• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Exclusive: Obama’s Secret Iran Détente

Renae

Banned
Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
50,241
Reaction score
19,243
Location
San Antonio Texas
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
While those negotiations now appear on the verge of a breakthrough the key condition for Iran—relief from crippling sanctions—began quietly and modestly five months ago. A review of Treasury Department notices reveals that the U.S. government has all but stopped the financial blacklisting of entities and people that help Iran evade international sanctions since the election of its president, Hassan Rouhani, in June.

On Wednesday Obama said in an interview with NBC News the negotiations in Geneva “are not about easing sanctions.” “The negotiations taking place are about how Iran begins to meet its international obligations and provide assurances not just to us but to the entire world,” the president said.
Exclusive: Obama

"We have achieved peace in our time."-Neville Chamberlain
 
Last edited:
we should stop demonizing Iran and normalize relations. That Iran made America look weak thirty years ago is hardly an excuse to perpetuate policies designed to punish them and shield Saudi Arabia for its oil when so much terrorism today against the US has strong ties to Saudi Arabia.
 
Obama wats to transform Israel also....into glass.
 
we should stop demonizing Iran and normalize relations. That Iran made America look weak thirty years ago is hardly an excuse to perpetuate policies designed to punish them and shield Saudi Arabia for its oil when so much terrorism today against the US has strong ties to Saudi Arabia.

Sure....Why not facilitate the caliphate that the Ayatollah's want, and just Nuke Israel ourselves! [/SARCASM] :doh
 
Sure....Why not facilitate the caliphate that the Ayatollah's want, and just Nuke Israel ourselves! [/SARCASM] :doh

If that is what it takes to have them stop blowing up US crap, then sure.
 
how is our exclusive alliance with the Sunni's working out for us? we have a naval base in the UAE, and military ties to Saudi Arabia.

We also have a crappy relationship with the Shiite Crescent states -how does this benefit the US?
In other words, if we want to spread or sphere of influence, it makes no sense to deal only with the Sunni states/population.

Iran is a major power, do we just cede all influence to Russia? Do we let Israel or saudi Arabi control our foreign affairs.

Not much I like about Obam's foreign interventionism - but if actually succeeds in opeing up some normalization of relations with Iran, it can't hurt.

We don't have to be allies, but we sure can go into a detente' situation with them.
 
If that is what it takes to have them stop blowing up US crap, then sure.

Nope, they'll take your concession and continue to blow up US stuff, and kill Americans. You can't negotiate with people that believe that you are to be killed because you don't follow what they follow.
 
we should stop demonizing Iran and normalize relations. That Iran made America look weak thirty years ago is hardly an excuse to perpetuate policies designed to punish them and shield Saudi Arabia for its oil when so much terrorism today against the US has strong ties to Saudi Arabia.
Iran's stated their mission, if you think it's bluster, just talk, you're naive. Question for you, are you willing to risk a mushroom cloud over Israel for "peace"?
 
Exclusive: Obama

"We have achieved peace in our time."-Neville Chamberlain

So you'd rather have nuclear war than a peaceful settlement?

The Chamberlain excuse is weak if you actually understand history. However, since that doesn't play into "Obama is bad," it's not surprising that you have no concept of it. Chamberlain had the consent of the people to do what he did, the people of Britain didn't want a war at that time. Also, the forces of Britain and France weren't good enough in 1938 to stop Hitler. If they had tried then, the war would have gone much worse.
 
Iran's stated their mission, if you think it's bluster, just talk, you're naive. Question for you, are you willing to risk a mushroom cloud over Israel for "peace"?

Well, you're willing to risk a mushroom cloud over Israel because you don't even want to talk about peace. So I don't see the difference. If Iran's going to do it, they're going to do it. Peace or war.
 
So you'd rather have nuclear war than a peaceful settlement?

The Chamberlain excuse is weak if you actually understand history. However, since that doesn't play into "Obama is bad," it's not surprising that you have no concept of it. Chamberlain had the consent of the people to do what he did, the people of Britain didn't want a war at that time. Also, the forces of Britain and France weren't good enough in 1938 to stop Hitler. If they had tried then, the war would have gone much worse.
I fully understand history, and had the UK, France and the rest of the world taken the threat seriously there might not have BEEN a war. Instead the pursuit of peace at any cost was far worse. Iran isn't interested in peace, The Mahdi is coming, and the Mahdi comes after armageddon. The Ayatollah believes he's the man to to bring about the return of the Mahdi. They don't care about material wealth or peace.
 
Well, you're willing to risk a mushroom cloud over Israel because you don't even want to talk about peace. So I don't see the difference. If Iran's going to do it, they're going to do it. Peace or war.

Iran can't if they are stopped from making the bomb, but that bomb can only be made if we let there be "peace". People like you condemn millions to death for fear of war.
 
Iran's stated their mission, if you think it's bluster, just talk, you're naive. Question for you, are you willing to risk a mushroom cloud over Israel for "peace"?

He gave you the answer in post #6. With that I ask you, how is it OK to "debate" with someone so hateful that they are fine with a result of a second holocaust.
 
He gave you the answer in post #6. With that I ask you, how is it OK to "debate" with someone so hateful that they are fine with a result of a second holocaust.
Debate is discussing differing views on a subject in hopes not of swaying the person you debate but those observing the debate.
 
Debate is discussing differing views on a subject in hopes not of swaying the person you debate but those observing the debate.

Interesting POV.
 
I fully understand history, and had the UK, France and the rest of the world taken the threat seriously there might not have BEEN a war. Instead the pursuit of peace at any cost was far worse. Iran isn't interested in peace, The Mahdi is coming, and the Mahdi comes after armageddon. The Ayatollah believes he's the man to to bring about the return of the Mahdi. They don't care about material wealth or peace.

If you think the rest of the world was in much of a position to stop Hitler in 1938, then you really don't understand history. Heck, France wasn't even really in a position to do it 1940 either.

Of the countries we've stopped talking to, how many of them have changed? North Korea? Cuba? It's clear that not talking is not a tenable position. Iran's new President has indicated a willingness to renew talks. What is it Reagan said - "Trust but verify?" You don't want to do either in this case.
 
we should stop demonizing Iran and normalize relations. That Iran made America look weak thirty years ago is hardly an excuse to perpetuate policies designed to punish them and shield Saudi Arabia for its oil when so much terrorism today against the US has strong ties to Saudi Arabia.

yep. This right here. Saudi Arabia is the regional hegemon. It's their job to step up if stepping up becomes necessary.
 
If you think the rest of the world was in much of a position to stop Hitler in 1938, then you really don't understand history. Heck, France wasn't even really in a position to do it 1940 either.

Of the countries we've stopped talking to, how many of them have changed? North Korea? Cuba? It's clear that not talking is not a tenable position. Iran's new President has indicated a willingness to renew talks. What is it Reagan said - "Trust but verify?" You don't want to do either in this case.

In 1938 no, they had plenty of warning PRIOR TOO, you forget, ther were other years, 37, 36,35,34,33,32,31,30,29,28... need I go on.

Iran's new President is a radical, don't believe the hype.
 
Interesting POV.

You're never going to sway the true believer, but the guy reading the thread, who isn't vested in the subject or not sure where they stand CAN be swayed, thus the object of my posts.
 
Awww.... poor Israel. Somebody must have removed their ring from America's nose.

The very thought of Israel no longer dictating American policy in the Middle East and America unconditionally sucking up to them at every turn is just disgusting.

They are, after all, "God's chosen people." :roll:

**** Iran too.
 
Awww.... poor Israel. Somebody must have removed their ring from America's nose.

The very thought of Israel no longer dictating American policy in the Middle East and America unconditionally sucking up to them at every turn is just disgusting.

They are, after all, "God's chosen people." :roll:

**** Iran too.

Worry not, Israel could wipe the floor with Iran....If you want to just let the whole region devolve, and turn your back on an ally, I guess that speaks to your own character doesn't it now?
 
You're never going to sway the true believer, but the guy reading the thread, who isn't vested in the subject or not sure where they stand CAN be swayed, thus the object of my posts.

good point!
 
Back
Top Bottom