Quote:Why do liberals have to lie to try and make their points? If there was a law against disingenuous attempts at moral relativism what would you guys do with your time?
Claiming someone's opinion is a lie? Whatever helps you feel good.
Quote:What are you talking about? The president of the United States said that the break out time in 10 years is a 0. This isn't in dispute.
How exactly is a time frame giving them a path?
Quote:This masochistic self deprecation is getting trite. "Michael Brown got shot so we should stand by and let Christians be beheaded on a beach somewhere." Imperfection vs. evil ladies and gentlemen.
Or maybe the cop who was shot execution style at a gas station. Kids getting shot in a classroom, or movie theatre...that you call an imperfection? But I get ya. Let's ignore problems here and fix them where they've been doing crazy things for over 1000 years.
How can we justify saving the world when our own little nest is having some serious issues.
Like a marriage counselor who has been divorced 3 times.
Quote:Every society will have its misfits. There's a huge difference from the actions of the very small percentage of criminals in our society vs. a nation of people including their governmental and cultural leaders who believe that it's a right and proper thing to kill "infidels."
As part of this deal we are giving the Iranian theocracy access to $150B, money that can and probably will be used to enhance their bomb development and buy missiles to deliver them. Using your analogy this would be equivalent to giving a movie theater shooter $10,000 if he promised to not kill any more people (oh, and we'll give you 24 days notice before we search your basement for weapons).
We are not doing it. We do not have the money. We are doing this with a coalition of other nations. This is not a terribly hard concept to get yet so many knuckleheads try to pretend this is all on Obama/Kerry or that they physically have the money in a white house safe preparing to FEDEX it over to Tehran.
I like how it's conveniently ignored that if the Iranians were building a bomb in a location, that even if they moved everything that we could still detect they were making the bomb for far longer than 24 hours. Far Far longer.
Quote:I like how it's conveniently ignored that if the Iranians were building a bomb in a location, that even if they moved everything that we could still detect they were making the bomb for far longer than 24 hours. Far Far longer.
Forget about the Lipton tea, it's over Rock. Obama literally gave them a bomb and 150 billion.
Quote:Forget about the Lipton tea, it's over Rock. Obama literally gave them a bomb and 150 billion.
Right. Because he's a secret muslim. Who... drinks alcohol, and shaves.
Quote:WE have control of most if not all of the $150B. And if the US refused to sign this deal, would it still go through? If so, why bother to sign a deal that isn't in our interests, it's not as if we're supporting our allies by signing it if it would go through anyway. If not, then let's get at least a fraction of what we want from it before accepting it.
Frankly, if the EU is on our side they should at least insist that the American prisoners be released. After all, we provide 95% of their defense.
I asked earlier for who controls this money. The answer I got was something along the line of world banking institutions so any citation you have that the US controls most if not all the funds would help this.
The people that signed it do believe it's in our best interests as do the other nations involved in their interests, as do non proliferation experts among others. Opponents do not so I fail to see what point you are trying to make.
Quote:And I ask again (but maybe not here) what does the US get out of the deal? Under this deal Iran can still secretly build a bomb. This changes nothing except it ends sanctions and frees up a lot of money for the "death to America" theocracy.
So you don't have citation? Just talking points, rhetoric, and pure speculation? Cool.
I'll say I'd ask again but you guys never present an alternative. It's total capitulation or war with war being the most likely. It changes a lot but because you simply must be partisan, terrified, or both potentially that you cannot see the positives at all or take the opinion form non-proliferation experts. This is my shocked face. That aside, what was the GOP alternative to what the administration was attempting?
Quote:That's a flat out lie. The alternative, which I have presented many times, is continuing negotiations for a deal where American prisoners are released, verification visits will be immediate, and American investigators can be part of the verification process. I believe that this (Obama's) deal will make war more likely.
Right now the count is 34 senators who will join in to uphold a presidential veto. That means 66 senators oppose the plan, a clear majority. Polls show a majority of Americans also oppose the plan. Whether you like the deal or not, treaties should require a large majority approval. The fact that Congress passed a bill allowing Obama to get around the 2/3 majority approval required in the Constitution is appalling. There is no longer an opposition party. We are subjects of an out of control government.
I have seen nothing that shows me this makes war more likely. The opposite is the case IMO. Again though, you are presenting a situation where the US is the only party at the table with Tehran. That is not the case I don't understand why people think we control the entire deal. We do not.
I don't know much about the bolded but I am inclined to agree.
By opposition party do you mean opposition to the current president or opposition to the president in general or something else entirely?
Quote:There is no longer an opposition party. We are subjects of an out of control government.
Do you really think things would be any different if the Republican Party were in the driver's seat? That's not how politics works. In politics, the general rule is to force everything you can through while you're in power, because once the other side takes office, forget about it.
All the left has left are straw man arguments.
This deal or war. That's rhetorical nonsense. That would be like an 8th grader getting every question wrong on his math homework and telling his teacher "would you rather i just didn't do it at all?" These were supposed to be the smartest people the world had ever seen and we got this mess? ridiculous.
We weren't the only people at the table. True, but we are the one's that bought the table. Our umbrella of protection and funding has allowed the proliferation of Europe as we know it. There is no question that we are the worlds superpower and when things go wrong you don't see Germany and France declaring blood and treasure for the proliferation of freedom. The idea that America doesn't have the influence not to get absolutely trounced the way that we did is so asinine it doesn't merit discussion. When you look at Cuba Berghdal etc. etc. you can see that this policy of capitulation engagement is what Obama wants. It's disingenuous to say otherwise.
31 pages and 150 billion dollars and i have still not seen one tangible verifiable thing that we got in these negotiations aside from a bunch of hot air from a state that's a proven liar. So much for the party of science.
As for the experts, Shovel ready jobs, 2500 less on your premiums, if you like your doctor you can keep your doctor.... do i really have to keep going. I can't believe that people are still carrying water for this guy.
And just as an aside we are talking about roughly 150 billion dollars in frozen or heavily restricted Iranian assets frozen in the international banking system that is by and large underwritten by the US dollar.
Quote:The Pubs ran on a platform of opposing the Dem position on these items. The fact that they ignored the wishes of the citizens who voted them in based on these positions tells us all we need to know. There is only one party. The Pubs are merely pretending to be an opposition party.
Ok, this makes more sense.
And I do agree, to a point. The two major parties go out of their way to point out their differences, mostly surrounding social issues, while not really letting slip that ideologically, they aren't really all that different. We need a third party, and I really believe that a stronger libertarian presence would be a great thing for the US, as it would pull voters away from both parties.