Iran Deal, the reset..... and halt

rgambs

If people want to criticize the lifting of the sanctions because it is fully possible that they will have increased economic capacity to sponsor terrorism, that is a legitimate criticism.

jeffbr

rgambs said:

It really bothers me that these discussions don't appraise the current situation. Iran is building toward nuclear weapons under the almighty sanctions that people are so upset about lifting. FACT: This deal INCREASES Iran's breakout time even under their lowest level of compliance.
All discussion from conservative sources deliberately ignore this fact, which is a deplorable obfuscation.

Yup, here's an OpEd piece that puts it in perspective for me:
Obama's Nuclear Deal with Iran is the Worst Option, Except for all the Others

mickeyrat

Jason P said:

mickeyrat said:

Jason P said:

benjs said:

Jason P - curious to hear your opinion (not the satirical news site's), if you care to share!

I've made previous post explaining my position, but in summary I think it is a dumb decision to make a deal when we hold all the cards. People making the argument that we have nukes so why shouldn't they is the same argument the NRA makes when saying more guns save lives. And no matter what the debate is for any topic, the whole "10 years down the road" is complete BS because there is no accountability.

It makes great sense for Iran because economic sanctions get lifted and they can comply or keep on working on uranium enrichment in the darkness and some day down the road yell "Fooled you!" and then what?

The deal should have been shut everything down, we give you energy credits, you get your economy back and we are all cool, like three little Fonzies.

Speaking of the Fonz, this is how the negotiations should have played out, with Sam Jackson playing the role of the current POTUS and Pumpkin and Honey Bunny playing the role of Iran...

https://youtube.com/watch?v=QPPN_gkj_gk

Add in the fact that this admins foreign policy is be far it's weakest link, this deal concerns me greatly. They have allowed ISIS and a poor mans Soviet Union resurrect themselves under their watch.

Your last doesn't take into account that both were long simmering and bound to happen at some point. No matter who was in office OR how big dick swinging they might have been.

Simply stating it happened on his watch foesnt accuratrly reflect all past admins role in both. Congresses too.

You can play the blame game back to the Roman ages if you want, but this administration had a full term in before ISIS and Putin came to power. That is a key sign to bad foreign policy.

Especially since this administration used foreign policy as a key selling point in the last election!

Umm no, Bush was REAL chummy with Putin. Remember , he could see it in his eyes, he was a tructworthy man.

Jason P

mickeyrat said:

Jason P said:

mickeyrat said:

Jason P said:

benjs said:

Jason P - curious to hear your opinion (not the satirical news site's), if you care to share!

I've made previous post explaining my position, but in summary I think it is a dumb decision to make a deal when we hold all the cards. People making the argument that we have nukes so why shouldn't they is the same argument the NRA makes when saying more guns save lives. And no matter what the debate is for any topic, the whole "10 years down the road" is complete BS because there is no accountability.

It makes great sense for Iran because economic sanctions get lifted and they can comply or keep on working on uranium enrichment in the darkness and some day down the road yell "Fooled you!" and then what?

The deal should have been shut everything down, we give you energy credits, you get your economy back and we are all cool, like three little Fonzies.

Speaking of the Fonz, this is how the negotiations should have played out, with Sam Jackson playing the role of the current POTUS and Pumpkin and Honey Bunny playing the role of Iran...

https://youtube.com/watch?v=QPPN_gkj_gk

Add in the fact that this admins foreign policy is be far it's weakest link, this deal concerns me greatly. They have allowed ISIS and a poor mans Soviet Union resurrect themselves under their watch.

Your last doesn't take into account that both were long simmering and bound to happen at some point. No matter who was in office OR how big dick swinging they might have been.

Simply stating it happened on his watch foesnt accuratrly reflect all past admins role in both. Congresses too.

You can play the blame game back to the Roman ages if you want, but this administration had a full term in before ISIS and Putin came to power. That is a key sign to bad foreign policy.

Especially since this administration used foreign policy as a key selling point in the last election!

Umm no, Bush was REAL chummy with Putin. Remember , he could see it in his eyes, he was a tructworthy man.

Putin was kept in check under 'Dubya. I don't think Putin has any respect for Obama. I think Russia sees Obama as weak and Putin is seizing the chance to try to repower the Soviet Union.

10 years ago I was happy that the whole Cold War was over and that there was little chance for global thermonuclear warfare. Currently, on July 4th of this year, we had Tupolev Tu-95 "Bear" strategic bombers probing our intercepting response off the coast of California and Alaska.

That is fucked up.

mickeyrat

Jason P said:

mickeyrat said:

Jason P said:

mickeyrat said:

Jason P said:

benjs said:

Jason P - curious to hear your opinion (not the satirical news site's), if you care to share!

I've made previous post explaining my position, but in summary I think it is a dumb decision to make a deal when we hold all the cards. People making the argument that we have nukes so why shouldn't they is the same argument the NRA makes when saying more guns save lives. And no matter what the debate is for any topic, the whole "10 years down the road" is complete BS because there is no accountability.

It makes great sense for Iran because economic sanctions get lifted and they can comply or keep on working on uranium enrichment in the darkness and some day down the road yell "Fooled you!" and then what?

The deal should have been shut everything down, we give you energy credits, you get your economy back and we are all cool, like three little Fonzies.

Speaking of the Fonz, this is how the negotiations should have played out, with Sam Jackson playing the role of the current POTUS and Pumpkin and Honey Bunny playing the role of Iran...

https://youtube.com/watch?v=QPPN_gkj_gk

Add in the fact that this admins foreign policy is be far it's weakest link, this deal concerns me greatly. They have allowed ISIS and a poor mans Soviet Union resurrect themselves under their watch.

Your last doesn't take into account that both were long simmering and bound to happen at some point. No matter who was in office OR how big dick swinging they might have been.

Simply stating it happened on his watch foesnt accuratrly reflect all past admins role in both. Congresses too.

You can play the blame game back to the Roman ages if you want, but this administration had a full term in before ISIS and Putin came to power. That is a key sign to bad foreign policy.

Especially since this administration used foreign policy as a key selling point in the last election!

Umm no, Bush was REAL chummy with Putin. Remember , he could see it in his eyes, he was a tructworthy man.

Putin was kept in check under 'Dubya. I don't think Putin has any respect for Obama. I think Russia sees Obama as weak and Putin is seizing the chance to try to repower the Soviet Union.

10 years ago I was happy that the whole Cold War was over and that there was little chance for global thermonuclear warfare. Currently, on July 4th of this year, we had Tupolev Tu-95 "Bear" strategic bombers probing our intercepting response off the coast of California and Alaska.

That is fucked up.

That kinda shit never stopped.

Gern Blansten

The prediction is that gasoline will be $2/gallon in a few months....oil dropping to $50/barrel now that Iran's supply is in the pipeline.

mickeyrat

Gern Blansten said:

The prediction is that gasoline will be $2/gallon in a few months....oil dropping to $50/barrel now that Iran's supply is in the pipeline.

Hmm, wonder if that still makes the tar sands a viable investment now.

rgambs

Gern Blansten said:

The prediction is that gasoline will be $2/gallon in a few months....oil dropping to $50/barrel now that Iran's supply is in the pipeline.

This puts the conservative uproar in context!

JimmyV

rgambs said:

Gern Blansten said:

The prediction is that gasoline will be $2/gallon in a few months....oil dropping to $50/barrel now that Iran's supply is in the pipeline.

This puts the conservative uproar in context!

It really does. There are certainly legitimate questions and concerns about this deal because no deal is perfect...but the potential for shrinking oil profits has to be terrifying to many.

Gern Blansten

http://www.vox.com/2015/4/2/8336219/iran-nuclear-deal-plain-english

mickeyrat

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2015/07/15/how-the-nuclear-deal-can-keep-iran-from-cheating-according-to-a-former-u-n-inspector/?tid=sm_fb

mickeyrat

http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2015/7/15/israel-and-saudi-arabia-brace-for-resurgent-iran.html?utm_content=main&utm_campaign=ajam&utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=SocialFlow

callen

For critics just have one answer: North Korea.

Last-12-Exit

How much does Isreal hate Obama now?

benjs

Last-12-Exit said:

How much does Isreal hate Obama now?

Frankly, who cares? How much global pressure does Israel need in order to get them to move on literally the exclusive contentious issue that leaves them with logical adversary (i.e. not hatred for hatred's sake) in the eyes of the world?

-division of Jews around the world surrounding contentious topics, and obvious Muslim opposition (religious adversary)
-BDS (economic adversary)
-nuclear Iran, which Netanyahu says could lead to the destruction of Israel (military adversary - not the kind with homemade rockets and stones)

A government ought to protect its country's economy, its religious freedoms, and its right to survive. Maybe out of this we'll see a more realistic Netanyahu emerge, as opposed to the delusional and paranoid one governing on fear and the fallacious promise that he will lead Israel to perpetual security, when his people catch wind of the fact that he provides none of the above.

Maybe this is an opportunity for Israel and the Palestinians to talk once again for a serious plan, with rules, regulations, compromises, and consequences when these aren't abided by.

Jason P

mickeyrat said:

Jason P said:

mickeyrat said:

Jason P said:

mickeyrat said:

Jason P said:

benjs said:

Jason P - curious to hear your opinion (not the satirical news site's), if you care to share!

I've made previous post explaining my position, but in summary I think it is a dumb decision to make a deal when we hold all the cards. People making the argument that we have nukes so why shouldn't they is the same argument the NRA makes when saying more guns save lives. And no matter what the debate is for any topic, the whole "10 years down the road" is complete BS because there is no accountability.

It makes great sense for Iran because economic sanctions get lifted and they can comply or keep on working on uranium enrichment in the darkness and some day down the road yell "Fooled you!" and then what?

The deal should have been shut everything down, we give you energy credits, you get your economy back and we are all cool, like three little Fonzies.

Speaking of the Fonz, this is how the negotiations should have played out, with Sam Jackson playing the role of the current POTUS and Pumpkin and Honey Bunny playing the role of Iran...

https://youtube.com/watch?v=QPPN_gkj_gk

Add in the fact that this admins foreign policy is be far it's weakest link, this deal concerns me greatly. They have allowed ISIS and a poor mans Soviet Union resurrect themselves under their watch.

Your last doesn't take into account that both were long simmering and bound to happen at some point. No matter who was in office OR how big dick swinging they might have been.

Simply stating it happened on his watch foesnt accuratrly reflect all past admins role in both. Congresses too.

You can play the blame game back to the Roman ages if you want, but this administration had a full term in before ISIS and Putin came to power. That is a key sign to bad foreign policy.

Especially since this administration used foreign policy as a key selling point in the last election!

Umm no, Bush was REAL chummy with Putin. Remember , he could see it in his eyes, he was a tructworthy man.

Putin was kept in check under 'Dubya. I don't think Putin has any respect for Obama. I think Russia sees Obama as weak and Putin is seizing the chance to try to repower the Soviet Union.

10 years ago I was happy that the whole Cold War was over and that there was little chance for global thermonuclear warfare. Currently, on July 4th of this year, we had Tupolev Tu-95 "Bear" strategic bombers probing our intercepting response off the coast of California and Alaska.

That is fucked up.

That kinda shit never stopped.

It didn't stop but it at least became rare. Ever since The Summer Of Putin was ruined by the Ukraine civil war, the shit was up scaled big time.

They have been probing US and European borders and scouting response time constantly since the Putin-bribed Olympics ended. The 4th of July probes were a sure mark of gamesmanship by our comrades.

Last-12-Exit

benjs said:

Last-12-Exit said:

How much does Isreal hate Obama now?

Frankly, who cares? How much global pressure does Israel need in order to get them to move on literally the exclusive contentious issue that leaves them with logical adversary (i.e. not hatred for hatred's sake) in the eyes of the world?

-division of Jews around the world surrounding contentious topics, and obvious Muslim opposition (religious adversary)
-BDS (economic adversary)
-nuclear Iran, which Netanyahu says could lead to the destruction of Israel (military adversary - not the kind with homemade rockets and stones)

A government ought to protect its country's economy, its religious freedoms, and its right to survive. Maybe out of this we'll see a more realistic Netanyahu emerge, as opposed to the delusional and paranoid one governing on fear and the fallacious promise that he will lead Israel to perpetual security, when his people catch wind of the fact that he provides none of the above.

Maybe this is an opportunity for Israel and the Palestinians to talk once again for a serious plan, with rules, regulations, compromises, and consequences when these aren't abided by.

Yea, it was a sarcastic question.

EA17313

Baleh. Kabob sorkh kon... sofreh bendaz!!! Eddie Vedder Joon!

hedonist

EA17313 said:

Baleh. Kabob sorkh kon... sofreh bendaz!!! Eddie Vedder Joon!

Are you Iranian? I know what Baleh, Kabob and Joon mean but can't get the gist of your post.

Just random Persian words strung together? If I'm mistaken that you're poking fun or being insulting, apologies.

benjs

Last-12-Exit said:

benjs said:

Last-12-Exit said:

How much does Isreal hate Obama now?

Frankly, who cares? How much global pressure does Israel need in order to get them to move on literally the exclusive contentious issue that leaves them with logical adversary (i.e. not hatred for hatred's sake) in the eyes of the world?

-division of Jews around the world surrounding contentious topics, and obvious Muslim opposition (religious adversary)
-BDS (economic adversary)
-nuclear Iran, which Netanyahu says could lead to the destruction of Israel (military adversary - not the kind with homemade rockets and stones)

A government ought to protect its country's economy, its religious freedoms, and its right to survive. Maybe out of this we'll see a more realistic Netanyahu emerge, as opposed to the delusional and paranoid one governing on fear and the fallacious promise that he will lead Israel to perpetual security, when his people catch wind of the fact that he provides none of the above.

Maybe this is an opportunity for Israel and the Palestinians to talk once again for a serious plan, with rules, regulations, compromises, and consequences when these aren't abided by.

Yea, it was a sarcastic question.

My bad. Passion got the best of me!