronews 2016-01-17

[ezzra]

This will be a cry for generations to come, and Iran has emerged the victor here, having duped the west

of it's ' good intentions ", soon there will be more ballistic rocket testing, US and the west acts of humiliations,

and all around snubs of the agreement, why? because of the weakling stinting in the white house

who saw fit to trust the Iranians..... Time will tell....

[sirineou]

This will be a cry for generations to come, and Iran has emerged the victor here, having duped the west

of it's ' good intentions ", soon there will be more ballistic rocket testing, US and the west acts of humiliations,

and all around snubs of the agreement, why? because of the weakling stinting in the white house

who saw fit to trust the Iranians..... Time will tell....

as far as I know there is nothing about ballistic rocket testing in the agreement, do you know something different?

[JetsetBkk]

"Today almost exactly six months after the finalisation of this historic deal, the International Atomic Energy Agency has verified that Iran has implemented its nuclear-related commitments under the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action), is in the offing."

Who writes this stuff? This is not a sentence.

Why is ", in the offing" at the end and what exactly does it mean?

[KayCee]

It may be best to read or watch a brief explanation of what has, and hasn't, been lifted. BBC has something like that I believe. Nuclear related sanctions remain in place for another 8 years and weapons and armament sanctions according to BBC news this morning.

[Srikcir]

"Today almost exactly six months after the finalisation of this historic deal, the International Atomic Energy Agency has verified that Iran has implemented its nuclear-related commitments under the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action), is in the offing."

Who writes this stuff? This is not a sentence.

Why is ", in the offing" at the end and what exactly does it mean?

"offing" is an unusal word. From Dictionary.com:

A nautical term from the 1600's meaning "the more distant part of the sea as seen from the shore.." Originally the phrase meant "in the distant future" and the modern sense of "impending."

So the author might mean that the verification will allow the agreement to go forward for implementation. A bit ackward use of the word.

[JetsetBkk]

"Today almost exactly six months after the finalisation of this historic deal, the International Atomic Energy Agency has verified that Iran has implemented its nuclear-related commitments under the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action), is in the offing."

Who writes this stuff? This is not a sentence.

Why is ", in the offing" at the end and what exactly does it mean?

"offing" is an unusal word. From Dictionary.com:

A nautical term from the 1600's meaning "the more distant part of the sea as seen from the shore.." Originally the phrase meant "in the distant future" and the modern sense of "impending."

So the author might mean that the verification will allow the agreement to go forward for implementation. A bit ackward use of the word.

Sorry, I know what the phrase "in the offing" means, I just don't know why it is tagged on to the end of the sentence. Without it, the sentence makes sense; with it, the sentence is not a sentence.

Worst case scenario: everything in the preceding sentence is "in the offing", i.e. it is not decided and is not agreed.

[billd766]

"Today almost exactly six months after the finalisation of this historic deal, the International Atomic Energy Agency has verified that Iran has implemented its nuclear-related commitments under the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action), is in the offing."

Who writes this stuff? This is not a sentence.

Why is ", in the offing" at the end and what exactly does it mean?

Google is your friend.

http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/in+the+offing

in the offing

happening at some time in the future. There is a big investigation in the offing, but I don't know when. It's hard to tell what's in the offing if you don't keep track of things.

McGraw-Hill Dictionary of American Idioms and Phrasal Verbs. © 2002 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

in the offing

In the near or immediate future; soon to come. For example, Jan was delighted that exams were finished and graduation was in the offing. This expression originally meant "in the part of the ocean visible between shore and horizon"; its figurative use dates from the late 1700s. Also see in the wind.

[Grouse]

Can we get back on topic please?

I, for one, am optimistic about re-establishing friendly relations with Iran

Pumping more oil into the market will surely continue to depress prices and hurt the dreadful Saudis further.

I see the US is now exporting oil to China. Which has to be good for balancing the economy?

I think Iran COULD be a powerful at useful ally in ME. Certainly it will give Sunni states pause. Could also apply pressure on Turkey to toe the line....

[GeorgesAbitbol]

Haters gonna hate...

So fun to read conservative people rant about this deal

[Chicog]

The important thing to note is: "As Iran has fulfilled its commitments today multilateral and national economic and financial sanctions related to Iran’s nuclear programme are lifted".

[GOLDBUGGY]

Look out below Oil Prices! The $15 / bbl is coming soon. Right after they unload there 4 Oil Tankers and refill a couple of times with there bulging Oil Storage Tanks.

[Chicog]

You're not wrong

[JetsetBkk]

"Today almost exactly six months after the finalisation of this historic deal, the International Atomic Energy Agency has verified that Iran has implemented its nuclear-related commitments under the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action), is in the offing."

Who writes this stuff? This is not a sentence.

Why is ", in the offing" at the end and what exactly does it mean?

Google is your friend.

http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/in+the+offing

in the offing

happening at some time in the future. There is a big investigation in the offing, but I don't know when. It's hard to tell what's in the offing if you don't keep track of things.

McGraw-Hill Dictionary of American Idioms and Phrasal Verbs. © 2002 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

in the offing

In the near or immediate future; soon to come. For example, Jan was delighted that exams were finished and graduation was in the offing. This expression originally meant "in the part of the ocean visible between shore and horizon"; its figurative use dates from the late 1700s. Also see in the wind.

I'll say it again: I know what the phrase means, but by putting it at the end of the perfectly valid sentence, it turns the sentence into nonsense.

By removing the clauses and sub-clauses that add nothing to the sentence, you end up with:

"Today, the International Atomic Energy Agency has verified that Iran has implemented its nuclear-related commitments, is in the offing."

Does that make sense?

No.

[Chicog]

It's euronews; probably a simple typo from someone for whom English is not their first language.

[arjunadawn]

This will be a cry for generations to come, and Iran has emerged the victor here, having duped the west

of it's ' good intentions ", soon there will be more ballistic rocket testing, US and the west acts of humiliations,

and all around snubs of the agreement, why? because of the weakling stinting in the white house

who saw fit to trust the Iranians..... Time will tell....

as far as I know there is nothing about ballistic rocket testing in the agreement, do you know something different?

Iran is banned from sanctioned to prevent ballistic missile R&D and the fraudulent nuke deal was linked to this previous 2010 UN Resolution 1929 stating Iran was banned sanctioned until this fake nuke deal went into effect. In other words, this restriction expired when the current deal went into effect. It was not in effect in October during the ballistic launch.

It is argued Iran never committed to its own sanctions and therefore could R&D ballistic missiles. It is one more example of the West offering dolts to negotiate with masters. The West could have fielded better negotiators, we just did not. Near history will judge this period as pivotal in events spiraling out of control. Iran has been made regionally unassailable. The US has moved the region from low intensity conflict to mid/high intensity conflict by this betrayal.

Iran's entire existence is predicated upon warring upon self and others; it is an "Islamic State;" people conveniently forget this point.

Edited January 17, 2016 by arjunadawn

[Grouse]

Betrayal of whom exactly?

[Chicog]

This will be a cry for generations to come, and Iran has emerged the victor here, having duped the west

of it's ' good intentions ", soon there will be more ballistic rocket testing, US and the west acts of humiliations,

and all around snubs of the agreement, why? because of the weakling stinting in the white house

who saw fit to trust the Iranians..... Time will tell....

as far as I know there is nothing about ballistic rocket testing in the agreement, do you know something different?

Iran is banned from sanctioned to prevent ballistic missile R&D and the fraudulent nuke deal was linked to this previous 2010 UN Resolution 1929 stating Iran was banned sanctioned until this fake nuke deal went into effect. In other words, this restriction expired when the current deal went into effect. It was not in effect in October during the ballistic launch.

It is argued Iran never committed to its own sanctions and therefore could R&D ballistic missiles. It is one more example of the West offering dolts to negotiate with masters. The West could have fielded better negotiators, we just did not. Near history will judge this period as pivotal in events spiraling out of control. Iran has been made regionally unassailable. The US has moved the region from low intensity conflict to mid/high intensity conflict by this betrayal.

Iran's entire existence is predicated upon warring upon self and others; it is an "Islamic State;" people conveniently forget this point.

Again: Iran has fulfilled its commitments so far by disposing of nuclear material and disabling a reactor.

How exactly do you define this as "spiralling out of control"?

The instability in the region is down to Bush and Cheney unleashing Islamic State upon it.

I would argue that having Shi'a powerful enough to fight these extremists is far better than letting them take over the GCC (which is their aim).

Edited January 17, 2016 by Chicog

[chuckd]

This will be a cry for generations to come, and Iran has emerged the victor here, having duped the west

of it's ' good intentions ", soon there will be more ballistic rocket testing, US and the west acts of humiliations,

and all around snubs of the agreement, why? because of the weakling stinting in the white house

who saw fit to trust the Iranians..... Time will tell....

as far as I know there is nothing about ballistic rocket testing in the agreement, do you know something different?

Iran is banned from sanctioned to prevent ballistic missile R&D and the fraudulent nuke deal was linked to this previous 2010 UN Resolution 1929 stating Iran was banned sanctioned until this fake nuke deal went into effect. In other words, this restriction expired when the current deal went into effect. It was not in effect in October during the ballistic launch.

It is argued Iran never committed to its own sanctions and therefore could R&D ballistic missiles. It is one more example of the West offering dolts to negotiate with masters. The West could have fielded better negotiators, we just did not. Near history will judge this period as pivotal in events spiraling out of control. Iran has been made regionally unassailable. The US has moved the region from low intensity conflict to mid/high intensity conflict by this betrayal.

Iran's entire existence is predicated upon warring upon self and others; it is an "Islamic State;" people conveniently forget this point.

Again: Iran has fulfilled its commitments so far by disposing of nuclear material and disabling a reactor.

How exactly do you define this as "spiralling out of control"?

The instability in the region is down to Bush and Cheney unleashing Islamic State upon it.

I would argue that having Shi'a powerful enough to fight these extremists is far better than letting them take over the GCC (which is their aim).

"The instability in the region is down to Bush and Cheney unleashing Islamic State upon it."

Did Obama get some sort of Hold Harmless Clause when he took office in 2009?

Seven years into an eight year term and he still isn't responsible for anything.?

You can't make this stuff up.

[sirineou]

what has happened to Iraq since 1953 is a crime against humanity, and has created a number of regrettable actions and reactions that has compromised the well being of the whole world.by destabilizing the region.

Today's events should be celebrated as a new chapter, in history with the potential to rectify this unfortunate conditions.

I join all sane people in the word, in welcoming the great country of Iran back in the family of nations.

In an other thread I talked about the economic downturn and how it is fueled by a vicious cycle of diminished consumer participation, suppressing production, suppressing commodities used, suppressing wages, compromising consumer spending......

I suggested that this vicious cycle can only be broken by some stimulus. external to the consumption, production cycle.

This could be it, not only by it's actual economic contribution, but also by the psychological impact of it.s potential.

Frankly I am pleased and excited.

To all those feeling otherwise, I suggest they assume the fetal position, and suck on their second ammendment weapons.

[sirineou]

as far as I know there is nothing about ballistic rocket testing in the agreement, do you know something different?

..

Iran is banned from sanctioned to prevent ballistic missile R&D and the fraudulent nuke deal was linked to this previous 2010 UN Resolution 1929 stating Iran was banned sanctioned until this fake nuke deal went into effect. In other words, this restriction expired when the current deal went into effect. It was not in effect in October during the ballistic launch.

It is argued Iran never committed to its own sanctions and therefore could R&D ballistic missiles. It is one more example of the West offering dolts to negotiate with masters. The West could have fielded better negotiators, we just did not. Near history will judge this period as pivotal in events spiraling out of control. Iran has been made regionally unassailable. The US has moved the region from low intensity conflict to mid/high intensity conflict by this betrayal.

Iran's entire existence is predicated upon warring upon self and others; it is an "Islamic State;" people conveniently forget this point.

Again: Iran has fulfilled its commitments so far by disposing of nuclear material and disabling a reactor.

How exactly do you define this as "spiralling out of control"?

The instability in the region is down to Bush and Cheney unleashing Islamic State upon it.

I would argue that having Shi'a powerful enough to fight these extremists is far better than letting them take over the GCC (which is their aim).

"The instability in the region is down to Bush and Cheney unleashing Islamic State upon it."

Did Obama get some sort of Hold Harmless Clause when he took office in 2009?

Seven years into an eight year term and he still isn't responsible for anything.?

You can't make this stuff up.

Obama is managing a situation he inherited, whether effectively or not is arguable .

"Seven years into an eight year term and he still isn't responsible for anything.?"

Bush and Cheney drove the car in to a ditch . Obama is responsible of putting some dent and mud on it while trying to get it out.

[arjunadawn]

as far as I know there is nothing about ballistic rocket testing in the agreement, do you know something different?

Iran is banned from sanctioned to prevent ballistic missile R&D and the fraudulent nuke deal was linked to this previous 2010 UN Resolution 1929 stating Iran was banned sanctioned until this fake nuke deal went into effect. In other words, this restriction expired when the current deal went into effect. It was not in effect in October during the ballistic launch.

It is argued Iran never committed to its own sanctions and therefore could R&D ballistic missiles. It is one more example of the West offering dolts to negotiate with masters. The West could have fielded better negotiators, we just did not. Near history will judge this period as pivotal in events spiraling out of control. Iran has been made regionally unassailable. The US has moved the region from low intensity conflict to mid/high intensity conflict by this betrayal.

Iran's entire existence is predicated upon warring upon self and others; it is an "Islamic State;" people conveniently forget this point.

Again: Iran has fulfilled its commitments so far by disposing of nuclear material and disabling a reactor.

How exactly do you define this as "spiralling out of control"?

The instability in the region is down to Bush and Cheney unleashing Islamic State upon it.

I would argue that having Shi'a powerful enough to fight these extremists is far better than letting them take over the GCC (which is their aim).

"The instability in the region is down to Bush and Cheney unleashing Islamic State upon it."

Did Obama get some sort of Hold Harmless Clause when he took office in 2009?

Seven years into an eight year term and he still isn't responsible for anything.?

You can't make this stuff up.

Ezzra edited for space.

Basically, I agree with both of you, to a point. It is highly likely the DAESH Frankenstein was created or envisioned in the past administration. I think teasing the facts from the smoke support this. It is likely Obama inherited a policy in place that he manipulated rather than repudiated, thus buying ownership in any event. There are just no other ways to explain 7 years of continued money and legitimacy poured after bad unless Obama bought the premise, if not the goal. There is a point where the preponderance of coincidence is just overwhelming and then intention must be considered. This is a neocon play right from their playbook "Which Path to Persia." However, every single action Obama has taken in the region has served only one end. It is self evident- the empowerment of previously repugnant ideologies. No human can fail that much. It has to be Obama's insurgent policy aims in addition to the previously launched DAESH creation by neocons.

Forces greater than Obama had in place a policy which would have been more destructive to his ends to abandon it. Instead, he continued it with the caveat that he would rebel against it- empowering Iran. IMO Obama wants a bipolar Middle East where legitimacy and power is given to Islamic States broadly, if not entirely in the region. DAESH continues to support that aim, isolating Iran did not. Obama marginaly engages DAESH but grossly empowers Iran. Obama acts under a Sword of Damocles and thus seeks not even to placate sunni actors but simply buy time until his vision is the status quo and his aims are acted upon the region.

[chuckd]

Iran is banned from sanctioned to prevent ballistic missile R&D and the fraudulent nuke deal was linked to this previous 2010 UN Resolution 1929 stating Iran was banned sanctioned until this fake nuke deal went into effect. In other words, this restriction expired when the current deal went into effect. It was not in effect in October during the ballistic launch.

..

It is argued Iran never committed to its own sanctions and therefore could R&D ballistic missiles. It is one more example of the West offering dolts to negotiate with masters. The West could have fielded better negotiators, we just did not. Near history will judge this period as pivotal in events spiraling out of control. Iran has been made regionally unassailable. The US has moved the region from low intensity conflict to mid/high intensity conflict by this betrayal.

Iran's entire existence is predicated upon warring upon self and others; it is an "Islamic State;" people conveniently forget this point.

Again: Iran has fulfilled its commitments so far by disposing of nuclear material and disabling a reactor.

How exactly do you define this as "spiralling out of control"?

The instability in the region is down to Bush and Cheney unleashing Islamic State upon it.

I would argue that having Shi'a powerful enough to fight these extremists is far better than letting them take over the GCC (which is their aim).

"The instability in the region is down to Bush and Cheney unleashing Islamic State upon it."

Did Obama get some sort of Hold Harmless Clause when he took office in 2009?

Seven years into an eight year term and he still isn't responsible for anything.?

You can't make this stuff up.

Obama is managing a situation he inherited, whether effectively or not is arguable .

"Seven years into an eight year term and he still isn't responsible for anything.?"

Bush and Cheney drove the car in to a ditch . Obama is responsible of putting some dent and mud on it while trying to get it out.

Obama and Hillary stretched that ditch all the way from Iraq to Libya, back to Syria and all points in between.

If my memory serves me well, Libya and Syria were relatively peaceful on 20 January 2009.

And Iran was not using proxies in their war in Yemen.

[Chicog]

Yemen was a craphole. The Arab Spring was a result of decades of repression tolerated by the West.

[arjunadawn]

what has happened to Iraq since 1953 is a crime against humanity, and has created a number of regrettable actions and reactions that has compromised the well being of the whole world.by destabilizing the region.

Today's events should be celebrated as a new chapter, in history with the potential to rectify this unfortunate conditions.

I join all sane people in the word, in welcoming the great country of Iran back in the family of nations.

In an other thread I talked about the economic downturn and how it is fueled by a vicious cycle of diminished consumer participation, suppressing production, suppressing commodities used, suppressing wages, compromising consumer spending......

I suggested that this vicious cycle can only be broken by some stimulus. external to the consumption, production cycle.

This could be it, not only by it's actual economic contribution, but also by the psychological impact of it.s potential.

Frankly I am pleased and excited.

To all those feeling otherwise, I suggest they assume the fetal position, and suck on their second ammendment weapons.

Hello sirineou

Iran is most certainly not a "great country." The Persian people are indisputably a great civilization but Iran is a caricature of its people as a State. Iran is among the most brutal and regressive theocratic regimes in history. Iran and the OIC, reacting to the fact that they are most definitely not reflective of the "family of nations" responded to the fact they object to the Universal Declaration on Human Rights and in 1990 the OIC signed the Cario Declaration on Human Rights in Islam to placate the west. Like the treaties and double speak of most Islamic States the caveats are contained in Article 19, and 24, basically laying bare the entire absurdity of the Declaration itself. All human rights are IAW sharia alone. All punishments are IAW sharia alone. If one is an ethical relativist it can be concluded such actors are in the "family of nations" but once realizing this, can any truly rationalize such inhumanity? Not a member of my family!

Were I neutral regarding the benefits or liabilities of this recent "deal" with Iran I would still not celebrate. At best I would remain hopeful and guarded. There is simply zero justification for celebration. There is also zero reason to conclude Iran is "back in the family of nations." Iran remains a pariah State. Putting an ape in a tux does not mean it can play the violin.

[JetsetBkk]

It's euronews; probably a simple typo from someone for whom English is not their first language.

Yes. It is exactly the same on the Euronews website.

Makes me wince .

[chuckd]

what has happened to Iraq since 1953 is a crime against humanity, and has created a number of regrettable actions and reactions that has compromised the well being of the whole world.by destabilizing the region.

Today's events should be celebrated as a new chapter, in history with the potential to rectify this unfortunate conditions.

I join all sane people in the word, in welcoming the great country of Iran back in the family of nations.

In an other thread I talked about the economic downturn and how it is fueled by a vicious cycle of diminished consumer participation, suppressing production, suppressing commodities used, suppressing wages, compromising consumer spending......

I suggested that this vicious cycle can only be broken by some stimulus. external to the consumption, production cycle.

This could be it, not only by it's actual economic contribution, but also by the psychological impact of it.s potential.

Frankly I am pleased and excited.

To all those feeling otherwise, I suggest they assume the fetal position, and suck on their second ammendment weapons.

The crimes against humanity began in Iran in January 1979 and continue to this day.

I lived and worked there from 1974 through early 1979 and Iran had a thriving economy with a rising middle class of well educated, happy people. It was a great place to live and life was good for all...except, of course, the radical Islamists.

The smiling Mullahs that rule there now are doing so to the detriment of the entire world.

If you and the other remaining sane people of the world are willing to welcome another Islamic Republic into your hearts, feel free.

I would suggest you not turn your back to them. They cannot be trusted.

[sirineou]

what has happened to Iraq since 1953 is a crime against humanity, and has created a number of regrettable actions and reactions that has compromised the well being of the whole world.by destabilizing the region.

Today's events should be celebrated as a new chapter, in history with the potential to rectify this unfortunate conditions.

I join all sane people in the word, in welcoming the great country of Iran back in the family of nations.

In an other thread I talked about the economic downturn and how it is fueled by a vicious cycle of diminished consumer participation, suppressing production, suppressing commodities used, suppressing wages, compromising consumer spending......

I suggested that this vicious cycle can only be broken by some stimulus. external to the consumption, production cycle.

This could be it, not only by it's actual economic contribution, but also by the psychological impact of it.s potential.

Frankly I am pleased and excited.

To all those feeling otherwise, I suggest they assume the fetal position, and suck on their second ammendment weapons.

The crimes against humanity began in Iran in January 1979 and continue to this day.

I lived and worked there from 1974 through early 1979 and Iran had a thriving economy with a rising middle class of well educated, happy people. It was a great place to live and life was good for all...except, of course, the radical Islamists.

The smiling Mullahs that rule there now are doing so to the detriment of the entire world.

If you and the other remaining sane people of the world are willing to welcome another Islamic Republic into your hearts, feel free.

I would suggest you not turn your back to them. They cannot be trusted.

You should have started that post, with the IMO caveat,

Obviously NOT in the opinion of the thousands that rebelled against the autocratic, authoritarian, SAVAK endorsed regime.

I am sure the Shah was great for you and America.

The Theocratic regime that followed, might not have being any better, but were both certainly a product of US interference in the Iranian democratic process,

[Scott]

Let's stick a little closer to the original topic. Although the history is interesting, it is a little too far off the main issue of the thread.

[sirineou]

Again: Iran has fulfilled its commitments so far by disposing of nuclear material and disabling a reactor.

How exactly do you define this as "spiralling out of control"?

The instability in the region is down to Bush and Cheney unleashing Islamic State upon it.

I would argue that having Shi'a powerful enough to fight these extremists is far better than letting them take over the GCC (which is their aim).

"The instability in the region is down to Bush and Cheney unleashing Islamic State upon it."

Did Obama get some sort of Hold Harmless Clause when he took office in 2009?

Seven years into an eight year term and he still isn't responsible for anything.?

You can't make this stuff up.

Obama is managing a situation he inherited, whether effectively or not is arguable .

"Seven years into an eight year term and he still isn't responsible for anything.?"

Bush and Cheney drove the car in to a ditch . Obama is responsible of putting some dent and mud on it while trying to get it out.

Obama and Hillary stretched that ditch all the way from Iraq to Libya, back to Syria and all points in between.

If my memory serves me well, Libya and Syria were relatively peaceful on 20 January 2009.

And Iran was not using proxies in their war in Yemen.

as I said, whether he is doing a good job getting it out of the ditch is arguable and the subject for an other Tread. which you are welcome to start and sure that I will participate.

As you said in an other post you lived and worked in Iran a number of years and as such you must be familiar with the Iranian people. I have also the pleasure to work with some of them, and I must tell you, they are the least likely candidates for a Theocratic constituency.

What occurred to Iran was a reactionary product of external interference. It's longevity was a reaction to external interference.

I applaud Obama's efforts to bring marginalized countries back in the fold

Both in the case of Iran and Cuba. IMO History would be very kind to President Obama

I agree with you, what Happened in Libya, Syria , and elsewhere is unfortunate to say the least, but IMO is a function of as being busy trying to get out of the ditch that Bush put as in.

Let's concentrate on the subject at hand, Iran , it's return in the international theater. and the implications.

You having lived there and knowing the people better than we do, tell as what you think, do you think , given their culture, and disposition,

Will the current situation lead toward a more liberal more easy to deal with l Iran or a more Theocratic, conservative less easy to deal with Iran,

Edited January 17, 2016 by sirineou