Experts Knock Down Attacks On Obama’s Approach To Iran

[Lakhota]

WASHINGTON – Critics of the nuclear deal that major world powers struck with Iran this week have largely based their case on a counterfactual. Had President Barack Obama imposed sanctions on Iran that were more aggressive -- “crippling,” even -- then, the theory goes, he would have extracted more favorable concessions.

This argument is meant, in part, to reinforce the idea that a third option existed between the two Obama outlined -- that is, between military confrontation and the agreement that was ultimately struck. But would it actually have been practical?

According to experts in the subject, including those who worked on Iran sanctions, the answer is basically no.

Much More: Could Obama Have Gotten More From Iran With Additional Crippling Sanctions?

I applaud President Obama's approach to Iran. He put diplomacy ahead of war - and apparently his European partners agreed. War is always an option of last resort.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

An article from Huffpo with two former Obama admin officials as "experts"? Good grief

 

[Two Thumbs]

WASHINGTON – Critics of the nuclear deal that major world powers struck with Iran this week have largely based their case on a counterfactual. Had President Barack Obama imposed sanctions on Iran that were more aggressive -- “crippling,” even -- then, the theory goes, he would have extracted more favorable concessions.

This argument is meant, in part, to reinforce the idea that a third option existed between the two Obama outlined -- that is, between military confrontation and the agreement that was ultimately struck. But would it actually have been practical?

According to experts in the subject, including those who worked on Iran sanctions, the answer is basically no.

Much More: Could Obama Have Gotten More From Iran With Additional Crippling Sanctions?

I applaud President Obama's approach to Iran. He put diplomacy ahead of war - and apparently his European partners agreed. War is always an option of last resort.

So you support the undeniable fact that that racist obama left our citizens behind and gave Iran so much that they celebrated.

'people' like you make me wish there was a hell

 

[Stephanie]

They should be called: Desperts.= Desperate to save Obama's ASS and so desperate they went on the Hufferpufferpost TO DO IT


or losers: either one will do

 

[healthmyths]

WASHINGTON – Critics of the nuclear deal that major world powers struck with Iran this week have largely based their case on a counterfactual. Had President Barack Obama imposed sanctions on Iran that were more aggressive -- “crippling,” even -- then, the theory goes, he would have extracted more favorable concessions.

This argument is meant, in part, to reinforce the idea that a third option existed between the two Obama outlined -- that is, between military confrontation and the agreement that was ultimately struck. But would it actually have been practical?

According to experts in the subject, including those who worked on Iran sanctions, the answer is basically no.

Much More: Could Obama Have Gotten More From Iran With Additional Crippling Sanctions?

I applaud President Obama's approach to Iran. He put diplomacy ahead of war - and apparently his European partners agreed. War is always an option of last resort.

The third option ... KEEP sanctions in place adding more rigid and strict sanctions.
After all it was the "sanctions" that got them to talk in the first place.
NOW with $150 billion freed Iran has more money to do the following:
James Clapper, Obama's director of national intelligence, calls Iran the world's
"foremost state sponsor of terrorism," citing Iran's support for Hezbollah in Lebanon, Bashar Assad's regime in Syria and Houthi insurgents in Yemen.

Yet the Obama administration argues that a nuclear deal with world powers and increased revenue would reduce Iran's isolation, potentially leading to a more constructive Iranian foreign policy.

State Department spokesman John Kirby said Iran's support of terrorism "remains a concern," but U.S. policy has been that the nuclear talks will impact only sanctions targeting Iran's nuclear program. Terrorism-related sanctions will remain unless Iran ends its support for terrorism, Kirby said.

There's hope that success on the nuclear deal "could lead to other openings with Iran on other issues that could possibly have a positive benefit in terms of their behavior and conduct on a whole range of other security matters in the region," Kirby said.
Lawmakers alarmed over Iranian nuclear windfall

 

[Hossfly]

WASHINGTON – Critics of the nuclear deal that major world powers struck with Iran this week have largely based their case on a counterfactual. Had President Barack Obama imposed sanctions on Iran that were more aggressive -- “crippling,” even -- then, the theory goes, he would have extracted more favorable concessions.

This argument is meant, in part, to reinforce the idea that a third option existed between the two Obama outlined -- that is, between military confrontation and the agreement that was ultimately struck. But would it actually have been practical?

According to experts in the subject, including those who worked on Iran sanctions, the answer is basically no.

Much More: Could Obama Have Gotten More From Iran With Additional Crippling Sanctions?

I applaud President Obama's approach to Iran. He put diplomacy ahead of war - and apparently his European partners agreed. War is always an option of last resort.

I like Netanyahu's plan better. Not as complicated and full of bull.

 

[evince]

WASHINGTON – Critics of the nuclear deal that major world powers struck with Iran this week have largely based their case on a counterfactual. Had President Barack Obama imposed sanctions on Iran that were more aggressive -- “crippling,” even -- then, the theory goes, he would have extracted more favorable concessions.

This argument is meant, in part, to reinforce the idea that a third option existed between the two Obama outlined -- that is, between military confrontation and the agreement that was ultimately struck. But would it actually have been practical?

According to experts in the subject, including those who worked on Iran sanctions, the answer is basically no.

Much More: Could Obama Have Gotten More From Iran With Additional Crippling Sanctions?

I applaud President Obama's approach to Iran. He put diplomacy ahead of war - and apparently his European partners agreed. War is always an option of last resort.

the right is no longer interested in the best for the country


they only do best for the republican party now

 

[Lakhota]

WASHINGTON – Critics of the nuclear deal that major world powers struck with Iran this week have largely based their case on a counterfactual. Had President Barack Obama imposed sanctions on Iran that were more aggressive -- “crippling,” even -- then, the theory goes, he would have extracted more favorable concessions.

This argument is meant, in part, to reinforce the idea that a third option existed between the two Obama outlined -- that is, between military confrontation and the agreement that was ultimately struck. But would it actually have been practical?

According to experts in the subject, including those who worked on Iran sanctions, the answer is basically no.

Much More: Could Obama Have Gotten More From Iran With Additional Crippling Sanctions?

I applaud President Obama's approach to Iran. He put diplomacy ahead of war - and apparently his European partners agreed. War is always an option of last resort.

I like Netanyahu's plan better. Not as complicated and full of bull.

Nutanyahoo is a lunatic - and land squatter.

 

[Stephanie]

WASHINGTON – Critics of the nuclear deal that major world powers struck with Iran this week have largely based their case on a counterfactual. Had President Barack Obama imposed sanctions on Iran that were more aggressive -- “crippling,” even -- then, the theory goes, he would have extracted more favorable concessions.

This argument is meant, in part, to reinforce the idea that a third option existed between the two Obama outlined -- that is, between military confrontation and the agreement that was ultimately struck. But would it actually have been practical?

According to experts in the subject, including those who worked on Iran sanctions, the answer is basically no.

Much More: Could Obama Have Gotten More From Iran With Additional Crippling Sanctions?

I applaud President Obama's approach to Iran. He put diplomacy ahead of war - and apparently his European partners agreed. War is always an option of last resort.

I like Netanyahu's plan better. Not as complicated and full of bull.

and how sad. I trust him more than I do that man calling himself our President
He SOLD us out frikken, traitor

 

[Two Thumbs]

WASHINGTON – Critics of the nuclear deal that major world powers struck with Iran this week have largely based their case on a counterfactual. Had President Barack Obama imposed sanctions on Iran that were more aggressive -- “crippling,” even -- then, the theory goes, he would have extracted more favorable concessions.

This argument is meant, in part, to reinforce the idea that a third option existed between the two Obama outlined -- that is, between military confrontation and the agreement that was ultimately struck. But would it actually have been practical?

According to experts in the subject, including those who worked on Iran sanctions, the answer is basically no.

Much More: Could Obama Have Gotten More From Iran With Additional Crippling Sanctions?

I applaud President Obama's approach to Iran. He put diplomacy ahead of war - and apparently his European partners agreed. War is always an option of last resort.

So you support the undeniable fact that that racist obama left our citizens behind and gave Iran so much that they celebrated.

'people' like you make me wish there was a hell

laktose

what's funny about my post?

obama is a racist, clearly
he left our citizens behind, clearly
Iranians celebrated, clearly

It's a loss at best and another bowing at worst.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Whatever would we do without "the experts".

WASHINGTON – Critics of the nuclear deal that major world powers struck with Iran this week have largely based their case on a counterfactual. Had President Barack Obama imposed sanctions on Iran that were more aggressive -- “crippling,” even -- then, the theory goes, he would have extracted more favorable concessions.

This argument is meant, in part, to reinforce the idea that a third option existed between the two Obama outlined -- that is, between military confrontation and the agreement that was ultimately struck. But would it actually have been practical?

According to experts in the subject, including those who worked on Iran sanctions, the answer is basically no.

Much More: Could Obama Have Gotten More From Iran With Additional Crippling Sanctions?

I applaud President Obama's approach to Iran. He put diplomacy ahead of war - and apparently his European partners agreed. War is always an option of last resort.

Too funny.

Whatever would we do without "The Experts"?

I mean without them, we never could have prepared for the Ice Age that appeared in the 1980s, right?

 

[Two Thumbs]

WASHINGTON – Critics of the nuclear deal that major world powers struck with Iran this week have largely based their case on a counterfactual. Had President Barack Obama imposed sanctions on Iran that were more aggressive -- “crippling,” even -- then, the theory goes, he would have extracted more favorable concessions.

This argument is meant, in part, to reinforce the idea that a third option existed between the two Obama outlined -- that is, between military confrontation and the agreement that was ultimately struck. But would it actually have been practical?

According to experts in the subject, including those who worked on Iran sanctions, the answer is basically no.

Much More: Could Obama Have Gotten More From Iran With Additional Crippling Sanctions?

I applaud President Obama's approach to Iran. He put diplomacy ahead of war - and apparently his European partners agreed. War is always an option of last resort.

the right is no longer interested in the best for the country


they only do best for the republican party now

obama did what was best for Iran and left our citizens behind.

go fuck yourself, filthy leftist degenerate.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

WASHINGTON – Critics of the nuclear deal that major world powers struck with Iran this week have largely based their case on a counterfactual. Had President Barack Obama imposed sanctions on Iran that were more aggressive -- “crippling,” even -- then, the theory goes, he would have extracted more favorable concessions.

This argument is meant, in part, to reinforce the idea that a third option existed between the two Obama outlined -- that is, between military confrontation and the agreement that was ultimately struck. But would it actually have been practical?

According to experts in the subject, including those who worked on Iran sanctions, the answer is basically no.

Much More: Could Obama Have Gotten More From Iran With Additional Crippling Sanctions?

I applaud President Obama's approach to Iran. He put diplomacy ahead of war - and apparently his European partners agreed. War is always an option of last resort.

Zarif: Wait, we get $100B, we keep our nuclear program AND we keep the prisoners?!
Kerry: Yeah? Why? Do you want more?

 

[MACAULAY]

I think your Experts have fallen victim to the "Experts Disease" which plagues Greater New England & California.....they get to know more and more about less and less until they know everything about nothing.

This is nothing more than the same kind of cowardly horse shit that Neville Chamberlain's "Experts" came up with.

The issue is: Are Iranian Mullahs and Ayatollahs as bat-shit crazy and dangerous as Hitler was.

There is so much evidence that these people in Iran are bat-shit crazy that I won't even go into it all...I will point out instead that they are even more dangerous than Hitler....because Hitler had no oil (that's why he made that fatal mistake of invading Russia) and he had no nuclear weapon--which he surely would have used.

Obama's deranged and cowardly Experts have made it certain that an Ayatollah will have his finger on a nuclear weapon before your fifth grader is out of High School.

Let cowards enjoy, for now, your Expert's bull shit. The cowards' children will reap the world wind, along with the rest of us.

 

[kwc57]

WASHINGTON – Critics of the nuclear deal that major world powers struck with Iran this week have largely based their case on a counterfactual. Had President Barack Obama imposed sanctions on Iran that were more aggressive -- “crippling,” even -- then, the theory goes, he would have extracted more favorable concessions.

This argument is meant, in part, to reinforce the idea that a third option existed between the two Obama outlined -- that is, between military confrontation and the agreement that was ultimately struck. But would it actually have been practical?

According to experts in the subject, including those who worked on Iran sanctions, the answer is basically no.

Much More: Could Obama Have Gotten More From Iran With Additional Crippling Sanctions?

I applaud President Obama's approach to Iran. He put diplomacy ahead of war - and apparently his European partners agreed. War is always an option of last resort.

Apologists aren't experts. I'll put my money on Alan Dershowitz being way smarter than the "smartest" President ever.

Alan M. Dershowitz on Iran deal US gave away better options - Opinion - The Boston Globe

 

[The Irish Ram]

Gee, if only the Huff post wasn't getting millions from Soros...........

 

[kwc57]

 

[Claudette]

An article from Huffpo with two former Obama admin officials as "experts"? Good grief

I agree. Funny how all these "Experts" know more than anyone else.

Iran has never abided by any agreement its ever made in reference to its Nuclear Program.

As an "Expert" LOL. I predict this deal will go down the toilet before to long. An "Expert" I am. LMAO.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

An article from Huffpo with two former Obama admin officials as "experts"? Good grief

I agree. Funny how all these "Experts" know more than anyone else.

Iran has never abided by any agreement its ever made in reference to its Nuclear Program.

As an "Expert" LOL. I predict this deal will go down the toilet before to long. An "Expert" I am. LMAO.

I doubt Shitting Bull bothered to read the garbage, he saw "expert" and fell for it

 

[Stephanie]

I think those so called "experts" has went though a few pair of these




I could hear the sucking sound from my computer