NotfooledbyW
Gold Member
- Jul 9, 2014
- 25,185
- 5,033
- 245
JH 10924504
What is 'real' about speculating based upon political bias regarding what might or might not happen in the future? Second question is why does the signature of a US President force the US to abide by the terms of the agreement if Iraq violates the agreement. Obama says if Iran tries to break out and start making a nuclear bomb the US has the option that they always have of bombing their nuclear facilities? The US only abides by the agreement if Iran complies fully with the agreement. The
'signature of a US President' part of your comment makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
Republicans are realists in this case. They know dam well an agreement made by Iran won’t be worth the paper it is written on....but the signature of a US President would force the US to abide by the terms.
What is 'real' about speculating based upon political bias regarding what might or might not happen in the future? Second question is why does the signature of a US President force the US to abide by the terms of the agreement if Iraq violates the agreement. Obama says if Iran tries to break out and start making a nuclear bomb the US has the option that they always have of bombing their nuclear facilities? The US only abides by the agreement if Iran complies fully with the agreement. The
'signature of a US President' part of your comment makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.