Thread: Khamenei calls ‘Death to America’ as Kerry hails progress on nuke deal

Originally Posted by US Conservative

Ah yes, its Booooosh!!! time again, eh?

Still have no answer about what you would consider to be an appropriate action?

Maybe Gruber needs to say something so you have something to oppose. You don't actually favor anything it would seem.

Originally Posted by rocket88

They were working on that ability throughout the Bush administration. He didn't stop it.

What, in your opinion, would be the appropriate action? When pressed you won't own up to calling for military action. You oppose diplomacy. It seems that you have no ideas other than continuing the failed policies that didn't change Iran, and didn't keep them from pursuing a weapons program.

I see we are making improvements.....

147 posts before the ghost of the most powerful president America has ever had is even mentioned.

As I recall? Your side was denying Iran was building nukes, so can Bush be blamed for that too?

Wait, he's responsible for the crash, the recovery failure, that you can't keep your plan, the war in Afghanistan, Libya, Egypt, Crimea, Ukraine, the Keystone Pipeline, Iraq 2, the pull out of Iraq, the re-invasion of Iraq and now the fact Iran really IS building a bomb...which was not so, even as late as the last presidential election.

So, yeah, I agree it IS Bush's fault...

Originally Posted by Montecresto

I understand the basis of your point. An Iranian revolution, the overthrow of the authoritarian government and figs for everybody in Iran. Except, the revolutions across the region are tearing it apart. Things are worse in the region than they've been in our lifetimes. And the more US/Western policy digs, the hole just gets deeper. I'm waiting for the day when there are more people in the West that acknowledge, ok, what we done so far has only worsened things. Then, maybe we can get on with a new approach.

Iran is a cat of a different color. Highly educated, booming population, high inflation, no jobs, economy tanking. Iran needs this deal.
It will only take a spark. No interference needed.

Originally Posted by rocket88

Still have no answer about what you would consider to be an appropriate action?

Theoretically there may be lots of actions but realistically there are only three...
1. The Obama administration goes through with the agreement, Iran holds to it, gives up any nuclear weapons ability and everyone wins.
2. The Obama administration goes through with the agreement, Iran doesn't hold to it, gets nukes anyway and makes Obama and the US look like fools (Which I suspect we already are... but that's just me.)
3. The Obama administration fails to go through with the agreement, Iran gets nuclear weapons.

Since no military options are on the table which, if there was a time to forcibly remove Iran's capability, it would be now - that's not realistically in the list. Even if there were a military option, I'm sorry but Obama doesn't have the balls to do that when his legacy would be at risk. Humans will start ****ting gold bars before that ever happens. There's no reason to think Iran will voluntarily give up their nuclear weapons since the last 40 years has shown they have no interest in being a peaceful nation but one that wants to exert it's power on the region either through terrorism, political or nuclear methods. It wants a seat at the big boy table. In 2 of the 3 scenario's Iran gets nukes. I would also say #1 has a <5% chance of happening. Iran has shown (as in 2010) it's willing to hide it's nuclear facilities from the world.

I guess we better get used to the idea of a nuclear Iran then eh?

Originally Posted by Fearandloathing

I see we are making improvements.....

147 posts before the ghost of the most powerful president America has ever had is even mentioned.

As I recall? Your side was denying Iran was building nukes, so can Bush be blamed for that too?

Wait, he's responsible for the crash, the recovery failure, that you can't keep your plan, the war in Afghanistan, Libya, Egypt, Crimea, Ukraine, the Keystone Pipeline, Iraq 2, the pull out of Iraq, the re-invasion of Iraq and now the fact Iran really IS building a bomb...which was not so, even as late as the last presidential election.

So, yeah, I agree it IS Bush's fault...

You guys are starting to make me think that conservatism is all about anger and being opposed to something and not about favoring anything.


I ask again, though I have no hope that it will be answered. What would be the appropriate action? So far we've ruled out military and diplomatic means.

Originally Posted by JANFU

Iran is a cat of a different color. Highly educated, booming population, high inflation, no jobs, economy tanking. Iran needs this deal.
It will only take a spark. No interference needed.

To the bolded. I assume you refer to the P5+1 deal, if so we agree. Otherwise, I disagree with your optimism of a preferred outcome to an Iranian revolution. And particularly, this is not the time to be wishing to add another destabilized country to the list in the ME.

Originally Posted by US Conservative

So your premise is that at a public address regarding the nuclear talks, the Supreme leader of Iran and a crowd were just saying virtually meaningless words? Perhaps it was just a coincidence?

Explain why we should negotiate with a nation to allow it to get nukes as they call for the deaths of Americans.

Why is it that the left can't even say the words islamic terrorism in the same sentence (despite Iran being a hardline islamic state that is the worlds largest state sponsor of terror), but somehow "Death to America" is meaningless.

We are giving them billions, to help them weaponize, and listening to them say they want to kill Americans...and for what exactly? In exchange for sitting down at talks? Talks that even the President says are most likely NOT to work?

Where is the "deal" here exactly? Kindly show how we benefit from this.

"Death to America" in Persian is "Death to America"!

But it's still OK, but Boehner is a "traitor" for visiting Israel.

I wonder what would be the reaction if several hundred Canadians with ark hair and deep tans showed up at the Ambassador bridge shouting "Death to America".....

At least a swat team.