https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documen.../iran-deal-text.pdf?wpisrc=nl_daily202&wpmm=1 "Q. ACCESS 74. Requests for access pursuant to provisions of this JCPOA will be made in good faith, with due observance of the sovereign rights of Iran, and kept to the minimum necessary to effectively implement the verification responsibilities under this JCPOA. In line with normal international safeguards practice, such requests will not be aimed at interfering with Iranian military or other national security activities, but will be exclusively for resolving concerns regarding fulfilment of the JCPOA commitments and Iran's other non-proliferation and safeguards obligations. The following procedures are for the purpose of JCPOA implementation between the E3/EU+3 and Iran and are without prejudice to the safeguards agreement and the Additional Protocol thereto. In implementing this procedure as well as other transparency measures, the IAEA will be requested to take every precaution to protect commercial, technological and industrial secrets as well as other confidential information coming to its knowledge. 75. In furtherance of implementation of the JCPOA, if the IAEA has concerns regarding undeclared nuclear materials or activities, or activities inconsistent with the JCPOA, at locations that have not been declared under the comprehensive safeguards agreement or Additional Protocol, the IAEA will provide Iran the basis for such concerns and request clarification. 76. If Iran’s explanations do not resolve the IAEA’s concerns, the Agency may request access to such locations for the sole reason to verify the absence of undeclared nuclear materials and activities or activities inconsistent with the JCPOA at such locations. The IAEA will provide Iran the reasons for access in writing and will make available relevant information. 77. Iran may propose to the IAEA alternative means of resolving the IAEA’s concerns that enable the IAEA to verify the absence of undeclared nuclear materials and activities or activities inconsistent with the JCPOA at the location in question, which should be given due and prompt consideration. 78. If the absence of undeclared nuclear materials and activities or activities inconsistent with the JCPOA cannot be verified after the implementation of the alternative arrangements agreed by Iran and the IAEA, or if the two sides are unable to reach satisfactory arrangements to verify the absence of undeclared nuclear materials and activities or activities inconsistent with the JCPOA at the specified locations within 14 days of the IAEA’s original request for access, Iran, in consultation with the members of the Joint Commission, would resolve the IAEA’s concerns through necessary means agreed between Iran and the IAEA. In the absence of an agreement, the members of the Joint Commission, by consensus or by a vote of 5 or more of its 8 members, would advise on the necessary means to resolve the IAEA's concerns. The process of consultation with, and any action by, the members of the Joint Commission would not exceed 7 days, and Iran would implement the necessary means within 3 additional days." Surely "79" explains what will happen if Iran does NOT comply within the 14 days, plus up to 7 days, and then another 3 days. What is the "or else"? Let us take a gander. "R. CENTRIFUGE COMPONENT MANUFACTURING TRANSPARENCY 79. Iran and the IAEA will take the necessary steps for containment and surveillance on centrifuge rotor tubes and bellows for 20 years." The "or else" must be located in another section of the 159 page document. I shall keep looking. Groovy times are finally here. Papers have been signed. Pics have been taken. Yay! Yay!! Kerry for President!
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/15/w...-deal-is-reached-after-long-negotiations.html http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2015/07/14/iran-deal-what-each-won-and-lost/30062147/ http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/14/politics/iran-nuclear-deal/ http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/07/14/us-iran-nuclear-idUSKCN0PM0CE20150714 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-33518524 http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/...storic-iran-nuclear-deal-150714162542420.html If only nations told the truth, kept their word, and truly strived for progress. The world just became more dangerous. Prepare thyself.
Code Pink is rabidly supporting this. Which I find bizarre. How the fudge does their reason for existence translate into support for Iran?
If your point is that the US might start a war of aggression against Iran, well, they could have anyway, so in that respect not much changed. How so.
Obama said we would have access anytime, anywhere to Iran's nuclear program. Lie. http://www.frontpagemag.com/point/2...47-access-irans-nukes-obama-daniel-greenfield This lie moves the region, and maybe the US of A, closer to war. I am tired of Iran slaughtering muslims. I am tired of America slaughtering muslims. I am tired of blood and horror. Do tell why this treaty is good. Or why it is constitutional. Or how it benefits humanity. Inquiring minds.
How would it be unconstitutional? Why would that matter to anyone but US citizens either? As for how this treaty makes the world a better place, it reduces the chance of the US attacking Iran and delegitimizes the Israeli attacks on Iran.
darkjello in case you haven't noticed this yet Boozha is a serious coolaid drinker. I mean like, he doesn't even need the sugar and water, he just downs the powder straight from the package. if you feel the need to try to explain to him how a nuclear iran =/= a better world, be my guest, but youre wasting your pixels.
So you are just implying that Iran will go for nuclear weapons without showing any evidence? Do you expect people to believe you or to laugh the crap out of you? Not that I'd mind if Iran had nuclear weapons, they didn't nuke a bunch of civilians.
Surely the idea is to bring Iran into a more healthy place as a trade partner, where there is an active dialouge with the western world, and mutual interests and goals - rather than an outlawed nation fearful (seems legitimately so) of both its neighbours and the US. An Iran with its back to the wall is much more likely to want the security of nuclear weapons than one which has a trade and diplomatic relationship with the west.
Iran sponsors many thousands of terrorists. Huge numbers of innocent peeps have been murdered by them, including some Americans. I don't trust either gvt. Our citizens have more freedom than theirs, but the gap is closing. What u suggest is logical. Again, I don't trust either side. War sucks, and it is approaching. Sad panda. Nukes in WWII was the right call.
I was avoiding this thread but I was really surprised to see this coming from you, DJ. You are always so calm and mellow. Killing that many innocent people was not the right call at all, no matter what spectrum you are using to analyze the situation. Im a tad disappointed at you.
You mourn innocent people being killed, and call killing innocent people the right call. That's slightly odd.
Yes, war is approaching. It is increasing. It is getting worse. Amazing how much damage the "JV" team called ISIS is doing. This "treaty" is a joke. I aint implying. The tyrants of Iran make the Westboro Baptist folks look like toe tickling goofballs. I expect people to use every neuron in their arsenal when evaluating the "leaders" of Iran. YOU need to prove Iran is not run by tyrants. And no, this is not a laughing matter. Nuking Japan was logical. They had already lost. Further fighting would have killed a LOT more people on both sides of the war. That makes no sense. Onus is on YOU to explain otherwise. Good day, and best of fortune. Open thyself to wisdom.
I believe he is suggesting that ISIS is a subpar militant group when compared to major military forces.
Obama responded: "The analogy we use around here sometimes, and I think is accurate, is if a jayvee team puts on Lakers uniforms that doesn’t make them Kobe Bryant." (For the nonsports fan, JV stands for junior varsity, and it usually means a high school or college's secondary team.) http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m.../what-obama-said-about-islamic-state-jv-team/
