Featured Joe Biden reaffirms he will seek return to Iran nuclear deal

[Philosopher]

Before Trump:

EIA estimates that Iran's oil net export revenues totaled $55 billion in 2017. projects. According to EIA estimates based on tanker-tracking data reported by ClipperData, Iran's crude oil and condensate exports averaged 2.5 million b/d in 2017, about 0.2 million b/d higher than the 2016 average (Figure 4)

https://www.eia.gov/international/content/analysis/countries_long/Iran/pdf/iran_exe.pdf

With complete oil embargo

According to the data, Iran is exporting as much as 600,000 barrels daily, using ship-to-ship transfers with transponders turned off to avoid detection, skirting U.S. sanctions. The daily average number compares with an estimate of 227,000 bpd made in a U.S. Congressional report, NBC’s Raf Sanchez wrote on Twitter

Iranian Oil Exports Much Higher Than Official Data Suggests | OilPrice.com

Iran is exporting a lot more crude oil than U.S. figures suggest, data from TankerTrackers.com has revealed

www.google.com

The amount actually sold on black market and sold as Iraqi oil is impossible to know

The market is already saturated with oil, thus one of the main factors effecting Iran oil sales would be to what extend Iran could regain market share, it is still part of OPEC and I doubt they be very accommodating, especially the Saudis. The other bottle-neck is just how much oil Iran could produce/pump. It's infrastructure is not all up to the job.

Thus the only thing Biden will give Iran is waivers to export oil to friendly countries to Iran. Thus Iran is looking at possible less than 2M barrels extra of oil export.

That would go against the terms of the JCPOA. If Biden tries to restrict the deal like that, then Iran has the right to take action.

Is this your idea of tangible economic benefits?

You're focusing too much on the oil. Iran will be free to sell its gas and also it's non crude petrochemical products. And yes, when you add all that up, the revenues Iran will gain is not comparable to the situation right now.

Iran will once again give away another round of leverage (uranium deposits, scuttle Fordow, and stop construction of underground centrifuge site) just to be able to sell some more oil for 4 years.

That is a much better alternative than remaining under sanctions, which is your plan. Truly outstanding strategy.

I mean what else can someone expect from someone so naive that takes the Biden’s words as gospel.

Yes, instead lets take the words of users on an internet forum.

The return “deal” is going to force a second more punishing JCPOA 2.0 then force a third even more punishing JCPOA 3.0 deal in a few years that will totally gut Iran.

Nobody is going to force Iran to accept anything beyond JCPOA. Iran has made this clear. You're just making unsubstantiated predictions.

Meanwhile you will have given up leverage to return to JCPOA. Given up even more leverage to to get to JCPOA 2.0

Iran will merely return to its obligation under JCPOA. Avoid inventing your own theories and trying to pass them off as facts.

This is how US destroyed Saddam from 1990 to 2003.

Pick up a history book or two. Saddam's Iraq was crushed by sanctions and heavily impacted by multiple wars. Comparing that situation to Iran via JCPOA is fallacious beyond recognition.

 

[WudangMaster]

 

[SalarHaqq]

Actually, you do. You first put pressure on them to see their reaction. If you see no reaction, you will progressively increase pressure on them and entrench them. A game changing move is a move that leads to them recalculating their strategy. As long as they see no such move, they will continue to entrench Iran militarily, economically and politically.

Again, while taking these steps you are still pursuing a concrete objective. And entrenching Iran wasn't that objective per se, forcing Iran to the negotiating table to make further concessions was. In particular to limit its ballistic missile arsenal and to draw down its presence in the region.

This much was explicitly stated by the Trump regime.

Their strategy failed to reach its objectives. The Trump regime did not alter this strategy because it was stuck with this unproductive method (back-pedalling was not really an option Trump was willing to choose since it would make him lose face).

As I said, the US is pretty happy with the status quo. Why shouldn't they be? They have isolated Iran with minimal cost.

Islamic Iran has always been more or less isolated from the zio-American sphere of influence.

Yet its allies are still there, standing strong, putting up resistance and being more numerous than before (given the addition of Yemen's Ansarallah).

Their attempts to suppress Lebanese Hezbollah (or to extract it from the Iranian orbit) haven't yielded any results. Nor has their attempted "colored revolution" or rather, "colored social movement" in Iraq succeeded in neutralizing Iran's interests there. Same goes for their efforts to eject Iran from Syria and to drive wedges between Damascus and Tehran. Their scheming to make Hamas cut ties with Iran hasn't led anywhere either.

Iran's missile program and other defence sectors have been experiencing unabated progress and expansion.

Their end goal is not to keep Iran isolated and under pressure. It is to destroy and dismantle Iran. To achieve that, they need Iran to abandon its missiles and to be unable to rely on this many idelogically-motivated allies accross the region. This is the standard by which their success or failure ought to be measured.

If you look at the game from Trump's perspective as a tactic to show him triumph and strong in the eye of the public, you can say that Trump's maximum pressure campaign failed miserably. If you look at it from the perspective of the US as a system, the very fact that you and I are now discussing the issue of returning to the JCPOA shows that their maximum pressure campaign has worked. So, one can say that Trump's maximum pressure campaign worked and the next US administration is going to inherit a leverage in the next negotiation, if there will be one.

The US as a system needs Iran to be obliterated from ground up. I don't see any groundbreaking progress in that direction.

We will always be discussing plots by the zio-American empire against Iran. They are not going to stop scheming and Iran is not going to stop resisting.

And as you noticed, I expressed the view that they won't manage to have Iran acquiesce to additional concessions in exchange for a return of the US to the JCPOA. If it goes as I predict, there will be no win for Washington. Furthermore, you concur that another negotiation anytime soon is uncertain to take place or to bear fruit.

I don't know to be honest. Decisions like this are made by the system, not only one person. Everyone knows that I hate Rouhani with a passion, but I don't think he is solely responsible for the JCPOA scandal. Khamenei gave him the green light and allowed him to stay in power for 8 years.

Because Rohani had enough political clout and influence within the system to pressure the Leader and make it hard for him to choose otherwise, and because circumstances favored the liberals at that point in time. These parameters no longer apply.

 

[TheImmortal]

The market is already saturated with oil, thus one of the main factors effecting Iran oil sales would be to what extend Iran could regain market share, it is still part of OPEC and I doubt they be very accommodating, especially the Saudis. The other bottle-neck is just how much oil Iran could produce/pump. It's infrastructure is not all up to the job.

This only proves my point

That would go against the terms of the JCPOA. If Biden tries to restrict the deal like that, then Iran has the right to take action.

Actually it doesn’t. Wrong again like usual. It appears you know nothing about the JCPOA and your knowledge is lacking. Congress required the president to verify every 3 months that Iran was abiding terms of nuclear deal in order to stay in and give sanctions relief. A simple research will show that Trump followed along for a year or so and certified Iran was following the deal then stopped forcing countries to scale back oil before Trump officially signed that he was leaving the deal.

You're focusing too much on the oil. Iran will be free to sell its gas and also it's non crude petrochemical products. And yes, when you add all that up, the revenues Iran will gain is not comparable to the situation right now.

It’s when you say things like this that show clueless you are. Iran exports natural gas mainly to two countries: Iraq and Turkey. This has not been impeded by US withdrawal from JCPOA. Iraq has a gas waiver from US. Again do research.

That is a much better alternative than remaining under sanctions, which is your plan. Truly outstanding strategy.



Yes, instead lets take the words of users on an internet forum.



Nobody is going to force Iran to accept anything beyond JCPOA. Iran has made this clear. You're just making unsubstantiated predictions.

Iran will merely return to its obligation under JCPOA. Avoid inventing your own theories and trying to pass them off as facts.

You should listen to Biden who you believe so much, he has said he will return To the deal and negotiate a better more expansive deal after returning to the deal. Europe has signaled it is open to expanding JCPOA in a separate agreement after US. And what do you think will happen if Iran refuses to negotiate after both parties return to original JCPOA? Surely you cannot be that naive.

Pick up a history book or two. Saddam's Iraq was crushed by sanctions and heavily impacted by multiple wars. Comparing that situation to Iran via JCPOA is fallacious beyond recognition.

There was one war (Persian gulf war I) and clearly my point was that after Persian gulf war I, US embarked on a brutal sanctions campaign to weaken Iraq to the point of easy finishing it off for Persian Gulf War II.

you don’t think Iran is crushed by sanctions? Iran is under worse Sanctions.

My response in bold in quote box above.

I suggest you do basic research before acting like a know-it-all. Your lack of basic understanding of the old deal and Iran’s current export situation makes it hard to take you seriously. I am sure you will try to talk your way out of glaring mistakes.

 

[Arian]

Again, while taking these steps you are still pursuing a concrete objective. And entrenching Iran wasn't that objective per se, forcing Iran to the negotiating table to make further concessions was. In particular to limit its ballistic missile arsenal and to draw down its presence in the region.

This much was explicitly stated by the Trump regime.

Their strategy failed to reach its objectives. Trump did not modify it because he didn't know any better.

The US objective has always been clear to us. It's regime change. Right now the US is pursuing regime change through raising dissatisfaction among Iranians with economic sanctions and disinformation campaigns by the media. That policy worked on the Soviet Union, and it seems that it's working on Iran too.

Islamic Iran has always been more or less isolated from the zio-American sphere of influence.

But its allies are still there, standing strong, putting up resistance and being more numerous than before (given the addition of Yemen's Ansarallah).

Their attempts to suppress Lebanese Hezbollah (or to extract it from the Iranian orbit) haven't yielded any results. Nor has their attempted "colored revolution" or rather, "colored social movement" in Iraq succeeded in neutralizing Iran's interests there. Same goes for their efforts to eject Iran from Syria and to drive wedges between Damascus and Tehran. Their scheming to make Hamas cut ties with Iran hasn't led anywhere either.

Iran's missile program and other defence sectors have been experiencing unabated progress and expansion.

Their end goal is not to keep Iran isolated and under pressure. It is to destroy and dismantle Iran. To achieve that, they need Iran to abandon its missiles and to be unable to rely on this many idelogically-motivated allies accross the region. This is the standard by which their success or failure ought to be measured.

Not really. The Europeans did a lot of trade with Iran, including sensitive technologies, before 2007. Many of the components of our nuclear program were imported from Europe. They used to be our main trade partners before China became a global power in the 21st century.

Again, one can cite the case of the Soviet Union. They never defeated the Soviet Union militarily. They defeated them economically and that eventually led to the dissolution of a world power that had tremendous control over many countries in Asia, Europe, Latin America and Africa.

The US as a system needs Iran to be obliterated from ground up. I don't see any groundbreaking progress in that direction.

We will always be discussing plots by the zio-American empire against Iran. They are not going to stop scheming and Iran is not going to stop resisting.

And as you noticed, I expressed the view that they won't manage to have Iran acquiesce to additional concessions in exchange for a return of the US to the JCPOA. If it goes as I predict, there will be no win for Washington. Furthermore, you concur that another negotiation anytime soon is uncertain to take place or to bear fruit.

I agree that Iran and the US can never become friends or even frenemies. Yeah, you need fundamental changes in the US or Iran to bring the countries close to each other, which isn't going to happen any time soon. However, we should come up with a way to coexist with them without losing 50 billion dollars a year (as it is the case now).

Because Rohani had enough political clout and influence within the system to pressure the Leader and make it hard for him to choose otherwise, and because circumstances favored the liberals at that point in time. These parameters no longer apply.

You might be right, but the Rouhani lost public support 3 years ago. But the Leader defended him.

 

[Philosopher]

This only proves my point

On the contrary, it showed you did not understand the reason why Iran's oil sale/output were at the level they were.

Actually it doesn’t. Wrong again like usual. It appears you know nothing about the JCPOA and your knowledge is lacking. Congress required the president to verify every 3 months that Iran was abiding terms of nuclear deal in order to stay in and give sanctions relief. A simple research will show that Trump followed along for a year or so and certified Iran was following the deal then stopped forcing countries to scale back oil before Trump officially signed that he was leaving the deal.

This is not a rebuttal to my statement. You claimed Biden could chose to pick which nations Iran can sell to, and I stated he cannot because the JCPOA does not allow him to create such limitation. You're confusing the JCPOA with something the US congress created. The certification process of the US president is not part of the JCPOA. It's rather ironic you claim I need to undergo research yet you miss something so simple.

It’s when you say things like this that show clueless you are. Iran exports natural gas mainly to two countries: Iraq and Turkey. This has not been impeded by US withdrawal from JCPOA. Iraq has a gas waiver from US. Again do research.

Seems you missed the (rather obvious) point of that post. It was to show you that Iran's revenues are not derived from crude oil alone. I gave multiple example, of which gas is one. You need to put more thoughts in your replies.

You should listen to Biden who you believe so much, he has said he will return To the deal and negotiate a better more expansive deal after returning to the deal. Europe has signaled it is open to expanding JCPOA in a separate agreement after US. And what do you think will happen if Iran refuses to negotiate after both parties return to original JCPOA? Surely you cannot be that naive.

The JCPOA and whatever deal they try to get after are separate. As long as Iran's interests under the JCPOA are met, then it will remain in it. If Iran refuses to negotiate further and they attempt to backtrack on their commitments, then Iran will retaliate. It does not mean Iran will accept further concessions. This is elementary logic.

There was one war (Persian gulf war I) and clearly my point was that after Persian gulf war I, US embarked on a brutal sanctions campaign to weaken Iraq to the point of easy finishing it off for Persian Gulf War II.

you don’t think Iran is crushed by sanctions? Iran is under worse Sanctions.

So use simple reasonings and realise Iran joining the JCPOA is not comparable to what happened to Iraq.

I suggest you do basic research before acting like a know-it-all. Your lack of basic understanding of the old deal and Iran’s current export situation makes it hard to take you seriously. I am sure you will try to talk your way out of glaring mistakes.

It appears to me you're projecting. You are obviously not spending enough time looking into these matters before commenting on them. If want me to provide you with reading sources, I'll do so. It is blatantly obvious you try to alter facts to satisfy your faulty conclusions. That is not how it works. If you wish for your arguments to hold merit, they must be backed with grounded realities.

 

[SalarHaqq]

The US objective has always been clear to us. It's regime change. Right now the US is pursuing regime change through raising dissatisfaction among Iranians with economic sanctions and disinformation campaigns by the media. That policy worked on the Soviet Union, and it seems that it's working on Iran too.

One will be able to say it works if the Islamic Republic is overthrown. So to this day it has not yielded the desired results in Iran.

Not really. The Europeans did a lot of trade with Iran, including sensitive technologies, before 2007. Many of the components of our nuclear program were imported from Europe. They used to be our main trade partners before China became a global power in the 21st century.

Hence why I said more or less. I'm not going to delve into nitpicking, but we were talking about the Trump regime's maximum pressure campaign, which did not bring too many changes in this respect.

And given that Iran has kept progressing in technological areas at an acceptable pace, to me Trump's policy can't be qualified as a success.

Again, one can cite the case of the Soviet Union. They never defeated the Soviet Union militarily. They defeated them economically and that eventually led to the dissolution of a world power that had tremendous control over many countries in Asia, Europe, Latin America and Africa.

I did not claim that the US intends to defeat Iran through military means. But that they have not defeated Iran at all. Otherwise the Islamic Republic would no longer exist and Iran would now be balkanized. Which isn't the case.

I agree that Iran and the US can never become friends or even frenemies. Yeah, you need fundamental changes in the US or Iran to bring the countries close to each other, which isn't going to happen any time soon. However, we should come up with a way to coexist with them without losing 50 billion dollars a year (as it is the case now).

Difficult to conceive due to the fact that the US is subservient to zionism. And America's zionist masters are probably not going to allow it. But if it was possible then why not.

Those lost dollars will hurt less if and when Iran switches to a war economy.

You might be right, but the Rouhani lost public support 3 years ago. But the Leader defended him.

The Leader criticized him and his administration publicly on many occasion (even though he didn't cite his name explicitly, but that is the normal procedure and it was clear who he was talking about).

 

[HAIDER]

US official says Israel was behind assassination of Iranian scientist

By Kylie Atwood, CNN

Updated 10:50 AM ET, Wed December 2, 2020

 

[mohsen]

Biden Sets New Demands for Iran Nuclear Deal Return: NYT - Politics news - Tasnim News Agency

The Times said the Biden administration would seek to extend the duration of "restrictions on Iran's production of fissile material that could be used to make a (nuclear) bomb" in a new round of negotiations.

Iran would also have to address its activities in the region in the talks that would have to include its Arab neighbors like Saudi Arabia, the report said.

 

[Capt. Karnage]

Mr Dolaan Trump never realised that his policy of antagonizing Iran is benefiting China their biggest enemy. It even created problems for India.

 

[Trench Broom]

This is why Israel and the Arabs have aligned. To circumvent the USA and go it together against Iran. A senile Biden will not stop Israel and the Arabs crushing the regime in tehran.

 

[WudangMaster]

Biden Sets New Demands for Iran Nuclear Deal Return: NYT - Politics news - Tasnim News Agency

Enghad in maadar ghabehaa (team zarif 2021) az tasleem harf mizanan keh oon aashghaal kesaafat hanooz sar jaa nashesteh daareh migeh cheh goh haa ezaafeh baayad khord taa dobareh gool bezanan!

 

[reflecthofgeismar]

Just go full thicc Kimmi Boi mode.
Winning/surviving is helal, living in poverty, non-stop threatning status or death isn't.
I mean, the Iranians can do good whatever they want, they get maybe from international stage a bit "nice!" but in the end the don't help Iranians on big stage.
Just get over it, nuclear armed Iran - Israelis will need some more kosher diapers but THEN you can negotiate on an equal footing.
Biden will be the guy who does real wars again, instead of Uncle Trumpy Twitter wars.

 

[aryobarzan]

Two Questions from any one who knows the answer:

1- If Biden wants to go back to JCPOA...what happens to extra Uranium and Centrifuges that Iran has produced..what happens to financial damages to Iran in the past three years..

2- What happens in 5 years when JCPOA ends...Can US dump all nuclear sanctions on Iran again and Iran goes back enriching 20% and above..and we go on and on and on...

 

[Tumba]

Two Questions from any one who knows the answer:

1- If Biden wants to go back to JCPOA...what happens to extra Uranium and Centrifuges that Iran has produced..what happens to financial damages to Iran in the past three years..

2- What happens in 5 years when JCPOA ends...Can US dump all nuclear sanctions on Iran again and Iran goes back enriching 20% and above..and we go on and on and on...

forget JCPOA completely new deal will be discussed and will go through US congress... new terms new goals new timelines...
but issue is Democrats doesnt have full power in Us administration... POTUS will need to go back and again to US democratic structures to take go ahead ...
Most likely POTUS will start negotiations with multi nation groups for some iranian pass on trade and tech ... but cost to Iranian nuke research will be much more I assume if you guys need passage to international systems