Iran: No deal reached, only framework; Iran can still enrich

So what about countries like Taiwan or Cuba? Where many countries including US allies, and the US itself, don't recognize their legal existence?

This is the the type of tangential arguments that make it impossible to actually do diplomacy. Whether Iran recognizes Israel or not doesn't really matter that much. In fact Israel conducts negotiations all the time with countries that don't recognize it's existence.

 

I think it is pretty obvious that most young Iranians loathe the Mullahs but as long as the hardliners can point to external enemies it keeps them in power. I'm fully convinced that if Iran is opened more to the world that there will be some major changes. I don't think Iran will end up being a US ally but I don't think it will continue as the repressive Islamic state that it is.

 

These negotiations have been going on for a very long time - no one ever put that in the mix and it would be absurd to just throw that in at the very end of negotiations. Israel is simply trying to do that now to scuttle the deal - they didn't even mention it earlier. This is about stopping Iran from getting a nuclear bomb - not solving every disagreement anyone has with them.

The only reason to add that to the deal is if the goal is to ensure there is no deal. It would be like negotiating an NBA deal for $10 million a year and at the very end, the player demanding 10% ownership in the team also.

 

No, because the whole issue of preventing Iran from having a nuclear bomb is, of course, linked to whom they would theoretically use it against. And who would that be? Oh yes, the country they have repeatedly stated they would like to see wiped off the map. So them recognizing that country's right to exist would go a long way towards trusting them that their interest is indeed not in building a nuclear bomb.

 

I'm marveling at ATW's bold-faced lie that I have ever claimed to be an "expert" about Mosaddegh (note that in a previous post, I specifically said I don't claim to be an expert on Iran).

I'm fairly sure that a search would reveal that there haven't been any in-depth discussions of the history of Iran on this BBS, which is where such a reference would occur.

I guess when you don't have any actual, factual argument, lies have to suffice.

 

Really? They are going to bomb Israel and put Palestine at risk from the fall out?

Iran isn't going to nuke Israel. They would sooner attack the Saudis than Israel.

 

This is obviously a desperate late reach by Netanyahu who will say anything at all, no matter how uncredible or untruthful. It's what he does.

 

Louie Gohmert and John McCain come directly to mind, though I'm sure there are others.

 

One is a member of the House of Representatives and another is a Senator, how exactly are those people NOT members of the U.S. government?

 

What does it matter if they recognize Israel's right to exist if they don't have the capability to do anything about Israel's existence. While it would be nice for them to recognize Israel's existence that really doesn't mean anything unless they are looking to normalize trade relations, have tourists or etc...

Further this is an area where Israel's interests aren't necessarily the US. Israel isn't Iran's only enemy. At the moment Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States are far larger rivals to Iran than Israel is. Those countries are also US allies and and one's where the US has substantial interest in. The US has far more to be concerned with Iran getting the bomb as a threat to them than just whether Iran recognizes Israel. Also note that Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States don't recognize Israel yet that hasn't stopped the US from being allied with them.

 

Let's not forget that Israel has a top of the line air defense system, nukes of their own and a first strike capability that Iran doesn't have.

Also if Iran did nuke Israel, Tehran would be smoking crater not too long after from US bombs.

 

Exactly....Iran would be wiped off the map if they tried to nuke Israel.

 

http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showpost.php?p=9665501&postcount=299

 

Well, yes, this was why I asked the question whom they would sooner attack earlier in the thread. But while they have said they want to see Israel wiped off the map, they haven't openly said any such thing about Saudi Arabia.

 

This.

Look at the physical size and location of Israel in relation to the Palestinian lands. It's basically the outskirts of Jerusalem. Nukes are self-defeating in the confrontation over land rights.

 

No one really cares about Palestinians, least of all other Arabs. They've been using them since day one setting them up to suffer as an excuse to go to war with Israel.

 

They are currently conducting a proxy battle against the Saudis in Yemen. The Saudis are pretty clearly attacking Iran with their oil policy imo.

They aren't some blood thirsty movie villians ATW. They aren't just going to arbitrarily use nukes against Israel. That is just a strange argument and if you believe it then you are reading too much propaganda.

Also you were complaining about Iran not recognizing Israel's right to exist when the US and most of the Western world doesn't recognize Palestine as a state.

 

If it was that important, then someone should have thought to bring that up sometime in the last year or however long the negotiations have been going on. None of the partners involved - nor Israel - considered that relevant during the entirety of the negotiation. It would be ridiculous to try to add that on after they spent a year developing a detailed, balanced framework that everyone was comfortable with. It's basically openly stating that the whole negotiation was a farce and not done in good faith.

 

I don't think that's the whole issue. It might not even be the #1 issue.

The #1 issue might be a nuclear arm race. If Iran get a bomb, Saudi Arabia will follow, and so on. That region full of nukes is a much scarier situation (from the US POV) than Israel potentially being targeted. Of course, the goal of a no nuclear bomb Iran solve both issues, but it doesn't mean they are of equal weighting.

 

This is absolutely untrue. To say that Israel did not consider its right to exist relevant is downright laughable.

What is not in good faith is this:

http://www.timesofisrael.com/iran-militia-chief-destroying-israel-nonnegotiable/