• 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!

Iran Opens Campaign to Lay Blame on U.S. if Nuclear Talks Fail [W:96]

Re: Iran Opens Campaign to Lay Blame on U.S. if Nuclear Talks Fail

eohrnberger said:
Umm, we get what Obama's negotiations typically results in . . . nothing except additional expenses. Not a good negotiator he.
Click to expand...

It looks like there's a good chance you will eat those words. It now looks good for an agreement to be announced tomorrow. I expect you won't like that either. You guys are so predictable it's hilarious. You righties are like weebles. You keep getting knocked down and just pop right back up. I guess it gets easier after a few dozen KO's.

The Western diplomats say the major hurdles to a deal have been overcome, although they acknowledge some important issues needed to be resolved and capitals still needed to sign off. Those loose ends are what are keeping Iranian officials from sounding more optimistic, with a Monday deadline looming.

"There are two or three things that need to be worked out," a senior Iranian official told CNN on Sunday.

But if all goes well, an announcement could come as early as Monday, Western officials said.

"We are nearly there," one Western diplomat said.
Click to expand...
John Kerry 'hopeful' an Iran deal is near - CNNPolitics.com
 
Re: Iran Opens Campaign to Lay Blame on U.S. if Nuclear Talks Fail

iguanaman said:
It looks like there's a good chance you will eat those words. It now looks good for an agreement to be announced tomorrow. I expect you won't like that either. You guys are so predictable it's hilarious. You righties are like weebles. You keep getting knocked down and just pop right back up. I guess it gets easier after a few dozen KO's.


John Kerry 'hopeful' an Iran deal is near - CNNPolitics.com
Click to expand...

Oh I'm sure that Kerry's hopeful that a deal is near. What that deal contains is yet a completely different matter.

Given the current track record of Obama giving in on nearly every principal, if he has any is a valid question, its a valid question to ask if the deal is a bad one that this administration and the US should walk away from or not. Given the level of details released, or lack there of (understandable in negotiations of this type), whether to walk away or not is yet a question to be answered.
 
Re: Iran Opens Campaign to Lay Blame on U.S. if Nuclear Talks Fail

eohrnberger said:
I disagree. You may think so, but that's hardly the only option for engagement that's typically used. While military action may always be on the table, it, most appropriately, is the last one used by either side of the political isle.
Click to expand...

No, it is NOT!!!
 
Re: Iran Opens Campaign to Lay Blame on U.S. if Nuclear Talks Fail

Montecresto said:
No, it is NOT!!!
Click to expand...
How's that?

Which president committed ever more troops to Viet Nam? Johnson D
Which president declared war in WW II? For D
 
Re: Iran Opens Campaign to Lay Blame on U.S. if Nuclear Talks Fail

Objective Voice said:
At this point, the U.S. would be justified under such circumstances. If Iran claims their nuclear ambitions are for peaceful energy usage, medical and scientific research only, they shouldn't have a problem providing verifiable proof that's exactly what they're constructing nuclear energy to do.

I understand the counter argument here - that if the situation were reversed neither the U.S. nor the P5 countries involved in these negotiations would be so willing to open up their military and/or research facilities - but those who hold such a view miss the point. Neither we nor the P5 countries have threatening to use nuclear weapons against another country, nor have we/are they been sponsors of terrorism and, as such, refuse to denounce future participation in such terrorist activities or sponsorship thereto.

So, if the negotiations do fall apart, you can't say the U.S. (Pres. Obama) didn't try. I don't think asking Iran to verify their activities prior to loosing sanctions incrementally is too much to ask.

However, Montecresto makes a very valid point.



So, if the U.S./P5 negotiations keep moving the goal post as it were and can't seem to agree on terms amongst even themselves, how do you expect the Iranian delegate to accept an unreasonably structured agreement? I'd say the principle negotiators need to get their act together and fast!
Click to expand...

Right, the other countries have each their own issues, which understandably would be troubling for Iran. Otherwise, you discount the fact that the US is indeed the only country to have used nuclear weapons, and on civilian targets at that, so.....zero credibility in your scenario. ;)
 
Re: Iran Opens Campaign to Lay Blame on U.S. if Nuclear Talks Fail

eohrnberger said:
How's that?

Which president committed ever more troops to Viet Nam? Johnson D
Which president declared war in WW II? For D
Click to expand...

And? In neither case was diplomacy exhausted! What's your point?
 
Re: Iran Opens Campaign to Lay Blame on U.S. if Nuclear Talks Fail

eohrnberger said:
Oh I'm sure that Kerry's hopeful that a deal is near. What that deal contains is yet a completely different matter.

Given the current track record of Obama giving in on nearly every principal, if he has any is a valid question, its a valid question to ask if the deal is a bad one that this administration and the US should walk away from or not. Given the level of details released, or lack there of (understandable in negotiations of this type), whether to walk away or not is yet a question to be answered.
Click to expand...

Wanna bet you wont like any deal? You don't like negotiations that fail and you don't like it when deals are made. You fit in perfectly in the party of NO. You don't even mind that it is a losing position because sooner or later someone asks you what you would say yes to.
 
Re: Iran Opens Campaign to Lay Blame on U.S. if Nuclear Talks Fail

Montecresto said:
And? In neither case was diplomacy exhausted! What's your point?
Click to expand...

What's yours?
My position is not to use military action first, but only that the military option has to remain on the table at all times, even if rarely used and used as the last resort. Your posts seem to disagree with this position.
 
Re: Iran Opens Campaign to Lay Blame on U.S. if Nuclear Talks Fail

Roadvirus said:
Well, Iran is the one denying any access to military sites or other key nuclear facilities. So technically, it would be Iran's fault if talks fail.
Click to expand...

That's what you say, now. But then you don't believe anything that the Obama administration says about anything, why do you believe the rhetoric on this...............hmm?
 
Re: Iran Opens Campaign to Lay Blame on U.S. if Nuclear Talks Fail

eohrnberger said:
What's yours?
My position is not to use military action first, but only that the military option has to remain on the table at all times, even if rarely used and used as the last resort. Your posts seem to disagree with this position.
Click to expand...

Oh good gawd!!!! The military option has never been off the USFP table, wtf are you talking about?
 
Re: Iran Opens Campaign to Lay Blame on U.S. if Nuclear Talks Fail

iguanaman said:
Wanna bet you wont like any deal? You don't like negotiations that fail and you don't like it when deals are made. You fit in perfectly in the party of NO. You don't even mind that it is a losing position because sooner or later someone asks you what you would say yes to.
Click to expand...

Bombs and missiles are the first and last option for the wingers! There's nothing in between!
 
Re: Iran Opens Campaign to Lay Blame on U.S. if Nuclear Talks Fail

iguanaman said:
Wanna bet you wont like any deal? You don't like negotiations that fail and you don't like it when deals are made. You fit in perfectly in the party of NO. You don't even mind that it is a losing position. LOL
Click to expand...

Project much?

You have any bases for making ingredients my clearly stated position?

Hard to judge what my opinion on the desl will be as there's no deal as of yet, but to suffice it to say, I don't think the world's nations will have a willing partner in Iran, even that we'll see if a deal comes to pass.
 
Re: Iran Opens Campaign to Lay Blame on U.S. if Nuclear Talks Fail

Montecresto said:
Oh good gawd!!!! The military option has never been off the USFP table, wtf are you talking about?
Click to expand...

NPR should it be, I read your posts to mean that military action should be off the table. Oh well,
Montecresto said:
Bombs and missiles are the first and last option for the wingers! There's nothing in between!
Click to expand...

What a load of crap.
 
Re: Iran Opens Campaign to Lay Blame on U.S. if Nuclear Talks Fail

Montecresto said:
Bombs and missiles are the first and last option for the wingers! There's nothing in between!
Click to expand...

That is the truth. They also have a very bad case of sour grapes. The more they lose the sourer those grapes get. They are going to be puckered up for at least 8 more years too. It isn't a pretty sight either. That behavior never is.
 
Re: Iran Opens Campaign to Lay Blame on U.S. if Nuclear Talks Fail

eohrnberger said:
How's that?

Which president committed ever more troops to Viet Nam? Johnson D
Which president declared war in WW II? For D
Click to expand...

Which president took the US into Vietnam? Which president got you out? Which president risked WW3 over Turkish missiles?

And in the end, we are ALL waiting for that list of Democrat lawmakers who voted against the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq....
 
Re: Iran Opens Campaign to Lay Blame on U.S. if Nuclear Talks Fail

eohrnberger said:
NPR should it be, I read your posts to mean that military action should be off the table. Oh well,


What a load of crap.
Click to expand...

The MILITARY OPTION IS NEVER OFF THE USFP TABLE, what's wrong with you. The thing is, you wing nut warmongers ALWAYS want to throw the military at everything. Intellectual dialogue, sound reasoning, and a diplomatic compromise is ALWAYS viewed as weakness and isolation to you because you never learned anything other than hostility growing up. The rest of us are trying hard to prevent total meltdown from the knuckle dragging, mouth breathing, obnoxious violent natured idiots.
 
Re: Iran Opens Campaign to Lay Blame on U.S. if Nuclear Talks Fail

The deal with Iran is the most stupid decision we've ever made.
 
Re: Iran Opens Campaign to Lay Blame on U.S. if Nuclear Talks Fail

Erod said:
The deal with Iran is the most stupid decision we've ever made.
Click to expand...

What deal with Iran?
 
Re: Iran Opens Campaign to Lay Blame on U.S. if Nuclear Talks Fail

Erod said:
The deal with Iran is the most stupid decision we've ever made.
Click to expand...
[modification by bubba for the point to follow]

same objections were made in 1964 about the civil rights act, when i was a kid
 
Re: Iran Opens Campaign to Lay Blame on U.S. if Nuclear Talks Fail

DA60 said:
Seems.

It seemed that Israel and South Africa worked together on nukes. It seems that Israel has nukes and has allowed ZERO inspections (and I do not care that they did not sign the NP treaty). It seems that Iran is being hounded because they actually signed the NPT. It seems that Israel kills roughly ten times as many innocent Palestinian civilians as the reverse. It seems America is staggeringly hypocritical in that they can have all the nukes they want and they actually killed over a hundred thousand people with theirs long ago, but Iran is the evil, boogie man.

It seems to me that this is an example of incredible hypocrisy in that - sure Iran is no great country when it comes to human rights. But with Gitmo, rendition, illegally bombing countries at will, invading countries at will (without a declaration of war) and on and on...neither is America. And do not even get me started with Israel's pathetic record on human rights over the past 30 years or so (of course they treat Jews like gold...It's just a certain religion their leaders clearly hate. Sound familiar?)

As I see it...Iranian leaders suck, American leaders (of both parties) suck, Israeli leaders suck (worse then American leaders - not sure in comparison to Iranian leaders). BUT the American leaders are so powerful that they get to have nukes and let their friends have them as well BUT they do not want those they do not like to have them. So the Iranian people are screwed royally (with various embargoes) in this regard.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel–South_Africa_relations#Alleged_nuclear_collaboration
Click to expand...

As I pointed out, the membership and text are important. While Iran is bound by the treaty, Israel is not. Now this might make people angry and lead them to all sorts of silly logic and conclusions. But they are wasting their time barking up that tree. I am not saying we might want to change the international security setup. But gripping about things that are totally legal is not the way to achieve it.
 
Re: Iran Opens Campaign to Lay Blame on U.S. if Nuclear Talks Fail

Moderator's Warning:
Folks, a couple of posters have desperately attempted to derail this thread into a debate about Israel. If they continue, action will be taken. If others assist them with this threadjacking by going along with it then they'll receive consequences as well. If the majority of your post is discussing something other than IRAN, this deal, or the blame falling upon the US then it's probably not smart to hit the reply button at the end of it
 
Re: Iran Opens Campaign to Lay Blame on U.S. if Nuclear Talks Fail

Montecresto said:
The MILITARY OPTION IS NEVER OFF THE USFP TABLE, what's wrong with you. The thing is, you wing nut warmongers ALWAYS want to throw the military at everything. Intellectual dialogue, sound reasoning, and a diplomatic compromise is ALWAYS viewed as weakness and isolation to you because you never learned anything other than hostility growing up. The rest of us are trying hard to prevent total meltdown from the knuckle dragging, mouth breathing, obnoxious violent natured idiots.
Click to expand...

I challenge you to find that in any of my posts ("ALWAYS want to throw the military at everything").

So nice to see that you are personalizing your posts here. Good job.

Not criticizing negotiations in the least. But I have to admit that I am concerned about the details deal that's pending, as it seems the details are where Obama's the weakest. Just think of all the 'details' that were revealed in his previous efforts, and all the lies that he's told to sell it to the 'stupid American voters' that Gruber was talking about. It's those details that end up killing you in the longer term.
 
Re: Iran Opens Campaign to Lay Blame on U.S. if Nuclear Talks Fail

eohrnberger said:
I challenge you to find that in any of my posts ("ALWAYS want to throw the military at everything").

So nice to see that you are personalizing your posts here. Good job.

Not criticizing negotiations in the least. But I have to admit that I am concerned about the details deal that's pending, as it seems the details are where Obama's the weakest. Just think of all the 'details' that were revealed in his previous efforts, and all the lies that he's told to sell it to the 'stupid American voters' that Gruber was talking about. It's those details that end up killing you in the longer term.
Click to expand...

I'm not concerned with Iran having nukes, they're not the aggressor nation that Israel is who has them already. So any Obama incompetency isn't a threat to my life. And it's funny that your knickers are all in a knot over Obama's lies, but BushCo seems to get the pass from you for all their lies to sell the Iraq war to the "stupid American voters". ;)

If it's not the military that you want to throw at Iran, what is it? Obama has repeated that no deal at all is preferred to a deal that allows Iran to become a nuclear power. He's stated that even in the event of a deal that Iran chooses to violate, you'll still have the opportunity to use the military option on Iran before they build a nuke. There's really nothing here worthy of the criticism other than partisans doing their thing.
 
Re: Iran Opens Campaign to Lay Blame on U.S. if Nuclear Talks Fail

Montecresto said:
I'm not concerned with Iran having nukes, they're not the aggressor nation that Israel is who has them already.
Click to expand...
Far be it for me to defend Israel as I don't believe nor support all the things they do, however, I think it very foolish to not be concerned about the Iranian theocracy having nuclear weapons and the ballistic missile program with which to delivery them. That's a very disconcerting combination of capabilities which has a factorial effect on the risk that it poses.

Somewhere someone posted that religion and religious conflicts have been the bane of human existence, responsible for more of human death, maiming and suffering through history. And still you aren't concerned about allowing a nation ruled by theocracy of a religion that has many members of extremist hate preaching, known terrorists and suicide bombers some of the most powerful weapons known to man?

Are ye daft man?

Montecresto said:
So any Obama incompetency isn't a threat to my life.
Click to expand...
His incompetency may yet post a threat to your life.
Montecresto said:
And it's funny that your knickers are all in a knot over Obama's lies, but BushCo seems to get the pass from you for all their lies to sell the Iraq war to the "stupid American voters". ;)
Click to expand...
Fact of the matter is that Sadaam had WMDs, which he in fact used on the Kurds, but details, details. As long as you can continue to repeat your ideology issued talking point and feel warm and safe inside with that.
Montecresto said:
If it's not the military that you want to throw at Iran, what is it? Obama has repeated that no deal at all is preferred to a deal that allows Iran to become a nuclear power. He's stated that even in the event of a deal that Iran chooses to violate, you'll still have the opportunity to use the military option on Iran before they build a nuke. There's really nothing here worthy of the criticism other than partisans doing their thing.
Click to expand...
He keeps saying that, but he has little to no credibility with as many lies that he's already told. It's therefore fair to be concerned about what the details of the deal he manages to negotiate with the Iranians are, and whether or not the US should go along with it.
 
Re: Iran Opens Campaign to Lay Blame on U.S. if Nuclear Talks Fail

eohrnberger said:
Far be it for me to defend Israel as I don't believe nor support all the things they do, however, I think it very foolish to not be concerned about the Iranian theocracy having nuclear weapons and the ballistic missile program with which to delivery them. That's a very disconcerting combination of capabilities which has a factorial effect on the risk that it poses.

Somewhere someone posted that religion and religious conflicts have been the bane of human existence, responsible for more of human death, maiming and suffering through history. And still you aren't concerned about allowing a nation ruled by theocracy of a religion that has many members of extremist hate preaching, known terrorists and suicide bombers some of the most powerful weapons known to man?

Are ye daft man?


His incompetency may yet post a threat to your life.

Fact of the matter is that Sadaam had WMDs, which he in fact used on the Kurds, but details, details. As long as you can continue to repeat your ideology issued talking point and feel warm and safe inside with that.

He keeps saying that, but he has little to no credibility with as many lies that he's already told. It's therefore fair to be concerned about what the details of the deal he manages to negotiate with the Iranians are, and whether or not the US should go along with it.
Click to expand...

Ok, leaving Israel out of this then. Besides the fact that I have zero concerns that a nuclear weapons powered Iran would be a threat to me. Very educated senior fellows at the Council on Foreign Relations have argued the merits of a nuclear powered Iran on the basis of the stability it would bring to the region. Pakistan is a far less stabile nation than Iran, and they seem to be maintaining control of their nukes.

Saddam was NOT a threat to the United States was the point. "Do we have to wait for the smoking gun to come in the form of a mushroom cloud over a US city" was the bull**** fear mongering advanced to scare an American population into supporting a completely gratuitous war that the Rand Corporation has defined as Bush's "blunder" and the 16 intelligence agencies pointed out caused an increase in global terrorism and made America LESS SAFE!!!! So stop defending the indefensible.

Otherwise, Obama will be gone soon, and hawkish as the old goat is, whether we get Hillary or John Ellis, you'll still have the opportunity to bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran!!! :shrug:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom