Iranian nuclear deal in 6 months?
Discussion
The funny thing is the more BiBi speaks, the more he makes Israel look war hungry and aggressive while Iran looks passive and in search of the much vaunted “peaceful solution”. Ironically the Iranians look this way even while killing innocents all over the Middle East and Israel exercises supreme self restraint.
This deal may be an extremely watered down version of what is ideal but what is the alternative? Sanctions, assassinating Iranian scientists, threatening an invasion or an airstrike, sponsoring Jihadis to fight Iranian interests? That's worked really well over the past decade hasn't is.
This deal may be an extremely watered down version of what is ideal but what is the alternative? Sanctions, assassinating Iranian scientists, threatening an invasion or an airstrike, sponsoring Jihadis to fight Iranian interests? That's worked really well over the past decade hasn't is.
Jimbeaux said:
spitsfire said:
Jimbeaux said:
On an ironic twist, the Syrians with the worse wounds are being treated in Israel' s trauma centers. Those evil Israelis; it must be some sort of trick.
I don't think, at any point in this thread, anybody has described the Israelis as being 'evil'. Trying to reframe the discussion as being one of 'anybody who takes the other side of the argument is a bigot' is at best disingenuous, and at worst, dishonest. It does you, and the side of the argument you're trying to promote, no favours and makes those of us in the middle ground less likely to believe anything you say. Funnily enough, I'm actually lifting most of that from a discussion I had a while ago with somebody who'd had business dealings with Netanyahu in Israel years ago. They were not very complimentary about old Bibi!
t at the other side; an approach that this topic could well do without.Victor McDade said:
The funny thing is the more BiBi speaks, the more he makes Israel look war hungry and aggressive while Iran looks passive and in search of the much vaunted “peaceful solution”. Ironically the Iranians look this way even while killing innocents all over the Middle East and Israel exercises supreme self restraint.
This deal may be an extremely watered down version of what is ideal but what is the alternative? Sanctions, assassinating Iranian scientists, threatening an invasion or an airstrike, sponsoring Jihadis to fight Iranian interests? That's worked really well over the past decade hasn't is.
Whilst I'd agree with you about the perception of Netanyahu in the West (outside of the USA), I'm not entirely sure if Israel exercises supreme self restraint - Operation Cast Lead, the use of white phosphorus, facebook photos of Israeli snipers aiming down the sights at children playing football, and the relentless settlement building program, provide a lot of contrary evidence. This deal may be an extremely watered down version of what is ideal but what is the alternative? Sanctions, assassinating Iranian scientists, threatening an invasion or an airstrike, sponsoring Jihadis to fight Iranian interests? That's worked really well over the past decade hasn't is.
Israel has got a lot of good aspects - treating Syrian injured is an excellent example of that - but, by the same token, they're doing some pretty horrific things too, such as using white phosphorus on civilians. The blockade of Gaza (which includes basic medical supplies and other essentials like nappies) has more than a hint of collective punishment to it.
The Israelis are in a difficult position - any relaxation of the US position on Iran reduces the 'polarisation' of the ME, and makes it more difficult for Israel to cast itself as the West's only friend in the region. With a fairly right-wing and antagonistic government, they're almost inevitably going to oppose anything that brings the Iranians to the table, because it might allow the EU/US to go round them, and deal directly with the other ME powers. The EU in particular aren't very comfortable dealing with Israel - they don't like some of their actions in the OTs, for example - but are reluctant to criticise because any criticism of Israel immediately brings up the issue of previous anti-sematism in Europe.
As a consequence, I'd say the biggest motivator for the Iranians isn't getting sanctions lifted, it's being able to kick Israel in the stones in a very public forum. But hey, if it prevents nuclear proliferation in the ME, I'll take that as a win.....
spitsfire said:
Jimbeaux said:
spitsfire said:
Jimbeaux said:
On an ironic twist, the Syrians with the worse wounds are being treated in Israel' s trauma centers. Those evil Israelis; it must be some sort of trick.
I don't think, at any point in this thread, anybody has described the Israelis as being 'evil'. Trying to reframe the discussion as being one of 'anybody who takes the other side of the argument is a bigot' is at best disingenuous, and at worst, dishonest. It does you, and the side of the argument you're trying to promote, no favours and makes those of us in the middle ground less likely to believe anything you say. Funnily enough, I'm actually lifting most of that from a discussion I had a while ago with somebody who'd had business dealings with Netanyahu in Israel years ago. They were not very complimentary about old Bibi!
t at the other side; an approach that this topic could well do without.
Countdown said:
Mermaid said:
That's reasonable. 
The Iranians will be better to deal with & their women are a lot prettier as far as I can see.
Arab women in general seem to be quite gorgeous. Until they get married AFAICS.The Iranians will be better to deal with & their women are a lot prettier as far as I can see.
Maybe if they're wrapped up in chadors and kept away from all male eyes there isn't the incentive?
Apologies for the blatant sexism.
Iranians are not arab you bellend.
DoodoolTala said:
Iranians are not arab you bellend.
Perhaps you should spend a little more time on reading what is written rather than showing off your prowess with Internet memes. I'm well aware that Arabs are not Persians and vice versa. I was responding to Mermaids comments about Iranian women with my views about Arab women.Have a think about it and if you're still struggling to comprehend, let me know.
Countdown said:
DoodoolTala said:
Iranians are not arab you bellend.
Perhaps you should spend a little more time on reading what is written rather than showing off your prowess with Internet memes. I'm well aware that Arabs are not Persians and vice versa. I was responding to Mermaids comments about Iranian women with my views about Arab women.Have a think about it and if you're still struggling to comprehend, let me know.
Jimbeaux said:
Seeing as I have been a member of this site for the better part of a decade, I believe I am already well aware of that which you feel I need to be enlightened to; however, you are beginning to sound like an accountant or engineer the way you over-analyze and insist upon pole vaulting over mouse turds. It's going to be OK; now breathe. ETA:With total respect to all PH accountants & engineers BTW.
It's really not a PH thing - I've never encountered it on here. On the other hand, I've encountered it repeatedly when discussing/debating the ME with Americans. Not sure whether, on your analysis, the whole ME thing is 'going to be ok'? Jimbeaux said:
Am I reading you correctly? You do realize that most ME nations are not fond of Iran either? Perhaps I misunderstood.
Most of the time, they all hate each other. Occasionally, there is something they can all find common cause on. Sadly, that something is mostly Israel. Amongst the populace, a visceral dislike of the USA ranks pretty highly too, and who can blame them? The US has bombed, sanctioned, and waged war on half the countries in the ME, and in the other half it props up the totalitarian rulers who do same to the population themselves, often with US supplied weaponry. It's a nice place, the Middle East.
Edited by spitsfire on Tuesday 26th November 22:18
spitsfire said:
Jimbeaux said:
Seeing as I have been a member of this site for the better part of a decade, I believe I am already well aware of that which you feel I need to be enlightened to; however, you are beginning to sound like an accountant or engineer the way you over-analyze and insist upon pole vaulting over mouse turds. It's going to be OK; now breathe. ETA:With total respect to all PH accountants & engineers BTW.
It's really not a PH thing - I've never encountered it on here. On the other hand, I've encountered it repeatedly when discussing/debating the ME with Americans. Not sure whether, on your analysis, the whole ME thing is 'going to be ok'? Jimbeaux said:
Am I reading you correctly? You do realize that most ME nations are not fond of Iran either? Perhaps I misunderstood.
Most of the time, they all hate each other. Occasionally, there is something they can all find common cause on. Sadly, that something is mostly Israel. Amongst the populace, a visceral dislike of the USA ranks pretty highly too, and who can blame them? The US has bombed, sanctioned, and waged war on half the countries in the ME, and in the other half it props up the totalitarian rulers who do same to the population themselves, often with US supplied weaponry. It's a nice place, the Middle East.
Edited by spitsfire on Tuesday 26th November 22:18
But to your points, true, it is an unsettled region, always has been. We have done our fair share of trouble-making but it was for what was in our interests, which is what all nations do, don't doubt that. As you pointed out, they mostly hate each other and would whether we were there or not. Israel is simply their excuse to act an ass. If they were truly concerned with "Palestinians", the "brother" nations could easily absorb them into their borders; however, they are more useful being kept as a rallying cry. To the thread subject.....there is a danger of Israel making a deal with Saudi Arabia (who very much hates Iran)for basing military hardware for a strike on Iran. What limits such a strike by Israel is not ability but distance, Saudi territory would eliminate that distance. That said, I do not think this will happen, but it should be at least noted. ETA: I will be extremely happy, as we reach energy independence, to just leave that rats nest to devour itself or deal with the Chinese.....in which case, if they think we are bad, well stand by for a real show.
Edited by Jimbeaux on Wednesday 27th November 13:50
Jimbeaux said:
..To the thread subject.....there is a danger of Israel making a deal with Saudi Arabia (who very much hates Iran)for basing military hardware for a strike on Iran. What limits such a strike by Israel is not ability but distance, Saudi territory would eliminate that distance. That said, I do not think this will happen, but it should be at least noted.
Enemy of my enemy etc. but I don't see it happening although makes sense to do so. If Saudi absorbs all the Palestinian..
If the US falls out with Saudi Arabia over Iran, does Israel sit on the fence?
Mermaid said:
Jimbeaux said:
..To the thread subject.....there is a danger of Israel making a deal with Saudi Arabia (who very much hates Iran)for basing military hardware for a strike on Iran. What limits such a strike by Israel is not ability but distance, Saudi territory would eliminate that distance. That said, I do not think this will happen, but it should be at least noted.
Enemy of my enemy etc. but I don't see it happening although makes sense to do so. If Saudi absorbs all the Palestinian..If the US falls out with Saudi Arabia over Iran, does Israel sit on the fence?
Jimbeaux said:
I see they are not too keen on you lot either, for historic reasons. But to your points, true, it is an unsettled region, always has been. We have done our fair share of trouble-making but it was for what was in our interests, which is what all nations do, don't doubt that.
Yes and no But to your points, true, it is an unsettled region, always has been. We have done our fair share of trouble-making but it was for what was in our interests, which is what all nations do, don't doubt that. The British Empire did make a mess of the ME, but nothing on the scale of what the damage caused by US foreign policy, and looking at the state of the ME today, I'd be sceptical of any argument which suggested their actions have actually been in their long term interests - the ME is now more sectarian and divided, more heavily armed, and more unstable than it was 30 years ago, largely as a result of US efforts. I certainly wouldn't call that a 'win'.
Jimbeaux said:
As you pointed out, they mostly hate each other and would whether we were there or not. Israel is simply their excuse to act an ass. If they were truly concerned with "Palestinians", the "brother" nations could easily absorb them into their borders; however, they are more useful being kept as a rallying cry.
You're assuming that Israel has a right to seize land on an ad hoc basis. That's not an assumption that is supported in international law or (and I'm going to go out on a limb here) common sense. I read, years ago, an article arguing that the Palestinians were to the Arabs what the Jews were to the West: they didn't want them but couldn't disown them. There is no way that the Arab States are going to provide a home for the Palestinians, and (playing devil's advocate) why should they be obliged to simply to create a state for the Zionists?
Jimbeaux said:
To the thread subject.....there is a danger of Israel making a deal with Saudi Arabia (who very much hates Iran)for basing military hardware for a strike on Iran. What limits such a strike by Israel is not ability but distance, Saudi territory would eliminate that distance. That said, I do not think this will happen, but it should be at least noted. ETA: I will be extremely happy, as we reach energy independence, to just leave that rats nest to devour itself or deal with the Chinese.....in which case, if they think we are bad, well stand by for a real show.
I do appreciate where you're coming from, but my argument isn't that the USA is bad, per say. It's more that the USA buys it's own opinion about being the beacon of freedom or the greatest country in the world (ergo this is the only way to do things), and doesn't understand that other cultures operate differently. US attempts to impose an Americanised philosophy on the wider world have often ended badly, partly because the motivations weren't always very pure, but mostly because the USA just doesn't do a very good job of putting itself in somebody else's shoes. In SE Asia (political ideology), the ME (oil, weaponisation, and ideology), and in Latin America (drugs, weapons, and political ideology), the USA has excelled in fking up other nations by accident rather than design. It's only serious competition in this 'game' was the USSR, and they're long gone. The US might set out with the best of intentions, but they leave a hell of a mess in their wake.The House of Saud is too dependent on the Americans to do anything with the Israelis without the nod from Uncle Sam, and they're too scared of pushing their fairly downtrodden and badly repressed population too far by openly siding with Christians or Jews against Muslims, even Shias. They're never going to make a deal with Israel, because it confirms the most potent criticism of the House of Saud - they are American puppets. I don't think they have any great love of the US or Israel: As you say, they loathe the Iranians, and they love the cash and weaponry they get from the USA, but they're scared of ending up in exile or hanging from a gallows.
Edited by spitsfire on Thursday 28th November 11:05
Jimbeaux said:
..To the thread subject.....there is a danger of Israel making a deal with Saudi Arabia (who very much hates Iran)for basing military hardware for a strike on Iran. What limits such a strike by Israel is not ability but distance, Saudi territory would eliminate that distance. That said, I do not think this will happen, but it should be at least noted.
Not a chance in hell Jim, considering the Saudis won't allow you into the country if you have an Israeli stamp in your passport....not that they do it now anyway.
Apache said:
Jimbeaux said:
..To the thread subject.....there is a danger of Israel making a deal with Saudi Arabia (who very much hates Iran)for basing military hardware for a strike on Iran. What limits such a strike by Israel is not ability but distance, Saudi territory would eliminate that distance. That said, I do not think this will happen, but it should be at least noted.
Not a chance in hell Jim, considering the Saudis won't allow you into the country if you have an Israeli stamp in your passport....not that they do it now anyway.
spitsfire said:
Jimbeaux said:
I see they are not too keen on you lot either, for historic reasons. But to your points, true, it is an unsettled region, always has been. We have done our fair share of trouble-making but it was for what was in our interests, which is what all nations do, don't doubt that.
Yes and no But to your points, true, it is an unsettled region, always has been. We have done our fair share of trouble-making but it was for what was in our interests, which is what all nations do, don't doubt that. The British Empire did make a mess of the ME, but nothing on the scale of what the damage caused by US foreign policy, and looking at the state of the ME today, I'd be sceptical of any argument which suggested their actions have actually been in their long term interests - the ME is now more sectarian and divided, more heavily armed, and more unstable than it was 30 years ago, largely as a result of US efforts. I certainly wouldn't call that a 'win'.
Jimbeaux said:
As you pointed out, they mostly hate each other and would whether we were there or not. Israel is simply their excuse to act an ass. If they were truly concerned with "Palestinians", the "brother" nations could easily absorb them into their borders; however, they are more useful being kept as a rallying cry.
You're assuming that Israel has a right to seize land on an ad hoc basis. That's not an assumption that is supported in international law or (and I'm going to go out on a limb here) common sense. I read, years ago, an article arguing that the Palestinians were to the Arabs what the Jews were to the West: they didn't want them but couldn't disown them. There is no way that the Arab States are going to provide a home for the Palestinians, and (playing devil's advocate) why should they be obliged to simply to create a state for the Zionists?
Jimbeaux said:
To the thread subject.....there is a danger of Israel making a deal with Saudi Arabia (who very much hates Iran)for basing military hardware for a strike on Iran. What limits such a strike by Israel is not ability but distance, Saudi territory would eliminate that distance. That said, I do not think this will happen, but it should be at least noted. ETA: I will be extremely happy, as we reach energy independence, to just leave that rats nest to devour itself or deal with the Chinese.....in which case, if they think we are bad, well stand by for a real show.
I do appreciate where you're coming from, but my argument isn't that the USA is bad, per say. It's more that the USA buys it's own opinion about being the beacon of freedom or the greatest country in the world (ergo this is the only way to do things), and doesn't understand that other cultures operate differently. US attempts to impose an Americanised philosophy on the wider world have often ended badly, partly because the motivations weren't always very pure, but mostly because the USA just doesn't do a very good job of putting itself in somebody else's shoes. In SE Asia (political ideology), the ME (oil, weaponisation, and ideology), and in Latin America (drugs, weapons, and political ideology), the USA has excelled in fking up other nations by accident rather than design. It's only serious competition in this 'game' was the USSR, and they're long gone. The US might set out with the best of intentions, but they leave a hell of a mess in their wake.The House of Saud is too dependent on the Americans to do anything with the Israelis without the nod from Uncle Sam, and they're too scared of pushing their fairly downtrodden and badly repressed population too far by openly siding with Christians or Jews against Muslims, even Shias. They're never going to make a deal with Israel, because it confirms the most potent criticism of the House of Saud - they are American puppets. I don't think they have any great love of the US or Israel: As you say, they loathe the Iranians, and they love the cash and weaponry they get from the USA, but they're scared of ending up in exile or hanging from a gallows.
Edited by spitsfire on Thursday 28th November 11:05
Edited by Jimbeaux on Thursday 28th November 16:51
Jimbeaux said:
So in short, the ME would be all harmonious if it weren't for the U.S. Israel, after being attacked by five nations, cannot keep some of the land taken in said war for a buffer? But of course, if you say so.
Can't clap with one hand. IMO, Israel (& the US while we are discussing them together ) should have mounted a charm offensive many years ago, and still it is not too late.Thanksgiving rather more.
Jimbeaux said:
So in short, the ME would be all harmonious if it weren't for the U.S. Israel, after being attacked by five nations, cannot keep some of the land taken in said war for a buffer? But of course, if you say so.
Not so much, no. The land seized over the last 30 years or so isn't really a 'buffer', it's more about building settlements. If I were a Palestinian, I'd be a bit unhappy if I'd been forcibly evicted from my home because of my faith or ethnicity and it had been given to somebody else by virtue of their ethnicity. Add to that the settlers are mainly from the religious fundamentalist camp (the Arabs don't have a monopoly on crazy religious types), and it's fairly easy to see where this one goes..... Edited by Jimbeaux on Thursday 28th November 16:51
The E1 proposals are a good example of this; if the Israelis go ahead with their plans, it will be very difficult to have a viable Palestinian capital in East Jerusalem - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E1_Plan
spitsfire said:
Jimbeaux said:
So in short, the ME would be all harmonious if it weren't for the U.S. Israel, after being attacked by five nations, cannot keep some of the land taken in said war for a buffer? But of course, if you say so.
Not so much, no. The land seized over the last 30 years or so isn't really a 'buffer', it's more about building settlements. If I were a Palestinian, I'd be a bit unhappy if I'd been forcibly evicted from my home because of my faith or ethnicity and it had been given to somebody else by virtue of their ethnicity. Add to that the settlers are mainly from the religious fundamentalist camp (the Arabs don't have a monopoly on crazy religious types), and it's fairly easy to see where this one goes..... Edited by Jimbeaux on Thursday 28th November 16:51
The E1 proposals are a good example of this; if the Israelis go ahead with their plans, it will be very difficult to have a viable Palestinian capital in East Jerusalem - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E1_Plan
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff