-
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!
Obama Says Nuclear Deal Offered to Iran Is ‘Extraordinarily Reasonable’ [W:170]
- Thread starter JANFU
- Start date
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2011
- Messages
- 74,303
- Reaction score
- 32,540
- Location
- Florida
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Re: Obama Says Nuclear Deal Offered to Iran Is ‘Extraordinarily Reasonable’
You mean let them go back to building the bomb. Why is that preferable to you?
You mean let them go back to building the bomb. Why is that preferable to you?
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2014
- Messages
- 59,347
- Reaction score
- 38,883
- Location
- Best Coast Canada
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Liberal
Re: Obama Says Nuclear Deal Offered to Iran Is ‘Extraordinarily Reasonable’
Do you prefer to bomb them?
Do you prefer to bomb them?
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2014
- Messages
- 9,869
- Reaction score
- 3,495
- Location
- Los Angeles area
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Re: Obama Says Nuclear Deal Offered to Iran Is ‘Extraordinarily Reasonable’
Sometimes the use or threat of force certainly does provide perfect guarantees, or very nearly perfect ones. How much trouble did Rome have with Carthage after the Third Punic War, when it completely destroyed it? How much concern about a surprise attack by Japan has the U.S. had since 1945? How vanishingly small is the probability that North Korea will invade across the 38th parallel, having had thousands of U.S. troops right in its way for the past sixty years?
The notion that there is no effective way to prevent the regime in Tehran from making nuclear weapons is nonsense. It provides a convenient excuse for everyone who lacks the nerve to confront these bastards. In October, 1962, the same type of hand-wringer would have been claiming the U.S. had no choice but to accept the Soviet nuclear missiles in Cuba, because there was nothing we could do to guarantee their removal. And yet in the end, every last one of those missiles was removed, along with every last one of the 158 nuclear weapons that had been brought to Cuba and all the equipment that accompanied these things.
Where there is a will, there is a way.
Sometimes the use or threat of force certainly does provide perfect guarantees, or very nearly perfect ones. How much trouble did Rome have with Carthage after the Third Punic War, when it completely destroyed it? How much concern about a surprise attack by Japan has the U.S. had since 1945? How vanishingly small is the probability that North Korea will invade across the 38th parallel, having had thousands of U.S. troops right in its way for the past sixty years?
The notion that there is no effective way to prevent the regime in Tehran from making nuclear weapons is nonsense. It provides a convenient excuse for everyone who lacks the nerve to confront these bastards. In October, 1962, the same type of hand-wringer would have been claiming the U.S. had no choice but to accept the Soviet nuclear missiles in Cuba, because there was nothing we could do to guarantee their removal. And yet in the end, every last one of those missiles was removed, along with every last one of the 158 nuclear weapons that had been brought to Cuba and all the equipment that accompanied these things.
Where there is a will, there is a way.
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2015
- Messages
- 26,517
- Reaction score
- 26,638
- Location
- New York State, USA
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Liberal
Re: Obama Says Nuclear Deal Offered to Iran Is ‘Extraordinarily Reasonable’
The GOP is going to drag us into another ****ing 10 year war. Thier kids won't be the ones going, so why would those selfish, war mongering bastards care?
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/10/world/asia/white-house-faults-gop-senators-letter-to-irans-leaders.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=first-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0
Angry White House and G.O.P. Senators Clash Over Letter to Iran
By PETER BAKERMARCH 9, 2015
WASHINGTON — The fractious debate over a possible nuclear deal with Iran escalated on Monday as 47 Republican senators warned Iran against making an agreement with President Obama and the White House accused them of undercutting foreign policy.
In an exceedingly rare direct congressional intervention into diplomatic negotiations, the Republicans sent an open letter addressed to “leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran” declaring that any agreement could be reversed by the next president “with the stroke of a pen.”
The letter appeared aimed at unraveling an agreement even as negotiators grow close to reaching it. Mr. Obama, working with leaders of five other world powers, argues that the emerging agreement would be the best way to keep Iran from obtaining a nuclear bomb, while critics from both parties contend that it would be a dangerous charade that would still leave Iran with the opportunity to eventually build weapons that could destroy Israel or other foes.
Continued.
The GOP is going to drag us into another ****ing 10 year war. Thier kids won't be the ones going, so why would those selfish, war mongering bastards care?
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/10/world/asia/white-house-faults-gop-senators-letter-to-irans-leaders.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=first-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0
Angry White House and G.O.P. Senators Clash Over Letter to Iran
By PETER BAKERMARCH 9, 2015
WASHINGTON — The fractious debate over a possible nuclear deal with Iran escalated on Monday as 47 Republican senators warned Iran against making an agreement with President Obama and the White House accused them of undercutting foreign policy.
In an exceedingly rare direct congressional intervention into diplomatic negotiations, the Republicans sent an open letter addressed to “leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran” declaring that any agreement could be reversed by the next president “with the stroke of a pen.”
The letter appeared aimed at unraveling an agreement even as negotiators grow close to reaching it. Mr. Obama, working with leaders of five other world powers, argues that the emerging agreement would be the best way to keep Iran from obtaining a nuclear bomb, while critics from both parties contend that it would be a dangerous charade that would still leave Iran with the opportunity to eventually build weapons that could destroy Israel or other foes.
Continued.
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2011
- Messages
- 74,303
- Reaction score
- 32,540
- Location
- Florida
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Re: Obama Says Nuclear Deal Offered to Iran Is ‘Extraordinarily Reasonable’
I prefer weapon inspectors verifying that they are not continuing to progress towards a bomb.
I prefer weapon inspectors verifying that they are not continuing to progress towards a bomb.
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2014
- Messages
- 59,347
- Reaction score
- 38,883
- Location
- Best Coast Canada
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Liberal
Re: Obama Says Nuclear Deal Offered to Iran Is ‘Extraordinarily Reasonable’
That is the key to the deal- Intrusive inspections. It will take many decades before reasonable trust is a building block- or longer. Depends upon Iran's behavior with terror groups.
That is the key to the deal- Intrusive inspections. It will take many decades before reasonable trust is a building block- or longer. Depends upon Iran's behavior with terror groups.
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2011
- Messages
- 101,819
- Reaction score
- 45,416
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Re: Obama Says Nuclear Deal Offered to Iran Is ‘Extraordinarily Reasonable’
shrug...
It's okay...you can use your semantic games...but the reality is that Iran wants to remove Israel. That's why they are supporting the terrorist organization that attack Israel on a regular basis.
Numbers 2, 3 and 4 are not simply my opinions...they are facts...reality. And, we are not talking about the Iranian people here...but about their government.
The MEK? US/Israeli funded terrorists? LOL!! Do you seriously consider all that comparable to the Taliban? Al Qaeda? That's who Pakistan has to contend with and those groups are supported by Iran.
~snipped the anti-israeli balderdash~
Thanks[/QUOTE]
Frankly, all your pro-Iranian propaganda is just that...propaganda. Looks like you bought into it.
So it goes.
shrug...
It's okay...you can use your semantic games...but the reality is that Iran wants to remove Israel. That's why they are supporting the terrorist organization that attack Israel on a regular basis.
Numbers 2, 3 and 4 are not simply my opinions...they are facts...reality. And, we are not talking about the Iranian people here...but about their government.
The MEK? US/Israeli funded terrorists? LOL!! Do you seriously consider all that comparable to the Taliban? Al Qaeda? That's who Pakistan has to contend with and those groups are supported by Iran.
~snipped the anti-israeli balderdash~
Thanks[/QUOTE]
Frankly, all your pro-Iranian propaganda is just that...propaganda. Looks like you bought into it.
So it goes.
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2011
- Messages
- 101,819
- Reaction score
- 45,416
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Re: Obama Says Nuclear Deal Offered to Iran Is ‘Extraordinarily Reasonable’
I didn't say Pakistan is a perfect country. I just don't consider it comparable, in terms of being a danger to the Middle East, to Iran.
I didn't say Pakistan is a perfect country. I just don't consider it comparable, in terms of being a danger to the Middle East, to Iran.
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2015
- Messages
- 1,042
- Reaction score
- 365
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Re: Obama Says Nuclear Deal Offered to Iran Is ‘Extraordinarily Reasonable’
Frankly, all your pro-Iranian propaganda is just that...propaganda. Looks like you bought into it.
So it goes.[/QUOTE]
Frankly, all your pro-Iranian propaganda is just that...propaganda. Looks like you bought into it.
So it goes.[/QUOTE]
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2014
- Messages
- 59,347
- Reaction score
- 38,883
- Location
- Best Coast Canada
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Liberal
Re: Obama Says Nuclear Deal Offered to Iran Is ‘Extraordinarily Reasonable’
Ask yourself what threat they are to India and Afghanistan?
Bush threatened to bomb Pakistan, says Musharraf | World news | The Guardian
Armitage denies threatening Pakistan - World news - South and Central Asia | NBC News
Musharraf, in an interview with CBS News’ magazine show “60 Minutes,” to air on Sunday, said Armitage told Ahmad that without cooperation: “Be prepared to be bombed. Be prepared to go back to the Stone Age."
Armitage told NBC the conversation was a “strong, factual” exchange, but said he made no military threats. He said he told Ahmad “Pakistan would need to be with us or against us. For Americans, this was seen as black or white.”
Ask yourself what threat they are to India and Afghanistan?
Bush threatened to bomb Pakistan, says Musharraf | World news | The Guardian
Then the rebuttal
Armitage denies threatening Pakistan - World news - South and Central Asia | NBC News
Musharraf, in an interview with CBS News’ magazine show “60 Minutes,” to air on Sunday, said Armitage told Ahmad that without cooperation: “Be prepared to be bombed. Be prepared to go back to the Stone Age."
Armitage told NBC the conversation was a “strong, factual” exchange, but said he made no military threats. He said he told Ahmad “Pakistan would need to be with us or against us. For Americans, this was seen as black or white.”
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2015
- Messages
- 1,042
- Reaction score
- 365
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Re: Obama Says Nuclear Deal Offered to Iran Is ‘Extraordinarily Reasonable’
Frankly, all your pro-Iranian propaganda is just that...propaganda. Looks like you bought into it.
So it goes.[/QUOTE]
___________________
Why are you going to burn down my house?
Denying it is “just a matter of semantics”
- - - - - - - - - - - -
That is an example of how absurd your claim is that Ahmadinejad said he/Iran was “going to wipe Israel from the face of the earth”
It’s not “a matter of semantics” its a simple fact. Ahmadinejad’s speech was deliberately mistranslated to engender anti Iranian sentiment & pro War Fever in people who otherwise know nothing about Iran, its history & aggressive US - Israeli double standard. The mistranslation was later corrected by BBC.....look it up.
. . . . . . . .Re: 2 , 3, & 4, If they are facts, you should be able to support them with credible documentation
. . . . . . .
Re: You asked: “5.Which country is a target of terrorists? Pakistan or Iran?" & I simply answered.
Just because you haven’t heard of MEK & U.S. - Israeli Hit Squads, Terrorists & the extent of the carnage they inflict on the Iranian people doesn’t mean that they are as significant to Iranians as a.Q. & Taliban to the West.
The US & Israel have also supported a.Q. factions when it served their ends.
Just as Iran condemned a.Q. after 9/ll, Iranian support of a.Q. is not as solid as you have been led to believe:
For Example:
“Iran And Al Qaeda Connected? The History Behind A Complex Relationship”
Iran And Al Qaeda Connected? The History Behind A Complex Relationship
EXCERPT “ Q: Are Iran and al-Qaida allies?
A: Relations have always been rocky. Iran has been at odds with al-Qaida on many fronts. A fundamental divide is over the two main branches of Islam. Iran is mostly Shiite. Al-Qaida is nearly exclusively Sunni-led.” CONTINUED
"Terrorism", like beauty, is in the eyes of the beholder. Hezbollah & Hamas are only regarded as "Terrorist Groups" in the US, Israel and a handful of other countries. Hezbollah is considered a political group in the UK & its repeated rebuilding of homes, schools, hospitals, power plants in Lebanon after murderous Israeli forays has endeared it to civilian victims of "State Terrorism"
For Example:
“HIZBULLAH, MORE THAN A ‘TERRORIST ORGANISATION”
openmode.net - openmode Resources and Information. This website is for sale!
EXCERPT "The movement is at once a religious organization, an aid organization, a political party, and a paramilitary force. This makes it hard for governments to know how to categorize and confront it."CONTINUED
The whole notion of "Terrorist Groups" is a subjective topic. Killing civilians while wearing a uniform of via F-16s & High-Tech weaponry leaves them just as dead & badly mutilated as a car bomb etc.
. . . . . . . .
Re: “~snipped the anti-israeli balderdash~”
Again, just because you are unaware of threats to the US posed by elements within the Israeli government doesn’t mean that they are not considered significant by loyal Americans and US Intelligence.
“An 82-page analysis concludes that Israel is currently the greatest threat to US national interests”
An 82-page analysis concludes that Israel is currently the greatest threat to US national interests | From the Trenches World Report
My criticism of those threatening Israeli elements is hardly “anti Israel”
. . . . . . . . .
Re: “Frankly, all your pro-Iranian propaganda is just that...propaganda. Looks like you bought into it.”
Because I support an equitable US Foreign Policy for a country to which I’ve been & oppose the killing of people some of whom I’ve met hardly makes me a victim of “pro-Iranian propaganda.
On the other hand, your hatred of a country to which you’ve never been and enmity toward people whom you’ve never met is a far greater indicator of self destructive gullibility.
Thanks for your time
Frankly, all your pro-Iranian propaganda is just that...propaganda. Looks like you bought into it.
So it goes.[/QUOTE]
___________________
Why are you going to burn down my house?
Denying it is “just a matter of semantics”
- - - - - - - - - - - -
That is an example of how absurd your claim is that Ahmadinejad said he/Iran was “going to wipe Israel from the face of the earth”
It’s not “a matter of semantics” its a simple fact. Ahmadinejad’s speech was deliberately mistranslated to engender anti Iranian sentiment & pro War Fever in people who otherwise know nothing about Iran, its history & aggressive US - Israeli double standard. The mistranslation was later corrected by BBC.....look it up.
. . . . . . . .Re: 2 , 3, & 4, If they are facts, you should be able to support them with credible documentation
. . . . . . .
Re: You asked: “5.Which country is a target of terrorists? Pakistan or Iran?" & I simply answered.
Just because you haven’t heard of MEK & U.S. - Israeli Hit Squads, Terrorists & the extent of the carnage they inflict on the Iranian people doesn’t mean that they are as significant to Iranians as a.Q. & Taliban to the West.
The US & Israel have also supported a.Q. factions when it served their ends.
Just as Iran condemned a.Q. after 9/ll, Iranian support of a.Q. is not as solid as you have been led to believe:
For Example:
“Iran And Al Qaeda Connected? The History Behind A Complex Relationship”
Iran And Al Qaeda Connected? The History Behind A Complex Relationship
EXCERPT “ Q: Are Iran and al-Qaida allies?
A: Relations have always been rocky. Iran has been at odds with al-Qaida on many fronts. A fundamental divide is over the two main branches of Islam. Iran is mostly Shiite. Al-Qaida is nearly exclusively Sunni-led.” CONTINUED
"Terrorism", like beauty, is in the eyes of the beholder. Hezbollah & Hamas are only regarded as "Terrorist Groups" in the US, Israel and a handful of other countries. Hezbollah is considered a political group in the UK & its repeated rebuilding of homes, schools, hospitals, power plants in Lebanon after murderous Israeli forays has endeared it to civilian victims of "State Terrorism"
For Example:
“HIZBULLAH, MORE THAN A ‘TERRORIST ORGANISATION”
openmode.net - openmode Resources and Information. This website is for sale!
EXCERPT "The movement is at once a religious organization, an aid organization, a political party, and a paramilitary force. This makes it hard for governments to know how to categorize and confront it."CONTINUED
The whole notion of "Terrorist Groups" is a subjective topic. Killing civilians while wearing a uniform of via F-16s & High-Tech weaponry leaves them just as dead & badly mutilated as a car bomb etc.
. . . . . . . .
Re: “~snipped the anti-israeli balderdash~”
Again, just because you are unaware of threats to the US posed by elements within the Israeli government doesn’t mean that they are not considered significant by loyal Americans and US Intelligence.
“An 82-page analysis concludes that Israel is currently the greatest threat to US national interests”
An 82-page analysis concludes that Israel is currently the greatest threat to US national interests | From the Trenches World Report
My criticism of those threatening Israeli elements is hardly “anti Israel”
. . . . . . . . .
Re: “Frankly, all your pro-Iranian propaganda is just that...propaganda. Looks like you bought into it.”
Because I support an equitable US Foreign Policy for a country to which I’ve been & oppose the killing of people some of whom I’ve met hardly makes me a victim of “pro-Iranian propaganda.
On the other hand, your hatred of a country to which you’ve never been and enmity toward people whom you’ve never met is a far greater indicator of self destructive gullibility.
Thanks for your time
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2011
- Messages
- 101,819
- Reaction score
- 45,416
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Re: Obama Says Nuclear Deal Offered to Iran Is ‘Extraordinarily Reasonable’
I'm not the one who brought Pakistan into the conversation so you'd be better served by talking to the one who did. (maybe in another thread since this one is about Iran)
I'm not the one who brought Pakistan into the conversation so you'd be better served by talking to the one who did. (maybe in another thread since this one is about Iran)
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2011
- Messages
- 101,819
- Reaction score
- 45,416
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Re: Obama Says Nuclear Deal Offered to Iran Is ‘Extraordinarily Reasonable’
Your method of posting and the fact that you screwed up your quote of my post makes it hard for me to address your post, so I'll try to respond without showing your actual words...you can refer back to your own post if you get confused.
1. Do you deny that the Iranian government wishes to destroy Israel?
2. Here are links that show that my points 2,3 and 4 are facts:
2.) Indo-Pakistani wars and conflicts - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Of particular importance considering the topic of this thread is the section on those country's nuclear arms race.
3.) Government of Pakistan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
4.) Pakistan
3. I won't get into a pissing contest on which country is a bigger victim of terrorists. Do you deny that the Iranian government supports terrorists throughout the Middle East?
4. Alliances shift with world events, just as those in control of countries shift. But to say that the US supports Al Qaeda is ridiculous.
5. You still don't understand...or you refuse to understand...I don't hate Iran or its people, so don't apply characteristics to me that I have not expressed. I will express that I do not like the Iranian government, their objective to obtain nuclear weapons or their actions in supporting terrorists throughout the Middle East.
Your method of posting and the fact that you screwed up your quote of my post makes it hard for me to address your post, so I'll try to respond without showing your actual words...you can refer back to your own post if you get confused.
1. Do you deny that the Iranian government wishes to destroy Israel?
2. Here are links that show that my points 2,3 and 4 are facts:
2.) Indo-Pakistani wars and conflicts - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Of particular importance considering the topic of this thread is the section on those country's nuclear arms race.
3.) Government of Pakistan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
4.) Pakistan
3. I won't get into a pissing contest on which country is a bigger victim of terrorists. Do you deny that the Iranian government supports terrorists throughout the Middle East?
4. Alliances shift with world events, just as those in control of countries shift. But to say that the US supports Al Qaeda is ridiculous.
5. You still don't understand...or you refuse to understand...I don't hate Iran or its people, so don't apply characteristics to me that I have not expressed. I will express that I do not like the Iranian government, their objective to obtain nuclear weapons or their actions in supporting terrorists throughout the Middle East.
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2012
- Messages
- 16,386
- Reaction score
- 7,793
- Location
- Where I am now
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Re: Obama Says Nuclear Deal Offered to Iran Is ‘Extraordinarily Reasonable’
This paranoia over Iran's nukes is ridiculous.
The idea that the leaders of Iran are so insane and suicidal that the second they get nukes they will use them on Israel WHICH they know FULL WELL will immediately result in Israel wiping them off the map with their nuclear-tipped MRBM's is ludicrous.
There have been TONS of wacko leaders of countries over the centuries. How many of them committed suicide when their position was not under threat....just for the heck of it? Not many. Yet the West is so full of sheep that they are buying this nonsensical viewpoint. I mean think people...why would leaders spend all that energy desperately trying to attain power only to immediately throw it away in a murder suicide? That makes NO SENSE.
The last two leaders of North Korea are/were clearly loco...and did either one of them launch nukes against the South knowing they would be obliterated by American retaliation? NO.
And for the last time people, the 'Wipe Israel off the map' reference was simply a quote from a previous leader.
Jeez...you people are like sheep. No matter how ridiculous the idea, if someone throws the word 'patriotic' on the end of it, you people buy it hook, line and sinker.
No nuclear power has ever used them (other then America, oddly enough)...and please don't tell me every Soviet leader was completely sane. And they did not end the world.Man...you don't even know who will be in power when Iran does get nukes (if they got them) and you automatically assume that they will nuke Israel right away. It's silly and illogical.
Israel has nukes...anyone that denies it is an ignoramus on the subject. Hundreds of them. Iran and Israel are none to happy with each other. Were you the leader of Iran - would you not want nukes if your enemy had them? Duh.
Iran has attacked NO ONE in decades...if ever since the Shah was deposed (Iraq attacked them to start the Iran-Iraq war). Yes, they are no saints internationally...far from it. But that is a gigantic stretch to nuking neighbors. And, btw, America bombs countries, overthrows governments, props up cruel regimes (like Saudi Arabia) kills hundreds of innocent civilians and locks people up who are innocent without trial for over a decade. The latter are no saints either.
I would rather neither Israel nor Iran had nukes. But that ain't gonna happen. And I would still rather Iran did not have them. But this paranoia about Iran getting them is ridiculous. If they get them, it is just another power that has them. And btw, you better get used to it. Because if you think Iran is the last country that gets nukes that you do not like...forget it.
Additionally, the clowns in Washington that are calling a deal with Iran on nukes bad even before they se it are just comically stupid. How on Earth can you judge a deal before you even see it?
I am no fan of Obama as POTUS. But I think he is - all things considered - taking the sensible course of action. And why don't you people stop foaming at the mouth and at LEAST wait until you see the agreement before you send your partisan glands into overdrive and start knocking it?
This paranoia over Iran's nukes is ridiculous.
The idea that the leaders of Iran are so insane and suicidal that the second they get nukes they will use them on Israel WHICH they know FULL WELL will immediately result in Israel wiping them off the map with their nuclear-tipped MRBM's is ludicrous.
There have been TONS of wacko leaders of countries over the centuries. How many of them committed suicide when their position was not under threat....just for the heck of it? Not many. Yet the West is so full of sheep that they are buying this nonsensical viewpoint. I mean think people...why would leaders spend all that energy desperately trying to attain power only to immediately throw it away in a murder suicide? That makes NO SENSE.
The last two leaders of North Korea are/were clearly loco...and did either one of them launch nukes against the South knowing they would be obliterated by American retaliation? NO.
And for the last time people, the 'Wipe Israel off the map' reference was simply a quote from a previous leader.
Jeez...you people are like sheep. No matter how ridiculous the idea, if someone throws the word 'patriotic' on the end of it, you people buy it hook, line and sinker.
No nuclear power has ever used them (other then America, oddly enough)...and please don't tell me every Soviet leader was completely sane. And they did not end the world.Man...you don't even know who will be in power when Iran does get nukes (if they got them) and you automatically assume that they will nuke Israel right away. It's silly and illogical.
Israel has nukes...anyone that denies it is an ignoramus on the subject. Hundreds of them. Iran and Israel are none to happy with each other. Were you the leader of Iran - would you not want nukes if your enemy had them? Duh.
Iran has attacked NO ONE in decades...if ever since the Shah was deposed (Iraq attacked them to start the Iran-Iraq war). Yes, they are no saints internationally...far from it. But that is a gigantic stretch to nuking neighbors. And, btw, America bombs countries, overthrows governments, props up cruel regimes (like Saudi Arabia) kills hundreds of innocent civilians and locks people up who are innocent without trial for over a decade. The latter are no saints either.
I would rather neither Israel nor Iran had nukes. But that ain't gonna happen. And I would still rather Iran did not have them. But this paranoia about Iran getting them is ridiculous. If they get them, it is just another power that has them. And btw, you better get used to it. Because if you think Iran is the last country that gets nukes that you do not like...forget it.
Additionally, the clowns in Washington that are calling a deal with Iran on nukes bad even before they se it are just comically stupid. How on Earth can you judge a deal before you even see it?
I am no fan of Obama as POTUS. But I think he is - all things considered - taking the sensible course of action. And why don't you people stop foaming at the mouth and at LEAST wait until you see the agreement before you send your partisan glands into overdrive and start knocking it?
Morality Games
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2009
- Messages
- 3,733
- Reaction score
- 1,156
- Location
- Iowa
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
Re: Obama Says Nuclear Deal Offered to Iran Is ‘Extraordinarily Reasonable’
... Iran thinks that their path to recapturing the glory of Ancient Persia depends more on access to the global economy than on nuclear weapons that will sit in their silos because nobody wants to risk using them. Its not in the interest of the United States to disabuse them of that notion. Aren't we supposed to be equal opportunity capitalists?
... Iran thinks that their path to recapturing the glory of Ancient Persia depends more on access to the global economy than on nuclear weapons that will sit in their silos because nobody wants to risk using them. Its not in the interest of the United States to disabuse them of that notion. Aren't we supposed to be equal opportunity capitalists?
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2014
- Messages
- 59,347
- Reaction score
- 38,883
- Location
- Best Coast Canada
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Liberal
Re: Obama Says Nuclear Deal Offered to Iran Is ‘Extraordinarily Reasonable’
No but you replied enough to ask the question. Right
Telling me after you made a number of responses to that specific question then telling me to take it to a different thread is what? What do you call that?
Sharps that should have been stated on your first reply.
Pakistan is more of a threat than Iran? Yes, no, maybe?
No but you replied enough to ask the question. Right
Telling me after you made a number of responses to that specific question then telling me to take it to a different thread is what? What do you call that?
Sharps that should have been stated on your first reply.
Pakistan is more of a threat than Iran? Yes, no, maybe?
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2011
- Messages
- 101,819
- Reaction score
- 45,416
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Re: Obama Says Nuclear Deal Offered to Iran Is ‘Extraordinarily Reasonable’
Then why are they trying so hard and spending so much money on nuclear weapons.
Then why are they trying so hard and spending so much money on nuclear weapons.
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2011
- Messages
- 101,819
- Reaction score
- 45,416
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Re: Obama Says Nuclear Deal Offered to Iran Is ‘Extraordinarily Reasonable’
Those five points I made are in reference to Somerville's question about Pakistan. Do you dispute any particular point? Do you think the US should be more concerned about Pakistan than Iran? Less concerned? Tell Somerville.
shrug...
In any case, like I said to Somerville, I don't think Pakistan is as much of a threat to the Middle East as Iran.
Those five points I made are in reference to Somerville's question about Pakistan. Do you dispute any particular point? Do you think the US should be more concerned about Pakistan than Iran? Less concerned? Tell Somerville.
shrug...
In any case, like I said to Somerville, I don't think Pakistan is as much of a threat to the Middle East as Iran.
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2014
- Messages
- 59,347
- Reaction score
- 38,883
- Location
- Best Coast Canada
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Liberal
Re: Obama Says Nuclear Deal Offered to Iran Is ‘Extraordinarily Reasonable’
Due to the fact of the Iarq war for one.
next would be US invasions.
Next, read the link.
A coda to the Cotton letter - The Washington Post
Due to the fact of the Iarq war for one.
next would be US invasions.
Next, read the link.
A coda to the Cotton letter - The Washington Post
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2014
- Messages
- 59,347
- Reaction score
- 38,883
- Location
- Best Coast Canada
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Liberal
Re: Obama Says Nuclear Deal Offered to Iran Is ‘Extraordinarily Reasonable’
Shrug till the cows come home- They, Pakistan are more of a threat than Iran.
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2011
- Messages
- 101,819
- Reaction score
- 45,416
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Re: Obama Says Nuclear Deal Offered to Iran Is ‘Extraordinarily Reasonable’
Okay. Your unsupported opinion is noted.
Okay. Your unsupported opinion is noted.
Morality Games
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2009
- Messages
- 3,733
- Reaction score
- 1,156
- Location
- Iowa
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
Re: Obama Says Nuclear Deal Offered to Iran Is ‘Extraordinarily Reasonable’
Why not? Nukes (or the ability to make them) give you heightened diplomatic standing, and Iran has been sanctioned since the 1979 Revolution. Little risk, huge gain.
Why not? Nukes (or the ability to make them) give you heightened diplomatic standing, and Iran has been sanctioned since the 1979 Revolution. Little risk, huge gain.
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2011
- Messages
- 101,819
- Reaction score
- 45,416
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Re: Obama Says Nuclear Deal Offered to Iran Is ‘Extraordinarily Reasonable’
I don't see why the Iraq War would bother them that much, after all, we removed one of their biggest threats.
You are going to have to point out what in that article is significant.
I don't see why the Iraq War would bother them that much, after all, we removed one of their biggest threats.
You are going to have to point out what in that article is significant.
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2011
- Messages
- 101,819
- Reaction score
- 45,416
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Re: Obama Says Nuclear Deal Offered to Iran Is ‘Extraordinarily Reasonable’
That doesn't align with the statement you previously made. They don't want to use them, right? They don't care about anything except their capitalistic position, right?
I think you are just plain wrong. I think they have desires to be politically, militarily and economically dominant in the Middle East...including over Israel. Even if they don't intend to use nuclear weapons directly, they will use them to threaten the region.
That doesn't align with the statement you previously made. They don't want to use them, right? They don't care about anything except their capitalistic position, right?
I think you are just plain wrong. I think they have desires to be politically, militarily and economically dominant in the Middle East...including over Israel. Even if they don't intend to use nuclear weapons directly, they will use them to threaten the region.
Last edited: