Iran wants to stall for time...

Jocko said:
Oh? And what "reality of the negotiations" has been widely reported this week? I find it amusing that apparently I'm the one who's misapprehending the realities. I know the US is involved, but the effort has been led by Britain, France and Germany. This is not in dispute.

Don't get all defensive, I'm merely acknowledging that Europe finally got its way on resolving an international weapons crisis. We live with our decisions, so must you.
Click to expand...

Sorry - I just can't follow your logic or point.
 
Darat said:
Those negotiations had stopped the progression of any practical steps to continue their nuclear program so they at least bought the world some more time before this became a major problem.
Click to expand...

By the way, those negotiations have bought exactly nothing. They rented time. Americans take a greater interest in owning our peace of mind whenever possible.

Why are you so certain that Europe bought time... and Iran didn't?
 
Jocko said:
Screw 'em. It's Europe's problem. Let them handle it without our imperialistic, pre-emptive hegemony-based involvement. No blood for oil, and all that.
Click to expand...

I think you will find it is Israel's problem initialy. With luck all that support the french gave them may be about to pay off.
 
Jocko said:
By the way, those negotiations have bought exactly nothing. They rented time. Americans take a greater interest in owning our peace of mind whenever possible.
Click to expand...

Still don't understand this - the USA has been negotiating with Iran for decades, even helped start their nuclear capability (granted decades ago). Why has this suddenly become "our" fault?

Jocko said:
By the way, why are you so certain that Europe bought time... and Iran didn't?
Click to expand...

Because that is what USA and EU intelligence agencies and so on have been reporting i.e. that they'd stopped their development of nuclear capabilities.

I still do not follow your logic.

What has happened in the last few years is that countries like the USA, UK , France, Germany, Russia and so on have been involved in trying via negotiation to prevent Iran developing or obtaining nuclear weapons.

Iran obviously states it is still into trying to develop nuclear weapons but has now restarted research and construction plans that could lead to nuclear weapons or nuclear power.

Now you are apparently saying that the USA, UK, France, Germany and so on have wasted all this time.

Therefore I am assuming that you hold that military action should have been taken against Iran sometime in the past (presumably at least two years ago). At what date should this action have happened, how have you determined that (which can't be hindsight) and who should have undertaken this military action and why didn't they?
 
Ed said:
What is the value of "buying time"?
Click to expand...


Because they are madmen and the longer we can prevent them having nuclear weapons the better!

(ETA) And it is normally cheaper in terms of life and money if you can achieve your aimes with talking rather then with military intervention.
 
Last edited:
Ed said:
So, you put off the inevitable and you buy life? Don't see that.
Click to expand...

Death appears to be inevitable. Putting it off is mearly buying time otherwise know as life.
 
Ed said:
"Longer" implies that they will eventually.
Click to expand...

Well I can't tell the future but consider if a regime change was to happen (internally triggered) and a less nutty group took over who put store in say economic growth with the country then for destroying Israel. Wouldn't it have been worth while "stalling for time"?
 
Darat said:
Well I can't tell the future but consider if a regime change was to happen (internally triggered) and a less nutty group took over who put store in say economic growth with the country then for destroying Israel. Wouldn't it have been worth while "stalling for time"?
Click to expand...

I seem to recall that in the lase round of elections (a term that might be open to argument in the Iran case) the west was surprised at the showing of the hard liners thruout the country. You recall that? If my memory is reliable, then it suggests that an internal change is sometihng of a forlorn hope.
 
Ed said:
I seem to recall that in the lase round of elections (a term that might be open to argument in the Iran case) the west was surprised at the showing of the hard liners thruout the country. You recall that? If my memory is reliable, then it suggests that an internal change is sometihng of a forlorn hope.
Click to expand...

I'm not suggesting it is going to happen or even within the realms of likelihood but you asked what is the benefit of buying time and I was giving an illustration why a couple of years ago it may have been a good idea to go down the talk route. (If you remember just the other day I agreed with you that we - by we I mean the sensible countries have a bleak decision to make - do we allow them to continue to try and develop their weapons or use force to stop them?)
 
Darat said:
I'm not suggesting it is going to happen or even within the realms of likelihood but you asked what is the benefit of buying time and I was giving an illustration why a couple of years ago it may have been a good idea to go down the talk route. (If you remember just the other day I agreed with you that we - by we I mean the sensible countries have a bleak decision to make - do we allow them to continue to try and develop their weapons or use force to stop them?)
Click to expand...

What disturbs me is your unflinching assumption that time was "bought" for some greater reason, and not simply another example of European wishful thinking a-la Chamberlain... cuz that's sure what it looks like from here.

And before you try to tar the US with the same yellow brush, consider which two parties have publically stated that "all options are on the table" - the US and Israel.
 
Darat said:
Jocko - your response bears no relation to the reality of the negotiations that have been going on for years that have included EU countries, the USA and even Russia.

Those negotiations had stopped the progression of any practical steps to continue their nuclear program so they at least bought the world some more time before this became a major problem.
Click to expand...

I suppose that's one way of looking at it.

Another way would be to say that Iran pretending to participate in "negotiations" has allowed them to advance their program without military intervention.
 
Jocko said:
What disturbs me is your unflinching assumption that time was "bought" for some greater reason, and not simply another example of European wishful thinking a-la Chamberlain... cuz that's sure what it looks like from here.
Click to expand...

Then can you explain why the USA was involved in these negotiations?

Jocko said:
And before you try to tar the US with the same yellow brush, consider which two parties have publically stated that "all options are on the table" - the US and Israel.
Click to expand...

Any chance you will answer the questions I put to you?

Any chance of supplying some evidence to back up your claims and arguments?
 
Mycroft said:
I suppose that's one way of looking at it.

Another way would be to say that Iran pretending to participate in "negotiations" has allowed them to advance their program without military intervention.
Click to expand...

Any evidence for this hypothesis?
 
Darat said:
Any evidence for this hypothesis?
Click to expand...

Sure; a couple hundred news articles over the past couple years showing their relentless pursuit of technology capable of building a bomb over the strongest objections of everyone involved.

I and others have started thread after thread on the subject.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom