Ms. Spam Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 Do you think this is the greatest thing Obama has done? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Krawlie Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 I thought it was the worst. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 I liked when he brought world peace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pong Messiah Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 And didn't he heal the earth in 2008? How is this even significant? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ms. Spam Posted April 3, 2015 Author Share Posted April 3, 2015 You guys are like naysayers. Come on! Can't you see this deal will bring peace to the Middle East? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kurgan Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 Isn't this what the antichrist is supposed to do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pong Messiah Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 my goodness what a cynical bunch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkeygirl Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 this deal will bring peace to the Middle East? WHAT now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkeygirl Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 I liked when he brought world peace. I liked it when he single-handedly kicked the ASS outta bin Laden. Thaawas AWESOME. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 It's simple. If Iran nukes Israel, all of the problems in the Middle East will be destroyed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RelentlessMalice Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 Bad deal. Reading through the agreement it kept saying 15 years as the agreement timeframe? So technically we are saying in 15 years you can resume your nuclear weapon ambition. Iran simply needs to be told no period the end! This Obama foreign policy administration is beginning to rival the Chamberlin policy of appeasement to Hitler. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest El Chalupacabra Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 The deal itself seems a good deal, at least on paper. Like they say, if its too good to be true, it probably is. The issue is if Iran will follow it, and I don't think it was worth the risk on our part to see if they will or not follow it. I don't think this deal should have been made. I don't like the idea of the president circumventing congress with an "un-treaty." This is a bad precedent, IMHO. Also, in the short term, Iran likely will honor the agreement without Saddam-like shenanigans, because the reason they were brought to the negotiating table in the first place is their economy is in shambles due to economic sanctions, and they want to open up trade again, especially selling their oil. The downside to that is once Iran's economy starts to come back, even if they don't develop weaponized nukes, what's to stop them to double down on funding global terror? I think they may not have been after weaponized nukes all along, but to have the appearance of wanting to in an effort to have something worth negotiating for so that they could have sanctions lifted in an effort to kick start their cash flow again. In essence, I wonder if naive Obama was outmaneuvered by the Iranians in this case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkeygirl Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 Blan blah blah blah...Hitler. I'm sorry but I'm LMFAO with TEARS, man, TEARS!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kurgan Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 Godwin's law. It always happens.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t2ngFEBD95c Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RelentlessMalice Posted April 4, 2015 Share Posted April 4, 2015 Laugh it up folks but it's appeasement rather then telling Iran flat out no you are not enriching uranium period. There is nothing to gain by talking with Iran. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ms. Spam Posted April 4, 2015 Author Share Posted April 4, 2015 They're partying in Tehran.http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/03/world/middleeast/in-tehran-optimism-and-talk-of-revival-after-nuclear-deal.html?_r=0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pong Messiah Posted April 4, 2015 Share Posted April 4, 2015 omg i want to go Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ms. Spam Posted April 4, 2015 Author Share Posted April 4, 2015 The deal itself seems a good deal, at least on paper. Like they say, if its too good to be true, it probably is. The issue is if Iran will follow it, and I don't think it was worth the risk on our part to see if they will or not follow it. I don't think this deal should have been made. I don't like the idea of the president circumventing congress with an "un-treaty." This is a bad precedent, IMHO. Also, in the short term, Iran likely will honor the agreement without Saddam-like shenanigans, because the reason they were brought to the negotiating table in the first place is their economy is in shambles due to economic sanctions, and they want to open up trade again, especially selling their oil. The downside to that is once Iran's economy starts to come back, even if they don't develop weaponized nukes, what's to stop them to double down on funding global terror? I think they may not have been after weaponized nukes all along, but to have the appearance of wanting to in an effort to have something worth negotiating for so that they could have sanctions lifted in an effort to kick start their cash flow again. In essence, I wonder if naive Obama was outmaneuvered by the Iranians in this case.This should be interesting. I mean the upshot of Iran even considering this is that they may finally get iPhones that work because sanctions will be lifted and an influx of businesses will start being able to work with them within the religious regime. Cuba is just as interesting too in an economics view point. But I don't think Obama is naive. We're getting a foot further in the door. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest El Chalupacabra Posted April 4, 2015 Share Posted April 4, 2015 This should be interesting. I mean the upshot of Iran even considering this is that they may finally get iPhones that work because sanctions will be lifted and an influx of businesses will start being able to work with them within the religious regime. Cuba is just as interesting too in an economics view point. But I don't think Obama is naive. We're getting a foot further in the door. A foot further in the door, and right into a pile of sh*t, maybe. If Obama isn't naive, then he is incompetent, when it comes to foreign policy, particularly when it comes to Iran. There is a vast difference between Cuba and Iran, chief of those being Cuba doesn't overtly provide state sponsored support to major terrorist organizations like Hamas, Hezbolah, Islamic terrorists in Inda, Iraqi insurgents, and conduct state sponsored cyber terrorism. What I find odd is when Kayla Mueller's parents begged the Obama Administration to cut whatever deal that was needed to set their daughter free, Obama's answer was the long time US policy of never negotiating with terrorists. Which, I believe is the correct move. Yet, it is perfectly okay with Obama to circumvent Congress, and rather doing it the correct way and negotiate a treaty that needs to be ratified by Congress, and he makes an agreement with the Iranian government, which has been a financial backer of terrorist organizations all over the world, who are at war with the US and its allies. That is an act much like taking military action without a formal declaration of war...something Obama railed against Bush about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DANA-kin Skywalker Posted April 4, 2015 Share Posted April 4, 2015 Iran shouldn't get iPhones until they get a religious reformation. If you haven't self-evolved passed the 1500s so then you shouldn't enjoy technology from 2015 sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkeygirl Posted April 4, 2015 Share Posted April 4, 2015 Laugh it up folks but it's appeasement rather then telling Iran flat out no you are not enriching uranium period. There is nothing to gain by talking with Iran. But...isn't 'telling Iran flat out no you are not enriching uranium period' talking to them? And you think Iran will respond well to being talked to like a 10-year-old who wants to stay up late? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ms. Spam Posted April 4, 2015 Author Share Posted April 4, 2015 Okay, Chalupa. A couple of points: I don't see how Obama's circumventing Congress. It's just an agreement. I believe that he had to come home to us, and sell it as a good deal to the American People and Congress. I feel that this maybe something Obama was angling towards for a while with Iran as his tone to Israel has been very different for years than previous administrations as well as Bergdahl's release (and he's going to be court martialed!). As far as negotiating with terrorists we could be considered terrorists right back at Iran with all kinds of examples even down to cyber hacks to people going illegally across it's borders to funding other people who turn out to be just as bad. I am not trying to defend Iran but I do know people who have identified themselves as Persian to keep American's from freaking out on them that would like to have a chance to go back to Iran and visit family they have not seen for decades. One of the few people I still count as a friend from my high school days was from Iran. I went to high school with her in Tucson. There are also several families here in San Antonio who are from Iran. Secondly, my point about Cuba and Iran economically speaking was more directed towards a change in policy that will help lift the people past a third world presence. Iran has very intelligent people living in a very suppressive regime. They will have more access to things and more purchasing power which drives change. While not the same situation Capitalism is probably going to break the current regimes because people want to be able to have light at night, buy things that work for them and they're willing to give up the ideas of religion and state so they can have these things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DANA-kin Skywalker Posted April 4, 2015 Share Posted April 4, 2015 While not the same situation Capitalism is probably going to break the current regimes because people want to be able to have light at night, buy things that work for them and they're willing to give up the ideas of religion and state so they can have these things....or Iran is going to destabilize the sh!t out of the region further. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RelentlessMalice Posted April 4, 2015 Share Posted April 4, 2015 Monkeygirl yes it is talking to them like a 10 year old and that is because they deserve to be treated that way when they A. Sponsor terrorism B. They are an arse backward theocracy. C. They will destabilize the rest of the region. Of all the various forms of energy Iran could use they pick the one that would pave the way for them to have a nuclear weapon. Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon is not what the rest of the world needs. Too risky and if that means we treat them as a child then so be it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 4, 2015 Share Posted April 4, 2015 I don't buy the whole "money will change them!" argument. How many Islamist terrorists are wealthy, Western educated men? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts