world

Obama denounces 'chest-beating' critics of Iran nuclear deal

48 Comments
By JOSH LEDERMAN

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2015 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

48 Comments
Login to comment

Funny how the same chest-pounding pearl-clutchers against the Iran deal are the same chest-pounding chicken littles who screeched the US into invading Iraq.

9 ( +12 / -3 )

“We’re hearing the echoes of some of the same policies and mindsets that failed us in the past,”

The problem is that for those who made money off the Iraq war, the policies and mindsets succeeded, not failed. They have their own personal finances placed first, above the people and the world. So they WANT to keep those same policies and mindsets.

The amazing part is that they've managed to brainwash so many people into following them, even though their policies do not benefit those followers at all. Instead, they hit them on emotional triggers:

Illegal aliens

Freeloaders

Black president

etc.

It's the disingenuous leading the blind.

5 ( +10 / -5 )

Just as in Japan, and really every other country, the US has its far-right element, that will always advocate war instead of diplomacy – but the US public won’t be duped again by these arm-chair generals, almost all who have never wore a uniform. Their credibility, if they ever had any, is long gone – no one gives their views any standing. Their message only resonates in the far right wing media bubble. Kudos to President Obama, and the other P5 countries, for forging this agreement – if the Iranians decide to cheat or non-comply, then other options can be looked at.

And the fact that Republicans are trying to roll back elements of the Dodd-Frank Act, which puts in place safeguards so big banks and investment firms can't engage in the same type of risky trading that precipitated the 2008 financial crisis is especially egregious......

6 ( +7 / -1 )

It's the disingenuous leading the blind.

Were that it entirely true. The sad, actually tragic, thing is too many Republicans leaders and operatives believe their own bs.

Case in point: Rmoney never prepared a concession speech. Now, staying positive and playing to win are one thing. But not preparing a Plan B is foolish. Eisenhower, you may know, actually planned if D-Day did not go off in our favor.

Compare that with Rummey and his no plans for turning on the electricity in Bagdad.

Movement conservatism is a blinding ideology. The whole party is broken.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

for once ithink i have to agree with him. Although will wait to hear what The Donald has to say on this topic before I make my mind up.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Were that it entirely true. The sad, actually tragic, thing is too many Republicans leaders and operatives believe their own bs.

Those ones aren't the leaders. They are just the head brainwashed.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Ah. Then, who are the leaders, then?

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Obama said the U.S. was drawing strength from Chattanooga while sending an unmistakable message that the U.S. won’t give in to fear or attempts to change the American way of life.

Here's something that sounds wholeheartedly american & something I can agree with. LoL- even coming from a 1/2 White President.

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

the U.S. won’t give in to fear or attempts to change the American way of life.

Waaaaaay too late for that. The US gave in to fear, and changed their way of life, right after 9/11. Now it's a matter of whether or not they can spring back.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Ayatollah Khamenei told supporters on Saturday that U.S. policies in the region were "180 degrees" opposed to Iran's, at a speech in a Tehran mosque punctuated by chants of "Death to America" and "Death to Israel".

That is who Obama wants to make a deal with.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

9/11 was bound to happen. Didn't they try to originally blast out its foundations in the early 90's?

The US gave in to fear, and changed their way of life

Not me. I always do as I please (when stateside) without any worries and go wherever I want. Even here in Tokyo. But, that's just me.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Words are empty, actions count. It doesn't matter what Iran says, it matters what Iran does. Don't forget, they have their right-wingers they have to appease, same as the US. So they need to say one thing, while doing another. What matters is signing the agreement, and sticking with it. If they do that, then their words mean nothing.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Can an individual earn the Noble Peace Prize twice?

The Military Industrial Complex and zombies like Netanyahu must be pissed. They want bombs dropped and blood spilled. There should be a study someday of how murderers in suits come to act out their fantasies.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

“The same politicians and pundits that are so quick to reject the possibility of a diplomatic solution to Iran’s nuclear program are the same folks who were so quick to go to war in Iraq and said it would only take a few months,” Obama said.

Precisely. And they don't have any alternative. As Colin Powell famously said to George W. regarding Iraq "If you break it, you own it". Are we going to make the same mistake with Iran? And at the cost of another 3,500 U.S. lives and thousands upon thousands of casualties? When does the neo-cons finally learn that might does not make right?

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Just as in Japan, and really every other country, the US has its far-right element, that will always advocate war instead of diplomacy.

No one in the US was suggesting war, why does the left keep perpetuating that stupid myth? However, there is a thing that the Repubs do that Dems just cannot or will not do and that is use their brain to strategize and use SMART diplomacy instead of EMOTIONAL diplomacy is what the Dems and libs always use.

Waaaaaay too late for that. The US gave in to fear, and changed their way of life, right after 9/11. Now it's a matter of whether or not they can spring back.

After this deal?? The only thing that Obama did was ratchet up the fear. You can forget about springing back to anything.

Words are empty, actions count.

And we and more importantly Israel and the Sunni states will be the brunt of those actions.

It doesn't matter what Iran says, it matters what Iran does.

Give them time. The Ayatollah will make good on his promise and Netanyahu will make good on his with a little help of his NEW friends.

Don't forget, they have their right-wingers they have to appease, same as the US. So they need to say one thing, while doing another. What matters is signing the agreement, and sticking with it. If they do that, then their words mean nothing.

Yeah, riiight.

Were that it entirely true. The sad, actually tragic, thing is too many Republicans leaders and operatives believe their own bs.

Sorry, but BOTH parties believe their own BS.

Compare that with Rummey and his no plans for turning on the electricity in Bagdad.

I'm sorry, but did Hillary lay out her plans for doing that? No, didn't think so.

Movement conservatism is a blinding ideology. The whole party is broken.

You can definitely say that about both parties for sure!

-11 ( +3 / -14 )

Not me. I always do as I please (when stateside) without any worries and go wherever I want. Even here in Tokyo.

I'm not speaking of individual Americans, I'm speaking of America. Freedoms have been severely whittled down post 9/11, and so many of America's actions, including invading a sovereign nation with no valid reason for doing so, have been in fear. The result of this has been a major change in American's lives.

This is what I mean when I say it's too late.

After this deal?? The only thing that Obama did was ratchet up the fear. You can forget about springing back to anything.

Got anything to actually offer the conversation that isn't something you've just parroted off Faux?

It doesn't matter what Iran says, it matters what Iran does.

Give them time. The Ayatollah will make good on his promise and Netanyahu will make good on his with a little help of his NEW friends.

Well you have the right idea - give them time. If they don't follow the outlines of the agreement, they agreement becomes null and void, and America has more power in the deal, as they've tried a diplomatic solution, and Iran will have shown that they are not interested in a diplomatic solution. If they do follow the outlines of the agreement, then everyone is in a better position. I know you Republic.. I mean "non-partisans" (cough cough)... hate it, but this is a win-win situation, and not just for the US, but the world as a whole.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Black Sabbath: Movement conservatism is a blinding ideology.

Their problem is that they will continue to ride their ideology, even to the point where it's obviously counterproductive. I believe Ted Cruz would have caused America to default on our debt just to make a point about the debt. It's ideology on steroids with no exit ramp, and Republican's try to outdo each other because they honestly believe it's the only way to show "strength". Whether it's smart or not doesn't factor in.

Look at Cuba. Five decades of a failed embargo and the GOP is fighting tooth and nail to keep the same policy. They just aren't flexible even in the face of failure. Sometimes you have to be strong and sometimes you have to be smart.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

No one in the US was suggesting war, why does the left keep perpetuating that stupid myth? However, there is a thing that the Repubs do that Dems just cannot or will not do and that is use their brain to strategize and use SMART diplomacy instead of EMOTIONAL diplomacy is what the Dems and libs always use.

This has been pointed out to you before - denying or ignoring it does not make it any less of a fact.............

Former diplomat and noted NEOCON John Bolton: The inescapable conclusion is that Iran will not negotiate away its nuclear program. Nor will sanctions block its building a broad and deep weapons infrastructure. The inconvenient truth is that only military action like Israel’s 1981 attack on Saddam Hussein’s Osirak reactor in Iraq or its 2007 destruction of a Syrian reactor, designed and built by North Korea, can accomplish what is required. Time is terribly short, but a strike can still succeed.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/26/opinion/to-stop-irans-bomb-bomb-iran.html?_r=0

Former U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney voiced his support for an Israeli strike on Iran's nuclear facilities over the weekend, during his closed-door keynote address at the Republican Jewish Coalition's annual spring meeting.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/middle-east/1.583323

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Words are empty, actions count.

And we and more importantly Israel and the Sunni states will be the brunt of those actions.

Sounds like un-american talk to me. "more importantly"? Let the Sunni states and Isreal deal with it then. The only reason America keeps getting hated on is because we stick our guns in people faces. Isreal is a nuclear power with the most advanced military in the region. If they want war they can fight one. THEY can fight one.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Diplomats and nuclear physicists say it's a good deal. Neocon chicken hawks say it isn't. It's a win. The flood of misinformation and propaganda from the neocons, religious end timers and zionists is hitting peak cow pie.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Obama is pushing this deal forcefully because he does not need the GOP to get it approved. The best way to corral all of the chicken Dems is to turn it into a partisan issue so that the Dems can be protected from the pro-Israeli bloc.

Just like the Supreme Court's decision on Obamacare, though, the GOP is secretly hoping Obama will succeed because, if they manage to overturn the deal, the results are all in their hands, and they have zero alternatives.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

" that those who oppose the diplomatic agreement to rein in Iran’s nuclear program "

That is a classic strawman. People oppose his disastrous deal with Iran oppose precisely because it doe does NOT "rain in" Irans nuclear program, but gives it a green light.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

That is a classic strawman.

I don't think "strawman" means what you think it means. But the simple fact is true a lot of the "geniuses" "who oppose the diplomatic agreement to rein in Iran’s nuclear program are some of the same people who were quick to want to go to war in Iraq and thought military action there would take only a matter of months."

People oppose his disastrous deal with Iran oppose precisely because it doe does NOT "rain in" Irans nuclear program,

Baloney.. That's clearly NOT why Republicans and Neo-cons oppose the deal. They oppose it, first and foremost, because they reflexively are against anything Obama says or does. Secondly, they will not tolerate any Obama success, foreign or domestic. Third, don't want to cross AIPAC or Sheldon Adelson.

Romney, said. “I think, by and large, you can just look at the things the president has done and do the opposite."

Bolton, who has been advocating war with Iran since 2008, has opposed the deal well before any of the details were available, back when he was an advisor to Mitt Romney in 2012.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) rushed to CNN yesterday morning to denounce the agreement “as a bad deal, the worst possible outcome”…before admitting he hadn’t read it.

47 senator sent a letter to Tehran trying to sabotage the deal before it was even inked.

but gives it a green light.

a "green light"? not particularly original parroting there.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

I'm not speaking of individual Americans, I'm speaking of America. Freedoms have been severely whittled down post 9/11, and so many of America's actions, including invading a sovereign nation with no valid reason for doing so, have been in fear. The result of this has been a major change in American's lives.

I'm perfectly fine with the removal of Saddam. But seriously, do you feel the same way for This administration not taking any action on stopping the rise of ISIS?

Got anything to actually offer the conversation that isn't something you've just parroted off Faux?

Actually, I was watching a lot of CNNj, but keep on, don't let me stop your....lol

Iran will have shown that they are not interested in a diplomatic solution.

They never did and never will.

If they do follow the outlines of the agreement, then everyone is in a better position.

That's what Clinton said about North Korea in 1994 and look how that worked out.

I know you Republic.. I mean "non-partisans" (cough cough)... hate it, but this is a win-win situation, and not just for the US, but the world as a whole.

Hmmmm...given Iran's history in dealing with them for over 40 years, I would rule on the side of history that believe what any individual on JT says and as an indicator of that Iran can't be trusted, but then again, we went through the same BS with Clinton in 1994.

Their problem is that they will continue to ride their ideology, even to the point where it's obviously counterproductive. I believe Ted Cruz would have caused America to default on our debt just to make a point about the debt.

You say that and Obama has created a bigger underclass of 45 million people on food stamps for the last 48 months??! Give me a friggin break!

It's ideology on steroids with no exit ramp, and Republican's try to outdo each other because they honestly believe it's the only way to show "strength". Whether it's smart or not doesn't factor in.

Since the world already looks at Obama as a joke and not mention, weak! I prefer to negotiate from a position of strength and not throw daisies at our enemies.

Look at Cuba. Five decades of a failed embargo and the GOP is fighting tooth and nail to keep the same policy. They just aren't flexible even in the face of failure. Sometimes you have to be strong and sometimes you have to be smart.

So still no mention about our wanted fugitives that have escaped justice. The embargo should have remained in place until they were sent back to face justice. That never happened, but at least the anointed one can get a laughable star in Hollywood with the rest of the clowns.

-7 ( +1 / -8 )

No one in the US was suggesting war, why does the left keep perpetuating that stupid myth?

This has been pointed out to you before - denying or ignoring it does not make it any less of a fact.............

So, Bass, no comment? You, so prolix, nothing to say? Still claim no one in the US was suggesting war? A yes or a no will suffice. Thanks.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

So, Bass, no comment?

I do.

Bolton, who has been advocating war with Iran since 2008, has opposed the deal well before any of the details were available, back when he was an advisor to Mitt Romney in 2012

Former Ambassador John Bolton has repeatedly said that the sanctions should have been kept in place, he was asked most recently on Greta's show, you don't need to go to war with Iran, there are other was to bring the regime down to its knees.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) rushed to CNN yesterday morning to denounce the agreement “as a bad deal, the worst possible outcome”…before admitting he hadn’t read it.

Like when Pelosi said about the 60,000 page Obamacare, you need to read it before you know what's in it, but didn't really understand the basics herself. What is up with liberals writing something that NO ONE cares about and I mean NO ONE! Particularly the Iranians wouldn't read it.

47 senator sent a letter to Tehran trying to sabotage the deal before it was even inked.

Kennedy did the same thing to Reagan when He tried to deal with Gorbachev, so what's your point. Ahhh, because Obama is the president, they have to jump over the cliff as well?

You, so prolix, nothing to say? Still claim no one in the US was suggesting war? A yes or a no will suffice. Thanks.

I just did.

Baloney.. That's clearly NOT why Republicans and Neo-cons oppose the deal. They oppose it, first and foremost, because they reflexively are against anything Obama says or does.

Just as the Democrats were so reflexively against Bush NO MATTER what he did. Was it because of his skin color?

Secondly, they will not tolerate any Obama success, foreign or domestic.

What success? Ok, you got OBL I'll give you that bone and what else?

Third, don't want to cross AIPAC or Sheldon Adelson.

Ahhh, so now it's a Jewish conspiracy issue all of a sudden. You guys are a crack up!

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Or maybe you should follow John Bolton a bit more. I know it bothers you lobs, but conservatives love war as much as libs love small government.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Bolton, who has been advocating war with Iran since 2008, has opposed the deal well before any of the details were available, back when he was an advisor to Mitt Romney in 2012. Former Ambassador John Bolton has repeatedly said that the sanctions should have been kept in place, he was asked most recently on Greta's show, you don't need to go to war with Iran, there are other was to bring the regime down to its knees.

Your information is factually incorrect - as I said before, you cannot ignore or deny these facts – John Bolton said on Greta Van Sustern's show on 14 Jul that Israel should bomb Iran now, in addition to his article that the US should launch a military strike on Iran in the New York Times on 26 Mar.

http://therightscoop.com/bolton-israel-should-bomb-iran-today-before-it-gets-too-late/

No one in the US was suggesting war, why does the left keep perpetuating that stupid myth?

The only one perpetuating myths is you, and you can deny facts all you want, but it just further diminishes your credibility.

JOSHUA MURAVCHIK has been recognized by the Wall Street Journal as “maybe the most cogent and careful of the neoconservative writers on foreign policy. Does this mean that our only option is war? Yes, although an air campaign targeting Iran’s nuclear infrastructure would entail less need for boots on the ground than the war Obama is waging against the Islamic State, which poses far smaller a threat than Iran does.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/war-with-iran-is-probably-our-best-option/2015/03/13/fb112eb0-c725-11e4-a199-6cb5e63819d2_story.html

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Perhaps you should learn to read...

To Stop Iran’s Bomb, Bomb Iran http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/26/opinion/to-stop-irans-bomb-bomb-iran.html

The inescapable conclusion is that Iran will not negotiate away its nuclear program. Nor will sanctions block its building a broad and deep weapons infrastructure. The inconvenient truth is that only military action like Israel’s 1981 attack on Saddam Hussein’s Osirak reactor in Iraq or its 2007 destruction of a Syrian reactor, designed and built by North Korea, can accomplish what is required. Time is terribly short, but a strike can still succeed.

This is an act of war. Bolton is advocating war. You are clearly wrong in your statement "No one in the US was suggesting war". Pure and simple.

Funny thing, regarding Bolton's reference to the Israeli strike on Osirak reactor didn't actually impede Iraq's nuclear ambitions. Instead the bombing of Osirak had the opposite effect. It backfired. The bombing prompted Saddam to refocus and "initiate a full-fledged nuclear weapons program."

If any lesson is to be drawn from Osirak is that bombing Iran would virtually ensure Tehran would set out to get the bomb, and would eventually get it.

To borrow from the parrots, bombing Iran would give it the "green light"

Bolton, not only reckless but, as usual, stupidly wrong.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Your information is factually incorrect - as I said before, you cannot ignore or deny these facts – John Bolton said on Greta Van Sustern's show on 14 Jul that Israel should bomb Iran now, in addition to his article that the US should launch a military strike on Iran in the New York Times on 26 Mar.

I had NO Idea Bolton was a member of congress. Personally, I agree, but then again, I'm not in congress either. Now do I think we should or if it's a wise idea, No, I do not, but I feel somewhere down the line, it will happen, either by us, Israel or by the Saudis for sure.

The only one perpetuating myths is you,

So now you speak for every conservative? Give me a break.

and you can deny facts all you want, but it just further diminishes your credibility.

The last thing I worry about is what liberals think.

JOSHUA MURAVCHIK has been recognized by the Wall Street Journal as “maybe the most cogent and careful of the neoconservative writers on foreign policy.

So that makes him the spokesperson for all conservatives? I love Krauthammer, huge fan, but unlike liberals, I don't believe in towing the line in lock step and agreeing with everything the latest news puts out. That's called FREE WILL.

Does this mean that our only option is war? Yes, although an air campaign targeting Iran’s nuclear infrastructure would entail less need for boots on the ground than the war Obama is waging against the Islamic State, which poses far smaller a threat than Iran does.

Again, one opinion. But given the circumstances of Obama's treachery towards our allies and given the fact that Iran STILL as much as last week threatened to wipe Israel and the Sunni states. off the map, they should do whatever they must to stay alive.

Your assertion that "no one" in the US is advocating war is just dead wrong,

Actually it's not. When I said that, I was referring to the people that matter. Whatever you or think it's irrelevant. We are not in congress and the majority of the GOP don't want to go to war.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

“We’re hearing the echoes of some of the same policies and mindsets that failed us in the past,”

There is absolutely no denying this.

bass4funk: "No one in the US was suggesting war, why does the left keep perpetuating that stupid myth?"

You've been given DIRECT proof of members of the GOP literally saying the US should bomb Iran, and you still just choose to deny it.

"The last thing I worry about is what liberals think."

Yeah, and how many posts is that so far?

"But given the circumstances of Obama's treachery "

Hahaha! THIS? From a guy who literally supports letters of TREASON that the GOP sent? Yeah, the peace deal sure is 'treacherous'! Watch out! and from a guy who supports Netanyahu, who literally spits on the US? Nice way to undermine your arguments, bass.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

First, of all it's toeing the line, not towing the line. If you're going to use the expression in every other post then get it right. You're welcome.

Actually it's not. When I said that, I was referring to the people that matter. Whatever you or think it's irrelevant. We are not in congress and the majority of the GOP don't want to go to war.

Actually, it is... dead wrong. You did't say Boehner didn't say X or Y. You did't say a congressman didn't day Xor Y. You said; No one in the US was suggesting war. And Former Ambassador John Bolton, as you put it, neocon pundit, senior fellow at AEI, foreign policy advisor to presidential candidate Romney and potential presidential candidate himself is not a person who matters? Back pedaling, back pedaling...

So, since we're clear your statement was dead wrong, are you now changing your statement to say not a single Congressman is suggesting war with Iran is an option?

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Well, I’m going to assume that irrespective if you sound like a far right Neanderthal, English may not be your native language, so here it is in simple form;

You said “No one in the US is suggesting war, why does the left keep perpetuating this myth”

I said that was not true, that “John Bolton authored an article in the 26 Mar edition of the NY Times entitled; To Stop Iran’s Bomb, Bomb Iran” – where he advocated a military strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities.

You said, “, he was asked most recently on Greta's show, you don't need to go to war with Iran, there are other ways to bring the regime down to its knees.

I said that was not true, the transcript of Greta Van Sustern’s show on 14 Jul shows he said; “”that Israel should bomb Iran now.”

I also provided an article by a noted right wing NECON who stated ; Does this mean that our only option is war? Yes.”

As a result, your statement that “no one was suggesting war” *was proven false and factually incorrect with three empirical examples.

For providing this clearly false information and promoting this ”myth”, you should have the integrity and courage to apologize to the readers on this thread.

Will you, or won’t you?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

So, since we're clear your statement was dead wrong, are you now changing your statement to say not a single Congressman is suggesting war with Iran is an option?

There was, of course, the 'Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb bomb Iran' utterance by McCain, which may or may not have been in jest - but then, I prefer my war heroes not to have been captured. Doubtless, this GOP encouragement did much to bolster the moderates in Iran, who are crucial for not only the success of this deal but for potential cooperation in future.

Basically, though, a position against negotiation is either capitulation or war, and the stance that the agreement reached could have been more stringent must be taken up with our partners, including China and Russia. Good luck with that on your first day, Scott Walker.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Let me try this one last time.......in very simple form;;

You said “No one in the US is suggesting war, why does the left keep perpetuating this myth”

I said that was not true, that “John Bolton authored an article in the 26 Mar edition of the NY Times entitled; To Stop Iran’s Bomb, Bomb Iran” – where he advocated a military strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities.

You said, “, he was asked most recently on Greta's show, you don't need to go to war with Iran, there are other ways to bring the regime down to its knees.

I said that was not true, the transcript of Greta Van Sustern’s show on 14 Jul shows he said; “”that Israel should bomb Iran now.”

I also provided an article by a noted right wing NECON who stated ; Does this mean that our only option is war? Yes.”

As a result, your statement that “no one was suggesting war” *was proven false and factually incorrect with three empirical examples.

For providing this clearly false information and promoting this ”myth”, you should have the integrity and courage to apologize to the readers on this thread.

Will you, or won’t you?"

Moderator: Not acceptable at all. Questioning someone's integrity is poor debating on your part.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The "American Way of Life" in current times isn't something to be proud of.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Laguna: Just like the Supreme Court's decision on Obamacare, though, the GOP is secretly hoping Obama will succeed because, if they manage to overturn the deal, the results are all in their hands, and they have zero alternatives.

They call it, "Vote NO, hope YES." It's a thing with the Republican party. They can pump their base full of BS rhetoric then hope for Democrats to bail them out. Then they criticize Democrats.

bass: No one in the US was suggesting war

I believe your diplomatic position is that the US could lose the support of Russia, China, and Europe, back out of the deal, then impose unilateral sanctions while the others do not, and that would magically create leverage to make a list of demands that Iran would be forced to accept, including 24-hour access to military facilities.

Personally, I think that's a proposal that would backfire, isolate us, and give Iran a way out while getting nothing in return. Building a coalition with the P5+1 is what brought Iran to the table and forced concessions from them. Any plan that throws them aside while promising to be even more effective just doesn't sound like a sound argument to me.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

You've been given DIRECT proof of members of the GOP literally saying the US should bomb Iran, and you still just choose to deny it.

Yes, but that doesn't collectively link and put all conservatives or the entire GOP in that box, now you are being speculative and making accusatory statements. This is the problem with liberals, you guys always do this. Trump says something outlandish, the main MSM will go to another GOP candidate and asks them "are you going to denounce those comments?" As if they have anything to do with that that blowhard idiot says. If they would do that to the libs every time Sander (and he has said outrageous things himself) go to any of the other Dems and ask them if they denounce their comments, libs would have a fit, NO a meltdown.

Yeah, and how many posts is that so far?

Brother, too many to count!

Hahaha! THIS? From a guy who literally supports letters of TREASON that the GOP sent?

Why?? But it's ok to support a treasonous president??!!!!!

Yeah, the peace deal sure is 'treacherous'!

But it's NOT, not for Israel or the Sunni states, because they have to live next door to a nation that SWORE to destroy them. Now because of this moron, we now have WW3 on our hands because NOW we will have an arms race and if you think the Israelis and the Sunnis are going to allow Iran to bully and threaten to wipe them off the map, the only thing that I feel bad for all the innocent Iranians that in the future will have to pay for these crazy Mullahs mistakes.

Watch out! and from a guy who supports Netanyahu,

I support Israel's right to exist and I support that at least the Israeli's have a leader that cares about their country and would do everything in his power to keep his people safe.

who literally spits on the US?

If I did then I would be the same as Obama.

Nice way to undermine your arguments, bass.

Undermine, I was just telling the truth, no need for hate.

First, of all it's toeing the line, not towing the line. If you're going to use the expression in every other post then get it right. You're welcome.

I'm sorry, where did it say, I was supposed to be perfect, if Obama can can do it, so can I, even if I am not anointed or omnipotent as our Sainted Obama and he's the president (even if he doesn't act like one)

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/05/21/barack-obama-gaffe-machine/

Actually, it is... dead wrong. You did't say Boehner didn't say X or Y. You did't say a congressman didn't day Xor Y. You said; No one in the US was suggesting war.

didn't day? Didn't you just excoriated me for....never mind LOL!!

And Former Ambassador John Bolton, as you put it, neocon pundit, senior fellow at AEI, foreign policy advisor to presidential candidate Romney and potential presidential candidate himself is not a person who matters? Back pedaling, back pedaling...

No, because 1) Romney didn't win, should have, but didn't. 2) He's NOT in congress and can't legislate any laws, though I was he were and could.

So, since we're clear your statement was dead wrong,

But it wasn't. What are you talking about?

are you now changing your statement to say not a single Congressman is suggesting war with Iran is an option?

No, I am saying the majority of the GOP congress doesn't want war, just like some of the Democrats wouldn't rule out military action like Clinton or Webb that's a few and that is not labeling the entire Democratic party. Hope that helps.

Personally, I think that's a proposal that would backfire, isolate us, and give Iran a way out while getting nothing in return. Building a coalition with the P5+1 is what brought Iran to the table and forced concessions from them. Any plan that throws them aside while promising to be even more effective just doesn't sound like a sound argument to me.

The problem is, there is no guarantee that Iran will abide by the conditions of the deal, they haven't abided by any deals before and what makes the Obama admin. think they will do so now? Because Obama commands it, because he IS the GREAT Obama? I believe there are other ways of bring Iran to it's knees, if Russia and China were to back out, short of taking military actions as I said before use a blockade or isolate and cut any business dealings with countries that want to deal or sell to Iran. As I said before, this deal will only make things worse in the ME. No way the Sunnis and Israel will wait around and become sitting ducks for the Ayatollah.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

The problem is, there is no guarantee that Iran will abide by the conditions of the deal, they haven't abided by any deals before and what makes the Obama admin. think they will do so now?

It would take me a while to explain because I'm sure you still really don't have any idea about the technical aspects of the deal, but I will say that if that's your position then you are effectively saying there should be zero diplomacy with Iran. If that's the case, then come out and say it. Tell us that you will never negotiate with Iran and you think the US alone can make a situation where we can make them accept any deal we see fit.

I believe there are other ways of bring Iran to it's knees, if Russia and China were to back out, short of taking military actions as I said before use a blockade or isolate and cut any business dealings with countries that want to deal or sell to Iran.

I know what you're saying but I just think it's a fantasy. Iran will simply export and buy from Russia and China which will gives them a release valve on US sanctions, and certainly enough of a release valve where Iran will not willfully enact policies that are normally imposed on a conquered nation. And it would cause a serious, serious riff between us and Europe who would resist along the way.

Obama's plan was simple: use sanctions to get them to the negotiating table. If they break the deal then you have evidence that diplomacy did not work and then the military option becomes much more credible.

Because Obama commands it, because he IS the GREAT Obama?

You come off as childish and hostile when you say things like this. Just my opinion.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It would take me a while to explain because I'm sure you still really don't have any idea about the technical aspects of the deal,

So now all of a sudden, liberals know more about National Security. Instersting, so now you guys care about technical aspects? That is a new one.

but I will say that if that's your position then you are effectively saying there should be zero diplomacy with Iran.

Yes, of course. Once they can promise to recognize Israel, not destroy the Jewish state, not destroy all the Sunni states, cease sponsor any forms of terrorism funding them, supplying them, nover to pursue to building a bomb, swear to denounce them, then you can sit at the table and begin the negotiations

If that's the case, then come out and say it. Tell us that you will never negotiate with Iran and you think the US alone can make a situation where we can make them accept any deal we see.

Unless the conditions are met that I have outlined. No negotiations should ever take place.

I know what you're saying but I just think it's a fantasy. Iran will simply export and buy from Russia and China which will gives them a release valve on US sanctions, and certainly enough of a release valve where Iran will not willfully enact policies that are normally imposed on a conquered nation. And it would cause a serious, serious riff between us and Europe who would resist along the way

You honestly and seriously believe that Iran can be trusted, seriously?

!Obama's plan was simple: use sanctions to get them to the negotiating table. If they break the deal then you have evidence that diplomacy did not work and then the military option becomes much more credible.

As I said before, we did I this before with the North Koreans and look how that turned out.

You come off as childish and hostile when you say things like this. Just my opinion.

Not at all. I am asking a perfectly legitimate question and making an assertion based on the Iran's past history

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Can't understand why everyone is so freaked out over Iran having NIKEs... and I'm paying attention!

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

So now all of a sudden, liberals know more about National Security. Instersting, so now you guys care about technical aspects? That is a new one.

I'm sure many liberals have about as much understanding of the deal with Iran as you do. That is to say none. The difference being that those liberals are probably not saying anything, rather than just parroting a bunch of sound bites about Obama being the devil.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I'm sure many liberals have about as much understanding of the deal with Iran as you do.

Since when has this liberal administration had an understanding on ANYTHING? Government, NO. Social issues, I think NOT! Foreign policy? Pleeeese!

The difference being that those liberals are probably not saying anything, rather than just parroting a bunch of sound bites about Obama being the devil.

They don't have to, if Obama were to jump in a fire pit, believe me, all the Democrats would follow.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Your assertion that "no one" in the US is advocating war is just dead wrong, and you owe an apology to all those on this thread for posting inaccurate and non-factual information.

what? ROFLMAO too funny!

Well, thank you Bass - I thought you might do the honorable and decent thing and apologize to everyone for posting clearly incorrect and non-factual information – but I see you decided not to. Again, thank you – this now allows everyone to see your arrogance, self-righteousness, and lack of self-reflection – qualities you share in abundance with all the other far right wing crazies who exist within the Faux News bubble. It is also going to save a lot of folks needless time reading and responding to your posts - why waste the effort on someone who hasn't the courage or integrity to admit they were wrong. So again, thanks - your comment above is a real "win-win" for all the folks who post here.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Since when has this liberal administration had an understanding on ANYTHING?

You mean other than rescuing the country from economic collapse, ending one war, getting health care for its citizens, and hundreds of other things?

I'd say the answer to your question is "every day".

3 ( +3 / -0 )

You mean other than rescuing the country from economic collapse, ending one war, getting health care for its citizens, and hundreds of other things?

But with 45 million on food stamps, ISIS growing more stronger everyday and more people having problems paying their premiums and the growing out of control healthcare costs...so seriously now, with all these problems we are currently facing, what has Obama done for the country.

I'd say the answer to your question is "every day".

"Every day" what?

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

bass: So now all of a sudden, liberals know more about National Security. Instersting, so now you guys care about technical aspects? That is a new one.

Bass, we both know you've done little to no investigation of what the deal includes. You are taking the talking points from conservatives and repeating them.

You honestly and seriously believe that Iran can be trusted, seriously?

I'm questioning the logistics of your plan. It depends on the US being able to dictate terms to everyone, both our allies and enemies. A worldwide embargo created by the threat the the US will stop doing business with your country? Other countries are going to balk at that, it will damage relations, and we will lose a lot more than we will get in return. You can't just walk into South Africa or Thailand or Nigeria and threaten to damage their economies if they don't do everything we want. It would be a catastrophe.

What's happening is that the GOP handlers give a few strong sounding statements and leave it at that. You come along with no knowledge of the deal and try to defend their position. That means it's up to you to actually talk about the specifics of your plan, and those specifics seem to change quite often. You're obviously making it up as you go along.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

They don't have to, if Obama were to jump in a fire pit, believe me, all the Democrats would follow.

You just can't seem to stop posting inaccurate and factually incorrect information - I thought you would have learned from your past mistake after being shown that there were in fact many in the US (mostly on the far right fringe) who want war with Iran. Now you claim Democrats will follow Obama anywhere;

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/key-democrats-skeptical-of-iran-deal-120123.html

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/06/12/politics/white-house-tpp-trade-deal-congress/

I assume no apology will be forthcoming for this error also.....but who knows, maybe you'll man-up, show some integrity, and admit you were wrong.......

Moderator: Please do not be impolite to other readers.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites