Nuke deal

[Pete McCluskey.]

I agree with all you say Pete but there's one thing missing. No-one in the West is prepared to go to war and they know this. To win, you have to think the unthinkable and be prepared to back it up.

Western leaders do not have a mandate for this in our touchy feely New World Order, but I have a cunning plan.

Why not wait until they transgress and then strike swiftly? Why turn yourself into a nervous wreck assuming they will be the enemy until they prove (by actions) that they actually are? There' s no need for us to worry, the proxy security state in the Middle East (you know who) will be watching like hawks, why should we concern ourselves?

It's the same with DAESH. Let them have their Caliphate - let them all rush to populate their Nirvana, and then they'll all be in the same place which means........??? Why are we even arresting people leaving the country to go to Syria? If it were up to me, I would give them 1st class tickets and a slab of Pepsi, AND I would advertise it..

Why are we even fighting the idea that millions of zealots who wish only death and destruction on the West will eventually be in defined areas? If the populations of Iraq, Syria, North Africa don't want DAESH control, let them take up arms and fight against it. If they succumb, well God has spoken. What I am trying to say in a clumsy way, is that we cannot possibly hope to change events before they have even happened.

It is in our nature to give people the benefit of the doubt, so, as far as Iran is concerned, we should hope for the best and plan for the worst. Otherwise, endless rhetoric will spew forth and solve absolutely nothing...

So, all you Nuke operators, shift your targets from Moscow to Teheran

PS. Note to Boris Johnson - ship your water cannon to Calais!

Of course you are right Keith, I was probably born in the wrong Era.
I agree with your point about stopping dickheads going to Syria, we have the same policy, let them all go, just make sure they can't get back when they get sick of beheadings and burning people alive.

 

[Larry L.]

Thanks for clearing it up, Larry...I really thought we had all had our chance to laugh over Pelosi's comment...and you are not wrong about what I quoted Pelosi as saying, it was one of the most inane comments I have ever heard out of ANY politician.

I was just drilling for the nerve, Larry...good on ya' for not biting like I had hoped, amigo!

Cheers!

Doug

Yeah, well, I've come to realize you're not QUITE as hopelessly far-left a 'whacko' as I'd first thought, sir! :lol:
(Edit: Oh, crap. There goes my pledge to be sufficiently "acerbic" in the future in regards to you!!! :veryangry

OTOH, Pelosi IS about as c-l-u-e-l-e-s-s as they come...and she PROVES IT darned near every time she opens her 'yap'. :beadyeyes:

 

[Al Wohlstrom]

What some Democrats think about the deal.

SENATOR CHUCK SCHUMER (Democrat - New York): "After deep study, careful thought and considerable soul-searching, I have decided I must oppose the agreement and will vote yes on a motion of disapproval. I will vote to disapprove the agreement, not because I believe war is a viable or desirable option, nor to challenge the path of diplomacy... It is because I believe Iran will not change, and under this agreement it will be able to achieve its dual goals of eliminating sanctions while ultimately retaining its nuclear and non-nuclear power."

SENATOR BOB MENENDEZ (Democrat - New Jersey): "I’m concerned that the deal ultimately legitimizes Iran as a threshold-nuclear state. I’m concerned the redlines we drew have turned into green-lights; that Iran will be required only to limit rather than eliminate its nuclear program, while the international community will be required to lift the sanctions, and that it doesn’t provide for anytime-any-place inspections of suspected sites. The bottom line is: The deal doesn’t end Iran’s nuclear program – it preserves it."

MARK BEGICH (Former Democrat Senator - Alaska): "If this deal is approved it will start a dangerous nuclear arms race in the Middle East, as other countries have already said they will obtain their own nuclear weapons in response."

MARY LANDRIEU (Former Democrat Senator - Louisiana): "We need to stop this deal and demand a better one. This deal allows Iran to continue developing intercontinental ballistic missiles. These missiles have only one real purpose—and it’s not peaceful nuclear energy or nuclear medicine."

JOE LIEBERMAN (Former Democrat Vice Presidential Candidate & Senator): "This Iran deal is dangerous for America, for Israel and for the world. Iran has violated over 20 international agreements, is the number one sponsor of terrorism in the world, and has been working to acquire nuclear weapons for years."

EVAN BAYH (Former Democrat Senator - Indiana): “Lifting economic sanctions before Iran has made the changes the agreement requires and without ‘anytime, anywhere inspections’ would be a mistake. America needs to keep the pressure on Iran.”

CONGRESSMAN ALCEE HASTINGS (Democrat - Florida): "I have decided that I cannot support this deal... The goal of the recently concluded negotiations was to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon... the JCPOA allows Iran to remain a nuclear threshold state while simultaneously reaping the benefits of relief from international sanctions."

SHELLEY BERKLEY (Former Democrat Congresswoman - Nevada): “This deal will make the world less safe. Iran will be allowed to continue developing intercontinetal ballistic missiles, and at best they will be just a year away from a nuclear weapon. In 10 years they will be just weeks away. A deal that prevents anytime, anywhere inspections, as this one does, is a deal that cannot be verified and leaves us trusting Iran too much. Congress should reject this deal.”

 

[Larry L.]

Did y'all know Iran get's its $150 billion (in seized funds) returned to 'em R-E-G-A-R-D-L-E-S-S of whether or not the deal's approved???????????????!!!!!!!!!!

Obama & Kerry are absolutely, completely and totally, unforgivably, 100% i-n-c-o-m-p-e-t-e-n-t.

U-N-B-E-L-I-V-A-B-L-E...

 

[Al Wohlstrom]

Did y'all know Iran get's its $150 billion (in seized funds) returned to 'em R-E-G-A-R-D-L-E-S-S of whether or not the deal's approved???????????????!!!!!!!!!!

Obama & Kerry are absolutely, completely and totally, unforgivably, 100% i-n-c-o-m-p-e-t-e-n-t.

U-N-B-E-L-I-V-A-B-L-E...

Be careful, you'll hurt Kerry's feelings!

 

[Larry L.]

Ask me if I care...

 

[Al Wohlstrom]

I was talking to my nephew (a devout Obama supporter) last night about the Iran deal. He was very upset by Chuck Schumer not supporting the deal, his constituents, or his president. He wasn't aware that 1.8 million of Schumer's constituents are Jewish and he is doing the will of his constituents. Supporting the president is secondary, his constituents come first. I see Schumer in a different light now. Good for him.

 

[Doug S.]

Agreed, Al.

Just when did the politicians get the idea that they were elected to defend and promote THEIR OWN beliefs...it has always been my belief that the constituents elected the candidate that would represent the majority beliefs of their constituents.

Cheers to Schumer for doing the right thing!!!

Doug

 

[Al Wohlstrom]

In a powerful move, more than 200 retired Generals and Admirals have written a letter to Members of Congress urging them to vote against Barack Obama's disastrous Iranian Nuclear Deal.

200 retired US generals lobby Congress to reject Iran deal | The Times of Israel

Almost 200 Retired Generals, Admirals Tell Congress: Vote Down the Iran Deal

 

[Larry L.]

In a powerful move, more than 200 retired Generals and Admirals have written a letter to Members of Congress urging them to vote against Barack Obama's disastrous Iranian Nuclear Deal.

200 retired US generals lobby Congress to reject Iran deal | The Times of Israel

Almost 200 Retired Generals, Admirals Tell Congress: Vote Down the Iran Deal

'Won't matter. Our 'all-knowing' community-organizer-turned-president can still approve the thing whether congress vetos it or not.
Besides, when has Obama EVER listened to the country's military brass - or to anyone ELSE who really knows a thing or two about ANY subject?
His agenda is all that matters...

 

[Doug S.]

What do you think his agenda is regarding this issue, Larry?

I ask because IMHO he is trying to get a deal, any deal, that will keep ISIS from getting their hands on nuclear weapons. Is this a matter of "...any harbor in a storm"...or what do you think BO's agenda is?

Honestly, I am not trying to divert attention from the issue, as this seems to be exactly the issue this thread is all about.

Do you really think he has nefarious intentions, or is this a case in which you believe that the POTUS is so incompetent due to his community organization background that nothing he could do would be right?

Cheers!!!

Doug

 

[Al Wohlstrom]

I think he's over his head, and that this "peaceful" solution is wishful thinking. A stab a at legacy. Maybe an actual Nobel Prize.

 

[Larry L.]

What do you think his agenda is regarding this issue, Larry?

I ask because IMHO he is trying to get a deal, any deal, that will keep ISIS from getting their hands on nuclear weapons. Is this a matter of "...any harbor in a storm"...or what do you think BO's agenda is?

Honestly, I am not trying to divert attention from the issue, as this seems to be exactly the issue this thread is all about.

Do you really think he has nefarious intentions, or is this a case in which you believe that the POTUS is so incompetent due to his community organization background that nothing he could do would be right?

Cheers!!!

Doug

Look, Doug...THE IRANIANS will provide nuke site soil samples...THE IRANIANS will conduct "inspections" of certain military sites and VERIFY they're in compliance with the agreement...THE IRANIANS will get some $1.5 BILLION in seized $$$s returned to 'em R-E-G-A-R-D-L-E-S-S of whether the agreement is SIGNED or not...THE IRANIAN'S vast enrichment network will be left in place...the "anytime, anywhere inspections" Oblahblah said we'd get from any agreement we signed HAVE BECOME INSPECTIONS THAT WILL BE HELD 24 D-A-Y-S AFTER GIVING IRAN NOTICE(!!!)...and Iran can CHALLENGE inspection requests.............................. etc., etc., etc.

Furthermore...the Iranians have never - never - N-E-V-E-R kept A-N-Y agreement they've ever signed!!! What the DEUCE makes you think those mutants will keep THIS ONE???

So, I throw the question back to YOU: What do YOU think Obama's agenda is??????????

Edit: H-e-l-l-o-o-o...?

 

[Doug S.]

OK...I think BO is taking a moderate approach to the negotiations to keep from having the Iranians from backing out of the negotiations.

I'm not sure I believe everything you claim the Iranians will get...by all accounts independent verification and oversight are part of what the Iranians have agreed to.

Larry...Larry...Larry...you did not answer the question...what would BO benefit from giving Iran too much? Exactly WHAT do you think his agenda IS?

IMHO BO is aware of every one of those practices that you mentioned...he is not as dumb as you give him credit for being. BUT...and that's a BIG but...if he can get the Iranians to commit and keep their committents, he well may have helped the world avoid nuclear destruction...maybe for a decade or so.

I believe his "AGENDA" is "...any harbor in a storm is better than a boat at the bottom of the ocean", and IMHO he may just be able to accomplish that IF he can get ANY agreement out of the Iranians. Sure, I think they will break the agreement, too...but if he can get an agreement he may be able to get widespread support for EXTENSIVE U.N. sanctions when the Iranians do (and they WILL) violate the agreement.

No agreement (and the Iranians do not HAVE TO agree to ANYTHING)=NO SUPPORT from the U.N.

So...that's what I think...still waiting to hear what YOU think BO's agenda is. Please fill us in...

Thanks!

Cheers!!!

Doug

 

[Larry L.]

His agenda is to GET AN AGREEMENT...no matter how ineffectual...no matter whether it enables Iran to get 'the bomb' or not at ANY time...no matter WHAT...as long as the CONSEQUENCES OF SAME don't 'hit the fan' until AFTER he leaves office.

I say again: The Iranians have never - never - NEVER lived up to A-N-Y agreement they've ever signed. Therefore, only a M-O-R-O-N, or someone with an agenda (there's a difference?), would EVER sign an agreement with those bozos unless he/they figured he/they could score some personal POLITICAL points for his/their "legacy" or his/their "party"...or both.

 

[Doug S.]

Thanks!

So we both agree that his "agenda" is to GET AN AGREEMENT!

...we just disagree as to his motivation.

He's not as stupid as you give him credit for...either he's an egotist or genuine...but either way he knows about the history of broken agreements. Sure, they will break this one again, and again, and again until the UN takes action.

Either way...an agreement is better than no agreement...until they break it for the last time. Give 'em enough rope and they'll hang themselves.

In the end BO will be just a footnote in the story, just another president who did that balancing act...most of whom failed.

Doug

 

[Larry L.]

So, what you're saying is; even though Iran's march to a nuke won't be STOPPED by this "agreement" (which was the ORIGINAL stated goal/purpose/intent of the negotiations), AND, truth be told, the march very likely won't even be SLOWED DOWN by the agreement...AND, as a result of the agreement, Iran will be handed $1.5 BILLION with which to FUND that march as well as its terror operations...AND, even though the world knows that Iran will not KEEP the agreement...the world is somehow better off BECAUSE WE HAVE AN AGREEMENT??? :stunned:

'Makes no sense to ME at all...

Can you say 'kick the can down the road'? I knew you could. ('Apologies to the late Mr. Rogers.)

 

[Doug S.]

What I'm saying is that Iran does not HAVE to sign ANY agreement, they are a sovereign country. As I understand it Iran is engaging in the negotiations in an effort to obtain concessions regarding sanctions that are in place. THEY want something and if the world wants to achieve any control over Iran then it is the entire world that must hold their feet to the fire regarding compliance, not just one country. At least BO and the U.S. have the guts to make an effort toward reigning Iran in...ineffective as it will be.

As much as I hate to say so...to really control Iran will require a military invasion like we did to Iraq...do we as a nation have to do that, or, considering the threat that nuclear proliferation carries, where is the support of the rest of the world? if BO manages to strangle Iran's March to nuclear power WITHOUT having to send our military into harm's way, he may just deserve a Nobel Peace Prize (AND the legacy to which you refer).

At least he's trying...where is the rest of the world in this effort to stem the tide of nuclear threat from Iran???

Cheers!!

Doug

 

[Al Wohlstrom]

Doug, Contrary to what you think, we hold the cards. We could keep the "money for terrorist" from them, increase sanctions, stop all shipments to and from, plus more. We don't have to make a deal with the "kill the Americans" Iranians. How can we consider making a deal with a leadership that openly says that? I don't know what Obama's end game is, but his present course doesn't have the best interest of the Middle East, our allies and America. His prior comments lend to his naivety (“Lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ,” the president told an audience at the National Prayer Breakfast) comparing ISIS to the Crusades, he didn't mention what the Muslims did at that time. Maybe he thinks this is a passing trend that will turn out all rosy. Everyone acts as though accepting this deal is a do or die proposition, there are better options without war. But we can't walk around with our tail between our legs, they have to know there is a "big stick" option. Obama wants to hide in the closet and hope this doesn't "go to hell" before he gets out of office.

 

[Larry L.]

deleted. double post again...