This about says it. Obama wants to be remembered, this should do it.
https://youtu.be/1hIz_vkZH5k
https://youtu.be/1hIz_vkZH5k
Nuke deal
- Thread starter Al Wohlstrom
- Start date
The whole thing is a joke, and the US is the target of the joke. If it weren't so serious, it would be funny. Jimmy Carter Iran, Obama Iran...............and this dipstick is passing it off to us as a great deal.
Of COURSE he is. What else could you expect? After all, he and his minions also claimed with equal honesty "you can KEEP your doctor"..."Benghazi was caused by a video"..."there's not one SMIDGEON of corruption in the IRS"..."the NSA is NOT spying on the American people"...'if you DARE cross this red line it's all over for you, boy'...and on and on and on...:beadyeyes:
And he's humble too! "I actually think I'm a pretty good President. I think if I ran, I could win. But I can't," Obama ad-libbed during a speech in Ethiopia. "There's a lot that I'd like to do to keep America moving. But the law is the law, and no person is above the law, not even the president." Must have forgotten about some of those iffy Executive Orders.
Pete McCluskey.
Lifetime Supporter
I would probably say this was funny if this Goose wasn't the leader of the most powerful Nation on earth.
No it's not funny it's just plain scary.
Now we have "side" deals" between Iran and the IAEA that Obama knew of but didn't tell congress about. Why don't we just give them a bomb?
There are 2 secret side deals on top of the Iran nuclear agreement - Business Insider
There are 2 secret side deals on top of the Iran nuclear agreement - Business Insider
Jeff Young
GT40s Supporter
Let's put this in perspective.
100 former diplomats, from both parties, think the deal is a good one:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/17/us/politics/former-us-diplomats-praise-iran-deal.html?_r=0
And so on.
But, Al and Larry know better (actually, I suspect they know little about the terms of the deal itself other than the force fed scaremongering they get from their news sources).
Let me ask a more fundamental question. What would you have the President do? Bomb? Invade? And that would do what?
100 former diplomats, from both parties, think the deal is a good one:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/17/us/politics/former-us-diplomats-praise-iran-deal.html?_r=0
And so on.
But, Al and Larry know better (actually, I suspect they know little about the terms of the deal itself other than the force fed scaremongering they get from their news sources).
Let me ask a more fundamental question. What would you have the President do? Bomb? Invade? And that would do what?
My preference...as long as Iran does nothing wrong, let the area countries provide verification and enforcement; however, the first time Iran crosses the line in a manner that negativity impacts the U.S. Obama should hit them hard with every political and military option available.
We need to either let the rest of the world deal with this or really step up and lead. I'm not necessarily a hawk, but there are some serious penalty points for not monitoring and enforcing compliance!
Cheers!
Doug
KNOW THIS:
Articulation of taqiyya
According to the authoritative Arabic text, Al-Taqiyya Fi Al-Islam: "Taqiyya [deception] is of fundamental importance in Islam. Practically every Islamic sect agrees to it and practices it. We can go so far as to say that the practice of taqiyya is mainstream in Islam, and that those few sects not practicing it diverge from the mainstream...Taqiyya is very prevalent in Islamic politics, especially in the modern era."
Articulation of taqiyya
According to the authoritative Arabic text, Al-Taqiyya Fi Al-Islam: "Taqiyya [deception] is of fundamental importance in Islam. Practically every Islamic sect agrees to it and practices it. We can go so far as to say that the practice of taqiyya is mainstream in Islam, and that those few sects not practicing it diverge from the mainstream...Taqiyya is very prevalent in Islamic politics, especially in the modern era."
If Iran sticks to the deal, what makes us think they will change now? What is the deal between the IAEA and Iran that the US doesn't know the terms of? $11.9 billion in freed up assets to finance Hezbollah, etc. 24 day inspection notice? A lot of stuff can be moved in 24 days. There are military sites we can't inspect.
Iran would have to reduce its total of about 19,000 centrifuges -- 10,000 of which are still spinning today -- down to 6,104 under the deal. 6104 still seems like a lot of centrifuges.
Iran's centrifuges will only enrich uranium to 3.67% -- enough for civil use to power parts of the country, but not enough to build a nuclear bomb. And we believe that from a people that say America and Israel should die all through the talks and after the talks.
Iran can continue its research and development on enrichment, but that work will be limited to keep the country to its breakout time frame of one year. That is the time needed to produce enough material to build a bomb. That makes me reassured.
There is more, just as lame as this. And why not get them to release the hostages? Seems like a small concession for such a historic ground breaking event.
Iran would have to reduce its total of about 19,000 centrifuges -- 10,000 of which are still spinning today -- down to 6,104 under the deal. 6104 still seems like a lot of centrifuges.
Iran's centrifuges will only enrich uranium to 3.67% -- enough for civil use to power parts of the country, but not enough to build a nuclear bomb. And we believe that from a people that say America and Israel should die all through the talks and after the talks.
Iran can continue its research and development on enrichment, but that work will be limited to keep the country to its breakout time frame of one year. That is the time needed to produce enough material to build a bomb. That makes me reassured.
There is more, just as lame as this. And why not get them to release the hostages? Seems like a small concession for such a historic ground breaking event.
Jeff Young
GT40s Supporter
And a document shredder!
Where's Ollie when we need him..and some missiles for, who did the Gip send them to again?
Jeff Young
GT40s Supporter
That all sounds good to me. Plus Ollie and his shredder!
Jeff Young
GT40s Supporter
You know better Al. I dub thee, Al Kissinkerrystrom.
Now that made a lot of sense, why don't you try to contribute something? All you do is snipe at people. You haven't said anything about the deal.
For WHOM???????
Evidently...
So? From that very same piece: "Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries have, along with Israel, expressed either unease or outright opposition to the deal."
Now, WHO KNOWS IRAN BETTER? The 100 former U.S. diplomats - OR THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD???
In the end, Jeff, it's not going to be A-N-Y-T-H-I-N-G the U.S. does or doesn't do, nor whatever "agreement" may be signed and sealed between Iran and everyone else. Iran WILL NOT KEEP the agreement. They've never kept any agreement they've ever signed. Iran will continue its march to nukes no matter WHAT it signs or what others may do 'diplomatically' or 'economically'.
What will likely happen, then? Israel is going to bomb the crap out of anything and everything that even LOOKS like a nuke site the instant it determines Iran is '24 hours' (or whatever) from getting "the bomb". Israel is NOT going to just SIT THERE, do nothing, and "hope"(- Obama) for the best.
'Don't think Israel will bomb Iran's nuke sites? Seriously? Ask SYRIA whether IT believes Israel will do so. Ask Iraq the same question.
Last edited:
I hope you are right, Larry.
There are two scenarios, either it is a regional problem and the other countries in that region should be the ones to deal with Iran and their nuke aspirations...or, it is a world-wide problem and the entire world needs to deal with Iran and their nuclear potential. This is NOT an issue that needs to involve the USA other than as part of a world-wide coalition.
I really like that Israel is willing to step up and take the role of enforcement...it really IS a regional issue at this point and the surrounding region has the greatest potential for attack from Iran. We here in the USA, practically half-way across the world, are out of range. Let those who are at imminent danger deal with it while they can, once it is elevated to a world-wide problem their options will be diminished.
Cheers!
Doug
There are two scenarios, either it is a regional problem and the other countries in that region should be the ones to deal with Iran and their nuke aspirations...or, it is a world-wide problem and the entire world needs to deal with Iran and their nuclear potential. This is NOT an issue that needs to involve the USA other than as part of a world-wide coalition.
I really like that Israel is willing to step up and take the role of enforcement...it really IS a regional issue at this point and the surrounding region has the greatest potential for attack from Iran. We here in the USA, practically half-way across the world, are out of range. Let those who are at imminent danger deal with it while they can, once it is elevated to a world-wide problem their options will be diminished.
Cheers!
Doug
