Page 3 of 13 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 122

Thread: Schumer: Let Congress decide on Iran deal

  1. #21
    Sage

    eohrnberger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    22,300
    Blog Entries
    11

    Re: Schumer: Let Congress decide on Iran deal

    Quote Originally Posted by iguanaman View Post
    Maybe so but the question now is whether the U.S will honor deals with Iran. You sound just like Cheney when the Bush administration broke off nuclear talks with N. Korea. How did that work out? I guess you are looking for a similar result with Iran.


    Yeah, I think it's going to end up in the same place with Iran. Kinda works that way when you make deals with countries that don't honor the deals they make.

    Isn't it already well documented that Iran is already cheating on the already existing inspection regimes? <sarcasm> Yeah, that's sure got a bright future. </sarcasm>
    It's a global Jihad, stupid. Allowing that poison into the country is only going to increase the damage it inflicts on others.
    Trump: "When You Open Your Heart To Patriotism, There Is No Room For Prejudice"
    Trump to NYT: “Try reporting accurately & fairly!”

  2. #22
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,385

    Re: Schumer: Let Congress decide on Iran deal

    Quote Originally Posted by eohrnberger View Post


    Yeah, I think it's going to end up in the same place with Iran. Kinda works that way when you make deals with countries that don't honor the deals they make.

    Isn't it already well documented that Iran is already cheating on the already existing inspection regimes? <sarcasm> Yeah, that's sure got a bright future. </sarcasm>
    How can they honor a deal that we won't make? Bush broke the N. Korean deal and instead decided that invadng Iraq was the way to prevent them from making nuclear weapons. N. Korea made a bomb soon after.

    The Clinton administration negotiated an Agreed Framework with North Korea in 1994, which was successful in “bottling up North Korea’s nuclear program for eight years,” and which eased the crisis on the peninsula. In March 2001, Colin Powell said Bush/Cheney would pick up where Clinton/Gore had left off
    The Bush White House immediately rebuked Powell, forced him to walk back his position, and rejected the Agreed Framework. Kim Jong-il hoped for a new round of negotiations, but the Republican administration refused. As Dick Cheney once put it, “We don’t negotiate with evil – we defeat it.” The Republican president instead added North Korea to an “axis of evil.”

    By 2002, North Korea unlocked its fuel rods, kicked out international weapons inspectors, and became more aggressive in pursuing a nuclear weapons program. In response, “Bush didn’t take military action, he didn’t call for sanctions, nor did he try diplomacy” – instead focusing his energies on selling the United States on the need for a disastrous war in Iraq.
    Indeed, Bush argued at the time that the U.S. had to hurry up and invade Iraq before it could acquire nuclear weapons, effectively telling North Korea that the way to avoid an invasion was to advance its nuclear program as quickly as possible – which it did.
    North Korea's road to nuclear weapons | MSNBC
    Last edited by iguanaman; 04-07-15 at 12:28 PM.

  3. #23
    Sage

    eohrnberger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    22,300
    Blog Entries
    11

    Re: Schumer: Let Congress decide on Iran deal

    Quote Originally Posted by iguanaman View Post
    How can they honor a deal that we won't make? Bush broke the N. Korean deal and instead decided that invadng Iraq was the way to prevent them from making nuclear weapons. N. Korea made a bomb soon after.

    North Korea's road to nuclear weapons | MSNBC
    OK.

    Even so, Iran's already cheating on their commitments, were part of even entering into negotiations I believe, so there's reason to remain hopeful that they'll honor these other commitments?
    It's a global Jihad, stupid. Allowing that poison into the country is only going to increase the damage it inflicts on others.
    Trump: "When You Open Your Heart To Patriotism, There Is No Room For Prejudice"
    Trump to NYT: “Try reporting accurately & fairly!”

  4. #24
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,385

    Re: Schumer: Let Congress decide on Iran deal

    Quote Originally Posted by eohrnberger View Post
    OK.

    Even so, Iran's already cheating on their commitments, were part of even entering into negotiations I believe, so there's reason to remain hopeful that they'll honor these other commitments?
    That's why there are rigorous inspections that are part of the deal. Even Reagan said of the USSR we must "trust but verify". To scuttle the deal before it is made is extremely stupid and will virtually guarantee a nuclear Iran. They will be forced to make a bomb or face invasion, just like the ultimatum that Bush gave N. Korea.












    '
    Last edited by iguanaman; 04-07-15 at 12:42 PM.

  5. #25
    Sage

    eohrnberger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    22,300
    Blog Entries
    11

    Re: Schumer: Let Congress decide on Iran deal

    Quote Originally Posted by iguanaman View Post
    That's why there are rigorous inspections that are part of the deal. Even Reagan said of the USSR we must "trust but verify". To scuttle the deal before it is made is extremely stupid and will virtually guarantee a nuclear Iran. They will be forced to make a bomb or face invasion, just like the ultimatum that Bush gave N. Korea.
    Point here being that Iran is already cheating, as listed below, and we continue to believe that they won't.


    I think trusting Iran, expecting Iran to comply with something they are already cheating at now, isn't a wise course.

    Sure, trust buy verify, not much verify there (or trust for that matter) when verification is already being thwarted, and is only likely to get worse, right?
    It's a global Jihad, stupid. Allowing that poison into the country is only going to increase the damage it inflicts on others.
    Trump: "When You Open Your Heart To Patriotism, There Is No Room For Prejudice"
    Trump to NYT: “Try reporting accurately & fairly!”

  6. #26
    Sage

    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 04:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    10,663

    Re: Schumer: Let Congress decide on Iran deal

    Quote Originally Posted by iguanaman View Post
    Maybe so but the question now is whether the U.S will honor deals with Iran. You sound just like Cheney when the Bush administration broke off nuclear talks with N. Korea. How did that work out? I guess you are looking for a similar result with Iran.
    Not a question to me. I don't doubt that the U.S. will honor its end of an agreement. If by that you refer to the re-imposition of sanctions when Iran sticks its tongue out at the agreement, then I suspect that will be more difficult than the government thinks. If they don't have the bomb now, they will have it soon. No agreement or sanction or even war is going to change that. It is inevitable in the true sense of the word and has been for more than a decade. All we can do is treat them like the enemy they are.

  7. #27
    Tavern Bartender
    Kinky tres borrachos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    New England
    Last Seen
    05-02-17 @ 05:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    38,185

    Re: Schumer: Let Congress decide on Iran deal

    Quote Originally Posted by iguanaman View Post
    That's why there are rigorous inspections that are part of the deal. Even Reagan said of the USSR we must "trust but verify". To scuttle the deal before it is made is extremely stupid and will virtually guarantee a nuclear Iran. They will be forced to make a bomb or face invasion, just like the ultimatum that Bush gave N. Korea.
    Where did you hear/read that the inspections are "rigorous"? I keep hearing that what was proposed were weak, unresolved and very unclear.
    Horse sense is the thing a horse has which keeps it from betting on people. ~W.C. Fields

  8. #28
    A sinister place...
    OrphanSlug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Atlanta
    Last Seen
    05-18-17 @ 07:53 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    10,860

    Re: Schumer: Let Congress decide on Iran deal

    Quote Originally Posted by MMC View Post
    It could be a short term deal anyways. Considering their Ayatollah has terminal cancer.
    If anything it may be a short term deal because the deal has flaws.

    Our issue now is how the deal is characterized in terms of Constitutional application. Meaning no matter if we go down the Treaty path or Executive Order path there are clear longevity complications.

    Those are all aside from whatever could happen on the Iran side of the fence.
    "Every time something really bad happens, people cry out for safety, and the government answers by taking rights away from good people." - Penn Jillette.

  9. #29
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 08:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    56,981

    Re: Schumer: Let Congress decide on Iran deal

    Quote Originally Posted by iguanaman View Post
    How can they honor a deal that we won't make? Bush broke the N. Korean deal and instead decided that invadng Iraq was the way to prevent them from making nuclear weapons. N. Korea made a bomb soon after.

    North Korea's road to nuclear weapons | MSNBC


    Here is how that really played out. Do note how the N Korean military was never in on the deal. Left Unaddressed and left for someone else to handle, huh? Typical leftist methodology.



    "This U.S.-North Korean agreement will help to achieve a long-standing and vital American objective: an end to the threat of nuclear proliferation on the Korean peninsula." -President Bill Clinton.

    "The new accord ... outlines an elaborate timetable for steps by each side.... But American officials acknowledge that the agreement ... will require enormous patience and perseverance .... [T]hey concede that it poses a risk for much of the next decade that North Korea could change its mind, cast aside the accord and have the basic fuel in hand to produce nuclear weapons." -The New York Times

    After 17 months of tumultuous negotiations over the Pyongyang government's nuclear program, the United States and North Korea signed a detailed agreement in Geneva on October 2 1. The pact is a highly complex, three-staged, multilateral arrangement whose terms will not be fulfilled for many years. For the most part, the deal appears "front loaded" in favor of Pyongyang. A consor- tium of nations, led by the United States, is responsible for constructing a modem nu- clear power infrastructure for the well-armed, repressive communist state. The same con- sortium will bolster the North's faltering economy by easing its immediate energy bur- dens with large quantities of free fuel oil. In an October 20 letter to North Korean strong- man Kim Jong Il, moreover, President Clinton vastly expanded America's commitments under the formal agreement. The U.S., said Clinton, would finance the fuel shipments and the reactors if the consortium fails to do so. The total value of the U.S. pledge is esti- mated conservatively at more than $4 billion. In addition to leading the international energy assistance consortium, Washington has pledged to ease its long-standing trade embargo and move toward first-ever diplomatic relations with the North. These concessions provide Pyongyang a degree of political rec- ognition by the U.S. and its allies that it long has sought. Left unaddressed is the immedi- ate threat posed by the North's formidable conventional military force, which includes a large stockpile of chemical and biological weapons and missiles capable of reaching South Korea and Japan. About 37,000 U.S. troops are stationed in South Korea to counter the North's military threat. The Clinton Administration's aim in all of this is, first, to freeze the North Korean nu- clear program and, ultimately, to assess the North's past efforts to build nuclear bombs and preclude any future weapons capabilities. U.S. intelligence and defense officials esti- mate that the North has enough enriched fuel to produce nuclear weapons. Secretary of Defense William Perry has stated, "it is possible they could make one or even two de- vices, perhaps even nuclear bombs."5 Even assuming smooth implementation of the Oc- tober 21 agreement, however, its goals cannot possibly be fulfilled completely for at least a decade.....snip~

    The Clinton Nuclear Deal with Pyongyang: Road Map to Progress or Dead End Street?

  10. #30
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 08:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    56,981

    Re: Schumer: Let Congress decide on Iran deal

    Quote Originally Posted by eohrnberger View Post


    Yeah, I think it's going to end up in the same place with Iran. Kinda works that way when you make deals with countries that don't honor the deals they make.

    Isn't it already well documented that Iran is already cheating on the already existing inspection regimes? <sarcasm> Yeah, that's sure got a bright future. </sarcasm>

    Uh oh EB.....I think BO just told on himself.



    Obama: Yeah, This Iran Deal Doesn't Actually Stop The Regime From Getting a Bomb.....


    During an interview today with NPR, President Obama admitted the framework outlined in a State Department "fact sheet" and released last week only delays Iran's non-peaceful nuclear program. More from Fox News:

    The stark admission -- after his energy secretary even claimed the deal was a "forever agreement" -- came as the president seeks to quiet a growing chorus questioning whether the deal he and world leaders have negotiated merely delays the certainty of a nuclear-armed Iran. Obama has insisted confidently that Iran will not get a nuclear weapon on his watch, which ends in roughly 20 months, but has made no similar assurances about his successor.....snip~

    Obama: Yeah, This Iran Deal Doesn't Actually Stop The Regime From Getting a Bomb - Katie Pavlich

Page 3 of 13 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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