Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 678
Results 71 to 77 of 77

Thread: 'Very clear' signs of Iran sanitizing military site, Western diplomat says

  1. #71
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    11-28-17 @ 04:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,690

    Re: 'Very clear' signs of Iran sanitizing military site, Western diplomat says

    Quote Originally Posted by Khayembii Communique View Post
    No it doesn't. Not even in your quote. Not even in your underlined section. The IAEA has never said that Iran is in noncompliance with the obligations set forth either in the NPT or in its treaty with the IAEA.
    The IAEA stated that Iran is "not implementing its Additional Protocol..." There is no refuge from Iran's non-compliance in your semantical arguments. Any reasonably literate person understands that when it comes to contracts, agreements, treaties, and other similiar binding instruments, non-implementation, non-fulfillment, non-execution are the same thing as non-compliance.

  2. #72
    Iconoclast
    DaveFagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    wny
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:28 AM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,289

    Re: 'Very clear' signs of Iran sanitizing military site, Western diplomat says

    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    The IAEA stated that Iran is "not implementing its Additional Protocol..." There is no refuge from Iran's non-compliance in your semantical arguments. Any reasonably literate person understands that when it comes to contracts, agreements, treaties, and other similiar binding instruments, non-implementation, non-fulfillment, non-execution are the same thing as non-compliance.

    All your arguments pre-suppose that our aggressive attitude towards Iran is about "Nukes," not OIL. Does your reasoning seem to be slipping? Does a "Contrived Agenda" make any sense to you? I realize you are very articulate in always supporting the gov't line and bandy the Multimedia line sounding like a true believer or just doing your job.

  3. #73
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    11-28-17 @ 04:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,690

    Re: 'Very clear' signs of Iran sanitizing military site, Western diplomat says

    Quote Originally Posted by DaveFagan View Post
    All your arguments pre-suppose that our aggressive attitude towards Iran is about "Nukes," not OIL. Does your reasoning seem to be slipping? Does a "Contrived Agenda" make any sense to you? I realize you are very articulate in always supporting the gov't line and bandy the Multimedia line sounding like a true believer or just doing your job.
    Maintaining open access to the Persian Gulf through which oil shipping passes and assuring the safety of friendly oil producers e.g., Saudi Arabia, has long been a vital U.S. interest.

  4. #74
    Guru

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    06-28-17 @ 10:30 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,909

    Re: 'Very clear' signs of Iran sanitizing military site, Western diplomat says

    Quote Originally Posted by DaveFagan View Post
    All your arguments pre-suppose that our aggressive attitude towards Iran is about "Nukes," not OIL. Does your reasoning seem to be slipping? Does a "Contrived Agenda" make any sense to you? I realize you are very articulate in always supporting the gov't line and bandy the Multimedia line sounding like a true believer or just doing your job.
    The fact that US interests in the Persian Gulf are of paramount importance is no secret, however, as time passed that has not been the only interest. Indeed, the Carter Doctrine(1980) is very specific about that issue:

    "Let our position be absolutely clear: An attempt by any outside force to gain control of the Persian Gulf region will be regarded as an assault on the vital interests of the United States of America, and such an assault will be repelled by any means necessary, including military force."

    Jimmy Carter: The State of the Union Address Delivered Before a Joint Session of the Congress.

    Prior to that, On February 16, 1943,President Franklin D. Roosevelt said the "the defense of Saudi Arabia is vital to the defense of the United States."

    http://www.thepresidency.org/storage...ns/Bennett.pdf

  5. #75
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Last Seen
    08-14-12 @ 11:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    3,928

    Re: 'Very clear' signs of Iran sanitizing military site, Western diplomat says

    Quote Originally Posted by DaveFagan View Post
    How about, "It has nothing to do with NUKES." OIL is/was Iraq. OIL is/was Libya. "NUKES" is the strawman as an excuse to divert attention away from the "it's about OIL" reality. The powers that be don't want to acknowledge that the OIL money has purchased a policy of acquisition by war.. You can't deny history. Doesn't it feel just grand to be manipulated by our politicians and energy corporations? That'd be you and I.
    The US has imposed sanctions against Iran so we do not purchase oil from Iran. Why would it make a scrap of sense to spend a trillion dollars in a war "about oil" there when they provide us with no oil?

    No, contrary to liberal beliefs, not every war is about oil. Please quit lying.
    Last edited by dontworrybehappy; 06-02-12 at 12:27 PM.

  6. #76
    Iconoclast
    DaveFagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    wny
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:28 AM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,289

    Re: 'Very clear' signs of Iran sanitizing military site, Western diplomat says

    Quote Originally Posted by dontworrybehappy View Post
    The US has imposed sanctions against Iran so we do not purchase oil from Iran. Why would it make a scrap of sense to spend a trillion dollars in a war "about oil" there when they provide us with no oil?

    No, contrary to liberal beliefs, not every war is about oil. Please quit lying.
    I see! That would be just like Iraq that sold us no OIL (tell that to Dick Cheney). We spent a Trillion$ on Iraq. We imposed sanctions on Iraq. There seems to be really big holes in your argument/analogy. I am stating categorically that the imbroglio with Iran is about OIL, not nukes. I am stating a fact that you would rather not believe and attempt to rationalize away. You will never be right, just noisy.

  7. #77
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Last Seen
    08-14-12 @ 11:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    3,928

    Re: 'Very clear' signs of Iran sanitizing military site, Western diplomat says

    Quote Originally Posted by DaveFagan View Post
    I see! That would be just like Iraq that sold us no OIL (tell that to Dick Cheney). We spent a Trillion$ on Iraq. We imposed sanctions on Iraq. There seems to be really big holes in your argument/analogy. I am stating categorically that the imbroglio with Iran is about OIL, not nukes. I am stating a fact that you would rather not believe and attempt to rationalize away. You will never be right, just noisy.
    What the hell are you talking about?

    For someone who says they are always right and I'm wrong, I sure don't see any links backing up any of this bull**** you're making up. We might suspend oil purchases, but thats not why we are against Iran. We are against Iran because they are against Israel.
    Last edited by dontworrybehappy; 06-02-12 at 04:35 PM.

Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 678

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •