That's exactly my point regarding the "back room deals" that happens in today's politics.

 

  These back room deals are one of the major reasons that many members of Congress end up remaining in office.  It looks like they are attempting to accomplish something but in reality the only thing they care about is remaining in office and getting the perks that go with it.  

 

  There's no question that this is a problem with both parties and is one of the many reasons why I support Ted Cruz because of his position/ actions regarding this.  

 

  The bottom line is term limits in the Senate and House are essential.    This is something that should be asked of every candidate at a future debate.   Republican and Democrat.  

---

Ok. Deal is bad

Solutions?

---

Blakes Life Matters

Let's not give the bad people 150 billon dollars to be worse. 

---

Ok. Deal is bad

Solutions?

 

At the minimum, keep current sanctions in place.

 

Demand the release of the American hostages that they currently hold.

 

Demand real un-announced inspections of nuclear sites.

 

That would be a start.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

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!

More war. Perfect. 

---

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?  

Trust no one except the people you agree with ideologically. They are only ones that have real thoughts on the matter. Do I have that correct?

---

  These back room deals are one of the major reasons that many members of Congress end up remaining in office.  It looks like they are attempting to accomplish something but in reality the only thing they care about is remaining in office and getting the perks that go with it.  

 

  There's no question that this is a problem with both parties and is one of the many reasons why I support Ted Cruz because of his position/ actions regarding this.  

 

  The bottom line is term limits in the Senate and House are essential.    This is something that should be asked of every candidate at a future debate.   Republican and Democrat.  

Agreed on term limits. 100%

---

At the minimum, keep current sanctions in place.

 

Demand the release of the American hostages that they currently hold.

 

Demand real un-announced inspections of nuclear sites.

 

That would be a start.

So basically, in your idea of a "deal", you want them to get nothing in return for giving up something we don't want them to have? It seems to me getting the sanctions lifted is the single reason they are negotiating in the first place. 

 

As far as I understand it, all known sites have real un-announced inspections. The idea that any country would allow another country, unfettered access to anything, anytime, anywhere, is delusional and an unreasonable expectation. 

---

So basically, in your idea of a "deal", you want them to get nothing in return for giving up something we don't want them to have? It seems to me getting the sanctions lifted is the single reason they are negotiating in the first place. 

 

As far as I understand it, all known sites have real un-announced inspections. The idea that any country would allow another country, unfettered access to anything, anytime, anywhere, is delusional and an unreasonable expectation. 

 

You seem to think we should play fair with them.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

More war. Perfect. 

 

 

Trust no one except the people you agree with ideologically. They are only ones that have real thoughts on the matter. Do I have that correct?

 

 

I'm glad to see that your commitment to a detailed point by point to a response you disagree with hasn't left you old friend.  

 

I trust people that have been proven correct over time and have been proven to be honest over time.  

 

As for war its not the people of the United States demanding war with Iran, its the leadership of war chanting DEATH TO AMERICA, killing american soldiers and arming themselves for a common conflict.  It's the people of America simply saying let's not help arm our enemies!

 

We gave up a more stringent inspection regime to the Russians in the START treaty (which they have threatened to violate) than we got in these negotiations.  Some of the most secretive and suspicious sites are completely off limits (Putchine), when you game out the appeals process the time it would take for us to get in and inspect is greater than their estimated break out time, American inspectors are bared from Iranian soil, and Its gotten so ridiculous in some instances that they are demanding that they are the ones who collect the soil samples to give to the IAEA.  That's a joke!  they can't even keep the top General in country, he's off negotiating arms deals with Russia in clear violation of international mandates.  

 

Oh and the snap back sanctions exempt any LONG TERM deals made with IRAN.  

 

So what you have is Iran as a threshold nuclear power that can do whatever they want whenever they want with the 150 billion dollars that we just gave back to them and maybe some day if they're in a good mood they might hand over some soil samples they collected from a site of their choosing after three months of bureaucratic nonsense...   Now that's CHANGE you can believe in!!!!

---

You seem to think we should play fair with them.

I think negotiating with an enemy is an important step in bringing about a safer world. What would you propose? War with anyone you disagree with? Wait I already know that answer. 

---

I'm glad to see that your commitment to a detailed point by point to a response you disagree with hasn't left you old friend.  

 

I trust people that have been proven correct over time and have been proven to be honest over time.  

 

As for war its not the people of the United States demanding war with Iran, its the leadership of war chanting DEATH TO AMERICA, killing american soldiers and arming themselves for a common conflict.  It's the people of America simply saying let's not help arm our enemies!

 

We gave up a more stringent inspection regime to the Russians in the START treaty (which they have threatened to violate) than we got in these negotiations.  Some of the most secretive and suspicious sites are completely off limits (Putchine), when you game out the appeals process the time it would take for us to get in and inspect is greater than their estimated break out time, American inspectors are bared from Iranian soil, and Its gotten so ridiculous in some instances that they are demanding that they are the ones who collect the soil samples to give to the IAEA.  That's a joke!  they can't even keep the top General in country, he's off negotiating arms deals with Russia in clear violation of international mandates.  

 

Oh and the snap back sanctions exempt any LONG TERM deals made with IRAN.  

 

So what you have is Iran as a threshold nuclear power that can do whatever they want whenever they want with the 150 billion dollars that we just gave back to them and maybe some day if they're in a good mood they might hand over some soil samples they collected from a site of their choosing after three months of bureaucratic nonsense...   Now that's CHANGE you can believe in!!!!

 

 

I am not sure what you expect. You approach the matter from a place of fear and a desire to flex power on a world stage. I do not. I support peaceful solutions and anything that even attempts to avoid all out conflict I am in favor of. It's a real hard debate to have because I genuinely do not understand the absolutism some exhibit in matters like these.

 

These generals are not trustworthy or were proven incorrect time and time again? Same with the nuclear watchdogs that support this deal? Name the trustworthy ones. Presumably they are politicians or journalists of some kind. I won't expect many scientists based on your thoughts on them.

 

If they wanted to race for a bomb they could have prior to this deal and still can if the opponents of the deal get their way. This deal makes it harder. All known sites can be inspected anytime why do we keep perpetuating this myth that there are no any time inspections? There are. As I said in a previous reply it's absurd to expect any country to allow any country full, unfettered access to anywhere in there country. 

 

Again, what's the alternative? It's ok to say it. War. That's that Bibby wants and that's what the warmongers want. I do not. I support negotiation. I am sure many on the right do as well but they approach negotiation from a perceived stance of power that is just not there (outside of full true war). US does not control the world as evidenced by multiple nations being involved in these negotiations. 

 

The deal is not perfect, no deal is perfect in any negotiation between nations. IMO, we ought not let perfect be the enemy of the good. 

---

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.

You throw the words "held accountable" around a lot...surely you're not advocating for criminal prosecution of private citizens who have voiced support for this deal.

---

I am not sure what you expect. You approach the matter from a place of fear and a desire to flex power on a world stage.

 

It's not fear to acknowledge when someone clearly states that they want to do you and your country serious harm.  That's common sense.  


 

I do not. I support peaceful solutions and anything that even attempts to avoid all out conflict I am in favor of.

 

Peace in our time, peace at any cost.  Appeasement only makes your aggressor more aggressive, as evidenced by the blatant flap to international law by the Iranians thus far
.  

 

It's a real hard debate to have because I genuinely do not understand the absolutism some exhibit in matters like these.

 

It's not absolutism.  I would support a meaningful negotiated settlement with the Iranians, i just know this isn't it.  


 

These generals are not trustworthy or were proven incorrect time and time again? Same with the nuclear watchdogs that support this deal? Name the trustworthy ones. Presumably they are politicians or journalists of some kind. I won't expect many scientists based on your thoughts on them.

 

Lol, what thoughts on them.  let's not try and rehash old debates by mis-characterizing my position.  As it stands right now, the Iranian regime is ALREADY IN VIOLATION OF INTERNATIONAL LAW and we haven't even voted on anything yet.  This isn't a matter of confidence, or credibility, its a matter of pure fact.  You are talking about a few unnamed retired Generals writing letters and they have their top General who we KNOW killed AMERICAN SOLDIERS out buying weapons preparing for war with us.   This is getting insane.


 

If they wanted to race for a bomb they could have prior to this deal and still can if the opponents of the deal get their way. This deal makes it harder.

 

How, I just gave you a laundry list of reasons why we got noting out of this deal.  And their economy was on the verge of collapse and we had frozen over 150 billion dollars of their assets.  Iran had TONS of motivation to get this deal done.  


 

All known sites can be inspected anytime

 

no they can't  http://www.timesofisrael.com/iran-talks-...with-iaea/  http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/07/1...V920150716


 

why do we keep perpetuating this myth that there are no any time inspections? There are. As I said in a previous reply it's absurd to expect any country to allow any country full, unfettered access to anywhere in there country. 

 

Because there's a minimum 24 day waiting period and its more like 90 with the appeals process.  


 

Again, what's the alternative? It's ok to say it. War. That's that Bibby wants and that's what the warmongers want. I do not. I support negotiation. I am sure many on the right do as well but they approach negotiation from a perceived stance of power that is just not there (outside of full true war). US does not control the world as evidenced by multiple nations being involved in these negotiations. 

 

The deal is not perfect, no deal is perfect in any negotiation between nations. IMO, we ought not let perfect be the enemy of the good. 

 

If this was good i'd agree with you.  This is as close to full capitulation as you get without writing the words term of surrender on the cover page of the agreement.  

 

What do I expect?  If Iran wants to be treated like a responsible nation LET IT ACT LIKE ONE!  Recognize israel's right to exist, recognize OUR right to exist, stop funding terrorism and give us back the hostages.  Let us verify all of the above for six months and lets talk about sanctions relief.  Those are negotiations.  That's diplomacy.  

 

Right now as we speak the leader of the country just published a book about how they are going to deceive us and wipe us off the Map.  Their top general who killed hundreds of American soldiers is entering into negotiations with the Russians on how to buy advanced weapons systems.  Even the architects of this agreement CONCEDE that the increase in funds is going to terrorist organizations and specifically those who wish to kill our soldiers abroad and the people of our ally Israel.  

 

when you concede that none of the above behavior has to change and that we will allow billions of dollars to flow into their economy then  it is you and YOUR ilk sir, who are operating from a point of fear Mr. Chamberlain.  

---

You throw the words "held accountable" around a lot...surely you're not advocating for criminal prosecution of private citizens who have voiced support for this deal.

 

the problem with knowing you are better than what you just typed is that i know you are better than what you just typed.

---

Not going to quote that whole post to respond to one point, but several "responsible nations" do not recognize Israel.

---

You throw the words "held accountable" around a lot...surely you're not advocating for criminal prosecution of private citizens who have voiced support for this deal.

 

No.   Private citizens have every right to advocate for the deal.

 

The accountability I mentioned has much greater consequences. 

---

Not going to quote that whole post to respond to one point, but several "responsible nations" do not recognize Israel.

 

 They aren't " responsible nations ". 

---

Not going to quote that whole post to respond to one point, but several "responsible nations" do not recognize Israel.

 

and i probably wouldn't support giving them 150 billion dollars and a nuke either.

---

I got to agree with JJ on this.  We negotiated as if we were the ones that needed 150 Billion.  We negotiated as if we were desperate.  Seriously, we couldn't get 4 hostages back?  I think Obama has been extremely weak when it comes to foreign affairs.  He negotiates harder within the confines of the US Government and with the Republican party.  I just don't get the desperation.

---