Awol Posted November 12, 2013 Share Posted November 12, 2013 Re your previous comments, nice to see you resorting to the personal abuse. You are the one that brought Labour into this thread, so you can certainly expect people to comment re the obvious obsession that right wing VT'ers seem to have there. Also I notice that you fail to acknowledge the error in your statement especially in respect to the Tory party opposition of the time being very instrumental in getting through the Iraq war debate, but I know that often comes under the "head in the sand" and "it didn't happen" mentality. Please, quote the personal abuse so I can report myself to the MOD's for a damn good thrashing. If you don't I'll assume you know there was no personal abuse and your comment was simply PFE. About the Tory votes for Iraq, the answer was implicit in the reference to the dodgy dossier. However to be clear (not that it worked last time) the "evidence" presented to Parliament was cooked, as almost every sentient being in Britain now recognises. The Government of the day deliberately misrepresented the information available to build a totally false prospectus for invading Iraq, that being Saddam's possession of WMD. No doubt you will insist that the Tories knew about this despicable behaviour, but given the fact that Blair concealed it from a good number of his own Cabinet I see no reason to assume the Tories or anyone else outside his inner circle of liars and charlatans knew exactly what he was up to. If the Tories had known the truth maybe they would still have backed Blair, who knows? Certainly not you. However given the fact Blair lied to the entire country I guess we'll never know and it's one for the alternate history thread... Re this thread topic, the rhetoric re the Iranian's is now becoming very interesting. There seems to be a lot of "getting ready" from the west business leaders for when a deal is struck that removes the sanctions placed on Iran. Maybe the whole deal stalling was more about who could get the most money? No, the real driver is that the Saudi and Israeli lobbies really don't want Iran to have any nuclear capability, even civil power. The Iranians have a right to develop nuclear technology for peaceful purposes and denying them this is not only wrong, it will eventually lead to war. Ahmedoinjihad has now gone and there is a chance to slowly bring Iran back into the international fold. The Persians are trying to meet us halfway and kicking dirt in their faces to appease the Wahhabi sponsors of Al Qaeda is simply f'in dumb. Step forward Monsieur Hollande, France's answer to Frank Spencer. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted November 12, 2013 Share Posted November 12, 2013 ..................... No, the real driver is that the Saudi and Israeli lobbies really don't want Iran to have any nuclear capability, even civil power. The Iranians have a right to develop nuclear technology for peaceful purposes and denying them this is not only wrong, it will eventually lead to war. Ahmedoinjihad has now gone and there is a chance to slowly bring Iran back into the international fold. The Persians are trying to meet us halfway and kicking dirt in their faces to appease the Wahhabi sponsors of Al Qaeda is simply f'in dumb. Step forward Monsieur Hollande, France's answer to Frank Spencer. Ignoring the other stuff because I neither agree with it nor do I want to spend even more time showing where you are wrong again, its interesting that you dismiss the idea of the west business getting "ready" for a deal with Iran. Interesting because a lot of the media are reporting it, interesting because a lot of business people are getting ready for it and interesting because there are some "big bucks" to be made and past performances certainty does show business to be not really worried where the monies come from. There is obviously a political desire from certain other states re Iran and Nuclear capabilities and a rarity I know but I agree with you re Iran certainly do have rights as do others. Re France I see the comments now coming from all concerned that it was not them that stopped the deal is being dismissed? But is it a case of its a French bloke with Left wing views so we cannot accept that? :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted November 12, 2013 Share Posted November 12, 2013 ..................... No, the real driver is that the Saudi and Israeli lobbies really don't want Iran to have any nuclear capability, even civil power. The Iranians have a right to develop nuclear technology for peaceful purposes and denying them this is not only wrong, it will eventually lead to war. Ahmedoinjihad has now gone and there is a chance to slowly bring Iran back into the international fold. The Persians are trying to meet us halfway and kicking dirt in their faces to appease the Wahhabi sponsors of Al Qaeda is simply f'in dumb. Step forward Monsieur Hollande, France's answer to Frank Spencer. Ignoring the other stuff because I neither agree with it nor do I want to spend even more time showing where you are wrong again, Okay good, so now we have confirmed there was no personal abuse and you've copped out of defending the indefensible Blair... its interesting that you dismiss the idea of the west business getting "ready" for a deal with Iran. Interesting because a lot of the media are reporting it, interesting because a lot of business people are getting ready for it and interesting because there are some "big bucks" to be made and past performances certainty does show business to be not really worried where the monies come from. I wasn't dismissing the fact that the world is getting ready for business with Iran, (much of it being facilitated next door in my current location) it's just irrelevant to this matter. My point was that the real driver behind the sudden French opposition to doing a deal (on the terms expressed and accepted by every other major nation) wasn't about jockeying for commercial advantage, it was about Hollande being the Saudi's bitch and attempting to do their dirty work for them. The Israeli's will doubtless be doing the same in the piece of real estate they own in Washington, namely the US Congress. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted November 12, 2013 Share Posted November 12, 2013 I'm not convinced Hollande is Saudi's puppet. From a few articles I've read and listened to recently, I think perhaps he's just plain out of his depth with poor advisers and a desperate worry about clinging to old world French views of French exceptionalism and France's perceived place in the world. If it is France that is stopping a sensible deal being done, I would suggest this might be for no moredeep or ideological reason than to distract the French and rack up some world leader photo opportunities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted November 12, 2013 Share Posted November 12, 2013 Chrisp65, Follow the money, defence contracts with Saudi are big business. However, if he is really just big timing it to get his face in the papers then it's a particularly inappropriate issue to try and get clever over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted November 12, 2013 Share Posted November 12, 2013 Yeah, that'll certainly buy influence there's no denying that, money talks, but that 1.5 Billion is the equivalent of not quite 10 eurofighters, so relatively small beer in that market. Dassault have been busy selling to Japan and India this year, ten times that Saudi figure, but that's not to say that Hollande (or Cameron or any of them), wouldn't do a sexy dance for that sort of money. Which moves me on to another digression / thought, aid for India....ten billion dollars to spend on fighter aircraft, Mars mission, nuclear programme...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted November 12, 2013 Share Posted November 12, 2013 Reference India: indeed, what a joke! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted November 12, 2013 Moderator Share Posted November 12, 2013 ....the warmongering nature of the last Labour Government it would be a mistake to equate the left of politics with an aversion to conflict, or indeed an attachment to peace. Far from being an obsession it is a simple statement of fact.... Er, the last labour Gov't weren't left wing, so it's far from a demonstrated, or supported point you make there. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted November 12, 2013 Share Posted November 12, 2013 You're not a proper French president until you've done a momentously awkward, attention seeking stunt on the world stage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maqroll Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 Potentially historic agreement between the West and Iran on matters nuclear...but I've noticed Netanyahoo is saying it's "foolish", etc. And back home all the usual suspects who are bought and paid for by the Israel lobby are crying foul. Predictable... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarewsEyebrowDesigner Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 Saudi response is ominous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackpotForeigner Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 Potentially historic agreement between the West and Iran on matters nuclear...but I've noticed Netanyahoo is saying it's "foolish", etc. And back home all the usual suspects who are bought and paid for by the Israel lobby are crying foul. Predictable... If Netanyahu gave it his seal of approval it would go down like a lead balloon in Iran. Condemning it is the kindest thing he could do for so many reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 Saudi response is ominous. Are they threatening to give even more money to Al Qaeda then? As the Saudis generously revealed (reported in the Torygraph today) the behind the scenes talks have been ongoing for months in Oman, the Geneva deal is merely the public ratification of those and a big fat win for sanity. It remains to be seen whether Netan-ya-hoo and the House of Saud can wreck it all by proxy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarewsEyebrowDesigner Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 (edited) Initial reports (radio, and somewhere else, probably the Grauniad) seemed to suggest they were pretty concerned about Iran's potential to control the region if the sanctions are fully lifted and the currency strengthens, which I thought (perhaps wrongly) sounded pretty ominous given the two's rivalry (sectarian or otherwise). Iran has plenty going for it if they get their act together but there remains a whole system of clerics and other nutjobs running the country behind the scenes so we'll have to wait and see what actually plays out, but the initial signs are good and, as you said, a big fat win for sanity. Edited November 25, 2013 by CarewsEyebrowDesigner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted May 8, 2018 Share Posted May 8, 2018 Media reporting Trump has informed Macron that he’s pulling the US out of the JCPOA and reimposing sanctions on Iran. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PompeyVillan Posted May 8, 2018 Share Posted May 8, 2018 I'm guessing that's a bad thing for world peace? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted May 8, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted May 8, 2018 It's not the smartest move in the world. But we knew that already. Trump is surrounded by people that hate the deal, and has himself spent the last 2 years saying how bad it is, when he doesn't appear to understand it. It would be available exceptionally dumb move. So he'll make it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted May 8, 2018 Share Posted May 8, 2018 (edited) 54 minutes ago, PompeyVillan said: I'm guessing that's a bad thing for world peace? It’s a bad thing if you want to stop Iran building the bomb. Removing the incentives not to do it by reimposing sanctions on Iran is double+ dumb & puts the UK, France and Germany in a really tough spot. If any foreign firms engage with Iranian companies they’ll be sanctioned in turn by the US , but if the EU pushes back it could lead to a big trans-Atlantic issue. I suspect (and it is a guess) that this will play itself out quite soon in Syria, Iraq and maybe Lebanon, but there are lots of variables and so many actors it’s really hard to anticipate. That said, the structural factors are shaping up for a conflict between Iran & Hezbollah versus Israel and the US in Syria. Killing the agreement is another step along that road, imo. Edited May 8, 2018 by Awol Predictive boolacks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted May 8, 2018 Moderator Share Posted May 8, 2018 Yup, stop the deal, let the Iranians take a tiny step toward developing a weapon and unleash the Israelis - I think ultimately, some ways down the road this results in lots and lots of dead people - still, it will make Netanyahu happy I suppose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted May 8, 2018 Moderator Share Posted May 8, 2018 It always raises a smile to see Israel commending efforts to prevent the appearance of nuclear weapons in the middle east. That's Israel, with the 6th largest nuclear arsenal on the planet. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts