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.
No I actually would want to know they aren't crazy and that remains to be seen.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.
What if you are wrong......................and by the way does that mean you want them to have one given their stance on supporting terrorist groups.
Meanwhile you're left with gay cakes, id cards and contraception.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.
Would they really be stupid enough to do something like that, KNOWING THAT Israel would blow them in to smithereens if they even attempted something like that...? Truely, they have to know what would be done to the whole region if they even attempted a dirty bomb in Israel.So under the same question............what if they give the bomb or DIRTY BOMB to their proxies Hamas and Hezballah.............Riddle me this...............If Al Queda took over Pakistan today and got control of the Nukes there what would you do...................................................
That is actually a very good question.......and I'd do EXACTLY what you would do......
(Actually, my first priority is to get whatever money I have invested in India......LOL)
You don't need a nuclear bomb to make a city or area uninhabitable..........You just use Nuclear Waste Materials.................
We are still allowing them to proceed in that area.
That begs the question are terrorist SANE to begin with.............and is the Iranian Gov't who chants Death to America SANE as well.Would they really be stupid enough to do something like that, KNOWING THAT Israel would blow them in to smithereens if they even attempted something like that...? Truely, they have to know what would be done to the whole region if they even attempted a dirty bomb in Israel.So under the same question............what if they give the bomb or DIRTY BOMB to their proxies Hamas and Hezballah.............Riddle me this...............If Al Queda took over Pakistan today and got control of the Nukes there what would you do...................................................
That is actually a very good question.......and I'd do EXACTLY what you would do......
(Actually, my first priority is to get whatever money I have invested in India......LOL)
You don't need a nuclear bomb to make a city or area uninhabitable..........You just use Nuclear Waste Materials.................
We are still allowing them to proceed in that area.
If Iran lights up a nuke on a country, will you be turning yourself in for the criminal act of endorsing Iran's nuclear program?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.
Yes.Would they really be stupid enough to do something like that, KNOWING THAT Israel would blow them in to smithereens if they even attempted something like that...? Truely, they have to know what would be done to the whole region if they even attempted a dirty bomb in Israel.So under the same question............what if they give the bomb or DIRTY BOMB to their proxies Hamas and Hezballah.............Riddle me this...............If Al Queda took over Pakistan today and got control of the Nukes there what would you do...................................................
That is actually a very good question.......and I'd do EXACTLY what you would do......
(Actually, my first priority is to get whatever money I have invested in India......LOL)
You don't need a nuclear bomb to make a city or area uninhabitable..........You just use Nuclear Waste Materials.................
We are still allowing them to proceed in that area.
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.
A better question is when it doesn't, are the lefties going to take the blame or find some excuse as to why it really wasn't their fault?
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.
Funny, usually, Democrats have to fix Republican fuck-ups. Want me to name some?dimocraps fuck up everything they do.
Why should this be any different?
Iraq
Afghanistan
The economy
Health care
The justice department
Education
There's more.
What?
You what?
Oh, you had enough. Well, so have we.
Would they really be stupid enough to do something like that, KNOWING THAT Israel would blow them in to smithereens if they even attempted something like that...? Truely, they have to know what would be done to the whole region if they even attempted a dirty bomb in Israel.So under the same question............what if they give the bomb or DIRTY BOMB to their proxies Hamas and Hezballah.............Riddle me this...............If Al Queda took over Pakistan today and got control of the Nukes there what would you do...................................................
That is actually a very good question.......and I'd do EXACTLY what you would do......
(Actually, my first priority is to get whatever money I have invested in India......LOL)
You don't need a nuclear bomb to make a city or area uninhabitable..........You just use Nuclear Waste Materials.................
We are still allowing them to proceed in that area.
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.
Only a fool thinks there is an agreement on Obama's terms.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.
First this framework doesn't guarantee a final agreement, or what it will look like. Your dear leader used more caveats than a used car salesman when he announced the framework, I'd say the chances of a final agreement are slim. If one comes the chances Iran will live up to them are zero, then what, more talks?
You know exactly what I meant..............Will Obama give a stand down order should they attack.............Are you gonna clear that one with your boss..............Next time your down there please ask pretty please.
My boss is Netanyahu????
(and its you're down there, etc.)
Not sure who's pulling he strings, but they're an evil cult of mother<u^kers... thus Lefslamic to the bone.
Hey! Aren't you the same gal who asked 'If it turns out that everyone DOES deserve their own home, will Americans Apologize?"
If Iran lights up a nuke on a country, will you be turning yourself in for the criminal act of endorsing Iran's nuclear program?
Will you do life in prison for the 10's of thousands of deaths caused by the smoking hole that used to be Tel Aviv?
