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.
Good. Sorry, hater dupes- no dumbass war for you...
and you say this iranians using iraqi air space for their war in syria...sheeesh
They're covert and sneaky like the GOP- who've wrecked them- but Iran hasn't actually attacked anyone in 2400 years. Youngest country outside of Africa too- about to get civilized... SORRY.
U.S. official: Obama, Rouhani discussed fate of three Americans
By Susan Candiotti, CNN National Correspondent
updated 12:03 PM EDT, Sat September 28, 2013
(CNN) -- The fate of three U.S. citizens who have disappeared or been imprisoned in Iran was discussed during Friday's historic conversation between the two nations' presidents, a senior U.S. administration official said.
U.S. President Barack Obama, during his phone call with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, "noted our concern about three American citizens who have been held within Iran -- Robert Levinson, Saeed Abedini, and Amir Hekmati -- and noted our interest in seeing those Americans reunited with their families," the official said.
Two of the Americans have been tried and convicted in Iranian courts, and the whereabouts of another have been unknown for more than six years.
Here are the most recent developments in the stories of the detained U.S. citizens:
[/SIZE]Are you referring to these 'conservatives'? And, if you are, don't you feel rather ignorant?
"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003 | Source
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
- President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998 | Source
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
- President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998 | Source
"We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the stability and security of his neighbors with weapons of mass destruction."
- Madeline Albright, Feb 1, 1998 | Source
"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
- Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998 | Source
"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton.
- (D) Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, others, Oct. 9, 1998 | Source
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
- Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998 | Source
"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999 | Source
"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them."
- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002 | Source
"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do"
-- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002
"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 | Source
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 | Source
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002 | Source
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002 | Source
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002 | Source
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002 | Source
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002 | Source
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002
They changed their mind after it was obvious that the Iraq War was a mistake.
When it became clear to me what great and wonderful outcomes might result from a successful conduct of the Invasion/War/Transition/Handover/Withdrawal, I became a big fan of GWB and supported a successful outcome in Iraq rather a sure defeat as the Dems. were (and in the media still are) pushing for.
Remember, the war could have gone either way. And but for a few events it would have been seen as a big win for the Iraqi people, the American people, the Bush administration, American prestige and respect abroad, future engagements with foreign leaders, 'Conservatism', and lastly, it would have been a big win for GWB.
Yeah. The year 2000 marked a turning point. The election and the recount brought out the worst in the passionate, impulsive, out of control Liberals and Leftists.
And those passions have sometimes turned to hatred and it has become a movement and it has only spread and grown hotter since then.
Bottom line: I changed my mind after I saw what a great thing COULD have resulted if everyone involved was working towards victory.
And there are STILL a whole crap load of Libs and Lefts who would have PREFERRED we'd lost and left Iraq in disgrace.
Just saw Iran's President is claiming the deal ends all sanctions against Iran the Whitehouse denies this if true the good feelings lasted almost 24 hours.
It is interesting, how Obama got the Nobel first, and then earned it later.
Conservatives are flailing on this one. They simply don't get how small the demographic of hypermacho dickless wonders is. Most Americans don't take orders from Israel, and don't want another war. Hence, Americans overwhelmingly side with Obama here, and Republicans are going to self-destruct if they go too openly seditious here.
I would love to see Israel go rogue. I'd laugh my ass off.
[/SIZE]
They changed their mind after it was obvious that the Iraq War was a mistake.
When it became clear to me what great and wonderful outcomes might result from a successful conduct of the Invasion/War/Transition/Handover/Withdrawal, I became a big fan of GWB and supported a successful outcome in Iraq rather a sure defeat as the Dems. were (and in the media still are) pushing for.
Remember, the war could have gone either way. And but for a few events it would have been seen as a big win for the Iraqi people, the American people, the Bush administration, American prestige and respect abroad, future engagements with foreign leaders, 'Conservatism', and lastly, it would have been a big win for GWB.
Yeah. The year 2000 marked a turning point. The election and the recount brought out the worst in the passionate, impulsive, out of control Liberals and Leftists.
And those passions have sometimes turned to hatred and it has become a movement and it has only spread and grown hotter since then.
Bottom line: I changed my mind after I saw what a great thing COULD have resulted if everyone involved was working towards victory.
And there are STILL a whole crap load of Libs and Lefts who would have PREFERRED we'd lost and left Iraq in disgrace.
We bagged and tagged almost 15,000 hardcore AQ and lesser known jihadists in Iraq. When Dubya said "bring it on" he was saying come fight our military instead of murdering our office workers you chickenshits. And they came into Iraq and got dirt napped. We let the sunni arabs see what life under AQ would be like and they FREAKED and listened when Patraeus told them to join us or die like the rest. They joined, became the "Sons of Iraq", began "The Awakening" and murdered AQ until they ran back into Syria like the gutless cowards they are.
Was the invasion perfect? We breached the berm from Kuwait into Iraq with barely a pause. The run to Baghdad was almost perfect. We lost 153 KIA in the fastest moving operation of that magnitude in the history of modern warfare. Iraqi aircraft never left the ground other than to escape into Iran. Saddam's radar was blinded. His RG fought us, his regular troops ran home. We arrived in Baghdad with little remaining resistance. So far, so good. Then it went south.
Rumsfeld should have told the Turks the same thing Dubya told the Pakistanis before we went into Afghanistan. Do your part and support the invasion or we'll carpet-bomb your crummy country. The Pakis didn't hestiate. The Turks reneged on their promise to have 4th ID stage and invade down through the sunni-triangle. Rummy greenlighted the invasion without them....and there in the sunni-triangle the resistance was born. The ammo dumps were raided, ordinance stolen, and the artillery shells that had laid gathering dust for years were now placed on roadsides with cell-phone detonators.
Still, after the SURGE, the resistance was falling apart....after we got Zarqawi they had no spirtual leader, and certainly no leader with enough military experience to coordinate the withering resistance. At the end, they gave up.
We won the Iraq War. Anybody saying we didn't simply doesn't matter.
I figured that Obama would come up with something to remove the Obamacare headlines and this appears to be his latest attempt.
Obama claims to have a deal with Iran to halt their nuke production.
John Kerry says this is just the beginning. Where have we heard this before.
Unfortunately nothing Obama does can be trusted. In his desperation to change the subject and it appears that contrary to the objections of every country in the region, Obama has made this conditional agreement without taking anyone else's advice. Kerry says that this only locks their program where it is today. He claims we will be allowed to monitor everything.
Bullshit.
This is yet another political move that means jack shit. They are of the belief that something is better than nothing.
Well, this is all about nothing.
The Obama Administration, eagerly seeking a deal on Iran’s nuclear program, is now signaling that it will ease the sanctions that finally forced Tehran to the negotiating table.
On Thursday, White House press secretary Jay Carney said that the Obama Administration is considering the easing of some sanctions to further advance negotiations with Tehran.
In fact, the White House has already chosen to lighten Iran’s sanctions burden by slowing the implementation of existing sanctions and delaying congressional legislation that would impose new sanctions. Eli Lake and Josh Rogin reported in today’s Daily Beast that the Administration began softening sanctions after the June election of Hassan Rouhani by slowing the pace of designating Iranian front companies, individuals, ships, and aircraft as sanctions violators.
The Administration has also lobbied Congress to postpone any new sanctions to avoid disrupting the current round of negotiations with Iran. But this is a gross misreading of the situation. The prospect of new sanctions would enhance American bargaining leverage with Iran and increase the chances that an acceptable agreement can be negotiated with the recalcitrant regime in Tehran.
Iran Gains Sanctions Relief from the Obama Administration | The Foundry: Conservative Policy News Blog from The Heritage Foundation
You loons understand that the deal prevents an Iranian bomb, right?
Did you even bother to look at it? Or were you too busy hyperventilating and stroking yourselves at the thought of a war?
When it became clear to me what great and wonderful outcomes might result from a successful conduct of the Invasion/War/Transition/Handover/Withdrawal, I became a big fan of GWB and supported a successful outcome in Iraq rather a sure defeat as the Dems. were (and in the media still are) pushing for.
Remember, the war could have gone either way. And but for a few events it would have been seen as a big win for the Iraqi people, the American people, the Bush administration, American prestige and respect abroad, future engagements with foreign leaders, 'Conservatism', and lastly, it would have been a big win for GWB.
Yeah. The year 2000 marked a turning point. The election and the recount brought out the worst in the passionate, impulsive, out of control Liberals and Leftists.
And those passions have sometimes turned to hatred and it has become a movement and it has only spread and grown hotter since then.
Bottom line: I changed my mind after I saw what a great thing COULD have resulted if everyone involved was working towards victory.
And there are STILL a whole crap load of Libs and Lefts who would have PREFERRED we'd lost and left Iraq in disgrace.
We bagged and tagged almost 15,000 hardcore AQ and lesser known jihadists in Iraq. When Dubya said "bring it on" he was saying come fight our military instead of murdering our office workers you chickenshits. And they came into Iraq and got dirt napped. We let the sunni arabs see what life under AQ would be like and they FREAKED and listened when Patraeus told them to join us or die like the rest. They joined, became the "Sons of Iraq", began "The Awakening" and murdered AQ until they ran back into Syria like the gutless cowards they are.
Was the invasion perfect? We breached the berm from Kuwait into Iraq with barely a pause. The run to Baghdad was almost perfect. We lost 153 KIA in the fastest moving operation of that magnitude in the history of modern warfare. Iraqi aircraft never left the ground other than to escape into Iran. Saddam's radar was blinded. His RG fought us, his regular troops ran home. We arrived in Baghdad with little remaining resistance. So far, so good. Then it went south.
Rumsfeld should have told the Turks the same thing Dubya told the Pakistanis before we went into Afghanistan. Do your part and support the invasion or we'll carpet-bomb your crummy country. The Pakis didn't hestiate. The Turks reneged on their promise to have 4th ID stage and invade down through the sunni-triangle. Rummy greenlighted the invasion without them....and there in the sunni-triangle the resistance was born. The ammo dumps were raided, ordinance stolen, and the artillery shells that had laid gathering dust for years were now placed on roadsides with cell-phone detonators.
Still, after the SURGE, the resistance was falling apart....after we got Zarqawi they had no spirtual leader, and certainly no leader with enough military experience to coordinate the withering resistance. At the end, they gave up.
We won the Iraq War. Anybody saying we didn't simply doesn't matter.
I saw GWB meet with the soldiers often during the war and he was always well received. One could tell he was genuinely respected as the CIC. I respected him as the President then and today I remember him as the {President fondly. Thank you for your heroic service and bravery!
We bagged and tagged almost 15,000 hardcore AQ and lesser known jihadists in Iraq. When Dubya said "bring it on" he was saying come fight our military instead of murdering our office workers you chickenshits. And they came into Iraq and got dirt napped. We let the sunni arabs see what life under AQ would be like and they FREAKED and listened when Patraeus told them to join us or die like the rest. They joined, became the "Sons of Iraq", began "The Awakening" and murdered AQ until they ran back into Syria like the gutless cowards they are.
Was the invasion perfect? We breached the berm from Kuwait into Iraq with barely a pause. The run to Baghdad was almost perfect. We lost 153 KIA in the fastest moving operation of that magnitude in the history of modern warfare. Iraqi aircraft never left the ground other than to escape into Iran. Saddam's radar was blinded. His RG fought us, his regular troops ran home. We arrived in Baghdad with little remaining resistance. So far, so good. Then it went south.
Rumsfeld should have told the Turks the same thing Dubya told the Pakistanis before we went into Afghanistan. Do your part and support the invasion or we'll carpet-bomb your crummy country. The Pakis didn't hestiate. The Turks reneged on their promise to have 4th ID stage and invade down through the sunni-triangle. Rummy greenlighted the invasion without them....and there in the sunni-triangle the resistance was born. The ammo dumps were raided, ordinance stolen, and the artillery shells that had laid gathering dust for years were now placed on roadsides with cell-phone detonators.
Still, after the SURGE, the resistance was falling apart....after we got Zarqawi they had no spirtual leader, and certainly no leader with enough military experience to coordinate the withering resistance. At the end, they gave up.
We won the Iraq War. Anybody saying we didn't simply doesn't matter.
I saw GWB meet with the soldiers often during the war and he was always well received. One could tell he was genuinely respected as the CIC. I respected him as the President then and today I remember him as the {President fondly. Thank you for your heroic service and bravery!
You're welcome Sir, but I was a little long in the tooth for Iraq....I served in Vietnam.
It is interesting, how Obama got the Nobel first, and then earned it later.
Conservatives are flailing on this one. They simply don't get how small the demographic of hypermacho dickless wonders is. Most Americans don't take orders from Israel, and don't want another war. Hence, Americans overwhelmingly side with Obama here, and Republicans are going to self-destruct if they go too openly seditious here.
