Quote:That's what you take of my multi-part statement? How about linking the text where the economic sanctions are not lifted immediately?
You stated that I wanted them to give up basically everything. That was what I want. What I want is a lot different from what I would expect in the treaty, and I never complained that I couldn't have what I wanted. One thing I would expect of any agreement is anytime/anywhere inspections. Otherwise it's just "trust us" from a religion that considers it acceptable to lie on an agreement with a non-believer.
Ok fine,
You don't want them to force women to wear burkas (they don't), I don't want people vilifying women for getting abortions or for gays getting married. You can't force culture changes in people that don't want to change.
I was specifically talking about the weapons because that's the part that came out.
I'd rather not link to speculation because, as far as I know, that's all there is right now. What about linking the full text? I stated earlier about me taking a cautiously optimistic approach until more than just "guide lines" or speeches about it are available. Forgive me for not being apocalyptic over what seems to me to be a chance at something good without having to raze a country first.
Quote:Women are not required to wear burqas in Iran. They are required by law to wear a hijab (head covering) but it's not strictly and uniformly enforced
Quote:^
A lot of people would benefit more from this discussion if they had an actual cultural knowledge of Iran and the Middle East. The reason why we're in so much trouble with all these other countries is because of a lack of cultural dialogue and understanding. This is not merely an intellectual theory, this is a fact.
Quote:The U.S. president who started the second Gulf war did not understand the difference between Shiites and Sunnis. We are still dealing with the effects of that ignorance to this day.
Why not stick to the topic at hand, rather than divert it to the discussion between burqas and hijabs?
Quote:Why not stick to the topic at hand, rather than divert it to the discussion between burqas and hijabs?
Why not quote the guy who drew that tangent? These quotes came from that.
Quote:Why not quote the guy who drew that tangent? These quotes came from that.
Because that wasn't his point or his message regarding the topic. Rather than address his point, it's just "cherry picking" a comment to divert from the real message. RJ's second comment is a thinly veiled attack on President Bush and has nothing to do with the topic of this thread. I could have easily challenged the truth to the claim, but then I would be falling into the "typical liberal tactic" of diverting from the REAL issue and defending the opposition to his comment. I would rather stay focused on the topic at hand, that being this deal with Iran.
Quote:Because that wasn't his point or his message regarding the topic. Rather than address his point, it's just "cherry picking" a comment to divert from the real message. RJ's second comment is a thinly veiled attack on President Bush and has nothing to do with the topic of this thread. I could have easily challenged the truth to the claim, but then I would be falling into the "typical liberal tactic" of diverting from the REAL issue and defending the opposition to his comment. I would rather stay focused on the topic at hand, that being this deal with Iran.
Instead you comment on the derailment started by a person you agree with, then when asked about it you accuse people correcting him of a liberal tactic. What a conservative tactic.
Quote:Or we could just go bomb them now over throw their regime again.
You know, i understand where you're coming from. If i had to defend the indefensible I'd get a little frustrated too. I mean you went so far as to say that Iran's primary focus of their nuclear program was MEDICAL RESEARCH... I can see why you wouldn't want to keep having to bend over backwards to try and retort reasoned concerns.
I mean basically this is like your son coming in the door telling you that he spent his entire college fund on a car that he has never seen or test driven based on a picture handed to him by a guy on probation for fraud. When you ask the son why he did it he starts rambling off about the kelly blue book value of the car he's never seen and never driven. When you ask him why he would do something so silly he responds that "hey, what would you want me to do, WALK TO WORK?"
When you inform him that now he's walking back to work without a college fund then he just gets mad and slams his room door and shouts insults... kind of like you did above!
Quote:Yes war is the answer.
It's coming whether you like it or not. The question is whether or not they have the bomb when it happens.
Quote:It's coming whether you like it or not. The question is whether or not they have the bomb when it happens.
If it comes to war, nothing will stop Iran from getting the bomb.
Quote:Instead you comment on the derailment started by a person you agree with, then when asked about it you accuse people correcting him of a liberal tactic. What a conservative tactic.
You don't get it do you?
The followup comments had nothing to do with what he said regarding the topic at hand. They were pointing out his mis-statement regarding burqas (not required in Iran). Sure he was wrong in his initial statement, but when that's the only comment on a discussion regarding the topic of this thread, it's an attempt to divert discussion away from said topic, much like you are trying to do.
How about instead, address how
other Arab states in the region don't like this deal?
How about instead address how
Americans are being held in Iranian prisons, and their release was not part of this deal?
No, the liberal argument has no answers to these questions, so let's focus on burqas and hijabs, and when called out regarding it, then start an argument as to why.
Quote:You know, i understand where you're coming from. If i had to defend the indefensible I'd get a little frustrated too. I mean you went so far as to say that Iran's primary focus of their nuclear program was MEDICAL RESEARCH... I can see why you wouldn't want to keep having to bend over backwards to try and retort reasoned concerns.
I mean basically this is like your son coming in the door telling you that he spent his entire college fund on a car that he has never seen or test driven based on a picture handed to him by a guy on probation for fraud. When you ask the son why he did it he starts rambling off about the kelly blue book value of the car he's never seen and never driven. When you ask him why he would do something so silly he responds that "hey, what would you want me to do, WALK TO WORK?"
When you inform him that now he's walking back to work without a college fund then he just gets mad and slams his room door and shouts insults... kind of like you did above!
I am sure you were just chomping at the bit on this but please go ahead and show me where I said this. There really is no reason to fabricate things because you don't agree with my patience on the matter.
Quote:I think that's a very hyperbolic stance to take on the matter but I do understand your perspective. Israel is in danger but it's not because of this deal.
I beg to differ. Israel has more of a stake than anyone in making sure Iran doesn't get its hands on nuclear weapons. Right now, their biggest ace in the hole vs. the Arab Middle East is that they have 80 nukes to everyone else's 0. If Iran develops nuclear weapons, they lose that edge, and an all-out war becomes much more likely. I believe Israel would sooner attack Iran than let them finish a bomb if they get actionable intelligence indicating that Iran is continuing its nuclear efforts, so yes, I would say this agreement puts Israel in a little more danger than it was in before. If nothing else, it shoves them a little bit closer to the brink.
Quote:You don't get it do you?
The followup comments had nothing to do with what he said regarding the topic at hand. They were pointing out his mis-statement regarding burqas (not required in Iran). Sure he was wrong in his initial statement, but when that's the only comment on a discussion regarding the topic of this thread, it's an attempt to divert discussion away from said topic, much like you are trying to do.
How about instead, address how other Arab states in the region don't like this deal?
How about instead address how Americans are being held in Iranian prisons, and their release was not part of this deal?
No, the liberal argument has no answers to these questions, so let's focus on burqas and hijabs, and when called out regarding it, then start an argument as to why.
I understand the frustration. The deal was on the nuclear sanctions and ambitions and you wanted more than what was achieved. I get that. That's not how negotiations work, you of all people should know that given your constant statements about all the political books you read. You cannot get everything you want.
Forgive me if I don't give a hoot what a nation like SA thinks about anything given their own hand in certain events both current and say 14 years ago.
In the end, as I have said before I will be cautiously optimistic until all the actual facts are out rather than being apocalyptic on the matter. Having oversight is better than nothing and having some limitations are better than none especially when support for sanctions was potentially running in lieu of a deal.
Quote:I beg to differ. Israel has more of a stake than anyone in making sure Iran doesn't get its hands on nuclear weapons. Right now, their biggest ace in the hole vs. the Arab Middle East is that they have 80 nukes to everyone else's 0. If Iran develops nuclear weapons, they lose that edge, and an all-out war becomes much more likely. I believe Israel would sooner attack Iran than let them finish a bomb if they get actionable intelligence indicating that Iran is continuing its nuclear efforts, so yes, I would say this agreement puts Israel in a little more danger than it was in before. If nothing else, it shoves them a little bit closer to the brink.
I was not trying to imply there was no danger. Quite the opposite. I was just saying this topic was not the reason. If it is as poor as the apocalypse crowd would have us believe then sure. There are plenty of other reasons to say they are in danger as is the entire region.
Quote:Have at it:
http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/documen...deal/1651/
Tell me how a deal which requires no anytime/anyplace inspections is anything more than a waste of paper.
That is to much to read at work. I'll read it tongiht or tomorrow if I don't get off early enough.
I wonder, is there a precedent for IAEA having those types of inspections? When the "Framework" was announced I believe any kind of inspection was off the table from Iran.
Quote:Why not stick to the topic at hand, rather than divert it to the discussion between burqas and hijabs?
Malabar made a point about how the Iranians treat women, and how it should affect our dealings with them. That is directly on topic, and I pointed out a small difference that is typically misunderstood. The point I made about Bush was valid and true, and my intention was not to veil it thinly. His ignorance has been well documented and played a part in the mishandling of post-war Iraq, and if continued can negatively affect our relationship with Iran. That same ignorance was on display in the post to which I replied.
You need to get down off your high horse long enough to realize you derailed the thread as much as I did.
Now carry on in your belief that all liberals act in one manner, while you conservatives are the only ones above the fray.
