Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Rumor has it they have already tried it and were told to turn back by us...............aka Obama..................
They can't attack when we in full combat mode in the region unless we get out of the way.................
I'm all for letting Israel take out the Nuke sites............they have already done so in Iraq and Syria already.
We are currently in combat operations against ISIL with Military assets all over the Persian Gulf..............any air attack will get picked up by our Radars and aircraft in the region..........................Rumor has it they have already tried it and were told to turn back by us...............aka Obama..................
They can't attack when we in full combat mode in the region unless we get out of the way.................
I'm all for letting Israel take out the Nuke sites............they have already done so in Iraq and Syria already.
Such nonsense .........
First, if Israel wants to destroy Iran's potential nuke sites, WE ARE FAR FROM THOSE SITES....we obviously don't have troops close to those sites.
Second, if Israel wants to try one of her nukes on Iran, they better pray to Abraham for northerly winds for the next couple of generations.
Israel would use bunker busters, not nukes and Azerbaijan (next door to Iran) has agreed to let Israel have a base there. Maybe Israel is already there and just waiting to pounce.Rumor has it they have already tried it and were told to turn back by us...............aka Obama..................
They can't attack when we in full combat mode in the region unless we get out of the way.................
I'm all for letting Israel take out the Nuke sites............they have already done so in Iraq and Syria already.
Such nonsense .........
First, if Israel wants to destroy Iran's potential nuke sites, WE ARE FAR FROM THOSE SITES....we obviously don't have troops close to those sites.
Second, if Israel wants to try one of her nukes on Iran, they better pray to Abraham for northerly winds for the next couple of generations.
Are all republicans scared little bitches? Sure act like it....OH NOES! IRAN MIGHT HAVE 1 NUKE! We have 300 at least but they are gonna wipe us off the earth! Jesus...stop wetting your pants...fucking wimps
Are you gonna clear that one with your boss..............Next time your down there please ask pretty please.Fine, let Israel do the bombing, and lets all watch what happens after.....
(It'll be a bit tough for you guys to blame Obama for the repercussions of an Israeli attack, however........)
No. Like the economy or war they'll try to take credit for when it all works out.WASHINGTON (AP) — Giving a scientific defense of the emerging nuclear deal with Iran, Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz called the plan a "forever agreement" that would block all pathways to a nuclear weapon and set up tough international inspections with no end date. Moniz, a nuclear physicist, spoke at the White House on Monday as the Obama administration ramped up its campaign for a framework deal with Iran that has drawn criticism from congressional Republicans, the Israeli government and skeptical Arab allies of the U.S.
Under the agreement, Moniz said, all plutonium created as a byproduct of Iran's nuclear power production would be sent out of the country so it couldn't be used to make weapons. And international inspectors would watch over all stages of Iran's nuclear program to ensure Tehran sticks to the agreement.
"This is not built upon trust, this is built upon hard-nosed requirements," Moniz said, describing the deal as providing "unprecedented access and transparency" to Iran's nuclear program. The White House says the tougher inspection requirements would continue in perpetuity.
Many Congress members, including several Democrats, have worried that the final deal may lift sanctions on Iran without ensuring that Tehran keeps its word.
At the same time, skeptical Arab allies worry about Iran's destabilizing activity in the region. President Barack Obama has invited leaders of six Gulf nations to Washington this spring and said he wanted to "formalize" U.S. assistance.
Obama is staunchly defending the framework agreement worked out with other world powers as a "once-in-a-lifetime opportunity" to prevent an Iranian bomb and bring longer-term stability to the Middle East. He insists the U.S. would stand by Israel if it were to come under attack, but acknowledged that his pursuit of diplomacy with Tehran has caused strain with the close ally.
"It's been a hard period," Obama said in an interview with New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman. He added that it is "personally difficult" for him to hear his administration accused of not looking out for Israel's interests.
The framework reached with Iran last week clears the way for negotiators to hammer out technical details ahead of a June 30 deadline for a final deal.
Obama argued that successful negotiations presented the most effective way to keep Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, but insisted he would keep all options on the table if Tehran were to violate the terms.
"I've been very clear that Iran will not get a nuclear weapon on my watch, and I think they should understand that we mean it," Obama said in the interview published Sunday.
The president said there are many details that still need to be worked out with the Iranians and cautioned that there would be "real political difficulties" in implementing an agreement in both countries. He reiterated his opposition to legislation that would give the U.S. Congress final say in approving or rejecting a deal, but said he hoped to find a path to allow Congress to "express itself."
___
Associated Press writers Hope Yen, Connie Cass and Josh Lederman contributed to this report.
Iran isnt going to trade nukes with Israel. They want a nuke because america doesnt invade countries with nukes. We didn't invade Pakistan why? They have a nuke. We dont invade north Korea why? They have a nuke.By who?And if it doesn't and we're wiped from the face of the plane, will the left? Oh wait... never mind.
Oh, I get it. You're scared. Poor baby.
Hey, asshat... if it is no big deal, then why strike a deal?
And yes, I admit it, crazies with nukes scare the shit out of me because you know, I'm sane.
What about Reagan? Should we dig him up?If it proves to be non-effective within the next two years will Obama resign? If Iran ultimately develops and uses a nuclear weapon will Obama be arrested for murder?
The Left are so much like cockroaches, they'd probably surviveAnd if it doesn't and we're wiped from the face of the planet, will the left? Oh wait... never mind.
Obama will resign Feb 2017 he will hand the keys back to the clintons.If it proves to be non-effective within the next two years will Obama resign? If Iran ultimately develops and uses a nuclear weapon will Obama be arrested for murder?
Will Israel give up their nukes?And if it doesn't and we're wiped from the face of the planet, will the left? Oh wait... never mind.
WASHINGTON (AP) — Giving a scientific defense of the emerging nuclear deal with Iran, Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz called the plan a "forever agreement" that would block all pathways to a nuclear weapon and set up tough international inspections with no end date. Moniz, a nuclear physicist, spoke at the White House on Monday as the Obama administration ramped up its campaign for a framework deal with Iran that has drawn criticism from congressional Republicans, the Israeli government and skeptical Arab allies of the U.S.
Under the agreement, Moniz said, all plutonium created as a byproduct of Iran's nuclear power production would be sent out of the country so it couldn't be used to make weapons. And international inspectors would watch over all stages of Iran's nuclear program to ensure Tehran sticks to the agreement.
"This is not built upon trust, this is built upon hard-nosed requirements," Moniz said, describing the deal as providing "unprecedented access and transparency" to Iran's nuclear program. The White House says the tougher inspection requirements would continue in perpetuity.
Many Congress members, including several Democrats, have worried that the final deal may lift sanctions on Iran without ensuring that Tehran keeps its word.
At the same time, skeptical Arab allies worry about Iran's destabilizing activity in the region. President Barack Obama has invited leaders of six Gulf nations to Washington this spring and said he wanted to "formalize" U.S. assistance.
Obama is staunchly defending the framework agreement worked out with other world powers as a "once-in-a-lifetime opportunity" to prevent an Iranian bomb and bring longer-term stability to the Middle East. He insists the U.S. would stand by Israel if it were to come under attack, but acknowledged that his pursuit of diplomacy with Tehran has caused strain with the close ally.
"It's been a hard period," Obama said in an interview with New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman. He added that it is "personally difficult" for him to hear his administration accused of not looking out for Israel's interests.
The framework reached with Iran last week clears the way for negotiators to hammer out technical details ahead of a June 30 deadline for a final deal.
Obama argued that successful negotiations presented the most effective way to keep Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, but insisted he would keep all options on the table if Tehran were to violate the terms.
"I've been very clear that Iran will not get a nuclear weapon on my watch, and I think they should understand that we mean it," Obama said in the interview published Sunday.
The president said there are many details that still need to be worked out with the Iranians and cautioned that there would be "real political difficulties" in implementing an agreement in both countries. He reiterated his opposition to legislation that would give the U.S. Congress final say in approving or rejecting a deal, but said he hoped to find a path to allow Congress to "express itself."
___
Associated Press writers Hope Yen, Connie Cass and Josh Lederman contributed to this report.
Hillary needs more bone china?Obama will resign Feb 2017 he will hand the keys back to the clintons.If it proves to be non-effective within the next two years will Obama resign? If Iran ultimately develops and uses a nuclear weapon will Obama be arrested for murder?
That begs the question..............Iran isnt going to trade nukes with Israel. They want a nuke because america doesnt invade countries with nukes. We didn't invade Pakistan why? They have a nuke. We dont invade north Korea why? They have a nuke.By who?And if it doesn't and we're wiped from the face of the plane, will the left? Oh wait... never mind.
Oh, I get it. You're scared. Poor baby.
Hey, asshat... if it is no big deal, then why strike a deal?
And yes, I admit it, crazies with nukes scare the shit out of me because you know, I'm sane.
Iran wants respect.
Regime change.Is there a reason why we would invade either Pakistan or North Korea?
Pakistan could be for the same reason as Afghanistan.Is there a reason why we would invade either Pakistan or North Korea?
Of course not. The right never apologizes for anything. They'll just go after the next outrage du jour, whether it be birth certificates, flag lapel pins, Been gassy, etc. They may even continue to bitch about it. They never let a few facts get in the way of their hate.WASHINGTON (AP) — Giving a scientific defense of the emerging nuclear deal with Iran, Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz called the plan a "forever agreement" that would block all pathways to a nuclear weapon and set up tough international inspections with no end date. Moniz, a nuclear physicist, spoke at the White House on Monday as the Obama administration ramped up its campaign for a framework deal with Iran that has drawn criticism from congressional Republicans, the Israeli government and skeptical Arab allies of the U.S.
Under the agreement, Moniz said, all plutonium created as a byproduct of Iran's nuclear power production would be sent out of the country so it couldn't be used to make weapons. And international inspectors would watch over all stages of Iran's nuclear program to ensure Tehran sticks to the agreement.
"This is not built upon trust, this is built upon hard-nosed requirements," Moniz said, describing the deal as providing "unprecedented access and transparency" to Iran's nuclear program. The White House says the tougher inspection requirements would continue in perpetuity.
Many Congress members, including several Democrats, have worried that the final deal may lift sanctions on Iran without ensuring that Tehran keeps its word.
At the same time, skeptical Arab allies worry about Iran's destabilizing activity in the region. President Barack Obama has invited leaders of six Gulf nations to Washington this spring and said he wanted to "formalize" U.S. assistance.
Obama is staunchly defending the framework agreement worked out with other world powers as a "once-in-a-lifetime opportunity" to prevent an Iranian bomb and bring longer-term stability to the Middle East. He insists the U.S. would stand by Israel if it were to come under attack, but acknowledged that his pursuit of diplomacy with Tehran has caused strain with the close ally.
"It's been a hard period," Obama said in an interview with New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman. He added that it is "personally difficult" for him to hear his administration accused of not looking out for Israel's interests.
The framework reached with Iran last week clears the way for negotiators to hammer out technical details ahead of a June 30 deadline for a final deal.
Obama argued that successful negotiations presented the most effective way to keep Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, but insisted he would keep all options on the table if Tehran were to violate the terms.
"I've been very clear that Iran will not get a nuclear weapon on my watch, and I think they should understand that we mean it," Obama said in the interview published Sunday.
The president said there are many details that still need to be worked out with the Iranians and cautioned that there would be "real political difficulties" in implementing an agreement in both countries. He reiterated his opposition to legislation that would give the U.S. Congress final say in approving or rejecting a deal, but said he hoped to find a path to allow Congress to "express itself."
___
Associated Press writers Hope Yen, Connie Cass and Josh Lederman contributed to this report.
