Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

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

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

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 .

Quote:

---

waging war in this country

---

Why? 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...esolution_1835

https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.document...-deal-text.pdf

From

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/iran-a...210931530.html

Then

Tehran Celebrates Iran Nuclear Deal

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.

Quote:

---

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

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

Quote:

---

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 .

Quote:

---

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 .

Quote:

---

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 .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

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

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

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

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

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 .