If we had a like button I’d press it. But we don’t, so I’m making this awkward post.
Uh… yeah.
Says the guy who insisted Republicans are standing in the way of peace, as if that’s what these negotiations are designed to bring about.
As for Russia and China, our sanctions prevent full trade with their companies, because our sanctions punish the companies of those nations that do business with Iran. We know it hurts, because they hate when we do that.
Oh please, that’s one of the milder things anyone’s been accused of on this board. If Doper liberals can’t take it, they shouldn’t dish it out. You can start by removing “traitor” from your vocabulary.
Or, you can start by simply stating that you won’t just support ANY deal this administration agrees to.
Have I called you a traitor in thsi forum?
I think you’re wrong, and are loathe to admit it. That’s not saying you want a nuke to go off in an American city.
I’d have to know the deal. Unlike you, who has made up his mind with no information.
Well first, I didn’t say “nuked”, I said “bombed”, and given Hezbollah’s presence in this country that’s a likely outcome. And since Iran’s use of Hezbollah is not actually being discussed, we aren’t discussing peace in any meaningful sense.
You’re dodging. I know what we’ve conceded already, and it’s too much. It shouldn’t be too much for you to state what the limits of concessions should be. Should we accept no inspections? Simple question.
Of course they are. They are designed to stop us from bombing Iran. Remember that goofy shit you said above:
That’s gibberish. It’s nonsense. It’s words spake without regard to meaning. It’s an ex-parrot.
If you think we’re gonna get hard-line with Russia and China if we go unilateral against Iran, that’s up to you.
States have already done it. Congress has already done it. I can’t help it if our President has no spine. Bring on Hillary, she’ll show those f!*ckers.
Any meaningful sense. That’s quite the eye of the needle you’re shoving that camel through. So you’re saying I want America to be bombed? Look, I know you say a lot of shit. You Gish-Gallop, that’s your rhetorical style. But the difference between you and me, is that I want good outcomes. Not just for my team to win. As it happens, of late, my team is the only one that cares about good outcomes, but whatchagonnado?
It’s a stupid question. I’d need to know the deal’s details to judge it.
And we’re not gonna do inspections? How interesting. :rolleyes:
It takes a spine to stand up like an adult and try for peace. Even a sway-backed old gimp like McCain can push a button loosing bombs. But strength comes from not hitting without thinking. Yes we could bomb them. And yes there is likely nothing they could do about it. Do you think that would make us brave?
The chickenshit neocon hawks cluck from the sidelines while other people’s kids die. Applauding their bravery is nonsensical.
Sorry, Hannity, but this has no bearing with reality.
I’m a bit curious on this “kill their scientists” thingy. Does that require any Congressional approval, this assassination of civilians? I was under the impression that this sort of thing had been forbidden, except for actual terrorists. Was there a work-around, just defining Iranian scientists as de facto terrorists?
I suppose we could simply consider the “we kill scientists” to include early retirement imposed by Israel, our BFF, who’s interests are essentially identical to our own. Perhaps we should invite Vlad the Impaler Putin to speak before Congress, give us his view.
Not to nag a triviality, but what are the legal underpinnings of murdering the civilians of a foreign nation?
I am puzzled. Iran retains its ability to enrich uranium (but not to the level of purity needed to make nuclear bombs). So, presumably, they will be making fuel rods for their new nuclear power plants (which they will buy from Russia). Inspections will be scheduled to make sure the Iranians do not cheat.
this all sounds reasonable. So why the underground enrichment factories? If there is nothing to hide, why have them?Now, assuming the Iranians intend to cheat all along, they will be able to build some small gun-type atomic bombs-will they come out and announce this? or keep it quiet like Israel? I still don’t see what this would buy them-nobody (least of all the USA) wants to invade Iran. SA is up to its neck in Yemen. And the Israelis would not risk an air attack upon Iran.
BTW-does Iran have substantial uranium deposits? or do they import the ore?
The F-35 fighter jet is designed to counter advanced threats just like the one posed by the Russian-made S-300 surface to air missile system, a senior Lockheed Martin executive who is visiting Israel said on Wednesday.
Lockheed’s fifth generation F-35 multi-role plane will begin arriving in Israel at the end of next year.
I seriously doubt the US had anything to do with the killing of the Iranian scientists. That was almost certainly Mossad by themselves.
Frankly, I think their deaths was proof that Iranian intelligence services aren’t remotely as competent as many think.
Anyway, Israel has assassinated or kidnapped plenty of civilians of other nations. Remember Eichmann and the guerrillas responsible for Munich.
Can’t tell if you are posting in contradiction, correction, or corroboration. Advise.
The way you were talking about the legality you seemed to be implying the US was somehow involved in the killing of the Iranian scientists. That’s why I posted that.
If you’re asking what justification Israel would give they’d just argue that Iran is effectively at war with them so killing Iranian scientists was like Osirak.
Iran is also effectively at war with us. And as with other issues, such as Fast and Furious, spying on AP reporters, targeting conservative nonprofits, wait lists at the VA, you can rest assured no one has told the President if we are doing it.
I’m not saying it’s us, it could be Israel, could even be Iranian rebel groups or even Arab countries behind it. But despite the apparent illegality, it’s an essential enough national security issue that if we had the means and the opportunity I don’t think the CIA would hesitate to do the job and let some deputy director take the fall if it became public.
And based on current estimates, if Iran decides to break out tomorrow, they’ll have the Bomb by then. Great plan!
Nah, John Clark will never get caught! USA! USA! USA!
Meanwhile, Russia is getting more aggressive about invading British airspace. Japan has had a near record number of incursions from Russia and China. These are the countries you’re counting on to keep the sanctions in place against a country they have no real historical beef with. A country who is, by the way, a potentially lucrative trading partner for them. Great plan!
That also means we can’t count on them to keep any agreement. Your logic argues as much against an agreement as for it. Iran won’t keep an agreement out of a sense of honor. If they know Russia and China won’t reimpose sanctions, then they’ll disregard the agreement as soon as its signed. They’ll pocket the concessions we’ve already given and take whatever minor consequences arise from reneging.
For starters, how does one “pocket” a concession? If the concession is that we will resume selling them pistachio ice cream so long as they don’t screw it up, how is that something they can “pocket”?
And “minor consequences”? If, as you seem convinced, there is no actual sincerity in the appearance that Iran seeks a peaceful solution, then only the threat of consequences has them at the table in the first place. Would an agreement remove all our options for retribution if the agreement is broken? How?
We may, therefore, safely assume that they do not regard those consequences as minor. There may be some consequences they *would *regard as minor, but your insinuation is larger then that. that they might simply shrug off all consequences.
But there they are. At the table. According to you, only because of the dreadful consequences.