Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: So, looks like (knock on wood) the Iran deal is done. Nobel Peace Prize #2, anyone? [View all]geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)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
Besides the fact that this applies only to NONDECLARED SITES, there's this:
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.
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.
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.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
20 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
So, looks like (knock on wood) the Iran deal is done. Nobel Peace Prize #2, anyone? [View all]
True Blue Door
Sep 2015
OP
One of the greatest accomplishments in American foreign policy history, if not THE greatest.
randys1
Sep 2015
#1
I wouldn't say THE greatest. The UN, the Marshall Plan, etc. are way bigger. But it is big.
True Blue Door
Sep 2015
#4
Yeah, that is why I conditioned it. But it drives righty nuts when I slightly exaggerate his
randys1
Sep 2015
#6
IMO, Obama is doing what he is supposed to do, as President of the United States.
djean111
Sep 2015
#2
"Iran deal opponents now have their "death panels" lie, and it's a whopper"
geek tragedy
Sep 2015
#10