• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

After Months of Ranting About Taking Iran’s Uranium, Trump Asks, ‘Why Bother?’

ThatRobGuy

Part of the IT crowd
Site Supporter
Sep 4, 2005
31,031
17,724
Here
✟1,630,931.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Really? An agreement that Iran signed off on that prevented them even enriching uranium past 4%? What you have now is not a heck of a lot worse than that?

You are having a laugh at someone's expense. But I'm not sure who the joke could possibly be aimed at.

They weren't abiding by the previous deal in good faith. (I've enumerated the reasons before, but I can do so again if you really want the repetitive list)

Not to mention, we don't have to make any sorts of deals with other nations to be decent international actors.

There's no "deal" that had to be made to prevent Canada, Ireland, Spain, Portugal, Japan, etc. (the list goes on) to say "we'll give you some money and expand trade with you and excuse your behaviors that we find to be abhorrent, just please don't blow anything up" in order for them to be decent (in the most low-bar sense of the word)
 
Upvote 0

Bradskii

Under the Southern Cross I stand...
Aug 19, 2018
25,634
17,845
73
Bondi
✟437,239.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
They weren't abiding by the previous deal in good faith.
I have no idea what you mean by not abiding 'in good faith'. They were either abiding to the deal or they were not. And I've seen nothing to indicate that they weren't. Especially in regard to uranium. In fact, just the opposite. From here:

“The JCPOA would absolutely not have allowed Iran to develop nuclear weapons,” Nephew (international and public affairs senior research scholar at Columbia University who worked as a special envoy for Iran and for the State Department under the Biden administration) said. “First of all, there were prohibitions; then there were transparency requirements; and, then, there were the risks of snapback and punishment” if Iran violated the terms.'

What you have said sounds a lot like Trump might have said at some point. Vague generalisations with no specific facts noted which could be refuted. And I don't want reasons why you think 'they weren't abiding by the previous deal in good faith'. I'd like to know what aspects of the agreement they actually were flouting.

You need to do better.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: wing2000
Upvote 0

Lukaris

Orthodox Christian
Site Supporter
Aug 3, 2007
9,384
3,537
Pennsylvania, USA
✟1,080,414.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Views of Iranians.





 
  • Informative
Reactions: DaisyDay
Upvote 0

Valletta

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2020
14,407
6,234
Minnesota
✟385,472.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
“The JCPOA would absolutely not have allowed Iran to develop nuclear weapons,” Nephew (international and public affairs senior research scholar at Columbia University who worked as a special envoy for Iran and for the State Department under the Biden administration) said. “First of all, there were prohibitions; then there were transparency requirements; and, then, there were the risks of snapback and punishment” if Iran violated the terms.'
The truth is Iran was one-step away from nuclear weapons because of the JCPOA combined with the lack of effort to hold Iran accountable.
 
Upvote 0

Bradskii

Under the Southern Cross I stand...
Aug 19, 2018
25,634
17,845
73
Bondi
✟437,239.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
The truth is Iran was one-step away from nuclear weapons because of the JCPOA combined with the lack of effort to hold Iran accountable.
Abject nonsense. Noticeably backed up by a complete and utter lack of any evidence whatsoever. And for good reason. There literally isn't any. You are not now simply repeating Trump's lies. You are making things up yourself. Confirmed by umpteen posts by many members here showing you the facts of the matter with heaven knows how many links and direct quotes.

Please, give it a rest. This is becoming somewhat embarrassing for everyone.
 
Upvote 0

Lukaris

Orthodox Christian
Site Supporter
Aug 3, 2007
9,384
3,537
Pennsylvania, USA
✟1,080,414.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
The thing is was the 2015 JCPOA necessary to begin with? Iran was under strong sanctions and pursuing terrorism anyway rather than caring for the Iranian people like supporting the Houthi rebellion from 2009. Sanctions were lifted while Iranian terrorism against the interests of Saudi Arabia continued.




When Trump abandoned the JCPOA doubts emerged if Iran was compliant when Israeli agents seized secret Iranian documents showing ongoing military oriented nuclear activity. Per an analysis from a former IAEA official at the Institute for Science and International Security think tank:


There is considerable information in the archive that shows that Iran deceived the IAEA and the international community about its nuclear weapons activities throughout the 2000s and provided incomplete and misleading declarations. There are actually “deception folders” in the archive that catalogue Iran’s lies to inspectors, to enable it to be consistent from meeting to meeting.

The archive contains information about significant nuclear facilities not previously known to the IAEA and Western intelligence agencies. For example, the archive reveals for the first time the “Shahid Boroujerdi project,” which was a plan for an underground facility intended to build components of highly enriched uranium cores for nuclear warheads.



Trump didn’t just “tear up” the JCPOA, he didn’t accept its standing validity. There was still room for negotiation in 2019 but Iran rejected any criticism of their compliance and chose to reject further negotiation.


Since May 2019, however, Iran has continued to violate the terms of the JCPOA agreement. It has lifted the cap on its stockpile of uranium, which is now 30 times the level permitted; increased its enrichment activities to 60%, significantly beyond the 3.67% permitted under the JCPOA; expanded its enrichment capabilities and resumed activity at nuclear facilities that were previously prohibited under the terms of the deal. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) says it has been prevented from satisfactorily monitoring Iran’s nuclear activities since February 2021.



I don’t think the 2026 Hormuz war was a good move but I don’t believe Iran ( the regime, not many of the people) ever intends for peaceful settlements. The sentiments of hardliners expressed within my links in my earlier post from Iran International form my opinion on that.
 
Upvote 0

Valletta

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2020
14,407
6,234
Minnesota
✟385,472.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Abject nonsense. Noticeably backed up by a complete and utter lack of any evidence whatsoever. And for good reason. There literally isn't any. You are not now simply repeating Trump's lies. You are making things up yourself. Confirmed by umpteen posts by many members here showing you the facts of the matter with heaven knows how many links and direct quotes.

Please, give it a rest. This is becoming somewhat embarrassing for everyone.

Netanyahu claims Israel, US removed ‘immediate’ Iranian nuclear threat, ‘saved State of Israel from anniliation,’ but fight is ‘not over’​

 
Upvote 0

Bradskii

Under the Southern Cross I stand...
Aug 19, 2018
25,634
17,845
73
Bondi
✟437,239.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
The thing is was the 2015 JCPOA necessary to begin with?
Yes. You even supply the answer as to why:
There is considerable information in the archive that shows that Iran deceived the IAEA and the international community about its nuclear weapons activities throughout the 2000s and provided incomplete and misleading declarations.
So prior to the JCPOA, as you have just posted, there were doubts about Iran's honesty in regard to uranium enrichment and their progress to develop a nuclear weapon. Why in heaven's name do you ask why the JCPOA was necessary when in almost the next paragraph you explain the reason why? Are you not following the logic of your own posts?
When Trump abandoned the JCPOA doubts emerged if Iran was compliant...
Good grief. Obviously doubts emerged. You'd have to be a lunatic with an IQ lower than ambient room temperature not to realise that once Iran was no longer constrained by the agreement they were free to do as they wished. Trump abandoning the agreement was the cause of them restarting the process to obtain nuclear weapons.

Again, I am struggling not to write that down in all upper case, italicised and in bold letters twice the normal size. If we were having this discussion in a pub then security would have been called and I would have been asked if I could please keep the noise down, as I would literally be shouting that out at this point.
Trump didn’t just “tear up” the JCPOA, he didn’t accept its standing validity.
Well, I don't really think there were pieces of the agreement to be found in the waste paper basket under the Resolute Desk. But that's effectively what Trump did. The agreement was cancelled as far as he was concerned, freeing Iran to do as they pleased.
There was still room for negotiation in 2019 but Iran rejected any criticism of their compliance and chose to reject further negotiation.
They had no reason to renegotiate anything. Trump had given them carte blanche to do as they wished. What would you expect them to do? Ask pretty please for another agreement that would deny them what they wanted to do?
I don’t think the 2026 Hormuz war was a good move...
The only reasonable part of the post...
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Ophiolite
Upvote 0

Bradskii

Under the Southern Cross I stand...
Aug 19, 2018
25,634
17,845
73
Bondi
✟437,239.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married

Netanyahu claims Israel, US removed ‘immediate’ Iranian nuclear threat, ‘saved State of Israel from anniliation,’ but fight is ‘not over’​

Apart from the fact that Netanyahu is a war criminal, I think that the nonsense you have been continually posting and your constant repetition of Trump's lies when you have been continuously bombarded with the facts of the matter has excused me from taking anything else you say seriously.
 
Upvote 0

Valletta

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2020
14,407
6,234
Minnesota
✟385,472.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Apart from the fact that Netanyahu is a war criminal, I think that the nonsense you have been continually posting and your constant repetition of Trump's lies when you have been continuously bombarded with the facts of the matter has excused me from taking anything else you say seriously.
There are many people who will automatically take the opposite position Trump takes on almost any issue. This is difficult to overcome. Just like Hillary, Trump will not accept Iran having a nuclear weapon. They certainly had enough material to make a dirty bomb. As to other nuclear weapons,the person with the best intelligence available on how close they were is the president of the United States.
 
Upvote 0

Bradskii

Under the Southern Cross I stand...
Aug 19, 2018
25,634
17,845
73
Bondi
✟437,239.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
There are many people who will automatically take the opposite position Trump takes on almost any issue.
Only on ones where he acts remarkably stupidly. Like cancelling an agreement that Iran was keeping which did not allow them to develop a nuclear wespon.
As to other nuclear weapons,the person with the best intelligence available on how close they were is the president of the United States.
He's lied to you. And you are simply repeating those lies. And you are effectively repeating what you've already conceded: If Trump says or does something, then it must be true! He has absolutely no evidence whatsoever. And, rather obviously, neither do you. He just says things with not even a scintilla of evidence...the election was stolen, there is fraud in the California elections, Iran was two weeks off from having a nuclear weapon on a ballistic missile, the boats were carrying narcotics to the US etc etc ad nauseum. And all you do is repeat it.

It's unnatural. Seriously. People who have no internal ability to know when an obvious lie is just that, or in Trump's case, hundreds upon hundreds of lies, are not acting normally.

Look, the person I trust more than anyone on the planet is my wife. But there are obviously times when I doubt some of the things she says. Because I know it's natural to bend the truth. To tend towards a statement that isn't factually true to avoid either embarrassment or because of a lack of knowledge or simply to win an argument. Good grief, we all do it! It's human nature. If it's not an actual part of someone's character, if they are not a compulsive liar, then we make allowances for them. You'd be inhuman if you could go through life without telling a lie. But you will deny that Trump has lied until doomsday. You will nonsensically argue, without evidence, in fact against all evidence, that he always tells the truth.

He's now, god help us all, a politician. Who was known to have lied before he ever ran for office. Do you honestly think that at the moment that he sought high office that this guy took some internal pledge to never lie again? You cannot be that naive! But pushing you to the limit as to what you might admit is wrong with Trump and I think you replied that his speeches sometimes went on too long.

I literally laughed out loud at that. It was akin to a simple throw away SNL joke. You can't be taken seriously when you say things like that. It's not a serious answer. It exhibits a lack of understanding of basic human frailty. But instead of accepting it and perhaps forgiving it...you actually deny it.

You really should reconsider what you are doing.
 
Upvote 0

Matt5

Well-Known Member
Jun 12, 2019
1,161
477
Zürich
✟213,717.00
Country
Switzerland
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
How close is Iran to building a nuclear weapon?

The article below gives Iran a probability of successfully completing a nuclear weapon in 5 to 6 months at 84%. That just means more likely than not. It has to decide to build one. The articles gives that a probability of 40 to 50%.

[20-Feb-2026] Iran Threat Geiger Counter: A Probabilistic Approach; What is the probability that Iran will build nuclear weapons? | ISIS Reports | Institute For Science And International Security

Summarizing the various components first:
  • The current probability that the Iranian regime decides to build nuclear weapons is estimated as 40 to 50 percent.
  • The current probabilities that after this decision Iran succeeds in building a nuclear weapon in a specified timeframe follow:
    • In a two-to-three-month effort, a crash program to build a nuclear weapon, with the two scenarios reflecting challenges faced by Iran, has a probability of success of:
      • Five percent for the Expected case
      • 28 percent for the Optimistic case
    • In a five-to-six-month effort, this program has a probability of success of 84 percent
To get an overall probability requires multiplying the two main factors, that Iran decides to build a nuclear weapon and then does so. The overall current probabilities that Iran builds a nuclear weapon are:

  • In a two-to-three-month timeframe, a crash program to build a nuclear weapon, with the two scenarios reflecting challenges faced by Iran, the probability that Iran will build a nuclear weapon is:
    • Two to 2.5 percent for the Expected case
    • 11 to 14 percent for the Optimistic case
  • In the five-to-six-month timeframe, the overall probability is 34 to 42 percent.
While these probabilities are all less than 50 percent, they need to be understood in the context of risk tolerance, which is especially acute when talking about nuclear weapons in the hands of enemies. For example, would an average person get on an airplane if they were told the chance of a crash is 30 percent, or even two percent? What risk is a neighboring country supposed to tolerate?
 
  • Wow
Reactions: Larniavc
Upvote 0

Valletta

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2020
14,407
6,234
Minnesota
✟385,472.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Only on ones where he acts remarkably stupidly. Like cancelling an agreement that Iran was keeping which did not allow them to develop a nuclear weapon.
I've already point out the flaws in the Obama deal. Trump viewed that plan as an easy path to a nuclear weapon, that's why he dropped the U.S. out. Yet Iran continued in the plan as did the Russians, Chinese, the U.K, Germany, and France. What was Iran doing with the nuclear scientists and why build facilities so deep underground? They have killed tens of thousands of their own people, it's not like they're big on the safety concerns of the populace. If they really weren't really interested in long range missiles and nuclear bombs Iran could have just announced they would turn over all nuclear material as long as foreign countries picked up the tab to build new natural gas and solar power plants!
 
Upvote 0

Pommer

Future History Slab Carver
Sep 13, 2008
25,244
15,362
Earth
✟303,904.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Democrat
The truth is Iran was one-step away from nuclear weapons because of the JCPOA combined with the lack of effort to hold Iran accountable.
Even with my limited understanding nuclear weapons, I know that obtaining enough fissionable materials is “the easy part”…so what was this “one-step”?
 
Upvote 0

wing2000

E pluribus unum
Site Supporter
Aug 18, 2012
27,017
22,626
✟1,925,769.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
While it's pretty obvious that he's trying to repackage some bad decisions to save face (and being concerned about an Islamic theocracy having serious firepower isn't an irrational concern), I fail to see how this approach is worse (in a practical sense) than previous approaches that suggested that we pay what's tantamount to a mafia-style protection vig in order for them not to blow a quarter of the planet up.

Is it time to perhaps acknowledge the reality that world powers that adhere to fundamentalist Islam present some challenges that are unique to them and don't allow for any (ideologically) "pure" solutions?

....really? You can't see the strategic loss the United States has incurred by going to war with a 2nd tier military and then being forced to negotiate an end to a conflict that failed to acheive our objectives?
 
Upvote 0

Valletta

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2020
14,407
6,234
Minnesota
✟385,472.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
....really? You can't see the strategic loss the United States has incurred by going to war with a 2nd tier military and then being forced to negotiate an end to a conflict that failed to acheive our objectives?
The objective was to stop Iran from having a nuclear weapon. 100 percent success.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: Larniavc
Upvote 0

Valletta

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2020
14,407
6,234
Minnesota
✟385,472.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Even with my limited understanding nuclear weapons, I know that obtaining enough fissionable materials is “the easy part”…so what was this “one-step”?
The fissionable material is not the easy part. It is the same process to go from 60% to 90% but it was difficult, much more difficult, at the beginning. The one-step I was talking about was going from 60 to 90. Iran obviously doesn't need that high of enrichment for anything but a nuclear weapon. Iran has a history of hiding things, what specifically U.S. intelligence knew about their missile delivery system or technical expertise in assembling has not been revealed.
 
Upvote 0