The MOU

[SpankyMcFarland]

 

1 hour ago, gatomontes99 said:

I did. I just set it up in context. Be realistic. 

I’ll repost them:

Vance pointed to criticism of the deal from Israeli officials, including far-right ministers Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir.

“And I guess my response to them would be: What is your exact proposal? You’re a country of nine million people. You can’t just kill your way out of solving every single national security problem that you have,” he said.

 

[Deluge]

2 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Well, it’s enough of a rational actor for America to negotiate with it, apparently. 

And as for fanaticism, some Israeli politicians have their own baggage there. 

Oh, Trump's got it all wrong on this one. The only approach is to keep those wild animals confined to their own prehistoric environment. 

[gatomontes99]

33 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

 

I’ll repost them:

Vance pointed to criticism of the deal from Israeli officials, including far-right ministers Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir.

“And I guess my response to them would be: What is your exact proposal? You’re a country of nine million people. You can’t just kill your way out of solving every single national security problem that you have,” he said.

 

And? What response should there be? That statement is perfectly fine. 

[Army Guy]

4 hours ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Iran is nowhere near as important in the global game as you think it is. The key competitor is China with Russia playing a supporting role. America should not allow domestic politics to distract it from the most important rivalry.  

I don't think i have given them any importance, i have said repeatedly they are major sponsor if terrorism around the globe, including their own people...and they deserved to be kicked in the face by the entire globe...instead most of the globe prefers to sit around and whine and watch...including Canada...

[Army Guy]

4 hours ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Iran is surrounded by nuclear states that are either avowed enemies or potential enemies who are somewhat friendly at the moment - the US navy, China, Russia, Pakistan and India. Above all, Israel, a bitter foe, has nuclear weapons that it refuses to acknowledge. This means it has never publicly discussed or committed to when it would use them against Iran - it cannot do so explicitly without admitting their existence. Instead we get word salads from Israeli spokespeople about how trustworthy and nice they are. Would any Iranian government be able to trust a government that contains the likes of Smotrich and Ben-Gvir to show restraint in a conventional missile exchange that Israel was losing in a future when the US is less generous with missile defence? At the least, Iran will want to remain a nuclear threshold state like Japan and South Korea, able to race to a bomb if the need arose. To do otherwise would be irresponsible. 

Iran has on thousands of occasions proven with out a shadow of a doubt they are not stable enough to handle nuclear weapons...be like giving a monkey a machine gun, then acting surprised he actually used it...Infortunely for us a huge glowing hole where Israel/Iran once were, would drive up the costs of everything we take advantage off, making the price unaffordable to everyone but the extreme rich.

[BeaverFever]

17 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

That is all pure fantasy. Every Democrat in the House and Senate has publicly stated that Iran wanted nukes. 

Well I want a billion dollars that doesn’t mean I am on the cusp of getting it.  And nowhere did the Democrats in your clip that was about to happen.  Furthermore Democrats are still American politicians and all American politicians exaggerate and stoke fear of a big bad foreign boogeymen, it’s just how politics in America work, always has been. 
 

17 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

Everyone that has seen the intelligence says they were weeks away.

LMAO that is false. Just like when Republicans made similar false claims about Saddam

 

 As YET ANOTHER REMINDER enriched uranium is mot the same thing as having a nuclear weapon  Even if you have fully enriched uranium you don’t just throw handfuls of it at people you need to develop a nuclear warhead which is its own complicated multi year project they never started  Furthermore Iran only achieved that level of uranium enrichment over the years after the incompetent orange fool tore up the JCPOA with no replacement   
 

17 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

Thoae are 1990's tech. We used them in Iraq. 

Dude you know nothing, and are making things up. That is the US active military combat arsenal still in production theres not a “b team” of old leftovers  It doesn’t all date to the 90s and even the stuff that was first invented back then has been upgraded over the years.  Just because the Ford Mustang was invented in the 1960s doesn’t mean a brand new Ford Mustang is 60s tech. Why do you think they said it will take at least 4 years to replenish it?  Just stop with this kind of nonsense you know nothing about  Like what are you saying the Patriot air defence missiles the US uses to defend its overseas bases are junk and there is activity some other super secret air defence missiles they keep on those bases that they keep for the “real” wars?  Stop being a fool  

18 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

Yeah, no. They did not help because they were never our allies. 

We didn’t help because the doomed unnecessary and stupid mission lead by incompetent fools in the White House was clearly doomed unnecessary and stupid mission lead by incompetent fools in the White House  Period  

 

18 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

First, yes, the MOU sets the goal of no nukes. They can't make or buy a nuke. 

Second, the JCPOA is universally known for being ineffective.

Hilarious!  So you are claiming the JCPOA which also had a goal of “no nukes” and a verification mechanism to go along with it l was “ineffective” simply because Iran can’t be trusted.

BUT THEN you claim Trump’s MOU which simply has Iran “promise” to not to get a Nuke, period is effective simply because it “has a goal” of no nukes. . 

Don’t you see your own ridiculous argument?

The facts speak for themselves- Iran’s enrichment program only took off after Trump cancelled JCPOA, not before.  

And I already debunked your claims about JCPOA

 

18 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

So they largely proved me correct, except point one neglected to talk about undeclared sites. The undeclared sites are where they enriched uranium.

No that’s why it said FALSE not “mostly correct”. And now you can’t find any credible evidence except some random anti-Iran website called “Iran Watch”. The same types of websites that popped up to tell us Saddam was definitely behind 9/11 and definitely had an active WMD arsenal. 
 

Your secret sites claim is more of your slight-of-hand the undermines your argument.   The “secret sites” were not active during JCPOA but before and Iran hadn’t disclosed them. Therefore the shriekeing that “Iran can’t be trusted”. But this undermines your current argument. If Iran can’t be trusted then Trump’s MOU where Iran simply promises to be good from now on is by definition worthless. 
ChatGPT’s take on your secret sites:

According to recent IAEA findings, Iran conducted nuclear-related activities using undeclared nuclear material at several of these locations and failed to provide satisfactory explanations for uranium traces found there. The agency also concluded that some sites had been sanitized or altered before inspectors could fully investigate them.

What the evidence does not show 

The same IAEA findings did not conclude that Iran currently had an active, structured covert nuclear weapons program operating at those sites. In fact, the agency stated it had no credible indications of an ongoing undeclared structured weapons program, while still expressing serious concern about unresolved questions and lack of cooperation.

This distinction is critical.

There is strong evidence that:

• Iran concealed nuclear-related activities in the past.
• Iran did not fully cooperate with investigations into some undeclared sites.
• Some locations appear to have been sanitized before inspection.

But that is different from proving:

• A currently operating secret weapons-production network.
• Active enrichment at hidden sites during the JCPOA years.

Before the JCPOA

Much of the evidence that Iran had conducted undeclared nuclear-related work comes from activities in the late 1990s and early 2000s, including work associated with what the IAEA called the possible military dimensions (PMD) of Iran’s nuclear program.

Examples include:

• Work at Parchin Military Complex.
• Activities at Lavizan-Shian.
• Uranium-related work at locations later identified by the IAEA.

By the time the JCPOA was signed in 2015, the major question was not whether Iran had hidden activities in the past—it was whether those activities had ended and whether any undeclared work was continuing.

During the JCPOA (2015–2018)

The IAEA repeatedly certified that Iran was complying with the agreement’s declared enrichment limits.

However, during this period:

• Questions remained about historical activities.
• Some military sites were not inspected in the way critics wanted.
• The IAEA did not conclude that it had uncovered an active covert enrichment program.

This is where supporters and critics diverged. Supporters said, “The inspectors are finding no evidence of an ongoing weapons program.” Critics replied, “The absence of evidence isn’t proof there isn’t one.”

After the JCPOA began unraveling

A major development occurred in 2018 when Mossad seized a large archive of Iranian nuclear documents. Information from that archive contributed to later IAEA investigations of sites such as Turquzabad and Varamin.

The IAEA subsequently found uranium particles and other evidence suggesting undeclared nuclear-related activities had occurred at some locations and that Iran had not fully explained them.

The important point is that these findings generally related to:

• Activities that often dated back many years.
• Material and facilities that had not been fully declared.
• Questions about completeness of Iran’s declarations.

They did not establish that Iran was secretly enriching uranium to weapons grade while formally complying with the JCPOA’s enrichment limits.

So if someone says…

“The IAEA found secret nuclear sites.”

That’s substantially true.

But if they then say:

“Therefore Iran was actively running a covert weapons program during the JCPOA.”

That is a further conclusion that the IAEA itself did not reach.

A fair summary would be:

The strongest evidence concerns undeclared nuclear-related activities that occurred largely before the JCPOA and were discovered or further investigated during and after the JCPOA. Those discoveries raised legitimate doubts about the completeness of Iran’s declarations, but they did not by themselves prove an active secret weapons program during the years when the JCPOA was being implemented.

 

19 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

So?

I dunno, you brought up this whole weird black market thing, I just said doubted your claims were correct or relevant. 
 

19 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

Excess supply from the ships sitting in the gulf will cause a market crash. It will eventually recover

“Eventually” meaning several years. There’s something called “pent-up demand” that will absorb any excess supply without a crash. And it’s not like they were continuing to full up new oil tankers as the war went on, a lot of oil and gas was left in the ground during the war so you misjudge the amount of excess supply. Furthermore all kinds of pipelines and facilities in the region were damaged and destroyed and will take years to rebuild. Plus shipping companies and the companies that insure them will have to newly evaluate the risk of potentially renewed hostilities and/or stray mines and that reevaluated risk will get priced in and drive up costs. . 

[SpankyMcFarland]

2 hours ago, Army Guy said:

Iran has on thousands of occasions proven with out a shadow of a doubt they are not stable enough to handle nuclear weapons...be like giving a monkey a machine gun, then acting surprised he actually used it...Infortunely for us a huge glowing hole where Israel/Iran once were, would drive up the costs of everything we take advantage off, making the price unaffordable to everyone but the extreme rich.

I suspect this is what will happen given the neighbourhood they are in. The Shah was interested in establishing a nuclear weapons program and as far as I know Iran hasn’t moved location since. 

[SpankyMcFarland]

The Israelis and their allies in America are deeply disappointed with what has emerged about this deal so far. I hope we can agree on that much. 

[eyeball]

7 hours ago, Deluge said:

Iran is a jihadist state. That means they are savage lunatics who can't be trusted to NOT nuke other nations. 

The US is a Christian state and they HAVE nuked people. What's your point?

[Deluge]

19 minutes ago, eyeball said:

The US is a Christian state and they HAVE nuked people. What's your point?

And for good reason. I hope your dear friends, the terrorists, don't provoke us any further.  

 

 

 

 

[Reg Volk]

33 minutes ago, eyeball said:

The US is a Christian state and they HAVE nuked people. What's your point?

Point is that Iran would nuke people that they aren't at war with.  Iran would nuke people purely out of hate.  And we all know the idlot apologists and antisemitic Marxist fools would cheer them on.

[gatomontes99]

4 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

Well I want a billion dollars that doesn’t mean I am on the cusp of getting it.  And nowhere did the Democrats in your clip that was about to happen.  Furthermore Democrats are still American politicians and all American politicians exaggerate and stoke fear of a big bad foreign boogeymen, it’s just how politics in America work, always has been. 

 

You said no one believed Iran wanted a nuke and yet Democrats spent decades saying exactly than and Obama sent them $100B to not build one. Wtf do you get off saying they didn't? 

4 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

LMAO that is false. Just like when Republicans made similar false claims about Saddam

AI restatement of Chuck U Schumer: In August 2015, while explaining his opposition to the Iran nuclear deal, Schumer argued that the agreement would leave Iran with a "breakout time" of just two to three months by the end of the deal's lifespan. He outlined his position on his

 

4 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

 As YET ANOTHER REMINDER enriched uranium is mot the same thing as having a nuclear weapon  Even if you have fully enriched uranium you don’t just throw handfuls of it at people you need to develop a nuclear warhead which is its own complicated multi year project they never started  Furthermore Iran only achieved that level of uranium enrichment over the years after the incompetent orange fool tore up the JCPOA with no replacement   
 

Iran finished theoretical plans in 2003. They just about got to the point where they had the uranium that was capable of doing the job. 

4 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

Dude you know nothing, and are making things up. That is the US active military combat arsenal still in production theres not a “b team” of old leftovers  It doesn’t all date to the 90s and even the stuff that was first invented back then has been upgraded over the years.  Just because the Ford Mustang was invented in the 1960s doesn’t mean a brand new Ford Mustang is 60s tech. Why do you think they said it will take at least 4 years to replenish it?  Just stop with this kind of nonsense you know nothing about  Like what are you saying the Patriot air defence missiles the US uses to defend its overseas bases are junk and there is activity some other super secret air defence missiles they keep on those bases that they keep for the “real” wars?  Stop being a fool  

We have stockpiles of advanced and not advanced weapons. The 3 that were used were not advanced weapons. To my knowledge, we did not use any advanced weapons. We used 90's tech with some upgraded guidance. 

We also have replacement plans in effect. So it isn't like we will never recover. 

4 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

We didn’t help because the doomed unnecessary and stupid mission lead by incompetent fools in the White House was clearly doomed unnecessary and stupid mission lead by incompetent fools in the White House  Period  

Bullshit. 

4 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

Hilarious!  So you are claiming the JCPOA which also had a goal of “no nukes” and a verification mechanism to go along with it l was “ineffective” simply because Iran can’t be trusted.

No. I am saying it was ineffective because the inspectors could not visit the 3 undeclared sites and are on record of knowing about those sites and not asking to see them for fear of upsetting Iran. Even Chuck Schumer said the plan was bullshit. 

4 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

BUT THEN you claim Trump’s MOU which simply has Iran “promise” to not to get a Nuke, period is effective simply because it “has a goal” of no nukes. . 

No one said that. The goal is to keep them from being nuclear. The methods have not been determined, but Trump has hinted it would be UN inspectors with unlimited access. 

4 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

Don’t you see your own ridiculous argument?

I see the ridiculous ous of your strawman.

4 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

The facts speak for themselves- Iran’s enrichment program only took off after Trump cancelled JCPOA, not before.  

No. The 3 sites we bombed were the 3 sites that the inspectors under the JCPOA could not go. 

4 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

And I already debunked your claims about JCPOA

 

No that’s why it said FALSE not “mostly correct”. And now you can’t find any credible evidence except some random anti-Iran website called “Iran Watch”. The same types of websites that popped up to tell us Saddam was definitely behind 9/11 and definitely had an active WMD arsenal. 

 

 

No one ever said Sadam was behind 911. 

4 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

Your secret sites claim is more of your slight-of-hand the undermines your argument.   The “secret sites” were not active during JCPOA but before and Iran hadn’t disclosed them. Therefore the shriekeing that “Iran can’t be trusted”. But this undermines your current argument. If Iran can’t be trusted then Trump’s MOU where Iran simply promises to be good from now on is by definition worthless. 
ChatGPT’s take on your secret sites:

According to recent IAEA findings, Iran conducted nuclear-related activities using undeclared nuclear material at several of these locations and failed to provide satisfactory explanations for uranium traces found there. The agency also concluded that some sites had been sanitized or altered before inspectors could fully investigate them.

What the evidence does not show 

The same IAEA findings did not conclude that Iran currently had an active, structured covert nuclear weapons program operating at those sites. In fact, the agency stated it had no credible indications of an ongoing undeclared structured weapons program, while still expressing serious concern about unresolved questions and lack of cooperation.

This distinction is critical.

There is strong evidence that:

• Iran concealed nuclear-related activities in the past.
• Iran did not fully cooperate with investigations into some undeclared sites.
• Some locations appear to have been sanitized before inspection.

But that is different from proving:

• A currently operating secret weapons-production network.
• Active enrichment at hidden sites during the JCPOA years.

Before the JCPOA

Much of the evidence that Iran had conducted undeclared nuclear-related work comes from activities in the late 1990s and early 2000s, including work associated with what the IAEA called the possible military dimensions (PMD) of Iran’s nuclear program.

Examples include:

• Work at Parchin Military Complex.
• Activities at Lavizan-Shian.
• Uranium-related work at locations later identified by the IAEA.

By the time the JCPOA was signed in 2015, the major question was not whether Iran had hidden activities in the past—it was whether those activities had ended and whether any undeclared work was continuing.

During the JCPOA (2015–2018)

The IAEA repeatedly certified that Iran was complying with the agreement’s declared enrichment limits.

However, during this period:

• Questions remained about historical activities.
• Some military sites were not inspected in the way critics wanted.
• The IAEA did not conclude that it had uncovered an active covert enrichment program.

This is where supporters and critics diverged. Supporters said, “The inspectors are finding no evidence of an ongoing weapons program.” Critics replied, “The absence of evidence isn’t proof there isn’t one.”

After the JCPOA began unraveling

A major development occurred in 2018 when Mossad seized a large archive of Iranian nuclear documents. Information from that archive contributed to later IAEA investigations of sites such as Turquzabad and Varamin.

The IAEA subsequently found uranium particles and other evidence suggesting undeclared nuclear-related activities had occurred at some locations and that Iran had not fully explained them.

The important point is that these findings generally related to:

• Activities that often dated back many years.
• Material and facilities that had not been fully declared.
• Questions about completeness of Iran’s declarations.

They did not establish that Iran was secretly enriching uranium to weapons grade while formally complying with the JCPOA’s enrichment limits.

So if someone says…

“The IAEA found secret nuclear sites.”

That’s substantially true.

But if they then say:

“Therefore Iran was actively running a covert weapons program during the JCPOA.”

That is a further conclusion that the IAEA itself did not reach.

They could not reach that conclusion because they could not go there and prove it dip shit. 

4 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

A fair summary would be:

The strongest evidence concerns undeclared nuclear-related activities that occurred largely before the JCPOA and were discovered or further investigated during and after the JCPOA. Those discoveries raised legitimate doubts about the completeness of Iran’s declarations, but they did not by themselves prove an active secret weapons program during the years when the JCPOA was being implemented.

 

I dunno, you brought up this whole weird black market thing, I just said doubted your claims were correct or relevant. 

 

What? You don't know that China was buying Iran oil on the black market? What rock did you just crawl out from? 

4 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

“Eventually” meaning several years. There’s something called “pent-up demand” that will absorb any excess supply without a crash. And it’s not like they were continuing to full up new oil tankers as the war went on, a lot of oil and gas was left in the ground during the war so you misjudge the amount of excess supply. Furthermore all kinds of pipelines and facilities in the region were damaged and destroyed and will take years to rebuild. Plus shipping companies and the companies that insure them will have to newly evaluate the risk of potentially renewed hostilities and/or stray mines and that reevaluated risk will get priced in and drive up costs. . 

I am not the source:

LONDON, June 17 (Reuters) - The oil market will move into a significant supply surplus in 2027 after recovering from the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, the International Energy Agency said in its monthly oil market report on Wednesday.

You see, I read things and then I talk about them. You just seem to be listening to M-SNOWjob and regurgitating DNC talking points without any understanding of what is going on. 

[SpankyMcFarland]

I’ll give Trump some credit. Like Biden in Afghanistan he cut his losses and went home, but unlike his predecessors it didn’t take him decades to see that the policy was just going to get ever worse for the country. 

[Deluge]

13 hours ago, Reg Volk said:

Point is that Iran would nuke people that they aren't at war with.  Iran would nuke people purely out of hate.  And we all know the idlot apologists and antisemitic Marxist fools would cheer them on.

Exactly. Terrorists are criminally insane - the US isn't. 

Of course, a piece of shit sympathizer like eyeball can't see that, so the rest of the normal world has to put up with their stupidity because it's a free country. 

[Army Guy]

20 hours ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

The Israelis and their allies in America are deeply disappointed with what has emerged about this deal so far. I hope we can agree on that much. 

Yes i think the deal is crap....not only for the US but for all of us...

[Army Guy]

Carney has said publicly that the Iran attacks were worth it...not that it means much he has flipped flopped on this topic 3 times, now...