O plays the game a little differently. . . - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

link · #1 09-24-2009, 03:48 PM

According to the article below an implied reason that O backed off on the missile defense shield was to encourage Russia to help coerce Iran to drop it's nuke program.

Russia appears to be going along.

Quote:

White House officials could barely hide their glee. "I couldn't have said it any better myself," a delighted Michael McFaul, Mr. Obama's senior adviser for democracy and Russia, told reporters after the meeting. He insisted nonetheless that the administration had not tried to buy Russia's cooperation with its decision to scrap the missile shield in Europe in favor of a reconfigured system.

Privately, several administration officials did acknowledge that missile defense might have had something to do with Moscow's newfound verbal cooperation on the Iran sanctions issue.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/24/world/24prexy.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper

Anyone wanna predict how will this play out over the next 18 months or so?

aklim · #2 09-24-2009, 04:16 PM

"consider, amenable". All sounds like a definite maybe to me.

Whether Mr. Medvedev’s words translate into strong action once the issue moves back to the Security Council remains to be seen. American officials have been disappointed before by Moscow’s distaste for tough sanctions, and Prime Minister Vladimir V. Putin seemed to cast doubt on the need for stronger sanctions just last week.

The Obama administration hailed the pending resolution as a significant step forward. But it would not be binding, and would become so only if the Security Council required countries to make their nuclear exports subject to such restrictions. Many countries balked at that requirement, an indication of how difficult it may prove to toughen the treaty itself when it is up for review next year.

My guess is words will flow and business as usual.

MTUpower · #3 09-24-2009, 04:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by link

Anyone wanna predict how will this play out over the next 18 months or so?

Russia will play us like they have for decades, and we them.

aklim · #4 09-24-2009, 04:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MTUpower

Russia will play us like they have for decades, and we them.

That is, unless they have something to gain

aklim · #5 09-24-2009, 05:12 PM

What I am curious about is why all the hoopla about him not trying to buy their cooperation? I mean, besides the fact that he gave freely WITHOUT laying down terms, what else is so bad about quid pro quo? Why all the beating around the bush? Just come out and say "If you support us, I will take that off the table".

POS · #6 09-24-2009, 06:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by link

Anyone wanna predict how will this play out over the next 18 months or so?

Sure, the US will keep on positioning ourselves with the UN for sanctions and diplomacy. Russia will play along on the surface. N. Korea will continue to supply Iran with whatever it needs. Isreal will get tired of the UN's inaction and Obama criticisms of Israeli policies, and Israel will initiate a series of strikes taking out what they know about Iran's facilities. All within 18 months.

cmac2012 · #7 09-24-2009, 07:48 PM

Or we could continue to squander $billions on a system that has a .000001% chance of working and if it got that good, it would cost a small fraction of our costs to develop evasive capabilities, which they've probably already done.

We freaked out about missiles in Cuba, but Russia should be good with missiles on their borders? Not the same kind of missiles but it's just more proof that we won't grant them the sort of respect that we demand.

t walgamuth · #8 09-24-2009, 08:39 PM

This reminds me very much of the cuban missle crisis when we had a bunch of outdated jupiter missles sitting in Russia's back yard. They agreed to take the missles in cuba home and we agreed to remove the jupiters quietly in the next year or so.

450slcguy · #9 09-24-2009, 09:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by POS

Sure, the US will keep on positioning ourselves with the UN for sanctions and diplomacy. Russia will play along on the surface. N. Korea will continue to supply Iran with whatever it needs. Isreal will get tired of the UN's inaction and Obama criticisms of Israeli policies, and Israel will initiate a series of strikes taking out what they know about Iran's facilities. All within 18 months.

I'd say that's pretty close, adding that an Israeli attack would probably turn into a full blown war. If the Iranians do have nukes, and I believe they do, they'll probably launch them. In response, the Israelis will respond with their much larger nuclear arsenal. After that, all bets are off on what will happen next, but the Armageddon thing does comes to my mind.

Pavka007 · #10 09-24-2009, 09:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by POS

Sure, the US will keep on positioning ourselves with the UN for sanctions and diplomacy. Russia will play along on the surface. N. Korea will continue to supply Iran with whatever it needs. Isreal will get tired of the UN's inaction and Obama criticisms of Israeli policies, and Israel will initiate a series of strikes taking out what they know about Iran's facilities. All within 18 months.

Gosh...so little time so many models in Mercedes line I've never driven or owned..... I better get going....

t walgamuth · #11 09-24-2009, 10:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 450slcguy

I'd say that's pretty close, adding that an Israeli attack would probably turn into a full blown war. If the Iranians do have nukes, and I believe they do, they'll probably launch them. In response, the Israelis will respond with their much larger nuclear arsenal. After that, all bets are off on what will happen next, but the Armageddon thing does comes to my mind.

Silly alarmist drivel.

Did you see that on Fox?

450slcguy · #12 09-24-2009, 10:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by t walgamuth

Silly alarmist drivel.

Is it really? Do you really believe Iran wouldn't retaliate if Israel attacked their nuclear facilities? I wouldn't underestimate their response in a defensive situation, especially considering their declared hatred and numerous vows to destroy Israel. If they do have nukes, I have little doubt they wouldn't use them, especially if they're back into a corner.

Quote:

Originally Posted by t walgamuth

Did you see that on Fox?

Don't be ridiculous.

tankdriver · #13 09-24-2009, 11:33 PM

Iran doesn't have nuclear weapons. If and when they do, they aren't going to keep it a secret.

POS · #14 09-25-2009, 08:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tankdriver

Iran doesn't have nuclear weapons. If and when they do, they aren't going to keep it a secret.

A little out of touch? http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/25/AR2009092500289.html

link · #15 09-26-2009, 10:42 AM

Thanks for the comments.

It was interesting to read the report of the leaders from USA, France and the UK standing together to denounce the latest disclosure about Iran’s nuke program. Accordingly the newly disclosed facility is clearly designed for fuel refinement. A clear Fuk You from Iran.

I predict it probably won’t be 18 months until Iran gets at least a bloody nose and maybe their leadership will be decapitated. After a corrupt election, a clear elbow in the eye of international law and now they’ve gone and pissed off France. Clearly not even the sleaze of the world will stand with the Iran government much longer.