Iran

[hayden_horn 11,401]

you're a little weird

[WhatTheBuck 28,904]

56 minutes ago, 5 5 said:

Our military should "Sadat" Trump.

Trump would have to make a peace deal first. Don't hold your breath. But yeah. if it did happen, it would be religious conservatives who did the deed. Same with Begin. 

Religious conservatives don't want peace. 

[NastyDreams 11]

Iran won't like us now.

[Sawbonz 28,082]

Trump may actually be the antichrist 

[Theo Huxtable 48]

If Iran ever nukes us, I sincerely hope the epicenter is Trump’s fat fucking face.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Theo Huxtable 48]

What is the award given that’s the exact opposite of nobel peace prize?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Brisketexan 106,625]

Trump may actually be the antichrist 

5 5’s absurdity aside...you’re getting there, aren’t you?

[Theo Huxtable 48]

Who’d have thought I’d one day think more highly of the leaders in North Korea and Iran than ours.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Theo Huxtable 48]

Trump has smartly...

This is how we know that you’re about to say is wrong.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Lagunamadre 1,975]

11 minutes ago, Theo Huxtable said:

If Iran ever nukes us, I sincerely hope the epicenter is Trump’s fat fucking face.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Preferably while he is on a solo visit to a remote Nevada missile testing site. 

[FondrenRoad 4,378]

1 hour ago, Fozzz said:

They are obviously not going to become more moderate after getting burned for engaging with the international community  

Of course they aren't.  They're going to try to get nukes quickly because we breached.  We'll get none of the money back.  We won't even have a diplomatic play available when they restart enrichment because we decided to shred all of our cards except the military card.  We also won't invade once they actually have nukes, so the clock is ticking.  I think we have boots on the ground in Iran by the 4th of July.  Iran could make it really interesting by further opening up their military bases to the Russians.

[Stros 153]

So Trump got us out of a piece shit deal, that the US Senate couldn’t even vote on.

Liberal tears are still tasty.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[David Dennison 19,441]

7 minutes ago, Stros said:

So Trump got us out of a piece shit deal, that the US Senate couldn’t even vote on.

Liberal tears are still tasty.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

At the expense of credibility with allies.

America breaks its promises.

Great.

[Stros 153]

At the expense of credibility with allies.
America breaks its promises.
Great.

Our allies should get out to Obama/Kerry/corker screwballed them, just like they fucked the senate.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GHOSTUSER 361]

1 hour ago, 5 5 said:

The point is. Mueller better indict. Asap. Trump's criminality must be revealed. And the Pentagon ought to deep throat him. That's the only solution here.

The FBI, CIA & Pentagon takes him down. And Yes. That's the deep state. So be it.

I'll take Law & Order USA any day over The Russian Mafia Tea Party.

Let me guess, you just finished season 6 of Homeland didn’t you? Dar Adal is your homeboy.

[David Dennison 19,441]

2 minutes ago, Stros said:

Our allies should get out to Obama/Kerry/corker screwballed them, just like they fucked the senate.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

A competent president would have negotiated a better deal while Americans are still able to enter Iran and monitor their nuclear program.

But we have Donald Trump.  

[CowboyFred 1,162]

55 minutes ago, 5 5 said:

I'm like one of them omen / exorcist priests.

No, you're strange and need to back away from the computer for a bit.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

It would have been one thing if Trump negotiated or even attempted to negotiate a better Iran deal...but no, he’s not capable of solving problems.

It’s much like his approach to Obamacare. No replace, just repeal. We all suffer but haha liberal tears! So worth it.

[zork 629]

Governing via Executive Order is not governing correctly.  Trump is guilty of this as Obama was clearly.  There was no treaty, no Legislative Branch buy in on the Iran agreement between Kerry, Obama and Iran.

National Review columnist opines:

Quote

...

The worldview Trump opposes privileges therapy and dialogue over realism and hard decisions. It imagines that the Iranian theocracy is a reliable or trustworthy hedge against Sunni power and will liberalize gradually as the arc of justice progresses. These are the ideas that motivated the presidency of Barack Obama. The Iran deal was the signature achievement of Obama’s second term, and it is now gone. In truth, though, Obama’s legacy was disappearing long before Trump made his announcement. Obama’s legacy, like much of his self-presentation, was a mirage, a pleasing and attractive image that, upon closer inspection, loses coherence.

Because he governed so extensively through executive order and administrative fiat, because he was so contemptuous of criticism and had a “my way or the highway” approach to negotiations with Republicans (though not with Iranians), the longevity of Obama’s agenda depended heavily on his party’s winning a third consecutive term in the White House. As Tom Cotton warned the Iranians years ago, an agreement entered into by a president and not submitted to the Senate as a treaty can be abrogated by the next man who holds the office. Hillary Clinton’s failure doomed the Iran deal and the reputations it had established. It was Barack Obama and John Kerry who allowed Donald Trump to exit the deal by rejecting longstanding procedure. Perhaps it was knowledge of this fact that inspired Kerry in his desperate attempt to preserve the agreement.

Trump has spent much of his time in office reversing Obama policies that were made outside, or in opposition to, America’s constitutional framework. He has had the hardest time repealing Obamacare, for the very reason that the Affordable Care Act was passed by the Senate and upheld by the Supreme Court. That is a lesson for any president: To have a long-lasting influence on American life, work within the system bequeathed to us by the Founders.

...

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/05/donald-trump-ends-iran-deal-obama-mirage/

 

 

 

Edited May 8, 2018 by zork

[Dolemite 143]

Trumps goes str8 to the Ghettoe. 

 

 

 

Edited May 8, 2018 by Dolemite

[TexArcher 38,816]

Not going to single out anyone on this thread, but...

One hundred percent of the people who hate the Iran nuclear deal have no idea how it worked or what we got out of it.

They're the same people who hated the Affordable Care Act but never read it, while it was available online the entire time.

I'm not saying there weren't things to dislike about either of those deals.  I'm saying you don't know what they are.  You don't understand either situation, the deals, or the alternatives.  You can't even speak intelligently about *why* you don't like the deals.  You just parrot what you hear on Fox News.  It would be sadly humorous, if there weren't so god damned many of you.

Disclaimer: not a liberal.

Now...  prove me wrong.  Someone make one intelligent statement as to how the world is better off because of what Trump did today...

[Brisketexan 106,625]

Not going to single out anyone on this thread, but...
One hundred percent of the people who hate the Iran nuclear deal have no idea how it worked or what we got out of it.
They're the same people who hated the Affordable Care Act but never read it, while it was available online the entire time.
I'm not saying there weren't things to dislike about either of those deals.  I'm saying you don't know what they are.  You don't understand either situation, the deals, or the alternatives.  You can't even speak intelligently about *why* you don't like the deals.  You just parrot what you hear on Fox News.  It would be sadly humorous, if there weren't so god damned many of you.
Disclaimer: not a liberal.
Now...  prove me wrong.  Someone make one intelligent statement as to how the world is better off because of what Trump did today...

Sir, it seems that you missed the post about “sweet lib tears” above. It’s the only metric that matters anymore.

Retarded orange moose out front shoulda told ya.

[Thetexashammer 1,062]

37 minutes ago, TexArcher said:

Not going to single out anyone on this thread, but...

One hundred percent of the people who hate the Iran nuclear deal have no idea how it worked or what we got out of it.

They're the same people who hated the Affordable Care Act but never read it, while it was available online the entire time.

I'm not saying there weren't things to dislike about either of those deals.  I'm saying you don't know what they are.  You don't understand either situation, the deals, or the alternatives.  You can't even speak intelligently about *why* you don't like the deals.  You just parrot what you hear on Fox News.  It would be sadly humorous, if there weren't so god damned many of you.

Disclaimer: not a liberal.

Now...  prove me wrong.  Someone make one intelligent statement as to how the world is better off because of what Trump did today...

Quotes from the report at this link: https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/iran-nuclear-deal-definitive-guide

 

Quote

4.1.2 Access to Undeclared Facilities
Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement
Under Iran’s Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement, the
IAEA can seek access to an undeclared site through a “special
inspection” if the IAEA Director General believes that access is
required to confirm the correctness and completeness of information
provided by Iran. In circumstances that may lead to a
special inspection, the IAEA is required to consult with Iran.
There is no deadline specified in the CSA for resolving disputes
between the IAEA and Iran over special inspections, but the
Director General would normally report the situation to the
IAEA Board of Governors.

Quote

Additional Protocol
The Additional Protocol permits the IAEA broader access on a
more routine basis to follow up questions or inconsistencies. In
the event of a question or inconsistency, the IAEA is required
to provide Iran with an opportunity to clarify and facilitate the
resolution of the question or inconsistency before the request
for access is made (unless the IAEA considers that any delay
in access would prejudice the purpose for which the access is
sought). In any event, the IAEA may not draw any conclusions
regarding the question or inconsistency until Iran has been provided
with such an opportunity. If Iran is unable to provide the
requested access, it is required to make every reasonable effort
to satisfy the IAEA’s requirements, without delay, through other
means.
The IAEA is required to offer Iran at least 24 hours notice before
access occurs in order to explain the reason for seeking access,
and to give Iran an opportunity to resolve issues by other means.
If Iran is “unable” to allow access at the requested location, there
is no deadline specified in the AP for resolving disputes over
complementary access to suspect sites. The AP also allows for
“managed access” to sites in order to protect sensitive or proprietary
information.

There is a fake inspection regime in place. Iran lied before the deal and as far as anyone knows, is most likely cheating on the deal since the deal itself was designed to allow that. Iran would not have signed a truly binding deal.  The inspections are completely tootless.

 

To answer your question, we now have an opportunity to negotiate a deal which prevents Iran from getting nuclear weapons, where before there was a certainty that they would get them. What do I win?

 

 

[David Dennison 19,441]

2 minutes ago, Thetexashammer said:

Quotes from the report at this link: https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/iran-nuclear-deal-definitive-guide

 

There is a fake inspection regime in place. Iran lied before the deal and as far as anyone knows, is most likely cheating on the deal since the deal itself was designed to allow that. Iran would not have signed a truly binding deal.  The inspections are completely tootless.

 

To answer your question, we now have an opportunity to negotiate a deal which prevents Iran from getting nuclear weapons, where before there was a certainty that they would get them. What do I win?

 

 

They aren't going to negotiate with us now. Our idiot president made sure of that.

Edited May 9, 2018 by David Dennison

[Hate 20,232]

They aren't going to negotiate with us now. Our idiot president made sure of that.

Why in the hell would they negotiate with us before? They already got their money and would get nukes eventually anyway.

[David Dennison 19,441]

2 minutes ago, Hate said:

Why in the hell would they negotiate with us before? They already got their money and would get nukes eventually anyway.

 

It'll be a whole lot easier now.

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

Whatever happens with Iran, Trump owns it now. 

[Pods 7,622]

Just now, Mojo Hand said:

Whatever happens with Iran, Trump owns it now. 

You break it, you buy it. We know he owns it. He does not own it to the Trumpkins though and he never will. It's Obama and John Kerry's fault. It can be Bill Clinton or even Carter's fault if they need to go back far enough, but it will never be Trump's fault. 

[Thetexashammer 1,062]

This thread is a Rogue's Gallery of TDS victims.

[David Dennison 19,441]

Now you know what 2009 to 2017 was like.

[XR4ticlone 122]

1 hour ago, David Dennison said:

They aren't going to negotiate with us now. Our idiot president made sure of that.

Yea...the fact Obama paid them already for things they were never going to do...probably doesn't help. 

But what could a homicidal, terror sponsoring, nation do with a hundred billion dollars?   

Ehhh...probably nothing bad.  

[Lurch 5,949]

Wish someone would let him end now.

Thoughts and prayers

[XR4ticlone 122]

59 minutes ago, Hate said:

 

Why in the hell would they negotiate with us before? They already got their money and would get nukes eventually anyway.

 

Yea...but Trump!  

Sure Obama gave them a $100 billion and a road to nukes...but this will be the REAL problem!  

 

[David Dennison 19,441]

2 minutes ago, XR4ticlone said:

Yea...the fact Obama paid them already for things they were never going to do...probably doesn't help. 

But what could a homicidal, terror sponsoring, nation do with a hundred billion dollars?   

Ehhh...probably nothing bad.  

At least there's no confusion that America doesn't keep its promises.

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

38 minutes ago, Thetexashammer said:

This thread is a Rogue's Gallery of TDS victims.

The only derangement belongs to those who still support Trump at this point. 

[Lurch 5,949]

First, this is the problem with any POTUS entering into such a dramatic deal without congressional approval.  Because if we let one guy do it, then we do not have a choice if the next guy wants to undo it.

The original deal was terrible.  IMO, it was the epitome of political grandstanding which actually made the situation worse.  The Iranians said they only coveted nuclear capabilities for energy, yet, the recent report by Israel makes it abundantly clear that they want nuclear military capabilities.  

The 2 biggest problems with the original deal are 1) the timelines and, 2) the access. 

Obama has openly admitted that this deal gives Iran the capability to have advanced enough centrifuges that they could enrich uranium to military grade in a number of days.  Certainly in a shorter time than any inspections could stop it.  Why would we agree to a deal that lets the Iranians have the advanced centrifuges?  They are completely unnecessary for energy production.  It was an absolute horrible part of the deal and the one that, essentially, makes the deal worthless from a practical standpoint.  A whopping 10 or so years Iran has to wait to get everything they wanted and we released 100s of billions to them.  Literally, the deal from Iran's prospective was- we get 100s of billions in cash, we get trade sanctions lifted, we get advanced centrifuges, we get limited inspection and, if we wait a whole 10 years, we get the ability to enrich military grade uranium in a matter of days.  That is the deal of century for Iran.  Again, purely political grandstanding.

The access is equally as bad.  Iran was in bad, bad shape financially and politically.  Bad shape.  They HAD to make a deal.  Yet, we did not demand unfettered access to their potential sites.  It is baffling why we would do that.  It is like Aggy facing the death penalty for football recruiting violations and Texas agreeing to let them off the hook if we get to inspect their recruiting of punters only.  

I am hopeful that the advanced centrifuges and access issues can be renegotiated in a new deal.  We shall see.

 

Obama bought 10 years of peace. Trump just returned 8 of it without getting a refund.

[GHOSTUSER 361]

Brisket has sounded the alarm bells that our “fragile” institutions (we aren’t Hungary or Poland Brisket) are under assault because of Trump’s rule via executive orders but did not call out Obama for creating this mess in the first place by enacting his signature pieces of legislation that way. What do you expect would happen when the other party came into power?  If you are trying to pretend to be non-partisan and above the fray you need to do a better job. I’m a life-long Republican who was voted Democratic for President only in 2004 and 2008 because I was a staunch opponent of the Iraq War. Trump has done a lot of dumb shit I don’t like. I will give him credit where it’s due. As crazy as it sounds, he has a much more coherent foreign policy advancing American interests vis a vis our enemies like Iran.

[DixonHur 11,941]

So the gist of what I'm hearing from the rights is that the reason to kill the deal is because the inspections provisions weren't strong enough...so the solution is to remove ALL inspection provisions.  Seems logical.

[David Dennison 19,441]

Just now, DixonHur said:

So the gist of what I'm hearing from the rights is that the reason to kill the deal is because the inspections provisions weren't strong enough...so the solution is to remove ALL inspection provisions.  Seems logical.

We're really showing them.

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

Trump's own SecDef just admitted last week that the verification in the deal was robust.  The notion that it wasn't is just manufactured bullshit. 

[XR4ticlone 122]

7 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

At least there's no confusion that America doesn't keep its promises.

America didn't MAKE ANY PROMISES...

The Obama Administration is still madly in love with Iran and it's deal...I'm sure they're 100% in place on THEIR deal.

See the American PEOPLE didn't make a promise.  WE make promises via TREATY.  

Why don't we have an IRAN TREATY?  Because it was a shitty deal and no one other than a lame duck, muslim loving, dip shit and his leftist lap dogs wanted this POS.

Even Jon Podesta said it was a joke and Iran would get nukes from the deal...and the money?  Well, the money's all gone.  😡

[David Dennison 19,441]

3 minutes ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

Brisket has sounded the alarm bells that our “fragile” institutions (we aren’t Hungary or Poland Brisket) are under assault because of Trump’s rule via executive orders but did not call out Obama for creating this mess in the first place by enacting his signature pieces of legislation that way. What do you expect would happen when the other party came into power?  If you are trying to pretend to be non-partisan and above the fray you need to do a better job. I’m a life-long Republican who was voted Democratic for President only in 2004 and 2008 because I was a staunch opponent of the Iraq War. Trump has done a lot of dumb shit I don’t like. I will give him credit where it’s due. As crazy as it sounds, he has a much more coherent foreign policy advancing American interests vis a vis our enemies like Iran.

It's not coherent at all. He has no foreign policy.

[DixonHur 11,941]

3 minutes ago, XR4ticlone said:

See the American PEOPLE didn't make a promise.  WE make promises via TREATY.  

You mean like NAFTA?

[XR4ticlone 122]

7 minutes ago, Lurch said:

 

Obama bought 10 years of peace. Trump just returned 8 of it with getting a refund.

 

The ME is peaceful?   

Iran's spending Obama's gift to them via Hezbollah and its other agents to create everything but peace. 

[Lurch 5,949]

The ME is peaceful?   
Iran's spending Obama's gift to them via Hezbollah and its other agents to create everything but peace. 

We were very close to Israel bombing suspected nuke sites. Yes, granted it’s all relative.

[kevwun 16,269]

7 minutes ago, XR4ticlone said:

America didn't MAKE ANY PROMISES...

The Obama Administration is still madly in love with Iran and it's deal...I'm sure they're 100% in place on THEIR deal.

See the American PEOPLE didn't make a promise.  WE make promises via TREATY.  

Why don't we have an IRAN TREATY?  Because it was a shitty deal and no one other than a lame duck, muslim loving, dip shit and his leftist lap dogs wanted this POS.

Even Jon Podesta said it was a joke and Iran would get nukes from the deal...and the money?  Well, the money's all gone.  😡

You clearly know more than James Mattis.

[David Dennison 19,441]

World War III is going to be so much fun.

[kopp0e 1,135]

29 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Now you know what 2009 to 2017 was like.

There was quite the hubbub in 2000 as well...

 

[Incredulity 11,861]

Fuck that.

Only Russia and China are remotely capable of a military action against the US that isn’t over in a week( if the gloves are off).

and spare me the global thermonuclear war scare tactic.

 

[Thetexashammer 1,062]

12 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

Trump's own SecDef just admitted last week that the verification in the deal was robust.  The notion that it wasn't is just manufactured bullshit. 

Again from the report:

Quote

 At declared facilities, the JCPOA verification
regime provides the IAEA with sufficient tools to verify with
high confidence that Iran is complying with the nuclear limits
and to detect and report in a timely manner any substantial
diversion of nuclear material or use of undeclared material.

.........

Quote

The IAEA is very effective at verifying compliance at declared, inspected facilities, but intelligence agencies are most likely to detect clandestine activities.

So the Harvard report is basically admitting that the procedures for discovering nuclear work at "undeclared facilities" is totally ineffective. Getting access to "undeclared facilities" would take months, under the provisions of the deal. 

This isn't about partisanship or team red or team blue. It's about reading comprehension.

This is the Mattis quote:

Quote

“It is written almost with an assumption that Iran would try to cheat, so the verification, what is in there is actually pretty robust, as far as our intrusive ability to get in,” Mattis told the Senate Armed Services Committee. “Whether or not that is sufficient, that is a valid question.”

That quote doesn't mean what you think it means.