US Iran agreement...

[william.scherk]

Regarding security, nothing that you have said has convinced me that the US is less secure if these deal is approved. I do not think Israel's perspective matters, they are a cause of instability in the region. Furthermore the region has always been insecure since the Ottoman Empire fell. Iran may use a nuclear program to flex its muscles more, but I do not think it can acquire territory beyond the Shi'a areas of Iraq.

I am not swayed by the security arguments, either. I have spent some time absorbing details of the agreements. As a whole, it seems to me comprehensive and toothy, especially the IAEA intrusion and control. Despite what I said about Saudi and Sunni-majority disquiet, those nations have been encouraging in their public statements about the agreements. Iraq is happy. Turkey is happy, Egypt is if not happy, encouraging.

Wiiliam, I am quite taken with your innocence. I've heard the prime time statements put out by the heads and FM's of Turkey, Jordan, etc. and now I'm the skeptic. You don't suspect any duplicity?

I think those Arab neighbors are 1. being very careful not to criticize Obama and the US (for various reasons) 2. being outwardly sweet to Iran, an Iran with future industrial strength, but more critically a growth of military might which will disturb the balance of power. These guys are highly nervous behind their smiling compliments.

Agreed. The region is a live theatre of war. Saudi Arabia is bombing the shit out of perceived enemies in Yemen. Saudi is funding and supporting (behind the scenes) elements of the Syrian war. Iran is inside Syria taking a 'elder uncle' protective military stance. This means they are deeply implicated in that war ... not least of which is funding the bankrupt Syrian government.

Turkey is very weird. You will have noted that Turkish opinion is relatively unconcerned about Islamic Extremism (per the disputed PEW results on that other thread). This doesn't make sense on the surface -- they border the ISIS-controlled death-cult lands. The not-so-secret background to their stance is that they have relationships of convenience with Islamist warriors, up to an including ISIS (if you believe the conventional wisdom). They fear The Kurds more than ISIS, it seems. Which is very weird indeed.

There are lots more items of duplicity or double-faced dealings in almost every country that has expressed an opinion on the Geneva nuclear agreements. I don't know if you are an innocent (cynic/pessimist/realist) with hope like me. I don't really yet grasp what your alternative to the agreements are and how that would play out. If you have the time or inclination, I would be interested in your sketch of a likely scenario, given your understanding: what will be the first signs that Iran is going to stymie agreed-upon measures? When do we know without a doubt that Iran intends to break out and damn the torpedoes?

You are, I assume, methodologically skeptical that the agreements will serve to lessen tensions. We could argue, but I think I have laid out what I think and why up above in earlier comments. I doubt anyone takes the time to re-read them, but I won't simply restate them.

Quotes and questions welcomed!

Secretly they all backed Netanyahu's crusade, I believe.

All? I don't know. Netanyahu failed to get what he wanted. The crusade, such as it is, has been ongoing for twenty years. Twenty years without direct hostilities between the two countries. Lots of angry recriminations, slogans, warnings, and no insane conflict yet.

More generally, I think you are right -- if you restrict that 'backing' to the few actors whose relationships with Israel are without treaty but still implicated in mutual non-religious regional understandings. So, Turkey is at peace with Israel and shares ambassadors (and intelligence and commercial love). Egypt and Jordan are at peace with Israel. I think there is a hidden Saudi-Israeli commonality that we can glimpse now and again -- even though on the surface they are implacable adversaries.

If the Saudis thought that Israel would take the military initiative to bomb the fuck out of Iranian whatever they felt like, I think they would be secretly pleased to some degree.

I'd be interested in reading any further thoughts you have on this. It is complicated. My thoughts aren't completely fixed in amber.

I am not swayed by the security arguments, either. I have spent some time absorbing details of the agreements.

Because you have the mindset of a bureaucrat you're afflicted by a peculiar stupidity in regards to human nature. You can't actually do anything real so it's natural for you to believe in every stupid bureaucrat's fantasy that words on paper actually have power to control evil people. If it's any consolation, your stupidity is shared by Obama and Kerry, both of whom are being played for fools.

I had to laugh out loud. Thank you Greg. It is greatly amusing to me that you believe you have X-ray vision, not only for personal qualities like morality, but as here -- the X-ray suggesting a mental handicap. Greg says I am stupid and that my stupidity is mumble mumble cannot do anything Real. That is a scream. I consider you to be an ignorant religious irrationalist and an enemy of reason. Who cares? It is the arguments that do the work, not the magical powers of discernment. Cue PastaRabbi Whosis and the End Times Blood Moon Tetrad whoopee. Cue "I call William names. Names." Who gives a fuck what we think about the other?

What happens when you apply your X-ray vision to the details of the agreements?

You are quoting William. If you tell William gravity is the reason the sun and the planets are round, I wonder if he would simply agree or make a ten paragraph post without much of a conclusion one way or the other.

--Brant

but if I were a Christian I'd have to love him--since I'm not, that's your job

win-win, for me; I just like him and his faux empiricism (his facts seem right, but they're only being used to defuse certainty (which can be a good thing)--Michael Marotta seems to be trying to do the opposite and both have questionable results, but it's hard to get the good stuff out of the gumbo [was that a dead mouse?])

I think I would have to be drunk to get all the implications here. Faux empiricism is a concept worth describing in more detail. I'd like to think that I am rational and corrigible. I write off MM as somewhat incorrigible since he insists on his bigoted nonsense regarding Asperger. But then he is corrigible in other matters, ie, the earliest money made of silver coils.

Honestly, I have a mildly exasperated liking for almost everyone here. I think it comes from propinquity. I mean, I get to understand that words can hurt, these are real people, treat them with a baseline of respect until otherwise authorized to kill. I have been hanging around and posting in the environment for ten years. You all are real to me.

I do get the sense you are a skimmer of WSS written bulges of a certain length. I will keep that in mind for the future: will Ideal Reader Brant be able to pick out the conclusion after a speed-read? Should my conclusions be more warranted? Etcetera. It's good to get honest feedback.

but if I were a Christian I'd have to love him--since I'm not, that's your job

Love is not necessarily like.

It's just doing right by others.

There will always be a place in the liberal government bureaucracy for William.

This is so weird. I wish I had a window on your cognition here, Greg. I guess we have moved on from Feminized Whoopee Whatsit to Boorookratized librul flapdoodle. May the heights of reason be reached in our lifetimes. You are excused from exercising reason or empiricism or even basic fact-checking.

You got Jeezuss and the RabbiPasto. Why would you want for more?

Edited July 19, 2015 by william.scherk

[Brant Gaede]

Okay, Bill, I'll give your stuff more detailed attention from now on. I was just trying to save myself from the embarrassment of true incomprehension and several hours a day from my life. (Humor alert.)

--Brant

[moralist]

This is so weird...

We each live by different values, William.

Greg

[william.scherk]

The major Saudi oil production facilities are within range of thousands of conventional Iranian rockets.

Yup. And the Iranian oil production facilities are within range of the US and allied rockets, missiles and naval forces. Mutual assured destruction.

There is no way I can imagine Iran wasting a nuclear weapon on an Arab target.

I agree. I can't imagine a nuclear Israel wasting its nukes on an Iranian target either, at least not in the present frame. Similarly, I can't imagine an Iranian change on its war-role with Iraq, Syria and Hezbollah. These are the active and present belligerent activities of Iran.

There is a way I can imagine an escalation of the Iranian war in Syria -- that is when and if they believe they can deliver knock-out blows to the ISIS+Nusra+FSA+4000 acronyms fighting.

I am most suspicious of unspoken understandings between the US and Iran with regard to Syria.

What's your take on escalation or 'victory' in Syria, Brant? What do you see happening that would confirm your own suspicions?

Real regime change in Iran is unlikely to change the basic, ongoing metric. Why would Iran stop the bomb getting if it had military rulers?

I don't quite understand. What conclusion are you arguing for -- is this a faux empricism or what?

Even democratic rulers would still leave the military in the strongest position albeit behind the ostensible rulers. Pakistan? Who knows? It's bombs have always been a counter to India's first.

This is pretty vague and general and without a unifying point, to my eyes. Maybe I should ask if you have read enough of the agreement texts to understand and illustrate what you think may, can, should and won't happen over the next five to ten years.

[RobinReborn]

R R seems to have the there's nothing special about the Jews or Israel so no big deal if they go. Just Israel. Well, as the European intellectual effete are discovering, it's just France, too. Maybe more.

Sunrise, sunset

Sunrise, sunset

Slowly comes the dawn

--Brant

What's special about the Jews and Israel is an unfortunate tendency for those people and that region to fall prey to violence.

I don't believe in historical determinism and I'm not an Anti-semite but some basic knowledge of history leads me to my thoughts on the situation.

The land currently called Israel has been called many different things over the years, it's been conquered by many different empires. I think the life expectancy of occupation of that region is about 90 years and there is always massive violence as it transfers occupiers. Jewish people have been kicked out of nearly every country in Europe at some point in history. They enjoyed relative acceptance in the Ottoman Empire, but shortly after it fell Mossad arranged something called Operation Magic Carpet where they "rescued" jews from throughout the middle east (except Iran). Now there's a large concentration of Jewish people in a small region of the world adjacent to one of the most important transit points for international shipping surrounded by countries that are unstable, violent and some of which may acquire nuclear weapons in the next few decades.

In practice, there's not much that the USA can do to save Israel. There may be hope for Israel to save itself diplomatically, but I'm not optimistic about that. Meanwhile they are trying to solve their problems with violence.... it will not work out for them in the long term.

[RobinReborn]

South Africans did what they had to do, and then applied for acceptance back in the global village. IOW, only after we began to repair our political landscape did we (effectively) go cap in hand to the West.

Iran is a reversal of all that. Arrogantly, they have reformed not a jot of their internal affairs or external involvements - or at least independently begged for sanction relief with promises of reform. No, the 5 + 1 pitched up and made overtures to them, not the other way around. All under the unlikely rationale that the carrot of relaxed sanctions will (somehow) block Iran's development of nuclear weapons? Is Obama dreaming? Perhaps too, he sees Iran as an ally against ISIS - but "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" is an evident and unprincipled fallacy, no more so than in the Middle East.

But Iran doesn't oppress the 80% of its population which happen to be the original inhabitants. To my understand minorities are treated pretty well in Iran...

And Iran was never part of the west... all these negotiations are happening because the West recognizes that it can't rule the world anymore and want to outsource security issues to the countries that are powerful. And if Iran fucks up and uses the nukes inappropriate, the West has a very good excuse to invade and nobody would oppose it.

[RobinReborn]

South Africans did what they had to do, and then applied for acceptance back in the global village. IOW, only after we began to repair our political landscape did we (effectively) go cap in hand to the West.

Iran is a reversal of all that. Arrogantly, they have reformed not a jot of their internal affairs or external involvements - or at least independently begged for sanction relief with promises of reform. No, the 5 + 1 pitched up and made overtures to them, not the other way around. All under the unlikely rationale that the carrot of relaxed sanctions will (somehow) block Iran's development of nuclear weapons? Is Obama dreaming? Perhaps too, he sees Iran as an ally against ISIS - but "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" is an evident and unprincipled fallacy, no more so than in the Middle East.

But Iran doesn't oppress the 80% of its population which happen to be the original inhabitants. To my understand minorities are treated pretty well in Iran...

And Iran was never part of the west... all these negotiations are happening because the West recognizes that it can't rule the world anymore and want to outsource security issues to the countries that are powerful. And if Iran fucks up and uses the nukes inappropriate, the West has a very good excuse to invade and nobody would oppose it.

[william.scherk]

But Iran doesn't oppress the 80% of its population which happen to be the original inhabitants. To my understand minorities are treated pretty well in Iran...

Please take the time to check your assumptions, Robin. That comment comes off as uninformed, as if you have never heard of the Baha'i or flogging of women who don't dress according to religious dictates.

Edited July 19, 2015 by william.scherk

[Selene]

But Iran doesn't oppress the 80% of its population which happen to be the original inhabitants. To my understand minorities are treated pretty well in Iran...

Please take the time to check your assumptions, Robin. That comment comes off as uninformed, as if you have never heard of the Baha'i or flogging of women who don't dress according to religious dictates.

He and Gary went to the "special" schools.

A...

[anthony]

R R seems to have the there's nothing special about the Jews or Israel so no big deal if they go. Just Israel. Well, as the European intellectual effete are discovering, it's just France, too. Maybe more.

Sunrise, sunset

Sunrise, sunset

Slowly comes the dawn

--Brant

What's special about the Jews and Israel is an unfortunate tendency for those people and that region to fall prey to violence.

I don't believe in historical determinism and I'm not an Anti-semite but some basic knowledge of history leads me to my thoughts on the situation.

The land currently called Israel has been called many different things over the years, it's been conquered by many different empires. I think the life expectancy of occupation of that region is about 90 years and there is always massive violence as it transfers occupiers. Jewish people have been kicked out of nearly every country in Europe at some point in history. They enjoyed relative acceptance in the Ottoman Empire, but shortly after it fell Mossad arranged something called Operation Magic Carpet where they "rescued" jews from throughout the middle east (except Iran). Now there's a large concentration of Jewish people in a small region of the world adjacent to one of the most important transit points for international shipping surrounded by countries that are unstable, violent and some of which may acquire nuclear weapons in the next few decades.

In practice, there's not much that the USA can do to save Israel. There may be hope for Israel to save itself diplomatically, but I'm not optimistic about that. Meanwhile they are trying to solve their problems with violence.... it will not work out for them in the long term.

Robin: Facts - Operation Magic Carpet was in 1949 and only from the Yemen, long after the Ottoman Empire fell (1918) and limited to 45,000 Jews. (The Imam of Yemen ~permitted~ that number out of the population of 46,000 to be airlifted out in American and British transport planes). Like there, Jews in most Arabic countries had been for generations relegated to second class or guest status (Dhimmis). As in Yemen, immediate with the founding of Israel, violent incidents and killings in many Arab countries against them dramatically increased. You think they should have stayed?

Do you understand the difference between (almost exclusively) defensive "violence" - and offensive? If it went by the morality of its enemies, Israel has, and has had, the military capability to control or possess several times its present territory. Ask yourself why it hasn't.

[Selene]

Tony:

His ability to critically analyze approaches zero when it comes to history.

When the "history" supports his/her alternate reality, it is good and correct history, when it doesn't it is contested history and therefore dismissible.

Tony, I do not know whether you went to college or not, my strong feeling is that you did, however, I do not believe you ever mentioned it.

If you did, college today is so abhorrently anti intellectual and anti critical reasoning that you would be stunned into temporary silence.

A...

[Brant Gaede]

South Africans did what they had to do, and then applied for acceptance back in the global village. IOW, only after we began to repair our political landscape did we (effectively) go cap in hand to the West.

Iran is a reversal of all that. Arrogantly, they have reformed not a jot of their internal affairs or external involvements - or at least independently begged for sanction relief with promises of reform. No, the 5 + 1 pitched up and made overtures to them, not the other way around. All under the unlikely rationale that the carrot of relaxed sanctions will (somehow) block Iran's development of nuclear weapons? Is Obama dreaming? Perhaps too, he sees Iran as an ally against ISIS - but "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" is an evident and unprincipled fallacy, no more so than in the Middle East.

But Iran doesn't oppress the 80% of its population which happen to be the original inhabitants. To my understand minorities are treated pretty well in Iran...

And Iran was never part of the west... all these negotiations are happening because the West recognizes that it can't rule the world anymore and want to outsource security issues to the countries that are powerful. And if Iran fucks up and uses the nukes inappropriate, the West has a very good excuse to invade and nobody would oppose it.

This is verified by studying all the appropriate use of weapons by Nazi Germany.

--Brant

[RobinReborn]

But Iran doesn't oppress the 80% of its population which happen to be the original inhabitants. To my understand minorities are treated pretty well in Iran...

Please take the time to check your assumptions, Robin. That comment comes off as uninformed, as if you have never heard of the Baha'i or flogging of women who don't dress according to religious dictates.

Pretty well is a relative term, compared to other countries in that region...

[RobinReborn]

@Selene, thanks for the contextless accusations. You're clearly a wise old man who feels so right that he's comfortable not supporting his arguments with evidence, but feels the right to request support from others... Your history is outdated and I fear you're too old to bother learning all of the new developments, oh well!

[Selene]

@Selene, thanks for the contextless accusations. You're clearly a wise old man who feels so right that he's comfortable not supporting his arguments with evidence, but feels the right to request support from others... Your history is outdated and I fear you're too old to bother learning all of the new developments, oh well!

It would be amusing if it were true and thanks for the agism slur.

I feel properly castigated.

[RobinReborn]

R R seems to have the there's nothing special about the Jews or Israel so no big deal if they go. Just Israel. Well, as the European intellectual effete are discovering, it's just France, too. Maybe more.

Sunrise, sunset

Sunrise, sunset

Slowly comes the dawn

--Brant

What's special about the Jews and Israel is an unfortunate tendency for those people and that region to fall prey to violence.

I don't believe in historical determinism and I'm not an Anti-semite but some basic knowledge of history leads me to my thoughts on the situation.

The land currently called Israel has been called many different things over the years, it's been conquered by many different empires. I think the life expectancy of occupation of that region is about 90 years and there is always massive violence as it transfers occupiers. Jewish people have been kicked out of nearly every country in Europe at some point in history. They enjoyed relative acceptance in the Ottoman Empire, but shortly after it fell Mossad arranged something called Operation Magic Carpet where they "rescued" jews from throughout the middle east (except Iran). Now there's a large concentration of Jewish people in a small region of the world adjacent to one of the most important transit points for international shipping surrounded by countries that are unstable, violent and some of which may acquire nuclear weapons in the next few decades.

In practice, there's not much that the USA can do to save Israel. There may be hope for Israel to save itself diplomatically, but I'm not optimistic about that. Meanwhile they are trying to solve their problems with violence.... it will not work out for them in the long term.

Robin: Facts - Operation Magic Carpet was in 1949 and only from the Yemen, long after the Ottoman Empire fell (1918) and limited to 45,000 Jews. (The Imam of Yemen ~permitted~ that number out of the population of 46,000 to be airlifted out in American and British transport planes). Like there, Jews in most Arabic countries had been for generations relegated to second class or guest status (Dhimmis). As in Yemen, immediate with the founding of Israel, violent incidents and killings in many Arab countries against them dramatically increased. You think they should have stayed?

Do you understand the difference between (almost exclusively) defensive "violence" - and offensive? If it went by the morality of its enemies, Israel has, and has had, the military capability to control or possess several times its present territory. Ask yourself why it hasn't.

OK, so I thought that:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ezra_and_Nehemiah

Was part of Operation Magic Carpet, I guess it has a different name but it's the same thing only a different time and country.

As for whether Jews should have stayed in the Middle East, I don't claim to be able to predict alternate histories but now that there are basically zero jews in the middle east outside of Israel (and Iran) the situation becomes harder to resolve peacefully. Think about it, part of the reason the US can negotiate treaties with almost any country in the world is because there are citizens of almost every country in the world in the US.

As for defensive and offensive violence, I do understand those concepts. But I don't think they apply too well to the situation in the middle east. People have been fighting there for centuries and everybody claims they're using defensive violence and their enemy is using offensive violence but they have different religions, and languages and histories etc so they continue to fight amongst themselves. The US should not have any long term interests in the region, it's too unstable.

Israel does not have the military capacity to control much land outside of its borders, it's military is too small and there are too many people who hate jews near Israel. Its military is very strong (partly because of a nationwide draft which is completely immoral) but there is a significant anti-war movement in Israel. The more land it controls, the harder it becomes to control it and the more likely it is for another country to attack it. It's military strategy of occasionally using excessive force (in conflicts where the aggressor is hard to discern but Mossad and Israeli intelligence can often concoct a convince story to make Israel look like the defender) is practical in the short term, but not in the long term.

It's not clear to me what a practical long term strategy for Israel should be. I do not think the US can save Israel.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

I do not think the US can save Israel.

RR,

I have no doubt Israel will survive anything anyone throws at it.

If needed, I will help it.

Michael

[Brant Gaede]

I do not think the US can save Israel.

The 51st State.

--Brant

Mission Accomplished!

Now, where to put that star?--that's the hard question

[Selene]

I do not think the US can save Israel.

The 51st State.

--Brant

Mission Accomplished!

Now, where to put that star--that's the hard question

In the first Islamic Jihadist's throat that we can get to at the admission ceremony...

[moralist]

In practice, there's not much that the USA can do to save Israel.

If America betrays Israel, the only free Western Democracy in the Middle East...

...it will have called down upon itself a well deserved curse.

Greg

[Selene]

OK, so I thought that:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ezra_and_Nehemiah

Was part of Operation Magic Carpet, I guess it has a different name but it's the same thing only a different time and country.

As for whether Jews should have stayed in the Middle East, I don't claim to be able to predict alternate histories but now that there are basically zero jews in the middle east outside of Israel (and Iran) the situation becomes harder to resolve peacefully. Think about it, part of the reason the US can negotiate treaties with almost any country in the world is because there are citizens of almost every country in the world in the US.

As for defensive and offensive violence, I do understand those concepts. But I don't think they apply too well to the situation in the middle east. People have been fighting there for centuries and everybody claims they're using defensive violence and their enemy is using offensive violence but they have different religions, and languages and histories etc so they continue to fight amongst themselves. The US should not have any long term interests in the region, it's too unstable.

Israel does not have the military capacity to control much land outside of its borders, it's military is too small and there are too many people who hate jews near Israel. Its military is very strong (partly because of a nationwide draft which is completely immoral) but there is a significant anti-war movement in Israel. The more land it controls, the harder it becomes to control it and the more likely it is for another country to attack it. It's military strategy of occasionally using excessive force (in conflicts where the aggressor is hard to discern but Mossad and Israeli intelligence can often concoct a convince story to make Israel look like the defender) is practical in the short term, but not in the long term.

It's not clear to me what a practical long term strategy for Israel should be. I do not think the US can save Israel.

RR:

Any reason you do not capitalize Jews?

A...

[moralist]

Any reason you do not capitalize Jews?

I know... pick me, pick me!

[william.scherk]

This is a weird music video. I won`t give too much introduction or explanation other than to note the song is in Persian, and that it is nationalistic, and is called Nuclear Energy, and was released before these Geneva agreements were signed.

If that turns you off entirely, well it might, but what if I also told that the music was a rip-off blend of several American popular genres: R & B, rap, and hip-hop? If the Iranians have a hate hard-on for the USA, why do they ape its culture? It just seemed bizarre to me, so I thought I would share. It has nothing but everything to do with Iranian pride ... nationalism, piety, and submission. It strikes me as almost as eerie as the AKP TV ads in the last Turkish election and equally disturbing. Separation of Clergy, State, Music? Not a chance.

Subtitles

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Shah Reza Pahlavi, in addition to bad guy stuff like overseeing a brutal secret police, tried to westernize Iran and planted lots and lots of seeds among the young. The fundamentalist government does not oppress everyone who was touched by this effort because it can't. So it oppresses sporadically, just enough to keep people afraid of it.

The problem with Iran is not its people, but its fundamentalist government. And the problem with Iran getting a nuke is not the people, but the government, which is full of Shiite power-mongers and crazy twelvers (in addition to a more benign bureaucracy).

Michael

[Backlighting]

Looks like the Saudi's will take action on their own to Obummers "deal" with Iran.

http://www.mrctv.org/blog/saudi-prince-even-after-deal-military-action-against-iran-still-table-or-without-us