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

[Care4all]

"Peace for our time"

From Thomas Sowell:

If you look back through history, you will be hard pressed to find a leader of any democratic nation so universally popular -- hailed enthusiastically by opposition parties as well as his own -- as was British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain when he returned from Munich in 1938, waving an agreement with Hitler's signature on it, and proclaiming "Peace for our time."

Who cared that he had thrown a small country to the Nazi wolves, in order to get a worthless agreement with Hitler? It looked great at the time because it had apparently avoided war.

Now Barack Obama seems ready to repeat that political triumph by throwing another small country -- Israel this time -- to the wolves, for the sake of another worthless agreement.

Back in 1938, Winston Churchill was one of the very few critics who tried to warn Chamberlain and the British public. Churchill said: "The idea that safety can be purchased by throwing a small State to the wolves is a fatal delusion."

After the ruinous agreement was made with Hitler, he said: "You were given the choice between war and dishonor. You chose dishonor and you will have war." Chamberlain's "Peace for our time" lasted just under a year.

Comparing Obama to Chamberlain is unfair -- to Chamberlain. There is no question that the British prime minister loved his country and pursued its best interests as he saw it. He was not a "citizen of the world," or worse. Chamberlain was building up his country's military forces, not tearing them down, as Barack Obama has been doing with American military forces.

piss and vinegar article imho.... with no solutions....

how is trying to curb Iran from getting nuclear weapons throwing Israel under a bus more so than they are under that bus without an agreement?

how is ''no agreement'' better and safer for Israel? Be specific please....

No one is advocating "no agreement". The GOP wants a good agreement, not a Neville Chamberlain agreement, or did you miss the whole point of Dr. Sowell's article?

what IS A GOOD agreement according to the GOP? Anything Obama didn't make...???

Why are ALL OF YOU GOPers bitching n moaning about how bad this agreement is while NOT offering up what you all think is a GOOD agreement that you would accept?

Just seems like partisan bull crud to me, without ever taking a stance on what you/the gop actually want....or what is acceptable to you....

What a bunch of sheep, there is no "deal" and there will only be a "deal" after congress approves the final agreement. if not there will be no deal understand?

Nope!
This is an executive agreement and NOT a treaty, so the Senate does NOT have to pass it with 2/3rds vote....at least this is how it has worked WITH ALL OTHER PRESIDENTS....

understand?

 

[Jroc]

"Peace for our time"

From Thomas Sowell:

If you look back through history, you will be hard pressed to find a leader of any democratic nation so universally popular -- hailed enthusiastically by opposition parties as well as his own -- as was British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain when he returned from Munich in 1938, waving an agreement with Hitler's signature on it, and proclaiming "Peace for our time."

Who cared that he had thrown a small country to the Nazi wolves, in order to get a worthless agreement with Hitler? It looked great at the time because it had apparently avoided war.

Now Barack Obama seems ready to repeat that political triumph by throwing another small country -- Israel this time -- to the wolves, for the sake of another worthless agreement.

Back in 1938, Winston Churchill was one of the very few critics who tried to warn Chamberlain and the British public. Churchill said: "The idea that safety can be purchased by throwing a small State to the wolves is a fatal delusion."

After the ruinous agreement was made with Hitler, he said: "You were given the choice between war and dishonor. You chose dishonor and you will have war." Chamberlain's "Peace for our time" lasted just under a year.

Comparing Obama to Chamberlain is unfair -- to Chamberlain. There is no question that the British prime minister loved his country and pursued its best interests as he saw it. He was not a "citizen of the world," or worse. Chamberlain was building up his country's military forces, not tearing them down, as Barack Obama has been doing with American military forces.

piss and vinegar article imho.... with no solutions....

how is trying to curb Iran from getting nuclear weapons throwing Israel under a bus more so than they are under that bus without an agreement?

how is ''no agreement'' better and safer for Israel? Be specific please....

No one is advocating "no agreement". The GOP wants a good agreement, not a Neville Chamberlain agreement, or did you miss the whole point of Dr. Sowell's article?

what IS A GOOD agreement according to the GOP? Anything Obama didn't make...???

Why are ALL OF YOU GOPers bitching n moaning about how bad this agreement is while NOT offering up what you all think is a GOOD agreement that you would accept?

Just seems like partisan bull crud to me, without ever taking a stance on what you/the gop actually want....or what is acceptable to you....

A good agreement is one that guarantees that Iran won't build any nukes.

And your plan to accomplish this is WHAT? Tell us all this ingenious and PERFECT plan of yours (gop's) to accomplish this feat of yours....

This is just partisan mouthing off from the Peanut Gallery.... AGAIN from the Do Nothings in congress....

again little sheep there will be no deal without the approval of congress and if getting something done means Iq getting tens of billions of dollars supporting terrorist around the world developing intercontinental missiles and continuing to develop nukes I choose that

 

[Jroc]

"Peace for our time"

From Thomas Sowell:

If you look back through history, you will be hard pressed to find a leader of any democratic nation so universally popular -- hailed enthusiastically by opposition parties as well as his own -- as was British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain when he returned from Munich in 1938, waving an agreement with Hitler's signature on it, and proclaiming "Peace for our time."

Who cared that he had thrown a small country to the Nazi wolves, in order to get a worthless agreement with Hitler? It looked great at the time because it had apparently avoided war.

Now Barack Obama seems ready to repeat that political triumph by throwing another small country -- Israel this time -- to the wolves, for the sake of another worthless agreement.

Back in 1938, Winston Churchill was one of the very few critics who tried to warn Chamberlain and the British public. Churchill said: "The idea that safety can be purchased by throwing a small State to the wolves is a fatal delusion."

After the ruinous agreement was made with Hitler, he said: "You were given the choice between war and dishonor. You chose dishonor and you will have war." Chamberlain's "Peace for our time" lasted just under a year.

Comparing Obama to Chamberlain is unfair -- to Chamberlain. There is no question that the British prime minister loved his country and pursued its best interests as he saw it. He was not a "citizen of the world," or worse. Chamberlain was building up his country's military forces, not tearing them down, as Barack Obama has been doing with American military forces.

piss and vinegar article imho.... with no solutions....

how is trying to curb Iran from getting nuclear weapons throwing Israel under a bus more so than they are under that bus without an agreement?

how is ''no agreement'' better and safer for Israel? Be specific please....

No one is advocating "no agreement". The GOP wants a good agreement, not a Neville Chamberlain agreement, or did you miss the whole point of Dr. Sowell's article?

what IS A GOOD agreement according to the GOP? Anything Obama didn't make...???

Why are ALL OF YOU GOPers bitching n moaning about how bad this agreement is while NOT offering up what you all think is a GOOD agreement that you would accept?

Just seems like partisan bull crud to me, without ever taking a stance on what you/the gop actually want....or what is acceptable to you....

What a bunch of sheep, there is no "deal" and there will only be a "deal" after congress approves the final agreement. if not there will be no deal understand?

Nope!
This is an executive agreement and NOT a treaty, so the Senate does NOT have to pass it with 2/3rds vote....at least this is how it has worked WITH ALL OTHER PRESIDENTS....

understand?

Wrong girl, Obama is not dictator, and as no power to enter into any treaty with out approval from congress, even democrats in congress know this. You're not too bright, any thinking person would not want this clueless person, to be able to have the fate of this country in his hands, even after he leaves office in less than two years. that says a lot about people like you

 

[Slyhunter]

"Peace for our time"

From Thomas Sowell:

If you look back through history, you will be hard pressed to find a leader of any democratic nation so universally popular -- hailed enthusiastically by opposition parties as well as his own -- as was British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain when he returned from Munich in 1938, waving an agreement with Hitler's signature on it, and proclaiming "Peace for our time."

Who cared that he had thrown a small country to the Nazi wolves, in order to get a worthless agreement with Hitler? It looked great at the time because it had apparently avoided war.

Now Barack Obama seems ready to repeat that political triumph by throwing another small country -- Israel this time -- to the wolves, for the sake of another worthless agreement.

Back in 1938, Winston Churchill was one of the very few critics who tried to warn Chamberlain and the British public. Churchill said: "The idea that safety can be purchased by throwing a small State to the wolves is a fatal delusion."

After the ruinous agreement was made with Hitler, he said: "You were given the choice between war and dishonor. You chose dishonor and you will have war." Chamberlain's "Peace for our time" lasted just under a year.

Comparing Obama to Chamberlain is unfair -- to Chamberlain. There is no question that the British prime minister loved his country and pursued its best interests as he saw it. He was not a "citizen of the world," or worse. Chamberlain was building up his country's military forces, not tearing them down, as Barack Obama has been doing with American military forces.

piss and vinegar article imho.... with no solutions....

how is trying to curb Iran from getting nuclear weapons throwing Israel under a bus more so than they are under that bus without an agreement?

how is ''no agreement'' better and safer for Israel? Be specific please....

No one is advocating "no agreement". The GOP wants a good agreement, not a Neville Chamberlain agreement, or did you miss the whole point of Dr. Sowell's article?

what IS A GOOD agreement according to the GOP? Anything Obama didn't make...???

Why are ALL OF YOU GOPers bitching n moaning about how bad this agreement is while NOT offering up what you all think is a GOOD agreement that you would accept?

Just seems like partisan bull crud to me, without ever taking a stance on what you/the gop actually want....or what is acceptable to you....

A good agreement is one that guarantees that Iran won't build any nukes.

And your plan to accomplish this is WHAT? Tell us all this ingenious and PERFECT plan of yours (gop's) to accomplish this feat of yours....

This is just partisan mouthing off from the Peanut Gallery.... AGAIN from the Do Nothings in congress....

I repeat, they either make a good deal or we start killing the ones in charge in their capital buildings and in their homes.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

SH 11146134

Bullshit

Your lack of intelligence on this topic has now overpowered your ability to respond. That is not an argument against my point. Its nothing at all.

 

[Ernie S.]

Obama converted Libya into a failed state by bombing Kadahfi out of power,

A good agreement is one that lets Iran know that the US means business and that there will be very serious consequences if Iran continues to develop nuclear capability.
No enrichment. No centrifuges. No underground bunkers. NOTHING.

If you call for "No enrichment. No centrifuges. No underground bunkers. NOTHING" you are nearly all alone in the world of nations. Therefore you are not for a good deal - you are for NO DEAL - you are for war as the first resort. You can fool no one with your doublesspeak.

So, you want Iran to possess the capability to build a nuclear bomb and promise not to.

Where have you seen any indication that Iran should be trusted to abide by an agreement?
Where have you seen evidence that obama has the balls to enforce such an agreement?
Where do you buy your meth?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Jroc 11146602

... there will be no deal without the approval of congress...

The first part of your reply is false since there are five other major powers involved in the framework to complete the deal that limits quite strongly Iran's ability to build a nuclear weapon. The US is not the sole player in this deal.

Dems will not support a Republican last minute bombing of the deal if you listen closely to what Senators like Tim Kaine are saying. The Dems will force the Republicans to water down whatever the hard right Republicans want to pass against this deal. Dems won't agree to support a bill that the President would have to veto.

Dems won't embarrass America in the eyes of the world by sabotaging the final agreement that is put in writing, because the framework laid out is a pretty good deal that most of the nations in the world support.

 

[Jroc]

Jroc 11146602

... there will be no deal without the approval of congress...

The first part of your reply is false since there are five other major powers involved in the framework to complete the deal that limits quite strongly Iran's ability to build a nuclear weapon. The US is not the sole player in this deal.

Dems will not support a Republican last minute bombing of the deal if you listen closely to what Senators like Tim Kaine are saying. The Dems will force the Republicans to water down whatever the hard right Republicans want to pass against this deal. Dems won't agree to support a bill that the President would have to veto.

Dems won't embarrass America in the eyes of the world by sabotaging the final agreement that is put in writing, because the framework laid out is a pretty good deal that most of the nations in the world support.

The world doesnt make our foreign policy and they don't control our government even though you leftist would like that to be the case

 

[Ernie S.]

Fuck 5 other countries. If they want to make a deal with Iran, it's on them. They are closer and would be easier targets.
obama needs to grow a set and stand up to these pigs.

 

[Statistikhengst]

Fuck 5 other countries. If they want to make a deal with Iran, it's on them. They are closer and would be easier targets.
obama needs to grow a set and stand up to these pigs.

China, France, Russia, the UK and Germany are pigs?!?!?!?!?

Put the bong down. Walk away....

 

[eagle1462010]

Only a Fool would make an agreement with a country that you know will never keep it's word............They will Lie their asses and say whatever they need to say to get the Sanctions lifted...........Already European business are ready to jump into bed with them on economic deals............probably helping them get necessary items to help in getting the bomb.

A week before the SO called DEAL..............they were chanting DEATH TO AMERICA again.............and only a FOOL would still negotiate with them when they chanting this....................

During both the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars...........one still going............the Iranians were arming, training and funding our enemies. Specifically with advanced IED's.................70% of KIA's died from IED's..................with those being disarmed and captured regularily coming from IRAN..............

aka These Assholes sent a lot of our people home in a box...................

You don't cut a Paper Deal with these types............Oh if they break it........they'll get a PAPER CUT............

Iran will never honor their word................so keep Sanctions as harsh as possible...........and make it harder for them to get the Nuke..............It's a hell of a lot better than a piece of paper that will mean NOTHING IN THE END.

BTW..............Which part of the deal makes them stop funding Terrorist Orgs in the region.................This isn't even on the dang table................What a BS deal.

 

[Statistikhengst]

All those ellipses.....

....and still you make no sense at all....

 

[eagle1462010]

All those ellipses.....

....and still you make no sense at all....

You talking to me Stat

 

[Statistikhengst]

All those ellipses.....

....and still you make no sense at all....

You talking to me Stat

Yes....

....I know....

...and you know..... that I know....

 

[eagle1462010]

All those ellipses.....

....and still you make no sense at all....

You talking to me Stat

Yes....

....I know....

...and you know..... that I know....

Just want to clear that up................

Tell me about these ellipses.................

How is it an ellipse that Iran helped kill our people..............I've shown that data over and over again on other threads..........maybe hear haven't posted on this one much lately. Either way........I've shown the data............and your argument is IT'S AN ELLIPSE..............

Chanting Death to America..................Ellipse...................LOL

Not forcing part of the deal to include to stop funding Terrorist groups.....................Oh..........another Ellipse....................

During the Iraq War..................under Bush...........they got the Iranians to agree to stop giving the IED weapons and tech...........to the insurgents........................Didn't work...........they kept doing it..................

Statist you and your ilk are FOOLS......................and if it makes you feel better you are an Elliptical Idiot.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Jroc 11148162

The world doesn't make our foreign policy and they don't control our government even though you leftist would like that to be the case

I didnt make an argument that the world makes our foreign policy and control our government. Who are those 'leftists' you are ridiculously imagining in your head and arguing with?

Go back and read my posts. If you need help with your comprehension just ask for help. I'll be happy to oblige.

This is not to difficult to understand;

"The first part of your reply is false since there are five other major powers involved in the framework to complete the deal that limits quite strongly Iran's ability to build a nuclear weapon. The US is not the sole player in this deal."

Its called stating the facts. Six countries are involved in this deal. Can you refute that fact?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Erni 11148260

Fuck 5 other countries. If they want to make a deal with Iran, it's on them. They are closer and would be easier targets.
obama needs to grow a set and stand up to these pigs.

For one who favors war instead of negotiating a reasonable and realistic detail you express much hatred for potential allies.

 

[eagle1462010]

Erni 11148260

Fuck 5 other countries. If they want to make a deal with Iran, it's on them. They are closer and would be easier targets.
obama needs to grow a set and stand up to these pigs.

For one who favors war instead of negotiating a reasonable and realistic detail you express much hatred for potential allies.

Look buddy...................I'm from the UN and if you don't watch it...............I'm going to send you another sharply worded warning....................

Right now............we'll only just punish you if you don't comply.............keep it up................and we'll REALLY REALLY PUNISH YOU......................

 

[NotfooledbyW]

JH 10925798

You are assuming the treaty is a good one...

You are assuming the potential treaty is not a good one. What makes you right and anyone that sees the serious value in extending Iran's 'break-out' time from three months to a year as plenty of time to bomb any suspected sites where violations by Iran of the deal would be necessary to deny Iraq the ability to make a nuclear weapon. If they don't try to break out for fifteen years - this turns out to be a very good deal. Unless you prefer bombing first only to stop Iran from having nuclear power for peaceful purposes.

 

[Ernie S.]

Fuck 5 other countries. If they want to make a deal with Iran, it's on them. They are closer and would be easier targets.
obama needs to grow a set and stand up to these pigs.

China, France, Russia, the UK and Germany are pigs?!?!?!?!?

Put the bong down. Walk away....

Did I say that? We are talking about Iran here.