Disgusted with obama administration - Part II

• superman

  Dropping bombs is an act of peace.
• Con_Alma

  I apologize. I don't follow what your saying regarding bombs being dropped are an act of peace.
  
  I understand your point regarding those who call for war should be drafted. Has anyone done that? ...call for war?
• superman

  You really are an idiot aren't you?
• Con_Alma

  ...just asking a simple question. That's all. I understand if you don't want to answer.
• Con_Alma

  Playing "footsie" with Iran has a high price.
  
  http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2015/03/28/the-high-price-of-u-s-cooperation-with-iran/
  
  The negotiations have given Iran international legitimacy and weakened the U.S. influence in the Middle East.
• superman

  Con_Alma;1717102 wrote:Playing "footsie" with Iran has a high price.
  
  http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2015/03/28/the-high-price-of-u-s-cooperation-with-iran/
  
  The negotiations have given Iran international legitimacy and weakened the U.S. influence in the Middle East.

  We should probably just go ahead and bomb them.
• Con_Alma

  That's what John Bolton says. Others disagree.
  
  Backing off sanctions isn't a good idea. Negotiating with them doesn't appear to be either when we have allies in the Middle East distancing themselves from us. When Iran scoffs at the 10 year restriction and demands sanctions be reduced....we are playing footsie with the devil. What's next? ...convincing the UN to place a timeline on creating a Palestinian State?
• Spock

  

  energy independence= who gives a fuck.
  
  Keep them from getting Nukes and that is it. Let them kill each other. As long as it doesn't spill outside the region we shouldn't care. But since we need their oil cheap we have to play politics
• Con_Alma

  A nuclear armed Iran has greater implications than U.S. energy independence.
• superman

  Spock;1717110 wrote:energy independence= who gives a fuck.
  
  Keep them from getting Nukes and that is it. Let them kill each other. As long as it doesn't spill outside the region we shouldn't care. But since we need their oil cheap we have to play politics

  We wouldn't need their oil if we were allowed to drill own.
• Con_Alma

  superman;1717113 wrote:We wouldn't need their oil if we were allowed to drill own.

  Amen to that.
• Spock

  

  superman;1717113 wrote:We wouldn't need their oil if we were allowed to drill own.

  that's what I mean by that post
• HitsRus

  

  http://www.cleveland.com/obrien/index.ssf/2015/03/obsession_with_an_iran_deal_is.html#incart_river_mobile
  good take on this... Pretty much sims it up.
• QuakerOats

  [h=3]ministration To Announce Emissions Cut As Part Of Global Climate Treaty.[/h]The AP (3/31, Lederman) reports that the US, “in a highly anticipated announcement,” will on Tuesday “offer a roughly 28 percent emissions cut as its contribution to a major global climate treaty nearing the final stages of negotiation,” according to sources familiar with the Obama administration’s plans. The US intends to announce its commitment on the cusp of “the informal deadline for nations to submit their contributions to the United Nations.” The AP adds, “Although the goal of 26 percent to 28 percent by 2025 isn’t new” the proposal by the White House “has drawn intense interest from the vast majority of countries that have yet to announce how deeply they’ll pledge to cut greenhouse gas emissions as part of the treaty.”
  
  
  
  Wonderful. We saddle ourselves with a half a TRILLION in compliance expenditures which will drive up our manufacturing costs and make us less competitive in the global market, all the while China is allowed to pollute at any level they want until 2030 when they might have to do something. Between now and then they will have just about wiped us out. obama sells out to the communist regime putting economic freedom at risk for every American.
  
  We have elected the enemy.
• Con_Alma

  Howard Dean has come out and stated that he thinks the President is to eager to get a deal and that walking away from the talks at this time would enable getting a better deal.
  
  http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/237593-howard-dean-obama-should-walk-away-from-iran-talks
• ptown_trojans_1

  

  Well, if details of the Iran details are correct, the main portions that I felt needed to be implemented were verification, mainly Iran sign the Additional Protocol.
  If these details are correct, and they are going to be verified, then it is a great deal.
  http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/documents/world/parameters-of-plan-on-iran-nuclear-program/1507/
  
  Important things, Iran will have to adhere to IAEA inspections.
  Iran will only enrich at one site, and with a generation 1 centrifuge.
  And, the IAEA can inspect nearly any site it feels can be used for enrichment.
  
  Short of a total stop of enrichment, this basic outline is the best deal possible.
• Classyposter58

  

  Obama and Kerry have done a wonderful job with this situation
• Spock

  

  ptown_trojans_1;1718334 wrote:Well, if details of the Iran details are correct, the main portions that I felt needed to be implemented were verification, mainly Iran sign the Additional Protocol.
  If these details are correct, and they are going to be verified, then it is a great deal.
  http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/documents/world/parameters-of-plan-on-iran-nuclear-program/1507/
  
  Important things, Iran will have to adhere to IAEA inspections.
  Iran will only enrich at one site, and with a generation 1 centrifuge.
  And, the IAEA can inspect nearly any site it feels can be used for enrichment.
  
  Short of a total stop of enrichment, this basic outline is the best deal possible.

  dealing with Iran in this matter isn't a "best deal". This will all backfire on us.
• QuakerOats

  Classyposter58;1718341 wrote:Obama and Kerry have done a wonderful job with this situation

  
  Yes, negotiating with the largest exporter of terrorism in the world and expecting them to abide by a 'deal' when they have NEVER abided by any deal in the past is certainly a momentous occasion. I am certain that John "I served in Vietnam" Kerry is popping the champagne corks as peace is breaking out all over the planet.
  
  Masterful job.
• ptown_trojans_1

  

  Spock;1718348 wrote:dealing with Iran in this matter isn't a "best deal". This will all backfire on us.

  Short of war, what do you propose?
  
  The main verification measure needed to ensure that Iran does not cheat is the Additional Protocol (AP) and Code 3.1. This can ensure the IAEA has access to any location in the country.
  If the IAEA says Iran is not in compliance, the sanctions kick back in.
  
  The Iranians have been resisting the AP for years because it is so intrusive.
  I am guessing you just want Iran to magically give up it's enrichment program. And, I want the Indians to win the World Series. We know that is not happening.
• HitsRus

  

  anybody have the over/under on when the cat and mouse games begin?
• ptown_trojans_1

  

  HitsRus;1718370 wrote:anybody have the over/under on when the cat and mouse games begin?

  If they agree and sign the Additional Protocol, there is really no cat and mouse game. The IAEA can check anywhere they want for anything. This is the part that did surprise me as Iran has refused to even think about signing the AP for years.
  
  There is also this, "Iran will be required to grant access to the IAEA to investigate suspicious sites or allegations of a covert enrichment facility, conversion facility, centrifuge production facility, or yellowcake production facility anywhere in the country"
  
  So, if the IAEA thinks there is a suspected facility, like the one a few years ago, they will be granted access.
  
  Now, the final details and how long it will take various aspects of the deal to be implemented will be the thing to watch. When do the Additional Protocols kick in, how fast will Iran have to take down the advanced centrifuges.
  
  It is all pretty technical now.
  
  But, the take away is Iran will only have 1 facility that can enrich uranium, and can only do with it slow centrifuges that the IAEA will monitor.
  
  Reading through the opponents on why they do not like the deal, it is either they do not want any deal at all (so they didn't want anything from the start no matter what Iran gave up) or they have no technical knowledge of the subject.
• majorspark

  

  ptown_trojans_1;1718404 wrote:So, if the IAEA thinks there is a suspected facility, like the one a few years ago, they will be granted access.

  LOL.
• Con_Alma

  This is such a charade we are watching unfold. Iran continues to play the U.S. and we are eating it up.
• Con_Alma

  I remember President Clinton Telling us that If North Korea cheats, then we will know it. Yeah, So there's that.