2:00....Trump and Iran

Why would they strike a deal with a country that will have a reputation for reneging?

Why would anyone?
Why would anyone strike a deal with the worlds leading state sponsor of terror? Even after they said no deal will stop their destruction?

Who said that Iran is the leading state sponsor of terror? Where does that claim come from?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
All over the news.

Then it has to be true! The news is never wrong!


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
They've been saying it for nearly 40 years. Before the media hitched their wagon to the Democrats.
 
A person very close visited Iran recently. He found it to be a beautiful, friendly country. The people were welcoming, generous and interested in the outside world. The Iranians are not to be confused with a régime that is theocratic and outmoded, just as Americans are not to be judged by what Nixon, 'W' or others have done.
#1 tourist destination for Iranians before the revolution: Israel.
#1 medical needs destination for Iranians seeking significant medical attention before the revolution: Israel.

Fake news


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
Stop being a dumbass troll and grow up.

Your to statements are bullshit, you have nothing to support them.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
 
Well, considering what's happening in the Koreas, maybe the world is better off if the neocons are just told to get out and stay the fuck out. Nato may be an exception of sorts since most of us whose families have been here for 200 years have more buried over there than on Civil War battlefields. And there was the Marshall Plan. But outside of Europe, our trackrecord may not be so good.

Not to give kudos to Trump but its sort of MontyPython Peter Sellers absurdity of America and the use of power.
 
The other partners will not follow if Trump leaves. Further reducing our influence and weakening the Western Alliance. Guess who benefits the most if he does?

We should leave just because they chant death to America, what else matters!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
The Marshal Plan was brilliant. It shows how America is capable of greatness. It also indicts the incredibly stupid policies and actions America has also been involved with.
 
Why would they strike a deal with a country that will have a reputation for reneging?

Why would anyone?
Why would anyone strike a deal with the worlds leading state sponsor of terror? Even after they said no deal will stop their destruction?

Who said that Iran is the leading state sponsor of terror? Where does that claim come from?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
Who said that Iran is the leading state sponsor of terror? Where does that claim come from?

Every Marine knows most of our Marines in Iraq died via Iranian-supplied munitions.
Sheik and Bake

The other Marines were killed with weapons supplied by "our" ally, Saudi Arabia.
 
A person very close visited Iran recently. He found it to be a beautiful, friendly country. The people were welcoming, generous and interested in the outside world. The Iranians are not to be confused with a régime that is theocratic and outmoded, just as Americans are not to be judged by what Nixon, 'W' or others have done.
#1 tourist destination for Iranians before the revolution: Israel.
#1 medical needs destination for Iranians seeking significant medical attention before the revolution: Israel.

Fake news


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
Stop being a dumbass troll and grow up.

Your to statements are bullshit, you have nothing to support them.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
Thanks for reminding us you are ignorant on all topics.
Iran even recognized Israel as a sovereign nation before the revolution.

Israel and Iran Before the Revolution: A Not-So-Secret Marriage of Convenience - Languages Of The World

Iran–Israel relations - Wikipedia

From friends to foes: How Israel and Iran turned into arch-enemies
 
A minority of Iranians 'chant' "Death to America", just as a minority of Americans say "Nuke Iran". What is the difference in sentiment between the two expressions?
 
Why would they strike a deal with a country that will have a reputation for reneging?

Why would anyone?
Why would anyone strike a deal with the worlds leading state sponsor of terror? Even after they said no deal will stop their destruction?
We strike deals all the time with hostile countries to achieve certain goals.

We have a deal where everyone involved is saying works in achieving its goals. Iran reduced its store of nuclear fuel, centrifuges and most importantly opened its facilities to outside inspection. The deal wasn’t about terrorism, human rights, regional aspirations, it was about one specific goal only, nukes.

Now what?

Did you get the memo that they haven’t stopped, just hiding it, that’s why Trump is getting out. Sorry Obable is the anointed one anymore .
But you do have hope , the treader Kerry is being treasonous for you, wanting to kiss Irans bungas.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
A minority of Iranians 'chant' "Death to America", just as a minority of Americans say "Nuke Iran". What is the difference in sentiment between the two expressions?
Their lawmakers were chanting that when they voted to expand their missile program last year..
 
The 'deal' should never have been paid.

Every other nation walked away from the negotiating table from these terrorist pr!cks.
- Obama stayed.

The Iranian military / air force conducted practice bombing-runs on mock US aircraft carriers while Barry remained at the table.

Iran's leader led public chants of 'Death To America' as Barry remained at the table.

It was reported that Iran was violating the Temporary Rules set into place while the long-term agreement was being negotiated while Barry remained at the table.

Barry was so afraid they would walk away from the table and wanted this deal as part of his 'Legacy' so badly that he refused to make getting back US Hostages part of the deal. (Instead he later paid a ransom for their release.)

Barry Un-Constitutionally negotiated his own 'Treaty' on behalf of the United States, by-passing Congress to do so. When it was done, Barry ran with it to the U.n. to have it ratified before Congress could see / read it and act on it. This was just another example of how Barry 'Castro' did his own thing as 'Dear Leader'.
Cheap Tricks of Constitutionazis

Don't sell your Constitutionalism by using FUBARack as a counter- example. President Jefferson bypassed that obstructive document in order to purchase the Louisiana Territory; President Monroe did the same to get us Florida. Likewise, Teddy Roosevelt to get the Panama Canal Zone.
 
Here's a question that will leave you speechless:

What benefit did America, or the world, accrue by awarding nuclear weapons to the world's worst state sponsor of terrorism?

In what universe did such an award ever take place

"Obama Gave Iran A Faster Route To A Nuke -- And Didn't Tell Us
President Obama's deal with Iran was supposed to keep that nation's mullahs from creating a nuclear weapon with which it could intimidate and dominate the Mideast and much of Europe. Instead, it actually makes it more possible -- and in shorter time.

The Associated Press obtained a copy of a secret side deal that, in the words of the normally circumspect AP, advances "Tehran's ability to build a bomb even before the end of the pact." The accord as agreed to by the U.S. and five other nations was supposed to last 15 years. Or so we were told. Turns out, that's not the case.


...the deal as signed all but guarantees that Iran will someday get a nuclear weapon with which to terrorize its neighbors. What the AP document does is move up the time under which Iran can make a nuclear weapon. So we'll all be at risk sooner than we think.

The so-called "add-on" agreement lets Iran expand its uranium enrichment program after 10 years -- not 15 years, as the public parts of the deal suggested."
Obama Gave Iran A Faster Route To A Nuke -- And Didn't Tell Us | Stock News & Stock Market Analysis - IBD




BTW....

What benefit did America, or the world, accrue by awarding nuclear weapons to the world's worst state sponsor of terrorism?



" Iran President Hassan Rouhani endorsed the agreement in a nationally broadcast speech Sunday, saying the accord recognizes Iran's "nuclear rights" even if that precise language was kept from the final document because of Western resistance.

"No matter what interpretations are given, Iran's right to enrichment has been recognized," said Rouhani,...."
US, Iran nuclear deal spurs bipartisan concern in Congress





Iran's right to enrichment has been recognized,


By whom?


Oh.....by Obama.....



In your face, you dunce.

You’ve yet to show any award being given Jumbo. As is always the case…you offer nothing.

Having no agreement allows Iran to do whatever they want and outside of armed intervention, they will be a nuclear enabled military sooner rather than later.
 
A person very close visited Iran recently. He found it to be a beautiful, friendly country. The people were welcoming, generous and interested in the outside world. The Iranians are not to be confused with a régime that is theocratic and outmoded, just as Americans are not to be judged by what Nixon, 'W' or others have done.
Persian Poison

Appeasers have been riding that "good Iranian" lame camel for decades. Turn it in to the glue factory.
 
A person very close visited Iran recently. He found it to be a beautiful, friendly country. The people were welcoming, generous and interested in the outside world. The Iranians are not to be confused with a régime that is theocratic and outmoded, just as Americans are not to be judged by what Nixon, 'W' or others have done.
Persian Poison

Appeasers have been riding that "good Iranian" dead camel for decades. Turn it in to the glue factory.
He knows far more about the situation than anyone to be seen in these threads. Appeasing has nothing to do with it.
Having participated in overthrowing the Iranian government in 1953, however, might play in.
 
A minority of Iranians 'chant' "Death to America", just as a minority of Americans say "Nuke Iran". What is the difference in sentiment between the two expressions?
Their lawmakers were chanting that when they voted to expand their missile program last year..
And American 'law makers' (and law breakers) voted for the illegal invasion of Iraq. Should all Americans also be seen as war criminals because of that?
 
A minority of Iranians 'chant' "Death to America", just as a minority of Americans say "Nuke Iran". What is the difference in sentiment between the two expressions?
Their lawmakers were chanting that when they voted to expand their missile program last year..
And American 'law makers' (and law breakers) voted for the illegal invasion of Iraq. Should all Americans also be seen as war criminals because of that?
I think faulty evidence isnt equatable with chanting "death to america"
But yes, our lawmakers and intelligence should be held accountable for the invasion of Iraq.
One of the main things i want out of this country is to hold our leaders accountable. And we dont. Far from it.
 

Forum List

Back
Top