End of the road for Iran aviation imports

[rotor-rooter]

Everything to be shut down. Airbus, Boeing, ATR and everyone else. It's a great way to kick-off a negotiation.

Boeing, Airbus licences to sell jets to Iran to be revoked: U.S. treasury secretary | CBC News (http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/boeing-iran-united-states-trump-1.4653924)

[OldLurker]

End of the road to the West, yes. Iran Air's orders for Airbus and ATR will be cancelled, I guess - not a problem for the US!
Beginning of the road to Moscow? or the Belt and Road to China?

[Heathrow Harry]

Not cancelled, they'll be deferred

so a constant reminder to everyone of US bullying.....

[gcal]

Not cancelled, they'll be deferred

so a constant reminder to everyone of US bullying.....

Indeed and it is about time the European countries stood up to it.
The trouble is that such things largely affect the poor and cause yet more isolation; which can never be good.

[ATC Watcher]

Not cancelled, they'll be deferred
Indeed . the Trump administration is now at odds( to use a kind word) with its main allies and is unlikely to survive things like this for very long .

[Heathrow Harry]

rouble is they do it through the banks - no bank will touch an Iranian deal now nor want to deal with anyone who does.....

Doubt the Europeans can do anything about that TBH

[VinRouge]

rouble is they do it through the banks - no bank will touch an Iranian deal now nor want to deal with anyone who does.....

Doubt the Europeans can do anything about that TBH

What's to say that the Europeans can't continue to trade with Iran and ignore Trumps populist brain fart?

As far as I'm concerned, Trump can't stop the French selling Iran aircraft and spare parts. America's loss will be Europe's gain IMHO.

[DaveReidUK]

Trump can't stop the French selling Iran aircraft and spare parts

Well yes, the French can sell aircraft as long as they don't have any US content. That rules out pretty well all of the Airbus and ATR product line.

[Lonewolf_50]

What gets me annoyed about this is the hard reality of history: as evidenced by both Pakistan and North Korea, a nation will (if they've a mind to) develop their nuclear capability with a treaty or without one. (Two exceptions being Iraq and Syria, whose plants got bombed by the Israelis in 1981 and 2007).
This decision seems to me a way to cut off one's own nose to spite one's face; it harms harms high tech jobs, and overall national trade/commerce both at home, and among our allies.
The only silver lining I see is that any number of observers have opined that "a new deal" being reworked turns all of this back on. OK, if a "new deal" is worked out, and the orders turned back on, all to the good. But I wonder at the timeline on that.
I am not keen to see the aircraft building industry take a hit, on either side of the pond. :(
And here's the other thing: the opportunity to increase a variety of low level contacts and influence. For example, you've got simulator / training set ups that can establish the kinds of contacts benefit in a variety of multinational efforts ... OK. Nuff said.

[Chris2303]

To go slightly off topic I wonder if Trump has any idea that he may have made the USA considerably less safe.

[Ian W]

What gets me annoyed about this is the hard reality of history: as evidenced by both Pakistan and North Korea, a nation will (if they've a mind to) develop their nuclear capability with a treaty or without one. (Two exceptions being Iraq and Syria, whose plants got bombed by the Israelis in 1981 and 2007).
This decision seems to me a way to cut off one's own nose to spite one's face; it harms harms high tech jobs, and overall national trade/commerce both at home, and among our allies.
The only silver lining I see is that any number of observers have opined that "a new deal" being reworked turns all of this back on. OK, if a "new deal" is worked out, and the orders turned back on, all to the good. But I wonder at the timeline on that.
I am not keen to see the aircraft building industry take a hit, on either side of the pond. :(
And here's the other thing: the opportunity to increase a variety of low level contacts and influence. For example, you've got simulator / training set ups that can establish the kinds of contacts benefit in a variety of multinational efforts ... OK. Nuff said.

You are making the assumption that there will be no replacement deal; in the same way that there is now a replacement deal in the works for North Korea. I suspect that before the larger contracts are unwound (it takes time) that there may well be another deal in place better for both the Iranian people and the rest of the world. It will not be easy, but there was no verification in this deal and with the probable/possible " taqiyyah " approach of the Iranians and their apparent actions, then verification of compliance with an agreement will be necessary.

[JCviggen]

there was no verification in this deal

Who told you that and why did you believe it? It's patently untrue. https://www.gcsp.ch/News-Knowledge/Publications/The-Iran-Nuclear-Deal-Distrust-and-Verify (try page 25 onwards)

The US aren't the only ones who care about Iran and its nuclear ambitions, yet it is only they (well, along Iran's sworn enemies obviously) who insist on blowing up a deal that was doing fine for "something better" (undefined) for no obvious reason. (Of course even in the US there are plenty of well informed people in the government and military who were not in favor of terminating the deal either)

The world is a lot bigger than the US and ignoring long standing relationships with strong allies with this obvious buffoonery is worse for the US than it is for Iran.

[Heathrow Harry]

most people beleive Trump's biggest issue with the deal is that it was signed by Obama -

[Gilles Hudicourt]

Perhaps its time for non US manufacturers to remove US components from their products......

[KenV]

I am not keen to see the aircraft building industry take a hit, on either side of the pond. :(
I work for Boeing, so I know what you mean. That being said, both Boeing and Airbus have several years of backlog on the books. That means that there's several years breathing room to work out a new deal with Iran before there's any impact on "the aircraft building industry."

[KenV]

most people beleive Trump's biggest issue with the deal is that it was signed by Obama -"Most people?" Who are these mythical "most people" and who made you their spokesperson?

[KenV]

Who told you that and why did you believe it? It's patently untrue. https://www.gcsp.ch/News-Knowledge/Publications/The-Iran-Nuclear-Deal-Distrust-and-Verify (try page 25 onwards).Hmmmm. The italics are a direct cut and paste from your linked document:

Three major developments enabled breakthroughs in the negotiations. The first was the election of Barack Obama as US president in November 2008, allowing direct US negotiations with Iran. The second was a shift in P5+1 policy from insistence on the cessation of uranium enrichment by Iran combined with sanctions, to one of containing Iran’s nuclear programme and using the lifting of sanctions as leverage. The third major development was the 2013 election of Hassan Rouhani as president of Iran on a platform of sanctions relief and economic recovery."
Containment was a shaky concept to begin with and proven by North Korea to be impossible. Containment, a concept upon which the whole Iran deal is built, is a totally failed and discredited concept.

A mutually acceptable agreement was achieved through dialogue and active diplomacy rather than threats (including of a military strike), isolation and unilateral demands. Both sides achieved their goals: for the P5+1, that of preventing Iran from manufacturing nuclear weapons, and for Iran, that of preserving its acquired nuclear know-how and having the sanctions lifted.
Sadly, the recently released mountain of secret documents from Tehran proved that "preventing Iran from manufacturing nuclear weapons" was a fiction. And this deal that allows Iran "keeping their nuclear know-how" meant them keeping their nuclear weapon know-how.

The Vienna agreement put into place an unprecedented verification system to ensure that Iran will not enrich uranium above a low level, that the volume of its stockpiles will remain capped, that its capacity to produce enriched uranium will be limited and that it will not produce weapons-grade plutonium. The IAEA will monitor the whole Iranian fuel cycle, from mining to spent fuel (which Iran will not be able to reprocess).
Again, the recently release mountain of secret documents fro Tehran show the verification system is a farce. The Iranians have in place secret facilities for the enrichment of uranium "above a low level" including to nuclear weapons-grade level. Obama and Kerry promised that after their negotiations and deal with Syria, ALL of Syria's chemical weapons had been "verified" destroyed and their chemical weapon production facilities "verified" to be dismantled. Those "verified" assurances were a total farce.

The lack of mutual trust between Iran and the P5+1 explains this extensive verification system, which follows a “distrust-AND-verify” approach. Iran also had to work with the IAEA to clarify pending questions on the past possible military dimensions of its programme. The monitoring mechanism put in place will ensure joint supervision of the implementation of the commitments (including a Joint Commission and regular ministerial meetings). The JCPOA is a model of a cooperative security approach.
Another farce. The secret documents reveal that Iran did NOT truthfully "clarify pending questions on the past possible military dimensions of its programme." A "model cooperative security approach" depends totally on.......cooperation. The secret documents clearly show that Iran is not engaged in cooperation, but in deception.

The "negotiations" were a farce because the Iranians were not engaged in negotiation but deception, and the resulting deal is an equal farce. Knowing what we know now we can and should negotiate a much tougher deal with much more stringent verification that does not depend on "cooperation." And the end result needs to be much different. The old end result gave Iran unlimited unfettered ability to do whatever they wanted after the agreement expired, which begins in phases in 2023. The new end result must ensure Iran can NEVER produce nuclear weapons.

[JCviggen]

The "negotiations" were a farce because the Iranians were not engaged in negotiation but deception, and the resulting deal is an equal farce.

Is that why the anti-American hardliners hated it so much and why they celebrated today? They seem to be a weird bunch.

Knowing what we know now we can and should negotiate a much tougher deal

Please. It took years and years the last time and the people involved were actually semi qualified. Also, explain me the strength of the US' negotiating position when even its staunchest allies don't agree with it and are actively keeping the old, terrible, deal alive? How do you see that working, precisely?

The old end result gave Iran unlimited unfettered ability to do whatever they wanted after the agreement expired, which begins in phases in 2023.

From the document I linked to:

Under the agreement the IAEA will have access to all of Iran’s nuclear facilities for the
next 20 years. It will continuously monitor the country’s enrichment capability, including
through real-time monitoring of its enrichment facilities and access to its uranium mining
and milling facilities. The IAEA will also supervise the production of uranium concentrate
(“yellow cake”) for the next 25 years. The IAEA seals on disassembled and stored centrifuges
will notify the Agency if they are tampered with. Iran must allow short-notice inspections
of its nuclear facilities – as short as two hours if inspectors are already present at the site.
The JCPOA also outlines a mechanism for gaining access to sites of concern, for example, if there is suspicious activity at an undeclared site. Iran can challenge the IAEA
’s request to inspect the facility, leading to an arbitration process that could take up to 24 days to
resolve.

This provision is intended to close a loophole in the Additional Protocol, which
does not cover what the international community can do if a country refuses to grant
the IAEA access to a suspect facility within 24 hours. While Iran could potentially use that
timeline to hide some evidence of minor illicit activities, the facilities needed to develop
a covert nuclear programme are likely to leave traces of radiation that do not disappear
quickly. In other words, illicit activity at an undeclared site is likely to be detected under the
JCPOA. If Iran decided to “sneak out” it would have to rebuild an entire covert fuel cycle, from
uranium ore to weapons-usable uranium, but it cannot do so and escape detection. Iran is
unable to produce all the parts and components necessary for its programme indigenously.
As a result, it would have either to procure what it needs or divert materials from
authorized procurements. Diversion would likely be detected by the IAEA because of the
intrusive verification system put in place, combined with the existing export control
regimes

The new end result must ensure Iran can NEVER produce nuclear weapons.

At this point I'd be starting to feel safer if the US didn't have any, either.

[glad rag]

I remember in the 70s the Hazelnuts etc at Christmas came from Iran.

Remember reading it on the label. Realising that the world wasn't actually that big after all.





Once again the warmongers win. :(

[Lonewolf_50]

You are making the assumption that there will be no replacement deal; Actually, I alluded to a new deal, but I have no idea how long such a deal would take to put into place, given the number of principles involved. It would be great if in the next 30-60 days such a deal was arrived at. My crystal ball is hazy ...

[jack11111]

I guess that means Airbus will consider USA content to be as trustworthy as our treaties.

[Airbubba]

I guess that means Airbus will consider USA content to be as trustworthy as our treaties.

The Iran deal was never a treaty, it was never submitted to Congress. It was done by executive agreement.

I look forward to the day when America is no longer beholden to the Israel Lobby, ... because that is what this all about.

Consistent American policy is that only one country in the Middle East is allowed to have a secret, uninspected nuclear weapons program and it is not Iran.

[jack11111]

AirBubba wrote: "The Iran deal was never a treaty, it was never submitted to Congress. It was done by executive agreement."

Right you are...I stand corrected.

[Airbubba]

Looks kinda like ALPA's usual response to the company's opener :D:

https://twitter.com/MEMRIReports/status/994132722108026885

[ThreeThreeMike]

Looks kinda like ALPA's usual response to the company's opener :D:

https://twitter.com/MEMRIReports/status/994132722108026885

These well grounded intellectuals are obviously people that pose no threat to peace.

[LTNman]

Seems that American foreign policy is now set and controlled by Israel. For such a small country they seem to wield a great deal of power and influence over America.

[core_dump]

Seems that American foreign policy is now set and controlled by Israel.
"Now"? It's been that way for decades; what I don't understand is 'why'. That entire tiny country could be vaporized tomorrow and nobody here would be affected in the least, nor care. But yet our politicians in the USA obey like lapdogs. I don't get it.

[Heathrow Harry]

"Most people?" Who are these mythical "most people" and who made you their spokesperson?
ken

I am no -ones spokesman but reflecting the objective truth that a lot of people in the USA and just about every other world leader , opinion maker and sentient being thinks the President has made a major mistake

When yr only supporters are Netanyahu and the Saudis yr in a lonely place...............

[boguing]

"Now"? It's been that way for decades; what I don't understand is 'why'. That entire tiny country could be vaporized tomorrow and nobody here would be affected in the least, nor care. But yet our politicians in the USA obey like lapdogs. I don't get it.

In this case it's because Israel obtained the secret documents from Teheran - and were able to tell the US that the secret documents proved that the Iranians were really really nasty people, and as luck would have it, just in the nick of time for The Donald to have a completely concrete reason to scupper his predecessor's terrible deal. Israel has done a great job in keeping the secret documents so secret that I haven't seen any reports of what's actually in them. I presume that's so that none of Iran's neighbours have to wonder whether 45 minutes (randomly chosen, just for example) warning of any ooh er definitely real big bang objects referred to in the secret documents might be worth having really?

[nicolai]

I guess that means Airbus will consider USA content to be as trustworthy as our treaties.

This should be a good incentive for European aircraft manufacturers to develop European-made components of all types, so that an Airbus has nothing American in it. This is already in progress, for example receivers for US GPS will soon be unnecessary; Galileo will soon be available world-wide for all European users. Engines are a bit of a problem, most narrowbody jet aircraft are partly or wholly made by Americans (for example IAE and CFM both have American partners involved) - but Rolls-Royce could make narrowbody engines again if they wished, and Safran probably too. The Russians could also supply, too.

Trump's attitude to China is already driving them to develop indigenous high technology industries to make things they currently buy in from the USA because the USA is clearly an unreliable partner. Europe will likely do the same.

The real problem is US "Secondary sanctions". "Primary sanctions" means a US company can't trade with Iran - so Boeing can't sell to an Iranian airline. "Secondary sanctions" mean a US company can't trade with any company that trades with Iran. So American Airlines can't buy an Airbus if Airbus also sells to Iran (even if the Airbus aircraft contains no American parts). Secondary sanctions are the world-wide bullying tactic of the USA, and they have been stopped before - the EU forced the USA to withdraw secondary sanctions over Cuba in 1996. See https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-iran-nuclear-eu-business/in-1990s-redux-eu-to-consider-blocking-u-s-sanctions-over-iran-idUKKBN1IA2PG for a summary.

[Gordomac]

I must be missing something but didn't Donnie campaign promise that he would withdraw if elected. Keeping a promise. I like that. Obama drew a red line & let everyone cross it. Don;t like that much.

[ACMS]

Boy a lot of people in here trusting Iran!!

what.....

I suppose you think North Korea will never come to the table either!!

they certainly didn’t under Obama and Bush did they fellas.

Trump haters are so predictable.

[vapilot2004]

Any ideas of simply renegotiating the hard-won compromises Iran gave us as if it was some sleazy real estate deal of Trumpian standards is pure folly. We've turned our backs on our allies and broken our word and bond and in the process, incensed an abused nation that is the Iranian people.

We may not agree with their government, but it should be remembered that international relations are not won and lost in short-term, one-shot "deals" like down at the used car lot or at some gaudy Trump property management office.

The process is, more often than not, moved forward in steps, some of which are not easy for either side. Academics refer to international treaties and agreements as an iterative process with the eyes on the long term prize. That requires a bit of vision and not that of the myopic kind.

[pax britanica]

I suspect that trumps contribution to North Koreas change of heart was that the Chinese could use him as the Mad man ' in the Mad man theory.

Ie this guy is nits and really might nuke you- as we live next door thats not good for us so sort things out with the yanks or we will sort you out .

Israel is just a votes issue, a powerful lobby in USA in some very key areas, like NY and LA. Squeeze Israel and we will vote for the other guy .

As for keeping promises -Hitler did that to a large degree especially right after he got elected-that worked out really well for Germany didnt it

[ATC Watcher]

I must be missing something but didn't Donnie campaign promise that he would withdraw if elected. Keeping a promise. I like that
Duarte in the Philippine sis keeping his campaign promises as well.
Making promises during a campaign based on emotions and implementing them against the advice from you own security advisers is never a good thing. Upsetting and not listening to your traditional allies is not a good thing either. Mr Trump has managed to do both in 10 minutes.
Being a successful showman and being President of the most powerful country in the planet ( at the moment) are 2 different things.
If the US stop being a reliable partner (in Aviation or else), China will very nicely fill the void and I think the Europeans are likely to follow the new leader.

[CargoOne]

There is no direct ban for US-made components in aircraft, however there is a threshold on the max value %% of US-made components in total aircraft value. Generally speaking no jet can fit under it, but ATR and Dash8 may get there is thier engines are not US made.

[Vendee]

There is no direct ban for US-made components in aircraft, however there is a threshold on the max value %% of US-made components in total aircraft value. Generally speaking no jet can fit under it, but ATR and Dash8 may get there is thier engines are not US made.

I know the engines are made by Pratt & Whitney Canada but isn't the parent company US owned?

[oldchina]

I don't think Airbus or Boeing declare their prime sales targets as Iran Air.
Not a big deal. Look at their delivery backlogs.
Their sales stars are too busy with Emirates, Lufthansa and Singapore.

[Piltdown Man]

To go slightly off topic I wonder if Trump has any idea that he may have made the USA considerably less safe.

...could be shortened to:

I wonder if Trump as any idea

PM

[AAGpilot]

Hard to believe that America doesn’t want to send hundreds of millions to a country that chants, “death to America” as they pursue nuclear weapon capabilities.The Apologist isn’t in charge anymore.

https://youtu.be/E39bZl_mNAc

[Sunamer]

most people beleive Trump's biggest issue with the deal is that it was signed by Obama -
the biggest issue with the deal is that it is a one side deal, where one side does not care at all about the deal and continues to do what it promised it would stop doing. What is the point of that “deal”? Those types of deals work only with civilized countries and Iran is not one of those...

[Sunamer]

Hard to believe that America doesn’t want to send hundreds of millions to a country that chants, “death to America” as they pursue nuclear weapon capabilities.The Apologist isn’t in charge anymore.

https://youtu.be/E39bZl_mNAc


precisely. Limp-d@cked soyboys are not in charge anymore.

[vickers vanguard]

[QUOTE=LTNman;10142708]Seems that American foreign policy is now set and controlled by Israel. For such a small country they seem to wield a great deal of power and influence over America.[/QUOTE

they control the money....the zionists bankers created the central banks in the most influential countries in the west, and their master piece was the US federal reserve, after that , it was done. No body will ever become president of the US unless he or she bows to them. It’s rotten.....congress and all that. And even worse, any US administration also needs to accomodate the Saudi thugs..and we all know that Iran is public enemy no 1 to both Israel and Saudi Arabia.

[EEngr]

What's to say that the Europeans can't continue to trade with Iran and ignore Trumps populist brain fart?

The USA will just extend sanctions to countries that continue to do business with Iran. And then it becomes a poo-flinging contest. Who can less afford to do without the other's business. Ten years ago, US and world financial systems were so intertwined that such sanctions would have crippled both sides. But since then, the US has implemented FATCA (Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act) which has had the effect of other countries sending US banking and finance business back here (or risk some pretty invasive audits by US authorities). So now, disengagement is much more probable. It would hurt American companies dependent on EU products (US airlines who need Airbus spare parts). But with Trump, the phrase "cutting off one's nose to spite the face" comes to mind.

[Heathrow Harry]

I think you have to accept that every US politician will listen to the Israeli lobby -it's simple politics and not some bizarre CONSPIRACY

[vapilot2004]

I would add that America does not want to "send hundreds of millions to Iran", it is reparation of BILLIONS of Iranian funds illegally seized by America.

Actually it is the good faith repayment (with interest) of a $400 million dollar deposit made by the Shah's government (remember him?) towards US military hardware.

That hardware was never delivered thanks to the Iranian Revolution and the Hostage crisis.

[West Coast]

And you cannot use the words "good faith" in the same sentence as "America".

Just ask Gaddafi, or Hussein or pretty much anyone else in the world.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/us-has-killed-more-than-20-million-people-in-37-victim-nations-since-world-war-ii/5492051


During your graveside meeting with Gaddafi, ask him what he thinks of Canada’s efforts that aided in ousting him.

[obgraham]

Iran's nuclear facilities have been inspected to death by the IAEA and other agencies. Iran has been judged to be in COMPLETE compliance since the signing. Even Mossad agrees FFS.Perhaps you should read the actual "agreement" -- it is available online. No inspections at Iran's military installations. 24 days notice at the known nuclear sites.

Some compliance!

[West Coast]

Perhaps its time for non US manufacturers to remove US components from their products......


Right...and alienate the US market, one far larger than the Iranian one. Don’t fool yourself into thinking that removing US content wouldn’t ripple through airline boardrooms in the US. Having an international composition pays dividends beyond the occasional setback.

[Brat]

ken

I am no -ones spokesman but reflecting the objective truth that a lot of people in the USA and just about every other world leader , opinion maker and sentient being thinks the President has made a major mistake

When yr only supporters are Netanyahu and the Saudis yr in a lonely place...............
That’s a rather broad assumption.

[obgraham]

Then why does every nuclear inspection agency in the WORLD agree that Iran is in compliance?
Of course they are in compliance —with an inspection plan that requires 24 days notice, and does not allow iinspectors into military sites. Read the agreement.

[krismiler]

If using US sourced components in aircraft leaves foreign manufacturers vulnerable to restrictions on who they can sell to, they may consider looking elsewhere. The alternatives may be more expensive or not as good but at least a deal could go through.

Sanctions like this can often have the effect of making alternatives, which wouldn’t otherwise have been viable, a realistic proposition. South Africa developed a sophisticated domestic armaments industry and even went onto become an exporter because of trade restrictions.

If the French, Chinese and Russians got together, within a few years American parts might not be needed at all.

[West Coast]

If using US sourced components in aircraft leaves foreign manufacturers vulnerable to restrictions on who they can sell to, they may consider looking elsewhere. The alternatives may be more expensive or not as good but at least a deal could go through.

Sanctions like this can often have the effect of making alternatives, which wouldn’t otherwise have been viable, a realistic proposition. South Africa developed a sophisticated domestic armaments industry and even went onto become an exporter because of trade restrictions.

If the French, Chinese and Russians got together, within a few years American parts might not be needed at all.

Sure, go for it. It’ll be the same when the Chinese and the Russians exercise their right to nix a sale due to their content being in the aircraft.

[vapilot2004]

Sanctions like this can often have the effect of making alternatives, which wouldn’t otherwise have been viable, a realistic proposition

History has proven this bit to be true, but regarding commercial aviation...
If using US sourced components in aircraft leaves foreign manufacturers vulnerable to restrictions on who they can sell to, they may consider looking elsewhere...
...If the French, Chinese and Russians got together, within a few years American parts might not be needed at all.




France (and Germany) are part of agreement regimes regarding technology exports in aerospace which includes commercial aircraft. Aside from that inconvenience, avionics and propulsion tech nearly always involves UK or US expertise. Although...

The Russians (and the Chinese) are building commercial transports and the world is free to buy them, but I don't hear much about who's standing on the queue at the moment.

[krismiler]

I'm sure any collaboration would take this into account, the Chinese are quite happy to deal with anyone if it suits their interests especially in Africa. The Russians are quite similar.
Years ago sophisticated components could only be produced by a handful of countries, these days there are many more alternatives. The USA is less important than it was 40 years ago and can't expect to dictate to the rest of the world.

Britain was a world power in the 19th century but is considerably less important today.

[West Coast]

I dont doubt that OEMs and vendors could be sourced from other than US sources. That’s been the situation for awhile. If there was an appetite to do so, it would have already happened. You can can continue to dream about this, but we both know it won’t happen.

Your naive to think that the Chinese, Russian, or whomever else who had the authority to stop a sale wouldn’t step in from time to time. Let me know how helpful the Chinese would be with an aerospace sale to Taiwan with technology that might have a dual military/civil application.

[West Coast]

Can we assume America and Israel will be opening their nuke sites for "inspection" too.

Was that part of the agreement? No is the answer.

Of course you knew that ready.

[vapilot2004]

Compare the Korean cars of the 1980s with those made today.

There is a learning curve, but I highly doubt the world's major airlines nor their customers care to operate or take a ride on anything that sits upon such a curve.

If countries start buying Russian and Chinese aircraft in significant numbers because they have no alternative, this could be the catalyst that kicks off their aerospace industries.

That's true enough. Perhaps they could follow the Airbus model and practically give the early copies away, although they would need to have a quality bit of kit to peddle in the first place.

West Coast makes a good point regarding Russia and China. Witness their continued vetoes on the UN Security Council when matters far more grave than the sale of commercial transports were under consideration.

I agree, being worthy of trust in any bilateral or multilateral enterprise an issue, something the UK, EU and the US have in spades, although the current US president appears to be doing his best to erode some of that trust that has been steadily built up over decades.

[parabellum]

Utter nonsense.

Iran's nuclear facilities have been inspected to death by the IAEA and other agencies. Iran has been judged to be in COMPLETE compliance since the signing. Even Mossad agrees FFS.

It is AMERICA who has not lived up to its side of the agreement!

Just what PPRuNe needs, yet another America hater who hasn't done their homework.

[ATC Watcher]

interesting theory I just heard on TV this morning ; all this recent activity against Iran , incl. the missile strikes on Iran troops in Syria is a coordinated plan to get rid of Iran influence in the Mid East region .,Trump's electoral promise, the "secret nuclear old plan" leaks, the visit on Netanyahu to Moscow a few days ago , the official support f the Arab States for Israel actions ( to defend the Golan, an occupy territory according to them !) ,The US sanctions are just part of the plan .It would appear the Europeans are openly against it because they fear for they business deals with Tehran, ( including aviation ) but they secretly support the plan. So basically a big order for Airbus from some Arab States to compensate for Iran airlines lost deals would solve the issue .. A theory remember..

[valhalla634]

Some excellent well written posts on this thread. Countries tend to have the leadership they deserve. Unfortunately, Parabellum ( trans: prepare for war) you have elected presidents in the past that have brought well informed people to not only hate the USA but to despise all that you stand for.

[AAGpilot]

Some excellent well written posts on this thread. Countries tend to have the leadership they deserve. Unfortunately, Parabellum ( trans: prepare for war) you have elected presidents in the past that have brought well informed people to not only hate the USA but to despise all that you stand for.

I could not, unequivocally enough, relay just how mutual the feeling is.

[A Squared]

Iran is doing EXACTLY what they agreed to do in the agreement.

The point is that the agreement is defective. I don't think you're that obtuse, so I have to assume that you're missing it intentionally.

[A Squared]

"Now"? It's been that way for decades; what I don't understand is 'why'. That entire tiny country could be vaporized tomorrow and nobody here would be affected in the least, nor care. But yet our politicians in the USA obey like lapdogs. I don't get it.


One of the contributing factors in that is the role of the "end timers". There's a certain segment of fundamental Christians who believe that the bible says that the second coming of Christ will only occur after the Jews return to Israel ...all of Israel. I'm a little unclear on exactly what "All of Israel" includes, but the fact that the Second Coming has not occurred leads inevitably to the conclusion that "all of Israel" means more than what they currently occupy. So among those who believe this, the second coming is viewed as a really good thing, and they will support any US foreign policy whcih supports Israel generally, and specifically policies whcih would support Israeli expansion beyond what is currently "Israel"

[FLEXJET]

What we see is that countries which didn’t seperate state policy from faith doctrines have a real problem with diplomacy.
This is valid for all religions.

[A Squared]

What we see is that countries which didn’t seperate state policy from faith doctrines have a real problem with diplomacy.
This is valid for all religions.



Not that you're wrong, but the fundamental notion that a group of people are entailed to take possession of region at the expense of the people currently living there, on the basis of a historical association with people who lived there a thousand years ago depends pretty heavily on faith doctrine. Good luck removing faith doctrine from people's views of Israel.

[crewmeal]

Looks like the 747sp, 727's A300's and the A310's could be flying a little longer then.

[parabellum]

Some excellent well written posts on this thread. Countries tend to have the leadership they deserve. Unfortunately, Parabellum ( trans: prepare for war) you have elected presidents in the past that have brought well informed people to not only hate the USA but to despise all that you stand for.
So true, the eight years of Obama rule was utter crap.

[am111]

John Oliver had a very good, and very funny segment, on his HBO show a couple of weeks ago about the Iran deal. He examines what the Deal achieved, Trump's main gripes with it, and why Trump would be wrong to tear it up.

Official source if you are in the US - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5xnZ_CeTqyM

Or you can watch it here elsewhere - http://dai.ly/x6i9dz1

[Ian W]

Who told you that and why did you believe it? It's patently untrue. https://www.gcsp.ch/News-Knowledge/Publications/The-Iran-Nuclear-Deal-Distrust-and-Verify (try page 25 onwards)

The US aren't the only ones who care about Iran and its nuclear ambitions, yet it is only they (well, along Iran's sworn enemies obviously) who insist on blowing up a deal that was doing fine for "something better" (undefined) for no obvious reason. (Of course even in the US there are plenty of well informed people in the government and military who were not in favor of terminating the deal either)

The world is a lot bigger than the US and ignoring long standing relationships with strong allies with this obvious buffoonery is worse for the US than it is for Iran.

From your reference:

But what about Iran’s non-nuclear facilities? Opponents of the JCPOA criticize the lack of
“anytime, anywhere” inspections of all suspicious facilities. But Iran (or any other country,
for that matter) would never have accepted such an obligation, making it impossible to
reach an agreement. Iran legitimately wanted to protect its sensitive military facilities and
defences, some of which have nothing to do with its nuclear programme. The IAEA’s
monitoring of Iran is anyhow complemented by national intelligence organizations, which
can be expected to continue to closely monitor the country’s nuclear and military sites.

My highlight - so some of which DO have something to do with their nuclear program

Checks only after a notice period of 24 days in sites already known, and in new 'suspicious' sites on military facilities there is no access for anyone.
That's a really strong verification regime.

So Israel creates access and guess what
Israel finds evidence of Iran Nuclear Subterfuge (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/30/world/middleeast/israel-iran-nuclear-netanyahu.html)

[Ian W]

Utter gibberish. 🙄

Have you ever been to Iran? Do you know any Iranians?

Are all Americans so completely brain-washed by the Israel Lobby that they are incapable of seeing the other side?

Not been to Iran, but worked closely with Iranians and Iraquis and for that matter worked with nationals of most of the Middle East countries.

[NWA SLF]

As an American, embarrassed to see all the posts that have said that only Trump is right and all the other major world leaders are wrong. Iran had hard line Ahmadinejad who continually wanted the destruction of America. He was replaced by Rouhani of the Moderation and Development Party and negotiations began to end Iran's nuclear weapon program. World leaders from all corners embraced the agreement, but then Trump campaigned against it and now has succeeded in destroying it despite world outcry. Major lesson learned is never to trust America at their word. It was in the 1950s that Iran had a democratically elected president who America succeeded in overthrowing in favor of a ruthless dictator. America declared Iraq a producer of weapons of mass destruction based on pictures of a couple semi-trucks. Of course Iraq had chemical weapons - the US supplied them for use in fighting the Iranians. Take over the country and surprise, surprise, the Iraqis had got rid of their American supplied weapons. If I was Kim Jung Un would I get rid of my nuclear weapons? Not until America agrees to get rid of all its nuclear weapons and agree to international inspections proving so. After all America is the only country proven willing to use nuclear weapons (and I am not disagreeing with their having done that), but after the end of WWII they continued to use the nuclear weapons having killed many Pacific Islanders plus their own countrymen (example - read the cancer death list from the cast of Genghis Kahn).

I believe I read the Russki's are working to eliminate all US built components of the Superjet so it can be sold without US government approval. Doesn't get Iran into the wide bodies but will greatly enhance their domestic airlines. Now if only one of the nuclear powers would supply Iran nuclear weapons so they could use the "mutual destruction" defense and protect themselves from what is now an inevitable attack by 2 nuclear powers - America and Israel.

[Cynical Sid]

As an American, embarrassed to see all the posts that have said that only Trump is right and all the other major world leaders are wrong. Iran had hard line Ahmadinejad who continually wanted the destruction of America. He was replaced by Rouhani of the Moderation and Development Party and negotiations began to end Iran's nuclear weapon program. World leaders from all corners embraced the agreement, but then Trump campaigned against it and now has succeeded in destroying it despite world outcry. Major lesson learned is never to trust America at their word. It was in the 1950s that Iran had a democratically elected president who America succeeded in overthrowing in favor of a ruthless dictator. America declared Iraq a producer of weapons of mass destruction based on pictures of a couple semi-trucks. Of course Iraq had chemical weapons - the US supplied them for use in fighting the Iranians. Take over the country and surprise, surprise, the Iraqis had got rid of their American supplied weapons. If I was Kim Jung Un would I get rid of my nuclear weapons? Not until America agrees to get rid of all its nuclear weapons and agree to international inspections proving so. After all America is the only country proven willing to use nuclear weapons (and I am not disagreeing with their having done that), but after the end of WWII they continued to use the nuclear weapons having killed many Pacific Islanders plus their own countrymen (example - read the cancer death list from the cast of Genghis Kahn).

I believe I read the Russki's are working to eliminate all US built components of the Superjet so it can be sold without US government approval. Doesn't get Iran into the wide bodies but will greatly enhance their domestic airlines. Now if only one of the nuclear powers would supply Iran nuclear weapons so they could use the "mutual destruction" defense and protect themselves from what is now an inevitable attack by 2 nuclear powers - America and Israel.

If some one actually gave Iran some nukes, Trump could go and kiss Rouhani's backside. It worked for Kim Jung Un.

[Airbubba]

Sounds like somebody's green card application got denied. ;)

[West Coast]

Sounds like somebody's green card application got denied. ;)


also sounds like he’s as influenced by Iranians as much as he accuses the US of being under Israel’s spell.

[West Coast]

I hope Iran cranks their nuke program up as soon as possible - it will make the world a safer place.

Then why are you here complaining about Trump pulling out of it?

[West Coast]

I give you credit, you filled in any blanks in the past few posts readers might have has about you.

You want Iran to have the bomb, yet you wanted the agreement to remain in force. Yah, I guess not having your cake and eating it too has deeply angered you.

You can remain entrenched in the Iranian camp minus the anti semitism, anti US rhetoric, it’s a choice.

[West Coast]

So, if Iran builds a bomb in a locale not accessible to inspectors, how will you characterize the agreement then?

You’ve said you’re ok with Iran having the bomb, so the obvious is you want Iran to have the benefits the agreement comes with, yet you’re equally ok with them violating the agreement through a loophole you know is there.

Enough said.

[West Coast]

Knowing what mods think of this individual back and forth, I’ll make this my final comment.

Iran was already free to build nukes under the agreement by building them in places they’ve declared off limits to inspectors. If they didn’t have anything to hide, they’d open their bases to inspection. That’s too big a loophole to accept for the sake of having an agreement. For the sake of sales. It was a placebo pill, made you feel better without really doing anything.

[obgraham]

Don't feed the troll, folks!

[Cynical Sid]

It's a great shame that this thread had descended into attacks on the US people and those that do not agree with them. There is only one person responsible (and perhaps a couple around him) for this mess. He did not convince most of his own people by all accounts and mostly (just) they did not vote him in. His party (who did not want him) may well pay a price at elections this year.

I would not be sorry to see 90+% of the posts in this thread moderated into oblivion and for it to return to something vaguely aviation related.

[evansb]

It is a shame that no one has mentioned Iranian expansionism, because few know of it. Few are privy to the intelligence files of Khomeinism.

The growing antisemitism on this thread is alarming.

I am truly sickened by the antisemitism on this forum. Mass ignorance has infiltrated this once civil forum. I have little use for this forum now. Yes, the entire forum.

[A Squared]

The growing antisemitism on this thread is alarming.

I am truly sickened by the antisemitism on this forum.

B.S. there was one (1) comment posted here which could reasonably be considered "Anti-semetic". It has been removed. What you are indulging in here is the depressingly common tactic of shrieking "ANTI SEMITISM" any time anyone expresses an opinion that is critical of Israel or Zionism. It's a dishonest strategy to shout down anyone who is critical of Israel through the use of name calling and has no place in any rational discussion.

[Heathrow Harry]

B.S. there was one (1) comment posted here which could reasonably be considered "Anti-semetic". It has been removed. What you are indulging in here is the depressingly common tactic of shrieking "ANTI SEMITISM" any time anyone expresses an opinion that is critical of Israel or Zionism. It's a dishonest strategy to shout down anyone who is critical of Israel through the use of name calling and has no place in any rational discussion.

Well said - over the past few years I have flagged several messages to the Mods where the remarks were clearly anti-Semitic and there is no place on here or anywhere else for that sort of behaviour

You're correct tho' - ANY criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic according to some people and that can't be right................

[dr dre]

These well grounded intellectuals are obviously people that pose no threat to peace.

In relation to Iran, the US has
-overthrown their democratically elected government and installed and backed a dictator for 25 years.
-backed Saddam to invade their country in the 80’s leading to hundreds of thousands of Iranian deaths
-shot down an Iranian civilian airliner in Iranian airspace killing almost 300 people
-levelled sanctions that have crippled Iran’s aviation industry leading to numerous fatal crashes due to older aircraft.
-had numerous US officials (inc current National Security advisor John Bolton) express a desire to bomb their country

But what have the “evil” Iranians done to the US? Burn a piece of cloth. Yeah, sure, that makes them the ultimate bad guys who are a threat to peace.