Iran already wants the Nuclear deal changed. Are you surprised they want more?

LCDR Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 23 Sep 2015 16:17:15 -0400

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/09/23/iran-deal-open-for-debate-tehran-presses-new-ayatollah-demand/?intcmp=hpbt1

The Iranian government is pressing the U.S. and others to give even more ground to Tehran in the already-sealed nuclear agreement, posing a new headache as the Obama administration and others try to implement the deal.

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei earlier this month demanded that sanctions be lifted entirely, not just suspended. A top Khamenei adviser reiterated that demand over the weekend -- ahead of potential informal talks on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly.

Secretary of State John Kerry plans meet in the coming days in New York with his Iranian counterpart, Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif. According to Iran's Fars News Agency, Iranian officials also plan to meet with all members of the P5+1 group, which negotiated the deal, in New York on Sept. 28.

These reported plans prompted one group, the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), to question whether talks were being "reopened," in order to address Khamenei's concerns.

Asked about the speculation, a State Department official said there is no further negotiation and the U.S. expects the deal to be implemented "in good faith."

"We've long said that we're not going to comment on or react to every statement attributed to the Iranian leadership," the official told FoxNews.com. "Our focus is on implementing the deal, and verifying that Iran completes its key nuclear steps under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. There is no renegotiation, and the nuclear-related sanctions relief that Iran will receive once the IAEA verifies that it has completed its nuclear steps is clearly spelled out in the text of the [agreement]."

But at the least, the ayatollah's demands show the post-deal debate shifting now from Washington back to Tehran, leaving some uncertainty in the air as the U.S. and U.N. prepare to move forward.

In Washington, congressional critics have been unable to muster the votes to even send President Obama a resolution disapproving the deal. But in Tehran, the ayatollah on Sept. 3 renewed concerns about the nature of the deal's sanctions relief.

He said in a statement that sanctions should be lifted entirely, not just suspended -- and said "there will be no deal" unless this is done.

According to MEMRI's translation, he warned that if sanctions are only suspended, Iran, in turn, will only "suspend" nuclear activities cited in the deal. He also called for a parliamentary vote on the deal, though it's unclear whether that will happen.

Iran's Fars News Agency over the weekend quoted ayatollah adviser Ali Akbar Velayati saying Khamenei's views "should be materialized." He added: "It is understood from the Supreme Leader's remarks that balance is necessary in the two sides' measures and in case of imbalance, nothing will be done."

The text of the Iran nuclear agreement actually refers to the "lifting" of sanctions. But the White House has said that sanctions "will snap back into place" if Iran violates its end, indicating they indeed see the sanctions relief as reversible.

MEMRI wrote that the upcoming meeting could be a forum for all parties to "discuss the Iranian demand for further concessions." MEMRI, though, warned that outright lifting sanctions "would constitute a fundamental change" to the deal. "This is because lifting the sanctions, rather than suspending them, will render impossible a snapback [of sanctions] in case of Iranian violations."

The nature of the discussions being held next week is unclear.

On Sept. 20, Kerry said he planned to meet with his Russian and his Iranian counterpart, "regarding Iran and other things." But he indicated the meeting would cover a range of topics, including the Syrian civil war.

While Fars reported that the Iranians will meet with P5+1 representatives in New York on Sept. 28, the State Department has not announced such a meeting.

Earlier this month, after Iran's Supreme Leader spoke out against the process for sanctions relief in the deal, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest put the onus on Iran to follow through with its end before sanctions relief is even implemented.

"We've been crystal-clear about the fact that Iran will have to take a variety of serious steps to significantly roll back their nuclear program before any sanctions relief is offered," he said. "... And only after those steps and several others have been effectively completed, will Iran begin to receive sanctions relief. The good news is all of this is codified in the agreement that was reached between Iran and the rest of the international community."

Iran deal open for debate? Tehran presses new ayatollah demand

The Iranian government is pressing the U.S. and others to give even more ground to Tehran in the already-sealed nuclear agreement, posing a new headache as the Obama administration and others try to implement the deal.

Response by LTC Stephen F. made Sep 23 at 2015 4:18 PM

LTC Stephen F. — Wed, 23 Sep 2015 16:18:10 -0400

Not much surprise there LCDR Private RallyPoint Member . They enjoy changing the rules - once the West agrees to something they have changed in the past and I expect they will do their best to get as much as they can out of any deal. They have learned much from the North Koreans.

Response by Capt Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 23 at 2015 4:19 PM

Capt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 23 Sep 2015 16:19:21 -0400

I will only be surprised if we don't give them more.

Response by SFC Stephen King made Sep 23 at 2015 4:20 PM

SFC Stephen King — Wed, 23 Sep 2015 16:20:08 -0400

No thanks surprised at all. We need to reevaluate this whole debacle and plan accordingly. Remember the history of this country and be cognitive of their views towards us.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 23 at 2015 4:35 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 23 Sep 2015 16:35:34 -0400

Pretty clear how the State Department and the Administration look at the deal when the State department official states "We've long said that we're not going to comment on or react to every statement attributed to the Iranian leadership, our focus is on implementing the deal." It is clear that this deal means more about someones legacy then actually accomplishing what is good for America and the world.

Response by SGT Jeremiah B. made Sep 23 at 2015 4:40 PM

SGT Jeremiah B. — Wed, 23 Sep 2015 16:40:50 -0400

While I support the deal as the only peaceful way forward, the answer to this should be no. Iran needs to uphold their end of the bargain for a substantial amount of time and THEN concessions can be discussed.

Response by CPT Jack Durish made Sep 23 at 2015 4:43 PM

CPT Jack Durish — Wed, 23 Sep 2015 16:43:36 -0400

This situation just gets sadder and sadder. Critics of anyone opposed to "The Deal" contend that we simply can't go on in a state of belligerency forever, and they're correct. We should have begun dealing with the Iranians long ago. The Administration had their chance but blew it when they turned their backs on the dissidents. Now they double down by "making nice" with the tyrannical government that the dissidents wanted to replace. Those dissidents are the progeny of the Iranian people who once lived in peace and harmony with America, who provided stability in the Middle East until Carter brought down their government and allowed the religious zealots to take control. No, we can't go back in time and undo that damage, but neither should we move forward accepting nuclear armed terrorists which is the situation that "The Deal" guarantees.

Response by CDR Terry Boles made Sep 23 at 2015 5:09 PM

CDR Terry Boles — Wed, 23 Sep 2015 17:09:53 -0400

Not surprised at all. More concessions are a coming I'm sure..because we know they will behave like a spoiled child with very vocal threats and guess who will give in.

Response by SGT Francis Wright made Sep 23 at 2015 5:40 PM

SGT Francis Wright — Wed, 23 Sep 2015 17:40:55 -0400

They should not even be in a position to make demands. They want something; then they need to give something in return.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 23 at 2015 8:13 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 23 Sep 2015 20:13:53 -0400

Iran has no intention of honoring this deal. Now they are hedging against the possibility that a new administration might snap back sanctions when they inevitably act up. What they are trying to do now is to make that harder, hoping that they will receive top cover under the Aegis of Russia's Security Council veto.

Response by SCPO Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 23 at 2015 8:31 PM

SCPO Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 23 Sep 2015 20:31:39 -0400

The only thing that surprises me is that those Arabic armpits can even read!!!

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 9 at 2015 1:47 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 09 Oct 2015 13:47:02 -0400

I don't see anything wrong with continued negotiations to make the deal more appealing to both sides.

Response by SPC Luis Mendez made Oct 9 at 2015 4:28 PM

SPC Luis Mendez — Fri, 09 Oct 2015 16:28:40 -0400

I'm not following the news on this issue much if at all. So I don't know about this. Of course I haven read that Doc. which I'm sure consist of hundreds of pages. But No I would not be surprised at all.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 21 at 2015 11:23 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 21 Oct 2015 23:23:27 -0400

LCDR Private RallyPoint Member, I'm not surprised they want more, but I am surprised they didn't just go ahead and do it.

Response by SFC Ronald Burris made Oct 26 at 2015 3:05 PM

SFC Ronald Burris — Mon, 26 Oct 2015 15:05:39 -0400

I'm sure Obama willl give Iran what they want. He has done this already. I think Obama sold the Armed Forces out by telling the World that it wasn't the right time for us to disagree with the treaty since He felt our Armed Forces couldn't take Iran out. Of course, with the continued downsizing we have, as Commander in Chief, he can blame himself if he felt that way. But, now we see how Russia is acting up since He made that comment. No respect to the US Armed Forces.

Response by SFC Ronald Burris made Oct 26 at 2015 3:20 PM

SFC Ronald Burris — Mon, 26 Oct 2015 15:20:01 -0400

Sad thing when the US borrows money from Russia and China. It seems we are cautious when dealing with both Countries. Now we are dealing with Iran and giving them everything they want. I am not sure why President Obama was so quick to try and get this treaty signed. I guess He wants Iran to finish building their Nuclear Weapons so they can try to destroy us. What the heck, by then President Obama will probably be out of office. He doesn't care after that. I figured about two more years before Iran shows their hand by pointing Nuclear Weapons our way but with Russia being their ally, it could be less. Having China, Iran, Isis, North Korea, Syria, and Russia to deal with and we are still downsizing. Is there someone else out there that sees something isn't right about this picture? We don't mind gving all this money to other Counries but President Obama and the Congress doesn't see anything wrong with delaying approval of the new Fiscal Year monies. The past 61/2 years they have blown over 15 trillion dolllars on foreign support and our own Armed Forces is suffering and can't get the money to do what they need to do to fight our enemies. It's time we open our eyes and see that the President and Congress doesn't seem to care about what happens to our own Country. There has to come a time to end all the support we provide to other Countries so we can provide the support to our Armed Forces so they can bring the strength up and approve all the programs our military branches need to stay ahead of our enemy. If President Obama hasn't seen how dangerous Russia has gotten and that Russis is trying to provoke issues with America I just don't see his worth continuing to be President.