ADVERTISEMENT

Iran Tests Long-Range Missile, Possibly Violating Nuclear Accord

cigaretteman

HB King
May 29, 2001
79,360
62,365
113
Doesn't sound like a good development. I guess it will depend upon interpretation, and apparently it was done before their Parliament approved the accord. Could just be throwing a bone to the hardliners too:

Iran tested a new guided long-range ballistic missile on Sunday, hours before Parliament, in a rowdy session, approved the generalities of the nuclear agreement reached in July between Iran and world powers, the state news agency IRNA reported.

The missile launch may have violated the terms of the agreement, reached in Vienna with six world powers. According to some readings of the deal, it placed restrictions on Iran’s ambitious missile program.

Experts have been debating the interpretation of a United Nations Security Council resolution, adopted a few days after the accord was agreed upon, that bars Iran from developing missiles “designed to carry nuclear warheads.”

Hard-line Iranian officials had for months been demanding new missile tests, a common practice before the negotiations over the country’s nuclear program began in 2013.

The missile — named Emad, or pillar — is a step up from Iran’s Shahab-3 missiles because it can be guided toward its target, the Iranian defense minister, Hossein Dehghan, told the semiofficial Fars news agency. In recent decades, with Iran’s air force plagued by economic sanctions and other restrictions, the country has invested heavily in its nuclear program and has produced missiles that can reach as far as Europe.

“We don’t seek permission from anyone to strengthen our defense and missile capabilities,” Mr. Dehghan said.

Also on Sunday, members of Parliament voted in favor of a bill approving the generalities of the nuclear agreement, but they had been denied information on its details. State television broadcast the session using only audio and archived images of Parliament.

The head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, Ali Akbar Salehi, who had gone to Parliament to defend the deal, said in a speech that a member had threatened to kill him and bury his body “in the cement of the Arak heavy-water reactor.”

Under the nuclear agreement, a heavy-water plant in Arak will be redesigned and turned into a relatively less dangerous light-water reactor. The threat, which sounded like something from an American gangster film, was made in front of witnesses by a hard-line representative, Ruhollah Hosseinian, according to reports.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/12/w...on&region=bottom-well&WT.nav=bottom-well&_r=0
 
It's like I was telling you lefty and righty cupcakes of spoiled cream for awhile now. That 'deal' was never made to be an actual call for peace. It was set up, specifically to give us a reason to go into Iran somewhere down the line. We WANT them to fail to hold up their end of the bargain.

Iraq 2.0, here we come.
 
Weird, I thought they needed nuclear technology for energy development. Why are they shooting off rockets?
 
Doesn't sound like a good development. I guess it will depend upon interpretation, and apparently it was done before their Parliament approved the accord. Could just be throwing a bone to the hardliners too:

Iran tested a new guided long-range ballistic missile on Sunday, hours before Parliament, in a rowdy session, approved the generalities of the nuclear agreement reached in July between Iran and world powers, the state news agency IRNA reported.

The missile launch may have violated the terms of the agreement, reached in Vienna with six world powers. According to some readings of the deal, it placed restrictions on Iran’s ambitious missile program.

Experts have been debating the interpretation of a United Nations Security Council resolution, adopted a few days after the accord was agreed upon, that bars Iran from developing missiles “designed to carry nuclear warheads.”

Hard-line Iranian officials had for months been demanding new missile tests, a common practice before the negotiations over the country’s nuclear program began in 2013.

The missile — named Emad, or pillar — is a step up from Iran’s Shahab-3 missiles because it can be guided toward its target, the Iranian defense minister, Hossein Dehghan, told the semiofficial Fars news agency. In recent decades, with Iran’s air force plagued by economic sanctions and other restrictions, the country has invested heavily in its nuclear program and has produced missiles that can reach as far as Europe.

“We don’t seek permission from anyone to strengthen our defense and missile capabilities,” Mr. Dehghan said.

Also on Sunday, members of Parliament voted in favor of a bill approving the generalities of the nuclear agreement, but they had been denied information on its details. State television broadcast the session using only audio and archived images of Parliament.

The head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, Ali Akbar Salehi, who had gone to Parliament to defend the deal, said in a speech that a member had threatened to kill him and bury his body “in the cement of the Arak heavy-water reactor.”

Under the nuclear agreement, a heavy-water plant in Arak will be redesigned and turned into a relatively less dangerous light-water reactor. The threat, which sounded like something from an American gangster film, was made in front of witnesses by a hard-line representative, Ruhollah Hosseinian, according to reports.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/12/w...on&region=bottom-well&WT.nav=bottom-well&_r=0

So the Obama the moron trusted these people? Any 1st grader could have told you that muslims can never be trusted.
 
Other than the ones who supported the Iran deal, is anyone surprised by this?

Actually, I'm kind of shocked ciggy was the one who posted this. Other than that, no.
 
If they tested the rocket BEFORE the treaty has been concluded, can they be said to be in violation of the treaty?

This is like cease fire agreements. We could say "let's all stop shooting right now" but, instead, we set a date in the future and go on killing each other. What's worse, in those last couple of days, each side steps up the carnage to take key ground or to wipe out troubling opposition strongholds to get what they want and create more defensible positions.

This seems to be that sort of frustrating but perfectly rational activity before the rules are locked down.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
If they tested the rocket BEFORE the treaty has been concluded, can they be said to be in violation of the treaty?

This is like cease fire agreements. We could say "let's all stop shooting right now" but, instead, we set a date in the future and go on killing each other. What's worse, in those last couple of days, each side steps up the carnage to take key ground or to wipe out troubling opposition strongholds to get what they want and create more defensible positions.

This seems to be that sort of frustrating but perfectly rational activity before the rules are locked down.

Like a bachelor party!
 
If they tested the rocket BEFORE the treaty has been concluded, can they be said to be in violation of the treaty?

This is like cease fire agreements. We could say "let's all stop shooting right now" but, instead, we set a date in the future and go on killing each other. What's worse, in those last couple of days, each side steps up the carnage to take key ground or to wipe out troubling opposition strongholds to get what they want and create more defensible positions.

This seems to be that sort of frustrating but perfectly rational activity before the rules are locked down.
Rules locked down? Do liberals actually believe the crap they spout? There is no party to this agreement that can EVER be trusted.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT