Iran to resume enhanced nuclear program if Trump dishonors P5+1 agreement

[Shotgunner51]

As we say, hope for the best and prepare for the worst, there is plenty of hope among the Persians but I dont think they are prepared to face the worse.

I could be wrong though. I hope I am. The last thing we want is another destabilization on our western border, if Afghanistan wasn't enough!

Yes I have seen the same, for our (China and Pakistan) own sake of course we wish things don't deteriorate but nothing we can do about it. Say if US decides to breach the agreement, which was driven by Iran and US in the very first place, others can't do much. China can block UN resolutions, but more likely to abstain from doing so, after all it's an exclusive Iran-US matter, outsiders can't interfere.

 

[Aramagedon]

I have a slightly different view on this topic.

I think nukes have actually prevented wars between major powers. It raises the cost of such wars by hundreds of times. Today all the current wars are taking place between major powers, and non-nuclear smaller powers (such as US invasion of Iraq).

Also, nukes are the best available deterrent. During the Cold War, China was enemies with both the USA and the Soviet Union, having fought directly against both of them multiple times (we fought the Korean War against the USA and later fought against the Soviet Union during the Sino-Soviet split).

The only thing that allowed us some breathing room for our 1979 economic reforms (which cut millions of troops from the PLA), was the fact that we had thermonuclear weapons and ICBM's as a deterrent.

Otherwise there was no way we could have cut military spending for our economic reforms, with the Soviet Red Army sitting at our border and the US Navy at our Pacific coast. With two enemy superpowers surrounding us on all sides, the only possible deterrent we had were nuclear weapons.

Also, if those 3 countries that the USA invaded in the past decade (Iraq/Afghanistan/Libya) had thermonuclear weapons and the means to deliver them to the American mainland, do you think they would have been invaded? Even North Korea's fission firecrackers were enough to prevent them from being invaded. The cost of a nuclear attack is just too high.

If we build nukes then arms race will begin in our region. It would be much worse for security of our region. However we as one of rare countries in the world do enjoy full domestic nuclear energy and we have capabilty to build nuke anytime that is needed. We have this capability therefore countries like the US are very cautious about engaging war with Iran. Now add this capability with our missile capability and it would become more vivid. Our case is completely different from Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya. Our capabilities differ from each other as much as distance of ground and atmosphere.

 

[jamal18]

If Trump cancels this treaty then it means there is no peaceful resolution to this conflict. Iran must expect, and prepare for war.

The Iraqis were a nation that complied. They let 'UN' ( CIA spies) inspectors into there country, they dismantled weapon systems. As the coalition forces were about to invade, they were destroying their own missiles to show that they were complying. Where did it get them? One of the most prosperous countries in the middle east now a wreck.

 

[XenoEnsi-14]

t would be much worse for security of our region.

That's the point, turn the ME into a pile of glass without using our own nukes. Iran is being used by simple reverse psychology.

 

[Aramagedon]

If Trump cancels this treaty then it means there is no peaceful resolution to this conflict. Iran must expect, and prepare for war.

The Iraqis were a nation that complied. They let 'UN' ( CIA spies) inspectors into there country, they dismantled weapon systems. As the coalition forces were about to invade, they were destroying their own missiles to show that they were complying. Where did it get them? One of the most prosperous countries in the middle east now a wreck.

Iraq gave full full surrender as you have stated, but Americans attacked it after fake American, Saudi 9/11, as one of sources of evil....

 

[Full Moon]

Trump's administration has not yet started the real action, and there is always a difference between what is said to voters during campaigns, and the real actions that follow. Although apparently, Iran will miss Obama's days of "isolationism" and "inaction". Obama went in apology tours in Japan and elsewhere while leaving medieval religious wars burning in the ME. After all, the World can't really watch a state like Iran acquiring nuclear weapons. Iran is a mass terrorism sponsor state through its notorious Iranian Revolutionary Guard. It is one of the World's few countries that do employ in its armed forces globally recognized terrorists (like Qassem Sulimany).

 

[AmirPatriot]

I have a slightly different view on this topic.

I think nukes have actually prevented wars between major powers. It raises the cost of such wars by hundreds of times. Today all the current wars are taking place between major powers, and non-nuclear smaller powers (such as US invasion of Iraq).

Also, nukes are the best available deterrent. During the Cold War, China was enemies with both the USA and the Soviet Union, having fought directly against both of them multiple times (we fought the Korean War against the USA and later fought against the Soviet Union during the Sino-Soviet split).

The only thing that allowed us some breathing room for our 1979 economic reforms (which cut millions of troops from the PLA), was the fact that we had thermonuclear weapons and ICBM's as a deterrent.

Otherwise there was no way we could have cut military spending for our economic reforms, with the Soviet Red Army sitting at our border and the US Navy at our Pacific coast. With two enemy superpowers surrounding us on all sides, the only possible deterrent we had were nuclear weapons.

Also, if those 3 countries that the USA invaded in the past decade (Iraq/Afghanistan/Libya) had thermonuclear weapons and the means to deliver them to the American mainland, do you think they would have been invaded? Even North Korea's fission firecrackers were enough to prevent them from being invaded. The cost of a nuclear attack is just too high.

That is a valid point, but I think that its impossible to prevent war between major powers indefinitely. Eventually there will be one IMHO, and with nukes it will dwarf the 80 million killed in WW2.

Moreover, its impractical for everyone to have nukes because flashpoints are too common. To have unstable places like Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya have them... no.

Iran should tread carefully lest they want sanctions thrown on them again.

The whole point of this article is that it states Iran will retaliate if sanctions are unfairly placed on it.

 

[raptor22]

I have a slightly different view on this topic.

I think nukes have actually prevented wars between major powers. It raises the cost of such wars by hundreds of times. Today all the current wars are taking place between major powers, and non-nuclear smaller powers (such as US invasion of Iraq).

Also, nukes are the best available deterrent. During the Cold War, China was enemies with both the USA and the Soviet Union, having fought directly against both of them multiple times (we fought the Korean War against the USA and later fought against the Soviet Union during the Sino-Soviet split).

The only thing that allowed us some breathing room for our 1979 economic reforms (which cut millions of troops from the PLA), was the fact that we had thermonuclear weapons and ICBM's as a deterrent.

Otherwise there was no way we could have cut military spending for our economic reforms, with the Soviet Red Army sitting at our border and the US Navy at our Pacific coast. With two enemy superpowers surrounding us on all sides, the only possible deterrent we had were nuclear weapons.

Also, if those 3 countries that the USA invaded in the past decade (Iraq/Afghanistan/Libya) had thermonuclear weapons and the means to deliver them to the American mainland, do you think they would have been invaded? Even North Korea's fission firecrackers were enough to prevent them from being invaded. The cost of a nuclear attack is just too high.

Our case is similar to Japan , we have the capability to make a bomb but we don't make it .. it means we don't need to pay prices to acquire nukes and meanwhile we have the deterrence we seek from a nuke .. meanwhile we are working on our missile program and when it's needed we could use both of them ... as @Serpentine mentioned you are a UNSC member which indeed gives immune from UN sanctions a privilege we don't enjoy .. therefore we have to create a situation that could balance these two.

 

[HannibalBarca]

Iran to resume enhanced nuclear program if Trump dishonors P5+1 agreement
Published time: 23 Jan, 2017 02:44
Get short URL

A general view of Bushehr nuclear power plant © Raheb Homavandi / Reuters
Iran tension
The head of Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI), Ali Akbar Salehi, said Tehran reserves the right to “act appropriately” if Washington reconsiders the so-called P5+1 deal on the Iranian nuclear program.

"We can very easily snap back and go back … not only to where we were, but a much higher position technologically speaking," Salehi said in an interview with Canada’s CBC News.


Follow
abbas torabi @abbastorabi60
Ali Akbar Salehi: "We'll have to wait and see what happens. Iran is a patient county, we will not react hastily."https://www.google.com/amp/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.3946511 …

6:14 PM - 22 Jan 2017 · Islamic Republic of Iran

'We are prepared': Vice-president on Trump's attitude toward Iran
Iran says it is reserving judgment on new U.S. President Donald Trump. But if he does, as he’s vowed, “tear up” the international deal Tehran reached on curbing its nuclear program, it could quickly...

cbc.ca

• 
  
• 
  Retweets
  
• 
  likes

"I don't want to see that day. I don't want to make a decision in that course, but we are prepared,” Iran’s nuclear chief added.

According to the deal signed in July 2015 between Tehran and six major world powers (Russia, China, the US, Britain, France, and Germany), Iran agreed to reduce the number of its centrifuges by two-thirds.

Under the deal, governed by the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), Tehran also agreed to cap its uranium enrichment below the level needed for bomb-grade material.

The Islamic Republic also vowed to reduce its enriched uranium stockpile from around 10,000kg to 300kg for 15 years and agreed to international inspections. In response, Western countries agreed to lift international sanctions.

Read more
‘Dismantle the disastrous deal’: Trump tells AIPAC Iran deal is 'number one priority'
Despite the breakthrough being hailed by former US President Barack Obama as a way to halt Iran's alleged drive to develop nuclear weapons – an accusation which Tehran consistently denies – Trump previously called the agreement a “disaster”.

During his campaign trail, the new president told an American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) conference in May that dismantling the deal was top of his agenda.

“My number one priority is to dismantle the disastrous deal with Iran,”Trump said at the time, speaking before AIPAC in Washington, DC. “I have been in business a long time…this deal is catastrophic for Israel – for America, for the whole of the Middle East… We have rewarded the world’s leading state sponsor of terror with $ 150 billion and we received absolutely nothing in return.”

In an interview with Iran’s IRIB news published on Sunday, Salehi noted that it’s too early to evaluate Trump's stance on Iran. Tehran is gauging the new administration's behavior in honoring its commitment to the deal.

Read more
What happens to oil if Trump tears up Iran nuclear deal
Salehi said Iran will not initiate a violation of the JCPOA, but warned that should Washington backtrack on the deal, Tehran will increase uranium enrichment capacity to 100,000 SWU in a year, the Tehran Times, reported.

Last week, ahead of Trump's inauguration, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani said that Washington could not unilaterally cancel the nuclear deal.

"The president-elect has shown he is not happy about the nuclear deal, calling it the worst deal ever signed. This is only empty talk," Rouhani said. "I don't think he can do much when he goes to the White House."

The UN Security Council which monitors progress reports on the implementation of Iran's nuclear deal, earlier this week heard that Iran is honoring its end of the bargain.

“[The UN] has not received any report, nor is aware of any open source information regarding the supply, sale or transfer to Iran of nuclear-related items undertaken contrary to the provisions of the resolution,” Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs Jeffrey Feltman told the UNSC.

Feltman also noted there’s no information on "Iranian ballistic missile activities or ballistic missile-related transfers to the country undertaken contrary to the relevant provisions of the resolution," the UN news service noted.

sweety Trump

Trump will not come back on the deal and Iran neither. End of story, none of both sides want a conflict again, since Russia is in the game and stronger than ever.
Have Fun on... you gamy specumation
BB

 

[Beny Karachun]

I cant wait until the action

 

[BATMAN]

You need highly enriched uranium around 98% I think to be used in bombs. That requires a lot of time with centrifuges running on full capacity. I doubt Iran will be producing weapon grade uranium during the negotiating period and now as well. For Iran sake, I hope they have enough HEU prior to getting into this P5+1. Otherwise trouble is just around the corner.

Lollypop of 116 metric tons of Uranium.
and MORE

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Our case is similar to Japan , we have the capability to make a bomb but we don't make it .. it means we don't need to pay prices to acquire nukes and meanwhile we have the deterrence we seek from a nuke .. meanwhile we are working on our missile program and when it's needed we could use both of them ... as @Serpentine mentioned you are a UNSC member which indeed gives immune from UN sanctions a privilege we don't enjoy .. therefore we have to create a situation that could balance these two.

That's true, but remember that China's UNSC seat was actually held by the Republic of China (Taiwan) until 1971, long after China had already aquired nuclear weapons in the 1960's.

During the Korean War against the USA, General MacArthur threatened to nuke China several times as they were forced to retreat. China back then was not even a member of the United Nations, since the world back then still recognized the Republic of China (Taiwan) as the legitimate government of China.

But in geopolitics, only power matters. Today the situation is reversed, no major country has diplomatic recognition of the Republic of China (Taiwan). Once you have developed your power, no one can take it away, they will be forced to accept the new status quo.

That's why I personally feel that countries should just develop their power anyway, and who cares what the rest of the world thinks. Once you have the power, no one can take it away from you.

 

[OldTwilight]

None of Iranian centrifuges has got destroyed , and 6000 of them are working right now .. the point is Iran has been working on its new generation of centrifuges that could enrich much more than the previous generation and are ready to be used if it's needed ...we've bought enough uranium and once they want to do something crazy they only have themselves to blame...
And in that particular moment world would see who is the problem and who wants to solve the problems .. so far and base on P5+1 and the IAEA and the UN Iran has adhered to the deal completely ...

Don't lie .... This government = traitors , mi6 agents , ignorants , naived , idiots , cowards and....

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

If Trump cancels this treaty then it means there is no peaceful resolution to this conflict. Iran must expect, and prepare for war.

The Iraqis were a nation that complied. They let 'UN' ( CIA spies) inspectors into there country, they dismantled weapon systems. As the coalition forces were about to invade, they were destroying their own missiles to show that they were complying. Where did it get them? One of the most prosperous countries in the middle east now a wreck.

Regardless whether Saddam kept WMD or not, he behaved in a way that people normally do
when they have something to hide.
Best case, he pretended that he had WMD to make Iran scared.
Epic Fail...

 

[jamal18]

Regardless whether Saddam kept WMD or not, he behaved in a way that people normally do
when they have something to hide.
Best case, he pretended that he had WMD to make Iran scared.
Epic Fail...

Always good to have your opinion.

The Iraqis shouted at the top of their voices that they had no WMD. There was no ambiguity.