Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
49 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

Your boy shouldn't have torn up the nuclear deal that Iran was abiding by then.

You’re adamant about this. Do you have evidence Iran was in fact complying?  

Posted
4 minutes ago, Rex Kramer said:

You’re adamant about this. Do you have evidence Iran was in fact complying?  

They were complying to some extent. Part of the deal was allowing inspections by the IAEA. Those inspections were taking place and the IAEA was issuing quarterly reports. You can access them here: https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/focus/iran/iaea-and-iran-iaea-board-reports

Here are some specific examples from one of the quarterly reports:

Quote

D. Transparency Measures  21. Iran has continued to permit the Agency to use on-line enrichment monitors and electronic seals which communicate their status within nuclear sites to Agency inspectors, and to facilitate the automated collection of Agency measurement recordings registered by installed measurement devices (para. 67.1). Iran has issued long-term visas to Agency inspectors designated for Iran as requested by the Agency, provided proper working space for the Agency at nuclear sites and facilitated the use of working space at locations near nuclear sites in Iran (para. 67.2).  22. Iran has continued to permit the Agency to monitor – through measures agreed with Iran, including containment and surveillance measures – that all uranium ore concentrate (UOC) produced in Iran or obtained from any other source is transferred to the Uranium Conversion Facility (UCF) at Esfahan (para. 68). Iran also provided the Agency with all information necessary to enable the Agency to verify the production of UOC and the inventory of UOC produced in Iran or obtained from any other source (para. 69). 

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
2 minutes ago, Rex Kramer said:

So they were complying 7 years ago, but prior to the attacks were shown to not be complying. Thank you for the 10-second effort to give Fantana something to chew on. 

I mean... we have been withdrawn from the agreement for nearly a decade. Fantana's point was correct. You can't say it wasn't complying when the agreement was torn up. There was nothing to comply with. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
Just now, Rex Kramer said:

So they were complying 7 years ago, but prior to the attacks were shown to not be complying. Thank you for the 10-second effort to give Fantana something to chew on. 

What's wrong with your reading comprehension?

Fantana said that Iran was complying with the previous deal that got torn up by Trump 1.0. After that deal got torn up (as of yesterday at least), they were no longer complying. Fantana was NOT saying they were still in compliance as of yesterday.

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
4 minutes ago, Rex Kramer said:

You’re adamant about this. Do you have evidence Iran was in fact complying?  

IAEA Director General's Introductory Remarks at Press Conference | IAEA

Yukiya Amano (IAEA head) confirmed that Iran was complying with the terms of the JCPOA in March of 2018, Trump withdrew the US from the deal 2 months later, insisting (without offering any evidence) that Iran was not holding to its commitments, which later led to Iran actually moving away from its commitments even though they initially remained compliant with the deal for some time.

In response, the Trump administration attempted to unilaterally initiate the snapback mechanism to reimpose the UN sanctions, which was, of course, rejected by the other signatories and the UN security council because the United States had stupidly withdrawn itself from the agreement at the behest of its idiot manchild president and in the process undermined both our own credibility and the legitimacy of the snapback.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
14 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

The salvo they launched was quite a bit smaller than what they did earlier. Are they conserving missiles? Are their launch capabilities much degraded? Mixture of both? We likely won’t know from media alone. 

We'd need a breakdown on what was actually used. A smaller number of missiles doesn't mean a less committed attack. Looking at the footage, they appeared to use a significant amount of the good stuff. 

Posted (edited)

Unless I'm missing something, the article posted says they were in compliance with whatever was left of the deal after trump withdrew until yesterday and/or other deals that were in place. 

https://www.reuters.com/world/china/iaea-board-declares-iran-breach-non-proliferation-duties-diplomats-say-2025-06-12/

"The U.N. nuclear watchdog's 35-nation Board of Governors declared Iran in breach of its non-proliferation obligations on Thursday for the first time in almost 20 years, raising the prospect of reporting it to the U.N. Security Council."

Edited by 'stache
  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Dahobbs said:

I mean... we have been withdrawn from the agreement for nearly a decade. Fantana's point was correct. You can't say it wasn't complying when the agreement was torn up. There was nothing to comply with. 

 

1 minute ago, bolverk said:

What's wrong with your reading comprehension?

Fantana said that Iran was complying with the previous deal that got torn up by Trump 1.0. After that deal got torn up (as of yesterday at least), they were no longer complying. Fantana was NOT saying they were still in compliance as of yesterday.

 

Got it. Did Trump have reason to tear up the 2015 agreement?  I read the whole article and it suggests he did, but I don’t know and have no interest in defending his actions (ever). Also, I have no idea about the efficacy of the IAEA. 

  • Fuck You 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Rex Kramer said:

 

Got it. Did Trump have reason to tear up the 2015 agreement?  I read the whole article and it suggests he did, but I don’t know and have no interest in defending his actions (ever). Also, I have no idea about the efficacy of the IAEA. 

you seem pretty certain for someone who admits he doesn't know and has no idea.

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Drool 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Rex Kramer said:

 

Got it. Did Trump have reason to tear up the 2015 agreement?  I read the whole article and it suggests he did, but I don’t know and have no interest in defending his actions (ever). Also, I have no idea about the efficacy of the IAEA. 

We have no way of knowing. He claimed he did. The reports from the IAEA that was actually doing the inspections indicated compliance. Again, those reports were done quarterly and you can read all of them. The information is pretty detailed and specific. 

Posted
1 hour ago, Brian Fantana said:

Your boy shouldn't have torn up the nuclear deal that Iran was abiding by then.

Haha. "My boy". So predictable. Someone could disagree with you about their favorite flavor of soda and you'd claim "Trumper!" Get fucked. 

Posted
Just now, Deej said:

Haha. "My boy". So predictable. Someone could disagree with you about their favorite flavor of soda and you'd claim "Trumper!" Get fucked. 

I was kidding about that part, I know you're not a Trumper.

But, I mean, if you don't like Wild Cherry Pepsi Zero then fuck you honestly.

Posted
1 minute ago, elfenix said:

you seem pretty certain for someone who admits he doesn't know and has no idea.

No, I’m not certain at all and am asking questions. 

1 minute ago, Dahobbs said:

We have no way of knowing. He claimed he did. The reports from the IAEA that was actually doing the inspections indicated compliance. Again, those reports were done quarterly and you can read all of them. The information is pretty detailed and specific. 

The reports themselves weren’t what I was wondering about. This verbiage from the article suggests France and Trump had questions about the deal in place: “Le Drian, whose country signed the Iran deal along with Britain, Germany, China, Russia and the United States under then-President Barack Obama, said Tehran should be ready to negotiate on its future nuclear plans, its ballistic missile arsenal and its role in wars in Syria and Yemen.

Those issues were not covered by the 2015 deal and Trump has cited this as a major reason for pulling Washington out of it.”
1 minute ago, Brian Fantana said:

He just wanted to take some shots at me I guess who the fuck knows

My bad. Fantana, I’m sorry. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, Rex Kramer said:

 

Got it. Did Trump have reason to tear up the 2015 agreement?  I read the whole article and it suggests he did, but I don’t know and have no interest in defending his actions (ever). Also, I have no idea about the efficacy of the IAEA. 

I'm not going to do any more of your homework. Educate yourself rather than make definitive, blustering statements next time.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Drool 1
Posted
Just now, Rex Kramer said:

My bad. Fantana, I’m sorry. 

It's fine man it just gets tiresome.

1 minute ago, Deej said:

Fuck Pepsi. You'd have to be a psychopath to enjoy that stuff.

Honestly was never a Pepsi guy but the Wild Cherry Zero Sugar version for some reason tastes really good to me.

Posted
2 minutes ago, bolverk said:

I'm not going to do any more of your homework. Educate yourself rather than make definitive, blustering statements next time.

I made no such definitive statement. I asked for a link.  You provided. My reading comprehension was off. You called me on it. Thanks for the 10 seconds of homework for me. 

Posted
11 minutes ago, Rex Kramer said:

 

Got it. Did Trump have reason to tear up the 2015 agreement?  I read the whole article and it suggests he did, but I don’t know and have no interest in defending his actions (ever). Also, I have no idea about the efficacy of the IAEA. 

Blek president bad

  • Hook 'Em 8
  • Fuck You 1
Posted
None of these events are happening in a vacuum. Since 10/7 Israel has been on an absolute run, and has executed precisely on their objectives (ranging from ethnic cleansing to decapitation of Hizballah and Iranian leadership). They may have the most effective military planners in the world at the moment, at least judging by the skins on the wall. 

The Iranians also have real skins on the wall, ceiling, floor, building across the street…
Posted

Yes, the country that is known for sponsoring terrorism worldwide totally was NOT up to no good and totally could not have other facilities and labs doing research and god knows what. They definitely told that organization everything and were completely forth coming. That is what terrorists and enemies of the West do.

Y'all would rather Iran be in the right that admit that youre fucking naive. Cloak room people going to cloak room.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck You 2
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, WineGuy69 said:

Yes, the country that is known for sponsoring terrorism worldwide totally was NOT up to no good and totally could not have other facilities and labs doing research and god knows what. They definitely told that organization everything and were completely forth coming. That is what terrorists and enemies of the West do.

Y'all would rather Iran be in the right that admit that youre fucking naive. Cloak room people going to cloak room.

Surely you think more regulation of their nuclear programs was better than less, no? Also, who is saying Iran is in the right?

Edited by Hank_Hill
  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Drool 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Chopper said:

So far I've seen a couple experts who say that at most these bombs will set Iran's nuclear program back by a few months at most and they'll retain the facilities and expertise to develop nuclear weapons. If their nuclear program is not permanently destroyed or set back several years at minimum this op will be a failure.

I've not seen that. Link?

Posted
26 minutes ago, WineGuy69 said:

Yes, the country that is known for sponsoring terrorism worldwide totally was NOT up to no good and totally could not have other facilities and labs doing research and god knows what. They definitely told that organization everything and were completely forth coming. That is what terrorists and enemies of the West do.

Y'all would rather Iran be in the right that admit that youre fucking naive. Cloak room people going to cloak room.

No one has said that.

Posted (edited)
50 minutes ago, Hank_Hill said:

Surely you think more regulation of their nuclear programs was better than less, no? Also, who is saying Iran is in the right?

Relative to Trump doing anything right (and I’m not at all saying he did here)?  99% of the board dude.

Any conversation about anything (foreign policy in this case) devolves into Trump hatred. Granted this has Trump squarely in it, but this is a norm that is applied across Surlyhorns and general social media.  Basically Brisket has successfully cloned himself multiple times. 

Edited by Rex Kramer
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 hour ago, WineGuy69 said:

Yes, the country that is known for sponsoring terrorism worldwide totally was NOT up to no good and totally could not have other facilities and labs doing research and god knows what. They definitely told that organization everything and were completely forth coming. That is what terrorists and enemies of the West do.

Y'all would rather Iran be in the right that admit that youre fucking naive. Cloak room people going to cloak room.

What the fuck are you talking about, dude? You think the IAEA was just taking to Iran on the phone and taking their word for it? 

They had 24/7 access to all of their facilities and there was extremely invasive surveillance and monitoring equipment in place that was closely monitored 24/7. 

It was only after Trump destroyed the deal that Iran began to reduce its compliance with the IAEA.

Why even post this if you clearly don't have the first clue about any of the relevant details of the conversation?

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, WineGuy69 said:

Yes, the country that is known for sponsoring terrorism worldwide totally was NOT up to no good and totally could not have other facilities and labs doing research and god knows what. They definitely told that organization everything and were completely forth coming. That is what terrorists and enemies of the West do.

Y'all would rather Iran be in the right that admit that youre fucking naive. Cloak room people going to cloak room.

This didn’t happen in a vacuum.  This week Netanyahu barely survived a no-confidence vote only because he caved to the ultra-orthodox members of his party over mandatory military service and granted them a continued exemption, which pissed off a lot of Israelis because they are hurting for manpower in the armed forces.  His administration was on the ropes and had he not caved he loses power.

So he needs a win/diversion, and don’t think that observers are wondering if this is it.

The picture will become more clear if this starts to wind down rapidly.

Edited by atomheartbevo
  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
1 hour ago, Rex Kramer said:

Relative to Trump doing anything right (and I’m not at all saying he did here)?  99% of the board dude.

Any conversation about anything (foreign policy in this case) devolves into Trump hatred. Granted this has Trump squarely in it, but this is a norm that is applied across Surlyhorns and general social media.  Basically Brisket has successfully cloned himself multiple times. 

What? Trump fucking up allowing Iran to continue its shittiness with less oversight =\= Iran right Trump wrong

Posted

This whole bit is peak fucking @Rex Kramer. Just before recent Israeli strikes:

Surly posters: It's a bummer that the deal prohibiting Iran's development is no longer in effect. It seems like they were complying withe deal before Trump cancelled it.

Rex: You are all a bunch if Irani apologists, there's no way Iran was complying, the whole system is out of order!

Surly posters: We are not apologizing, just pointing out there there is no longer an agreement for them to stop developing nuclear weapons.

Rex: whatever, Israel has attacked, no longer relevant.

... attacks begin ...

Surly posters: Continue to say that Trump struck down the deal banning Iran from developing nuclear weapons

Rex: They weren't complying and stop blaming Trump

Surly posters: Here's evidence they were complying

Rex: I didn't know about that, but stop blaming Trump

Surly posters: Here is the year that Trump struck down the deal

Rex: whatever, I'm just tired of Trump being blamed

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Posted
2 minutes ago, Serak The Preparer said:

This whole bit is peak fucking @Rex Kramer. Just before recent Israeli strikes:

Surly posters: It's a bummer that the deal prohibiting Iran's development is no longer in effect. It seems like they were complying withe deal before Trump cancelled it.

Rex: You are all a bunch if Irani apologists, there's no way Iran was complying, the whole system is out of order!

Surly posters: We are not apologizing, just pointing out there there is no longer an agreement for them to stop developing nuclear weapons.

Rex: whatever, Israel has attacked, no longer relevant.

... attacks begin ...

Surly posters: Continue to say that Trump struck down the deal banning Iran from developing nuclear weapons

Rex: They weren't complying and stop blaming Trump

Surly posters: Here's evidence they were complying

Rex: I didn't know about that, but stop blaming Trump

Surly posters: Here is the year that Trump struck down the deal

Rex: whatever, I'm just tired of Trump being blamed

 

Other wino dipshit: Who can trust the IAEA, huh? 

Posted
2 hours ago, WineGuy69 said:

Yes, the country that is known for sponsoring terrorism worldwide totally was NOT up to no good and totally could not have other facilities and labs doing research and god knows what. They definitely told that organization everything and were completely forth coming. That is what terrorists and enemies of the West do.

Y'all would rather Iran be in the right that admit that youre fucking naive. Cloak room people going to cloak room.

And you would rather just make shit up rather than rely on actual factual information that has already been provided. 

Posted
53 minutes ago, Serak The Preparer said:

This whole bit is peak fucking @Rex Kramer. Just before recent Israeli strikes:

Surly posters: It's a bummer that the deal prohibiting Iran's development is no longer in effect. It seems like they were complying withe deal before Trump cancelled it.

Rex: You are all a bunch if Irani apologists, there's no way Iran was complying, the whole system is out of order!

Surly posters: We are not apologizing, just pointing out there there is no longer an agreement for them to stop developing nuclear weapons.

Rex: whatever, Israel has attacked, no longer relevant.

... attacks begin ...

Surly posters: Continue to say that Trump struck down the deal banning Iran from developing nuclear weapons

Rex: They weren't complying and stop blaming Trump

Surly posters: Here's evidence they were complying

Rex: I didn't know about that, but stop blaming Trump

Surly posters: Here is the year that Trump struck down the deal

Rex: whatever, I'm just tired of Trump being blamed

Hey man, he's JUST asking questions, GAWRSH!!

  • Fuck You 1
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, Chopper said:

OTOH people have been saying Iran is "close" to having a nuclear bomb for years and they haven't taken that step. 

 

image.gif.cc8c13b6d05ffb5f454a4c0f700b68aa.gif

 

Plutonium bombs like Fat Man and the Gadget require extremely intricate calculations and everything has to go perfectly to detonate. Gun type designs like Little Boy are very simple and don't require advance testing to determine whether they will work. It's not super efficient, but if they already have the enriched uranium, they can easily make a bomb. Dirty bombs are even easier.

The world's lackluster response to Russia's invasion of Ukraine made it clear, the only way to protect yourself against a nuclear power is to posses nukes yourself. 

If Iran doesn't currently have nukes, they've been massively incentivized to build them as soon as possible. 

 

5 hours ago, BurntEyes said:

It's better than Mr Pibb!!! 

Virtually anything is better than Dr. Pepper's high school dropout brother. 

 

  

Edited by Pods
  • Haha 1
Posted
7 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

Thats right you commie Mr Pibb loving pinko! Take your pro-Pibb bullshit to the CR. 

Keep supporting the patriarchy you knuckle-dragger - and do continue to completely ignore Mrs. Pibb’s contributions to society. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
2 hours ago, Serak The Preparer said:

This whole bit is peak fucking @Rex Kramer. Just before recent Israeli strikes:

Surly posters: It's a bummer that the deal prohibiting Iran's development is no longer in effect. It seems like they were complying withe deal before Trump cancelled it.

Rex: You are all a bunch if Irani apologists, there's no way Iran was complying, the whole system is out of order!

Surly posters: We are not apologizing, just pointing out there there is no longer an agreement for them to stop developing nuclear weapons.

Rex: whatever, Israel has attacked, no longer relevant.

... attacks begin ...

Surly posters: Continue to say that Trump struck down the deal banning Iran from developing nuclear weapons

Rex: They weren't complying and stop blaming Trump

Surly posters: Here's evidence they were complying

Rex: I didn't know about that, but stop blaming Trump

Surly posters: Here is the year that Trump struck down the deal

Rex: whatever, I'm just tired of Trump being blamed

Gonna disagree with your police work there, Lou. I don’t care if anyone blames Trump. I don’t at all and hate him. But good timing on the post with the slicing and dicing of threads, totally out of context, as immamac does all the time. 

Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Brian Fantana said:

What the fuck are you talking about, dude? You think the IAEA was just taking to Iran on the phone and taking their word for it? 

They had 24/7 access to all of their facilities and there was extremely invasive surveillance and monitoring equipment in place that was closely monitored 24/7. 

It was only after Trump destroyed the deal that Iran began to reduce its compliance with the IAEA.

Why even post this if you clearly don't have the first clue about any of the relevant details of the conversation?

And you think Iran is completely above board. This isnt about right vs left. This is about your belief that you think Iran is going to be honest with people that they sponsor terrorism against. 

Edited by WineGuy69
  • Fuck You 3
Posted
4 minutes ago, WineGuy69 said:

And you think Iran is completely above board.

Of course not.  But is it not better to have an agreement that provides for inspection, monitoring, and sanctions for non-compliance or nothing at all?

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted

The best plan is to eradicate our enemies. People like you are why Europe is failing as mass migration breaks the economy. Progressivism has broken the system and the reactive wave is going to change things. Glad you got a decade of transgender rights though!

  • Fuck You 7
Posted
13 minutes ago, WineGuy69 said:

The best plan is to eradicate our enemies. People like you are why Europe is failing as mass migration breaks the economy. Progressivism has broken the system and the reactive wave is going to change things. Glad you got a decade of transgender rights though!

You're not even a little ashamed to be drunk shitposting on your 37th user name on a Father's Day weekend Friday night?

  • Drool 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, aggie08 said:

You're not even a little ashamed to be drunk shitposting on your 37th user name on a Father's Day weekend Friday night?

No way this dude has kids or a father that love him. So, just a normal Friday night.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...