• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Iran: We may quit nuclear deal in 'hours' if new US sanctions imposed

redfirm

Banned
(CNN)Iran's newly re-elected President Hassan Rouhani has threatened to quit the 2015 nuclear deal "within hours" if the United States continues to impose new sanctions on the country.

Rouhani issued the warning in a televised speech to Iran's parliament Tuesday, kicking off a vote-of-confidence session for nominated ministers of his second-term cabinet.
"Iran could quit the nuclear deal within hours if the US imposes more sanctions," Rouhani said, according to Iran's state-run Press TV.

"Iran has remained and will remain committed to the deal, though any breach of promise by other parties will receive appropriate responses," he added, according to Iran's semi-official MEHR news agency.


http://edition.cnn.com/2017/08/15/middleeast/rouhani-iran-nuclear-deal/index.html
 

Doikor

Member
What else would one expect Iran to do? The deal was "we won't make nukes and you won't embargo us". Not following up on ones threats/deals in international politics truly makes you look weak as the next time everyone knows they don't have to hold up on their part of the deal.
 
Looks like Bernie might've had a point and it's not exactly something I'm happy or willing to gloat about. The less nuclear states exist, the better.
 

JettDash

Junior Member
Why were new sanctions put on Iran? There was a big deal about Russia and NK, but I wondered at the time why Iran was lumped in there.

Ballistic missiles. The US (even under Obama) says they are in violation of a UN Security Council resolution banning them from making missiles that can carry nukes. Iran says their missiles can't carry nukes.
 

Maledict

Member
The USA imposed sanctions against the rest of the peace deal parties wishes to punish Iran for interfering and funding militia in the Middle East war zone. These are totally seperate from the nucleur deal, but obviously that's an impossible definition to work with.

The fact is, we strongly support other regimes in the region who are just as bad, if not worse, who are also funding militias, bombing civilians and committing gross breaches of human rights. Whilst I'm intrinsically opposed to 'what about-isms', the fact is it's fucking stupid to be singling one party out in the murderous quagmire that is the Middle East, and these sanctions make peace and a nucleur free Iran far less likely.
 
Ballistic missiles. The US (even under Obama) says they are in violation of a UN Security Council resolution banning them from making missiles that can carry nukes. Iran says their missiles can't carry nukes.

I see. I figured there had to be something as just about everyone in the Senate voted in favor of it.
 
Obama made that deal so that Iran can began developing as a country without idiots fearing about some nuclear war and the people cannot suffer.

And then Cheeto comes in and fucks it all up because why not destroy Obama's legacy.

Smh
 
Obama made that deal so that Iran can began developing as a country without idiots fearing about some nuclear war and the people cannot suffer.

And then Cheeto comes in and fucks it all up because why not destroy Obama's legacy.

Smh
This one was on Congress (not including Bernie and Rand Paul) too.
 

WhatNXt

Member
Iran need to stay the course and stick with the deal, this is exactly what the right wing warmongers in the US want.

The UK and Europe should do everything they can to prevent Trump from wrecking this deal.
 
Iran need to stay the course and stick with the deal, this is exactly what the right wing warmongers in the US want.

The UK and Europe should do everything they can to prevent Trump from wrecking this deal.
The sanctions don't help, but McMaster's shaky position in the white house hierarchy probably makes the Iranians think that the Iran War hawks will win out and what better deterrent against invasion is there than nuclear technology? Someone should tell Donald and his administration that Teddy's "big stick" quote says to speak softly, not to spew death threats while waving the big stick at everyone in sight.
 
Iran need to stay the course and stick with the deal, this is exactly what the right wing warmongers in the US want.

The UK and Europe should do everything they can to prevent Trump from wrecking this deal.

Actually, USA isolating Iran without the international community support benefits EU and Asia. Iran is a modern country, it needs trade partners like EU's automotive industry just like EU is happy to receive oil tankers from Iran.
 

Aiii

So not worth it
DiplodummiesB.jpg

Time for Trump to hit the books.
 

UberTag

Member
Why were new sanctions put on Iran? There was a big deal about Russia and NK, but I wondered at the time why Iran was lumped in there.
They were lumped in there for just this reason. To sabotage the nuclear deal.
They knew the sanctions package would get passed because of the political weight on Russian collusion.
This was a trojan horse gambit.

Iran need to stay the course and stick with the deal, this is exactly what the right wing warmongers in the US want.
Iran sees the new sanctions imposed as the US cheating the deal and punishing them further while upholding the terms of the original agreement.

They're right.
 

Xando

Member
Iran need to stay the course and stick with the deal, this is exactly what the right wing warmongers in the US want.

The UK and Europe should do everything they can to prevent Trump from wrecking this deal.
The europeans already told the US to fuck off and stick to the deal.

If they impose new sanctions the US will be going at it alone
 

Horns

Member
All those false claims that Obama went on an apology tour after winning in 2008. We might actually need to send the next president on an apology tour.
 
Why were new sanctions put on Iran? There was a big deal about Russia and NK, but I wondered at the time why Iran was lumped in there.

2 things:

Material support of Assad- Iranian military commanders and troops, funding groups like Hezbollah to fight for Assad

Ballistic missile tests.


This is the long part of goals of the Iran deal. They need to start to behave as a stable country so banks and investors see them as a viable partner. Thier continued actions as a rogue state make the sanctions relief useless.
 

Principate

Saint Titanfall
I remember in that thread most people on gaf were condemning Bernie for his objections to those Russia Sanctions which were based on this very reason.

I guess many members of gaf has a "bitch eating crackers" level disdain for the guy.
 

SRG01

Member
2 things:

Material support of Assad- Iranian military commanders and troops, funding groups like Hezbollah to fight for Assad

Ballistic missile tests.


This is the long part of goals of the Iran deal. They need to start to behave as a stable country so banks and investors see them as a viable partner. Thier continued actions as a rogue state make the sanctions relief useless.

Yeah, I don't see how Iran's actions could be seen as anything but complete conflagration of the original agreement.
 

commedieu

Banned
Ballistic missiles. The US (even under Obama) says they are in violation of a UN Security Council resolution banning them from making missiles that can carry nukes. Iran says their missiles can't carry nukes.

There is a grey area around this. As it limit's their defense capabilities. And you have to miniaturized a nuke before you can have it on a warhead.

I mean there is a debate around this, it's not so Iran is guilty bomb them now..
 

TarNaru33

Banned
This is exactly why Bernie voted against the last "Russia" sanctions bill, it included Iran into it while they are following through on their part of the deal.

Fucking Republicans... Even some Neogaf members was hating on his vote when it was a logical vote. Why mess with the deal that is actually going well?
 
This is exactly why Bernie voted against the last "Russia" sanctions bill, it included Iran into it while they are following through on their part of the deal.

Fucking Republicans... Even some Neogaf members was hating on his vote when it was a logical vote. Why mess with the deal that is actually going well?

Giving the a pass on everything isn't in the spirit of the deal. The nuclear deal has a short and long term goal. Short term is to verifiably dismantle the nuclear capability of Iran and the second is to curb their actions as a rogue state. The second part is using sanction relief to get them to integrate in the world economy. Once they get integrated it becomes harder for them to act as a rogue state because of financial penalties with investment and trade. The more they support bad actions and they undermine their own standing because banks and investors don't want to lose money with sanctions.
 

TarNaru33

Banned
Giving the a pass on everything isn't in the spirit of the deal. The nuclear deal has a short and long term goal. Short term is to verifiably dismantle the nuclear capability of Iran and the second is to curb their actions as a rogue state. The second part is using sanction relief to get them to integrate in the world economy. Once they get integrated it becomes harder for them to act as a rogue state because of financial penalties with investment and trade. The more they support bad actions and they undermine their own standing because banks and investors don't want to lose money with sanctions.

Rogue state? Just because it pushes it's influence into areas we do not want it to, does not make it a rogue state. At most the only thing we should bother worrying about is their funding of groups on our terror list.

What you said would make sense if we sanctioned many other countries (some of them allies).
 
Top Bottom