U.S. Jews support the Iran deal, despite misgivings

[The Rabbi]

You certainly implied that by citing a poll of Israeli support for a strike. You understand what "imply" means, right?

Yes, I know what the word "imply" means. And no, I didn't imply it.

For the last time, I ask you: have you read the deal, and I mean, all of it?

Because if you have not read it, you are not qualified to be bitching about it?

Most of Congress has not read the deal. Does that mean they're not qualified to vote on it?
Of course you implied it. That's obvious.
More weaseling from the chief troll of Planet USMB.

So, you have not read the deal.

Got it.

And I see you are getting personal again.

Do you even have the ability to debate for just two minutes without getting angry at someone?

Can you be honest for more than one sentence? This is the basic problem with your posts: you get things wrong and then deny it or deflect instead of admitting it and moving on. Thats why you have zero credibility here.
Can you honestly maintain that this deal, which does not fulfill the administration's opening rules, is good for Israel or the United States?

First, I am going to grant you one point.

Yes, I am somewhat implying that there is a correlation between American Jews supporting the Iran deal and only a plurality, but not a majority, of Israelis supporting a pre-emptive strike against Iran. The correlation comes pretty automatically with Netanyahu's bullish stance on a pre-emptive strike since he is unhappy with the deal. So, yes, I will grant you that.

Now, I asked you a question three or four times, and you refused to answer it.

You are now asking me a question and unlike you, I will answer it right away.

First, the deal does in effect fullfill the administration's opening rules. So, I don't agree with your opening presumption.

As far as Israel itself, neither I nor you live there, so I am not qualified to answer that question. I'll let you speak for yourself.

And though I currently am not in the USA, I am a US citizen and am qualified to answer the middle part of your question:

YES, it is good for the USA.

Even if it kicks the can down the road 15 years, those are 15 years where we do not wage war, at least in Iran.

One less war = one less strain on our economy and less deficit, also less debt.

The reason I keep asking you whether you read the deal or not is simple. I don't think you really know when sanctions would be lifted and under what specific conditions, or what time frame this all is supposed to happen in, amirite?

That being said, should Israel suddenly detect something foul in Iran and decide to launch a pre-emptive strike, as it did in Iraq in, I believe, 1982, I wouldn't stand in their way.

I stopped about the second paragraph.
Obama said a nuclear Iran was unacceptable.
Obama s Crystal-Clear Promise to Stop Iran From Getting a Nuclear Weapon - The Atlantic
Now a nuclear Iran is acceptable.
The agreement fails to fulfill basic US aims. By that measure alone it is a bad deal.

Additionally we see how well Obama's deals work out. Recall the deal on Syrian chemical weapons was supposed to deprive Syria of chemical weapons. It provided for inspections as well.
Syria not only has chemical weapons, produces chemical weapons, but also uses chemical weapons. Is Obama bombing Syria?
Recall that Obama said Assad had to leave. That was US policy.
Assad must go Obama says - The Washington Post
Have you seen Assad leaving? Has the US done anything to remove him?
No and no.
Obama's foreign policy decisions and agreements are the worst in history.

 

[Statistikhengst]

Yes, I know what the word "imply" means. And no, I didn't imply it.

For the last time, I ask you: have you read the deal, and I mean, all of it?

Because if you have not read it, you are not qualified to be bitching about it?

Most of Congress has not read the deal. Does that mean they're not qualified to vote on it?
Of course you implied it. That's obvious.
More weaseling from the chief troll of Planet USMB.

So, you have not read the deal.

Got it.

And I see you are getting personal again.

Do you even have the ability to debate for just two minutes without getting angry at someone?

Can you be honest for more than one sentence? This is the basic problem with your posts: you get things wrong and then deny it or deflect instead of admitting it and moving on. Thats why you have zero credibility here.
Can you honestly maintain that this deal, which does not fulfill the administration's opening rules, is good for Israel or the United States?

First, I am going to grant you one point.

Yes, I am somewhat implying that there is a correlation between American Jews supporting the Iran deal and only a plurality, but not a majority, of Israelis supporting a pre-emptive strike against Iran. The correlation comes pretty automatically with Netanyahu's bullish stance on a pre-emptive strike since he is unhappy with the deal. So, yes, I will grant you that.

Now, I asked you a question three or four times, and you refused to answer it.

You are now asking me a question and unlike you, I will answer it right away.

First, the deal does in effect fullfill the administration's opening rules. So, I don't agree with your opening presumption.

As far as Israel itself, neither I nor you live there, so I am not qualified to answer that question. I'll let you speak for yourself.

And though I currently am not in the USA, I am a US citizen and am qualified to answer the middle part of your question:

YES, it is good for the USA.

Even if it kicks the can down the road 15 years, those are 15 years where we do not wage war, at least in Iran.

One less war = one less strain on our economy and less deficit, also less debt.

The reason I keep asking you whether you read the deal or not is simple. I don't think you really know when sanctions would be lifted and under what specific conditions, or what time frame this all is supposed to happen in, amirite?

That being said, should Israel suddenly detect something foul in Iran and decide to launch a pre-emptive strike, as it did in Iraq in, I believe, 1982, I wouldn't stand in their way.

I stopped about the second paragraph.
Obama said a nuclear Iran was unacceptable.
Obama s Crystal-Clear Promise to Stop Iran From Getting a Nuclear Weapon - The Atlantic
Now a nuclear Iran is acceptable.
The agreement fails to fulfill basic US aims. By that measure alone it is a bad deal.

Additionally we see how well Obama's deals work out. Recall the deal on Syrian chemical weapons was supposed to deprive Syria of chemical weapons. It provided for inspections as well.
Syria not only has chemical weapons, produces chemical weapons, but also uses chemical weapons. Is Obama bombing Syria?
Recall that Obama said Assad had to leave. That was US policy.
Assad must go Obama says - The Washington Post
Have you seen Assad leaving? Has the US done anything to remove him?
No and no.
Obama's foreign policy decisions and agreements are the worst in history.

This deal does not enable an Iran with nuclear weapons.


The rest of your stuff I do not agree with.

And:

Longest serving Jewish congressman supports Nuclear Deal - CNNPolitics.com

 

[The Rabbi]

Most of Congress has not read the deal. Does that mean they're not qualified to vote on it?
Of course you implied it. That's obvious.
More weaseling from the chief troll of Planet USMB.

So, you have not read the deal.

Got it.

And I see you are getting personal again.

Do you even have the ability to debate for just two minutes without getting angry at someone?

Can you be honest for more than one sentence? This is the basic problem with your posts: you get things wrong and then deny it or deflect instead of admitting it and moving on. Thats why you have zero credibility here.
Can you honestly maintain that this deal, which does not fulfill the administration's opening rules, is good for Israel or the United States?

First, I am going to grant you one point.

Yes, I am somewhat implying that there is a correlation between American Jews supporting the Iran deal and only a plurality, but not a majority, of Israelis supporting a pre-emptive strike against Iran. The correlation comes pretty automatically with Netanyahu's bullish stance on a pre-emptive strike since he is unhappy with the deal. So, yes, I will grant you that.

Now, I asked you a question three or four times, and you refused to answer it.

You are now asking me a question and unlike you, I will answer it right away.

First, the deal does in effect fullfill the administration's opening rules. So, I don't agree with your opening presumption.

As far as Israel itself, neither I nor you live there, so I am not qualified to answer that question. I'll let you speak for yourself.

And though I currently am not in the USA, I am a US citizen and am qualified to answer the middle part of your question:

YES, it is good for the USA.

Even if it kicks the can down the road 15 years, those are 15 years where we do not wage war, at least in Iran.

One less war = one less strain on our economy and less deficit, also less debt.

The reason I keep asking you whether you read the deal or not is simple. I don't think you really know when sanctions would be lifted and under what specific conditions, or what time frame this all is supposed to happen in, amirite?

That being said, should Israel suddenly detect something foul in Iran and decide to launch a pre-emptive strike, as it did in Iraq in, I believe, 1982, I wouldn't stand in their way.

I stopped about the second paragraph.
Obama said a nuclear Iran was unacceptable.
Obama s Crystal-Clear Promise to Stop Iran From Getting a Nuclear Weapon - The Atlantic
Now a nuclear Iran is acceptable.
The agreement fails to fulfill basic US aims. By that measure alone it is a bad deal.

Additionally we see how well Obama's deals work out. Recall the deal on Syrian chemical weapons was supposed to deprive Syria of chemical weapons. It provided for inspections as well.
Syria not only has chemical weapons, produces chemical weapons, but also uses chemical weapons. Is Obama bombing Syria?
Recall that Obama said Assad had to leave. That was US policy.
Assad must go Obama says - The Washington Post
Have you seen Assad leaving? Has the US done anything to remove him?
No and no.
Obama's foreign policy decisions and agreements are the worst in history.

This deal does not enable an Iran with nuclear weapons.


The rest of your stuff I do not agree with.

And:

Longest serving Jewish congressman supports Nuclear Deal - CNNPolitics.com

You're wrong as usual
Experts U.S. Concessions Give Iran a Clear Path to Nuclear Bomb Washington Free Beacon
Pact seals Iran s path to nuclear bomb Albuquerque Journal News

ANd I dont give a shit what liberal fuck-wad Sander Levin says. IT only proves that American Jews will sell out Israel in a heartbeat.

And f course you ignore the fact that Obama's positions has shifted.

 

[Mr. H.]

J-Street. A bunch of Jewish quislings. Every one of them needs to be lined up against the wall and machine0 gunned.

So, this puts you on record as saying that American Jews who are not Conservative as you are should be murdered. You realize that that makes you a NAZI, right? Because that is EXACTLY what NAZIs did.

There is no way in hell that you are a Jew. No real Jew would ever, ever, ever say that about his fellow Jews. I would never wish that upon you or any other of the 5 or 6 Conservative Jews out there.

Conservatives really are sick bastards. You prove the point day in and day out. Get help. You need it. I bet that even Jroc, who is crazy as a loon, would not go that far, but then again, who knows. I recommend that you stick to making wrong predictions about Greece, seems to be more up your alley.

guno
jillian
Mr. H.
Roudy
Sweet_Caroline
Mad Scientist

Damn....


Update: notice that his posting was deleted, but not before I could quote it. He really DID say this.

You woke me from a nap for THIS?

Z-z-z-z-z.....

 

[Statistikhengst]

J-Street. A bunch of Jewish quislings. Every one of them needs to be lined up against the wall and machine0 gunned.

So, this puts you on record as saying that American Jews who are not Conservative as you are should be murdered. You realize that that makes you a NAZI, right? Because that is EXACTLY what NAZIs did.

There is no way in hell that you are a Jew. No real Jew would ever, ever, ever say that about his fellow Jews. I would never wish that upon you or any other of the 5 or 6 Conservative Jews out there.

Conservatives really are sick bastards. You prove the point day in and day out. Get help. You need it. I bet that even Jroc, who is crazy as a loon, would not go that far, but then again, who knows. I recommend that you stick to making wrong predictions about Greece, seems to be more up your alley.

guno
jillian
Mr. H.
Roudy
Sweet_Caroline
Mad Scientist

Damn....


Update: notice that his posting was deleted, but not before I could quote it. He really DID say this.

You woke me from a nap for THIS?

Z-z-z-z-z.....

Yes, I did, brotch.

Now, BROTCHIFY!

 

[Jroc]

Most of Congress has not read the deal. Does that mean they're not qualified to vote on it?
Of course you implied it. That's obvious.
More weaseling from the chief troll of Planet USMB.

So, you have not read the deal.

Got it.

And I see you are getting personal again.

Do you even have the ability to debate for just two minutes without getting angry at someone?

Can you be honest for more than one sentence? This is the basic problem with your posts: you get things wrong and then deny it or deflect instead of admitting it and moving on. Thats why you have zero credibility here.
Can you honestly maintain that this deal, which does not fulfill the administration's opening rules, is good for Israel or the United States?

First, I am going to grant you one point.

Yes, I am somewhat implying that there is a correlation between American Jews supporting the Iran deal and only a plurality, but not a majority, of Israelis supporting a pre-emptive strike against Iran. The correlation comes pretty automatically with Netanyahu's bullish stance on a pre-emptive strike since he is unhappy with the deal. So, yes, I will grant you that.

Now, I asked you a question three or four times, and you refused to answer it.

You are now asking me a question and unlike you, I will answer it right away.

First, the deal does in effect fullfill the administration's opening rules. So, I don't agree with your opening presumption.

As far as Israel itself, neither I nor you live there, so I am not qualified to answer that question. I'll let you speak for yourself.

And though I currently am not in the USA, I am a US citizen and am qualified to answer the middle part of your question:

YES, it is good for the USA.

Even if it kicks the can down the road 15 years, those are 15 years where we do not wage war, at least in Iran.

One less war = one less strain on our economy and less deficit, also less debt.

The reason I keep asking you whether you read the deal or not is simple. I don't think you really know when sanctions would be lifted and under what specific conditions, or what time frame this all is supposed to happen in, amirite?

That being said, should Israel suddenly detect something foul in Iran and decide to launch a pre-emptive strike, as it did in Iraq in, I believe, 1982, I wouldn't stand in their way.

I stopped about the second paragraph.
Obama said a nuclear Iran was unacceptable.
Obama s Crystal-Clear Promise to Stop Iran From Getting a Nuclear Weapon - The Atlantic
Now a nuclear Iran is acceptable.
The agreement fails to fulfill basic US aims. By that measure alone it is a bad deal.

Additionally we see how well Obama's deals work out. Recall the deal on Syrian chemical weapons was supposed to deprive Syria of chemical weapons. It provided for inspections as well.
Syria not only has chemical weapons, produces chemical weapons, but also uses chemical weapons. Is Obama bombing Syria?
Recall that Obama said Assad had to leave. That was US policy.
Assad must go Obama says - The Washington Post
Have you seen Assad leaving? Has the US done anything to remove him?
No and no.
Obama's foreign policy decisions and agreements are the worst in history.

This deal does not enable an Iran with nuclear weapons.


The rest of your stuff I do not agree with.

And:

Longest serving Jewish congressman supports Nuclear Deal - CNNPolitics.com

Obama has his pet Jews he uses for cover. The majority of Jews don't like the deal double in fact

 

[Contumacious]

New poll U.S. Jews support Iran deal despite misgivings Nation Jewish Journal

The Iran Deal Poll Jewish Journal
Iran Questionnaire
http://www.jewishjournal.com/Newsletter/IranMethodology7-22-15.pdf
Tables from the survey of American Jews
Tables from the survey of the American general population

501 US-American Jews, conducted July 16-20, MoE +/-6
Complete survey, 501 US-American Jews and 506 US-American non-jews, conducted July 16-20, MoE = +/-5.2

Among US-American Jews, 49 to 31 = a margin of +18. That's a big margin.



This is also being reported here:

Jewish Americans support the Iran nuclear deal - The Washington Post

View attachment 45815

Jewish support for the deal was 20 percentage points higher than for Americans overall, according to a side-by-side poll of the general public. A separate question found 54 percent of Jews saying Congress should approve the deal, while 35 percent want Congress to block it. Both polls were conducted by telephone in the week after the deal was announced among 500 respondents each.

The relatively pro-deal attitudes of American Jews might be surprising given the intensity displayed by Netanyahu and American Jewish groups pushing Congress to block the agreement. While some liberal Jewish groups have come out in support of a deal, they are probably financially outgunned by anti-deal groups, who are lobbying this week to persuade Democrats to help achieve the two-thirds-majority opposition needed in both the House and Senate to block the deal.

Jewish support for the deal is less surprising given two other facts: Jews are much more liberal than the overall public, and liberals largely support the Iran deal. Fully 53 percent of Jews in the poll identified as liberal, while 28 percent were moderate and 16 percent were conservative, which is similar to the findings of a larger 2013 survey of American Jews by the Pew Research Center. In contrast, the survey of U.S. adults found slightly more conservatives than liberals, 36 to 31 percent.

The poll also found:

View attachment 45817


Those are the figures from this poll. Should other polls of Jewish Americans vis-a-vis the Iran Deal appear, I'll publish them here on this thread as well.

EVERONE knows that any Jew who is not a ZIONUT is not a real Jew and their views ought not to be posted in USMB.

I am going to recommend that this post be removed to the "Badlands"

.

 

[Statistikhengst]

New poll U.S. Jews support Iran deal despite misgivings Nation Jewish Journal

The Iran Deal Poll Jewish Journal
Iran Questionnaire
http://www.jewishjournal.com/Newsletter/IranMethodology7-22-15.pdf
Tables from the survey of American Jews
Tables from the survey of the American general population

501 US-American Jews, conducted July 16-20, MoE +/-6
Complete survey, 501 US-American Jews and 506 US-American non-jews, conducted July 16-20, MoE = +/-5.2

Among US-American Jews, 49 to 31 = a margin of +18. That's a big margin.



This is also being reported here:

Jewish Americans support the Iran nuclear deal - The Washington Post

View attachment 45815

Jewish support for the deal was 20 percentage points higher than for Americans overall, according to a side-by-side poll of the general public. A separate question found 54 percent of Jews saying Congress should approve the deal, while 35 percent want Congress to block it. Both polls were conducted by telephone in the week after the deal was announced among 500 respondents each.

The relatively pro-deal attitudes of American Jews might be surprising given the intensity displayed by Netanyahu and American Jewish groups pushing Congress to block the agreement. While some liberal Jewish groups have come out in support of a deal, they are probably financially outgunned by anti-deal groups, who are lobbying this week to persuade Democrats to help achieve the two-thirds-majority opposition needed in both the House and Senate to block the deal.

Jewish support for the deal is less surprising given two other facts: Jews are much more liberal than the overall public, and liberals largely support the Iran deal. Fully 53 percent of Jews in the poll identified as liberal, while 28 percent were moderate and 16 percent were conservative, which is similar to the findings of a larger 2013 survey of American Jews by the Pew Research Center. In contrast, the survey of U.S. adults found slightly more conservatives than liberals, 36 to 31 percent.

The poll also found:

View attachment 45817


Those are the figures from this poll. Should other polls of Jewish Americans vis-a-vis the Iran Deal appear, I'll publish them here on this thread as well.

EVERONE knows that any Jew who is not a ZIONUT is not a real Jew and their views ought not to be posted in USMB.

I am going to recommend that this post be removed to the "Badlands"

.

Sure, you can recommend that your posting be moved to the badlands. Why, you can even delete your posting all on your own.

Oh, maybe you meant "thread" instead of "post"... who knows....Right Wing intelligence is often a wild, wooly, whacky wonder to behold.

The thread itself is based on actual data from a real organization. So, good luck with trying to get a bona-fide thread thrown down to the Badlands.

Mebbe if you write in 9 or 10 point and add lots of colors to your bolded "I am screaming my ass off" print, that will help, mkay?