Azalin Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 The crux of it all is simple, the Iranians want to build a nuclear weapon. U.S policy towards Iran should be based on that assumption. Period! Don't 'cha just love the way POTUS pontificates that Iran will not have a nuclear weapon on his watch? Yo, POTUS, your watch is almost over (Thank you, Jesus) you nitwit! There you guys go obfuscating with facts again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 Some tweets by the one and only, IowaHawk David Burge @iowahawkblog Follow Once again, Obama does an end zone dance after being tackled for a safety. 2:33 PM - 2 Apr 2015 1,125 Retweets 703 favorites In short, we got Iran to maybe agree to a nuke deal that would lift sanctions on Iran for cheating on a nuke deal. WH: we trust everything Iran says, except when they're kidding around with that "exterminate Israel" running gag. Q: what language was the deal written in? A: Farce-y. . You get political tweets from propaganda mongers? And you pass them on to us? Oh thanks The crux of it all is simple, the Iranians want to build a nuclear weapon. U.S policy towards Iran should be based on that assumption. Period! Well...and what is in our tool box to deal with it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 You get political tweets from propaganda mongers? And you pass them on to us? Oh thanks Did gatortard really just say that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 You get political tweets from propaganda mongers? #BringBackOurGirls How's that one working out, by the way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 Did gatortard really just say that? #BringBackOurGirls How's that one working out, by the way? Oh, I could just imagine the howls of indignation if i started to post tweets from Michael Moore or something Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 Oh, I could just imagine the howls of indignation if i started to post tweets from Michael Moore or something It would appear that you do, but fail to give him credit for the content. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 You get political tweets from propaganda mongers? And you pass them on to us? Oh thanks Well...and what is in our tool box to deal with it I have my ideas, but the point I'm making is that however you deal with this issue, that US policy on Iran should be based off of that premise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 Oh, I could just imagine the howls of indignation if i started to post tweets from Michael Moore or something But you're an exceptionally bad example, since you get howls of indignation just for being the retard you are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 In the usual fashion of not just Obama administration foreign policy, but US Middle East policy in general, the US and Iran don't agree on the preliminary agreement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keukasmallies Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 So, at this point the US and others have firmly agreed on tentative points upon which there is no common agreement by either "side" in the negotiations. If the mantra of one of the parties (Death to the United States) prevails, there will continue to be a series of meetings to confirm the points of disagreement; following those meetings, the sanctions will be immediately lifted at such time as the agreed upon steps that continue to be disputed are verified. Barring said Death to the United States, the signatory parties will develop an agreement in perpetuity that expires in either five or ten years. Nevertheless, Iran will not have a nuclear weapon during the current US Presidents remaining twenty months in office, or for ten years, or until Israel grants approval. Why even worry about the agreement when the US' real worry is the mental state of the dullard who believes all will be well in the Middle East? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 Heard on the radio that Israel isn't as worried about the nuke program as they are the lifting of sanctions that would provide Iran more economic muscle to carry on its dirty little wars around the region. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 Heard on the radio that Israel isn't as worried about the nuke program as they are the lifting of sanctions that would provide Iran more economic muscle to carry on its dirty little wars around the region. You heard it on the radio? Well, that settles that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 You heard it on the radio? Well, that settles that. Ha ha, I know, just sounded interesting, but rings true. They have more money then Hezbolah benefits as does Shiite groups throughout the region Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/08/opinion/israels-unworkable-demands-on-iran.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=c-column-top-span-region®ion=c-column-top-span-region&WT.nav=c-column-top-span-region No wonder Obama thinks he's unreasonable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 I do have to give Obama credit for one thing on this deal. He got the Arabs and Israelis to agree on something Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keukasmallies Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 I'm more and more relaxed about the Iran - US "allies" nuclear "deal" because it will never happen! We think the agreed-upon preliminary position says this; the other side of the table thinks it says that, etc. Rather than break the terms of the agreement following its being formalized, Iran has chosen to obfuscate the matter now through differing interpretations. (Or maybe we're the ones who don't know what we've agreed to, after all John Kerry is the negotiator.) Why wait to scuttle the mess when it can easily be done now? Ah, but the ever-keen POTUS should feel good about all the misinterpretations because it allows him to play both sides of the matter with equal bluster, e.g, "Iran will never have a nuclear weapon on my watch." "If Iran has a nuclear weapon, all our options are on the table." Of course, in POTUS-speak our options are limited to a stern scolding of Iran the next time POTUS appears on Jimmy Kimmel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 I'm more and more relaxed about the Iran - US "allies" nuclear "deal" because it will never happen! We think the agreed-upon preliminary position says this; the other side of the table thinks it says that, etc. Rather than break the terms of the agreement following its being formalized, Iran has chosen to obfuscate the matter now through differing interpretations. (Or maybe we're the ones who don't know what we've agreed to, after all John Kerry is the negotiator.) Why wait to scuttle the mess when it can easily be done now? Ah, but the ever-keen POTUS should feel good about all the misinterpretations because it allows him to play both sides of the matter with equal bluster, e.g, "Iran will never have a nuclear weapon on my watch." "If Iran has a nuclear weapon, all our options are on the table." Of course, in POTUS-speak our options are limited to a stern scolding of Iran the next time POTUS appears on Jimmy Kimmel. What makes you think Obama/Kerry won't apologize to Iran for not understanding Farsi and just let them do what they want? http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/08/opinion/israels-unworkable-demands-on-iran.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=c-column-top-span-region®ion=c-column-top-span-region&WT.nav=c-column-top-span-region No wonder Obama thinks he's unreasonable The new demands are unrealistic and, if pursued, would not mean a better deal but no deal at all. He must have been asking that Iran make Israel's extermination negotiable. What a jerk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 Isn't Bibi just demanding that Iran recognize Israel's right to exist? How is that "unreasonable"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 What in the world does Iran have to do with Israel's right to exist? This ought to be good Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 Isn't Bibi just demanding that Iran recognize Israel's right to exist? How is that "unreasonable"? He also wants Iran to not nuke Israel. His demands are getting out of control and making Obama and Kerry, who is pictured below, look bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts