Why do Republicans support a nuclear Iran?

[HereWeGoAgain]

It shows there will be.

no, it doesn't. but if there were, that would be a violation of the agreement. that would mean that the sanctions would return, and we'd be no worse off than we are now.

So whats to stop them from starting their nuke program up once they get their money?
This deal wont be enforceable and iran has shown many times that they dont honor agreements. Not sure why you think this time will be any different.

Because Obama says it will

and you know that Obama. He's the most brilliant man who never DROPS bombs on any other countries and his word is all he needs to garner a Nobel Peace prize

now I go puke

snip;
Countries bombed by the U.S. under the Obama administration
By Kevin Liptak, CNN



Updated 9:38 PM ET, Tue September 23, 2014

Story highlights

• President Obama has ordered airstrikes in seven different countries
• Obama was close to ordering airstrikes in Syria in 2013
• Obama is the fourth president in a row to order airstrikes in Iraq

He's the war-ending President who, as of Tuesday, has ordered airstrikes in seven different countries

all of it here:
Countries bombed by the U.S. under Obama administration - CNNPolitics.com

This is downright hilarious. If any Republican had been president we would have boots on the ground in all of those countries and another $3 trillion added to the national debt. At least someone understands what it takes to get the job done.

Like democrats give a shit about the debt.

 

[HenryBHough]

I'm not a Republican - that party is far too soft on "progressivism" for me but I have come to believe that a nuclear Iran is sore needed. Iran is the country I feel most likely to nuke Washington, D.C. and that's about the only thing that can restore democracy. True, after a bit of a struggle, but far less of one than might be required if we just kick back and let the regime romp.

 

[IsaacNewton]

Reagan sells weapons to Iran: Right-Wing Hero

Obama prevents Iran from building nukes: Right-Wing Villain.

And that, is con logic. They are forever prisoners of the cult of personality.

 

[Stephanie]

SNIP;
Obama Announces Iran Deal, Says Bye-Bye to Western Civ
by Roger L Simon
JULY 14, 2015 - 2:32 PM
(0)(111)


(0)
Now we know what hope and change really meant.

Somewhere Frank Marshall Davis must be smiling. Barack Obama toasted what he always wanted, the decline of the West, as our president finally rolled over and made a big nuclear deal with Iran, giving the ayatollah virtually everything he could have dreamed of, let alone needed — including control over nuclear inspections, making them meaningless — and getting nothing in return.


Among the first to respond, Senator Marco Rubio:

Washington, D.C.– U.S. Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL), a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, today commented on the Obama Administration’s announcement of a nuclear deal with Iran:

“I have said from the beginning of this process that I would not support a deal with Iran that allows the mullahs to retain the ability to develop nuclear weapons, threaten Israel, and continue their regional expansionism and support for terrorism. Based on what we know thus far, I believe that this deal undermines our national security. President Obama has consistently negotiated from a position of weakness, giving concession after concession to a regime that has American blood on its hands, holds Americans hostage, and has consistently violated every agreement it ever signed. I expect that a significant majority in Congress will share my skepticism of this agreement and vote it down. Failure by the President to obtain congressional support will tell the Iranians and the world that this is Barack Obama’s deal, not an agreement with lasting support from the United States. It will then be left to the next President to return us to a position of American strength and re-impose sanctions on this despicable regime until it is truly willing to abandon its nuclear ambitions and is no longer a threat to international security

More from Rep. DeSantis, chairman of the Subcommittee for National Security :

ALL of it here:
Obama Announces Iran Deal Says Bye-Bye to Western Civ Diary of a Mad Voter

 

[Vigilante]

this is absolutely DISGUSTING and just shameful. This so called, President doesn't care about YOU American citizens. all he cared about was getting in cahoots against Israel . All he cared about was making a NAME for himself

SNIP;
Left Behind: Administration Urges Iran to Release Four Americans, But Deal Struck Without Hostages
by Bridget Johnson
July 14, 2015 - 3:25 pm




As the final nuclear deal with Iran was announced with concessions and trade-offs, four names were noticeably absent from the administration’s lips: Amir Hekmati, Saeed Abedini, Jason Rezaian, and Bob Levinson.

Families of the four had expressed trepidation in the weeks of negotiations leading up to the Vienna agreement. Would Iran feel generous in a new era of rapprochement? Or if Iran got what it wanted, would all leverage to gain the release of the American hostages could go out the window?

There was no sign today that Iran intended to release any of them.

“On the detained Americans, as I think most of you know every time we have a negotiation round with the Iranian’s we have on margin of those discussions about the detained Americans in Iran as well as our concerns about missing American, Robert Levinson. And both Secretary Kerry and myself, both separately and together, have had more than one conversation during the course of these — this negotiating round,” a senior administration official told reporters on a background call today.

“Secretary Kerry, in fact, had yet another conversation today with Minister [Javad] Zarif and their other people on the delegation that have close ties to other parts of the Iranian government with whom we speak as well. We believe very strongly that this is an opportunity for Iran to let the Americans come home.”

The official said they “certainly want to make sure that the treatment of Americans who are now being detained is the best until they get home, and that should be immediately.”

All of the Americans have suffered mistreatment including torture, malnourishment, and lack of medical care.

“And we are doing whatever we possibly can to get Americans home and we think that this is a moment where Iran has a really important opportunity to make a humanitarian gesture and bring the American home,” the official added of the world’s leading state sponsor of terror.

Hekmati, a decorated Marine veteran who served in the Iraq war, was visiting extended family for the first time in August 2011 when he was seized and sentenced on trumped-up espionage charges.

Washington Post reporter Rezaian, who has reported from Tehran since 2008, was seized on July 22, 2014, in a raid on his home. He is facing espionage charges and had a closed-door hearing Monday while the final details of the agreement were being worked out.

Idaho pastor Abedini was convicted in January 2013 of establishing Christian house churches while in the country to set up a government-sanctioned orphanage.

Former FBI agent Levinson went missing off the coast of Iran eight years ago while working as a private investigator. Levinson’s family later received images of him in captivity, though the Iranian government has maintained they don’t know who is holding him. He is the longest-held U.S. hostage in history.

The Americans were not mentioned by President Obama nor John Kerry in their remarks.

all of it here:
Left Behind Iran Deal Struck Without Hostages The Yellow Ribbon Project

Perhaps we need a weapon, that hasn't been a failure all his life!..... Just how long can the Manchurian muslims LUCK hold out?

 

[nuhuh]

no, it doesn't. but if there were, that would be a violation of the agreement. that would mean that the sanctions would return, and we'd be no worse off than we are now.

So whats to stop them from starting their nuke program up once they get their money?
This deal wont be enforceable and iran has shown many times that they dont honor agreements. Not sure why you think this time will be any different.

Because Obama says it will

and you know that Obama. He's the most brilliant man who never DROPS bombs on any other countries and his word is all he needs to garner a Nobel Peace prize

now I go puke

snip;
Countries bombed by the U.S. under the Obama administration
By Kevin Liptak, CNN



Updated 9:38 PM ET, Tue September 23, 2014

Story highlights

• President Obama has ordered airstrikes in seven different countries
• Obama was close to ordering airstrikes in Syria in 2013
• Obama is the fourth president in a row to order airstrikes in Iraq

He's the war-ending President who, as of Tuesday, has ordered airstrikes in seven different countries

all of it here:
Countries bombed by the U.S. under Obama administration - CNNPolitics.com

This is downright hilarious. If any Republican had been president we would have boots on the ground in all of those countries and another $3 trillion added to the national debt. At least someone understands what it takes to get the job done.

Like democrats give a shit about the debt.

We seem to be the only ones paying it down.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

So whats to stop them from starting their nuke program up once they get their money?
This deal wont be enforceable and iran has shown many times that they dont honor agreements. Not sure why you think this time will be any different.

Because Obama says it will

and you know that Obama. He's the most brilliant man who never DROPS bombs on any other countries and his word is all he needs to garner a Nobel Peace prize

now I go puke

snip;
Countries bombed by the U.S. under the Obama administration
By Kevin Liptak, CNN



Updated 9:38 PM ET, Tue September 23, 2014

Story highlights

• President Obama has ordered airstrikes in seven different countries
• Obama was close to ordering airstrikes in Syria in 2013
• Obama is the fourth president in a row to order airstrikes in Iraq

He's the war-ending President who, as of Tuesday, has ordered airstrikes in seven different countries

all of it here:
Countries bombed by the U.S. under Obama administration - CNNPolitics.com

This is downright hilarious. If any Republican had been president we would have boots on the ground in all of those countries and another $3 trillion added to the national debt. At least someone understands what it takes to get the job done.

Like democrats give a shit about the debt.

We seem to be the only ones paying it down.

Delusions ...you're chock full of em.

 

[nuhuh]

Because Obama says it will

and you know that Obama. He's the most brilliant man who never DROPS bombs on any other countries and his word is all he needs to garner a Nobel Peace prize

now I go puke

snip;
Countries bombed by the U.S. under the Obama administration
By Kevin Liptak, CNN



Updated 9:38 PM ET, Tue September 23, 2014

Story highlights

• President Obama has ordered airstrikes in seven different countries
• Obama was close to ordering airstrikes in Syria in 2013
• Obama is the fourth president in a row to order airstrikes in Iraq

He's the war-ending President who, as of Tuesday, has ordered airstrikes in seven different countries

all of it here:
Countries bombed by the U.S. under Obama administration - CNNPolitics.com

This is downright hilarious. If any Republican had been president we would have boots on the ground in all of those countries and another $3 trillion added to the national debt. At least someone understands what it takes to get the job done.

Like democrats give a shit about the debt.

We seem to be the only ones paying it down.

Delusions ...you're chock full of em.

All you have are tantrums and your diapers are full.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

and you know that Obama. He's the most brilliant man who never DROPS bombs on any other countries and his word is all he needs to garner a Nobel Peace prize

now I go puke

snip;
Countries bombed by the U.S. under the Obama administration
By Kevin Liptak, CNN



Updated 9:38 PM ET, Tue September 23, 2014

Story highlights

• President Obama has ordered airstrikes in seven different countries
• Obama was close to ordering airstrikes in Syria in 2013
• Obama is the fourth president in a row to order airstrikes in Iraq

He's the war-ending President who, as of Tuesday, has ordered airstrikes in seven different countries

all of it here:
Countries bombed by the U.S. under Obama administration - CNNPolitics.com

This is downright hilarious. If any Republican had been president we would have boots on the ground in all of those countries and another $3 trillion added to the national debt. At least someone understands what it takes to get the job done.

Like democrats give a shit about the debt.

We seem to be the only ones paying it down.

Delusions ...you're chock full of em.

All you have are tantrums and your diapers are full.

Like I said,delusional.
President Obama s Legacy 20 Trillion in Debt for 2016 Victor - Forbes

 

[Auld Phart]

So whats to stop them from starting their nuke program up once they get their money?
This deal wont be enforceable and iran has shown many times that they dont honor agreements. Not sure why you think this time will be any different.

Because Obama says it will

and you know that Obama. He's the most brilliant man who never DROPS bombs on any other countries and his word is all he needs to garner a Nobel Peace prize

now I go puke

snip;
Countries bombed by the U.S. under the Obama administration
By Kevin Liptak, CNN



Updated 9:38 PM ET, Tue September 23, 2014

Story highlights

• President Obama has ordered airstrikes in seven different countries
• Obama was close to ordering airstrikes in Syria in 2013
• Obama is the fourth president in a row to order airstrikes in Iraq

He's the war-ending President who, as of Tuesday, has ordered airstrikes in seven different countries

all of it here:
Countries bombed by the U.S. under Obama administration - CNNPolitics.com

This is downright hilarious. If any Republican had been president we would have boots on the ground in all of those countries and another $3 trillion added to the national debt. At least someone understands what it takes to get the job done.

Like democrats give a shit about the debt.

We seem to be the only ones paying it down.

Paid it down?

 

[nuhuh]

Because Obama says it will

and you know that Obama. He's the most brilliant man who never DROPS bombs on any other countries and his word is all he needs to garner a Nobel Peace prize

now I go puke

snip;
Countries bombed by the U.S. under the Obama administration
By Kevin Liptak, CNN



Updated 9:38 PM ET, Tue September 23, 2014

Story highlights

• President Obama has ordered airstrikes in seven different countries
• Obama was close to ordering airstrikes in Syria in 2013
• Obama is the fourth president in a row to order airstrikes in Iraq

He's the war-ending President who, as of Tuesday, has ordered airstrikes in seven different countries

all of it here:
Countries bombed by the U.S. under Obama administration - CNNPolitics.com

This is downright hilarious. If any Republican had been president we would have boots on the ground in all of those countries and another $3 trillion added to the national debt. At least someone understands what it takes to get the job done.

Like democrats give a shit about the debt.

We seem to be the only ones paying it down.

Paid it down?

Yes, paid it down, but it doesn't make any difference since projections say it will take 398,000 years to pay off the debt.. The IMF just published a statement that says in effect that best way to handle the economy is to let the economy grow and let the debt become a smaller and smaller percentage of GDP. But noooo, you guys needed tax cuts that haven't done a thing for the economy for 15 years. So whenever there has been money you have opted to put it in your pocket rather than confront your debts, but put the blame on Obama.

 

[Auld Phart]

and you know that Obama. He's the most brilliant man who never DROPS bombs on any other countries and his word is all he needs to garner a Nobel Peace prize

now I go puke

snip;
Countries bombed by the U.S. under the Obama administration
By Kevin Liptak, CNN



Updated 9:38 PM ET, Tue September 23, 2014

Story highlights

• President Obama has ordered airstrikes in seven different countries
• Obama was close to ordering airstrikes in Syria in 2013
• Obama is the fourth president in a row to order airstrikes in Iraq

He's the war-ending President who, as of Tuesday, has ordered airstrikes in seven different countries

all of it here:
Countries bombed by the U.S. under Obama administration - CNNPolitics.com

This is downright hilarious. If any Republican had been president we would have boots on the ground in all of those countries and another $3 trillion added to the national debt. At least someone understands what it takes to get the job done.

Like democrats give a shit about the debt.

We seem to be the only ones paying it down.

Paid it down?

Yes, paid it down, but it doesn't make any difference since projections say it will take 398,000 years to pay off the debt.. The IMF just published a statement that says in effect that best way to handle the economy is to let the economy grow and let the debt become a smaller and smaller percentage of GDP. But noooo, you guys needed tax cuts that haven't done a thing for the economy for 15 years. So whenever there has been money you have opted to put it in your pocket rather than confront your debts, but put the blame on Obama.

Which president since Ike has 'paid down' the debt?

Clinton had a chance, but decided not to.

 

[nuhuh]

This is downright hilarious. If any Republican had been president we would have boots on the ground in all of those countries and another $3 trillion added to the national debt. At least someone understands what it takes to get the job done.

Like democrats give a shit about the debt.

We seem to be the only ones paying it down.

Paid it down?

Yes, paid it down, but it doesn't make any difference since projections say it will take 398,000 years to pay off the debt.. The IMF just published a statement that says in effect that best way to handle the economy is to let the economy grow and let the debt become a smaller and smaller percentage of GDP. But noooo, you guys needed tax cuts that haven't done a thing for the economy for 15 years. So whenever there has been money you have opted to put it in your pocket rather than confront your debts, but put the blame on Obama.

Which president since Ike has 'paid down' the debt?

Clinton had a chance, but decided not to.

There wasn't a problem until Reagan went nuts with spending a left a two trillion dollar hit on the budget. Successive presidents couldn't address the debt with GHWB losing his job because Republicans were pissed at him trying to raise taxes to address it. It only got worse when GWB put the wars on the country's credit card and passed Medicare Part D without a plan to pay for it caused the current problems. History will address the facts surrounding our debt and colorizing the facts won't help.

 

[Auld Phart]

Like democrats give a shit about the debt.

We seem to be the only ones paying it down.

Paid it down?

Yes, paid it down, but it doesn't make any difference since projections say it will take 398,000 years to pay off the debt.. The IMF just published a statement that says in effect that best way to handle the economy is to let the economy grow and let the debt become a smaller and smaller percentage of GDP. But noooo, you guys needed tax cuts that haven't done a thing for the economy for 15 years. So whenever there has been money you have opted to put it in your pocket rather than confront your debts, but put the blame on Obama.

Which president since Ike has 'paid down' the debt?

Clinton had a chance, but decided not to.

There wasn't a problem until Reagan went nuts with spending a left a two trillion dollar hit on the budget. Successive presidents couldn't address the debt with GHWB losing his job because Republicans were pissed at him trying to raise taxes to address it. It only got worse when GWB put the wars on the country's credit card and passed Medicare Part D without a plan to pay for it caused the current problems. History will address the facts surrounding our debt and colorizing the facts won't help.

Still waiting for the name of that person you claimed was lowering the debt.

 

[nuhuh]

We seem to be the only ones paying it down.

Paid it down?

Yes, paid it down, but it doesn't make any difference since projections say it will take 398,000 years to pay off the debt.. The IMF just published a statement that says in effect that best way to handle the economy is to let the economy grow and let the debt become a smaller and smaller percentage of GDP. But noooo, you guys needed tax cuts that haven't done a thing for the economy for 15 years. So whenever there has been money you have opted to put it in your pocket rather than confront your debts, but put the blame on Obama.

Which president since Ike has 'paid down' the debt?

Clinton had a chance, but decided not to.

There wasn't a problem until Reagan went nuts with spending a left a two trillion dollar hit on the budget. Successive presidents couldn't address the debt with GHWB losing his job because Republicans were pissed at him trying to raise taxes to address it. It only got worse when GWB put the wars on the country's credit card and passed Medicare Part D without a plan to pay for it caused the current problems. History will address the facts surrounding our debt and colorizing the facts won't help.

Still waiting for the name of that person you claimed was lowering the debt.

The Secretary of the Treasury signs all checks but I imagine it was simply a fund transfer or a simple bookkeeping adjustment. That said, I would really like to return to the thread topic. We can talk on another thread if you like.

 

[rightwinger]

Staying the course and maintaining existing sanctions will result in Iran having the capability to produce eight nuclear weapons within six months

Under the new agreement, Iran would not have the ability to produce one warhead in the next ten years

Is Republican hatred of Obama so great that they would rather have a nuclear Iran than for Obama to get credit for disarming them?

Like you, the man is a proven liar.....

Are you claiming that he is not endorsing a nuclear powered Iran?


Better read this:

Here are some of his statements on the subject, going back to his first campaign for the presidency:


June 5, 2008, in Cairo: "I will continue to be clear on the fact that an Iranian nuclear weapon would be profoundly destabilizing for the entire region.It is strongly in America's interest to prevent such a scenario."


June 8, 2008, to AIPAC: "The danger from Iran is grave, it is real, and my goal will be to eliminate this threat.... Finally, let there be no doubt: I will always keep the threat of military action on the table to defend our security and our ally Israel."


October 7 2008, in the second presidential debate: "We cannot allow Iran to get a nuclear weapon. It would be a game-changer in the region. Not only would it threaten Israel, our strongest ally in the region and one of our strongest allies in the world, but it would also create a possibility of nuclear weapons falling into the hands of terrorists. And so it's unacceptable. And I will do everything that's required to prevent it. And we will never take military options off the table,"


November 7, 2008, press conference: "Iran's development of a nuclear weapon, I believe, is unacceptable. And we have to mount an international effort to prevent that from happening."


February 27, 2009, speech at Camp Lejeune: "(W)e are focusing on al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan; developing a strategy to use all elements of American power to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon; and actively seeking a lasting peace between Israel and the Arab world."


January 27, 2010, State of the Union address: "And as Iran's leaders continue to ignore their obligations, there should be no doubt: They, too, will face growing consequences. That is a promise."


July 1, /2010, at the signing of the Iran Sanctions Act: "There should be no doubt -- the United States and the international community are determined to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons."


May 19, 2011, speech on the Middle East: "Now, our opposition to Iran's intolerance and Iran's repressive measures, as well as its illicit nuclear program and its support of terror, is well known."


May 22, 2011, in an address to AIPAC: "You also see our commitment to our shared security in our determination to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.... So let me be absolutely clear -- we remain committed to preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons."


October 13,2011, press conference after meeting with South Korean president:"Now, we don't take any options off the table in terms of how we operate with Iran."


November 14, 2011, press conference: "So what I did was to speak with President Medvedev, as well as President Hu, and all three of us entirely agree on the objective, which is making sure that Iran does not weaponize nuclear power and that we don't trigger a nuclear arms race in the region. That's in the interests of all of us... I have said repeatedly and I will say it today, we are not taking any options off the table, because it's my firm belief that an Iran with a nuclear weapon would pose a security threat not only to the region but also to the United States."


December 8, 2011, press conference: (In response to question about pressuring Iran): "No options off the table means I'm considering all options."


December 16, 2011, speech to the General Assembly of the Union for Reform Judaism: "Another grave concern -- and a threat to the security of Israel, the United States and the world -- is Iran's nuclear program. And that's why our policy has been absolutely clear: We are determined to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons...and that's why, rest assured, we will take no options off the table. We have been clear."


January 24, 2012, State of the Union address: "Let there be no doubt: America is determined to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, and I will take no options off the table to achieve that goal."


March 2, 2012, interview with Goldblog: "I... don't, as a matter of sound policy, go around advertising exactly what our intentions are. But I think both the Iranian and the Israeli governments recognize that when the United States says it is unacceptable for Iran to have a nuclear weapon, we mean what we say."


March 4, 2012, speech to AIPAC: "I have said that when it comes to preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, I will take no options off the table, and I mean what I say That includes all elements of American power: A political effort aimed at isolating Iran; a diplomatic effort to sustain our coalition and ensure that the Iranian program is monitored; an economic effort that imposes crippling sanctions; and, yes, a military effort to be prepared for any contingency."


March 5, 2012, remarks after meeting with Benjamin Netanyahu: "... I reserve all options, and my policy here is not going to be one of containment. My policy is prevention of Iran obtaining nuclear weapons. And as I indicated yesterday in my speech, when I say all options are at the table, I mean it."


March 6, 2012, press conference: "And what I have said is, is that we will not countenance Iran getting a nuclear weapon. My policy is not containment; my policy is to prevent them from getting a nuclear weapon -- because if they get a nuclear weapon that could trigger an arms race in the region, it would undermine our non-proliferation goals, it could potentially fall into the hands of terrorists.


March 14, 2012, remarks after meeting with David Cameron: "...And as I said in a speech just a couple of weeks ago, I am determined not simply to contain Iran that is in possession of a nuclear weapon; I am determined to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon -- in part for the reasons that David mentioned... We will do everything we can to resolve this diplomatically, but ultimately, we've got to have somebody on the other side of the table who's taking this seriously."


September 25, 2012, speech to the United Nations General Assembly: "Make no mistake: A nuclear-armed Iran is not a challenge that can be contained...the United States will do what we must to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon."

Obama s Crystal-Clear Promise to Stop Iran From Getting a Nuclear Weapon - The Atlantic

Cut and paste again?

Color me surprised

Iran has the stockpiles now, Republicans want them to keep them

 

[Auld Phart]

Paid it down?

Yes, paid it down, but it doesn't make any difference since projections say it will take 398,000 years to pay off the debt.. The IMF just published a statement that says in effect that best way to handle the economy is to let the economy grow and let the debt become a smaller and smaller percentage of GDP. But noooo, you guys needed tax cuts that haven't done a thing for the economy for 15 years. So whenever there has been money you have opted to put it in your pocket rather than confront your debts, but put the blame on Obama.

Which president since Ike has 'paid down' the debt?

Clinton had a chance, but decided not to.

There wasn't a problem until Reagan went nuts with spending a left a two trillion dollar hit on the budget. Successive presidents couldn't address the debt with GHWB losing his job because Republicans were pissed at him trying to raise taxes to address it. It only got worse when GWB put the wars on the country's credit card and passed Medicare Part D without a plan to pay for it caused the current problems. History will address the facts surrounding our debt and colorizing the facts won't help.

Still waiting for the name of that person you claimed was lowering the debt.

The Secretary of the Treasury signs all checks but I imagine it was simply a fund transfer or a simple bookkeeping adjustment. That said, I would really like to return to the thread topic. We can talk on another thread if you like.

Just want an answer to the first question I asked.

You stated 'we seem to be the only ones paying it down'.

Who is this 'we' you are referring to?

The last time any of it was 'paid down' was under Ike, I believe in 1957, possibly 1958.

You could have answered the question half an hour ago, instead you get further and further from it.

It really is a simple question, right?

 

[2aguy]

I'll just be brutally blunt: If you support this deal, you either don't know even the basics of the deal or you are a hopelessly brainwashed Obamabot.

Do you know that the deal lifts the sanctions on the Quds force? Do you know what the Quds force is? Google it.

Do you know that Obama caved in to Iran's last-minute demand that the arms embargo be lifted as part of the deal?

Do you know that the deal contains no provisions, not one, for no-notice inspections, *and* that Iran, under the terms of this "deal," can stall any inspection for up to three weeks and possibly longer? Under this "deal," there is not a single provision for any kind of on-the-spot no-notice inspections--not one.

And then there's the truly idiotic argument, repeated in the OP, that if you oppose this deal you are supporting a nuclear Iran. How can anyone with functioning brain cells make such an argument with a straight face? If this were 1937, it would be like arguing that if you don't support appeasing Germany, you must want Germany to get stronger.

Sadly, I have come to the conclusion that these people we debate....a part of their brains did not develop properly. They have all the other functions of a human being, but that part that deals with the truth, reality, right and wrong....are underdeveloped or non existent.....you can see that with what they post.

Your post explains just a tiny fraction of what is wrong with this deal.....outside of iran just not living up to any of it from the moment they shook hands.

Don't forget their ballistic missle development is now free and clear.

And yet....they can't comprehend anything we are saying. It is like trying to explain math to a dog. I guess it isn't their fault, they are missing a section of their reasoning ability and they can't help it.

God help the world since one of them is actually in charge and allowing iran to go free....we and our children will pay for this.....

 

[hortysir]

Oh and you believe that?? WOW are you an idiot.

Iran will continue its work on a nuclear weapon in secret and will do exactly as they wish.

You seem to have comprehension problems
We lift sanctions AFTER we have verified destruction

If they want to restart in secret it will take ten years to get where we are today

So whats to stop iran from moving it's nuke program to those "no inspection zones"?

there are no 'no inspection zones'

iran refuses inspection - - Yahoo Search Results

what do you think that proves? that inspections were an area of contention? everyone knows that.

So we lift some sanctions.
By doing so we basically give Iran access to hundreds of billions of dollars.
They're not going to buy fucking Skittles with that money.
Sounds like the going price that will put a lot of blood on The Obama's hands

 

[hortysir]

Not any you know of..
The Islamic Republic of Iran s Violation of Treaties and Multilateral Agreements UANI

your link doesn't show that there are any 'no inspections zones'
try again.

It shows there will be.

no, it doesn't. but if there were, that would be a violation of the agreement. that would mean that the sanctions would return, and we'd be no worse off than we are now.

So whats to stop them from starting their nuke program up once they get their money?
This deal wont be enforceable and iran has shown many times that they dont honor agreements. Not sure why you think this time will be any different.

What is stopping them now?

They are close to a weapon now, what is the impact of delaying them 15 years?

The Obama only cares that it holds until Jan 2017