Well folk, after many long months Iran has agreed to a deal to curb its nuclear bomb program.

Iran nuclear deal: Fine 'new chapter' or 'historic mistake'? (http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/after-hard-negotiation-historic-iran-nuclear-deal-reached/ar-AAcUja5?ocid=ansnewsap11)

Something tells me that was the easy part and the hollering is going to get LOUD!

Does anyone actually believe Iran will do ANYTHING they promised? I don't.

What you have is an end to external hot air and the beginning of internal hot air. There is a lot of smoke and mirrors here

Not mentioned in the deal is that the Iranians are still holding at least 4 US hostages . Not mentioned is the Iranians being the lead state sponsor of terrorism. Not mentioned is the no accounting for the lion's share of US deaths in Iraq directly caused by Iranian providing road side explosive devises to our enemies in Iraq. Not mentioned is that there is very little inspection power to verify compliance.

You want hollering ? Ok I'm hollering at the Repubic leadership in Congress that surrendered their constitutional authority under Article II, Section 2, Clause 2. That's why the emperor can boast about a veto if the Senate votes the 'treaty 'down.

Hello:

Couple things... This ISN'T about hostages, and it ISN'T about believing the Iranians.

excon

Why would he make a deal while Americans are being held hostage ? Why would he make a deal if there is not a legitimate verification process ? Why would he make a deal when the political leaders of the country chant in the halls of Parliament "DEATH TO AMERICA " !

47618

Meanwhile a blast from the past ......the last time we made an agreement with a rogue nation about their nuclear program .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TcbU5jAavw

Well that op-ed cartoon is certainly based on ignorance, right from its first sentence.

Iran certainly got everything they wanted in the deal . Are you saying the emperor didn't ? The emperor's flunkies are all over the news saying this was the best deal they could get and the alternative was war . They say this eases tensions in the region. But the only tensions eased are the ones that the Iranians created with their violence and their threats of violence. The Iranians have backed up their threat of violence and their will to use it . But not using violence against the 12ers and their terrorist regime is the one red line the emperor stands by.

oh yeah i forgot . The emperor gets his "legacy " ;although it is still far from clear why he wants a rapprochement with Iran .I still predict he will try some Nixonian visit to Tehran before the end of the term so he can bow to Grand Ayatollah Ali Hosseini Khamenei in person.

Your hate is felt from here. Hope you give it up soon, it'll eat you up inside. There's more to life.

at least you have some rational actors in your foreign affairs .


Foreign Affairs Minister Rob Nicholson issued a statement saying that Canada “will continue to judge Iran by its actions not its words,” and that the government in Ottawa will examine the agreement carefully before making any policy changes.
“We will examine this deal further before taking any specific Canadian action,” Mr. Nicholson said in the statement.
That means Canada is refusing to follow the course set by its major allies............................................ ..............
Mr. Harper’s government has also been sharply critical of Iran, and it suspended diplomatic ties, closing the embassy in Tehran in 2012.


Canada to keep sanctions against Iran despite nuclear deal - The Globe and Mail (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/canada-says-iran-remains-significant-threat-to-peace-security/article25499682/)

Hello tom:

This is simple... You ask, why he made the deal. I say, it's to avoid war.. Why are all the right wingers AGAINST the deal? I say it's cause they wanna BOMB Iran.

excon

Let the middle east players bomb each other. Can't trust Israel either.

Who can you trust?

They both act like petulant children.

I think ex is right another war led recovery has been averted, that isn't good for profits but let's get down to it, there is a time for everything and this is an idea whose time has come, decades of animosity have led nowhere or more accurately to proxy war until it is so confused the principle players find themselves fighting on the same side. It is time to stop playing the saudi game

Well the Prez laid it out at a press conference, answered every question, and then had his own answers to even more questions the press didn't ask.

President Obama News Conference Iran Nuclear Deal | Video | C-SPAN.org (http://www.c-span.org/video/?327122-1/president-obama-news-conference-iran-nuclear-deal)

Meanwhile Netty, with 247 nukes of his own, and Big Brother USA at his side, still cries foul. Europe, Russia, China and the UN all agree. DONE DEAL!

Some people are just noisy when they loose the argument, look he may be right, this maybe another Chamberlain moment, but realistically short of all out war, you couldn't stop them anyway, so this is something better than nothing

DONE DEAL!

Yup ,an Iranian nuke in the most volitile region of the world . Yup the end of any non-proliferation efforts worldwide . Yup ,a nuclear arms race in the Middle East . Yup ,the end of any US influence in one of the most important regions of the world .Yup ,throwing our most reliable ally in the region under the bus and aligning ourselves with a Persian empire that we help create . Yup throwing our soldiers under the bus who were killed ,wounded and maimed by Iranians and their surrogates going back 30 years .
Yup leaving American hostages behind .

President Obama News Conference Iran Nuclear Deal | Video | C-SPAN.org (http://www.c-span.org/video/?327122-1/president-obama-news-conference-iran-nuclear-deal)

The emperor is a schmuck !


This is simple... You ask, why he made the deal. I say, it's to avoid war..
Nope ,he wants America out of the Middle East and he needs a hegemon to replace us .So he's inventing one. War is not avoided . He will continue to wage war behind the drones and make believe he ended war . He has just made the region less stable . Within a decade or 2 the Iranian nuke will be on ICBM warheads . The safeguards he outlined are a joke . For sanctions to return ,a committee that includes Iranian reps will have to approve them . For the Iranian efforts at stalling and digging in their heals ,they are being rewarded with $150 billion ;which if it were in proportion to the US economy would be an $8 trillion infusion into their economy . They won't be using that money to improve the lives of their citizens . What money doesn't line the pockets of the Mullah's will be used by them to continue to export their Iranian Revolution.

Yup ,an Iranian nuke in the most volitile region of the world .Nope, actually it's the opposite.You're getting wrong information somewhere.

Yup the end of any non-proliferation efforts worldwide . Wrong again.

Yup ,a nuclear arms race in the Middle East . Yup ,the end of any US influence in one of the most important regions of the world . Why is it one of the most important regions? I don't think so.

Yup ,throwing our most reliable ally in the region under the bus and aligning ourselves with a Persian empire that we help create . Wrong again. It's an attempt at peace.


The emperor is a schmuck ! No you are. See how we can all play that childish game?


Nope ,he wants America out of the Middle East Wonderful!

begone troll !

Just because someone has an opinion that disagrees with yours doesn't mean they are a troll. It says more about you than about me.

Which troll do you get your information from? Tom ?


Yup ,an Iranian nuke in the most volitile region of the world .

This isn't the way I read it, the pundits say this delays an Iranian nuke 15 years


Yup the end of any non-proliferation efforts worldwide .


Far as I know that wasn't discussed but maybe a modification of the treaty to allow peaceful use is needed.


Yup ,a nuclear arms race in the Middle East

This is a fabrication of GWB that you have been pursuing for 15 years


.
Yup ,the end of any US influence in one of the most important regions of the world .

You mean we will see the end of premptive strikes and drone attacks?


Yup ,throwing our most reliable ally in the region under the bus

No one was thrown under a bus because he didn't get what he wanted


and aligning ourselves with a Persian empire that we help create

Well if you helped to create it you have a responsibility to bring it in from the cold

..


The emperor is a schmuck !

On this we can agree but that's a jewish phrase and he is black so a mixed metaphor there, so I think the term in the 'hood is fool!

According to Netty, they were months away from a bomb anyway, thanks to more than a decade of inaction, while we were distracted by Bush/Cheney chasing Saddam's mushroom cloud. Now the right and Netty holler about the "bad" plan while they have NO PLAN!

GEEZ, even your hero Vlad agrees with the plan even though he can't sell Iran ICBM missiles.

This isn't the way I read it, the pundits say this delays an Iranian nuke 15 years
that's if you believe the Iranians will honor the terms . They will not and there is no history to suggest they will.

Far as I know that wasn't discussed but maybe a modification of the treaty to allow peaceful use is needed.....This is a fabrication of GWB that you have been pursuing for 15 years

Do you need Captain Obvious to explain it ? The last country that joined the nuke club did it with impunity . This time we are actually rewarding them for their efforts. How are you going to keep the Saudi's ,the Egyptians ,the Turks, the Emirate States from joining the club now ?


No one was thrown under a bus because he didn't get what he wanted
Yes Israel definitely was . They live under the threat of destruction by this regime ,and now we are allowing them to develop the means to fulfill their boast .


Well if you helped to create it you have a responsibility to bring it in from the cold
Oh yeah ,you and the utopian idiot running our country think they can be peacefully reigned in ,or that they will be a responsible hegemon once they dominate the region. Meanwhile their proxies wage war all over the region and have done so since 1979.

the utopian idiot running our countryhas kept you safe from any terrorist attacks on your soil from the "towel heads"... unlike your previous president.

the utopian idiot running our country

Saved your 401k, made a few rich guys richer, brought back cuban Cigars, and stopped two wars, while you guys hollered, screamed, and called names, so not bad for a bumbling idiot.

Just keep in mind the letter to the Mullahs by the 47 Republican Senators. This is NOT a treaty . It is an executive agreement that can be terminated as early as January 2017 once a Republican President and Congress ends this folly .


Saved your 401k Nah , I bought the dip as one should always do when there is a market decline.


brought back cuban Cigars, Who cares ? There are better cigars being made now by other Latin American nations

stopped two wars
should read retreating from 2 wars .Both wars are still being waged ,and being waged by Americans .

that's if you believe the Iranians will honor the terms . They will not and there is no history to suggest they will.
Do you need Captain Obvious to explain it ?

No but undoubtedly you do. How long do you think it takes to develop a bomb? You did it in a few years and the information has been in the public demain for fifty years.


The last country that joined the nuke club did it with impunity . This time we are actually rewarding them for their efforts.


You are not rewarding their efforts, you are removing sanctions that has forced them to develop industries so they don't need your industrial military complex.



How are you going to keep the Saudi's ,the Egyptians ,the Turks, the Emirate States from joining the club now ?

Not my job you are the self appointed policeman of the world, so either do the job or withdraw


Yes Israel definitely was . They live under the threat of destruction by this regime ,and now we are allowing them to develop the means to fulfill their boast .

Times change rhetoric changes, Saddam tried it and failed, Hezbollah tried it and failed, Hamas tried it and failed. It is just possible the Iranians have weighed the price and decided as Gaddafi did that there is a lot to be gained by changing course


Oh yeah ,you and the utopian idiot running our country think they can be peacefully reigned in ,or that they will be a responsible hegemon once they dominate the region. Meanwhile their proxies wage war all over the region and have done so since 1979.

Let us get a few things properly aligned. You can't afford a war and you desperately want someone else to take on Daesh on the ground. Your focus must be on what the Russians are doing. Already the Chinese have realised this. If Iran have been fighting a proxy war since 1979 they have done it successfully, somewhat more successfully than the outcome of the wars you have fought. They survived your puppet Saddam and his war against them so you can't talk about proxy wars. Even your ally Pakistan has dealings with them and it they get the bomb that's where the information will come from if it hasn't already. You really should start working out who you can trust

It is time for you to move on, the only interest you have in the middle east is Israel, so station your troops on the Syrian border and stop the sabre rattling

It is an executive agreement that can be terminated as early as January 2017 once a Republican President and Congress ends this folly .

You said that in 2008, and 2012, while the Prez just keeps BUMBLING along. Keep hollering though. Maybe you can get Russia, China, Europe and the UN to join you.

Hello again, tom:

What's preventing you from just saying that you WANT to go to war with Iran??? Do you think we don't know?

excon

How long do you think it takes to develop a bomb? not long given the head start they already have ;and also will many fewer centrifuges than the agreement suggests . That's why I don't believe the agreement is serious . What happened to Sec State Lurch JF Kerry saying inspections will happen "anytime anywhere " . Now the IAEA will have to beg the Iranians to be permitted into a facility .

You are not rewarding their efforts of course we are . They violated sanctions for years and nothing happened to them . Now we are lifting them on the promise to behave . Like I said ..the emperor is an idiot .


Times change rhetoric changes, Saddam tried it and failed, Hezbollah tried it and failed, Hamas tried it and failed. It is just possible the Iranians have weighed the price and decided as Gaddafi did that there is a lot to be gained by changing course

The Israeli's have twice had to bomb nuclear facilities in Iraq and Syria to prevent their enemies obtaining the bomb. Now I'm not so sure the emperor wouldn't order the US armed forces to shoot down Israeli jets trying to do the same in Iran. After all ;Iran is our new strategic ally in the region. You can't get any more betrayal than that .


You said that in 2008, and 2012, while the Prez just keeps BUMBLING along. Keep hollering though. Maybe you can get Russia, China, Europe and the UN to join you.

huh ? The agreement happened this week. I can guarantee that when Congress votes on this there will be significant cross over by Democrats who oppose this too. It won't lead to a veto proof rejection. But it will be a bipartisan majority rejection.


Hello again, tom:

What's preventing you from just saying that you WANT to go to war with Iran??? Do you think we don't know?

excon
I want regime change in Iran ..... peacefully if possible ;but regime change is the only possible way to avoid a much worse war .

You said that in 2008, and 2012, while the Prez just keeps BUMBLING along. Keep hollering though. Maybe you can get Russia, China, Europe and the UN to join you.

47623

Maybe we should rename this thread the "IBN cartoon thread". All the conservatives will come here for the echo chamber effect.

Oh and Ezra Klein - How Stephen Hawking Proves That Investor's Business Daily's Editorial Page Tells Lies (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2009/08/how_stehpen_hawking_proves_tha.html)

Hello tom:

This is simple... You ask, why he made the deal. I say, it's to avoid war.. Why are all the right wingers AGAINST the deal? I say it's cause they wanna BOMB Iran.

excon


Sorry, the word got out (which we already knew) was that he wanted it to cement his legacy. Which is going to suck when all hell breaks loose because of it.

P.S. In his speech on the deal he lied about having 24/7 access, which we don't have. Then his minions lied about never wanting 24/7 access, and Biden thinks Dems are going to love it when they can understand it. "We had to make the deal to know what was in the deal!'

Brilliant.

Hello Steve:

Tom spilt the beans.. You want WAR.. Therefore, you'd be against ANY agreement that avoided it.

excon

Actually what I said was "I want regime change in Iran ..... peacefully if possible ;but regime change is the only possible way to avoid a much worse war . "

I had hoped that eventually ;with external pressure applied ,the pendulum would swing in favor of regime change (like sanctions properly applied ,and supporting the Green Revolution). Now we are cementing the 12er's control on the nation ,and supporting the eventual nuclear capable empire,who's goal is exporting a revolution based on one of the most extremist Islamist ideologies...... to creating the chaos necessary for the 12th Imam the Madhi ;who fell in a well,to emerge and usher in Armageddon. A couple nukes will come in handy for that purpose .

Hello again, tom:

Ok, lemme translate.. I dunno WHY you're scared of saying it...

Regime change will NOT happen through negotiation. You don't think it will either, so I don't know why you set that as a benchmark. In fact, if a Republican is elected president, he WON'T negotiate at all..

Therefore, if you're gonna get what you want, WAR is the ONLY way. Now, you can mince words, but you're NOT fooling anybody..

excon

Tom you need to get some fresh ideas. You wanted regime change in Iraq, what you wound up with is far worse that what was there. Ditto for Libya. You wanted regime change in Afghanistan, for the moment you have your puppet installed. You wanted regime change in Syria, how's that going for you? You want regime change in Iran, meanwhile the world has moved on. The question is do the Iranian people want regime change? What you want is irrelevant. You should focus on what can be achieved and solve one problem at a time. For the moment the Iranian bomb has receded into the cupboard

if you're gonna get what you want, WAR is the ONLY way. Sorry you are wrong . Had we supported the Green Revoltution there would've been regime change and no war. Now I agree that regime change with a nuked up Iran is impossible without war . So this deal makes the likelyhood of war greater . Great job emperor !


Tom you need to get some fresh ideas. You wanted regime change in Iraq, what you wound up with is far worse that what was there. Ditto for Libya. You wanted regime change in Afghanistan, for the moment you have your puppet installed. You wanted regime change in Syria, how's that going for you? You want regime change in Iran, meanwhile the world has moved on. The question is do the Iranian people want regime change? What you want is irrelevant. You should focus on what can be achieved and solve one problem at a time. For the moment the Iranian bomb has receded into the cupboard
and you want "stability" by having tyrannous dictatorships . What you should understand by now is that that stability is temporary . You are just kicking the can down the road to the day when the sh*t hits the fan . Further ,the longer you delay ,the more powerful those regimes become and the price paid is greater .

and you want "stability" by having tyrannous dictatorships . What you should understand by now is that that stability is temporary . You are just kicking the can down the road to the day when the sh*t hits the fan . Further ,the longer you delay ,the more powerful those regimes become and the price paid is greater .

Tom I sometimes wonder if you are serious about what you say. For years I lived in a country who believed in the yellow peril that China would invade us and take what we have away because of our small population. this of course was fed by Japanese actions in WWII Then I became mature, even travelled in China and my understanding changed. They have a different outlook and we don't need to fear that. They want to reestablish their ancient boundries, something we have a little difficulty with because of our democratic ways.

Yes I don't want war, open warfare, what sane person does. Sometimes military solutions are necessary. What did your military solution in Germany produce? A nation with far greater economic might and influence than they had before. Ditto Japan, what holds Japan back are their racist views they are not prepared to accept migration to offset an aging population. Those nations should have been left to be an economic backwater. These nations in Asia take a very long term view and we should learn to do the same. Empires come and go.

When nations reach a certain critical mass they become expansionary. Iran may be entering that phase, may be not after all they can glory in what their past empires achieved and reflect upon how smaller nations ultimately subdued them. The US should learn from this. Iran is actually in the company of some very large neighbours so your only concern is Israel. A small very paranoid nation. Iran has not directly attacked Israel in the way Iraq and Syria attacked Israel and now that Ahmamadjihad is off the scene there may be opportunity for change

Iran has not directly attacked Israel in the way Iraq and Syria attacked Israel and now that Ahmamadjihad is off the scene there may be opportunity for change

You think the Rouhani is any different than the Mahdi-hatter ? Both take their marching orders from Khomeni and he has not changed tone ,or rhetoric ,or that actions of the Qod forces ,or any of the other Iranian surrogate terrorist organizations .

None of that matters Tom, but forming rules and boundaries of acceptable behavior with Iran is a plus. If they screw up, make 'em pay. It doesn't matter what they do, just what we do about it. I give you the example of Pearl Harbor and the price Japan paid for sneaky underhanded tactics.

But keep hollering it's amusing.

None of that matters Tom, but forming rules and boundaries of acceptable behavior with Iran is a plus. If they screw up, make 'em pay. It doesn't matter what they do, just what we do about it. I give you the example of Pearl Harbor and the price Japan paid for sneaky underhanded tactics.

But keep hollering it's amusing.

Rules ? How about NPT and UN regulations ? Here is a short and incomplete history of their compliance with rules :
UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon way back in 2003 said the "onus" was on Iran since there is a history of non-cooperation on IAEA inspections the IAEA is unable to confirm that all nuclear material is in peaceful activities. They

did not even declare they had a program until 2003 when a dissedent group outed them and revealed that Iran had 2 facilites ; a uranium enrichment plant and research lab at Natanz and a heavy water production plant in Arak. It was later revealed that they were doing nuclear activity at their Parchin military base near Tehran.

2005, IAEA found Iran in noncompliance with the NPT Safeguards Agreement and decided to refer Tehran to the U.N. Security Council for further action. The decision followed Iran’s repeated failure to fully report its nuclear activities.

2006 they broke IAEA seals at their Natanz enrichment facility and resumed activites there . Again The IAEA voted to report Iran to the U.N. Security Council for its non-compliance with its NPT Safeguards Agreement obligations.

2009 The emperor, French President Sarkozy and British Prime Minister Brown told a press conference that Iran had a covert fuel enrichment plant near Qom. Iran decided to reveal it to the IAEA after they learned they were outed .

A year later they reached the 20% enrichment threshold . 2011

An IAEA report claimed that Iran had continued nuclear weaponization work since 2003 and that Iran had a secret project to enrich uranium .

2012 The IAEA confirmed that Iran had ANOTHER secret operation at Fordow

2013 The IAEA had talks with Tehran because they suspected that Iran was working on nuclear triggers .

So knowing that history ,why do you think they will comply to the rules now ? They know that they were able to violate NPT and UNSC resolutions with impunity . So what is the enforcement mechanism for this agreement ? More inspections by IAEA .....which won't be immediate . The earliest the IAEA can inspect ;assuming complete compliance ,is 24 DAYS after they request it .

This agreement is a joke . You know it and I know it .

Tom no one denies that Iran has been fighting a proxy war but then so has the US you would both rather use your surrogates than stand toe to toe. Surely you don't need another devistated failed state in the middle east. You made an enemy of Iran, It is time to understand that you don't rule the world. Iran has been doing things in secret, what has the US been doing in secret? We don't know because it is a secret.


The agreement is the best deal you could get at this time, you can take the hard line and reject it in your congress and where does that leave you? Iran on a path to a bomb

Hello again,

I'm vague on this, but I understand in the trade bill that was passed, the Republicans GAVE up their ability to STOP this agreement from going into effect.. Pursuant to that vote, they DON'T need 2/3rd's of congress to ratify the agreement, which would NEVER happen.. Now, they need 2/3rd's of them to override his veto, which also will NEVER happen.

Like Obamacare, this agreement is a DONE deal.

excon

You think someone can hide radioactive activity in 24 days? They confirmed Syria's activity after months when Israel bombed their secret facility.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Orchard

Hello again,

I'm vague on this, but I understand in the trade bill that was passed, the Republicans GAVE up their ability to STOP this agreement from going into effect.. Pursuant to that vote, they DON'T need 2/3rd's of congress to ratify the agreement, which would NEVER happen.. Now, they need 2/3rd's of them to override his veto, which also will NEVER happen.

Like Obamacare, this agreement is a DONE deal.

excon

you are 100 % correct . The idiot Corker made the agreement on the Iran deal . I had thought originally it was a treaty .However ; this is not a treaty . It is an executive agreement with Iran and the P5+1 nations . It can be reversed by Congress after the emperor's term . The Republican Senators spelled that out to the Iranians in a letter this year .

Now you are talking Tom, keep hollering REPEAL!!

Well Tal it will give him something to do

has kept you safe from any terrorist attacks on your soil from the "towel heads"... unlike your previous president.


The terrorist attack by Abdulazeez marks the seventh terrorist attack on U.S. soil by jihadists during the emperor's reign . Two dozen people have been killed . Scores more have been seriously injured.

In a country that has seen many mass shootings, what's the significance of singling out the jihadists? They are all disgusting.

In a country that has seen many mass shootings, what's the significance of singling out the jihadists? They are all disgusting.
Because there is a big difference between mass shootings by a nut and foreigners waging war inside the country . Mohammad Abdulazeez travelled to Jordon to get his marching orders to wage war against our troops . Whether they take these actions as lone wolfs or with training ;they are being indoctrinated into waging war in this country .

waging war in this countryWhy? What do they have against your country?

I find it quite sad that you can dismiss the taking of innocents lives by crazy nuts, and go after specific crazy nuts to make a point. That's a pretty narrow view of a bigger problem.

Whatever fits his agenda of contempt.

You talk about this as being about you alone, these nutcases are waging war against every western country

What the hell are you talking about . You throw a strawman argument at me ...either I have to be concerned about mass shootings or jihadists attacks ,but not both ? You are the sad one if you equate jihadists waging war and random acts of murder .

Both examples have the same result, random acts of mass murder. What's the difference between the motives of criminally insane loony nut jobs? Are you saying Roof and Holmes were better terrorist than Abdulazeez the only difference being their religion?

Yes Tom you do have to be concerned about both, they don't both stem from the same source. You do have lone wolf loonies and it seems you also have lone wolf jihadists. One attacks the general population, the other attacks the military and of course there is always the possibility of the Boston style attack. It is apparent that there might not be large numbers but there are enough to remind you you are not out of their reach

Make way for the Kerry Peace Prize . He at least should get a prize for twisting words like a pretzel . During a hearing at the Congressional Committee on Terrorism,non-proliferation and trade ;Kerry admitted he's heard the Mullahs chant "Death to America" in their Parliament . But, says JF Kerry ,he's not aware of any plan by the Mullahs to actually destroy America. Kerry said the threats “reflect an attitude and rhetorical excess, but I see no evidence that they have a policy that is implementing that against us at this point in time.”

Duh you idiot ! They won't be able to do that until they nuke up and get the suitable delivery system . You just guaranteed they can get that capacity in 8 years !

When Rep. Mo Brooks asked if terrorists supplied by Iran would try to kill Americans or Israelis, Kerry replied, “Well, they may. They may.”
But he doesn't think they mean it when they say "death to America".
Under questioning from Fla Dem Alan Grayson ,Kerry admitted releasing sanctioned funds for Iran may increase Tehran-sponsored terrorism.
He then said ;"We have no way to know. I presume in some places possibly, only in the sense that they are committed to certain things that we interpret as terrorism, they don’t, and we’re going to continue to conflict on those issues,”

Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.)(formerly Congressman from the district I reside) listed many reasons for his deep “trepidation” about the deal.
“Barely a week after the Iranian’s signed the deal with us there was the supreme leader, the ayatollah, chanting, ‘Death to Americans, death to Israel.’ You would think that after an agreement was signed with us there might be a modicum of goodwill that perhaps they would keep quiet for a week or two, or a month, but it went back to business as usual,”...“How can we trust Iran when this type of thing happens? It is very disconcerting.”

This isn't a deal just between Iran and the US. Why does everybody not at least acknowledge that it's a deal between the P5+1? And who said anything about trusting Iran? I see this deal as a rope tied in a noose, and handing it to the Iranian hardliners and saying "Here, put this on!".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_1835

https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/2165388/iran-deal-text.pdf

From

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/iran-achieved-major-economic-objective-210931530.html

Then

Tehran Celebrates Iran Nuclear Deal (http://www.wsj.com/video/tehran-celebrates-iran-nuclear-deal/3AAE8FEF-E86F-4E27-8DBF-63653079D363.html)

Not all Iranians are chanting death to America, but of course the wingers only know about the militant ones. LOL, they have probably seen us the same way. The guy with the big stick doesn't have to holler about it, nor is he afraid of the ones that are hollering.

Not all Iranians are chanting death to America, but of course the wingers only know about the militant ones.
Glad you've come around to regime change. How is this a noose ? They made no concessions and we gave away the store.

Marvellous how a small dose of reality doesn't go down well, you got a deal to end a deadlock it wasn't perhaps all you wanted but the alternative was a path to war

Marvellous how a small dose of reality doesn't go down well, you got a deal to end a deadlock it wasn't perhaps all you wanted but the alternative was a path to war

you really do have to learn the difference between a deal or treaty and a hudna ....A dishonest truce, made only to buy time, and broken at the first available opportunity.

Ironically ,the original hudna ,The Treaty of Hudaybiyyah was also a 10 year deal.

Tom I already said this might be a Chamberlain moment, however Iran is not as powerful as you suppose, but the sanctions have made them self sufficient which makes them dangerous in a minor or regional power sense power. I have no doubt they have considered what is arrayed against them and will bide their time but they are surrounded by nuclear powers and so would want to keep up. The whole point is not everyone has to bow to the will of the US or its puppet UN or NATO. Some nations have nuclear capabilty and have not proved a threat, in fact that security may have allowed them to progress in other ways. I think what you really have to be concerned about is those who could place massive forces on the ground and sustain themselves in the field. I don't think Iran has demonstrated this capability lately and you cannot equate the duplicitous dealings of the Arabs with the Persians

You also have to consider that this is a difficult proud people with a long history and you will not succeed unless you are prepared to bend a little. If your congress derails this deal you could be at war tomorrow, do you really want to fight another asian war?, in fact can you afford to fight another asian war? I say this becuase there will be those who would take advantage of such an engagement

If your congress derails this deal The only thing this Congress is capable of is tripping over it's shoe-laces. They already voted away their constitutional authority on this deal .


do you really want to fight another asian war?, I submit that a state of war exists between the US and the 12ers and there has been since 1979. Now do I want war ? Nope never have. What this deal almost assuredly means is that there will be a bigger war in the future that will have consequences no one can afford .


Tom I already said this might be a Chamberlain moment,
This deal is worse than Munich . Chamberlain implemented what was, at the time, was a mainstream theory of international relations.... that appeasing a dictatorship could limit its ultimate aims. At least Chamberlain did not pay Hitler a huge amount of money for signing the agreement. At least he did not finance Hitler's regime. At least he did concede to Hitler his blessing of regional hegemony . At least Chamberlain and Parliament did not adopt a suspect procedure enabling him to prevail against Parliament's majority will . At least he did not negotiate a time limited agreement and acknowledged it would put Germany in a position to prevail at the end of the agreement.
Reagan walked away from a bad deal at the Reykjavik summit ,and came back later to sign a deal from a position of strength. The emperor and JF Kerry gave away the store because their ambitions would not let them walk away. There is no deal worse than a bad deal an this was the worse bad deal possible .

I submit that a state of war exists between the US and the 12ers and there has been since 1979. .

Yes you seem to be in a continual hot or cold war with someone



This deal is worse than Munich . .

I don't recall the Iranians threatening to invade anyone although their actions may have similar overtones to the Spanish civil war. It is unlikely they have territorial ambitions but I'm sure southern Iraq is tempting because of the religious relationship of the population, however they may be able to
Take their revenge on the sunni without an invasion. I think we fail to realise what impacts a war has on attitudes of the future generations. The ruling class in Iran is old generation, desperately clinging to out of date ideas, we can expect change in the future. I didn't expect someone who shouted hatred for Isreal for years to change, that would be niaive, however it doesn't mean the next generation is of similar mind. The current generation knows little of the duplicity of the americans years ago so change is possible. You don't have Saddam to wage your proxy war now, so better move on.

I don't recall the Iranians threatening to invade anyone Then you cvonveniently ignore their Qod force and their proxies Hezbollah ,Hamas ,Houthis etc . They have done nothing but threaten their neighbors since the revolution.

I don't forget their proxies any more than I forget yours. Yes they have supported some very radical causes and I suspect they would be unlikely to do that if religion wasn't involved. I don't think we understand the depth of feeling between shiia and sunni, Iraq and Syria allowed it to chrystallise and burst into flame, something that may not have happened if you hadn't interferred. Many nations have highly trained forces, some of them use them to carry out assassinations, renditions and other covert incursions. In this world there is a certain reality which isn't exposed to the light very often

I don't forget their proxies any more than I forget yours. Yes they have supported some very radical causes and I suspect they would be unlikely to do that if religion wasn't involved. I don't think we understand the depth of feeling between shiia and sunni, Iraq and Syria allowed it to chrystallise and burst into flame, something that may not have happened if you hadn't interferred. Many nations have highly trained forces, some of them use them to carry out assassinations, renditions and other covert incursions. In this world there is a certain reality which isn't exposed to the light very often

That's right blame America. And you think it's a good idea to introduce a nuked up Iran into the mix .

You are just paranoid, I didn't think it was a good idea to introduce a nuked up Pakistan or India into the mix. I have said before being a nuclear state may allow some of these paranoid societies to adjust, look what it did for you. Your problem is you don't want any rivals you can't dominate. Do You think that Iran has reason to be paranoid about the intentions of the US. You fellows really need to stop smoking that dope you do over there

I didn't think it was a good idea to introduce a nuked up Pakistan or India into the mix.

Yes but it happened . So you want even more proliferation ? Guessing your thrilled that the lunny Kim family has their equalizers . Tell me how that has moderated them ?

Well they haven't started a war yet but seriously I'm not pleased however had they been given the same deal as Iran the outcomes might have been different.

Well they haven't started a war yet but seriously I'm not pleased however had they been given the same deal as Iran the outcomes might have been different.
ummm they were . sound familiar ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TcbU5jAavw

What? We won't shoot at you if you don't shoot at us?

The NORKS did the same dance the 12'ers are doing now . Guaranteed this agreement was violated by them before the ink dried . They played the emperor and JF Kerry for the fools they are . The emperor is an ego maniac who is desperate for a legacy ;and they knew Kerry would never walk out of the negotiations .

The other day ,in testimony before Congress they asked Kerry why this wasn't handled like the treaty that it is instead of an 'executive agreement'. Kerry replied it was because they knew that this cr@p sandwich would never pass as a treaty by normal constitutional means .

Your whole basis for hollering ad calling names seems to be based on your conviction that they WILL cheat. Well let them!

Yes Tal is right, give them some rope, don't tell me you aren't looking for an excuse for a war, but if you go down that road, it may cost you more than you can afford. I heard that monkey Trump say he was going to make america so strong no one would mess with it. What sort of message do you think that sends? To Iran it says increase your military, to NK it says the same, to Russia it says increase your nuclear capability, same to China. Not helpful, in fact, has he looked at the imbalance of military capability that already exists? But he will solve the unemployment problem and of course put you further in debt. Don't worry you will be spending funny money soon.

You fellows really have to learn you can't make statements that are for local consumption and expect the world not to listen. It is 24 hour news cycle in many parts of the world

We should've walked away . Even Jacques Audibert,the senior diplomatic adviser to President Francois Hollande says that if Congress voted this deal down ;that a better one will be negotiated . The emperor and Kerry are fools . The emperor ruled out the military option and that is precisely why the Iranians dug in their heals and gave no concessions . And as I already stated ;Kerry was so concerned about securing his Nobel Peace Prize that he never was going to walk away ;no matter what concessions the Iranians got from us without reciprocal concessions .

This is a complete failure that our children will have to deal with .

The claim that a military option is ruled out is bogus.

Tom reaching an agreement is not a failure, you have had to concede that Iran can have a nuclear power industry

Iran has violated more than 20 international agreements and Security Council Resolutions and is the leading state sponsor of terrorism.
How can we trust them with a nuclear deal that prevents anytime, anywhere inspections? Tal is big on 'trust but verify ' .There is no adequate verification program in this deal . That is a deal breaker even if you think it's a good idea.

There is no adequate verification program in this deal . That is a deal breaker even if you think it's a good idea.

That's not what the science says Tom, just what the non science guys like you say.

Speaking of non deals I notice you haven't got a deal with the TPP either, Once again your dog in the manger attitude of protectionism falls short as you back off things that had been previously agreed. Election year in the boondocks must be close. Free trade really is a non event where the US is concerned. Fact is we don't want you in our markets either

Yes you do, even if you personally don't. LOL, foolish to think you can balance your book on Chinese, Asian, or European financial adjustments alone.

Yes it is an election year in the US.

Ah yes but it is so easy, indonesia didn't want 500,000 to 1,000,000 cattle but China did, Balance achieved, India just loves uranium and Europe, well I'm sure you would like to get their cars out of our market

That's not what the science says Tom, just what the non science guys like you say.
how can you say that when some sites are not even open to inspection ?

After the deal is signed sealed and delivered, there will be a process to gain access to previously blocked sites. That's the whole point of the deal, gaining access to suspected sites.

After the deal is signed sealed and delivered, there will be a process to gain access to previously blocked sites. That's the whole point of the deal, gaining access to suspected sites.


rubbish ,the emperor knew the Iranians made side deals with the IAEA about the scope of the inspections they would permit . Neither he or Kerry know what sites will be inspected ,when or how .



The agreements were uncovered, completely by chance, by two members of Congress — Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-Kan.) and Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) — who were in Vienna meeting with the U.N.-releated agency.
In an interview, Pompeo told me that he and Cotton were meeting with the deputy director of the IAEA and the agency's two top Iran negotiators just days after the nuclear accord was announced, when they asked how the agency will carry out verification at the Iranian military complex at Parchin. IAEA officials told them, quite casually, that the details were all covered in agreements negotiated between the IAEA and the Iranian government. It was the first they had heard of the side deals.
Pompeo says they asked whether they could see those agreements. He says IAEA officials replied, " 'Oh no, of course not, no, you're not going to get to see those.' And so everybody on our side of the table asked, 'Has Secretary Kerry seen these?' 'No, Secretary Kerry hasn't seen them. No American is ever going to get to see them.' "
It turns out that only the two parties — the IAEA and Iran — get to see the actual agreements (though you can see a picture of Iranian and IAEA officials holding up what appear to be the secret accords here).

In other words, Obama is gambling our national security and handing over $150 billion in sanctions relief to Iran, based on secret agreements negotiated between the IAEA and Iran that no U.S. official has seen.


There are 2 secret side deals on top of the Iran nuclear agreement - Business Insider (http://www.businessinsider.com/there-are-2-secret-side-deals-on-top-of-the-iran-nuclear-agreement-2015-7#ixzz3hbu5PknK)

We were suckered by the emperor and Pelosi when she told us Obamacare would have to be passed for us to find out what's in it . Now we are told that Iran and the IAEA made a secret agreement behind the back of the P-5 +1 and we should be ok with it because the 12ers are so trustworthy . The emperor will get away with it again because he's the HL Mencken of modern American politics. “No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.”

the intelligence of the American public

What exactly is the intelligence rating of the american public? How do you rate the IQ of a nation, scientific method suggests you should ask some questions like where is Tuvalu? or even Timbuktu? What is the highest ambient temperature ever recorded? And average the answers and of course you would come up with zero

https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/safeguards_web_june_2015_1.pdf

I find it both hilarious and SAD congressmen can be so ignorant of a process that encompasses 53 nation states and decades of agreements just like the one with Iran that was just signed. It's been in the works for quite a while Tom, but of course no republican cared to read up on it before they started hollering about it.

https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/pressreleases/iaea-iran-sign-joint-statement-framework-cooperation

So your so called "side deal" is standard policy for every nation, and mandatory for any signatory of a Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

Tal Tom wouldn't know that, it wasn't a law passed by his congress of ningnongs

so tal ,you are not denying that the side deal they made excludes inspection of Parchin and other military sites that we know they have used for nuclear and ballistic missile R&D . I rest my case .
The Iranians made it clear before and after the talks concluded that they would never permit inspection of their military sites . You can be happy with this capitulation but I am not .

Tom, what part of MANDATORY are you not getting here? Your characterization of Iran becoming a signatory to a NPT as a side deal hold no water.

Here's the list of other countries who agreed to the "side deal" with the IAEA.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_parties_to_the_Treaty_on_the_Non-Proliferation_of_Nuclear_Weapons

And another FACT we don't see coming from you "bad deal" guys,

Iran's foreign minister calls for world's nuclear weapons states to disarm | World news | The Guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jul/31/iran-nuclear-weapons-states-disarm-israel)


Patricia Lewis, the research director for international security at the Chatham House thinktank, said: “Most interesting to me is that Zarif is strongly linking the nuclear deal in Vienna to the WMD-free zone. Iran used to be a thought leader in this process – a role it absconded from in recent years. It looks as if once again it may be prepared to take this on as a major issue. The fascinating thing to watch will be how Israel will respond, a country that won’t even reveal its nuclear weapons capability and remains outside the NPT.”

Maybe stop hollering and calling names, and let go of those knee jerk talking points would yield a greater understanding of complex moving parts.

Tom, how much inspection of US military sites is there, perhaps we can have some facts in that

Tom, how much inspection of US military sites is there, perhaps we can have some facts in that


Russians Inspect Montana Nuclear Launch Facilities | Military.com (http://www.military.com/daily-news/2014/04/22/russians-inspect-montana-nuclear-launch-facilities.html)

Tal ,Even when there are inspections there will be no US IAEA inspectors allowed. The emperor got hosed . You should stop defending a soddy deal that puts the world in greater danger .

Tom I cannot see why you keep saying it puts the world in greater danger when various facilities in Iran are dismantled or modified. If there was/is a danger, then the danger is no greater and should be lessened. You are belly aching about not allowing your spies into their facilities but maybe it takes time to build up trust in the process. As far as Russia and the US are concerned how long did it take to reach this degree of cooperation and how long will it last?

Thankfully the opposition to this deal is bipartisan. Yukiya Amano, the director general of the IAEA, until Friday was refusing to brief senators on exactly how the UN nuclear weapons watchdog would monitor Iran's nuclear activities. Now Amano,will testify to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee Wednesday due to pressure from opposition Dems .Kudos to ranking Foreign Relations member , Maryland liberal Dem Ben Cardin who has taken the lead on this issue. It was insane to put all the verification for this agreement on the IAEA without them giving Congress the details of their inspection plans. Like it or not ,secret agreements between Iran and the IAEA is not the way to 'trust and verify 'compliance as JF Kerry and Secretary of Energy Ernest Moniz would have us believe . You know it and I know it . Given the IAEA past history with verification of Iraqi WMD ,and it's failure to inspect Parchin even though we know Iran has been doing secret nuclear testing there ;it is not wise to hand off all compliance inspections to the UN agency .

I don't get why the IAEA should have to molycoddle your Senate. The IAEA is not there for you to nitpick. They are an experienced organisation who know what they are doing. We don't want another IRAQ where inspectors were saying WMD and they couldn't be found

I don't get why the IAEA should have to molycoddle your Senate. The IAEA is not there for you to nitpick. They are an experienced organisation who know what they are doing. We don't want another IRAQ where inspectors were saying WMD and they couldn't be found

They had a terrible record on Iraq WMD . All you have to do is read Hans Blix conflicting testimony to the UN in the months leading up OIF . They have had an even worse record about Iran's nuke program. We learned most of what we know from defectors .The IAEA missed one site after another .

We learned a load of crap from defectors in Iraq and it is not unlikely we have learned a load of crap from defectors in Iran, what part of telling you what you want to hear don't you understand?

We learned a load of crap from defectors in Iraq and it is not unlikely we have learned a load of crap from defectors in Iran, what part of telling you what you want to hear don't you understand? It is already confirmed that the sites Iran was hiding ,that were disclosed by the defectors exist . Iran has confirmed that .

Yes so along the way you will get to know whether they have done what they agreed. What I understand is that no one does instant, no one does exactly what others expect, all we can hope for is a robust agreement that we don't need a war to enforce. What we don't need is a war to put an agreement in place, there have been enough battered nations, enough failed nations and we have more than enough conflict.

Tom we too often look to see conflict that might not exist. Right now Russia is a serious concern in the Ukraine. Iran might be making political gains in Iraq, but you choose not to escalate your involvement. Syria just tears itsself apart but it is an artificial construct, a legacy of WWI imperial thinking, the whole of the middle east is the same, part of the great game, which you now play with Russia and Iran. Playing this game has destroyed empires

What we don't need is a war to put an agreement in place, The strawman argument is that we have to accept THIS agreement or have a war . WE should've walked away until the Iranians agreed to terms close to what we wanted . All this agreement is one way concessions on our part with NO reciprocal concessions on theirs .

Tom who has been beating the tom toms of war, The US has been threatening Iran for years over this, It is not Iran who has been saying to the US you can't have nuclear weapons, Send another aircraft carrier into the Gulf it may impress them

And what will we do when we walk away and the rest of the world does business with the Iranian? Do you really think the other negotiating partners will walk away with us and continue to punish Iran's economy?

No I don't expect the rest of the world will continue to punish Iran because the rest of the world doesn't have the same issue with Iran. I get it that your embassy was attacked and captives taken, I get it that you got your asses kicked in a failed rescue attempt setting the scene for long term issues between you.

I get it that they have a philosopy so foreign to you that you want regime change. I get it that you fought a proxy war with them using Saddam. I also get that you are responding to pressure from Israel and your own jewish lobby. What none of us want is another US preemptive strike and belligerousness from US republicans and hawks.

Walk away from the deal if you want and we will go back to the same crap we have heard for the last ten years and teh Iranians will continue their enrichment to gain plutonium. The Iranian rhetoric has toned down in recent times. They have a focus on daesh because unlike yourselves daesh is a real threat. Syria is a key ally for them, the shiites of Iraq are important and they have the military capability to put boots on the ground

I also get that you are responding to pressure from Israel and your own jewish lobby Who ? Me ? What bs ! Under the emperor ,the US treats Israel as the pariah ,not Iran (the worlds biggest state sponsor of terrorism).


What none of us want is another US preemptive strike and belligerousness from US republicans and hawks.
Again with the strawman false choice . Make a deal with Iran when they are serious about making a real deal . Essentially ,all this deal is capitulation and concessions without anything reciprocal. The Iranians were ALREADY under the inspection regime of the IAEA .The sanctions were for VIOLATIONS of UN mandates . So what was gained ? The only beneficiaries from this deal are the Iranians . They give nothing in return .

Who ? Me ? What bs ! Under the emperor ,the US treats Israel as the pariah ,not Iran (the worlds biggest state sponsor of terrorism).


No your republican politicians, didn't you allow the Israeli PM to address your congress? In the middle of your negotiations with Iran? What message did that send? That the american government is whiped by a bunch of jewish political contributions. I have another name for it but the editor would edit it out.


Again with the strawman false choice . Make a deal with Iran when they are serious about making a real deal . Essentially ,all this deal is capitulation and concessions without anything reciprocal. The Iranians were ALREADY under the inspection regime of the IAEA .The sanctions were for VIOLATIONS of UN mandates . So what was gained ? The only beneficiaries from this deal are the Iranians . They give nothing in return .

When will you realise you got the only deal you were going to get, they weren't going to dismantle their nuclear power industry for you. You have been forced to give them back their own money and allow them to have normal relations with other countries but guess what, no trade deal for you! The Irans had to dismantle a significant part of their industry, where do you get the idea they didn't have to give anything away?


Tom in international diplomacy big gains are rare, incremental progress is what you hope for. You have been the bully on the block for so long you think that every idea you have is going to be accepted but 95% of the world don't think the way you do. Obama has just done the grandstand thing on climate change and he thinks the rest of us will fall in line before he proves he can actually put it in place, it's another Obama photo op and a diversion from that other debate. He wants to give his congress something to chomp on 'cause they can't chew 'baccy and spit at the same time. What's better than an internal issue that will get their local constituents hollerin' and while they are dealing with that the Iran deal will slip quietly into the sunset

No your republican politicians, didn't you allow the Israeli PM to address your congress? In the middle of your negotiations with Iran? What message did that send? That the american government is whiped by a bunch of jewish political contributions. I have another name for it but the editor would edit it out.I agree with you 100%.

I remember repubs doing the same thing to King Reagan back in the day, when he was talking to Gorby, Nixon too, with China. Everything Obama does is a disaster according to repubs anyway so no surprise they holler long and hard yet again.

Netty is a crybaby, with hundreds of Nukes himself, and while NO ONE trusts Iran, repubs and Netty want NO constraints on the country that's already told him and the US, screw you guys for decades, so it's safe to say the repub/Netty way has gained NOTHING over years.

To even think we should go back to that strategy, is an even worse deal than Obama's by far.

Tom who has been beating the tom toms of war, The US has been threatening Iran for years over this,
And they have waged war against the US since 1979 .There are thousands of US deaths and 10s of thousands injured and maimed directly from Iranian Qod forces and their many surrogates . Stop making excuses for them . We were justified in turning the whole country into a glass desert many times since 1979 .

10s of thousands injured and maimed directly from Iranian Qod forcesProof?

Thousands of US deaths, this is drawing a long bow Tom, if your government believed that you would have been at war with Iran years ago

you guys ignore the news even when it comes from one of your favorite sources . Geeze ;this is old information known since 2006 when US troops were taking some of the highest casualties on the Iraq war. Iran was providing their surrogates in Iraq with shaped plate armor penetrating EFPs . The bulk of US casualties in Iraq were from road side bombs that Iran provided.
EXCLUSIVE: Iraq Weapons -- Made in Iran? - ABC News (http://abcnews.go.com/International/IraqCoverage/story?id=1692347&page=1)

American forces also did battle with Shiite militias directly backed by Iran during the height of the war. The Iranian leader Quds Force, Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani, led much of the militias’ campaign against United States forces .
The Iranians ,through their surrogates in Lebanon killed 241 US servicemen in Beirut .
The Iranians were directly responsible for the Kobar Towers bombing that killed 19 US servicemen. The 1983 bombing of the US embassy in Kuwait was directly linked to Iran .The 1984 hijacking of TWA 847 that killed . U.S. Navy Diver Robert Dean Stethem was conducted by Iranian sponsored terrorists .

Yes Tom but it seems an american death in a far away place doesn't have the same value as a death in New York otherwise the avengers would have not only attacked Iraq they would have carried on to Iran. Your problem is you can't fight in three theatres at once. If your government believed they were being attacked by Iran then they should have sent a few cruise missles, at least, to Teheran. I expect you knew this would bring Russia in and you wanted to avoid that prospect. No, you reserved your best efforts for places where you had, on paper at least, numerical superiority, and of course, you didn't want to cut off oil supplies in the Gulf otherwise your allies would be directly threatened. Those american lives were expendiable, sorry to tell you that, but no other conclusion can be drawn but you allowed that the tail on the tiger to be twisted and all this crap about Iran and nuclear weapons was payback

And how did all that Iranian aggression workout for King Reagan, and Pappy Bush?

Yes Tom but it seems an american death in a far away place doesn't have the same value as a death in New York otherwise the avengers would have not only attacked Iraq they would have carried on to Iran. Your problem is you can't fight in three theatres at once. If your government believed they were being attacked by Iran then they should have sent a few cruise missles, at least, to Teheran. I expect you knew this would bring Russia in and you wanted to avoid that prospect. No, you reserved your best efforts for places where you had, on paper at least, numerical superiority, and of course, you didn't want to cut off oil supplies in the Gulf otherwise your allies would be directly threatened. Those american lives were expendiable, sorry to tell you that, but no other conclusion can be drawn but you allowed that the tail on the tiger to be twisted and all this crop about Iran and nuclear weapons was payback all I can speak to is my policy ideas . I don't agree with the current adm that dismisses these obvious attacks on US sovereignty and American troops .I don't agree with Bush when he got gun shy after properly identifying the 12ers as part of an axis of evil .He was 3-3 on that call btw . But he got soft when the going got tough. The fact remains that Iran has waged war against the US and the only thing we did reciprocally was the sanctions . And now the emperor is giving that option up with nothing in return .

The reality of US electoral cycles and your enemies don't suffer from this drawback

Perhaps it is that he believes you can no longer fight a war for ever. Ten years of war has crippled you as far as capability goes, these are no longer the days you can fight a hundred years war and the armies of Asia are huge so you cannot fight them on their own territory, Even Korea should have taught you that lesson but you had to learn it over again in Vietnam. It is good you are leaving Afghanistan

The Nuclear deterent has only deterred Russia it hasn't deterred these other nations from twisting your tail because they know you are not going to use the bomb except as a last resort

Don't be concerned about our military strength .Every war you speak of we imposed severe restrictions on our application of force that was decisive in the outcomes.

We choose not to use our nukes that is true . On the reverse ,the 12ers have made it quite clear that they will use any weapon at their disposal in aggressive attacks against the nations they intend to destroy .

Washington (AFP) - President Barack Obama acknowledged Wednesday that Iran might use cash coming its way under sanctions relief to fund "terrorist organizations" but argued this is preferable to allowing it to develop nuclear arms.
"The truth is, that Iran has always found a way to fund these efforts," Obama said, in a speech to defend the Iran nuclear deal.
"And whatever benefit Iran may claim from sanctions relief pales in comparison to the danger it could pose with a nuclear weapon."



Obama admits some unfrozen Iran cash will fund terror (http://news.yahoo.com/obama-admits-unfrozen-iran-cash-fund-terror-164816905.html)

The emperor is right in that the 12ers will use the money to fund their proxy terrorist organizations . However he is wrong in thinking this deal will deter their nuke development . This deal guarantees an Iranian nuke within a decade .

I can understand your feelings Tom, though I disagree, but why do you and the repubs, and NETTY, have to be on the side of the 12ers and chant "kill the deal".

Boggles my mind. I know politics make strange bedfellows but this is... crazy!


This deal guarantees an Iranian nuke within a decade .

No deal guarantees them a nuke by years end. How is THAT better?

Alan J Kuperman ,associate professor and the coordinator of the Nuclear Proliferation Prevention Project at the University of Texas at Austin, writes in the Slimes that the emperor's math is wrong. Iran’s actual breakout time under the deal would be approximately three months — not over a year. Thus, the deal would be unlikely to improve the world’s ability to react to a sudden effort by Iran to build a bomb.

Mr. Obama’s argument assumes that Iran would employ only the 5,060 centrifuges that the deal would allow for uranium enrichment, not the roughly 14,000 additional centrifuges that Iran would be permitted to keep mainly for spare parts. Such an assumption is laughable. In a real-world breakout, Iran would race, not crawl, to the bomb.These additional centrifuges would need to be connected, brought up to speed and equilibrated with the already operating ones. But at that point, Iran’s enrichment capacity could exceed three times what Mr. Obama assumes.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/23/opinion/the-iran-deals-fatal-flaw.html?ref=opinion&_r=3


Mr. Obama assumes that a dash for the bomb would start mainly from unenriched uranium, thereby lengthening the breakout time. But the deal would appear to also permit Iran to keep large amounts of enriched uranium in solid form (as opposed to gas), which could be reconverted to gas within weeks, thus providing a substantial head-start to producing weapons-grade uranium.......

Mr. Obama’s argument assumes that Iran would require 59 pounds of weapons-grade uranium to make an atomic bomb. In reality, nuclear weapons can be made from much smaller amounts of uranium (as experts assume North Korea does in its rudimentary arsenal). A 1995 study by the Natural Resources Defense Council concluded that even a “low technical capability” nuclear weapon could produce an explosion with a force approaching that of the Hiroshima bomb — using just 29 pounds of weapons-grade uranium.
Based on such realistic assumptions, Iran’s breakout time under the pending deal actually would be around three months, while its current breakout time is a little under two months. Thus, the deal would increase the breakout time by just over a month, too little to matter. Mr. Obama’s main argument for the agreement — extending Iran’s breakout time — turns out to be effectively worthless.

US troops were taking some of the highest casualties on the Iraq war.But YOU went there to wage war with Iraq, they didn't wage war on you - YOU were the aggressor.


Iran was providing their surrogates in Iraq with shaped plate armor penetrating EFPs . The bulk of US casualties in Iraq were from road side bombs that Iran provided.So? You guys provide arms to other nations. If doesn't back up your assertion that "There are thousands of US deaths and 10s of thousands injured and maimed directly from Iranian Qod forces ". That's just not true.

Don't worry Karma Tom is just playing mouthpiece for the right, next week he will try to convince us we must do something about climate change like CSG instead of coal

Why Israel's Security Experts Support The Iran Deal - And Why Iran's Hardliners Don't - The National Memo (http://www.nationalmemo.com/why-israels-security-experts-support-the-iran-deal-and-why-iranian-hardliners-dont/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_term=MM_frequency_six&utm_campaign=Morning%20Memo%20-%202015-08-06&utm_content=Final)


In short, both of these top former officials believe the agreement with Iran will enhance their nation's security – and contrary to what Fox News Channel's sages might claim, they represent mainstream opinion in Israel's military and intelligence circles.
So perhaps we can safely discount the partisan demagogues and feckless opportunists who claim to be protecting the Jewish state from Barack Obama. And when someone like Mike Huckabee – who memorably escaped military service because of his “flat feet” (http://2012.presidential-candidates.org/Huckabee/Biography.php) –denounces the president (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jul/26/huckabee-iran-nuclear-deal-obama-marching-israelis-to-door-of-the-oven) for “marching Israelis to the oven door,” let's remember the sane and serious response of Israel's most experienced defenders.

Just sayin'.

Yes Tom has hitched his horse to the wrong waggon once again

Why Israel's Security Experts Support The Iran Deal - And Why Iran's Hardliners Don't - The National Memo (http://www.nationalmemo.com/why-israels-security-experts-support-the-iran-deal-and-why-iranian-hardliners-dont/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_term=MM_frequency_six&utm_campaign=Morning%20Memo%20-%202015-08-06&utm_content=Final)



Just sayin'.
There are fools in Israel as well as fools here . I can easily find quotes from both sides of this debate by security "experts " .
Israel Should 'Seriously Consider' Striking Iran - Defense/Security - News - Arutz Sheva (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/193632#.VcPMnZvbJjo)


Why Israel's Security Experts Support The Iran Deal - And Why Iran's Hardliners Don't - The National Memo (http://www.nationalmemo.com/why-israels-security-experts-support-the-iran-deal-and-why-iranian-hardliners-dont/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_term=MM_frequency_six&utm_campaign=Morning%20Memo%20-%202015-08-06&utm_content=Final)



Just sayin'.
There are fools in Israel as well as fools here . I can easily find quotes from both sides of this debate by security "experts " .
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/193632#.VcPMnZvbJjo

You know he's right there are fools everywhere

I see nothing wrong with Israel striking Iran - have at 'er.

There is a madness associated with this debate, premptive strikes against nuclear reactors are complete madness. Israel got away with it in the past but there is no immediate threat

Qassem Soleimani, the Quds Force commander recently visited Moscow to meet with senior Russian leaders, despite a travel ban and U.N. Security Council resolutions barring him from leaving Iran. No doubt he carried a large shopping list with him now that Iran can anticipate a huge bounty from the world's surrender to the 12ers .
What ? You thought all this cash windfall is going to go to helping the people of Iran ? Why would you think that ? The 12ers used the limited amt of money they had during the sanction regime to purchase weapons and to export terror and their revolution throughout the region and the world .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QcG5hCND_F4

Kudos to Senator Shumer who has made a very difficult decision to oppose the emperor on this so called deal with Iran. Shumer is in line to take over as Democrat leader in the Senate when Harry the punching bag Reid retires. It would've been expedient for him to support the President on this issue. But Shumer announced that the deal is so bad for the world ,and the country that he could not support it .
Also opposing the deal is both my former and current Rep . ;Dems Elliot Engel and Nita Lowey . I'm beginning to think there is a chance that Congress can get enough opposition votes to over ride the emperor's veto. You can tell by his increasingly inflammatory rhetoric against opponents to the deal ,that the emperor is getting desperate .

That's a big call Tom if they have those votes they have enough to impreach, But this deal isn't misconduct.

A Iranian travelling outside a ban, I wonder how often that happen? and why would the Russians be concerned? They pay lip service to UN mandates. You keep running these strawman conspiracy scenarios. Stay with the facts, there is a deal that dismantles certain Iranian capability. This also frees up certain economic sanctions. This is not something Obama has done in isolation, he has international partners who are not constrained by red neck policies. I would expect the Russians would be pleased to embarrass the US by having this deal fail, so I expect that aiding them would be treason, and yet there are those in your government who have taken this course. Who are these fifth columnists?

By my count you need 13 dem senators to override a veto. More if a few repubs break ranks. Good Luck.

So what's the price of loyalty these days?

Shumer is a Jew from NY with a rather powerful rich Jewish lobby and constituency. He is also a HAWK who voted for the Iraq war. No surprise where his loyalties lie, and they haven't changed over the years.

Now what was I saying?

That's a big call Tom if they have those votes they have enough to impreach, But this deal isn't misconduct.
We aren't talking impeachment . We are talking terrible judgment by our policy makers in the executive branch .


By my count you need 13 dem senators to override a veto. More if a few repubs break ranks. Good Luck.Many Dems hate thisdecision but are afraid to go against the Emperor .


Shumer is a Jew from NY with a rather powerful rich Jewish lobby and constituency. He is also a HAWK who voted for the Iraq war. No surprise where his loyalties lie, and they haven't changed over the years.

You don't think he's risking a lot by taking a stand against the emperor ? Good keep dividing people tal . I never understood how Jews could side with the Dems anyway.

They have a more symathetic view of the world, Tom, having experienced the excesses of the right they don't quickly espouse right wing ideologies, however obviously they don't shirk from fighting for what they believe. You fail to see that being against something doesn't mean endorsement of your ideology. The enemy of my enemy is my friend only goes so far, and this is such a situation. Israel has many friends because they are against their enemies, but we have now seen that Israel doesn't endorse policies that reduce tensions

"Peace in our time." is what Chamberlain came home with from Germany

They have a more symathetic view of the world, Tom, having experienced the excesses of the right they don't quickly espouse right wing ideologies, however obviously they don't shirk from fighting for what they believe. You fail to see that being against something doesn't mean endorsement of your ideology. The enemy of my enemy is my friend only goes so far, and this is such a situation. Israel has many friends because they are against their enemies, but we have now seen that Israel doesn't endorse policies that reduce tensions

maybe because Israel is in an existential threat that the rest of the world isn't . But I wasn't just talking about Israel . Jews in America at least live "Republican " lives but vote Democrat.Even though there has been a slight change in this since the reign of the emperor began ,there is still a 32-point gap separating Democratic and Republican party identification among Jews.

It doesn't make sense .Jewish law permits abortion only to protect the life of the mother; it forbids homosexual sex ; and it prohibits suicide (except when the only alternatives are forced conversion or incest).In every instance of a clash between Jewish law and contemporary liberalism, it is the liberal creed that prevails for most American Jews.

it is the liberal creed that prevails for most American Jews.Because those jews are educated and enlightened.

Look at the 2016 candidates - who the hell wants to be associated with a party that fields that???

This isn't about Israel, its about VOTES in the house and senate to override Obama's VETO. The repubs NEED dems, plain and simple. Netty was a fool to run to the repubs hollering just because Obama was their enemy too. He gambled and will lose because in truth, they cannot STOP the plan, even if they had the votes because no one in the entire world will join us in keeping international sanctions going, and ours against Iran will be ignored, and ineffective.

By the way, the same debate rages in Iran.


It doesn't make sense .Jewish law permits abortion only to protect the life of the mother; it forbids homosexual sex ; and it prohibits suicide (except when the only alternatives are forced conversion or incest)

Every major religion does that, but it's okay if you are a Jew, or Christian but not a Muslim? The whole argument on religion is a strawman argument, and has little to do with the law, or acceptable behavior.

Tal if people really followed the moral laws of their religion the world would be a better place, but abortion is an invention of man, war is an invention of man, need I go on? Israel is not a religious society, the US is not a religious society, they consider themselves enlightened, well they are enlightened enough to kill babies, enlightened enough to kill those who oppose them, and the whole world is besotted with the idea that man is superior.

This isn't about Israel, its about VOTES in the house and senate to override Obama's VETO. Of course it is . That's why your attack on Shumer accusing him of being beholden to a lobby or a constituency was so off base .....or was it ?

Now that I've praised him let me bury him. Announcing his opposition is all well and good. But he's in a position in the Senate to have a huge impact on this vote. His lack of rallying hard for other Senate Democrats to join him is inexcusably insufficient given his opposition to the deal. If he truly wants the deal defeated then he has to make a better effort to defeat it beyond announcing his opposition. Schumer saying that while he will "try to persuade" other Senate Democrats is not good enough . He did not get where he is by trying to persuade. He got where he is by doing some serious arm twisting . He was the chief fund raiser for the Dems in the last 2 election cycles . That means he holds many IOUs in his pockets .
Any effort less than that will show me that his announced opposition is just pandering.

so how much of a stimulus will this be to the Iranian economy . If we go by the emperor's own words ,it is an infusion of $150 billion . By comparison ,in today's dollars ,the Marshall plan to rebuild all of Western Europe was $120 billion over a 4 year period .

You keep forgetting that it is their money, and unlike the Marshall Plan they will spend it where they want, which might be a nuclear reactor or might be to upgrade their air defenses. The thing is, some of the hatred of the US might just be lost in the changes in their society and maybe they will spend it on defeating Daesh and save you the money, or perhaps they will start a war with your friends the Saudi, who were backing Daesh. Life is a lottery, but it is unlikely they will attack Israel immediately. They may be sensible enough to know you can only fight one successful war at a time and Israel should consider how they can negotiate with the palestinians and take the heat out of one debate while attention is on Syria and Daesh

What you don't get is that the people of Iran want the changes in their society from the pre-modern society the 12ers brought with their revolution. If the Ayatollah Asshola had told them the truth about his vision of Iran ,the people would not have revolted in the 1st place. The people do not hate the US ;only the 12ers do.

The emperor thinks the money will be used to "fundamentally transform " Iran . All it will do is make them homicidal apocalyptic terrorists with nukes .

The emperor thinks the money will be used to "fundamentally transform " Iran . All it will do is make them homicidal apocalyptic terrorists with nukes .

Tom what you have is a picture if where the Iranian leadership might be without a deal. You argue that they are already "homicidal apocalyptic terrorists" however the only evidence you have of tha is that they have supported "homicidal apocalyptic terrorists" in Gaza and Lebanon and it is very possible your own nation could be accused of the same thing"


The " homicidal apocalyptic terrorists" are Daesh whom the Iranians oppose yet your alllies the Saudi and Turkey can be shown to have supported them. What is the problem here is your republicans are miffed that a reason for a war has been taken away and so there will be no war profits. You are on the wrong side Tom you are actually supporting Daesh

He said a lot more than that Tom.

CNN's Fareed Zakaria GPS EXCLUSIVE: President Barack Obama on the P+5 Iran deal – CNN Press Room - CNN.com Blogs (http://cnnpressroom.blogs.cnn.com/2015/08/09/cnns-fareed-zakaria-gps-exclusive-president-barack-obama-on-the-p5-iran-deal/)


...And part of the function of our meeting up at Camp David with Gulf leaders was to describe how we can work with them to create a more effective counter to these kinds of activities....

Hello again,

What I wanna know, is what's the right wing plan AFTER the deal is rejected???? You KNOW we can't go back to the table.. You KNOW there are no mulligans in diplomacy.. You KNOW our allies won't go back to the table.

Other than war, what is your plan?

excon

"Bomb-bomb bomb...bomb bomb Iran....."/John McCain and his right winger singers/2007

That's always been the plan, just ask Netty.

Hello again,
You KNOW we can't go back to the table.. Other than war, what is your plan?

excon
of course we can . Reagan walked away at Reykjavik and because of that got a better deal. My plan ? I would put even more pressure on the regime to come to the table with some concessions. But they didn't because they knew that the emperor took all out leverage off the table ,and Kerry is desperate to get a Nobel Peace Prize.

Hello again, tom:

Nahhh... Your history is misremembered. Reagan walked away BEFORE he made a deal. It matters..

excon

PS> Look, my friend.. I don't believe for a minute that you misremembered that fact... You want war, and you want PUNISHING war... Why are you afraid to SAY it?? Lindsey Graham isn't.

The basic difference was back in the day the summit was about two superpowers, talking to each other, now we have three superpowers (and a few more) on the same side against a regional second tier(?) wanna be.

Why do you guys keep leaving out the other negotiating partners?

Hello again, tom:

Nahhh... Your history is misremembered. Reagan walked away BEFORE he made a deal. It matters..

excon

PS> Look, my friend.. I don't believe for a minute that you misremembered that fact... You want war, and you want PUNISHING war... Why are you afraid to SAY it?? Lindsey Graham isn't.
Yes Reagan was smart enough to walk away from a deal where the country was going to get hosed . Clearly the emperor and Kerry aren't smart enough ;and clearly the Senate surrendered it's constitutional role in the process. So what I say is what I would've done. I would've supported the Green Revolution in 2009 when the 12ers stole the election . I would've been hardline at the negotiation table because that was the best way to AVOID war . What you fail the realize is that this deal makes a bigger badder war MORE LIKELY not less.


The basic difference was back in the day the summit was about two superpowers, talking to each other, now we have three superpowers (and a few more) on the same side against a regional second tier(?) wanna be.

Why do you guys keep leaving out the other negotiating partners?

They surrendered too . (except China a Russia ...they got exactly what they wanted )

Hello again, tom:

Yeah, yeah, yeah... I woulda done things differently too, but that's NOT the question. We ARE where we ARE. If NOT war, WHAT is your plan?

excon

My plan is to reject this deal in Congress ;refuse to allow Banks to release Iranian funds ,and suggest to them that if they want something else ;they 'd better come to the table with a workable proposal that guarantees no notice on site inspection of ALL suspected nuclear sites .

In other words Tom you want the Iranian people to surrender their soveriegnty to the american congress of red necked rubber necks and Iran haters like McKain and Trump. This is not post WWII and Iran is not Germany or Japan. To get those rights you are going to have to have a war and win it. Tell me Tom when did the US last actually win a war? Was that Panama or Granada?

In other words Tom you want the Iranian people to surrender their soveriegnty to the american congress of red necked rubber necks and Iran haters like McKain and Trump. This is not post WWII and Iran is not Germany or Japan. To get those rights you are going to have to have a war and win it. Tell me Tom when did the US last actually win a war? Was that Panama or Granada?
The Iranian people LOST their sovereignty when the 12ers hijacked the revolution in1979 . The Iranian people LOST their attempt to regain their sovereignty in 2009 when they were refused help by the emperor after they practically begged for our support . Your narrative is way off !!

We sure showed Cuba didn't we?

Yep you showed the taliban too, what Tom is complaining about is that the iranians deposed their american puppet despot in what was, at the time a popular uprising, democracy in action, heaven forbid power should be given to the people to decide their destiny, however dire. But the US has long decided that such things should not run their course, and of course, a great example of american+ intervention is Libya and how is Iraq going for you, Tom?

We sure showed Cuba didn't we?

So how did it work out in South Africa ? It was pressure from the international community ,including divestiture and sanctions that not only ended the South African nuclear regime ;but also ushered in F.W. de Klerk ;who began the dismantling of the Apartheid government ......in other words ,regime change.


heaven forbid power should be given to the people to decide their destiny,

The people's power to decide their destiny was taken from them by the 12ers . The people have no say in Iran. When they rose up they were shot down ....and we stood on the sidelines cheering the regime and making common cause with the apocalyptic homicidal rulers . Now we are going to allow them to get a nuclear capability that will permanently entrench them into power .

Hello again, tom:

Couple things... Most of the withheld money ISN'T in our banks.. So, it's going back no matter what we do.

You keep saying they better do something, as though we have some sort of leverage.. What I think they'll do is finish building the bomb.. They're 3 months away.. Since they KNOW they'll be attacked, maybe they accelerated their program.. Wouldn't you??

excon

What is missed here is it really doesn't matter, that genie was out of the bottle in 1945, seventy years ago, and we should be very thankful that few nations have progressed to the bomb even though many have the capability. It cound be said that with the sanctions regime the result was inevietable because the Iranians have felt threatened and vulnerable for many years. Anything that lessens that vulnerability and gets them opportunity for reflection may help them begin a new path

Proof?


As the Obama Administration seeks to normalize relations with Iran by concluding a nuclear deal with Tehran, it was revealed this week that the Islamic republic has killed about 500 American soldiers via armor-piercing bombs.
During testimony Tuesday before the Senate Committee on Armed Services, Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, revealed the U.S. deaths at the hands of Iranians under questioning from Sen. Tom Cotton.
“I think the Islamic State is a grave and throwing threat, but until they develop their own ballistic missile program and until they have thousands of centrifuges and tons of uranium, I believe the Islamic republic will be a graver threat than the Islamic State, that is, the Islamic Republic of Iran,” said Mr. Cotton, Arkansas Republican.
The senator said Iran remains an anti-American, state sponsor of international terrorism that has killed hundreds of Americans from Lebanon, to Iraq to Afghanistan.
“Hundreds of Americans died, and probably thousands were wounded or suspected of being wounded,” Mr. Cotton said. “What should we say to their families, the families who lost soldiers at the hands of Iranian militias or Iranian roadside bombs, once we reach a deal that’s going to give Iran tens of billions of dollars in sanctions relief and international legitimacy without them changing their behavior?”

Inside the Ring: Russian nuclear threat grows - Washington Times (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jul/8/inside-the-ring-russian-nuclear-threat-grows/?page=all)

Hello again, tom:

Couple things... Most of the withheld money ISN'T in our banks.. So, it's going back no matter what we do.

You keep saying they better do something, as though we have some sort of leverage.. What I think they'll do is finish building the bomb.. They're 3 months away.. Since they KNOW they'll be attacked, maybe they accelerated their program.. Wouldn't you??

excon

In other words they will violate the agreement before the ink is dry . I agree . They violated all the agreements ,sanctions and bans before the deal .Why would we believe their behavior would be any different now ?


The head of Iran's elite military Quds Force, who is subject to a United Nations travel ban, has met senior Russian officials in Moscow, an Iranian official said on Friday.Qassem Soleimani, chief of the force which is an overseas arm of the Revolutionary Guards, has been subject to an international travel ban and asset freeze by the U.N. Security Council since 2007.
But the Iranian official, who declined to be identified, said Soleimani had made the trip in the second half of July, where he had held talks covering regional and bilateral issues and the delivery to Iran of S-300 surface-to-air missiles and other weapons.
Soleimani had arrived in Moscow on July 24 and met President Vladimir Putin and Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu before departing three days later, Fox News reported on Thursday.
A Kremlin spokesman denied any meeting between Soleimani and Putin had taken place, RIA news agency reported.
However, two U.S. security sources told Reuters the United States believed the meeting between Putin and Soleimani took place.

Iran Quds chief visited Russia despite U.N. travel ban: Iran official | Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/08/07/us-russia-iran-soleimani-idUSKCN0QC1KM20150807)

The thing that gets lost on reactionary haters is that even us pro-deal types are smart enough to know we may still have to go upside some 12'er heads when/if they DO CHEAT!

I think Obama and Kerry know that too. If Bush had of said he was invading Iraq for violating the deal oil for medicine (With the Europeans no less) and not concocted some other story, he may have been understood too!

NAW, his half a$$ invasion was still the work of a military dufus. He just should have smacked France and Germany to name a few.

In other words they will violate the agreement before the ink is dry . I agree . They violated all the agreements ,sanctions and bans before the deal .Why would we believe their behavior would be any different now ? Hello again, tom:

What I SAID is that they may have been only 3 months away from acquiring a device BEFORE they agreed to STOP production... But, what I said, and what you said, isn't really the issue, is it??? You want WAR, and that's what ALL that you WANT..

Ok, that's not true.. You want ONE more thing - an Obama DEFEAT.. Right wingers simply CANNOT give him a victory, EVEN if it puts the nation at risk..

excon

Hello again, tom:

What I SAID is that they may have been only 3 months away from acquiring a device BEFORE they agreed to STOP production... But, what I said, and what you said, isn't really the issue, is it??? You want WAR, and that's what ALL that you WANT..

Ok, that's not true.. You want ONE more thing - an Obama DEFEAT.. Right wingers simply CANNOT give him a victory, EVEN if it puts the nation at risk..

excon

You can't accept the fact that this has nothing to do with my opinion of the emperor . A bad deal is a bad deal . I have given examples where continuing the sanction regime has worked (South Africa) and examples where a bad deal resulted in the rogue nation getting nukes (the NORKS ) . BTW ;the Iranians are using the NORKS as their R&D in their nuke and missile development programs ;paying hard cash for it as a matter of fact . Why would they use their limited $$ on nukes and what makes you think that will change when they have more $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ ??

Hello again, tom:

Look.. I didn't READ it, and I wouldn't understand it if I did.. I suspect you're like me. It MAY be a bad deal. It may not be. I dunno.. But, the POINT is, that's the deal we've GOT, and we're NOT gonna get another one. So, I wanna know what your PLAN is when the deal is rejected...

Saying things like putting more and even stricter sanctions on them, and not letting them have their money back are NOT grounded in reality..

excon

obviously if the deal is not rejected then I will support the candidate who will repeal this "executive agreement " which does not have the authority of a treaty . There is no deal if one of the parties to the agreement walks away .

What I will not be satisfied with is these posers patting themselves on the back and pretending that they solved the problem of a apocalyptic ,homicial regime with it's hands on nukes . They know the history of this better than you and I .

And just for a referesher ......
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TcbU5jAavw

How'd that work out ?

BTW how could we read it ? Parts of the deal are secrets even from the emperor .

So not only are we waiting for the congress to act, YOU guys are waiting to win the next election. Bummer, hope you got a Plan B, and highly suggest you NOT hold your breath.

Likely you will holler REPEAL until then though. Ask me how I know. I dare ya!!

It's a no brainer tal, it's an issue they can hook their star too and repeal of OBamacare is so yesterday, after all they lost an election on that one. It is a great pity they cannot be for something instead of this negative politics

Clete - we have a federal election in Canada and the conservatives are doing the same thing here: negative, attack ads. It's shameless.

Yes Karma it seems negative politics is the in thing, but where I come from both sides do it, but yesterday's decision here was something different, a sort of do nothing and kick the ball down the road in the hope that they don't have to fight an election on gay issues. By the way we're with you on climate change, do little, in fact I would think we have probably already reached the targets we set we have over 20% renewables already, solar rooftops are becoming a way of life and wind farms mess up the landscapes, but we can't do better without becoming nuclear, like the world needs another nuclear nation. i just hate the negative way it is sold, like as though we are doing nothing. What I'm aware of is 0.6% of something is effectively nothing and that is what a 40% reduction in emissions would mean. We have to go after the real problems in this world before they overtake us

I have no problem with Australia becoming a nuclear nation . You have a responsible government and are not likely to start dropping bombs on your neighbors.

I have no problem with Australia becoming a nuclear nation . You have a responsible government and are not likely to start dropping bombs on your neighbors.Hello clete:

Yeah.. Be like us. We DIDN'T start the war in Iraq, and we're NOT gonna start the war in Iran..

Bwa, ha ha ha ha..

excon

But Tom we are just as warlike as yourselves, we involve ourselves in wars with you, and yet you consider us more responsible than other non-nuclear nations. Fortunately we don't have many neighbours on whom we might drop bonbs

You may be interested in what's going on with the better deal crap

Iran Hawks Think We Can Impose Harsher Sanctions on Iran | The Nation (http://www.thenation.com/article/iran-hawks-think-we-can-impose-harsher-sanctions-on-iran/)


In the first place, the United States overestimated its ability to sanction Iran and, even at the height of the sanctions, could not stop it from exporting a million barrels a day (http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Energy-Resources/2015/08/11/Iran-reports-highest-crude-oil-production-since-2013/8491439298014/), to countries such as China, which told the Treasury Department to jump in a lake. Beijing will be even more defiant if there is a congressional demand for yet another round of severe sanctions. Admittedly, Iranian oil exports were down from 2.5 million barrels per day in 2011, and the sanctions hurt, but they weren't crippling and may have even had some benefits. A weaker Iranian currency caused non-oil exports to jump (http://www.tehrantimes.com/index_View.asp?code=248255), providing jobs and income to farmers and owners of workshops and factories.

It gets worse after the first paragraph.

You mean that once again the US shot itsself in the foot. Look, talk is cheap and nowhere is it cheaper than in New York where the UN sits. Sanctions were part of the proxy war of the US on Iran, sanctions didn't stop Iraq either, it took boots on the ground and look where that got us, in hindsight, absolutely nowhere. Iran is larger and much more capable than Iraq and unlike Iraq it is not dependent upon outsiders for its weapons.

This deal means that the world has backed away from war with Iran, which must be counted as an enlightened response. Let them have their nuclear electric industry and allow the nation to prosper, a little money in the pocket will soon change attitudes, give them something to loose rather than backing them into a corner

Cheating on a deal would be the perfect cover for swinging a big stick. Same outcome if they refused it, but if we walk away makes us look like shmucks after all these machinations.

Should have told Netty to shut the hell up, instead of slobbering all over the guy.

I agree about Israel, far too confrontational for a small nation, like the little snappy dog with the big dog behind it. No we must not walk away but be found to keep our word, either way

But Tom we are just as warlike as yourselves, we involve ourselves in wars with you, and yet you consider us more responsible than other non-nuclear nations. Fortunately we don't have many neighbours on whom we might drop bonbs
You have responsible government accountable to the people . You're nation is not run by despots who have an apocalyptic vision of their role in bringing about a violent end time . You're nation has not openly announced that their goal was to destroy one or more of it's neighbors.

This deal means that the world has backed away from war with Iran, which must be counted as an enlightened response. Let them have their nuclear electric industry and allow the nation to prosper, a little money in the pocket will soon change attitudes, give them something to loose rather than backing them into a corner

Incredibly naive . You are just like the emperor full of hopey changey . Even he knows that's not what this is about . What he and the P6+1 have done is what Roosevelt ,Churchill ,and Stalin did at Yalta ........ divide the world into spheres of influence . They have decided to unleash the 12ers in the hope that they will be a stabilizing force ;a regional hegemon.

I agree about Israel, far too confrontational for a small nation, like the little snappy dog with the big dog behind it. No we must not walk away but be found to keep our word, either way
Yeah the emperor is blaming the Jews too. He went so far as to question Chuck Schumer's loyalties.

So this differs from earlier strategy, how? You have always tried to create these regional hagemon, it so happens this one doesn't suit your philosopy of universal US style demcracy. That didn't work in Iraq either. Tom Iran is a muslim state even if their brand differs from the idiots in Saudi who seek world domination through religious fanaticism, You have allied yourselves with the wrong parties and look where it has led, case in point Syria and daesh. Let the Muslims work it out amongst themselves, Do the Israeli thing, build a bloody great wall around them and come back in a hundred years.

You miss this all the time, this is the great game and Persia has always been part of the great game. Russia wants you to engage in a war in the middle east with Iran. It can sell them arms and technology and bleed you, just as you bled Russia in Afghanistan

As I've already said ;Iran already wages war against us,and has been since 1979. What we have in this country is a rogue President who is turning American foreign policy on it's head. He's gone in a year and a half and then we can repair all the damage he has done to our foreign policy .

He's gone in a year and a half and then we can repair all the damage he has done to our foreign policy .Hello again, tom:

Yeah.... And, what'll FIX it, is a war with Iran, another one with Iraq, and throw in Syria too, what the hell?

excon

the emperor is trying to start a war with Russia too . You forgot that one .

the emperor is trying to start a war with Russia too . You forgot that one .Hello again, tom:

That one might be worth fighting..

I know, I know... You righty's have a bromance with Putin.

excon

Hello again, tom:

That one might be worth fighting..

I know, I know... You righty's have a bromance with Putin.

excon

bromance is a little strong . But I'm not enthused about the prospect of us fighting to defend a neo-nazi nation.

Come on Tom you know that if you could have got your aircraft carriers through the Bosporus you would have been fighting Russia already, but there is nothing more pathetic than a land locked aircraft carrier No stick to the fights you can win, like a few rag tag islamic militants, oh wait, I can't recall you actually winning any of those. Remind me please, when was it you actually won a fight? I know, we celebrate it last week

Hello again,

So, you negotiated a raise at work.. When you get home, your wife says, WE NEED A BETTER DEAL. What would happen to you if you went back to your boss?

excon

The prez is but ONE senator away from getting it done... AGAIN!

Breaking News

Senate Dems get 34th vote to hand Obama victory on Iran deal - AP News 9/2/2015 10:10 AM (http://townhall.com/news/politics-elections/2015/09/02/obama-locking-up-votes-in-senate-for-iran-nuclear-deal-n2046869)

The wingers have a right to holler, scream, and cry FOUL... AGAIN! Condolences to Netty... He tried!

Thinking the Schmuckster will lose his chance to become the Dem majority leader due to the one principled stand he's taken as Senator .

Bob Casey of Pa. was a disappointment . He said :“I'm very confident that all the pathways to a nuclear weapon are cut off,” so long as the agreement is strictly enforced.

Good luck with that ! The deal allows the Iranians to' self inspect ' key sites . I'll say it again. This deal makes war with Iran MORE likely .

I don't blame the Dems . I blame the worthless GOP for surrendering their prerogative to approve any deal.

Hello again,

So, you negotiated a raise at work.. When you get home, your wife says, WE NEED A BETTER DEAL. What would happen to you if you went back to your boss?

excon

I would tell her to negotiate a better deal with HER boss, and stay out of me and my bosses business.

>Grabs pillow heads for couch, and waits for the burned toast. (She ain't gonna to be happy tonight!! Oh well!!!<

Thinking the Schmuckster will lose his chance to become the Dem majority leader due to the one principled stand he's taken as Senator .

Bob Casey of Pa. was a disappointment . He said :“I'm very confident that all the pathways to a nuclear weapon are cut off,” so long as the agreement is strictly enforced.

Good luck with that ! The deal allows the Iranians to' self inspect ' key sites . I'll say it again. This deal makes war with Iran MORE likely .

I don't blame the Dems . I blame the worthless GOP for surrendering their prerogative to approve any deal.

I blame Obama for doing his job without the "shock and awe blowing stuff up"!! Back to the Trump Show... pass the popcorn please!!

Trump is an idiot . His position is that the deal can go through because he's an "expert " at reading the fine print of any deal and knows how to make sure all that fine print is enforced .

I also hope the constituents of the Dem Senators who will support this deal hold them responsible . Yeah pop your pop corn and watch those Dems in Red States support their position . Should be fun to watch !!!

Now you're talking. Can't wait for repubs in blue states to squirm either. Stop hoggin' the popcorn... unless you stocked up! ;)

Well the Senate agreeing on something, that's new

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-34131315

The only reason for that is that Senator Corker is a Repubic sell out . It was another one of them ;you have to pass it to find out what's in it bill. If it were not for the Corker bill passed last spring, Mikulski's yes vote would not matter.

So while I will enjoy watching the Dems defend their position on Iran ;I cannot put all the onus on the Dems because the 'stupid Party' voted away their constitutional prerogative

The "Stupid Party" is that the party with the majority or a new party of the disillusioned?

The "Stupid Party" is that the party with the majority or a new party of the disillusioned?
It was a nickname that Bobby Jindal gave the Repubics.

In this case it is warranted even though the Party that has Evita as the frontrunner with Bolshevik Bernie Sanders in the wings would wear that label well.

I thought it might be warranted because of its Tea Party connections, the far right can be very stupid. So from your comment it would seem that there is much stupidity in politics generally, that unfortunately has been my experience too

The Tea Party only recently became stupid with their apparent lining up behind the Trump campaign......a man who's positions(except perhaps controlling the border )are antithetical to the basic philosophy behind the Tea Party movement.


btw ;I said this deal would lead to proliferation in the ME .
http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/1/64/139348/Egypt/Politics-/Saudi-Arabia-and-Egypt-to-cooperate-in-peaceful-us.aspx

But no worry ;like the Iranian program....it's for "peaceful " uses.

That has been in the pipeline for a long time Tom, nuclear energy in Saudi is nothing new and you can bet the Saudi were laughing when you sanctioned Iran and left them alone. Nevertheless you have your dirty little deals