Please read: Macron holds US responsible if Iran leaves nuclear deal. - The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com - Debate Anything The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com
frame

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com. The only online debate website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the leading online debate website. Debate popular topics, debate news, or debate anything! Debate online for free! DebateIsland is utilizing Artifical Intelligence to transform online debating.


The best online Debate website - DebateIsland.com! The only Online Debate Website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the Leading Online Debate website. Debate popular topics, Debate news, or Debate anything! Debate online for free!

Please read: Macron holds US responsible if Iran leaves nuclear deal.
in Global

By YeshuaRedeemedYeshuaRedeemed 404 Pts
https://www.infowars.com/macron-holding-us-responsible-if-iran-leaves-nuke-deal/
I think this is bullsnickers, from a far leftist, but I want to hear your thoughts.



Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted To Win
Tie

Details +



Arguments

  • I refuse to click any infowars link... Credibility level is below ground level...
    Polaris95AlofRIpiloteer
    " Adversus absurdum, contumaciter ac ridens! "
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 1715 Pts
    The US may be responsible for it, but it does not make the US actions wrong. Iran has never been a trustworthy partner, and any deals with it are bound to be, at best, one-sided. The sooner Iran leaves it, the sooner we can stop pretending that the "nuclear deal" is anything more than a couple of papers signed by random people.
    piloteer
  • AlofRIAlofRI 229 Pts
    Iran was, in most respectable quarters, sticking to the agreement. If that is true, the POTUS is to blame. Iran may not have been a trustworthy partner, but trustworthy partners (AND ourselves) had the right, and most were, checking in on them. I don't know WTF we were doing, since 2017 that has been the case. I trust those friends we used to have more than this administration … because this administration doesn't even trust our own intelligence services over the words of Putin! Whatever Putin wants, Putin gets, and ……. dum, dum, dum, little Putin ….  wants U.S.! (Damn, I wish I could sing!) Eartha Kitt, where are you when I need you! 

    Anyway, Never thought I'd say this, but, I'm with Iran on this one! It seems THEY were the good guys here! Unbelievable as it may seem!
  • piloteerpiloteer 384 Pts
    @MayCaesar

    You're right, they are totally untrustworthy. They initiated a coup that toppled our government in 1953, then they put in a ravenous dictator who was in power for a quarter century. Then when we finally overthrew that dictator, they imposed sanctions on us and backed the Iraqis when we went to war with them, even though Iraq was a tyrannical country who had no qualms with invading neighboring countries to get out of paying their debts to them...............................oh, whoops. That was the US who did those things to Iran!!!!!!!! It actually makes my wonder why people wonder why Iran is so unfriendly with the US.
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 1715 Pts
    edited May 14
    @piloteer

    Or maybe it has something to do with the fact that for publicly supporting the US people get 10 years in prison in Iran, while for carrying a board with words "Death to Israel! Death to America!" on it people get free university admissions. Pretty hard to be friendly towards the US in such conditions.

    Pahlavi's regime was actually easily the softest and most prosperous regime in Iranian history, and one of the several regimes that were not ruled by religious fundamentalists. Almost everyone who escaped the regime of Ayatollahs said that things were much better under the US-friendly regime, than under current socialist theocrats.

    Blaming the US for people revolting and supporting totalitarian Islamic fundamentalists makes little sense, and was not even a part of my comment. I am not sure where your drive to constantly jab at the US, regardless of what the topic is, comes from.
    Oppolzer
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1086 Pts
    edited May 14
    AlofRI said:
    Iran was, in most respectable quarters, sticking to the agreement. If that is true, the POTUS is to blame. Iran may not have been a trustworthy partner, but trustworthy partners (AND ourselves) had the right, and most were, checking in on them. I don't know WTF we were doing, since 2017 that has been the case. I trust those friends we used to have more than this administration … because this administration doesn't even trust our own intelligence services over the words of Putin! Whatever Putin wants, Putin gets, and ……. dum, dum, dum, little Putin ….  wants U.S.! (Damn, I wish I could sing!) Eartha Kitt, where are you when I need you! 

    Anyway, Never thought I'd say this, but, I'm with Iran on this one! It seems THEY were the good guys here! Unbelievable as it may seem!

    It doesn't surprise me at all that you would side with Iran, not at all.  TDS is a debilitating mind-warping disease, as you've made clear with your absurd reference to Putin.

    The Iranians said they weren't complying with the agreement;

    Ali Akbar Salehi: In the Arak reactor, there is a pit. You can see the people standing around it. The calandria goes into this pit. That's where the fuel goes. We said that we should replace the calandria that goes into that pit.


    Interviewer: What's "calandria" in Persian?

    Ali Akbar Salehi: It's like a repository, where the fuel goes. We removed the repository that is supposed to contain the fuel. Because of the reconfiguration, the form of the repository should change as well. We are now building another repository that will be placed in the reactor's pit. Unfortunately, we have been saying for three years now that we had not poured cement into the pit of the Arak heavy water reactor. If we had, the Arak heavy water reactor would have been ruined.

    Interviewer: But you did say that you had poured cement into the tubes…

    Ali Akbar Salehi: Not into the tubes over there. We poured it into the calandria we pulled out [of the reactor]. Inside the calandria, there are tubes where the fuel goes. We had bought similar tubes, but I could not declare this at the time. Only one person in Iran knew this. We told no one but the top man of the regime [Khamenei]. When our team was in the midst of the negotiations, we knew that [the Westerners] would ultimately renege on their promises. The leader warned us that they were violators of agreements. We had to act wisely. Not only did we avoid destroying the bridges that we had built, but we also built new bridges that would enable us to go back faster if needed. There were a series of tubes, 3 or 4 meters long and 2 or 3 centimeters in diameter. You can imagine there tubes. They have a beginning and an end. We had bought the same quantity of similar tubes. When they told us to pour cement into the tubes, we did…

    Interviewer: Who told you? The IAEA?

    Ali Akbar Salehi: No, they said this during the negotiations, and we said: "Fine. We will pour [cement]." But we did not tell them that we had other tubes. Otherwise, they would have told us to pour cement into those tubes as well. Now we have the same tubes. They photoshopped cement being poured into the reactor's pit, and ever since, they have been saying that cement was poured into the reactor's pit. This is photoshopped. I am surprised that dear friends of ours… Even during a Friday sermon last week, it was said that we had poured cement into the reactor's pit. Reporters were there and saw it. You can take your cameras and go see for yourselves. So why are people saying this? Besides, people are talking as if the Arak reactor had been up and running… the Arak reactor had not been built at the time. We were in the process.
    https://www.memri.org/tv/iranian-atomic-energy-chief-ali-akbar-salehi-secret-purchase-nuclear-tubes-jcpoa-destroy-yellowcake-propulsion-arak-reactor/transcript

  • piloteerpiloteer 384 Pts
    edited May 15
    @MayCaesar

    I have no intention to make jabs at the US. I only intend to jab those who think my taxes should be spent on wars that only cause more wars and cost taxpayers money. Is your argument for regime change really going to be because they have boards that say death to America?!?!? I don't care if they have boards that say death to piloteer from DI, I still don't want to have to pay to have a regime change. Personally, If Canada caused a blockade of the US, you may just see me with a sign that says death to hockey fans!!! I think they may have some reasons as to why they have those signs. 

    If the US was concerned about keeping religious fundamentals out of control of Iran, why did they overthrow Mosaddegh who was considered the leading champion of secular democratic Iran? Wow, you seem to not have done to much study into the Shah.

    " An Amnesty International assessment on Iran for 1974–1975 stated:

    The shah of Iran retains his benevolent [world] image despite the highest rate of death penalties in the world, no valid system of civilian courts and a history of torture which is beyond belief. ... the total number of political prisoners has been reported at times throughout the year [1975] to be anything from 25,000 to 100,000".[268




    Is this really the mark of a soft and prosperous regime?!?!? The Shah spent insane amounts of money to protect a global public image of him being a progressive social reformer, but the truth was not that at all. Mosaddegh was only in power for two years before the US triggered the coup that caused him to resign (which Eisenhower later apologized for doing), but he had all of the same reforms on his agenda as the Shah did. The Shah recognized how popular those reforms were so he enacted them except for the nationalization of Iranian oil. All the prosperous or secular policies the Shah enacted, were actually the idea of the prime minister that the US overthrew. As far as the Iranians sentiments toward the US now, I really don't care anyway if they don't like the US, and I also don't care to have to pay taxes to a military strike to overthrow the government of Iran simply because they don't like the US, or Israel. 
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 1715 Pts
    edited May 15
    @piloteer

    You may have confused this thread with another one on a similar subject. In this one we are talking about who is responsible for Iran leaving the nuclear deal; nobody has said anything about supporting regime change in Iran. Granted, I would not mind seeing that regime fall, but that is a different matter entirely.

    I have never said that The Shah's regime was "soft and prosperous". I merely said that it was the softest and most prosperous regime in Iranian history, which, to be frank, is not a high standard.

    You are preaching to the wrong crowd: I would love seeing a system with no taxes at all, so obviously I do not support the government spending its people's taxes on foreign interventions. But since the money is already in the hands of the government, and since the government does not know do much about improving the domestic economy, it might as well spend the money on something that will make this world a better place. Whether intervention in Iran would do so or not, I do not know. I do know, however, that Iranian regime is vicious and I do not want the US to make any friendly deal with it, until it has undergone a massive secular and free market reformation.
  • piloteerpiloteer 384 Pts
    @MayCaesar

    I have to admit that you are correct. I went entirely off subject for the sake of shamelessly  attempting to prove my point, which has nothing to do with the topic at hand. I apologize to you and Yeshua for that. 
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 1715 Pts
    @piloteer

    No worries, all is well. ;) I was happy to have the discussion, even if it went slightly off the topic.
    piloteer
Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
2019 DebateIsland.com, All rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Awesome Debates
BestDealWins.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch