View Poll Results: Who do you trust more to deal with Iran?

Voters
124. You may not vote on this poll
  • Obama

    97 78.23%
  • PM of Israel

    27 21.77%
Page 5 of 18 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 177

Thread: Who do you trust more to deal with Iran?

  1. #41
    Left the building
    Fearandloathing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Vancouver, Canada Dual citizen
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    18,473

    Re: Who do you trust more to deal with Iran?

    Quote Originally Posted by BrewerBob View Post
    I don't care for either man but I think Obama is a bit more likely to prevent a war with Iran than Netanyahu because, at least in this case, Obama seems to favor diplomacy. Despite their rhetoric sometimes, I do believe Iran is a "rational actor".

    But I am also inclined to just pull out of that region altogether and let them deal with things themselves. But that could just be my frustration talking.

    I would like to see a list where his "diplomacy" has actually changed anything for the better.

    He had one war in one nation at one point, about three years into his mandate. Now he has seven. He has not had any impact on Putin to speak of, and even the Canadians are pissed off, which is almost impossible to do. The last time Canada-US relations were this bad Nixon was in power and we were sheltering draft dodgers....

    I don't see how "diplomacy" is working at any level.
    ""You know, when we sell to other countries, even if they're allies -- you never know about an ally. An ally can turn."
    Donald Trump, 11/23/17

  2. #42
    Sage

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Texas, Vegas, Colombia
    Last Seen
    11-28-16 @ 06:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    20,295

    Re: Who do you trust more to deal with Iran?

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    You're denying his criticism of the deal (that he hasn't seen) that the P-5+1 is working on? Do you think he was here to give Obama moral support and a pat on the back for a job well done. Why don't you try to disguise your dishonesty a bit?
    I dispute that his agenda was to undermine negotiations... his agenda was to tell us the position of Israel.... the ally that actually has to deal with the realities of the issue.
    Bibi's not an idiot... he knows he has no power to undermine our negotiations.(for my money, Obama will probably be more favorable to Iran now that bibi's presence hurt his feelings)

    in any event, it wouldn't have mattered what he had to say ... Obama's minions had their marching orders to oppose him and anything he had to says weeks before Bibi ever set foot in the country.
    and now democrats ( specifically proglibs) find themselves in the awkward position of allying themselves with a common enemy and ****ting all over a constant ally..... for no other reason other than Obamas feelings getting hurt.... petulant children, the lot of them

  3. #43
    Sage

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Texas, Vegas, Colombia
    Last Seen
    11-28-16 @ 06:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    20,295

    Re: Who do you trust more to deal with Iran?

    Quote Originally Posted by Fearandloathing View Post
    I would like to see a list where his "diplomacy" has actually changed anything for the better.

    He had one war in one nation at one point, about three years into his mandate. Now he has seven. He has not had any impact on Putin to speak of, and even the Canadians are pissed off, which is almost impossible to do. The last time Canada-US relations were this bad Nixon was in power and we were sheltering draft dodgers....

    I don't see how "diplomacy" is working at any level.
    yeah.. there hasn't been much in the way of diplomatic successes with this administration...we've even blown the easy calls with strong allies ( keystone come immediately to mind)

    well, I guess strengthening the Cuban regime could be viewed as a diplomatic success by some..

  4. #44
    Left the building
    Fearandloathing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Vancouver, Canada Dual citizen
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    18,473

    Re: Who do you trust more to deal with Iran?

    Quote Originally Posted by Thrilla View Post
    yeah.. there hasn't been much in the way of diplomatic successes with this administration...we've even blown the easy calls with strong allies ( keystone come immediately to mind)

    well, I guess strengthening the Cuban regime could be viewed as a diplomatic success by some..
    Maybe as a by product through stumbling...

    But that has to be the best example of failure yet.

    A year of Canadian led preliminary talks to get Cuba and the US to agree on what to talk about...one day of talks and the Cubans storm out in anger because Obama changed the agenda.....

    More smoke and not even mirrors
    ""You know, when we sell to other countries, even if they're allies -- you never know about an ally. An ally can turn."
    Donald Trump, 11/23/17

  5. #45
    Sage
    Skeptic Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    10,269

    Re: Who do you trust more to deal with Iran?

    Quote Originally Posted by Fearandloathing View Post
    I would like to see a list where his "diplomacy" has actually changed anything for the better.

    He had one war in one nation at one point, about three years into his mandate. Now he has seven. He has not had any impact on Putin to speak of, and even the Canadians are pissed off, which is almost impossible to do. The last time Canada-US relations were this bad Nixon was in power and we were sheltering draft dodgers....

    I don't see how "diplomacy" is working at any level.
    Why didn't you bold the "at least in this case" part of my text?

  6. #46
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: Who do you trust more to deal with Iran?

    Quote Originally Posted by Thrilla View Post
    I don't mind Reagan overall, but to say I worship him is far from the truth.
    if he were alive today, i'd probably thank him for being the kinYd of President we needed at the time.... right before I punched him in the mouth.


    in any event, I don't worry about what exaggerations idiot liberal ideologues concoct in their heads (no one takes them seriously anyways).. but it's still a good idea to challenge them when they start spewing their rhetoric.

    the US was not the major arms supplier for Iraq... we did not provide him with most of his arms.
    the Soviet Union, France, China, and .. oddly enough.. Chile.. provided Saddam with his armaments... US support, in the grand scheme, was minor.

    as for the Iran-Iraq war... i'm fairly familiar with it... familiar enough to know it found it's footing in long held border disputes ( primarily the Shatt al Arab) , and the assassination of an Iraqi foreign minister... of course, the tyrants Saddam wish to gain more oil lands coupled with the Ayatollahs hated of the ba'athist regime on religious grounds didn't help matters much either.

    if I had my druthers, I would have preferred Saddam taking Iran... he's an evil **** who deserves to reside in several levels of hell... but he wasn't as crazy as the lunatics in charge of Iran.
    IMO, taking Iran would have also hastened his demise.... which would have brought me delight ( as opposed to seeing him being allowed to breath for several more decades)

    while it's great Saddam has left the gene pool, it's still sucks the Islamic lunatics in Iran are still alive, kicking.. and ruling the roost.
    To the bolded, that's funny!

    US foreign policy in the Middle East has nothing to do with improvements to the Middle East for the sake of the inhabitants of the Middle East. US foreign policy is about what's good for a select few, wealthy elites that support politicians and foreign policy that is beneficial to them. Sometimes that means installing dictators, sometimes that means knocking them down. Sometimes but rarely, it means avoiding war, and often it means starting them, or provoking them. When it's advantageous to those ends, human rights abuses are highlighted, and when highlighting human rights abuses run counter to those ends, then they aren't. We fight terrorism and we use terrorism towards those ends. If it's advantageous for a country and a people's to be demonized, that will happen, if it's advantageous for a country and a people to be regarded as victims, that will happen, if need be, a country and people will be villains. Almost everybody is a villain and a victim. Which one to exploit depends upon its advantage. Yesterday Hussein was the Villain , today it's Putin and Khomeni. I'm frankly tired of it. But, that's nothing profound.
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

  7. #47
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: Who do you trust more to deal with Iran?

    Quote Originally Posted by Thrilla View Post
    I dispute that his agenda was to undermine negotiations... his agenda was to tell us the position of Israel.... the ally that actually has to deal with the realities of the issue.
    Bibi's not an idiot... he knows he has no power to undermine our negotiations.(for my money, Obama will probably be more favorable to Iran now that bibi's presence hurt his feelings)

    in any event, it wouldn't have mattered what he had to say ... Obama's minions had their marching orders to oppose him and anything he had to says weeks before Bibi ever set foot in the country.
    and now democrats ( specifically proglibs) find themselves in the awkward position of allying themselves with a common enemy and ****ting all over a constant ally..... for no other reason other than Obamas feelings getting hurt.... petulant children, the lot of them
    He said Obama's deal "doesn't prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons, it paves the way", and for that, and for his false claims for twenty five years now, he's a god damn liar and a freak that should never be allowed in the halls of congress. Btw, I have opposed Netanyahu since before Obama was ever heard of. He doesn't give any marching orders to me. I only hope that we don't witness a democratic controlled congress do the same thing some day and point the detractors to Boehner and the 114th congress.
    Last edited by Montecresto; 03-04-15 at 04:17 PM.
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

  8. #48
    Sage

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Texas, Vegas, Colombia
    Last Seen
    11-28-16 @ 06:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    20,295

    Re: Who do you trust more to deal with Iran?

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    To the bolded, that's funny!

    US foreign policy in the Middle East has nothing to do with improvements to the Middle East for the sake of the inhabitants of the Middle East. US foreign policy is about what's good for a select few, wealthy elites that support politicians and foreign policy that is beneficial to them. Sometimes that means installing dictators, sometimes that means knocking them down. Sometimes but rarely, it means avoiding war, and often it means starting them, or provoking them. When it's advantageous to those ends, human rights abuses are highlighted, and when highlighting human rights abuses run counter to those ends, then they aren't. We fight terrorism and we use terrorism towards those ends. If it's advantageous for a country and a people's to be demonized, that will happen, if it's advantageous for a country and a people to be regarded as victims, that will happen, if need be, a country and people will be villains. Almost everybody is a villain and a victim. Which one to exploit depends upon its advantage. Yesterday Hussein was the Villain , today it's Putin and Khomeni. I'm frankly tired of it. But, that's nothing profound.
    we might agree on some details here and there... but i pretty much wrote this post off when you started talking about " a few wealthy elites blablabla"... populist conspiracy theories aren't my thing, i'm afraid.

    but don't worry too much about it... one day this country will collapse or get taken out and we'll be done with all the ugly foreign policy/realpolitik stuff.

  9. #49
    Sage

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Texas, Vegas, Colombia
    Last Seen
    11-28-16 @ 06:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    20,295

    Re: Who do you trust more to deal with Iran?

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    He said Obama's deal "doesn't prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons, it paves the way", and for that, and for his false claims for twenty five years now, he's a god damn liar and a freak that should never be allowed in the halls of congress. Btw, I have opposed Netanyahu since before Obama was ever heard of. He doesn't give any marching orders to me. I only hope that we don't witness a democratic controlled congress do the same thing some day and point the detractors to Boehner and the 114th congress.
    I don't mind if a Democratic congress calls someone to speak before them... I'm a big big fan of 3 co-equal branches...
    the imperial presidency bull**** is getting pretty old, though


    Bibi isn't giving marching orders... Obama is ... and his lil minions have all fallen in line predictably.

  10. #50
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    56,981

    Re: Who do you trust more to deal with Iran?

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDemSocialist View Post
    Saying after this:
    "A new assessment by American intelligence agencies released Monday concludes that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003 and that the program remains frozen, contradicting a judgment two years ago that Tehran was working relentlessly toward building a nuclear bomb."
    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/04/wo...pagewanted=all

    "Less than a month after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's 2012 warning to the UN General Assembly that Iran was 70 percent of the way to completing its "plans to build a nuclear weapon", Israel's intelligence service believed that Iran was "not performing the activity necessary to produce weapons".
    Mossad contradicted Netanyahu on Iran nuclear programme - Al Jazeera English

    "(Reuters) - The United States, European allies and even Israel generally agree on three things about Iran's nuclear program: Tehran does not have a bomb, has not decided to build one, and is probably years away from having a deliverable nuclear warhead."
    Special Report: Intel shows Iran nuclear threat not imminent | Reuters

    "Despite this heady rhetoric, Netanyahu’s estimates of an imminent Iranian nuclear bomb have consistently been at odds with analyses made by his own intelligence agency. In 2011, departing Mossad intelligence chief Meir Dagan said in his final intelligence summary that, contrary to Netanyahu’s repeated statements at the time, an Iranian nuclear weapon is in fact not imminent, and that any military action against the country could end up spurring the development of such a weapon.... The conclusion from this history is inescapable. Over the course of more than 20 years, Benjamin Netanyahu has made false claims about nuclear weapons programs in both Iran and Iraq, inventing imaginary timelines for their development, and making public statements that contradicted the analysis of his own intelligence advisers."
    https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2...-nuclear-bomb/

    "Iran is continuing to comply with the conditions of the Joint Plan of Action (JPOA), an interim deal that Iran and the P5+1 reached in November 2013. In total, these actions have halted Iran’s nuclear progress and rolled back key elements of proliferation concern...Iran is continuing to implement all of its commitments under the JPOA. Iran is making progress on the new actions it pledged to take as part of the agreement to extend its negotiations with the P5+1. Iran has completed three of five actions it pledged to take as part of its cooperation with the IAEA’s investigation into past military actions." IAEA Report Shows Iran’s Nuclear Program Remains Frozen |

    After Netanyahu's Speech, A Reality Check : Parallels : NPR

    I'm gonna say not the crazy war hawk, who is running for an election, who has been making the same erroneous claim since 1992, who's own intelligence agency contradicts him.... Yea Bibi. Not that guy


    US: Iran uranium enrichment a 'further escalation' ......
    01.07.2015 <<<<< !

    State Department says IAEA confirmation that Iran enriching uranium up to 20% at underground Fordow facility represents further violation of UN obligations.

    "The fact that the IAEA has made clear that they are enriching to a level that is inappropriate at Fordow is obviously a problem," State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland told reporters at her daily briefing. "If they are enriching at Fordow to 20 percent, this is a further escalation of their ongoing violations with regard to their nuclear obligations," Nuland said, referring to a series of UN Security Council resolutions calling on Iran to halt its enrichment-related activities....snip~

    US: Iran uranium enrichment a 'further escalation' - Iranian Threat - Jerusalem Post


    Obama: Iran more than a year away from developing nuclear ...
    Obama: Iran more than a year away from developing nuclear weapon - CNN.com <<<<< March 14 2013.

Page 5 of 18 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... 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
  •