Reply With Quote
Repugs will do everything they can to screw it up, if they can't actually block it.
btw, it just wasn't USA, but six nations, all deserve some credit.
He did it again!
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/15/wo...etType=nyt_now
Repugs will do everything they can to screw it up, if they can't actually block it.
btw, it just wasn't USA, but six nations, all deserve some credit.
right on cue, the infamous extremist asshole
Tom Cotton Comes Out Swinging Against Iran Deal: 'Congress Will Kill' This
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewir...+%28TPMNews%29
1. He penned an underhanded letter to the leaders of Iran that sparked the trending hashtag #47Traitors. On March 9th, Cotton and 46 of his Republican colleagues went behind President Obama’s back by signing an “informative” letter to Iran, saying that a nuclear deal would not last because the next president could reverse it. Secretary John Kerry, one of the lead negotiators in the talks, called the letter “utterly disgusting” and “irresponsible.” Two dozen editorial boards slammed the letter and over 200,000 people signed a pe ion asking the senators to be charged for violating the Logan Act, a law which forbids unauthorized citizens from negotiating with foreign governments.
3. He has compared the negotiations of the UN Security Council (P5+1) with Iran to the “appeasement of Nazi Germany.”This accusation is ridiculous. Rouhani’s Iran is not Hitler’s Germany. Despite Cotton’s claims that “there are nothing but hardliners in Tehran,” Rouhani is a reformist, someone we need to work with to defeat ISIL. And the ongoing nuclear negotiations with Iran are a far better ––and safer–– approach than pushing Iran to the brink of war with the US (and Israel). For once, there is actually hope for a peaceful solution, something that certainly was not an option with Nazi Germany.
7. He received $700,000 for his senate campaign from the Emergency Committee for Israel.That’s correct -- $700,000! Such an exorbitant amount of money ensures that Cotton is one of the most pro-Israel senators in Congress. During the 2014 Israeli invasion of Gaza, when over 500 Palestinian were killed, Cotton called the Israeli defense force “the most moral, humanitarian fighting force in the world.” In December he said Congressshould consider supplying Israel with B-52s and so-called “bunker-buster” bombs for a possible strike against Iran.
http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/10-horrifying-facts-about-gop-senator-tom-cotton
Last edited by boutons_deux; 07-14-2015 at 08:52 AM.
No, it was all Obama. Kerry was just a proxy and the other nations just followed.
Fox and AM radio are going to provide much lulz over the next few days
We will see who lulz when Iran does the same thing it has always done and interferes with and stonewalls IAEA inspections.
Obama Squandering America’s Precious Supply of Enemies
WASHINGTON -- By easing tensions with Cuba and now Iran, President Obama is “recklessly squandering America’s precious supply of enemies,” the leader of a conservative think tank said on Tuesday.
“Our adversarial relationships with Cuba and Iran took years of frostiness and saber-rattling to maintain,” Harland Dorrinson, the executive director of the Washington-based Ins ute for Infinite Conflict, said. “Thanks to the President, decades of well-crafted hostility have been thrown out the window.”
According to Dorrinson, fears abound in conservative circles that the President might be “capriciously casting about for other powder kegs to defuse” during his remaining time in office.
“If his shameful record is any guide, he’ll probably try to disarm North Korea,” Dorrinson said. “That’s the doomsday scenario.”
Regardless of his future actions, Obama’s detente with Cuba and Iran will likely tarnish his legacy forever, Dorrinson said. “On this President’s watch, America lost two of its most enduring foes,” he said.
“He’s going to have to live with that for the rest of his life.”
http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borow...NzIxNzg2NTU5S0
My understanding is that the deal puts in place the following:
- If Iran does not respond within 14 days to a specific IAEA inspection requirement, all the parties (US, European partners, Russia, China and Iran) will review the dispute for up to 7 days
- This group will then agree on specific instructions for Iran; only 5 of the 8 parties need to agree (therefore China, Russia and Iran can't obstruct this by themselves)
- Iran will have 3 days to comply, failing which punitive action will be taken (military or economic)
Basically, Iran has at most a 24 day window to pull a stunt of some sort. After that, its ass is on the firing line.
Is it perfect? No, the perfect agreement would have been completely shutting down their nuclear program, but anyone with any standing in the matter says that they would not have agreed to that. Which would then have left military action as the only option. Imo this approach is a better alternative till Iran proves otherwise. If they renege, go HAM on them.
If they renege, it'll go the same as it always has. More extension, more talking, nothing being done to actually keep them from having nuclear weapons.
I am willing to wait and see how this is actually enforced. We know Iran is gonna try and push the boundaries. Sadly the guy above me is probably correct.
I understand the skepticism, but in the short term, if this gets Iran to reduce its centrifuges, reduce enriched Uranium and stop plutonium production ... that's a positive development. The alternative (continued sanctions) has done nothing to slow down their program. So unless we want another war in the middle east, this is better than the status quo.
lol some countries can have nuclear weapons and some can't. what a joke.
For the same reason we don't want crazy people owning guns
So... war then? I don't think you're really leaving another option.
Pakistan, North Korea.... China, Russia, India to an extent... you can only suppress this thing for so long... nuclear technology is over 70 years old.
It's inevitable, IMO, sooner or later they're going to clash. Too much animosity, fueled by religious hate. The writing has been on the wall for a long time now.
I caught some O'Reilly and he just assumed with no research Iran could "clean up" in 24 days. Really?
Seems more like 14 days or else they will start sniffing extra hard.
Just like Saddam! Am I right or what?!
Maybe but this ideological rhetoric made a of a lot more sense a month ago as opposed to today. Iran is going to have proxy wars with Sunni nations as long as people follow Ali but the nation state surprised pretty much everyone in the west by trying to work with us. It's a symbolic step with a chance for something better. It sure as beats the alternative.
Israel can do what it wants... I just don't want to be roped into it. If people feel the only option is war, that's fine, as long as they acknowledge that no agreement would be acceptable to them.
wannabe macho Repugs certainly want the BUSINESS of bombing Iran, starting a war.
That's how they define themselves, pro-business no matter what the costs, as long as they aren't the ones paying the costs in $Ts and lives.
Can't have "I don't care at ude" when you armed Israel. Specifically in terms of Iran, they already battled your other Frankenstein creation Saddam for 10 bitter years.
If Israel is attacked, sure, I don't mind defending. But if they start the war?... Well, I don't think we need to jump in all gungho. We have enough of our own wars for now.
A good read on IAEA enforcement issues.
http://www.defenseone.com/technology.../?oref=d-river
so like all brain-dead, stop-the-n!gg@ conservatives, you are against the deal. What's your solution to stop Iran, or any country, from going nuclear?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
