4 ms·

The reason why Iran was even back in the nuclear game was because a moron pulled out of the JCPOA that was giving them concrete steps and carrots to get them to

by sofixa 4mo ago

The reason why Iran was even back in the nuclear game was because a moron pulled out of the JCPOA that was giving them concrete steps and carrots to get them to stop.

defrost 4mo ago
An agreement that had independent inspectors from several countries accessing utilities and leaving behind tamper resistant (and tamper revealing) instrumentation at regular intervals (along with the usual back and forth robust discussions). The sort of gear that could count atoms from Fukushima drifting across the oceans to end up in HVAC filters in middle North America.
cmxch 4mo ago
[flagged]
- sofixa 4mo ago
  Not at all. Iran was rewarded with progressive sanction relief and progressive unblocking of their own money that was seized decades ago, as long as they continued cooperating.
  - dotancohen 4mo ago
    They only had to cooperate until January 2026, then they were free to carry on with their nuclear ambitions.
    - nixon_why69 4mo ago
      This is a great example of where the Israeli perspective diverges from the American. The classic American perspective wouldn't worry about that because being part of our market is so attractive. There is a win-win here, they are not mindless orcs.
      - krapp 4mo ago
        >The Israeli perspective assumes the muslims are mindless orcs that can't be reasoned with as humans. It seems that the American perspective after 9/11 has become more or less the same.
        nixon_why69 4mo ago
        Give us some credit, we have our bigots but it's been 25 years and we also have hospitality culture like everyone else. The average person, even if they voted Trump, would be kind and grant human-ness to a muslim they met in person. Look at the Borat sketches, he's there with southern conservatives acting like a freak and they STILL act like gracious hosts to the foreigner. Acknowledgement of edit: I rephrased the sentence you're replying to in order to try to be less inflammatory.
      - dotancohen 4mo ago
        Yes, living under constant rocket threat does affect one's perspective. I personally was injured in an Iranian rocket attack on Israel. My children have had their camp counselors kidnapped and murdered. And their teachers. And thier friends. My daughter attended the funeral of a close friend who was murdered in his home, along with his sister and brother and both parents. I could go on. I know two women whose babies were both burned to death due to Iran. I could tell even worse stories. Suffice it to say that us who actually live under Iranian threat treat the threat seriously. It is not theoretical for us.
        nixon_why69 4mo ago
        You were injured by a rocket counterattack. It's a distinction that reasonable people would give some thought and reflection.
        dotancohen 4mo ago
        No, Israel did not attack Iran previous to the Iranian attack on Israel. I don't know where you get your news from, but I suspect they are distorting facts to push a narrative. I suggest reading Arab, Persian, and Israeli sources. Telegram makes this easy with built-in translation - and Hamas has an official Telegram channel.
dotancohen 4mo ago
The JCPOA agreements were set to expire in January 2026 - and then Iran could continue their nuclear ambitions. The only people who could support those agreements either: 1. Didn't read them and know that they expire in 10 years. 2. Think that 10 years is a long enough time in the future where whatever happens then doesn't matter to their current goals. 3. Would like to see a nuclear-capable Iran. For what it's worth, January 2026 already passed 5 months ago.
- sofixa 4mo ago
  Or alternatively, in 2026 Iran would have been hooked on closer economic cooperation and trade, (relative) reformers would be in power, and the deal would have been renewed. Yanking the deal all but guaranteed that the hardliners would go back in charge, because they were proven right - the US could not be trusted to keep its word, so negotiations don't matter, the only thing that would actually protect them is nuclear weapons. > Would like to see a nuclear-capable Iran. Postponing their nuclear programme with at least 10 years is absolutely worth doing. Because realistically you cannot, I repeat, cannot force them to stop it. If the regime wants to continue, it will and their facilities deep under the mountains are impenetrable.
  - dotancohen 4mo ago
    > Or alternatively, in 2026 Iran would have been hooked on closer economic cooperation and trade, (relative) reformers would be in power, and the deal would have been renewed. Oh, so you expect to change their culture and their value system. And do that in only 10 years. That's called imperialism. I believe it's no longer fashionable.
    - sofixa 4mo ago
      > Oh, so you expect to change their culture and their value system What do you mean culture and value system? You think isolation and nuclear weapons are parts of the Iranian culture???? And yes, Iran had multiple bouts of reformer presidents. Reformer within the limits of what the Supreme Leader would allow of course, but there is still a massive gulf of difference between them and the hardliners. A few years of visible economic development under reformers would have nudged things in the reconciliation direction. Again, yanking the deal, even before the current strikes during negotiations, ensures that Iran will never fully trust the US. So realistically, what other choices do they have other than procure nuclear weapons for protection?
cmxch 4mo ago
For the benefit of those who missed it the first time: The Just Cash Pallets Over Americans agreement, where Iran was rewarded for all the wrong things and the public kept in the dark.

by sofixa 4mo ago

The reason why Iran was even back in the nuclear game was because a moron pulled out of the JCPOA that was giving them concrete steps and carrots to get them to stop.

defrost 4mo ago

An agreement that had independent inspectors from several countries accessing utilities and leaving behind tamper resistant (and tamper revealing) instrumentation at regular intervals (along with the usual back and forth robust discussions). The sort of gear that could count atoms from Fukushima drifting across the oceans to end up in HVAC filters in middle North America.

cmxch 4mo ago

[flagged]

sofixa 4mo ago
Not at all. Iran was rewarded with progressive sanction relief and progressive unblocking of their own money that was seized decades ago, as long as they continued cooperating.
- dotancohen 4mo ago
  They only had to cooperate until January 2026, then they were free to carry on with their nuclear ambitions.
  - nixon_why69 4mo ago
    This is a great example of where the Israeli perspective diverges from the American. The classic American perspective wouldn't worry about that because being part of our market is so attractive. There is a win-win here, they are not mindless orcs.
    - krapp 4mo ago
      >The Israeli perspective assumes the muslims are mindless orcs that can't be reasoned with as humans. It seems that the American perspective after 9/11 has become more or less the same.
      - nixon_why69 4mo ago
        Give us some credit, we have our bigots but it's been 25 years and we also have hospitality culture like everyone else. The average person, even if they voted Trump, would be kind and grant human-ness to a muslim they met in person. Look at the Borat sketches, he's there with southern conservatives acting like a freak and they STILL act like gracious hosts to the foreigner. Acknowledgement of edit: I rephrased the sentence you're replying to in order to try to be less inflammatory.
    - dotancohen 4mo ago
      Yes, living under constant rocket threat does affect one's perspective. I personally was injured in an Iranian rocket attack on Israel. My children have had their camp counselors kidnapped and murdered. And their teachers. And thier friends. My daughter attended the funeral of a close friend who was murdered in his home, along with his sister and brother and both parents. I could go on. I know two women whose babies were both burned to death due to Iran. I could tell even worse stories. Suffice it to say that us who actually live under Iranian threat treat the threat seriously. It is not theoretical for us.
      - nixon_why69 4mo ago
        You were injured by a rocket counterattack. It's a distinction that reasonable people would give some thought and reflection.
        dotancohen 4mo ago
        No, Israel did not attack Iran previous to the Iranian attack on Israel. I don't know where you get your news from, but I suspect they are distorting facts to push a narrative. I suggest reading Arab, Persian, and Israeli sources. Telegram makes this easy with built-in translation - and Hamas has an official Telegram channel.

dotancohen 4mo ago

The JCPOA agreements were set to expire in January 2026 - and then Iran could continue their nuclear ambitions. The only people who could support those agreements either: 1. Didn't read them and know that they expire in 10 years. 2. Think that 10 years is a long enough time in the future where whatever happens then doesn't matter to their current goals. 3. Would like to see a nuclear-capable Iran. For what it's worth, January 2026 already passed 5 months ago.

sofixa 4mo ago
Or alternatively, in 2026 Iran would have been hooked on closer economic cooperation and trade, (relative) reformers would be in power, and the deal would have been renewed. Yanking the deal all but guaranteed that the hardliners would go back in charge, because they were proven right - the US could not be trusted to keep its word, so negotiations don't matter, the only thing that would actually protect them is nuclear weapons. > Would like to see a nuclear-capable Iran. Postponing their nuclear programme with at least 10 years is absolutely worth doing. Because realistically you cannot, I repeat, cannot force them to stop it. If the regime wants to continue, it will and their facilities deep under the mountains are impenetrable.
- dotancohen 4mo ago
  > Or alternatively, in 2026 Iran would have been hooked on closer economic cooperation and trade, (relative) reformers would be in power, and the deal would have been renewed. Oh, so you expect to change their culture and their value system. And do that in only 10 years. That's called imperialism. I believe it's no longer fashionable.
  - sofixa 4mo ago
    > Oh, so you expect to change their culture and their value system What do you mean culture and value system? You think isolation and nuclear weapons are parts of the Iranian culture???? And yes, Iran had multiple bouts of reformer presidents. Reformer within the limits of what the Supreme Leader would allow of course, but there is still a massive gulf of difference between them and the hardliners. A few years of visible economic development under reformers would have nudged things in the reconciliation direction. Again, yanking the deal, even before the current strikes during negotiations, ensures that Iran will never fully trust the US. So realistically, what other choices do they have other than procure nuclear weapons for protection?

cmxch 4mo ago

For the benefit of those who missed it the first time: The Just Cash Pallets Over Americans agreement, where Iran was rewarded for all the wrong things and the public kept in the dark.