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...
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Iran respects strong leadership and if needed force. They, like most of the thuggish countries of the world do NOT respect whiny, appeasing, chumps like Obama.
Look around, WHERE is he succeeding? Can you give me examples of his smart diplomacy working? Face it, he fails constantly, and he and his army of gruberites try to spin it into success. The left is simply unable to deal with reality.
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?
“I think if Thomas Jefferson were looking down, the author of the Bill of Rights, on what’s being proposed here, he’d agree with it. He would agree that the First Amendment cannot be absolute.” - Chuck Schumer (D). Yet, Madison and Mason wrote the Bill of Rights, according to Sheila Jackson Lee, 400 years ago. Yup, it's a fact.
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.
Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy
"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.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.