Cheating already
On their terms? Iran wants to take own soil samples at suspected nuclear site
Iran reportedly is insisting that its own officials be able to take soil samples at a suspected nuclear site and may get its way, in the latest complication to raise concerns from Congress as the Obama administration tries to sell the newly struck nuclear deal.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/07/...oil-tests/
Quote:I'm all for diplomacy instead of war but what's the point of making a deal with a state sponsor of terror? We just basically said don't build a bomb and we're going to leave you alone and throw some cash at you.
I haven't read the details did we at least get our prisoners back?
I don't see how any arguement could be made in support of Obama's foreign affairs over the two terms as President. He is the worst president in American history.
Democrats are even coming around to how bad a deal this is.
Quote:Democrats are even coming around to how bad a deal this is.
Who, Chuck Schumer? It's kinda obvious why he'd be against it, if you ask me...
But even if the point is conceded that some dems don't like the deal, so what? Only 33 percent have to side with Obama to allow the deal to stand.
Quote:I don't see how any arguement could be made in support of Obama's foreign affairs over the two terms as President. He is the worst president in American history.
lol - you don't know much American history.
Quote:Who, Chuck Schumer? It's kinda obvious why he'd be against it, if you ask me...
But even if the point is conceded that some dems don't like the deal, so what? Only 33 percent have to side with Obama to allow the deal to stand.
To say the least, I'm suspicious that Obama knows that he already has enough Democrat votes to prevent his upcoming veto from being overridden.
One reason I'm heavily suspicious is the Junior Senator from NY State, Kirsten Gillibrand came out in favor of the Iran Deal late last week. It was around the time Chuck Schumer came out against the Iran Deal. Considering Gillibrand is considered by many, including myself, to be a puppet of Schumer's, this leads me to believe that Schumer was given the green light by Obama to vote against the deal.
If Schumer would have come out against the Iran Deal noticeably earlier on in the process, much like NY Democrat Congresswoman Grace Meng did, I would be viewing Schumer's decision differently.
Quote: To say the least, I'm suspicious that Obama knows that he already has enough Democrat votes to prevent his upcoming veto from being overridden.
One reason I'm heavily suspicious is the Junior Senator from NY State, Kirsten Gillibrand came out in favor of the Iran Deal late last week. It was around the time Chuck Schumer came out against the Iran Deal. Considering Gillibrand is considered by many, including myself, to be a puppet of Schumer's, this leads me to believe that Schumer was given the green light by Obama to vote against the deal.
If Schumer would have come out against the Iran Deal noticeably earlier on in the process, much like NY Democrat Congresswoman Grace Meng did, I would be viewing Schumer's decision differently.
Very good point. There is no proof at the moment, but it would not surprise me one bit if there were some "back room deals" going on. It happens on both sides of the aisle.
Quote:Very good point. There is no proof at the moment, but it would not surprise me one bit if there were some "back room deals" going on. It happens on both sides of the aisle.
Thanks.
At the time the Iran Deal was reached, it was imperative from my perspective that Democrats in Congress oppose it much sooner rather than later.
Grace Meng ( NY ), Juan Vargas ( CA. ), and Albio Sires ( NJ ) came out against the agreement noticeably earlier than any of the others. I expect them to be treated like outcasts by Obama and those that also support the deal. Kathleen Rice ( NY ) then came out against the agreement but I'll give her the benefit of the doubt because she co-write an article before the agreement was made official in which she expressed major concern about what would be in the deal. The rest, I'm NOT willing to give the benefit of the doubt. They waited too long. Unless this deal is defeated, they should be held responsible along with those that vote for it.
Quote:Thanks.
At the time the Iran Deal was reached, it was imperative from my perspective that Democrats in Congress oppose it much sooner rather than later.
Grace Meng ( NY ), Juan Vargas ( CA. ), and Albio Sires ( NJ ) came out against the agreement noticeably earlier than any of the others. I expect them to be treated like outcasts by Obama and those that also support the deal. Kathleen Rice ( NY ) then came out against the agreement but I'll give her the benefit of the doubt because she co-write an article before the agreement was made official in which she expressed major concern about what would be in the deal. The rest, I'm NOT willing to give the benefit of the doubt. They waited too long. Unless this deal is defeated, they should be held responsible along with those that vote for it.
What about the ex generals who came out in favor of it?
Quote:What about the ex generals who came out in favor of it?
Anyone that came out for it that should know better, including politicians, ex. generals, and scientists, should be held accountable and I believe will ultimately be.
Quote: Anyone that came out for it that should know better, including politicians, ex. generals, and scientists, should be held accountable and I believe will ultimately be.
Oh you think it's the apocalypse. Nevermind, I should have known better.
Why do I get the feeling there are way too many people itching for some war?
Quote:Oh you think it's the apocalypse. Nevermind, I should have known better.
I certainly believe the chances of the United States, Israel, and/ or many other countries are in much greater danger of a nuclear catastrophe if this deal becomes a reality.
Quote:Why do I get the feeling there are way too many people itching for some war?
Being that Iran has 4 U.S. hostages, this already is a war.
Quote:Since this thread is going again, I saw these this morning, seemed relevant:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/nat...story.html
http://news.antiwar.com/2015/08/10/anti-...iran-deal/
A couple pull quotes from the Washington Post Article
"Not only would U.S. global credibility be undermined, Kerry said, but also the
dollar’s position as the world’s reserve currency would be threatened."
" 'If everybody thinks ‘Oh, no, we’re just tough. . . . we can force people. . . . America is strong enough, our
banks are tough enough, we can just bring the hammer down and force people to do what we want to do.’ "
First of all, America just went through essentially the largest monetary expansion in the History of Man. Right now we're sitting just north of 100% Debt to GDP ratio and our national debt is growing at about 4-5 times greater than our GDP on an annual basis. This is a large part of why for the first time our credit was downgraded. If we are already at a point where another country can sit across the table from us and threaten our status as the reserve currency (vital to the strength of our currency and there is a meeting of the IMF scheduled for this October and they have threatened to introduce another Global reserve option) then this should be a bigger campaign item than what someone tweeted, what someone emailed or how someone is doing with NASCAR DADS. There is no greater long term threat to the United States than our future economic outlook.
Having said all that, there is nothing for them to replace the Dollar with on a Global scale. No other currency has the volume and strength to replace the Dollar on the world stage. the current proposal i believe has something to do with creating deposit recipts or some such thing for the IMF. at current, the Dollar represents about 62% of world reserves and it would take a titanic shift in the short term for that to happen and the fallout would affect all countries not just the US.
Also, I'm Glad that there are generals and heads of lobbying organizations who support the president and John Kerry. The supreme Leader of Iran on the other hand, has written a book about how he will decieve America and eventually wipe us off the Map and in open defiance of the UN has sent the head of their Khudz force to Russia to work out the details of how many conventional weapons and ICBMS 150 billion dollars can buy you.
Furthermore, the very idea that THE UNITED STATES needs to establish Diplomatic credibility on the world stage when dealing with the leading state sponsor of Terror is PREPOSTEROUS! An Iranian General is already responsible for the killing of hundreds of Americans, they helped fund parts of the Insurgency in IRAQ, they fund terrorist organizations all over the world including those who openly attack our ALLY ISRAEL. I'm leaving a lot out, but Any of these actions in and of themselves are acts of War, not to mention that they have already given the Middle Finger to the international community!
Quote:What about the ex generals who came out in favor of it?
Just like the economists who said that unemployment wouldn't get above 8% if we passed the stimulus package. Just like the insurance experts who said we were all going to save 2500 on our insurance premiums and if you like your doctor you can keep your doctor right?
Quote:Thanks.
At the time the Iran Deal was reached, it was imperative from my perspective that Democrats in Congress oppose it much sooner rather than later.
Grace Meng ( NY ), Juan Vargas ( CA. ), and Albio Sires ( NJ ) came out against the agreement noticeably earlier than any of the others. I expect them to be treated like outcasts by Obama and those that also support the deal. Kathleen Rice ( NY ) then came out against the agreement but I'll give her the benefit of the doubt because she co-write an article before the agreement was made official in which she expressed major concern about what would be in the deal. The rest, I'm NOT willing to give the benefit of the doubt. They waited too long. Unless this deal is defeated, they should be held responsible along with those that vote for it.
That's exactly my point regarding the "back room deals" that happens in today's politics.