Obama needs to provide real answers to Netanyahu’s arguments

[SouI]

Do you crave millions dead in nuclear wars or suffering under the yoke of terror and tyranny that the Iranian mullahs promote?

I say let's find out. How about you?

You yourself had said that it is not about 'a real nuke threat' but about 'regional hegemony and stability'.

So yeah, lets just be honest here. Everyone of us knows the actual reasons why Israel acts like that.

We want the region off of the influence of Iran. Not only Israel wants it, but also KSA and Turkey want it.



But in anyway, what is the proposal of Netanyahu? What does he want? An all-out-war with Iran?

 

[Solomon2]

...what is the proposal of Netanyahu? What does he want? An all-out-war with Iran?

"...we're being told that the only alternative to this bad deal is war. That's just not true. The alternative to this bad deal is a much better deal."

Iran has mastered the enrichment fuel cycle. Every hard part of making a nuclear weapon, Iran has mastered. If we made the political decision, we could make nukes. In other words, its not a technical issue for us. We have the infrastructure, resources and scientific base (over 10.000 nuclear scientists) to assemble a nuclear weapon.
It would behove Netanyahu to realise that a Iranian nuclear weapons capability is a fait acompli.

Not at all!

"My friends, what about the argument that there's no alternative to this deal, that Iran's nuclear know-how cannot be erased, that its nuclear program is so advanced that the best we can do is delay the inevitable, which is essentially what the proposed deal seeks to do?

"Well, nuclear know-how without nuclear infrastructure doesn't get you very much. A racecar driver without a car can't drive. A pilot without a plane can't fly. Without thousands of centrifuges, tons of enriched uranium or heavy water facilities, Iran can't make nuclear weapons."

 

[Oublious]

"...we're being told that the only alternative to this bad deal is war. That's just not true. The alternative to this bad deal is a much better deal."

Not at all!

"My friends, what about the argument that there's no alternative to this deal, that Iran's nuclear know-how cannot be erased, that its nuclear program is so advanced that the best we can do is delay the inevitable, which is essentially what the proposed deal seeks to do?

"Well, nuclear know-how without nuclear infrastructure doesn't get you very much. A racecar driver without a car can't drive. A pilot without a plan can't fly. Without thousands of centrifuges, tons of enriched uranium or heavy water facilities, Iran can't make nuclear weapons."

Typical zionist talk, you can find talk like that in Europe. And then we are falling back to genoicide and bla bla. And the congres is like a.

 

[Solomon2]

Didn't Bibi go to the UN saying in 1 year Iran can make the 'bomb'?

Why don't you search for that speech yourself?

Whats the alternative? American servicemen and women dying in the street of Tehran to only 3 years later find out the Ayatollah wasn't planing on making nukes?

I'm not sure, did the Israeli gov't favor America going after Saddam in 2003 and not the Iranian mullahs? As for Saddam "not planning on making nukes", here's an account by an America who transported tons of nuclear material out of Iraq: link

Typical zionist talk -

In other words, you find no grounds to disagree with me other than you've heard it all before and don't like to hear it. Hardly a sound basis for policy-making, is it?

 

[raptor22]

"...we're being told that the only alternative to this bad deal is war. That's just not true. The alternative to this bad deal is a much better deal."

There is a no deal if Iran's right are not met and that's the whole story ...his speech might be important for someone but we don't give a damn to it, he could go nuts for the next decade nothing would change ... Iran now has got the knowledge.

 

[ResurgentIran]

"...we're being told that the only alternative to this bad deal is war. That's just not true. The alternative to this bad deal is a much better deal."

Not at all!

"My friends, what about the argument that there's no alternative to this deal, that Iran's nuclear know-how cannot be erased, that its nuclear program is so advanced that the best we can do is delay the inevitable, which is essentially what the proposed deal seeks to do?

"Well, nuclear know-how without nuclear infrastructure doesn't get you very much. A racecar driver without a car can't drive. A pilot without a plane can't fly. Without thousands of centrifuges, tons of enriched uranium or heavy water facilities, Iran can't make nuclear weapons."

lol
You're adorable.

 

[Solomon2]

There is a no deal if Iran's right are not met and that's the whole story ...his speech might be important for someone but we don't give a damn to it -

Bravado.

... Iran now has got the knowledge.

Without the infrastructure the knowledge can't be applied.

 

[Arminkh]

You yourself had said that it is not about 'a real nuke threat' but about 'regional hegemony and stability'.

So yeah, lets just be honest here. Everyone of us knows the actual reasons why Israel acts like that.

We want the region off of the influence of Iran. Not only Israel wants it, but also KSA and Turkey want it.



But in anyway, what is the proposal of Netanyahu? What does he want? An all-out-war with Iran?

An honest answer from an honest person. Thank you for that. This is exactly what this whole circus is all about.

 

[SouI]

An honest answer from an honest person. Thank you for that. This is exactly what this whole circus is all about.

Which is actually enough to make the case legitimate.

I don't want Iran to take over countries via terrorists or proxies as well.

Typical zionist talk, you can find talk like that in Europe. And then we are falling back to genoicide and bla bla. And the congres is like a.

Don't forget that our stance against Israel is just because of their support of PKK.

We don't have any problem with them being jewish or sth like that. Israel itself is a good developed country.

The problem is the concurrent government which seeks the diversion of Turkey. That is also the only thing that made Turkey have to act like best-buddies with Hamas.

 

[ResurgentIran]

Bravado.

Without the infrastructure the knowledge can't be applied.

Well too bad for you we have the infrastructure and we are not going to relinquish it.
And the president of the United States and his security advisor (Susan Rice) has said that "zero enrichment" is a non-attainable goal.

I repeat: fait acompli

 

[Arminkh]

"...we're being told that the only alternative to this bad deal is war. That's just not true. The alternative to this bad deal is a much better deal."

Not at all!

"My friends, what about the argument that there's no alternative to this deal, that Iran's nuclear know-how cannot be erased, that its nuclear program is so advanced that the best we can do is delay the inevitable, which is essentially what the proposed deal seeks to do?

"Well, nuclear know-how without nuclear infrastructure doesn't get you very much. A racecar driver without a car can't drive. A pilot without a plane can't fly. Without thousands of centrifuges, tons of enriched uranium or heavy water facilities, Iran can't make nuclear weapons."

Oh man! You keep referring to Bibi's quotes as if it is a holy book or something.

You are entitled to what you like to believe and thanks god Mr. Obama is not listening to people like you.

However, if you at least agree that I as an Iranian know more than you about how we think and operate, then let me tell you that the strategy that Bib is proposing and you are supporting will certainly lead to another disaster in that area.

Let's say a deal is abandoned, there are two possible outcomes:

1. Iran's infrastructure is bombed. All of your own military experts have confirmed that it will not wipe out 100% of Iran's capacity and it will delay the process of building a bomb for at most a couple of years. So you won't gain anything valuable and you will loose the support of rest of the world. For the sake of the argument, let's assume that there is only 1% possibility that Iran was not after nuclear bomb. The bombardment will prompt any reasonable leader in Iran to seek nuclear weapon for deterrence. Why? look at North Korea for example. Is there any country in the world that would dare bombarding NK's nuclear facilities? No. So that is a lesson for Iran. Iran will go nuclear.

Furthermore, Iran will retaliate by hitting US bases in the area and disrupting the oil flow in the Persian Gulf. Now US need to put its fee on the ground to open up the route and also disarm Iran from it's arsenal of missiles. It requires a far more extensive operation all over Iran. But you have pissed off Putin too, remember? He will make sure you will pay dearly for that. Russia will start supporting Iran just like what he did in Vietnam. So Iran will have all the arms that it needs to fight an attrition war for years.

Everyone involved will suffer. Including Israel. I would be surprised if this scenario doesn't escalate into WWIII.

2. The deal is abandoned, Iran's infrastructure is not bombed but the sanction regime continues.Iran's economy will adjust eventually. Yes it will not flourish but it will not die either. Example? NK again. And Israel should live with the fear of Iranian nuclear bomb for ever.

Now let's say a deal is reached. Iran will accept an intense monitoring of it's nuclear infrastructure. Relation between Iran and USA will start to normalize. They will start to cooperate more in regional affairs just like what they are doing in Iraq. Now you don't need to retain a full fleet in Persian gulf to watch Iran. Less military cost for US and you can attend the rest of the crisis that you have at your plate like Ukraine and Far east. And eventually, a deal may be cut between them that you leave Israel alone and I will leave Syria alone.

Which one sounds better to you?

Which is actually enough to make the case legitimate.

I don't want Iran to take over countries via terrorists or proxies as well.

Another honest comment. You are on fire today!

I have nothing against your stance. Countries, like every other living thing, compete over bigger share of the pie. May the best country win! I will cheer for Iran and you Cheer for Turkey. As long as we both know why we are doing this and don't hide behind Human Right and/or WMD BS.

 

[SouI]

"...we're being told that the only alternative to this bad deal is war. That's just not true. The alternative to this bad deal is a much better deal."

Not at all!

"My friends, what about the argument that there's no alternative to this deal, that Iran's nuclear know-how cannot be erased, that its nuclear program is so advanced that the best we can do is delay the inevitable, which is essentially what the proposed deal seeks to do?

"Well, nuclear know-how without nuclear infrastructure doesn't get you very much. A racecar driver without a car can't drive. A pilot without a plane can't fly. Without thousands of centrifuges, tons of enriched uranium or heavy water facilities, Iran can't make nuclear weapons."

I watched it live, thanks.

However, in order to destroy their existing facilities, you first require to know where they are.

Bibi himself mentioned that their facilities are most likely buried deep inside the ground.

And they are probably not anywhere near their borders as well.

Sooo, how are you gonna destroy those facilities then? Not only you need troops on the ground, you need lots of troops to not only destroy them, but also to find them first. That also requires lots of time.

An all-out-war is needed for that matter.

Another honest comment. You are on fire today!

I have nothing against your stance. Countries, like every other living thing, compete over bigger share of the pie. May the best country win! I will cheer for Iran and you Cheer for Turkey. As long as we both know why we are doing this and don't hide behind Human Right and/or WMD BS.

I am a realist, and I am always honest.

I was honest while saying that the satellite of yours was falling 'fast'. And see what happened while you guys thought that I was just trolling.

 

[Thəorətic Muslim]

Why don't you search for that speech yourself?

I'm not sure, did the Israeli gov't favor America going after Saddam in 2003 and not the Iranian mullahs? As for Saddam "not planning on making nukes", here's an account by an America who transported tons of nuclear material out of Iraq: link

It was the speech with the cartoon drawing of a bomb.

Bibi did favor the US going into Iraq. In his delusional mind he assumed after Saddam fell, Mullahistan would also implode on itself, and the reverberations would make the entire region better.

Ok enough of Politicians and their lies/ half-truths. Lets have the serious discussion here.

What are the options if there is no deal?

Remember there has been a low intensity covert war going on for the past decade against Iran's Nuclear Program, the climax was the killing of Iranian Scientists, after which there was de-escalation.

Option 1: War.

Option 1A: Coalition launches airstrikes to dismantle Nuclear facilities

Option 1A.1: Mullahs overthrown
Option 1A.2: Mullahs retaliate into regional war
Option 1A.3: Regime survives and Iranians demand Nation go Nuclear​

Option 1B: High Intensity Global 'Covert' War​

Option 2: Additional Western Sanctions

Option 2A: Iranians get pissed, overthrow Mullahs
Option 2B: Iranians agree to no Nuclear Enrichment --> PEACE?
Option 2C: Iranians continue their program, but no nuclear weapons.
Option 2D: Iranian Public pissed at 3 decades of Western Sanctions demand nation go Nuclear to give The West the Middle Finger
​

@Solomon2 , kindly include your thoughts.

btw, the chart is not in most likeliness first with each additional option less likely.

 

[The SC]

Too many contradictions in the first article, and the MAIN concern of Natanyahud and his supporters that emerges is about the Iranian regime, not the nukes.
The Iranian nuclear program have been certified as a peaceful one by the world's concerned authorities and agencies...many times over.
This barking of Natanyahud in the US congress shows a new trend that can be dangerous for Usrael, so the more he (or Usrael) barks, the less friends it will get, because the Americans are taking the whole issue as a trap to them and an insult to their intelligence, since they were fooled at least twice or three times in the last 2 decades by the same falsehood barking dogs who want to use the US as their sword and shield. Not That they have not succeeded at that in the past, but the current trend in world politics shows that the Europeans as well as the Americans are aware of the deceptive political manoeuvrings of Usrael who sees that its own survival is based on the West's economic and social sacrifice for it as a biblical GOD or or even their superior GODS, since they were the "chosen ones (in a context they want to perpetuate for ever)", if that does not work then they play the card of genocide that they think they can stick to anyone, and if everything fails, well they'll bring up the Samson option to destroy the whole planet along with them, and no one is spared not even their friends or allies. This is the ultimate blackmail option that the world has ever seen. and all this is still made credible by the West's military assistance, be it for the nuclear weapons, the conventional weapons or even the 12-14000 km ICBMs to deliver their nukes any where in the world!!!
GOD (Allah) knows much better than all of us and he has warned the Muslims in his holy book to be careful and wary of the hypocrites.
Iranians know that the only power that will be tolerated in the Middle East by the West is Usrael, no matter what the reasons should be they all point to this direction. So not being fools, the Iranians are asking for the full deal of peace, and that is the lifting of all the falsely imposed sanctions, while maintaining their proven civilian nuclear infrastructure along with their efficient regime.
They have nothing to lose, if life goes on like it is now with the unjustified sanctions, they still have their ways of going around them and will still have their civilian nuclear program and their own elected regime. It is a matter of principles and divine rights of freedom and independence.
The only other option for Usrael and its friends (apart from trying to squeeze the Iranian economy a bit more) will be war, and that is not a realistic option at all, it was discussed in details all over the forum, i,e,: The strategic strait of Hormuz, world nations economic interests, Iranian military might and so on. Short of a (suicidal) nuclear attack, the West and Usrael can not harm Iran as they wish, Iran is invincible; even with 10 000 tomahawks or more the Usraelis and the West won't be able to stop the Iranian civil nuclear program nor defeat the Iranian nation. That is why lifting the sanctions and getting a normal relationship with Iran will be a wise decision.

 

[raptor22]

Bravado.

Without the infrastructure the knowledge can't be applied.

Any war against a signatory of NPT conducted by a nuclear armed regime and non-signatory of NPT, while its facilities are under the intrusive 24/7 monitoring and human watch of IAEA inspectors just gives it right to go after nuke. you can give a try ... simply you are not able.