It's certainly interesting to think about a few things.

 

President Obama has not exactly been "friendly" towards Israel during his presidency.  Why is that?  After all, Israel is our most important ally in the Middle East.

 

President Obama has made quite a few attempts at "diplomacy" by reaching out to Muslim countries with "mutual respect and mutual interests", particularly Iran.

 

President Obama claims that "Islam has always been a part of America’s story", yet there is really nothing to prove that.  Quite frankly, the opposite can be proven.  I don't want to turn this thread to religion, but I think this point should be addressed.

 

I believe that it's important to understand that this deal, from what we are seeing is bad not only for us, but for our closest ally in the region (Israel).

 

Hmmm...  Obama hasn't been friendly with Israel?  I wonder why?

---

http://www.breitbart.com/national-securi...in-russia/

 

Brietbart, huh?  OK...  So there are rumors...  Gotcha...

 

I've heard rumors too.  The rumors are that Iran, the USA, Russia, the UK, China, France, and Germany agree to keep Iran nuclear free in exchange for sanctions to be lifted.  Some of those sanctions aren't liked by opponents.  But Iran agrees to not build a nuclear bomb.  

 

Lot's of rumors running around...  It's hard to figure out which ones to believe, huh?

 

Wait, I know, I know...  You believe the rumors that Russia and Iran are going to break the deal...

 

I believe the rumors that the P5+1 are agreeing that Iran will not develop a nuclear bomb...

 

Time will tell, I guess...

---

Brietbart, huh? OK... So there are rumors... Gotcha...


I've heard rumors too. The rumors are that Iran, the USA, Russia, the UK, China, France, and Germany agree to keep Iran nuclear free in exchange for sanctions to be lifted. Some of those sanctions aren't liked by opponents. But Iran agrees to not build a nuclear bomb.


Lot's of rumors running around... It's hard to figure out which ones to believe, huh?


Wait, I know, I know... You believe the rumors that Russia and Iran are going to break the deal...


I believe the rumors that the P5+1 are agreeing that Iran will not develop a nuclear bomb...


Time will tell, I guess...

Reminds me of that time when another Democrat President signed a deal with a rogue state to freeze their nuclear program.


Time does tell.


History also repeats itself.


No rumor involved.

---

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

Reminds me of that time when another Democrat President signed a deal with a rogue state to freeze their nuclear program.


Time does tell.


History also repeats itself.


No rumor involved.

 

What about the time when we were told that we'd be greeted as liberators and the war would pay for itself...  

 

History does repeat itself, but only when one ignores it...

 


The Iran Nuclear Deal Is Much More Detailed Than The North Korean Agreement, And The Countries' Circumstances Are Different
<p style="color:rgb(66,66,66);font-family:arial, helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;"><b>State Department's Marie Harf: Unlike Iran, "North Korea Had Produced Weapons-Grade Plutonium Prior" To Agreement. </b>In a press briefing on April 23, State Department Spokeswoman Marie Harf addressed the comparison between the Iran deal and the North Korean Agreed Framework:

MS HARF: There's no - the comparison is just - they're completely different things, and I'm happy to talk through why a little bit. The comprehensive deal we are seeking to negotiate with Iran is fundamentally different than what we did in terms of our approach to North Korea. In the early 1990s, North Korea had produced weapons-grade plutonium prior to agreeing to limited IAEA inspections. After the Agreed Framework, they agreed to more intrusive inspections; but in 2002, when they finally broke its commitments, its violations were detected by the IAEA. We've also said very publicly that one of the reasons we have the Additional Protocol now, which is a key part of what we're negotiating with Iran, is in fact because of the lessons we learned from the North Korea situation. [U.S. Department of State,4/23/15]

<p style="color:rgb(66,66,66);font-family:arial, helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;"><b><i>National Interest</i></b><b>: Unlike The Four-Page North Korea Deal, Iran Deal Has "Unprecedented Degree Of Monitoring And Inspections."</b> Paul Pillar, nonresident senior fellow for both the Center for Security Studies and the Brookings Institution, wrote in his blog for <i>The National Interest</i>, "The Agreed Framework was a sketchy four-page document that provided for little in the way of monitoring and enforcement. In contrast, the leading feature of the agreement being negotiated with Iran is its unprecedented degree of monitoring and inspections. The final agreement will have an enforcement and dispute resolution mechanism consistent with the Additional Protocol pertaining to work of the International Atomic Energy Agency." [<i>The National Interest</i>,5/19/15]

<p style="color:rgb(66,66,66);font-family:arial, helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;"><b>CEIP: Unlike North Korean Agreement, "The P5+1 Are Unified In Wanting To Prevent Iran From Acquiring Nuclear Weapons."</b> According to an April 28 article by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (CEIP) titled "Why the Iran Nuclear Deal Is Not the North Korea Deal," all members of the P5+1, including Russia and China, are involved and invested in the deal, unlike the bilateral North Korean deal between only the U.S. and North Korea:

The negotiations that produced the 1994 Agreed Framework were conducted by the United States and the DPRK alone. The other permanent members of the UN Security Council were not invested in it and in its enforcement.

The P5+1 perceive major national and collective interests in preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons and in upholding the NPT. Each of these states has invested national prestige in demonstrating that their collective effort can abate a threat to international peace and security. They have made this clear in a number of ways, including by authorizing and enforcing an unprecedented array of economic sanctions on Iran. The intensity of these states' support for sanctions has varied, and the P5+1--particularly Russia--may have different priorities in dealing with Iran if and when the nuclear case is resolved. But there is reason to believe that they all are prepared to hold Iran to account for fulfilling the terms of an agreement. [Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 4/28/15]

<p style="color:rgb(66,66,66);font-family:arial, helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;"><b>CEIP: Iran Deal "Explicitly Addresses All Pathways To The Bomb." </b>The April 28 CEIP article further explained that in contrast to the deal with North Korea, every path to nuclear weapons is addressed in the Iran deal:

The Agreed Framework focused specifically on the DPRK's plutonium program. The framework also reaffirmed the DPRK's broader commitment not to seek nuclear weapons by any means, pursuant to the 1992 Joint Declaration of South and North Korea on the Denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. As it turned out, the DPRK secretly imported uranium enrichment technology from Pakistan and developed a parallel route for acquiring weapons-usable fissile material.

The proposed agreement with Iran explicitly covers both the uranium and plutonium pathways to acquiring nuclear weapons, and includes extensive measures to verify that declared and undeclared pathways would be blocked. [Carnegie Endowment for International Peace,4/28/15]

 

Speaking of History, didn't the USA and the USSR negotiate nuclear deals as well?  Yes, I know that the USSR already had nuclear weapons, but the fact remains, it's better to negotiate that to run a "cold war"...  

 

I wonder how many people thought Reagan was a fool for working with the Soviets?  I actually remember him being lauded for dealing with a nation that once said they would bury us...  

---

Shouldn't the Iranians be allowed nuclear weapons in case the American government goes all tyrannical?

---

The second ammendment doesnt mean a citizen can own nukes the iranians arent citizens and citizens can be stripped of their right to bear arms through due process.


I love how opponents to the deal quote facts and specific terns of the deal to justify our podition while mr. Burgandy just reverts back to talking points.

---

The second ammendment doesnt mean a citizen can own nukes the iranians arent citizens and citizens can be stripped of their right to bear arms through due process.


I love how opponents to the deal quote facts and specific terns of the deal to justify our podition while mr. Burgandy just reverts back to talking points.

The second amendment has restrictions now? So it is ok to ban types of guns/ammo?

 

I love how your posts switch from "I want to sound super smart" and "I duno how 2 us dis ting" sometimes mid post. 

---

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/08/nu...21459.html

---

I said it once, i'll say it again.  We have more accountability to the Russian Federation under the START treaty than we got from Iran in this debacle.

---

<a class="bbc_url" href='http://www.politico.com/story/2015/08/nuclear-experts-fall-in-behind-obama-iran-121459.html'>http://www.politico.com/story/2015/08/nuclear-experts-fall-in-behind-obama-iran-121459.html</a>

Ugh, can you stop with all your taking points?


Or as most people call them-- facts.

---

You know, i have been really tough on the administration fore this deal, but i think I am starting to come around today.  I just heard that the Iranians have agreed to self inspect their biggest and most suspicious nuclear facility.  The world remains safe and the IAEA get some well deserved time off.  I wonder if they want to come to a jags game?  

---

This whole thing has been a farce to begin with

---

You know, i have been really tough on the administration fore this deal, but i think I am starting to come around today.  I just heard that the Iranians have agreed to self inspect their biggest and most suspicious nuclear facility.  The world remains safe and the IAEA get some well deserved time off.  I wonder if they want to come to a jags game?  

 

Hey, it's more stringent than the requirement for the Norks, so PROGRESS!!!!!!!!!!

---

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

Ugh, can you stop with all your taking points?


Or as most people call them-- facts.

Yeah, "facts" backed by the Arms Control Association which is funded by none other than George Soros is undoubtedly completely unbiased.  I'm sure Israel and our allies will sleep better knowing Valerie Plame and her husband have endorsed the deal.  Same thing with luminaries like Thomas Pickering.  Those career diplomats are experts on covering the tails of other diplomats.  Pickering did a stellar job of finding no wrong doing in the Benghazi report, so he's clearly someone we should listen to.  Hans Blix, who never misses an opportunity to try to embarrass the US is certainly credible.   

 

What makes this even more entertaining is the fact that there are so many secret side deals that have been made between Iran and the UN that it will give the Obama administration complete insulation when the deal literally blows up.  When it does, the administration will have someone to blame besides themselves, which is just the way they prefer to operate. 

 

Iran has a history of making these deals, and then not following through.  They've already violated this deal, and there's nothing to indicate they won't continue to do so.  They don't care one bit about the deal.  All they wanted was the $150 billion they're getting, and an opportunity to show what a paper tiger the Obama administration is when it comes to negotiating deals.  This deal is a joke. 

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

You know, i have been really tough on the administration fore this deal, but i think I am starting to come around today. I just heard that the Iranians have agreed to self inspect their biggest and most suspicious nuclear facility. The world remains safe and the IAEA get some well deserved time off. I wonder if they want to come to a jags game?

Taking point alert!!!


Lol, how did I know you'd be the one to point this out.


Either you didn't read the entire details of the Iranian inspection or you're being intellectually dishonest...


Which is it?

---

Yeah, "facts" backed by the Arms Control Association which is funded by none other than George Soros is undoubtedly completely unbiased. I'm sure Israel and our allies will sleep better knowing Valerie Plame and her husband have endorsed the deal. Same thing with luminaries like Thomas Pickering. Those career diplomats are experts on covering the tails of other diplomats. Pickering did a stellar job of finding no wrong doing in the Benghazi report, so he's clearly someone we should listen to. Hans Blix, who never misses an opportunity to try to embarrass the US is certainly credible.


What makes this even more entertaining is the fact that there are so many secret side deals that have been made between Iran and the UN that it will give the Obama administration complete insulation when the deal literally blows up. When it does, the administration will have someone to blame besides themselves, which is just the way they prefer to operate.


Iran has a history of making these deals, and then not following through. They've already violated this deal, and there's nothing to indicate they won't continue to do so. They don't care one bit about the deal. All they wanted was the $150 billion they're getting, and an opportunity to show what a paper tiger the Obama administration is when it comes to negotiating deals. This deal is a joke.

You're right. We shouldn't broker a deal, we should just let them have a bomb. Then we could have war. What a hot take. Do I hear the tune of Barbara Ann? Methinks so.

---

Yeah, "facts" backed by the Arms Control Association which is funded by none other than George Soros is undoubtedly completely unbiased. I'm sure Israel and our allies will sleep better knowing Valerie Plame and her husband have endorsed the deal. Same thing with luminaries like Thomas Pickering. Those career diplomats are experts on covering the tails of other diplomats. Pickering did a stellar job of finding no wrong doing in the Benghazi report, so he's clearly someone we should listen to. Hans Blix, who never misses an opportunity to try to embarrass the US is certainly credible.


What makes this even more entertaining is the fact that there are so many secret side deals that have been made between Iran and the UN that it will give the Obama administration complete insulation when the deal literally blows up. When it does, the administration will have someone to blame besides themselves, which is just the way they prefer to operate.


Iran has a history of making these deals, and then not following through. They've already violated this deal, and there's nothing to indicate they won't continue to do so. They don't care one bit about the deal. All they wanted was the $150 billion they're getting, and an opportunity to show what a paper tiger the Obama administration is when it comes to negotiating deals. This deal is a joke.

Well, that's your opinion. And I most certainly understand it. Look, nobody is saying that we got everything perfectly the way we want it, but that's why it's a deal....


However, the article oface linked is factual in the representation of those who are behind the deal. You may think it's a bad deal, and that's your choice.


Also, were you aware we have instant access to all nuclear facilities. The 24 day period is we wanted to inspect other facilities or admin offices to audit paper work.


The anti freak guys are lying to us about the deal

---

http://news.yahoo.com/ap-exclusive-un-le...04071.html

---

In reality what fine pront could tgere possibly be to save the sentence IRAN WILL SELF INSPECT?

---

<a class="bbc_url" href='http://news.yahoo.com/ap-exclusive-un-let-iran-inspect-alleged-nuke-165604071.html'>http://news.yahoo.com/ap-exclusive-un-let-iran-inspect-alleged-nuke-165604071.html</a>

Ok, so you're being intellectually dishonest. Got it... thanks for clarifying. :-)

---