Republican Senators send a letter to Iran. Wow. Damn!

If they hijack the chances of a good treaty, the only alternative will be war.
you have an error in your premise....well...more than one.

You are assuming the treaty is a good one...a treaty is a good one ONLY if both sides adhere to it. Exactly what gives you reason to believe Iran will adhere to it? Their past? Their open desire to destroy a sovereign nation? The fact that they fund terrorism? The fact that they moved quickly to meet the first deadline?

Secondly.....stricter sanctions...whats wrong with that?

I know..."sanctions don't work"...I get it.....but...."Iran adhering to a treaty will? Really?


They might not adhere to it. At the point they deny frequent inspections, we will be in exactly the same position we are in now without a treaty. Bombing them out of business would be appropriate.
First of all...these "talks" have been going on for a year. They ignored the first deadline. So they are one year closer to nuclear capability. By the time they no longer adhere to inspections...they will be that must closer to the objective...and if the objective was accomplished, military action will be hampered if not completely eliminated by the fear of them using that capability on an innocent country around them.


I don't think they have inspections now. That's what the treaty is for.
it takes over a year to agree to inspections?

That in itself does not give you reason to believe Iran is intentionally delaying a treaty?

Various countries, as well as groups of countries have been talking to Iran about some sort of nuclear treaty since 03. This is not just a recent discussion. They do not now and have not in the past had nuclear capability. Why would you not want agreed upon inspections to make sure they are not capable of producing a weapon? Of course Iran would like to be able to do what ever they want with their nuclear plans, and without a treaty will proceed with what they claim is only nuclear power plants. We can either go to war to destroy what ever capability they might develop, or make inspections to assure that power plants are all they are doing. Why are you in such a rush to start a war that might not be necessary?
 
Given Iran"s history over the last 30 plus years what makes anyone think they will honor any deal they might sign?

What treaties or agreements have Iran broken over the course of the last 30 years?
How about the expectation they would not kill our soldiers and citizens?
What treaty said that?
No treaty...just what peace loving nations expect of one another
 
Given Iran"s history over the last 30 plus years what makes anyone think they will honor any deal they might sign?

What treaties or agreements have Iran broken over the course of the last 30 years?
I don't know that they have signed any but given the fact the current leadership seems no different in mindset and ideology to the ones who came to power in 79 I have little confidence they would honor any agreement. Im simply curious as why people think this is somehow a more kinder,gentler,agreeable Iran.
 
This treasonous Republican arrogance may have a silver lining - to help defeat Nutanyahoo in the upcoming Israeli election. Last I heard, his party is behind in the polls.
 
As I recall, iran signed the non proliferation treaty. As such they cannot pursue nukes. If they drop out of the treaty, they can. And we can nuke them back to Mohammed.
Since several states, including Israel, never signed the thing I'm not too worried about what our puppet the Shah did, and neither are they.
So treaties mean nothing to you. And they mean nothing to iran. So fuck iran. Nuke em.

Horrible, Iran has done nothing, they had to fight off Iraq. Israel and SA is jealous of Iran.
 
Given Iran"s history over the last 30 plus years what makes anyone think they will honor any deal they might sign?

What treaties or agreements have Iran broken over the course of the last 30 years?
I don't know that they have signed any but given the fact the current leadership seems no different in mindset and ideology to the ones who came to power in 79 I have little confidence they would honor any agreement. Im simply curious as why people think this is somehow a more kinder,gentler,agreeable Iran.

So, your lack of confidence is due to what you think the leadership of Iran "seems like", rather than any "history", as you initially claimed.
 
Since several states, including Israel, never signed the thing I'm not too worried about what our puppet the Shah did, and neither are they.
So treaties mean nothing to you. And they mean nothing to iran. So fuck iran. Nuke em.
A treaty signed by a puppet of the US? Yeah, that means nothing, at least it doesn't to the country who tossed out our puppet. And no one is going to be nuking anyone. That's not the point of this little game.
It is to bibi.
Whatever the little Jewish Nazi cares about I couldn't care less. His Kosher butt is soon to be in a brine, of sea salt.
And if it isn't...we go to war...such will be the will of the Jewish nation.

There isn't a jewish nation.
 
So treaties mean nothing to you. And they mean nothing to iran. So fuck iran. Nuke em.
A treaty signed by a puppet of the US? Yeah, that means nothing, at least it doesn't to the country who tossed out our puppet. And no one is going to be nuking anyone. That's not the point of this little game.
It is to bibi.
Whatever the little Jewish Nazi cares about I couldn't care less. His Kosher butt is soon to be in a brine, of sea salt.
And if it isn't...we go to war...such will be the will of the Jewish nation.

There isn't a jewish nation.
It's close enough for government work...
 
Wow that's damn near treasonous. Interfering in the most important negotiation our country is facing in a way that benefits the enemy. But that's the GOP for you, politics before America. :cool:
That's a matter of opinion.

Negotiating with a country like Iran, to me, is treason. They have proven over and over that they are not to be trusted...so for the US to sign a "promise' based on the promise of Iran is foolish and will hand tie the US while Iran will continues to do as they please.

Hey, if you trust the signature of Iran...go for it.

Most don't.

I definitely agree that allowing Iran to have weapons is treason....those dastardly republicans are at it again. Thank god...I mean...thank goodness that Obama is stopping them
 
As I recall, iran signed the non proliferation treaty. As such they cannot pursue nukes. If they drop out of the treaty, they can. And we can nuke them back to Mohammed.
Since several states, including Israel, never signed the thing I'm not too worried about what our puppet the Shah did, and neither are they.
So treaties mean nothing to you. And they mean nothing to iran. So fuck iran. Nuke em.

Horrible, Iran has done nothing, they had to fight off Iraq. Israel and SA is jealous of Iran.

Iran fights its wars by proxy...see Hezzbolah
 
Wow that's damn near treasonous. Interfering in the most important negotiation our country is facing in a way that benefits the enemy. But that's the GOP for you, politics before America. :cool:
That's a matter of opinion.

Negotiating with a country like Iran, to me, is treason. They have proven over and over that they are not to be trusted...so for the US to sign a "promise' based on the promise of Iran is foolish and will hand tie the US while Iran will continues to do as they please.

Hey, if you trust the signature of Iran...go for it.

Most don't.

I definitely agree that allowing Iran to have weapons is treason....those dastardly republicans are at it again. Thank god...I mean...thank goodness that Obama is stopping them
Could be worse. This time they have to make them themselves, Reagan isn't just shipping them in.
 
They might not adhere to it. At the point they deny frequent inspections, we will be in exactly the same position we are in now without a treaty. Bombing them out of business would be appropriate.
First of all...these "talks" have been going on for a year. They ignored the first deadline. So they are one year closer to nuclear capability. By the time they no longer adhere to inspections...they will be that must closer to the objective...and if the objective was accomplished, military action will be hampered if not completely eliminated by the fear of them using that capability on an innocent country around them.


I don't think they have inspections now. That's what the treaty is for.
yes...and by the time we have a treaty signed...and inspections are thwarted, they will likely have accomplished what they want......to me, it seems the talks have taken way too long....about a year so far and still nothing.....seems like a stall tactic to me.


Not surprising. If it is in opposition to your president, you're all for it.
That was an unsubstantiated claim and to be frank, a sign of immaturity.
Thought we had a good discussion going on....but once I made a point you could not refute (even with hyperbole), you opted to attack my character.
Sorry bud....no interest.


How long do you think it takes to convert from nuclear power to making a bomb? Experts say at least a year. If inspections are thwarted, and are not resumed in enough time to be assured a weapon is not possible, war to destroy all nuclear capabilities is still an option. As long as they play nice, and our inspections prove that is all they are doing, there is no reason to sacrifice lives and fortune. This in no way helps them in any efforts to produce a weapon.
 
Dr. Zarifs Response to the Letter of US Senators

Zarif expressed astonishment that some members of US Congress find it appropriate to write to leaders of another country against their own President and administration. He pointed out that from reading the open letter, it seems that the authors not only do not understand international law, but are not fully cognizant of the nuances of their own Constitution when it comes to presidential powers in the conduct of foreign policy.

Foreign Minister Zarif added that "I should bring one important point to the attention of the authors and that is, the world is not the United States, and the conduct of inter-state relations is governed by international law, and not by US domestic law. The authors may not fully understand that in international law, governments represent the entirety of their respective states, are responsible for the conduct of foreign affairs, are required to fulfil the obligations they undertake with other states and may not invoke their internal law as justification for failure to perform their international obligations.
Iranian Foreign Minister responds to traitorous republicans letter US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
 
I have a feeling this is a smoke screen so republicans can raise the debt ceiling and cave on immigration.
 
As I recall, iran signed the non proliferation treaty. As such they cannot pursue nukes. If they drop out of the treaty, they can. And we can nuke them back to Mohammed.
Since several states, including Israel, never signed the thing I'm not too worried about what our puppet the Shah did, and neither are they.
So treaties mean nothing to you. And they mean nothing to iran. So fuck iran. Nuke em.

Horrible, Iran has done nothing, they had to fight off Iraq. Israel and SA is jealous of Iran.

Iran fights its wars by proxy...see Hezzbolah
And we use Israel, mercenaries, and the CIA. Welcome to being a nation with plausible deniability.
 

Forum List

Back
Top