So, looks like (knock on wood) the Iran deal is done. Nobel Peace Prize #2, anyone?

[True Blue Door]

This President...

1. Completely reversed the course of US policy toward Iran that he inherited, which had been marching directly toward war on the same fabricated bases as Iraq.

2. Defied the very powerful AIPAC and the raving blowhard currently in control of the Israeli government.

3. Brought one of the most anti-American governments on Earth to the table in concert with other nations and created a consensus for peace that will protect the region both from nuclear proliferation and Republifascist aggression.

4. (Apparently) created enough Congressional support for the deal to cement it, again knock on wood.

Oh, and let's not forget that other thing...

5. Reestablished relations with Cuba after half a century.

I say it would be an outrage to not give Barack Obama another Nobel Peace Prize. One for Kerry too.

We can't know for certain whether peace will be achieved because of the deal, but that's always been true of all peace deals. Nobody could know if the Camp David Accords would hold. Nobody could know if the United Nations would continue to exist or just dissolve in a few years in chaos like the League of Nations had. But Nobel Peace Prizes are awarded to those who build the roads to peace, whether or not people walk them.

Maybe the Iranian government is the cartoon character of evil they are portrayed as and that their actions often suggest. Maybe the US government is so full of frothing, psychopathic Republican murderers that they will erase the deal and start a war the next time they are in control. Maybe both. Or maybe, just maybe, this is enough to do the next thing, and the next, and the next that heals the wounds of time between two nations.

If this deal holds and yet does not result in Nobel Peace Prizes, it will clearly be a politically-motivated oversight by people who do not hold the values they claim.

[randys1]

1. One of the greatest accomplishments in American foreign policy history, if not THE greatest.

But I am not an historian so I cant know that.

Sure is one hell of a deal, and Kerry gets credit too, in fact I want him to get the Nobel, not Obama. I mean he has one already, and that drove the racist rightys out of their minds like when he GOT OSAMA

The more the vicious, terrorist American Taliban teaparty hates it, the better you know it is.

Their true concern is their hatred of Obama and his getting credit.

[True Blue Door]

4. I wouldn't say THE greatest. The UN, the Marshall Plan, etc. are way bigger. But it is big.

Definitely a bigger deal than the Camp David accords, since this is about nuclear weapons. It makes the whole world safer.

[randys1]

6. Yeah, that is why I conditioned it. But it drives righty nuts when I slightly exaggerate his

accomplishments.

Since they cant point to any by Reagan or W, and since it is common knowledge W is a draft dodger, more or less and Reagan committed treason, etc.

[True Blue Door]

11. True. It's always fun to drive them into a froth.

Obama's definitely in my Top 5 Presidents, but I sometimes tell Republicans he's #1 just to watch them lose their shit. Fuck their psychosis.

[djean111]

2. IMO, Obama is doing what he is supposed to do, as President of the United States.

Great job, but I don't see handing out Nobel Peace Prizes as rewards.

[True Blue Door]

7. How does that attitude help?

All you're doing is diminishing the achievement, which by default excuses the lack of it.

Obviously you don't spend every day under other administrations demanding to know why they haven't achieved peace, so saying this now just sounds like a moving goalpost applied merely to diminish Barack Obama.

[Logical]

3. Someone explain the 24 days notice for inspections. Why so long? Nt

[GummyBearz]

5. 2 weeks isn't enough time to hide what they don't want to show

Well... it probably is. But with 3+ weeks they don't have to work very hard to do it.

[True Blue Door]

8. You can hide, but you can't hide the fact that you're hiding something.

The activity ripples out. And that's the only information that's actually needed.

[GummyBearz]

9. i guess we will find out (or not)

Who knows

[geek tragedy]

12. Thanks for the Breitbart.com nonsense talking point.

Here's how grownups understand the issue:

http://www.vox.com/2015/8/19/9176415/iran-deal-inspections-24-days

Hint: radiation doesn't disappear after 24 days. You should probably take a refresher on high school physics as well as taking the time to actually understand the deal, rather than repeating what you hear on Limbaugh.

[GummyBearz]

16. Hint: depends on the half life of the radioactive material

Every commonly used element for nuclear fission has a long half life, just wanted to make sure you understood that, since HS physics is your threshold for proper understanding of nuclear physics.

I thought we are allowing Iran to pursue peaceful nuclear programs for energy generation? *gasp*, it turns out similar materials can be used for both power generation and for bomb making... and they both give off radiation. Now you can possibly educate me on how measuring radiation levels can differentiate between bomb making and power plant making facilities... I always thought it was the inspectors looking for stuff that needs to be used to make a bomb, but doesn't have any business being present as part of a power plant.

[geek tragedy]

17. are you confused by the concept of declared sites vs nondeclared sites?

1) For DECLARED nuclear sites, there is CONSTANT monitoring and "any time" inspections.

2) For NON-DECLARED sites (i.e. every place that's not a declared nuclear site, including Khameini's personal bathroom), there is not supposed to be ANY radiation, and the presence of such radiation would be per se evidence of a violation of the agreement.

[GummyBearz]

18. Thank you for clearing that part up

It would have been faster to just say that in the first place. That alleviates things quite a bit.

[geek tragedy]

19. sorry for being short with you, there's a lot of misinformation

about the deal out there being pushed by some malfeasors.

[geek tragedy]

10. "Iran deal opponents now have their "death panels" lie, and it's a whopper"

http://www.vox.com/2015/8/19/9176415/iran-deal-inspections-24-days

Conservative media have hammered at this idea: that nuclear inspectors must wait 24 days before visiting any place in Iran that is not a declared nuclear site. Sometimes they imply or outright state, as in the case of this staggeringly misleading but representative Fox News story, that the 24-day wait applies even to known nuclear sites.

This certainly sounds scary. It sounds, as the critics often say, like those bumbling appeasers in the Obama administration have handed Iran the ability to cheat on the deal and then prevent inspectors from catching them.

Fortunately, this is all largely false. It's a lot like "death panels," in which Obamacare critics took a benign fact about the health-care bill — it would include end-of-life counseling — and then spun it up into a massive lie about how President Obama was going to cancel Granny's life-sustaining medications and send her to an early grave. This is an issue on which nuclear deal critics have taken a small truth and then exaggerated, distorted, and outright lied about it to make it into something very different.

Besides the fact that this applies only to NONDECLARED SITES, there's this:

Iran deal critics are lying when they present this process as the default way in which every visit to an undeclared site will go. In fact, under an agreement that Iran has accepted called the Additional Protocol, inspectors are required access within 24 hours. This other, multi-day process is meant as a fail-safe in case that doesn't work.

Critics claim that because the process could, in theory, take up to 24 days, it means Iran can force inspectors to wait 24 days. This is false. Iran does not control every step of the process — the US and its allies could force a vote on the international commission right away, for example — so it is nonsense to argue that Iran could unilaterally delay inspection up to 24 full days.

Even if Iran does push for as much delaying as possible, that would be like waving a big, neon-lit invitation over that particular site to Western spy agencies, which have a very good track record of spotting illicit Iranian nuclear activity. If Iran carted out material or bulldozed a test chamber or something, we would spot it, and the jig would be up.

Nuclear radiation lasts a very long time. If Iran wants to enrich uranium, it will produce radioactive isotopes that cannot be scrubbed out. Yes, there are non-radioactive activities that Iran could conduct, but you need the radioactive stuff to build a bomb, and that is detectable long after 24 days.

Iran deal critics pretend that during this process, the US and its allies would be powerless, essentially held hostage by Iranian intransigence. In fact, they have a variety of tools built into the deal by which they can pressure Iran to let in inspectors, and if necessary can blow up the deal by bringing back sanctions.

[Logical]

13. Thanks for this, explains it. Nt

[leftynyc]

14. That's just one of the things

that suck about the agreement. Also no way to make sure the billions of dollars Iran will be getting will not be making its way into the hands of hamas, hezbollah and islamic jihad. No deal is perfect.

[tech3149]

15. As I understand it

That is a maximum period to inspect of sites that are no longer in use that may or may not have been used for military development of nuclear technology.
All things considered, even that broad latitude on one particular issue is no reason to challenge an inspection regime that no other nation in the world would submit to.
Iran has already been subject to intensive monitoring for years and I doubt the US would submit to anything close to the same international oversight.

[muriel_volestrangler]

20. They wouldn't give it to Obama himself

Partly because the American part wasn't a particular effort by him, but by the State Department, partly because they don't share a prize between more than 3 entities, and they'd have to include Iran in some way, and the other members of the P5+1, too, and partly because they gave him the first one basically anticipating him getting American foreign policy back on track, of which this is an example.

I'd say there might be a chance Kerry could be named, though naming one of the 6 could be a problem (and remember, it's a European country, Norway, that makes the decision, and they're unlikely to want to diminish the European involvement).