What Obama said today was you have two choices with Iran and nuclear weapons: either you negotiate and this is the deal they reached with the international community after two years of talks. Or a military solution. Since if no deal they can continue their unpeaceful nuclear program. You pretty much can't slice it both ways because if no deal they will build a bomb. And either Israel or the US or both will attack them. And according to experts that will only deter them not stop them unless you have an all out ground and air war with them. So isn't this worth taking a chance.
No worries, just I despise that guy. He does a lot of good for Vegas but he also does some very bad things for Vegas. He's certainly entitled to his opinions and I don't fault him that but it's more the way he treats his employees that pisses me off.
Yea, I guess being a reporter should be against the law as well as visiting your grandmother. It just amazes me how many ordinary people happen to become spies when they go into countries like Iran, I mean Iran would never make up stuff like that.
Nobody knows what the Russians will do if an attack is launched against Iran. We'd have a pretty good read on it after the Security Council Resolution but until that point nobody knows. It's not even clear that we'd go for a resolution and it's almost certain that the Israeli's will not. Russia is probably pretty tired of having their client states steamrolled by now.
I think the problem is this doesn't have Israel's best interest at heart and that pisses a lot of people off. Honestly the US needs to do what is best for the US not what is best for Israel. I don't know all the parameters of the deal but if the international community sans Israel is on board with this deal than it is probably a good deal. Like you said you either negotiate a deal that slows them down and if they break it they pay the consequences or you ignore it until it's too late. I like the proactive approach and let's put the pressure on Iran to do what the right thing is, if they don't all bets are off. You have extended the olive branch to them to join the rest of the civilized world, what they chose to do now is strictly on them. However I do not like Obama's response to Major Garrett regarding the Americans being held prisoner in Iran, their release absolutely needed to be part of the solution and it sounds like it was never even addressed.
What he said was that it was a separate negotiation and they didn't want it to interfere with the nuclear negotiations. I saw it too and the guy was pretty rude to Obama. Basically the chance for peace rates over 4 people. And maybe they can find another way to negotiate their release. I thought Obama was genuine and was even a little teary eyed when talking about the captives.
We might as well just start selling nukes at hess stations then since you're so unlikely to be killed by them. Iran is a known state sponsor of terrorists. evil people like this with weapons of mass destruction is quite obviously a very bad thing for humanity as we know it. the last thing we want to do is level the playing field with these guys. The Japanese never knew anyone killed by nukes either, until they did and they had two melted cities.
You're taking away their ability to develop nuclear weapons for at least ten years.It is about as full proof as it can be. And the limit on sanctions the international community wants to impose. After that there are provisos and you can re establish sanctions. It doesn't address other issues. The nuke one is the most important. It allows Iran to re-enter the world community. It's the best way to get them to change their ways. All those billions: their money anyways. And those specific sanctions would have eventually been lifted anyways. If they cheat: deal off.
Are the laws of physics different in Iran than they are on the rest of the planet? Assuming the answer is no, then there is really nothing stopping them from achieving nukes if they so desire. Except strong government action. Which every self respecting bitter, disaffected, squirrel eating gun nut will tell you is a recipe for disaster, because the government is evil/stupid/corrupt or any combination of the three. Get people into your big tent and you'll most likely find that they'll want to piss outside, not inside. We seem to be doing okay with the Chinese now that they've gotten a taste of the good life. I'm betting the Iranians are going to love capitalism and all its wonders more than they hate Israel. Just a hunch. But that's the way most people roll.
Except - you know, money. Now that sanctions are lifted that shouldn't be a problem. The Iranian government gains the most from this financially, not the people of Iran. That's not to say the people won't see any gains. But we should have some cheaper gas prices here soon, so we've got that going for us, which is nice.
No personal responsibility here once again..."I'm an American and I can do anything anywhere!" Who cares about foreign laws? "I'm an American" On average about 5000 US citizens visit Iran per year via a third country...99.999% don't break the law and are responsible US citizens.
No state has ever transferred nuclear weapons to terrorists. No state will ever do that either because the monopoly on nuclear weapons is critical to maintaining state control over civil society. Capitalist, Religious, Socialist, Fascist, none of those distinctions would matter much in a world in which anybody was capable of knocking down the state. The second that nuclear weapons become a privately held commodity in any form the monopoly on power that states have enjoyed throughout the history of civilization will go away. Nobody has used nuclear weapons on people since Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It's an unthinkable thing for a state to do and one that would very likely lead to the destruction of the state using the weapons in fairly short order.
Somebody needs to post the song the little North Korean girl sings at the beginning of The Interview.
I think it's all posturing by Iran with a countering by Kerry in terms of what the US could do if Iran breaks the deal. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-john-kerry-iran-deal-20150723-story.html. The Supreme Leader had to say something threatening to save face but the fact is that behind the scenes in Iran the moderates are winning. You would have never thought the religious fundamentalists would allow a tough deal like this to go down. Of course the Repubs are making a big deal about it and have threatened to try to kill it since they never had an original idea in their lives.
- b.s. - b.s. - the Republican party was formally organized by thousands of anti-slavery activists at a convention "Under the Oaks" in Jackson, Michigan.
This is true but irrelevant, since the Republicans were the progressive party when they were formed (LIBERALS) and the Republicans are the conservative party now. Today's Republican Party is about 60% (maybe more) people who would have been Southern Democrats in the 50's. So the correct comment would have been that Southern Democrats in the 50's never had an original idea. That is about as far from the truth as you can get, since Southern Democrats came up with Jim Crow independently in hundreds of different locations and also were the driving forces behind agricultural subsidies and rural electrification and the TVA. John E. Rankin was a 16 term Democratic Representative from Mississipi who co-authored the TVA and was a leading congressional supporter of the Rural Electrification Act. He also put up a bill to prohibit inter-racial marriage and opposed a bill to prohibit the poll tax. He's the poster boy for Southern Democratic action under FDR.
Brad, please. I was mearly pointing out pclfan's one-trick-pony partisan penchant to a. carry water for OB while b. simultaneously whine about the Republican party at every opportunity and frankly, I find simplistic, Johnny-one-note posturing (be it 'moonbat' or 'wingnut') tiresome, that was all. "Never had an original idea in their lives" <--- Forget Dem or Rep for a second - that statement in and of itself is dismissively simplistic period and deserves to be called out, your 'irrelevant' adjudications notwithstanding. Why did the chicken cross the road? "The chicken crossed the road because it was time for a CHANGE! The chicken wanted CHANGE!" "When I was First Lady, I personally helped that little chicken to cross the road. This experience makes me uniquely qualified to ensure -- right from Day One! -- that every chicken in this country gets the chance it deserves to cross the road. But then, this really isn't about me……."
I was just pointing out that far from being the party of no ideas the Republicans are actually the party of bad ideas at this point. The reason that Barack Obama was elected twice was because the people had zero faith in the two guys the Republicans ran against him. Nobody the Republicans are running this time is any better than the guys they ran in 2008 and 2012. The odds are pretty good the nominee is going to be completely unqualified (Walker) or a forsaken dynasty pick (Bush) or a guy who can get the bad half of his platform through with no chance at all of getting the other required half through (Paul). This is what happens when you spend two decades railing against the government and trying to tear it down and then the one guy you get elected actually tries to run it into the ground.
