-- thank you John Kerry.., US Secretary of State...

[Mabouya]

And they didn't have access to any of that during the sanctions?

Regardless, I thought they practically had the bomb anyway? The image below was over four years ago, in Sept of 2012, when folks were just about to start bombing the Iranians because they supposedly were soooo close. I guess lifting the sanctions will be tantamount to lighting that fuse...

[Dallas Tex]

The best, most important item that will help Iran develop nukes is funding. Removing the sanctions will allow Iran to sell an enormous amount of oil and support & accelerate this program.

I answered your question twice. Now tell me what was gained ?

[Dallas Tex]

The fact that Iran doesn't already have a bomb speaks to the relevance and success of multi national sanctions. That are about to go away.

[lumpy]

The United States is not able to unilaterally maintain or impose sanctions. Russia and China only reluctantly agreed to continue sanctions to allow for continued negotiations. In the event they or any other country perceives the United States as overreaching or failing to negotiate in good faith, those countries can resume trade with Iran.

[Dallas Tex]

And they haven't. For years.

[Mabouya]

I think they were already using as much money as they wanted for their nuclear programs. It isn't as if they're a democracy and have to go to congress every year to justify the budget. If it's purely a budget thing, I doubt the deal will have a significant effect one way or the other on changing the rate at which they approach getting a bomb. The military probably gets whatever it want for that.

What is gained is that the Iranians are agreeing to limits on the number, quality and output of their centrifuges. Without any deal they keep operating as they have in the past.

[Dallas Tex]

Iran is cash starved due to the sanctions. That's why they are negotiating.

Reducing the number of centrifuges is silly, as more are needed for a true peaceful nuclear power program and less would be needed for a weapons program.

[Mabouya]

So what's better, them having 19,000 centrifuges, or 1000 centrifuges?

[lumpy]

The framework also provides for extensive inspection and access rights that would not otherwise exist.

[Dallas Tex]

So we leave Iran without enough centrifuges to run a peaceful nuclear power program. We leave only enough to run a nuclear weapons program. You define that as success?

[Mabouya]

Would your definition of success have been more of the same as we have now?

Or if you don't like that, sending in the bombers then the Marines?

Neither of those situations seems to be that great to me.

[SteveP]

recently saw a video tape with netanyahu... dated 1992.
his quote was... something like...
iran is 2 years away from having a nuclear bomb..

sure its lives on u-tube.

1992.

[Dallas Tex]

More of the same??

Yes. Hell yes. The same is currently a nuclear free Iran. Due to UN & EU sanctions.

[Dallas Tex]

recently saw a video tape with netanyahu... dated 1992.
his quote was... something like...
iran is 2 years away from having a nuclear bomb..

sure its lives on u-tube.

1992.

If you suppose Iran is not trying to build nuclear weapons, ask yourself why an oil-rich country would need a "peaceful " nuclear power generation program.

[Loki]

If you suppose Iran is not trying to build nuclear weapons, ask yourself why an oil-rich country would need a "peaceful " nuclear power generation program.

Because killing gays is boring.

[jclay]

It's been a tough couple of days for the far right. For some folks there is no better way to celebrate the resurrection of Christ than to hate gays and make war. And now the president is earning that Nobel prize he was previously given. They should give him another and really drive the nutters crazy.

In all seriousness, we are not even across mid field yet. So much more work to be done. I hope both sides realize peace can be good for all of our cultures and the nutters here and there don't get a chance to scuttle this. Maybe, just maybe if we can agree towards a de-escalation then at some point we can address a much larger goal of stability in the region which might help the moderates in Israel move that country towards a two state solution. I really do think this is the domino that needed knocking over first and the politics and anxiety around this nuclear deal kinda proves that. At the end of the day we will at least know who stands for peace and who doesn't. I support the president. His willingness to approach Cuba and Iran has been a net positive and potentially transformative wrt foreign policy.

Right on, John. I couldn't agree with you more (both paragraphs).

[Dallas Tex]

Silly. Thanks for your non-participation on a serious topic.

[quickag]

If you suppose Iran is not trying to build nuclear weapons, ask yourself why an oil-rich country would need a "peaceful " nuclear power generation program.

Here's a question for you...

Iran has had the capability and knowledge to build a nuclear weapon since the 60's and the hardware to build it since 1989. The engineering and scientific capability is the fastest growing in the world. They've had support from one of the only other nations in the world with a verified nuclear weapons program.

Why don't they have the weapons? The knowledge and hardware to build the weapons is the exact same stuff given to Best Korea and Pakistan (matter of fact, sold by the same guy). They both are nuclear powers. Matter of fact, our ally Pakistan is the largest nuclear proliferator in the world.

Given that Iran:
1) has the knowledge
2) has the capability
3) has the prerequisites (given to them by the United States, ironically)

What is stopping them?

[Mabouya]

What is stopping them?

In a related question, if they do want to build a bomb, why might they want it?

[quickag]

In a related question, if they do want to build a bomb, why might they want it?

You get it...