• 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!

Britain says no Iran deal 'better than a bad deal'

cite please

He said it during an interview on another channel other than Fox News and it was shown on Fox News yesterday, too bad you missed it.

Is not my fault that you missed it.
 
He said it during an interview on another channel other than Fox News and it was shown on Fox News yesterday, too bad you missed it.

Is not my fault that you missed it.

one would anticipate something in the print media when a former demo president calls out a current demo president
 
one would anticipate something in the print media when a former demo president calls out a current demo president

Don't you know by now that the print media is against anything negative said about 0bama? The media has protected him since day one, that's why so many fools still believe (including 0bama) that he is the best thing since sliced bread.

C'mon Man!
 
Obama's a fool. Most people with any understanding of the gangsters who run Iran know that talking and talking is exactly what Iran wants. As long as Obama's talking then Iran keeps building. Obama's a fool.

Not only is he a fool. He is a blatant narcissist. Nobody can tell him anything. He is merely hoping for a deal for the sake of legacy. He does not really care whether or not the deal goes south afterward. He feels safe in the fact that the next president will be stuck dealing with it.
 
just another unsubstantiated opinion from you

try something different. offer us something factual and pertinent when discussing this topic

Just going by your obviously lack knowledge of the middle east.
 
one would anticipate something in the print media when a former demo president calls out a current demo president


I am not in charge of the print media my friend.
 
The Iranians reinforce the Brits point.



Iran takes hard line on inspections, sanctions at nuke talks.....

Iran took a hard line Thursday on two of the biggest demands of world powers in a final nuclear accord, rejecting any extraordinary inspection rules and threatening to ramp up enrichment of bomb-making material if the United States and other countries re-impose sanctions after the deal is in place.

"We should be realistic," said the Iranian official, who briefed members of the news media on condition he not be quoted by name. He also questioned the legitimacy of countries that don't accept the International Atomic Energy Agency's jurisdiction demanding that Iran be subject to tougher requirements than any other nation. RIA-Novosti reported that Russia also backed Iran's position that additional inspection guidelines for Iran weren't necessary.....snip~

Iran takes hard line on inspections, sanctions at nuke talks
 
The Iranians reinforce the Brits point.



Iran takes hard line on inspections, sanctions at nuke talks.....

Iran took a hard line Thursday on two of the biggest demands of world powers in a final nuclear accord, rejecting any extraordinary inspection rules and threatening to ramp up enrichment of bomb-making material if the United States and other countries re-impose sanctions after the deal is in place.

"We should be realistic," said the Iranian official, who briefed members of the news media on condition he not be quoted by name. He also questioned the legitimacy of countries that don't accept the International Atomic Energy Agency's jurisdiction demanding that Iran be subject to tougher requirements than any other nation. RIA-Novosti reported that Russia also backed Iran's position that additional inspection guidelines for Iran weren't necessary.....snip~

Iran takes hard line on inspections, sanctions at nuke talks

Time for the rest of us to take a hard line on lifting sanctions, then.
 
Time for the rest of us to take a hard line on lifting sanctions, then.

Heya DH. :2wave: Did you like the part about where they threaten to ramp up enrichment? Being a couple months from break out and extending talks for a couple of weeks. They could be there, huh?
 
Heya DH. :2wave: Did you like the part about where they threaten to ramp up enrichment? Being a couple months from break out and extending talks for a couple of weeks. They could be there, huh?

Yep.

Time to hack the computers that control their centrifuges again...

not that it was us the first time around, you understand.
 
Heya DH. :2wave: Did you like the part about where they threaten to ramp up enrichment? Being a couple months from break out and extending talks for a couple of weeks. They could be there, huh?

i liked the part about russia backing the iranian position

effectively takes military action off the table - unless we want a long term proxy war

putin says "check"
 
Simpleχity;1064764096 said:
Britain says no Iran deal 'better than a bad deal'



Agreed. No deal is indeed preferable to a bad deal. Two days remain until the 30 June deadline. My greatest fears remain red-line concessions to Tehran, and a final product that is laced with language deficiency and inexactitude.

Shed your fears dude! Obama says no deal is preferred to a bad deal as well. ;)
 
He said it during an interview on another channel other than Fox News and it was shown on Fox News yesterday, too bad you missed it.

Is not my fault that you missed it.

Actually, in debate, its not true if you can not document it. So, its not true. Next!

BTW. I did see Carter's comments from Aspen, he did not say anything close to what you represented.

Again, the reason you have to back up your statements is so the rest of us can examine the evidence. If we had the evidence, we would see you took outrageous liberties with what was actually said,
 
Last edited:
i liked the part about russia backing the iranian position

effectively takes military action off the table - unless we want a long term proxy war

putin says "check"


You like that the Russians are backing the Iranians. "What" did you think they were the good guys or something? Do you like what they stand for too?

We already have a long term War. Be a shame if a couple of fools got mistaken for the enemy.

It don't take any military action off the table. It just makes Russia look weaker once they back down. Which they will do, not wanting to confront us directly.
 
Actually, in debate, its not true if you can not document it. So, its not true. Next!

BTW. I did see Carter's comments from Aspen, he did not say anything close to what you represented.

Again, the reason you have to back up your statements is so the rest of us can examine the evidence.
If we had the evidence, we would see you took outrageous liberties with what was actually said,

According to you, you have no grounds with which to make your final statement, because,"Actually, in debate, its not true if you can not document it. So, its not true."
 
Simpleχity;1064786891 said:

From your link.

For example, the precise details of how the International Atomic Energy Agency will inspect and monitor Iranian facilities is likely to be secret because the agency doesn't want to tip off other proliferators. The names of Iranian scientists associated with the program whom the agency would like to interview will also not be shared with the public.

This actually makes sense. ;) We already know that Israel assassinates Iranian scientists suspected of involvement in the Iranian nuclear program, let's just give them the names of the ones that actually are. :roll: I can see why the P-5 +1 would wish to keep that secret. And disclosing the exact movements of the IAEA would be beneficial to any other countries that may wish to get around inspectors. Not to worry.
 
You like that the Russians are backing the Iranians.
hell yes
takes the possibility of armed action off of the table
tho we could still engage in a proxy war with russia supplying the iranians as we supply the israelis and saudis
seems to cause more commotion than the very issue of non-proliferation

"What" did you think they were the good guys or something?
they are supporting the legitimate side in this instance
we have a history of supporting the wrong team. such as when we pulled our promised support of ho chi minh after WWII, where he fought the japanese beside us, and instead supported the french attempts to re-colonize vietnam. our support of the house of saud and the government of israel instead of iran in this matter is another such debacle

Do you like what they stand for too?
i like that they are backing the people of iran. the most western-like and educated culture in the ME outside of israel

We already have a long term War. Be a shame if a couple of fools got mistaken for the enemy.
do we really want to engage in mossad tactics to take out foreign leaders
would you be so righteous about it if those table were turned back upon our own elected leaders?
think "JFK"

It don't take any military action off the table.
really? you believe we are going to go to war against a russian backed iran? think again

It just makes Russia look weaker once they back down. Which they will do, not wanting to confront us directly.
yea, putin is going to back down. he has such a history of doing that [/sarcasm]
he just extended his middle finger at the west while uttering "check mate assholes"
and good on him for doing so
time to cut a deal and return iran to the world's economy. it will help counter saudi arabia's attempts to control the price of oil
 
hell yes
takes the possibility of armed action off of the table
tho we could still engage in a proxy war with russia supplying the iranians as we supply the israelis and saudis
seems to cause more commotion than the very issue of non-proliferation


they are supporting the legitimate side in this instance
we have a history of supporting the wrong team. such as when we pulled our promised support of ho chi minh after WWII, where he fought the japanese beside us, and instead supported the french attempts to re-colonize vietnam. our support of the house of saud and the government of israel instead of iran in this matter is another such debacle


i like that they are backing the people of iran. the most western-like and educated culture in the ME outside of israel


do we really want to engage in mossad tactics to take out foreign leaders
would you be so righteous about it if those table were turned back upon our own elected leaders?
think "JFK"


really? you believe we are going to go to war against a russian backed iran? think again


yea, putin is going to back down. he has such a history of doing that [/sarcasm]
he just extended his middle finger at the west while uttering "check mate assholes"
and good on him for doing so
time to cut a deal and return iran to the world's economy. it will help counter saudi arabia's attempts to control the price of oil


Well, you wont have to worry with Russia sticking its middle finger up at the USA and giving it to us really good like. Not with this Administration. They're inept.

Iran isn't standing on any Righteous ground. Its not like their upstanding Global Citizens, haven't been for a while now.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/inter...uclear-sanctions-relief-2.html#post1064787481
 
Back
Top Bottom