PDA

View Full Version : Iran deal



Tahuyaman
10-13-2017, 12:05 PM
This is not going to be received well by the Democrats and spineless Republicans. They are going to claim this is the first step toward going to war with Iran.

The establishment types are going to claim these additional sanctions are only provoking Iran.

Not recertifying the Iran deal is the right step to take.


Trump is forcing the Congress to do their job by not recertifying the ill conceived and unenforceable Iran deal. More undoing of the Obama legacy. Trump is reversing the policies of a previous president who thought he was elected King.

Tahuyaman
10-13-2017, 01:11 PM
More reasons for liberals to vapor lock.

Grokmaster
10-13-2017, 01:13 PM
President Trump continued his policy of confronting our enemies, today be de-certifying the outrageous Obama Iran Deal, which has done nothing to stop Iran's nuclear program, but instead gave them BILLION$ to pursue it, and its ongoing international funding of islamoterror.

Wow...the POTRUS is actually treatoing our enemies, as though they are our enemies, as opposed to the insanely weak , former Pres. Mommy Pants' nonstop appeasement policies...

This, of course, will be met with outrage by the anti-American "America last, grovel and appease first" left, as usual....

Trump strikes blow at Iran nuclear deal in major U.S. policy shift



WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump struck a blow against the 2015 Iran nuclear agreement on Friday in defiance of other world powers, choosing not to certify that Tehran is complying with the deal and warning he might ultimately terminate it.
Trump announced the major shift in U.S. policy in a speech in which he detailed a more confrontational approach to Iran over its nuclear and ballistic missile programs and its support for extremist groups in the Middle East.

Trump accused Iran of "not living up to the spirit" of the nuclear agreement and said his goal is to ensure Tehran never obtains a nuclear weapon. He suggested Iran might be working with North Korea on its weapons programs, an accusation that has not been substantiated.
"We will not continue down a path whose predictable conclusion is more violence more terror and the very real threat of Iran’s nuclear breakout," Trump said.


Trump warned that if "we are not able to reach a solution working with Congress and our allies, then the agreement will be terminated."

Trump's harder line on Iran was likely to infuriate Tehran but was welcomed by Israel.

Israel's intelligence minister described Trump's speech as "very significant" and one that could lead to war given threats that preceded it from Tehran.







https://www.yahoo.com/news/president-trump-decertify-iran-nuclear-deal-major-shift-153624871.html




Gasp !!! Opposing our enemies, and supporting our allies!!!??? Who ever heard of such a thing????!!!!

Grokmaster
10-13-2017, 01:13 PM
Darn it !!!! Dupe threaded you, too!!!

Captain Obvious
10-13-2017, 01:15 PM
Boom!

What a shit deal that was, those mullahs were laughing at us for years.

Common Sense
10-13-2017, 01:15 PM
Support allies???

All the US's allies support the deal. Not to mention they themselves are signed onto the deal.

Tahuyaman
10-13-2017, 01:19 PM
Darn it !!!! Dupe threaded you, too!!!

You should have checked.

Tahuyaman
10-13-2017, 01:20 PM
Support allies???

All the US's allies support the deal. Not to mention they themselves are signed onto the deal.

So what? It's unenforceable no matter how many nations support it. Iran ignored it.

MrMike
10-13-2017, 01:21 PM
I'm quite happy he made this move. It was a horrible deal brokered by an incompetent prior POTUS.

jimmyz
10-13-2017, 01:30 PM
Is Iran going to give back the $1.7 billion we gave them?

Tahuyaman
10-13-2017, 01:40 PM
It looks like Trump is trying to force congress to formulate an agreement which actually places enforcable conditions and sanction on Iran. Plus preventing Iran from colluding with North Korea.

The Democrats and rest of the world should jump on board with that. I predict they will after they recover from their initial knee-jerk reaction.

Hal Jordan
10-13-2017, 01:47 PM
Duplicate threads merged

KathyS
10-13-2017, 02:29 PM
this is not going to be received well by the democrats and spineless republicans. They are going to claim this is the first step toward going to war with iran.

The establishment types are going to claim these additional sanctions are only provoking iran.

Not recertifying the iran deal is the right step to take.


trump is forcing the congress to do their job by not recertifying the ill conceived and unenforceable iran deal. More undoing of the obama legacy. Trump is reversing the policies of a previous president who thought he was elected king.

bingo!!!

Tahuyaman
10-13-2017, 02:37 PM
I'm quite happy he made this move. It was a horrible deal brokered by an incompetent prior POTUS.

Things like this I'll conceived Iran deal is what happens when one is just groping to create a legacy.

Anyone with any common sense knew that this deal was a symbolic act which woukd accomplish nothing. Iran even laughed at it and went public saying that they had no intention of abiding by anything.

Abby08
10-13-2017, 03:00 PM
Things like this I'll conceived Iran deal is what happens when one is just groping to create a legacy.

Anyone with any common sense knew that this deal was a symbolic act which woukd accomplish nothing. Iran even laughed at it and went public saying that they had no intention of abiding by anything.

... while burning our flag and, chanting, "death to America".... don't forget that.....still, it was genius, because Obama did it.

Common Sense
10-13-2017, 03:10 PM
Mattis and Tillerson support the deal and admit Iran is abiding by the agreement. Unfortunately Trump would rather please his myopic base rather than listen to the adults in the room.

He is alienating the US's allies to score political points.

Common Sense
10-13-2017, 03:11 PM
... while burning our flag and, chanting, "death to America".... don't forget that.....still, it was genius, because Obama did it.
As opposed to you hating it just because Obama did it?

Abby08
10-13-2017, 03:21 PM
As opposed to you hating it just because Obama did it?

Did you happen to see my previous post? Obama made a deal with people who openly hate us, burn our flag while saying, "death to America". I realize you're in Canada, but, you honestly believe it was a good thing to make a deal with them?

Yes, I pretty much hated everything Obama did.... because of the outright stupidity of those things.

Green Arrow
10-13-2017, 03:22 PM
Did you happen to see my previous post? Obama made a deal with people who openly hate us, burn our flag while saying, "death to America". I realize you're in Canada, but, you honestly believe it was a good thing to make a deal with them?

Yes, I pretty much hated everything Obama did.... because of the outright stupidity of those things.

Would you rather waste more American lives and treasure on another unwinnable ME war?

Tahuyaman
10-13-2017, 03:22 PM
Mattis and Tillerson support the deal and admit Iran is abiding by the agreement. Unfortunately Trump would rather please his myopic base rather than listen to the adults in the room.

He is alienating the US's allies to score political points.

In spite of the shreaking, he de-certified the deal. Now it's up to the congress to develop a new one which has tougher sanctions and is enforcable. You don't like it..... Too bad.


Actually, one could look at this as a failure to keep a campaign promise.

Common Sense
10-13-2017, 03:26 PM
Did you happen to see my previous post? Obama made a deal with people who openly hate us, burn our flag while saying, "death to America". I realize you're in Canada, but, you honestly believe it was a good thing to make a deal with them?

Yes, I pretty much hated everything Obama did.... because of the outright stupidity of those things.

LOL...Canada gain? Seriously? Am I that much in your head?

Yes, many in Iran openly hate the US. Many don't. It's a complex country.

Making deals with adversaries is nothing new. Deals are made to avoid conflict.

The deal is supported by virtually all US allies and is signed by 7 nations.

According the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defence, the deal is working and worth being in. Are they stupid?

Essentially a deal was made to prevent Iran from pursuing a nuclear program. Partisan idiots hated it because Obama was part of it and they still do.

Common Sense
10-13-2017, 03:27 PM
Would you rather waste more American lives and treasure on another unwinnable ME war?

Probably.

Many people probably think a war with Iran would be like Iraq. They are vastly different countries. War would be catastrophic.

Abby08
10-13-2017, 03:28 PM
Would you rather waste more American lives and treasure on another unwinnable ME war?

So, Obama did it to save us from war with Iran? If, that deal wasn't struck, we'd for sure, be at war right now?

Iran led obama around by the short hairs.

Green Arrow
10-13-2017, 03:30 PM
So, Obama did it to save us from war with Iran? If, that deal wasn't struck, we'd for sure, be at war right now?

Iran led obama around by the short hairs.

Maybe not right this minute, but eventually.

The Secretary of State and Secretary of Defense both said Iran is holding up their end of the deal. Are they stupid?

Abby08
10-13-2017, 03:32 PM
Probably.

Many people probably think a war with Iran would be like Iraq. They are vastly different countries. War would be catastrophic.

Yeah, that's what I want, you nailed it. I guess I should thank Obama for selling out to terrorists, so we can all be safe.

Tahuyaman
10-13-2017, 03:33 PM
Probably.

Many people probably think a war with Iran would be like Iraq. They are vastly different countries. War would be catastrophic. Name some of these "many" people.

War is always catastrophic for someone. I would prefer to prevent Iran from developing weapons systems which could be used to start a nuclear war.

MisterVeritis
10-13-2017, 03:38 PM
Mattis and Tillerson support the deal and admit Iran is abiding by the agreement. Unfortunately Trump would rather please his myopic base rather than listen to the adults in the room.

He is alienating the US's allies to score political points.
It is a bad deal. If Tillerson and Mattis support it publicly after the President's decision they need to be replaced.

Our so-called allies are doing lots of business with the IslamoNAZIs. They loved Obama. They have ruined their own countries. The so-called allies should reconsider.

Common Sense
10-13-2017, 03:51 PM
It is a bad deal. If Tillerson and Mattis support it publicly after the President's decision they need to be replaced.

Our so-called allies are doing lots of business with the IslamoNAZIs. They loved Obama. They have ruined their own countries. The so-called allies should reconsider.

Why is it a bad deal?

Tahuyaman
10-13-2017, 03:53 PM
Honestly, I view this as Trump not fulfilling a campaign promise. He promised to "rip up" the Iran deal. Not de-certify it and have the congress rework it. This de-certification is nothing. The liberals are hyperventilating over nothing.

Abby08
10-13-2017, 03:54 PM
LOL...Canada gain? Seriously? Am I that much in your head?

Yes, many in Iran openly hate the US. Many don't. It's a complex country.

Making deals with adversaries is nothing new. Deals are made to avoid conflict.

The deal is supported by virtually all US allies and is signed by 7 nations.

According the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defence, the deal is working and worth being in. Are they stupid?

Essentially a deal was made to prevent Iran from pursuing a nuclear program. Partisan idiots hated it because Obama was part of it and they still do.

Yes, Canada again. If you can continually refer to people as stupid, or, other descriptors meaning the same thing, I'll continue to bring up Canada.....ahem, I must be in YOUR head, you have something to say about everything I say, you have to make sure I know, that you consider me, stupid.

Tahuyaman
10-13-2017, 03:54 PM
Why is it a bad deal?

Why is Trump's action in this wrong? Try to respond with something other than MSNBC style talking points. Be substantive and specific.

MisterVeritis
10-13-2017, 03:58 PM
Why is it a bad deal?
It is unenforceable. It guarantees Iran will have nuclear weapons and ICBMs to deliver the nuclear weapons. Iran is a major exporter of terrorism. They are bad actors. Barack Hussein O supported, strongly supported the IslamoNAZIs in Tehran. he gave them a hundred billion dollars. I suspect they used Obama's gift to substantially improve their ability to har Americans and our interests worldwide.

We need to topple the Iranian regime, not prop it up.

MisterVeritis
10-13-2017, 03:59 PM
Honestly, I view this as Trump not fulfilling a campaign promise. He promised to "rip up" the Iran deal. Not de-certify it and have the congress rework it. This de-certification is nothing. The liberals are hyperventilating over nothing.
I agree. It is another disappointment.

Tahuyaman
10-13-2017, 04:12 PM
I agree. It is another disappointment. It is. De-certifying it is a good thing, but completely eliminating it would have been better.

Common Sense
10-13-2017, 04:15 PM
It is unenforceable. It guarantees Iran will have nuclear weapons and ICBMs to deliver the nuclear weapons. Iran is a major exporter of terrorism. They are bad actors. Barack Hussein O supported, strongly supported the IslamoNAZIs in Tehran. he gave them a hundred billion dollars. I suspect they used Obama's gift to substantially improve their ability to har Americans and our interests worldwide.

We need to topple the Iranian regime, not prop it up.

The deal is, if you believe Trump's secretary of state, working and Iran is living up to their end.

The deal also does the opposite of what you claim. It doesn't guarantee that Iran will have nukes and ICBMs to deliver them. It prevents them from pursuing them.

Your warped idea that Obama hates America and gave Iran back their money so Americans could be harmed is ridiculous. How do people take accusations like that seriously? I've heard it before but it's gotta be one of the most idiotic things I've heard here.

Tahuyaman
10-13-2017, 04:15 PM
It is unenforceable. It guarantees Iran will have nuclear weapons and ICBMs to deliver the nuclear weapons. Iran is a major exporter of terrorism. They are bad actors. Barack Hussein O supported, strongly supported the IslamoNAZIs in Tehran. he gave them a hundred billion dollars. I suspect they used Obama's gift to substantially improve their ability to har Americans and our interests worldwide.

We need to topple the Iranian regime, not prop it up.

It does indeed guarantee Iran will eventually be able to develop nuclear weapons.

The current leadership in Iran has openly mocked this agreement. They have said that they will not comply with this agreement.

MisterVeritis
10-13-2017, 04:18 PM
The deal is, if you believe Trump's secretary of state, working and Iran is living up to their end.
I suppose one could live up to a deal that was so one-sided. But, if Tillerson agrees Iran is living up to the deal he needs to retire.

The deal also does the opposite of what you claim. It doesn't guarantee that Iran will have nukes and ICBMs to deliver them. It prevents them from pursuing them.
It does no such thing. Obama guaranteed them unhindered opportunities for mischief and the Iranians are doing exactly what they and Obama agreed to do. Build nuclear technology and ICBM capability. The so-called breakout period could be as little as a few weeks (from abrogation to weapons).

Your warped idea that Obama hates America and gave Iran back their money so Americans could be harmed is ridiculous. How do people take accusations like that seriously? I've heard it before but it's gotta be one of the most idiotic things I've heard here.
We can agree to disagree.

Common Sense
10-13-2017, 04:20 PM
It does indeed guarantee Iran will eventually be able to develop nuclear weapons.

The current leadership in Iran has openly mocked this agreement. They have said that they will not comply with this agreement.

It actually doesn't.

No wonder people oppose the deal...they don't know what it actually is.

Tahuyaman
10-13-2017, 04:22 PM
Of course Iran wants to live up to a deal which benefits them.

Green Arrow
10-13-2017, 04:24 PM
Common Sense, you're talking to a brick wall. Better to just not waste your time.

Common Sense
10-13-2017, 04:24 PM
The alternative to the deal is...

Iran continues to be subject to sanctions that punish the people but don't hinder a nuclear program.

Iran continues to pursue a nuclear program unhindered by the deal framework.

America literally does nothing and watches Iran build nuclear weapons.


Yeah, that sounds smart.

Common Sense
10-13-2017, 04:25 PM
@Common Sense (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=1085), you're talking to a brick wall. Better to just not waste your time.

It seems like it.

Captain Obvious
10-13-2017, 04:26 PM
lol

MisterVeritis
10-13-2017, 04:28 PM
The alternative to the deal is...
Iran continues to be subject to sanctions that punish the people but don't hinder a nuclear program.
Iran continues to pursue a nuclear program unhindered by the deal framework.
America literally does nothing and watches Iran build nuclear weapons.
Yeah, that sounds smart.
The alternative is to treat Iran as the enemy they are and defeat them.

Peter1469
10-13-2017, 04:36 PM
Support allies???

All the US's allies support the deal. Not to mention they themselves are signed onto the deal.
It was never made a treaty. It is more of a memorandum of understanding.

MisterVeritis
10-13-2017, 04:37 PM
It was never made a treaty. It is more of a memorandum of understanding.
I call it a handshake agreement.

Tahuyaman
10-13-2017, 04:42 PM
It actually doesn't.

No wonder people oppose the deal...they don't know what it actually is.It does, but you just want to ignore the facts. The desire to protect the Obama legacy is more important than our own national security.

With regards to inspections, military sites are off limits. Advanced notice long enough to sanatize sites must be given. It's a joke.

This is a step in the right direction, but I wish Trump would have just lived up to his campaign promise and removed our participation from this asinine agreement.

Tahuyaman
10-13-2017, 04:44 PM
It was never made a treaty. It is more of a memorandum of understanding.


Now, the congress can be hoodwinked into creating a binding treaty with other unenforceable conditions. If anyone has the ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, it's the US legislative branch of government.

Common Sense
10-13-2017, 04:46 PM
The alternative is to treat Iran as the enemy they are and defeat them.

...and how would you do that?

Tahuyaman
10-13-2017, 04:46 PM
The alternative to the deal is...

Iran continues to be subject to sanctions that punish the people but don't hinder a nuclear program.

Iran continues to pursue a nuclear program unhindered by the deal framework.

America literally does nothing and watches Iran build nuclear weapons.


Yeah, that sounds smart.

That was the reality with this deal in place.

Peter1469
10-13-2017, 04:46 PM
Why is it a bad deal?


It allows them to continue enriching uranium, which allows them more time for research to make their own nukes.

Common Sense
10-13-2017, 04:46 PM
It does, but you just want to ignore the facts. The desire to protect the Obama legacy is more important than our own national security.

With regards to inspections, military sites are off limits. Advanced notice long enough to sanatize sites must be given. It's a joke.

This is a step in the right direction, but I wish Trump would have just lived up to his campaign promise and removed our participation from this asinine agreement.

How exactly does it guarantee that they acquire nukes? Specifically?

Peter1469
10-13-2017, 04:48 PM
I call it a handshake agreement.

It is not binding on any party. And it certainly does not have the force and effect of a law in the US (only a treaty ratified by the Senate would.)

Tahuyaman
10-13-2017, 04:50 PM
How exactly does it guarantee that they acquire nukes? Specifically?
Have you ever read any of it? It allows them the ability to incrementally enrich uranium to weapons grade levels. It doesn't prohibit them from doing so. It just tells them that they can't do it as quickly as they want. But then there's no way to ensure they are complying other than taking their word for it.

Tahuyaman
10-13-2017, 04:51 PM
It allows them to continue enriching uranium, which allows them more time for research to make their own nukes.
Enough with the facts! Enough!

Common Sense
10-13-2017, 04:54 PM
It allows them to continue enriching uranium, which allows them more time for research to make their own nukes.

It limits their enrichment capacity and ability. It actually reduced their enrichment capacity by 98%.

Peter1469
10-13-2017, 05:01 PM
It limits their enrichment capacity and ability. It actually reduced their enrichment capacity by 98%.

Why leave them any room to continue research?

MisterVeritis
10-13-2017, 05:04 PM
...and how would you do that?
Start a thread with how we can defeat the Iranian regime. I will follow.

MisterVeritis
10-13-2017, 05:05 PM
It is not binding on any party. And it certainly does not have the force and effect of a law in the US (only a treaty ratified by the Senate would.)
It is the Obama-Corker-Iranian IslamoNAZI sweetheart deal.

Tahuyaman
10-13-2017, 05:05 PM
Now Trump said that if the Congress doesn't come back with something substantial and enforcable, he'll remove us from the agreement.

What will the Congress do?

Green Arrow
10-13-2017, 05:12 PM
It is the Obama-Corker-Iranian IslamoNAZI sweetheart deal.

Corker had nothing to do with the Iran deal. In fact, he was a leading member of the opposition to the deal when Obama first brought it up, and authored the bill that basically forced Obama to seek Congressional approval before he implemented the deal.

Do you guys do any research on this stuff, or do you just believe every lie that comes out of Trump's mouth?

Tahuyaman
10-13-2017, 05:21 PM
There is a credible argument that the Iran deal might slow down their acquisition of a nuclear capability, but it certainly doesn't prevent it.

MisterVeritis
10-13-2017, 05:22 PM
Corker had nothing to do with the Iran deal. In fact, he was a leading member of the opposition to the deal when Obama first brought it up, and authored the bill that basically forced Obama to seek Congressional approval before he implemented the deal.

Do you guys do any research on this stuff, or do you just believe every lie that comes out of Trump's mouth?
Corker introduced the arrangement where 2/3rds of the Congress had to oppose Obama's secret agreement with the Mullahs. Corker turned the Constitution on its head. So Corker shares the blame.

Tahuyaman
10-13-2017, 05:23 PM
Corker had nothing to do with the Iran deal. In fact, he was a leading member of the opposition to the deal when Obama first brought it up, and authored the bill that basically forced Obama to seek Congressional approval before he implemented the deal.

Do you guys do any research on this stuff, or do you just believe every lie that comes out of Trump's mouth?

I dont know much about Corker's involvement nor do I care, but it looks like are saying that he wasn't involved, until he was ultimately involved.

Common Sense
10-13-2017, 05:24 PM
Yes, Canada again. If you can continually refer to people as stupid, or, other descriptors meaning the same thing, I'll continue to bring up Canada.....ahem, I must be in YOUR head, you have something to say about everything I say, you have to make sure I know, that you consider me, stupid.

Lol...

Green Arrow
10-13-2017, 05:25 PM
Corker introduced the arrangement where 2/3rds of the Congress had to oppose Obama's secret agreement with the Mullahs. Corker turned the Constitution on its head. So Corker shares the blame.
Obama was going to implement the agreement regardless. Corker followed the constitution by requiring him to seek approval. There's nothing unconstitutional about what Corker did. He did what he could, fairly and appropriately, to stop the deal.

Do your homework and stop eating up Trump's lies.

Green Arrow
10-13-2017, 05:25 PM
I dont know much about Corker's involvement nor do I care, but it looks like are saying that he wasn't involved, until he was ultimately involved.

What I said was clear. Corker wasn't for the deal and did what he could to stop it.

Tahuyaman
10-13-2017, 05:38 PM
Parsing words. Moving on...

I don't understand the liberal's objection to this action taken by Trump. It doesn't nullify the agreement. It doesn't remove our participation. All it did was overturn an unconstitutional ower grab by a previous president and ensure the process goes on in accordance with constitutional principles.

Liberals always claim that they respect constitutional principles. Here's a situation where they can prove it.

It appears that they are opposed only because Trump stepped on Obama's legacy again.

MisterVeritis
10-13-2017, 05:38 PM
Obama was going to implement the agreement regardless. Corker followed the constitution by requiring him to seek approval. There's nothing unconstitutional about what Corker did. He did what he could, fairly and appropriately, to stop the deal.

Do your homework and stop eating up Trump's lies.
You err. The Senate had all the authority it needed to stop the sweetheart deal. Corker reversed the arrangement as mentioned above. Corker guaranteed the sweetheart deal would move forward. Advice and consent of the Senate is required for treaties. This should have been treated as a treaty.

Corker was either blackmailed by Barack Hussein O or was bribed.

exotix
10-24-2017, 07:41 AM
Today

http://res.cloudinary.com/luvckye9s/image/upload/v1508848791/10_d0pf1q.png



http://res.cloudinary.com/luvckye9s/image/upload/v1508848877/10a_edobpg.png

Green Arrow
10-24-2017, 08:48 AM
Today

http://res.cloudinary.com/luvckye9s/image/upload/v1508848791/10_d0pf1q.png



http://res.cloudinary.com/luvckye9s/image/upload/v1508848877/10a_edobpg.png
Trump is a liar. Corker has a 54% approval rating and would have cruisd to re-election if he had run again. He was the only non-incumbent Republican to win a Senate race in 2006, his first senate run. He won re-election in 2012 with 65% of the vote.

The only reason he’s not running again is because he promised to only serve two terms and is likely aiming to succeed Bill Haslam as governor of TN.

exotix
10-24-2017, 09:01 AM
Happening Now




'I regret supporting Trump'


~ (R-Tn) Bob Corker




http://res.cloudinary.com/luvckye9s/image/upload/v1508853825/11_jy0d0b.png


http://res.cloudinary.com/luvckye9s/image/upload/v1508853679/100_0429_sa973b.jpg

Ransom
10-24-2017, 11:13 AM
Corker becomes the Left's hero. When in 2015 he said....

The senator criticized what he considers to be Obama's lack of action against Hamas, Hezbollah and the Assad regime in Syria. The president is pushing forward with the plan not because it's sound, but because he's in search of a legacy", Corker said.