Face it. The Iranians were licking their chops when they were dealing with Barry and Kerry.
Red line
Printable View
Face it. The Iranians were licking their chops when they were dealing with Barry and Kerry.
Red line
Then interpret this for me:Quote:
Originally Posted by Shastafarian
Quote:
'Recognition of Israel after Palestinian solution'
Iran's FM also says extermination of Jews by Nazi regime was 'tragically cruel and should not happen again'
"Once the Palestinian problem is solved the conditions for an Iranian recognition of Israel will be possible," the Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said on Monday in an interview with the German TV station Phoenix.
"We have to put on the table a solution that will be acceptable by the Palestinians but until now we have not seen such a proposal," Zarif noted. "Crimes have been committed against the Palestinian people and we just cannot do that [recognize Israel] until they will be recognize. Only then it will be possible to discuss other solutions," he added.
However, as part of the Iranian regime's newfound desire to normalize relations with the international community, Zarif told the international conference in Munich on Sunday that that the extermination of Jews by the Nazi regime was "tragically cruel and should not happen again,"
Last September, in an interview to Georgre Stephanopoulos, Zarif said: “The Holocaust is not a myth. Nobody’s talking about a myth.”
"We condemn the killing of innocent people," he told Stephanopoulos, adding that the "Holocaust was a heinous crime, it was a genocide, it must never be allowed to be repeated, but that crime cannot be and should not be a justification to trample the rights of the Palestinian people for 60 years."
based on your logic, the U.S. Is occupying Great Britton and Mexico.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
:cryFace it:cryQuote:
Originally Posted by DarrinS
You're hilarious, Darrin. You don't even know what you're angry about most of the time.
How so, Darrin?Quote:
Originally Posted by DarrinS
Explain how they are exactly alike based on my logic so I can clear up any misunderstanding you undoubtedly have.
And it's Britain.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
desperate post
I agree your :cryFace it:cry post was pretty desperate, Darrin. All emotion. Fact free.Quote:
Originally Posted by DarrinS
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
Thanks for the spell check. No, I'm not going to write an essay about the Golan Heights and how the Israel captured that area.
So your contention is that the UN doesn't recognize the US territory that used to be part of Mexico?Quote:
Originally Posted by DarrinS
Use your words, Darrin.
I'm so interested to read ChunpDumpsters non-partisan views on this subject
slurp, slurp, slurpQuote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
Desperate attempt to change the subject, Darrin -- but can you think of a more successful second term president, Darrin?Quote:
Originally Posted by DarrinS
I notice you bring up my question a lot but you never answer it, Darrin.
And if you are stating the occupied territories are now Israeli territory by some right of conquest, that pretty much supports the position of someone like Splits that Israel is pretty militarily aggressive.
Is that, in fact, what you are stating, Darrin?
Make yourself clear.
His typo is all a part of the information warefare!
That would be a quote by the seemingly more reasonable Iranian Foreign Minister; a person I would suspect has little say in final policy decisions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Splits
What are the supreme leader's thoughts on the Holocaust?
In case you had trouble finding a pertinent quote.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ali Khamenai
Gotcha.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shastafarian
If the Foreign Minister of the country says something reasonable, it is a conspiracy and he has no influence.
The fact of the matter is Iran's leadership takes the same position as Israel's leadership takes of them: regime change. Israel does not seek to kill all Persians, just overthrow their regime. Iran does not seek to kill all Jews, just overthrow their regime. Both with good reason, tbh. Both regimes are sick and demented (though only one commits mass-murder and kills hundreds of children regularly against their neighbors).
This was clearly laid out recently by Khamenei. Notice how "elimination of Israel" is solely about the Zionist regime that is currently in power, not the citizens. Not pushing them into the sea. Not killing them. Simply justice for all living in greater Palestine.
https://ci5.googleusercontent.com/pr...rrIcAAMAZB.png
Are any of those 9 Q&A even controversial? He explicitly calls for no military conflict in point #8 ("We recommend neither a classical war by the army of Muslim countries nor to throw migrated Jews at sea"). This is a rational foreign policy proposal for anyone who is not a blinded Zionist.
Meanwhile, you have American politicians openly calling for extensive bombing of Iran, even nuking Iran. Yet none of their officials make similar claims. And the Zionist-controlled media continually spews "wipe Israel off the map" and "push the Jews into the sea" as if that were Iranian policy.
Note there are up to 25000 Jews willingly living inside Iran, despite the fact that they could leave if they wanted:
http://www.theatlantic.com/internati...ermany/400631/
Quote:
The Iranian regime has been in power for 36 years. It governs a Jewish population of between 10,000 and 25,000. Life for Iranian Jews is not easy. They cannot express any sympathy for Israel. Indeed, they must go out of their way to reject Zionism lest they confirm regime suspicions about their loyalty. And those suspicions sometimes descend into outright persecution,as happened in 1999 in the city of Shiraz, when 13 Jews were imprisoned for several years on charges of spying for Israel.
But while Iran’s Jews are not free, neither is their government trying to kill them. Three and a half decades after the Islamic Revolution, Iran boasts perhaps 60 functioning synagogues, along with multiple kosher butchers and Jewish schools. The regime recently erected a monument to Jews who died fighting in the Iran-Iraq War. When former president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad denied the Holocaust, the leader of Iran’s Jewish community publicly reprimanded him. Perhaps most tellingly, a substantial Jewish community remains in Iran, despite being allowed to leave.
*Sigh* Again you get your panties in a twist. What I said is the FM seems reasonable but that just like members of the cabinet here, he likely doesn't have final say over policy decisions. In fact you can argue he has less power than his contemporaries in western countries.Quote:
Originally Posted by Splits
Wow we agree. Only I seem to be the one in this argument who sees that both regimes would kill as many civilians as needed on the opposing side to achieve their goals.Quote:
The fact of the matter is Iran's leadership takes the same position as Israel's leadership takes of them: regime change. Israel does not seek to kill all Persians, just overthrow their regime. Iran does not seek to kill all Jews, just overthrow their regime. Both with good reason, tbh. Both regimes are sick and demented (though only one commits mass-murder and kills hundreds of children regularly against their neighbors).
"We'll just funnel money to militant organizations to do all the dirty work for us." There are other issues with that handy infographic. We can debate it if you really want to.Quote:
This was clearly laid out recently by Khamenei. Notice how "elimination of Israel" is solely about the Zionist regime that is currently in power, not the citizens. Not pushing them into the sea. Not killing them. Simply justice for all living in greater Palestine.
https://ci5.googleusercontent.com/pr...rrIcAAMAZB.png
Are any of those 9 Q&A even controversial? He explicitly calls for no military conflict in point #8 ("We recommend neither a classical war by the army of Muslim countries nor to throw migrated Jews at sea"). This is a rational foreign policy proposal for anyone who is not a blinded Zionist.
This link echoes what I said earlier. Iranian jews are not "free" per se but also are not rounded up and thrown in jail en masse for reason.Quote:
Note there are up to 25000 Jews willingly living inside Iran, despite the fact that they could leave if they wanted:
http://www.theatlantic.com/internati...ermany/400631/
But back on topic. This deal is necessary. I don't trust the Iranian leadership anymore than I would trust republican war-hawks here or right-wing nuts in Israel. The situation over there is extremely complex and right now the leadership in both countries only seeks to destabilize to achieve their goals. That being said I think Israel has a right to exist since there was a binding UN resolution back in 1947. Jews were happy enough to accept what some considered a lopsided deal (jews got lots of desert territory). Instead, surrounding arab countries invaded and attempted to push the jews into the sea (in actuality). I think it's funny you believe the supreme leader wants nothing more than jews, muslims, and christians to live in harmony.
He's an extremist right-wing East TX Repug, proof that he's lying.
Gohmert Vows To Quit Congress And Await 'Nuclear Holocaust' If Iran Deal Passes
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/louie-gohmert-glenn-beck-iran
... and he's probably too wonderfully dumb to be a lobbyist.
Michele Bachmann: US must send message of ‘peace’ to Iran by bombing nuclear sites — maybe with nukes
Former congresswoman Michele Bachmann wants to send a wake-up call to Iran by bombing its nuclear facilities — possibly with nuclear weapons.
Bachmann, who retired when her term ended last year, argued that a bombing raid against Iran would prevent war — not cause one.
“There is only one tried and true method that stops a rogue nation from getting a nuclear bomb, and it’s this: It is for a country like the United States to take our military superiority and to go into that country and to drop bombs on their nuclear hardware and destroy it,” Bachmann said.
“That’s called peace,” she added. “That’s not called war.”
http://www.rawstory.com/2015/09/michele-bachmann-us-must-send-message-of-peace-to-iran-by-bombing-nuclear-sites-maybe-with-nukes/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaig n=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story%29
Israel Lobby Spent Over $20 Million to Stop Iran Deal and Got Almost Nothing for It
http://www.alternet.org/world/israel...ter1042255&t=8
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/08/sc...deal.html?_r=0Quote:
At first glance, the metals that give atom bombs their destructive fury might seem interchangeable: Uranium and plutonium are both more valuable than gold. Both captivate would-be atomic powers. And both fueled bombs that leveled Japanese cities — uranium at Hiroshima and plutonium at Nagasaki.
But to see them as equal is to ignore a crucial difference: Of the 15,000 or so nuclear warheads on the planet, atomic experts say, more than 95 percent rely on plutonium to ignite their firestorms.
As a fuel for weapons, plutonium packs a far greater punch than uranium, and in bulk can be easier and cheaper to produce. Which is why some nuclear experts voice incomprehension at what they see as a lopsided focus on uranium in evaluations of the deal reached with Iran — under which Tehran would forsake the production of plutonium.
“It was an incredibly big breakthrough,” said Siegfried S. Hecker, a Stanford professor and former director of the Los Alamos weapons lab in New Mexico, the birthplace of the bomb. “But nobody seems to care.”
red-diaper baby Brent Scowcroft weighs in:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...5d8_story.htmlQuote:
Congress again faces a momentous decision regarding U.S. policy toward the Middle East. The forthcoming vote on the nuclear deal between the P5+1 and Iran (known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA) will show the world whether the United States has the will and sense of responsibility to help stabilize the Middle East, or whether it will contribute to further turmoil, including the possible spread of nuclear weapons. Strong words perhaps, but clear language is helpful in the cacophony of today’s media.
In my view, the JCPOA meets the key objective, shared by recent administrations of both parties, that Iran limit itself to a strictly civilian nuclear program with unprecedented verification and monitoring by the International Atomic Energy Agency and the U.N. Security Council. Iran has committed to never developing or acquiring a nuclear weapon; the deal ensures that this will be the case for at least 15 years and likely longer, unless Iran repudiates the inspection regime and its commitments under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and Additional Protocol.
There is no more credible expert on nuclear weapons than Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz, who led the technical negotiating team. When he asserts that the JCPOA blocks each of Iran’s pathways to the fissile material necessary to make a nuclear weapon, responsible people listen. Twenty-nine eminent U.S. nuclear scientists have endorsed Moniz’s assertions.
If the United States could have handed Iran a “take it or leave it” agreement, the terms doubtless would have been more onerous on Iran. But negotiated agreements, the only ones that get signed in times of peace, are compromises by definition. It is what President Reagan did with the Soviet Union on arms control; it is what President Nixon did with China.
Israeli intelligence Mossad and Shin Bet both counter Bibi and support JCPOA.
As ALWAYS, the Repugs are WRONG and their FUD is pure BULLSHIT
It's a Jewish/Israeli source, but is it wrong?
The Greatest Threat Facing Iran: Running Out of Water
Israel came to Iran’s rescue decades ago—and might again be the Islamic republic’s best hope for avoiding catastrophe
Rather, the greatest threat to Iran may be that the country is running out of water. The problem is so severe that social unrest, economic dislocation, even out migration can all be imagined. One government advisor recently predicted that as many as fifty million Iranians—seventy percent of Iran’s population—may be forced to leave because of a lack of water.
Water problems are a proxy for bad governance, and Iran has water problems galore. Underground resources have been overpumped beyond what can be naturally recharged by rain, and, on the present course, many aquifers will soon be unusable.
Iranian agriculture is among the most wasteful in the world.
Most countries use about seventy percent of their water for agriculture; Iran uses over ninety percent. Even so, Iran is already not self-sufficient in food, a trend that is projected to get worse.
The Islamic Republic’s climate is mostly arid and semiarid, which, by definition, means it only gets modest rainfall.
More than half of the country’s wells are believed to have been dug illegally and many of them, possibly most, are now polluted.
More than two-thirds of all industrial facilities fail to treat their wastewater, and manufacturers, even of chemical products, generally dump their waste into Iran’s waterways.
Iran discharges more than sixty percent of its sewage untreated, polluting groundwater, rivers, and lakes. Climate change is only likely to exacerbate the overall poor water outlook.
By contrast, Israel—Iran’s self-declared foe—has perhaps the most sophisticated and successful integrated water management system in the world.
Israel itself is sixty percent desert, has among the most rapidly growing populations and economies in the world, and markedly less rainfall than the modest amount at its founding in 1948.
Even so, Israel now has such an abundance of water that it exports billions of dollars a year of fruit and vegetables, and also provides water to Palestinians and the Kingdom of Jordan every day.
http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news...7f6b-207214637
Yeah, but most of Gaza's water is undrinkable: http://www.imemc.org/article/72970