Why do Republicans support a nuclear Iran?

[Synthaholic]

View attachment 44644

Telling that you sport a traitor's flag in your avatar.

Your fake concern for us Americans is transparent.

 

[Billy000]

According to who? By the way shouldn't the goal be to keep Iran from producing nukes period?

You expect them to just roll over and to whatever the U.S. prefers?

 

[Synthaholic]

All the wingnuts who whined about the ACA and "READ THE BILL!!!" couldn't be bothered to read this deal before spouting off.

 

[Synthaholic]

“You know, I have a lot of differences with Ronald Reagan, but where I completely admire him was his recognition that if you were able to verify an agreement that [was negotiated] with the evil empire that was hellbent on our destruction and was a far greater existential threat to us than Iran will ever be,” then it would be worth doing, Obama said.

 

[Interpol]

Republicans don't have a leg to stand on on this one. They're just all over the place with their Chicken Little statements. My favorite one was brought up earlier today by Major Garrett, who looked like an idiot by even putting it out there and asking the President why he didn't tie the freeing of hostages to the deal.

Of course, you can't tie the hostages to an agreement on nuclear weapons because then they'd use the hostages as trade bait, meaning we'd have to give up concessions on the nuclear deal.

The Republicans are giving us insight into how they would've handled the negotiations. What a boneheaded move it would have been to tie the hostages to a nuke deal.

First Reagan sold arms to Iran for hostages, now we apparently have Republicans on the side of allowing a nuclear Iran in exchange for hostages. There was a time they were the reliable ones on foreign policy, but those days are clearly over.

 

[Muhammed]

Is Republican hatred of Obama so great that they would rather have a nuclear Iran than for Obama to get credit for disarming them?

Your logic fails.

Have you stopped fucking your dog yet?

 

[Politico]

According to who? By the way shouldn't the goal be to keep Iran from producing nukes period?

Not if Obammy has his way.

 

[EatMorChikin]

98% reduction in fisionable material and a dismantling of centerfuges capable of making nuclear material

Why do Republicans want to maintain the old levels?

26 day warning for inspections, but it's cool those Iranians are usually pretty trustworthy. They also get to research long range ballistic missiles, for "non nuclear" stuff. Again that's cool I'm sure that is all they are gonna use it for, they are pretty cool guys.

Maybe we can make a deal with Syria next, so they don't get any of that nuclear stuff, I'm sure Syria would be lining up.

 

[bravoactual]

Pay close attention Cons.

The Nuclear Inspectors will have 24-7 access to ALL NUCLEAR RESEARCH SITES.

The 24-Day rule applies to Military Bases/Facilities/Sites ONLY.

One cannot just move nuclear material on a moments notice.

Attention All Cons.

Attention All Cons.

Try thinking for change.

Just turn off Fox and learn to think for yourself.

 

[Flopper]

98% reduction in fisionable material and a dismantling of centerfuges capable of making nuclear material

Why do Republicans want to maintain the old levels?

26 day warning for inspections, but it's cool those Iranians are usually pretty trustworthy. They also get to research long range ballistic missiles, for "non nuclear" stuff. Again that's cool I'm sure that is all they are gonna use it for, they are pretty cool guys.

Maybe we can make a deal with Syria next, so they don't get any of that nuclear stuff, I'm sure Syria would be lining up.

As with most of history’s important diplomatic documents, this agreement is flawed. However, it is better than no agreement. Without the agreement, war is our only opinion. With the agreement, continued development of nuclear weapons would mean a snap back of sanctions plus the possibility of military actions.

The US and it's allies needs time to deal with ISIS and this agreement will provide that time.

 

[Auld Phart]

War is our only option?

That's terrible.

If we back away from the deal, war is the only choice?

We can't just continue sanctions, possibly increase them?

It HAS to be war?

Bummer

 

[Valerie]

Obama s Unsatisfying Answer on Iran - Bloomberg View

When they began, a top priority of the administration was to reduce Iran's number of centrifuges that produce enriched uranium, as well as Iran's stockpiles of the fuel. These are the two elements that determine the speed at which a country can potentially reprocess fuel to weapons-grade and build a bomb: "breakout" time, in nuclear-speak.

If Iran abides by the terms of the agreement -- and its record of keeping promises is not exactly encouraging -- its breakout time will go from about two months to a year. For 15 years, Iran can ostensibly have only 300 kilograms of enriched uranium -- 2 percent of what it has now. Plus, it can run fewer than 6,000 centrifuges, a third of what the Iranians currently possess, let alone the 190,000 that Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei said last year that Iran needed.

In any case, once the deal expires, Iran will be able to conduct uranium enrichment on an unlimited scale. Khamenei won't need 190,000 centrifuges -- because the deal gives Iran the right to continue research and development on a new generation of centrifuges that are far more efficient. Industrial-scale production creates the possibility of amassing large stockpiles, and then feeding them into a system for quick processing and transfer to weapons.

Obama needs to address this looming threat...

 

[Valerie]

But the most critical factor will be how well the U.N.’s International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) can monitor Iran’s compliance and ensure the U.S. and others that it is not cheating.

John McLaughlin The Iran deal




John Kerry on Iran Nuke Deal: 'There's an Obvious Lack of Trust'

 

[Valerie]

Hillary: I don’t trust Iran to honor nuke deal

in New Hampshire, she asserted for the first time that critics of the deal had “a respectable argument.”

The former secretary of state reiterated her belief that the deal was the best the United States could reach at present, but added later in an exchange with reporters: “No one should be deluded about the continuing threat that Iran poses to the region.”


Clinton said that as president, her posture toward Iran would be “Don’t trust, and verify,” saying the United States would employ intrusive inspections and extensive monitoring to ensure Tehran complies with the accord.

Hillary I don t trust Iran to honor nuke deal New York Post

 

[Auld Phart]

Hillary: I don’t trust Iran to honor nuke deal

in New Hampshire, she asserted for the first time that critics of the deal had “a respectable argument.”

The former secretary of state reiterated her belief that the deal was the best the United States could reach at present, but added later in an exchange with reporters: “No one should be deluded about the continuing threat that Iran poses to the region.”


Clinton said that as president, her posture toward Iran would be “Don’t trust, and verify,” saying the United States would employ intrusive inspections and extensive monitoring to ensure Tehran complies with the accord.

Hillary I don t trust Iran to honor nuke deal New York Post

She needs to read a bit more about the deal.

NO Americans will be involved with inspections.

 

[Flopper]

War is our only option?

That's terrible.

If we back away from the deal, war is the only choice?

We can't just continue sanctions, possibly increase them?

It HAS to be war?

Bummer

No, that's not what I said. I said if Iran continues it's development of nuclear weapons without the agreement, military action will be our only option because if sanctions aren't effective there is no other real option. With the agreement, we will have the options of sanctions plus military action. If we turn down the agreement, we have nothing. In fact if we turn down the agreement, Iran will probably increase it's efforts to become a nuclear power, if for no other than to push the US into an even more advantages agreement.

 

[Valerie]

98% reduction in fisionable material and a dismantling of centerfuges capable of making nuclear material

Why do Republicans want to maintain the old levels?

why oh why...




Iran vow to defy U.S. is 'very disturbing'


DUBAI (Reuters) - U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said a speech by Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei on Saturday vowing to defy American policies in the region despite a deal with world powers over Tehran's nuclear program was "very disturbing".

"I don't know how to interpret it at this point in time, except to take it at face value, that that's his policy," he said in the interview with Saudi-owned Al Arabiya television, parts of which the network quoted on Tuesday.

"But I do know that often comments are made publicly and things can evolve that are different. If it is the policy, it's very disturbing, it's very troubling," he added


Ayatollah Khamenei told supporters on Saturday that U.S. policies in the region were "180 degrees" opposed to Iran's, at a speech in a Tehran mosque punctuated by chants of "Death to America" and "Death to Israel".

"Even after this deal our policy toward the arrogant U.S. will not change," Khamenei said.

Kerry says Iran vow to defy U.S. is very disturbing - Yahoo News

 

[Redfish]

Staying the course and maintaining existing sanctions will result in Iran having the capability to produce eight nuclear weapons within six months

Under the new agreement, Iran would not have the ability to produce one warhead in the next ten years

Is Republican hatred of Obama so great that they would rather have a nuclear Iran than for Obama to get credit for disarming them?

your naivete is showing, winger. better pull your pants up. You are as dumb as Kerry and obozo if you trust the iranians to live up to any deal.