Iran Nuclear Deal

35 senators in the United States have agreed to support the deal. With the 34th vote, even if the Senate rejects the deal (Senate has the power to accept/reject treaties), the President will be able to veto and without two thirs majority the deal will be passed. Do you support the deal? Do you feel it gives Iran too much power? Will this deal prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons? What other options do you propose will be better than the deal itself?

Every country have right to develop nuclear energy if it wants to. No country can order them to do otherwise. If anything, Pakistan is more extremist and violent, yet they have nuclear weapon. Iran have much stable government with peaceful population which dont start wars. Infact, Iran was invaded by others and recently had 8-years long defensive war.

Only states that should be banned to develop nuclear weapon should be Germany and Japan since they tried to conquer the World 70 years ago. But that ban can be revoked in 30 years (100 years after WWII) if Germany and Japan prove to be stable, good, friendly member of international community. Germany is on the good path, but Japan is not as they revoked their law about militarism and disobey their people who dont want to spend more tax money on military, plus they added new law which gives right to Japan to use military outside Japan which Japanese people are against.

Kirjutas Skanderbeg, 04.09.2015 at 05:07

Every country have right to develop nuclear energy if it wants to. No country can order them to do otherwise. If anything, Pakistan is more extremist and violent, yet they have nuclear weapon. Iran have much stable government with peaceful population which dont start wars. Infact, Iran was invaded by others and recently had 8-years long defensive war.

Only states that should be banned to develop nuclear weapon should be Germany and Japan since they tried to conquer the World 70 years ago. But that ban can be revoked in 30 years (100 years after WWII) if Germany and Japan prove to be stable, good, friendly member of international community. Germany is on the good path, but Japan is not as they revoked their law about militarism and disobey their people who dont want to spend more tax money on military, plus they added new law which gives right to Japan to use military outside Japan which Japanese people are against.

You don't feel that Iran's funding of terrorist groups (such as Hezbollah) should be considered when 180 billion dollars will be given to them?

fyi, I am still on the fence about the issue so just playing devil's advocate.

Kirjutas Skanderbeg, 04.09.2015 at 05:07

Every country have right to develop nuclear energy if it wants to. No country can order them to do otherwise. If anything, Pakistan is more extremist and violent, yet they have nuclear weapon. Iran have much stable government with peaceful population which dont start wars. Infact, Iran was invaded by others and recently had 8-years long defensive war.

Only states that should be banned to develop nuclear weapon should be Germany and Japan since they tried to conquer the World 70 years ago. But that ban can be revoked in 30 years (100 years after WWII) if Germany and Japan prove to be stable, good, friendly member of international community. Germany is on the good path, but Japan is not as they revoked their law about militarism and disobey their people who dont want to spend more tax money on military, plus they added new law which gives right to Japan to use military outside Japan which Japanese people are against.

only in the last few months ago they caused a war in yemen

Well my opinion on the matter is that while i think the deal is not very good, its as good as it will get, so i support. Usa has imposed the toughest sanctions it could and Iran actually increased their nuclear program. They already managed to enrich uranium to 20% and stockpile it and that is the hard part. Enriching it to 90% and weaponizing it is supposedly the easier part, so its safe to say they can have nukes if they want despite the sanctions.

What the democrats are realising i think, is that China, Russia and Europe dont care anymore and want to start business and trading with Iran. I think Obama just wants to get the best out of a bad situation. At least with this deal, Iran wont be able to get a nuke for the next 15 years as even their mines will be inspected. I think the deal is in Usa's and our best interests.

Moreso, i doubt Iran would want to use nuc weapons anyway, in case they even built them on secret. Nukes with the exception of, who else, only USA, have always been used as a safety, weapons of peace actually. They intimidate the opposition and make the prospect of war harder. Thats why the cold war never turned to a hot one. Iran certainly knows if they ever use nukes they will be wiped of the face of the earth in days.

Moreso, i believe Irans funding terrorist and being violent is not a strong argument. Usa has funded more terrorists and more opressive regimes than the whole world combined. Russia has the reputation of being suicidal and willing to decimate their own people to obtain their military goals and so is China. North Korea is rogue, Israel has the same regard to human life as you have for ants when you step on them, Pakistan is unarguably the most brutal and untrustworthy of them all and India, well when the court punishes a father by ordering his 15 year old daughters to public gang rape, you know somethings wrong with the morals of the country. So i dont think Iran is really that much more dangerous than the countries who already have nukes.

The single one thing that worries me is what else, the islam factor. Most of the countries foreign policy and military actions, are driven by ideology and interests and thus self-survival and preservation are always the most importand factor. In islam, we have the only ideology that supports suicide in the name of god, it is actually considered an honour to die for Allah, killing his enemies. Take suicide bombers for example. That worries me some, as if the bombs ever get to the wrong hands it could be ugly. But as i said above, iran can get nukes if they want anyway and i doubt Irans regime in power and the political elite are even trully religious lol. I am almost certain they are not and they just use Islam to opress and control the uneducated and stupid folks, so i think in the end Iran will act rationally, it will just be in a more powerfull position.
And even if Iran ultimately builds a nuke or two , it will get along fine in the nuclear social club with all the other psycho kids.

Kirjutas Pheonixking929, 04.09.2015 at 08:45

You don't feel that Iran's funding of terrorist groups (such as Hezbollah) should be considered when 180 billion dollars will be given to them?

fyi, I am still on the fence about the issue so just playing devil's advocate.

I dont have information that Iran fund terrorist cells, but i've heard accusations. Would like proof. I would support sanctions against Iran if they fund terrorism, but not economic sanctions because they hit poor people and lead them to death by starvation, but political and military sanctions.

Kirjutas Rock Lee, 04.09.2015 at 09:49

only in the last few months ago they caused a war in yemen

Iran? I think War in Yemen started by Yemeni people rebelling against their government. Most of those rebels are Shia Muslims, but they are still citizens of Yemen, so no need to auto-connect them to the only Shia country on planet - Iran.

There is a long history of Sunni Yemen oppressing Shia minority, although they are same nation. It was expected of them to rebel.


Let me add that Yemen's larger neighbor invaded Yemen to restore previous government, Saudi Arabia is fighting against Yemeni rebels.
Now imagine if Russia invaded Ukraine to restore previous government(Yanukovich). See the irony?

Kirjutas Khal.eesi, 04.09.2015 at 10:28

and India, well when the court punishes a father by ordering his 15 year old daughters to public gang rape, you know somethings wrong with the morals of the country.

Indian Court condemned them, village elders judged rape, not Indian Court, they called them 'kangaroo courts' and encourage people to ignore them.

I think India rejected caste system and old 'unwriten laws' officially, but some people still practice old norms and it is hard to force them otherwise.

Kirjutas Khal.eesi, 04.09.2015 at 10:28

Moreso, i doubt Iran would want to use nuc weapons anyway, in case they even built them on secret. Nukes with the exception of, who else, only USA, have always been used as a safety, weapons of peace actually. They intimidate the opposition and make the prospect of war harder. Thats why the cold war never turned to a hot one. Iran certainly knows if they ever use nukes they will be wiped of the face of the earth in days.

Since Russia, China, North Korea, Iran are in confrontation with America, but America still didnt attack them, do you think it is because those countries have nuclear weapon? Do you consider the only defense against America and guarantor of national independence is to own a nuke?

American invasion of Irak was quite fast, blitzkrieg, its like they were in hurry to find iraqi nukes if they have them. Maybe invasion was on purpose to defeat Iraq before it obtain nuclear weapon because by then it will be too late.

Kirjutas Skanderbeg, 04.09.2015 at 11:54

Iran? I think War in Yemen started by Yemeni people rebelling against their government. Most of those rebels are Shia Muslims, but they are still citizens of Yemen, so no need to auto-connect them to the only Shia country on planet - Iran.

There is a long history of Sunni Yemen oppressing Shia minority, although they are same nation. It was expected of them to rebel.


Let me add that Yemen's larger neighbor invaded Yemen to restore previous government, Saudi Arabia is fighting against Yemeni rebels.
Now imagine if Russia invaded Ukraine to restore previous government(Yanukovich). See the irony?

i believe iran encouraged and suppurted the shian people there as much as russia did in ukraine (it's not even conspiracy, it had been noticed in every report of many countries trustworthy media tools), and don't get me wrong, i'm not hostile to your country, i believe the leadership of both countries russia and iran have nationalist ambitions to gain power and influence in order to compete their rivals as they see them (usa for russia and the suna+ maybe israel for iran although i don't see what they want from us)

if they did'nt suppurt everything that is anti western and if they did'nt call to destroy usa and israel i believe that they should have had the rights to have that weapons, but as they keep doing it (only in the last military parade during the negotiations they called to destroy usa and israel, and their leader said israel is a wound in world's history) and as they keep competing for influence with saudi arabia and being involved in religious wars, i don't think it's reponsible to give them the rescoures to devolp such as weapons.