Historic deal between Iran and the world could happen

[WWWTT]

After the Russians, Israel is the second largest defense technology provider to China.......everything from search and fire control radars, military grade communications, to NVG and small arms optics.....

Lets see your sources.

Mine show another story.

Israeli sources report that a top Israeli defense official was forced to resign recently after the United States “expressed fury at Israel’s decision to sell military equipment to China.” The incident hearkens back to the Israel-China Phalcon airborne radar system deal which was cancelled at the United States’ insistence – the cancellation of that deal resulted in a costly settlement for Israel which had to pay China $350 million in damages for backing out of the contract at the “last minute” under U.S. pressure. The more recent indent involved the sale of Ricor miniature refrigeration systems, which are ”used for missiles and in electro-optic equipment.”

And this

http://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0LEVjr.RiBVnG4AUA8nnIlQ;_ylu=X3oDMTByZDBpbXI5BHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDNQRjb2xvA2JmMQR2dGlkAw--/RV=2/RE=1428207487/RO=10/RU=http%3a%2f%2fdefensetech.org%2f2013%2f12%2f24%2freport-israel-passes-u-s-military-technology-to-china%2f/RK=0/RS=OkO8dYTOqeWwd7FAmuO2CZAsc6o-

WWWTT

[Derek 2.0]

Makes no difference, both countries are getting the short end of the stick.

WWWTT

What makes you think that?

[Derek 2.0]

Lets see your sources.

Mine show another story.

Israeli sources report that a top Israeli defense official was forced to resign recently after the United States “expressed fury at Israel’s decision to sell military equipment to China.” The incident hearkens back to the Israel-China Phalcon airborne radar system deal which was cancelled at the United States’ insistence – the cancellation of that deal resulted in a costly settlement for Israel which had to pay China $350 million in damages for backing out of the contract at the “last minute” under U.S. pressure. The more recent indent involved the sale of Ricor miniature refrigeration systems, which are ”used for missiles and in electro-optic equipment.”

And this

http://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0LEVjr.RiBVnG4AUA8nnIlQ;_ylu=X3oDMTByZDBpbXI5BHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDNQRjb2xvA2JmMQR2dGlkAw--/RV=2/RE=1428207487/RO=10/RU=http%3a%2f%2fdefensetech.org%2f2013%2f12%2f24%2freport-israel-passes-u-s-military-technology-to-china%2f/RK=0/RS=OkO8dYTOqeWwd7FAmuO2CZAsc6o-

WWWTT

Right here........The Chinese have been (until recently surpassed by India) the largest importer of arms in the World, a common theme due to their lesser technological progress domestically......Israel, who will sell near anything to anyone, after the Russians, are the second largest exporter to the PRC.

Your articles don't disprove it, but highlight past concerns (as indicated in my link) from the US Government over Israeli arms exports and Western technology transfer to Israel............Ironically, a concern once shared by the French (who also export to near anyone) who once were the largest importer of arms to Israel.....which Israel pirated and sold as their own......much like the Chinese do today with nearly everything.

[WWWTT]

Your articles don't disprove it, but highlight past concerns (as indicated in my link) from the US Government over Israeli arms exports and Western technology transfer to Israel............Ironically, a concern once shared by the French (who also export to near anyone) who once were the largest importer of arms to Israel.....which Israel pirated and sold as their own......much like the Chinese do today with nearly everything.

No that's a feeble old link my friend. Snap shot of the past. 2002 was 13 years ago.

The link I provided speaks volumes because the US is the only thing keeping Israel afloat.

US aid is too important to jeopardize for them.

Something tells me you did searches already and didn't like what came up.

http://tnjeoli.blogspot.ca/2014/12/the-worlds-top-5-arms-exporters-2014.html

WWWTT

[WWWTT]

What makes you think that?

Sanctions are like drinking poison and expecting your enemy to die/fall ill.

In other words they hurt more than they help.

It's not ironic that this is a Chinese idiom, so the Chinese know very well sanctions won't work hence they have the #1 economy!

The UK isn't even in the top ten anymore I believe.

WWWTT

[GostHacked]

Israel will never bomb Iran without U.S.' permission. Israel is only into bombing defenseless people such as in Gaza.

Israel has made several attacks within Iran against nuclear and military facilities. They don't call the US for permission.

[Big Guy]

I have opined here before that there are really no good alternatives to this deal with Iran.

Fareed Zakaria is a well respected "expert" on the Middle East and has been proven correct very often in his analysis of events. He suggests that there are only 2 other alternatives to a deal, both of which are bad news for the West;

http://www.fareedzakaria.com/2015/04/02/a-nuclear-deal-with-iran-is-the-best-option/

The two choices are maintaining the sanctions or military involvement. I agree. He expresses the consequences of both options far better than I.

[Wilber]

Personally I think trying to integrate Iran with other mainstream countries is a good idea. The more they become like us economically, the more they have to lose by screwing it up.

[WWWTT]

http://www.fareedzakaria.com/2015/04/02/a-nuclear-deal-with-iran-is-the-best-option/

This link is a semi US policy patronage. Suggesting that sanctions actually work.

I thinks if posters here on this site are going to continue posting this stuff, then you are going to have to post links where it is clearly shown that sanctions actually work!

Sanctions by the US are ongoing with nations like Iran, Cuba and North Korea for decades now (among others) Sow these are clearly failures in the effectiveness of sanctions.

As well sanctions against Russia are now hurting the Canadian and European economies! Many EU countries have come out and said enough is enough!

WWWTT

[jacee]

I agree.

Give the people of Iran a chance to breathe, and to hold their leaders accountable.

.

[bush_cheney2004]

This link is a semi US policy patronage. Suggesting that sanctions actually work.

Some members here are very strong advocates for sanctions....as in the case of South Africa....or Libya...or Bosnia...or several other nations. Arguably, sanctions have worked on Iran if forcing a "deal" was the objective.

Sanctions are not just a U.S. policy.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/the-big-question-have-sanctions-ever-worked-and-should-they-be-applied-to-zimbabwe-863870.html

[On Guard for Thee]

I agree.

Give the people of Iran a chance to breathe, and to hold their leaders accountable.

.

As do I. I had the opportunity to work there and I found the people very accommodating, friendly, and, progressive. The population is also quite young. My take away was there are a few Ayatollahs, who unfortunately run the show currently, and everybody else.

[marcus]

Israel has made several attacks within Iran against nuclear and military facilities. They don't call the US for permission.

That's correct. They have engaged in assassinations and cyber warfare. But that's not an all out war, where we would see bombings and use of military weapons. That would not happen against a country like Iran without the blessing of the U.S.

[bush_cheney2004]

Israel didn't need or seek U.S. permission to attack the USS Liberty (AGTR-5) in 1967.

[GostHacked]

Personally I think trying to integrate Iran with other mainstream countries is a good idea. The more they become like us economically, the more they have to lose by screwing it up.

After the way global economics has been handled by the west (US, UK EU) with bank bailouts, national bailouts, money laundering, fraud, market manipulation and the housing market in the US which had global impacts....... if they get integrated into the global economy that will mean the end for Iran. They lose control over money and sovereignty.

That's correct. They have engaged in assassinations and cyber warfare. But that's not an all out war, where we would see bombings and use of military weapons. That would not happen against a country like Iran without the blessing of the U.S.

They'd bombed nuclear sites in Syria and Iraq.. Israel has a track record and will do it again. Without the USA's permission.

Edited April 6, 2015 by GostHacked

[WWWTT]

Some members here are very strong advocates for sanctions....as in the case of South Africa....or Libya...or Bosnia...or several other nations. Arguably, sanctions have worked on Iran if forcing a "deal" was the objective.

Sanctions are not just a U.S. policy.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/the-big-question-have-sanctions-ever-worked-and-should-they-be-applied-to-zimbabwe-863870.html

Good link you provided.

Yes big argue or debate.

I feel that they failed in Iran. Cuba is obvious failure.

As well, one must acknowledge that sanctions are to only impose one countries will over another.

Just because a country like the US Canada UK etc has a will to impose it's values on another region does not mean they are justified in imposing their standard on others.

Failure to in this recognition will only lead to further problems and is simply poor negotiations!

WWWTT

[marcus]

They'd bombed nuclear sites in Syria and Iraq.. Israel has a track record and will do it again. Without the USA's permission.

You have to understand that there is a difference between countries. Iraq and Syria are different than Iran. They were calculated moves where they knew there was a small risk of a retaliation. Iran has one of the largest armies in the world and the risk of a retaliation would prevent Israel from attacking it alone. I will post the link once I have more time to find it, but the estimation was that Israel was not capable of taking out all of the nuclear facilities, especially the one that's located deep in the mountain.

[GostHacked]

You have to understand that there is a difference between countries. Iraq and Syria are different than Iran. They were calculated moves where they knew there was a small risk of a retaliation. Iran has one of the largest armies in the world and the risk of a retaliation would prevent Israel from attacking it alone. I will post the link once I have more time to find it, but the estimation was that Israel was not capable of taking out all of the nuclear facilities, especially the one that's located deep in the mountain.

Ah, so that's it then. Israel will only pick on nations it knows there will be no retaliation. If Syria, Iraq or Iran did those kinds of blatant attacks on Israel, we'd never hear the end of it.

[overthere]

Canada needs to develop a huge fleet of giant bombers, and then bomb the entire middle East relentlessly with nice warm blankets.

OK, that wasn't all my own idea.

[Wilber]

After the way global economics has been handled by the west (US, UK EU) with bank bailouts, national bailouts, money laundering, fraud, market manipulation and the housing market in the US which had global impacts....... if they get integrated into the global economy that will mean the end for Iran. They lose control over money and sovereignty.

So you are saying the sanctions are good for Iran.

[Moonlight Graham]

http://www.fareedzakaria.com/2015/04/02/a-nuclear-deal-with-iran-is-the-best-option/

The two choices are maintaining the sanctions or military involvement. I agree. He expresses the consequences of both options far better than I.

I like Zakaria a lot. He says about sanctions that they hurt Iran but they won't prevent them from getting nukes, Since they're increased their nuclear capacity significantly over the last 10 years. So the options in the medium term are either war or trying to make a deal work. The other option he doesn't discuss is letting Iran acquire nuclear weapons. If the US would do such a thing, it would be interesting to see if Israel or possibly Saudi Arabia would let the get to that point without starting a fullscale war.

[Moonlight Graham]

They'd bombed nuclear sites in Syria and Iraq.. Israel has a track record and will do it again. Without the USA's permission.

http://fareedzakaria.com/2015/04/02/a-nuclear-deal-with-iran-is-the-best-option/

"People speak of a strike on Iran like Israel’s against an Iraqi reactor in 1981 and a Syrian facility in 2007. But those were single facilities. Iran, by contrast, has a vast nuclear industry, comprising many installations spread across the country, some close to population centers, others in mountainous terrain [one actually deep inside a mountain]. The United States [and/or Israel?] would effectively have to go to war with Iran, destroying its air defenses, then attacking its facilities in dozens — perhaps hundreds — of sorties. The bombers would be equipped with highly explosive weapons, demolishing buildings, reactors, and laboratories, but also producing considerable collateral damage."

[dre]

I like Zakaria a lot. He says about sanctions that they hurt Iran but they won't prevent them from getting nukes, Since they're increased their nuclear capacity significantly over the last 10 years. So the options in the medium term are either war or trying to make a deal work. The other option he doesn't discuss is letting Iran acquire nuclear weapons. If the US would do such a thing, it would be interesting to see if Israel or possibly Saudi Arabia would let the get to that point without starting a fullscale war.

A nuclear armed Iran might actually be the best thing for the stability of the middle east. India and Pakistan fought a series of bloody wars, but since they have both had nuclear weapons there has been relative peace besides a few major skirmishes.

Of course the hawks will say that Iran is different and that its leaders are crazy rabid psychos intent on nuking Israel and commiting suicide on behalf of the entire persion race at the same time, but this assertion is not backed up by any intelligence agencies nor is it reflected in Irans actions. Iran is a rational actor... Its leader has been pretty careful and conservative. They do back various proxies in the region (mostly shia), but who doesnt... Iran is a fairly garden variety middle tier regional player.

[dre]

http://fareedzakaria.com/2015/04/02/a-nuclear-deal-with-iran-is-the-best-option/

"People speak of a strike on Iran like Israel’s against an Iraqi reactor in 1981 and a Syrian facility in 2007. But those were single facilities. Iran, by contrast, has a vast nuclear industry, comprising many installations spread across the country, some close to population centers, others in mountainous terrain [one actually deep inside a mountain]. The United States [and/or Israel?] would effectively have to go to war with Iran, destroying its air defenses, then attacking its facilities in dozens — perhaps hundreds — of sorties. The bombers would be equipped with highly explosive weapons, demolishing buildings, reactors, and laboratories, but also producing considerable collateral damage."

Thats the thing... theres more than 300 individual sites from what I have read. And even if you destroyed a bunch of them you would still only set Iran back by a couple of years. Once you have the technology you dont "unlearn it".

[Moonlight Graham]

A nuclear armed Iran might actually be the best thing for the stability of the middle east. India and Pakistan fought a series of bloody wars, but since they have both had nuclear weapons there has been relative peace besides a few major skirmishes.

It might be good for stability, but also may not. Internally, Iran is fairly stable right now. But who knows what things will bring 10-20 years down the line. Some Islamist nutjob could take over from Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei when he dies, or internal conflict could break out like in Syria and Egypt and Islamist jihadists take over the regime.

Also, Iran getting nukes could start a nuclear arms race between Iran and Israel, and possibly Saudi Arabia as well. The less nukes the better IMO.