Why is there any controversy over what the Iran nuke "deal" says?

[Little-Acorn]

Obama recently announced that we have achieved an "agreement" with Iran over what they will do with their nuclear research and production facilities, their enriched fuel, etc.

The Iranian officials came out at the same time and started announcing that they had "agreed" on terms very different from what Obama had announced. Some of them directly contradicted what Obama had said.

I've seen more than one news station showing a video clip of Obama saying that Iran would stop enriching fuel, and that their most advanced reactor would be shut down. Then they cut to a clip of the Iranian official saying that Iran would go on enriching fuel, and that their most advanced reactor would be modernized and would continue operating even better than it is now.

Both parties have long histories of telling self-serving, malicious lies.

But this time, how can it be difficult to arrive at the truth?

Just get the written copy of what was agreed to, with the signatures of all parties right there at the bottom. Have language experts translate it into Farsi, English, French, and every other language spoken by everyone involved.

And then read it. It says exactly what WAS agreed to, doesn't it?

Where can we find that written declaration of the agreement? Anyone know?

[Perianne]

Obama recently announced that we have achieved an "agreement" with Iran over what they will do with their nuclear research and production facilities, their enriched fuel, etc.

The Iranian officials came out at the same time and started announcing that they had "agreed" on terms very different from what Obama had announced. Some of them directly contradicted what Obama had said.

I've seen more than one news station showing a video clip of Obama saying that Iran would stop enriching fuel, and that their most advanced reactor would be shut down. Then they cut to a clip of the Iranian official saying that Iran would go on enriching fuel, and that their most advanced reactor would be modernized and would continue operating even better than it is now.

Both parties have long histories of telling self-serving, malicious lies.

But this time, how can it be difficult to arrive at the truth?

Just get the written copy of what was agreed to, with the signatures of all parties right there at the bottom. Have language experts translate it into Farsi, English, French, and every other language spoken by everyone involved.

And then read it. It says exactly what WAS agreed to, doesn't it?

Where can we find that written declaration of the agreement? Anyone know?

Obama has told you what you need to know.

[jimnyc]

All I can find is "framework" for agreements, and outlines. I'm going to keep looking. It's kind of hard to judge any deal without reading specifics. Iran disagrees, so now it's even MORE important that we read specifics. This is the best I could find from ABC... The bold part I was reading about a few days back. The US states they get sanction relief if things are verified - where Iran stated it was an immediate lift of sanctions.

---

The United States, Iran and five other world powers announced a deal Thursday outlining limits on Iran's nuclear program so it cannot lead to atomic weapons. Negotiators now have to take that deal and shape it into a final accord by June 30. The agreement says that "nothing is agreed until everything is agreed." From the State Department:

———

Below are the key parameters of a Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA, regarding the Islamic Republic of Iran's nuclear program that were decided in Lausanne, Switzerland. These elements form the foundation upon which the final text of the JCPOA will be written between now and June 30, and reflect the significant progress that has been made in discussions between the P5+1, the European Union, and Iran. Important implementation details are still subject to negotiation, and nothing is agreed until everything is agreed. We will work to conclude the JCPOA based on these parameters over the coming months.

ENRICHMENT

—Iran has agreed to reduce by approximately two-thirds its installed centrifuges. Iran will go from having about 19,000 installed today to 6,104 installed under the deal, with only 5,060 of these enriching uranium for 10 years. All 6,104 centrifuges will be IR-1s, Iran's first-generation centrifuge.

—Iran has agreed to not enrich uranium over 3.67 percent for at least 15 years.

—Iran has agreed to reduce its current stockpile of about 10,000 kg of low-enriched uranium (LEU) to 300 kg of 3.67 percent LEU for 15 years.

—All excess centrifuges and enrichment infrastructure will be placed in IAEA monitored storage and will be used only as replacements for operating centrifuges and equipment.

—Iran has agreed to not build any new facilities for the purpose of enriching uranium for 15 years.

—Iran's breakout timeline — the time that it would take for Iran to acquire enough fissile material for one weapon — is currently assessed to be two to three months. That timeline will be extended to at least one year, for a duration of at least 10 years, under this framework.

FORDO CONVERSION

(Iran will convert its facility at Fordo so that it is no longer used to enrich uranium)

—Iran has agreed to not enrich uranium at its Fordo facility for at least 15 years.

—Iran has agreed to convert its Fordo facility so that it is used for peaceful purposes only— into a nuclear, physics, technology, research center.

—Iran has agreed to not conduct research and development associated with uranium enrichment at Fordo for 15 years.

—Iran will not have any fissile material at Fordo for 15 years.

—Almost two-thirds of Fordo's centrifuges and infrastructure will be removed. The remaining centrifuges will not enrich uranium. All centrifuges and related infrastructure will be placed under IAEA monitoring.

NATANZ FACILITY

(Iran will only enrich uranium at the Natanz facility, with only 5,060 IR-1 first-generation centrifuges for 10 years)

—Iran has agreed to only enrich uranium using its first generation (IR-1 models) centrifuges at Natanz for 10 years, removing its more advanced centrifuges.

—Iran will remove the 1,000 IR-2M centrifuges currently installed at Natanz and place them in IAEA monitored storage for 10 years.



—Iran will not use its IR-2, IR-4, IR-5, IR-6, or IR-8 models to produce enriched uranium for at least 10 years. Iran will engage in limited research and development with its advanced centrifuges, according to a schedule and parameters which have been agreed to by the P5+1.

—For 10 years, enrichment and enrichment research and development will be limited to ensure a breakout timeline of at least one year. Beyond 10 years, Iran will abide by its enrichment and enrichment R&D plan submitted to the IAEA, and pursuant to the JCPOA, under the Additional Protocol resulting in certain limitations on enrichment capacity.

INSPECTIONS AND TRANSPARENCY

—The IAEA will have regular access to all of Iran's nuclear facilities, including to Iran's enrichment facility at Natanz and its former enrichment facility at Fordo, and including the use of the most up-to-date, modern monitoring technologies.

—Inspectors will have access to the supply chain that supports Iran's nuclear program. The new transparency and inspections mechanisms will closely monitor materials and/or components to prevent diversion to a secret program.

—Inspectors will have access to uranium mines and continuous surveillance at uranium mills, where Iran produces yellowcake, for 25 years.

—Inspectors will have continuous surveillance of Iran's centrifuge rotors and bellows production and storage facilities for 20 years. Iran's centrifuge manufacturing base will be frozen and under continuous surveillance.

—All centrifuges and enrichment infrastructure removed from Fordo and Natanz will be placed under continuous monitoring by the IAEA.

—A dedicated procurement channel for Iran's nuclear program will be established to monitor and approve, on a case by case basis, the supply, sale, or transfer to Iran of certain nuclear-related and dual use materials and technology — an additional transparency measure.

—Iran has agreed to implement the Additional Protocol of the IAEA, providing the IAEA much greater access and information regarding Iran's nuclear program, including both declared and undeclared facilities.

—Iran will be required to grant access to the IAEA to investigate suspicious sites or allegations of a covert enrichment facility, conversion facility, centrifuge production facility, or yellowcake production facility anywhere in the country.

—Iran has agreed to implement Modified Code 3.1 requiring early notification of construction of new facilities.

—Iran will implement an agreed set of measures to address the IAEA's concerns regarding the Possible Military Dimensions, or PMD, of its program.

REACTORS AND REPROCESSING

—Iran has agreed to redesign and rebuild a heavy water research reactor in Arak, based on a design that is agreed to by the P5+1, which will not produce weapons grade plutonium, and which will support peaceful nuclear research and radioisotope production.

—The original core of the reactor, which would have enabled the production of significant quantities of weapons-grade plutonium, will be destroyed or removed from the country.

—Iran will ship all of its spent fuel from the reactor out of the country for the reactor's lifetime.

—Iran has committed indefinitely to not conduct reprocessing or reprocessing research and development on spent nuclear fuel.

—Iran will not accumulate heavy water in excess of the needs of the modified Arak reactor, and will sell any remaining heavy water on the international market for 15 years.



—Iran will not build any additional heavy water reactors for 15 years.

SANCTIONS

—Iran will receive sanctions relief, if it verifiably abides by its commitments.

—U.S. and E.U. nuclear-related sanctions will be suspended after the IAEA has verified that Iran has taken all of its key nuclear-related steps. If at any time Iran fails to fulfill its commitments, these sanctions will snap back into place.

—The architecture of U.S. nuclear-related sanctions on Iran will be retained for much of the duration of the deal and allow for snap-back of sanctions in the event of significant non-performance.

—All past U.N. Security Council resolutions on the Iran nuclear issue will be lifted simultaneous with the completion, by Iran, of nuclear-related actions addressing all key concerns (enrichment, Fordo, Arak, PMD and transparency).

—However, core provisions in the U.N. Security Council resolutions— those that deal with transfers of sensitive technologies and activities— will be re-established by a new U.N. Security Council resolution that will endorse the JCPOA and urge its full implementation. It will also create the procurement channel mentioned above, which will serve as a key transparency measure. Important restrictions on conventional arms and ballistic missiles, as well as provisions that allow for related cargo inspections and asset freezes, will also be incorporated by this new resolution.

—A dispute resolution process will be specified, which enables any JCPOA participant, to seek to resolve disagreements about the performance of JCPOA commitments.

—If an issue of significant non-performance cannot be resolved through that process, then all previous U.N. sanctions could be re-imposed.

—U.S. sanctions on Iran for terrorism, human rights abuses, and ballistic missiles will remain in place under the deal.

PHASING

—For 10 years, Iran will limit domestic enrichment capacity and research and development — ensuring a breakout timeline of at least one year. Beyond that, Iran will be bound by its longer-term enrichment and enrichment research and development plan it shared with the P5+1.

—For 15 years, Iran will limit additional elements of its program. For instance, Iran will not build new enrichment facilities or heavy water reactors and will limit its stockpile of enriched uranium and accept enhanced transparency procedures.

—Important inspections and transparency measures will continue well beyond 15 years. Iran's adherence to the Additional Protocol of the IAEA is permanent, including its significant access and transparency obligations. The robust inspections of Iran's uranium supply chain will last for 25 years.

—Even after the period of the most stringent limitations on Iran's nuclear program, Iran will remain a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, or NPT, which prohibits Iran's development or acquisition of nuclear weapons and requires IAEA safeguards on its nuclear program.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/text-agreement-iran-nuclear-program-30079073?page=3

[fj1200]

All I can find is "framework" for agreements, and outlines.

I think that's all it is at this point. Is this worse than no deal?

[jimnyc]

I think that's all it is at this point. Is this worse than no deal?

I dunno honestly. Leaving them with enriched uranium, all of their plants, and really not much changed from the past, IMO - I see this as only a delay - which even Obama stated himself. I suppose a delay IS better than nothing, but not if the delay somehow allows them to develop a nuke. I see no reason to believe yet that they will allow for full inspections which they have denied in the past. I think we will find out that this "regular access" will be bullshit.

[fj1200]

I dunno honestly. Leaving them with enriched uranium, all of their plants, and really not much changed from the past, IMO - I see this as only a delay - which even Obama stated himself. I suppose a delay IS better than nothing, but not if the delay somehow allows them to develop a nuke. I see no reason to believe yet that they will allow for full inspections which they have denied in the past. I think we will find out that this "regular access" will be bullshit.

What's the alternative?

[LongTermGuy]

I dunno honestly. Leaving them with enriched uranium, all of their plants, and really not much changed from the past, IMO - I see this as only a delay - which even Obama stated himself. I suppose a delay IS better than nothing, but not if the delay somehow allows them to develop a nuke. I see no reason to believe yet that they will allow for full inspections which they have denied in the past. I think we will find out that this "regular access" will be bullshit.


​`Totally agree.....after years of lying threats and deceit...a Regime for 30 years that has been trying to build a nuke....there is no reason to believe... What do these "people" respect and understand the most.....?

*Squatting down and peeing...hoping...wishing and burying ones head in the sand is not an option....as the left would have us believe...

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

What's the alternative?

Help Israel bomb their nuke sites..
But the traitor obama goes the opposite direction.
Wants to help them build their nukes while he lies to ALL of us!!! -Tyr

[jimnyc]

What's the alternative?

Either let Israel handle the threats...

Increase the sanctions ten fold, put them on their knees until they have no choice. They have a long track record of non-cooperation. If smaller sanctions don't work, cripple their ability to finance anything.

[fj1200]

Help Israel bomb their nuke sites..
But the traitor obama goes the opposite direction.
Wants to help them build their nukes while he lies to ALL of us!!! -Tyr

Thank you for the response from the loony side.


Either let Israel handle the threats...

Increase the sanctions ten fold, put them on their knees until they have no choice. They have a long track record of non-cooperation. If smaller sanctions don't work, cripple their ability to finance anything.

Sanctions are generally useless. Israel certainly does have more at stake but I'm not sure no deal is better than any deal.

[jimnyc]

Sanctions are generally useless. Israel certainly does have more at stake but I'm not sure no deal is better than any deal.

Useless when it has no teeth. Trust me, they can sanction them to their knees if they CHOOSE to. They can kill banking, shipping, industrial, imports... Of course the people will be harmed - but that's the responsibility of their government. That can be stopped very quickly when the enriched uranium is history and they don't get to dictate terms. Otherwise, let them be another North Korea as far as I'm concerned.

And as for Israel, I just think the entire world should sit back on the sidelines. Iran has made threats. If Israel chooses to lessen such a threat, I think everyone should let them handle their own issues. If "I" were Israel, jets would definitely be going all over Iran taking out any and all facilities to ensure they don't wipe Israel off the map. The only thing IMO that is stopping that is how the world would respond. I think it's more important at this time for the world to be concerned about Iran, and their continued threats. It was just last month that Khomeini the Kraphead was calling for death to America and to wipe Israel off the map. Making deals with these folks, and leaving them with the ability to perhaps continue to develop is nuclear weapon, is insane in my opinion. With that ability still intact, I don't see the deal amounting to much.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Thank you for the response from the loony side.

Really? Loony you say.
What is loony about letting Israel hit their nuke sites?
Or USA even helping Israel do it?
Are so damn dense as to not understand which nation is the ally and which is the damn enemy?
Damn sure appears that you are!
I'd say your comment was loony.
Those people only respect brute force, you people haven't a damn clue about that.
Tis why I know you are not conservative by any stretch of the imagination.
Iran's goal is to destroy Israel first, USA second.
Wake the hell up pedro... you seem to be riding along with the idiot in charge now-the bambastard. -Tyr

[fj1200]

Useless when it has no teeth. Trust me, they can sanction them to their knees if they CHOOSE to. They can kill banking, shipping, industrial, imports... Of course the people will be harmed - but that's the responsibility of their government. That can be stopped very quickly when the enriched uranium is history and they don't get to dictate terms. Otherwise, let them be another North Korea as far as I'm concerned.

And as for Israel, I just think the entire world should sit back on the sidelines. Iran has made threats. If Israel chooses to lessen such a threat, I think everyone should let them handle their own issues. If "I" were Israel, jets would definitely be going all over Iran taking out any and all facilities to ensure they don't wipe Israel off the map. The only thing IMO that is stopping that is how the world would respond. I think it's more important at this time for the world to be concerned about Iran, and their continued threats. It was just last month that Khomeini the Kraphead was calling for death to America and to wipe Israel off the map. Making deals with these folks, and leaving them with the ability to perhaps continue to develop is nuclear weapon, is insane in my opinion. With that ability still intact, I don't see the deal amounting to much.

The track record of sanctions is very poor. Yes, they harm the people but if we want change sanctions aren't going to do anything; dictatorial regimes don't particularly care about their own people.

[fj1200]

Really? Loony you say.
What is loony about letting Israel hit their nuke sites?
Or USA even helping Israel do it?
Are so damn dense as to not understand which nation is the ally and which is the damn enemy?
Damn sure appears that you are!
I'd say your comment was loony.
Those people only respect brute force, you people haven't a damn clue about that.
Tis why I know you are not conservative by any stretch of the imagination.
Iran's goal is to destroy Israel first, USA second.
Wake the hell up pedro... you seem to be riding along with the idiot in charge now-the bambastard. -Tyr

WOMPS indeed. :rolleyes: Feel free to join the stupid parade though.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

WOMPS indeed. :rolleyes: Feel free to join the stupid parade though.
Thanks for the invite but I must decline.
Seems you are marching right along banging a drum so no need for me to join in.

Have fun and be sure to sing in tune.. ;)--Tyr

[fj1200]

:blah: --Tyr

You're right there with the knuckleheads who rant the same ol' tune. The "you're not a conservative because you don't rant with us loons" drivel you do so well.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

You're right there with the knuckleheads who rant the same ol' tune. The "you're not a conservative because you don't rant with us loons" drivel you do so well.

My tune--haha
As opposed to the brilliance of your 7 awesome replies! :laugh2:-Tyr


fj's previous 7 replies. Awesome in scope and brilliance are they not?;)-Tyr


1. You're right there with the knuckleheads who rant the same ol' tune. The "you're not a
conservative because you don't rant with us loons" drivel you do so well

2. WOMPS indeed. Feel free to join the stupid parade though

3.The track record of sanctions is very poor.
Yes, they harm the people but if we want change sanctions aren't going to do anything;
dictatorial regimes don't particularly care about their own people.

4.Thank you for the response from the loony side.

5.Sanctions are generally useless. Israel certainly does have more at stake but I'm not sure
no deal is better than any deal.

6.What's the alternative?


7. I think that's all it is at this point. Is this worse than no deal?


Amigo , asking questions and insulting other comments made by me hardly qualify as
brilliant solutions presented by you. However look away from the mirror for a mere moment and see
reality.
If you were even 10% as bright as you imagined that you are you'd be blessed...
Hoss, you aren't blessed at all.. -Tyr

[fj1200]

As opposed to the brilliance of your 7 awesome replies!

Listen up WOMPS, where did I suggest that they were either brilliant or a solution?

[Drummond]

WOMPS indeed. :rolleyes: Feel free to join the stupid parade though.

... Wow. You really identified with WOMPS, didn't you, FJ ?

And I see that, here, we have an example of your being willing to see Obama's position as supportable. Obama, I take it, doesn't 'suck' in this instance ?

'Strangely', I feel no surprise ...

But as for the thread subject - with Iran, we already know they'll resort to subterfuge to win out. We therefore KNOW that, no matter what they'll end up agreeing from any talks (... and for how long HAVE they been involved with various negotiation efforts, always uselessly in terms of evidence of agreements !) .. they may still be playing everyone for fools.

It's like the Saddam situation, pre-2003 invasion. UN inspectors did their inspections, but they were always reliant on being told where to look, where to inspect, by the Ba'ath regime ! Likewise the Iran situation, now ... inspectors may go into establishments they're TOLD about and check them out. But what can they check, of locations and facilities they DON'T know about ??

Iran has a proven track record of that exact behaviour. They did in 2009, and THEN, Obama recognised it. So, what's accounting for Obama's present-day amnesia, allowing some sudden trust to be shown, where none was possible before ?

[Gunny]

Obama recently announced that we have achieved an "agreement" with Iran over what they will do with their nuclear research and production facilities, their enriched fuel, etc.

The Iranian officials came out at the same time and started announcing that they had "agreed" on terms very different from what Obama had announced. Some of them directly contradicted what Obama had said.

I've seen more than one news station showing a video clip of Obama saying that Iran would stop enriching fuel, and that their most advanced reactor would be shut down. Then they cut to a clip of the Iranian official saying that Iran would go on enriching fuel, and that their most advanced reactor would be modernized and would continue operating even better than it is now.

Both parties have long histories of telling self-serving, malicious lies.

But this time, how can it be difficult to arrive at the truth?

Just get the written copy of what was agreed to, with the signatures of all parties right there at the bottom. Have language experts translate it into Farsi, English, French, and every other language spoken by everyone involved.

And then read it. It says exactly what WAS agreed to, doesn't it?

Where can we find that written declaration of the agreement? Anyone know?

There's no controversy. Just a moron for a President who has outdone Jimmy Carter by a couple of miles.

[Gunny]

William Henry Harrison was a better President.

[Drummond]

My tune--haha
As opposed to the brilliance of your 7 awesome replies! :laugh2:-Tyr


fj's previous 7 replies. Awesome in scope and brilliance are they not?;)-Tyr




Amigo , asking questions and insulting other comments made by me hardly qualify as
brilliant solutions presented by you. However look away from the mirror for a mere moment and see
reality.
If you were even 10% as bright as you imagined that you are you'd be blessed...
Hoss, you aren't blessed at all.. -Tyr:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:

[Drummond]

.... where did I suggest that they were either brilliant or a solution?:laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:

[fj1200]

... Wow. You really identified with WOMPS...

Apparently I'm the only who can correctly identify it you idiot.

[avatar4321]

Because there is no deal.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Because there is no deal.
True. No deal as in the terms(lies) the bamboy is giving us but
they did strike a deal we are being denied knowledge of. Obama agreed to give them cover and to use ALL his influence and power to try to stop Israel from striking their nuke sites.
Additionally the bampunk agreed to lift sanctions, including billions being freed to finance their future nuke bomb making ventures. And obama then gets to save face by announcing the lying shit that he did..
Yet again the ffing traitor lies to the nation as he weakens it..
There was a deal alright--just one that we are not privy to..-Tyr

[aboutime]

If anyone bothers to read the responses from Iran, or listened to their rhetoric over the last several days. The truth is. THERE IS NO DEAL. None at all, other than Obama pretending to be proud of his NON-accomplishment that his BS Legacy, designed to further FOOL the Uninformed, Uneducated Americans who voted for him Twice...will still fall for in the future.

Obama's only accomplishment with IRAN, in any shape, or form; has been to Appease, and Apologize to them for WE THE TERRIBLE CITIZENS OF SATAN.