Support NeoGAF

[Funky Papa]

And it's not like we know if Iran wanted to procure itself nuclear weapons (which would have scalated the situation rather dangerously for all the parties involved) or just the technology to quickly produce them if it came to it, which would have provided some disuasory power without the same degree of scalation.

As a matter of fact, we don't really have any updated information about Iran's nuclear programme, and given its international standing, prior this deal it was in Iran's best interests to obfuscate it as much as it could. Because some people claim that Iran is not to be trusted, but what in the name of Christ has been done by America in order to position itself as trustworhty from Iran's perspective? Absolutely nothing.

The crux of the matter is that nobody trusts each other in full, which is why there's a rigid regime of inspections and checks in order to see if Iran is complying or not.

America and its allies need to come to terms with the fact that a strong and independent Iran (precisely what the sanctions are trying to impede) is good for the entire world. Right now Iran is the only major power fighting ISIS with boots on the ground. Iran needs to remains stable so it cannot fall prey to it.

But by all means, let's try to continue enacting sanctions in hopes to break another Middle Eastern country from the inside, this time one with a capable military. Because what could ever come wrong.

 

[shem935]

Damn just reading the front page of drudge report you would think the end times were upon us.

 

[Sijil]

Wonderful read about how Imam Hassan's peace with muawiyah influenced the negotiations and deal.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/st...led-to-the-iran-deal-120100.html#.VaVrrfdus4V

Friends in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and even Yemen are definitely happy since for them a stronger Iran means a stronger Shia front against ISIS and their ilk, and most think they are in an existential war against ISIS and Al Quaeda.

 

[j_k_redtail]

This sounds pretty accurate. If you still believed the US to be all powerful, it makes sense to just bend other countries to your will. In an increasingly multi-polar world, though, that just pushes them further into someone else's grasp.

I am reminded of Star Wars: "The more you tighten your grip, the more [states] will slip through your fingers..."

Which would suggest that the GOP's foreign policy at this point is basically the Tarkin Doctrine.

 

[Darkgran]

How the 2016 Presidential Candidates Are Reacting to the Iran Deal

Some scary responses in there.

Mike Huckabee took to Twitter to express his disapproval, saying that he would not rule out using military force in the region if he were in the Oval Office.

"Shame on the Obama admin for agreeing to a deal that empowers an evil Iranian regime to carry out its threat to 'wipe Israel off the map,' tweeted Huckabee, who went on to say, "As president, I will stand with Israel and keep all options on the table, including military force, to topple the terrorist Iranian regime."

SUCK MY DICK HUCKABEE

 

[Sijil]

SUCK MY DICK HUCKABEE

So what the hardline candidates are saying is basically "if I'm elected president I'll make sure to send your children to die in a war thousands of miles away!".

 

[RustyNails]

SUCK MY DICK HUCKABEE

 

[Funky Papa]

Because Iran and Libya have been such roaring successes.

Go home Huckster, you are drunk.

 

[SlickShoesRUCrazy]

SUCK MY DICK HUCKABEE

every time a gop asshat says they will take military action, his/her family should have required mandatory military service, and frontline shit, not hiding on some base.

 

[Suikoguy]

every time a gop asshat says they will take military action, his/her family should have required mandatory military service, and frontline shit, not hiding on some base.

Yeah, in such a way it would be putting your money where you mouth is.

It's so easy to say "Let's invade!" when you have nothing in the game.
Another reason why wars should be financed in part during the war, it will help us only get involved in needed wars if people will be taxed extra during times of war.

Often times people will see it as important enough. I would say the majority would have supported increased taxes after Pearl Harbor.

 

[dabig2]

Yeah, in such a way it would be putting your money where you mouth is.

It's so easy to say "Let's invade!" when you have nothing in the game.
Another reason why wars should be financed in part during the war, it will help us only get involved in needed wars if people will be taxes extra during times of war.

This. Bush actually cut taxes during Iraq/Afghanistan. If personally, the only negative result you see from a reckless war is a $400 refund check, then you probably won't really think about these wars too negatively as they happen. So...essentially bribe money in my opinion.

People lost their shit when Obama put that receipt back into the budget and for good reason. It's why Bush and co. did their hardest to hide it.

And they'd repeat the same tactic in a future war with Iran.

 

[Miles Quaritch]

I'll admit I haven't followed this very much, but from what I can gather, the amount of material Iran would need to create a bomb will be so little that they can't realistically hope to create one with this deal?

If that's true, what's the problem with the deal? Why are the Republicans so against it?

 

[Wolfgunblood Garopa]

This. Bush actually cut taxes during Iraq/Afghanistan. If personally, the only negative result you see from a reckless war is a $400 refund check, then you probably won't really think about these wars too negatively as they happen. So...essentially bribe money in my opinion.

People lost their shit when Obama put that receipt back into the budget and for good reason. It's why Bush and co. did their hardest to hide it.

And they'd repeat the same tactic in a future war with Iran.

Yep, and the right wonders why we laugh at them when they talk down to us about morality.

 

[Rebel Leader]

SUCK MY DICK HUCKABEE

Datagram, bend over and take it like a prisoner

 

[ElTorro]

If that's true, what's the problem with the deal? Why are the Republicans so against it?

Because they are warmongers and religious nuts who can't see a more glorious cause than to launch a new crusade in the "holy land".

Additionally, the only purpose their brain serves is to prevent their skullcap from collapsing.

 

[Sijil]

I'll admit I haven't followed this very much, but from what I can gather, the amount of material Iran would need to create a bomb will be so little that they can't realistically hope to create one with this deal?

If that's true, what's the problem with the deal? Why are the Republicans so against it?

Iran threatens Saudi influence in the region mainly Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen, those Republicans get backing from the Saudis and from the pro Israeli media.Ironic how Huckabee calls Iran a terrorist state while the same time his buddies the Saudis have been the genesis for much of the global terror ideology for decades, if not hundreds of years historically.

 

[DontBeThatGuy]

I like how CNN is being as negative as possible about this deal, focusing on the critics only, but making sure they do at least include Russia and China when talking about those that agree with the deal. (and this is Israeli spokesman is going hard with the fear mongering, the propaganda). The fuck is this channel even about.

 

[Suikoguy]

I like how CNN is being as negative as possible about this deal, focusing on the critics only, but making sure they do at least include Russia and China when talking about those that agree with the deal. (and this is Israeli spokesman is going hard with the fear mongering, the propaganda). The fuck is channel even about.

Thankfully we currently have adults in charge that care about more then just what Israel wants.

 

[Miles Quaritch]

Because they are warmongers and religious nuts who can't see a more glorious cause than to launch a new crusade in the "holy land".

Additionally, the only purpose their brain serves is to prevent their skullcap from collapsing.

Depressing, but I should have known that would be the reason.

Iran threatens Saudi influence in the region mainly Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen, those Republicans get backing from the Saudis and from the pro Israeli media.Ironic how Huckabee calls Iran a terrorist state while the same time his buddies the Saudis have been the genesis for much of the global terror ideology for decades, if not hundreds of years historically.

The Saudi issue will never make sense to me. They never seem to be called into question for their export of Wahhabism. It's sickening.

I guess that's the power of lobbying.

 

[commedieu]

Thankfully we currently have adults in charge that care about more then just what Israel wants.

Cant wait for the love affair to end. We just put our necks out for their benefit. Everythings always the end of the world if a arab does X. So far.. we've been just fine.

 

[davepoobond]

I'm on board with this, only if Danny DeVito gets to play Javad Zarif.

George Clooney as the Supreme Leader

 

[Suikoguy]

Cant wait for the love affair to end. We just put our necks out for their benefit. Everythings always the end of the world if a arab does X. So far.. we've been just fine.

Honestly, it's the one thing I'm a bit concerned about with Hillary.
Although, I think she will keep our end of the bargain with Iran.

 

[Ikael]

Wonderful read about how Imam Hassan's peace with muawiyah influenced the negotiations and deal.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/st...led-to-the-iran-deal-120100.html#.VaVrrfdus4V

Friends in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and even Yemen are definitely happy since for them a stronger Iran means a stronger Shia front against ISIS and their ilk, and most think they are in an existential war against ISIS and Al Quaeda.

My liberal friends in Iran are comparing this moment to the fall of the berlin wall and they're all cheering on my Facebook feed nonstop They're all convinced that this will help to liberalize Iran in the long run. However, take their enthusiasm with a grain of salt, as they were also convinced that the "Green revolution" would make the regime collapse too :/ still, massively positive news all around

I goddamn hate fisking.

Sorry for my abrasive-ness, it was totally unwarranted. I would rather not to have the last word in a debate if it is at the cost of burning out a kind, Mad-max avatar wearing gaffer.

 

[Business]

That's how you do it.

 

[Not]

So what the hardline candidates are saying is basically "if I'm elected president I'll make sure to send your children to die in a war thousands of miles away!".

We should do this:

If there is a call for war, and if we are to invade another nation, I will declare as commander in chief that the first to be sent into combat must be the conscripted adult offspring of all members of Congress, the president and the president’s cabinet (and then, in order, the children of the CEOs of the Fortune 500, all military contractors and the top media executives). This should reduce the number of wars considerably.

 

[thefro]

I like how CNN is being as negative as possible about this deal, focusing on the critics only, but making sure they do at least include Russia and China when talking about those that agree with the deal. (and this is Israeli spokesman is going hard with the fear mongering, the propaganda). The fuck is this channel even about.

Pretty sure you're watching this guy's show

 

[Damerman]

Iran threatens Saudi influence in the region mainly Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen, those Republicans get backing from the Saudis and from the pro Israeli media.Ironic how Huckabee calls Iran a terrorist state while the same time his buddies the Saudis have been the genesis for much of the global terror ideology for decades, if not hundreds of years historically.

Smdh. So fucking true.

 

[Version 3.0]

some people claim that Iran is not to be trusted, but what in the name of Christ has been done by America in order to position itself as trustworhty from Iran's perspective? Absolutely nothing.

I wonder how many critics of this deal - particularly GOP politicians - are even aware of the events you've linked here. And I wonder how many are aware, but think they are not relevant.

And I'm not sure which would be worse.

 

[IchigoSharingan]

IRAN deal = lower cost of oil = Republican constituents aren't happy.

This is business guys.

 

[RiZ III]

If Netanyahu says it's bad, it's probably the best thing there could be.

 

[Buba Big Guns]

If Netanyahu says it's bad, it's probably the best thing there could be.

Pretty much. Fuck that guy.

Diplomacy works, who would've thought. Fuck all these warmongers.

 

[Mr_Antimatter]

I wonder how many critics of this deal - particularly GOP politicians - are even aware of the events you've linked here. And I wonder how many are aware, but think they are not relevant.

And I'm not sure which would be worse.

As George HW Bush said: "I will never apologize for the United States — I don't care what the facts are... I'm not an apologize-for-America kind of guy."

The right's stance is it doesn't matter what we did, we are never going to feel sorry for it. What we do has no effect on what we ask others to do, or what we demand them to do. The US can't do any wrong, you see.

 

[dabig2]

As George HW Bush said: "I will never apologize for the United States — I don't care what the facts are... I'm not an apologize-for-America kind of guy."

The right's stance is it doesn't matter what we did, we are never going to feel sorry for it. What we do has no effect on what we ask others to do, or what we demand them to do. The US can't do any wrong, you see.

Relevant quote too as he said this in response to the US shooting down Iran Flight 665 that killed almost 300 people.

 

[gutter_trash]

I'll admit I haven't followed this very much, but from what I can gather, the amount of material Iran would need to create a bomb will be so little that they can't realistically hope to create one with this deal?

If that's true, what's the problem with the deal? Why are the Republicans so against it?

Israel

 

[shinobi602]

This is hilarious. BBC basically catches the Israeli Education Minister with his pants down: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI9fHLXFypg

 

[Suikoguy]

This is perhaps the best reason i've seen for republicans saying what they are:

Obama has certainly made mistakes in the Middle East. But behind his drive for an Iranian nuclear deal is the effort to make American foreign policy “solvent” again by bringing America’s ends into alignment with its means. That means recognizing that the United States cannot bludgeon Iran into total submission, either economically or militarily. The U.S. tried that in Iraq.

It is precisely this recognition that makes the Iran deal so infuriating to Obama’s critics. It codifies the limits of American power. And recognizing the limits of American power also means recognizing the limits of American exceptionalism. It means recognizing that no matter how deeply Americans believe in their country’s unique virtue, the United States is subject to the same restraints that have governed great powers in the past. For the Republican right, that’s a deeply unwelcome realization. For many other Americans, it’s a relief. It’s a sign that, finally, the Bush era in American foreign policy is over.

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/07/iran-nuclear-deal-obama/398450/

 

[shinobi602]

This is perhaps the best reason i've seen for republicans saying what they are:



http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/07/iran-nuclear-deal-obama/398450/

Very well written and hit the nail on the head.

 

[Retromelon]

Remember when we all thought that obama would have a typical lame duck second term

 

[Bsigg12]

Seems pretty solid. Once they release the 500 page document I'll gladly read someone's summary of it to see what all they have in it.

 

[m_shortpants]

Great, let's hand over billions of dollars to the World's leading sponsor of terrorism. That should work out well.

Looks like congratulations have already been received from Assad, who's ruthless government is propped up entirely by Iran (including a $1billion lifeline just last week)

Meanwhile the Iranian people suffer under the oppressive regime and atheists, gays, journalists et al, wonder how such liberal bastions as the US can throw them under the fucking bus.



I'd rather neither.

The irony.

 

[Damaniel]

Great, let's hand over billions of dollars to the World's leading sponsor of terrorism. That should work out well.

Looks like congratulations have already been received from Assad, who's ruthless government is propped up entirely by Iran (including a $1billion lifeline just last week)

Meanwhile the Iranian people suffer under the oppressive regime and atheists, gays, journalists et al, wonder how such liberal bastions as the US can throw them under the fucking bus.

I'd rather neither.

Firstly, it's their billions (money that's been frozen due to the sanctions). If you want to talk about handing over billions of dollars, let's talk about how we continue to prop up Israel and what a horrible waste of money that is.

As for what to do about Iran, are you proposing we bomb them or invade them? Frankly, I'm sick of war and I'm all for trying the diplomatic route for once. I'm also glad that we're currently a liberal bastion, because a conservative bastion would be throwing tens of thousands of troops in to die in yet another war against brown people with funny sounding names. When a conservative has a (military-industrial complex) hammer, everything looks like a nail.

 

[danm999]

I just don't understand what alternatives there are that make sense. War is obviously an unthinkable (at least I hope so) and the sanction imposed status-quo will fall apart with respect to other nations if the US rejects the deal.

Nor does rejecting the deal doesn't stop or create an incentive for Iran against developing nuclear weapons.

And if Iran reneges on the deal, or abuses it, you still have all the other alternatives on the table anyway. Difference is in the US can point to Iran's violation of the deal as justification to go back to sanctions or military action with the international community.

And if Iran keeps to the deal, it might begin to normalize its relations with the USA and the West, hopefully empowering moderates and shaping Iranian society into something a little less grotesque politically.

The only losers in this deal seem to conservative politicians in the US and Israel who have had the bogeyman of Iran severely undermined as a talking point in their political campaigns, and Saudi Arabia who are suddenly may not be the only regional power in that part of the world the West has a functional relationship with, severely undermining their influence and leverage.

 

[samar11]

Great, let's hand over billions of dollars to the World's leading sponsor of terrorism. That should work out well.

Looks like congratulations have already been received from Assad, who's ruthless government is propped up entirely by Iran (including a $1billion lifeline just last week)

Meanwhile the Iranian people suffer under the oppressive regime and atheists, gays, journalists et al, wonder how such liberal bastions as the US can throw them under the fucking bus.



I'd rather neither.

WTF mate? Is this a joke post or are you referring to Saudi Arabia?

 

[Jason's Ultimatum]

I'm 33, and I remember back in HS the news always talking about Iran one step closer to a nuclear bomb, or Israel planning to bomb Israel.

shits old.

 

[bananas]

I'm 33, and I remember back in HS the news always talking about Iran one step closer to a nuclear bomb, or Israel planning to bomb Israel.

shits old.

Those sneaky jews.

 

[foxuzamaki]

Guys, diplomacy has NOT failed, we dont need the wonderful 101 on this one

 

[Damerman]

It is political religious movements, islamic, christian or otherwise, the ones that lays down the ground for terrorism, not secularism.

How can you say this when its very clear that puppet dictators use WMDs against millions of people, most of the victims being innocent citizens?

I hate the house of saud as much as the next guy, they teamed up with the founder of the sunni sect that is plaguing the world with violence Including bokoharram all the way in nigeria. But to deny that the west hasn't caused disastrous bullshit in the arab world just for the sake of defending secularism is very wrong and disgusting. I would rather fight and die for real freedom than to pick the "lesser" evil between the two of those.

 

[Henchmen21]

George Clooney as the Supreme Leader

Nope. Kathleen Turner and Michael Douglas and make it a sequel to Jewel Of The Nile

 

[Sibylus]

Thanks misters Obama, Kerry, Rouhani, and Zarif. The public overtures were promising and this agreement looks promising too. Hopefully it's a beginning to detente and the easing of hostilities.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

How could Iran ever use a bomb to their advantage against the United States or any of its allies? Is the worry that Iran would use it as leverage or do people really think they are that suicidal?

The real reason that Iranian nukes would be a big deal is because their primary antagonists Saudi Arabia don't have nukes, and Israel pretends not to have nukes while also wanting to be the only country in the region that actually has nukes.

Iranian nukes aren't a problem for the US. They are a problem for Saudi Arabia and Israel.