I'm curious: are repubs dumb enough to think Iran would roll over and do whatever the West wants?

[cnm]

Anyway, if the US can facilitate Pakistan going nuclear I'm not sure what the concern about Iran is. I mean Pakistan nurtured the Taliban, spreads terror to India, not a whisper of concern from the usual suspects.

One would almost think some other agenda was in play.

 

[Ernie S.]

Hillaryous, coming from a Liberal idjut.

Social democrat, please. So are you another one who thinks there has not been a Saudi, Israel and US axis for years?

Axis? Your choice of words is quite telling. Do you call cooperation between Iran, Syria and the obama administration an alliance?

 

[cnm]

So do I take it you deny the Saudi, Israel, US axis in the ME?

 

[cnm]

Axis? Your choice of words is quite telling. Do you call cooperation between Iran, Syria and the obama administration an alliance?

When the US starts supplying weaponry to Iran and Syria I will call that an alliance.

Looks like you have to deny reality when it stares you in the face. Oh well.

 

[Geaux4it]

Axis? Your choice of words is quite telling. Do you call cooperation between Iran, Syria and the obama administration an alliance?

When the US starts supplying weaponry to Iran and Syria I will call that an alliance.

Looks like you have to deny reality when it stares you in the face. Oh well.

Should we honor alliances? Obama doesn't think so

-Geaux

 

[cnm]

Should we honor alliances? Obama doesn't think so

With dictators? Well that is a grand old American tradition.

 

[bedowin62]

you have to qualify that question leftard; with the current ***** in charge? NO

 

[bedowin62]

LEFTARD; ISNT THAT EXACTLY WHAT YOU LOONS ARE CLAIMING OBAMA HAS ACCOMPLISHED?

getting iran to see things our (the West's) way?

 

[Tehon]

So the alternative to doing something sane and logical is to do what you think. Right. Iran is a modern country that can be brought into submission to a civilized world through sanctions. We don't have to bargin with supporters of terrorism. We have the power to tell them to f..k off and if they don't like it then we will just start taking out their oil fields. If these islamo radical countries want to live in the 15th century so be it but we are not going to allow them to have any influence in a modern world. They have already stated that they will continue to support terrorism and once they get their 120 billion they will go on a military build up. For what reason, if what you say is true they have no enemies that are going to attack them.

If you wish to be a modern Neville Chamberlain then so be it. I perfer not to have to worry about a suitcase nuke.

You don't seem qualified to identify sane and logical actions. This is particularly evidenced by your "taking out their oil fields" comment. Do your parents know you are on the internet?

I thought we didn't need their oil, since Obozo is switching us to green energy to fight global cooling.

It's not about the oil its about the idea that we have a right to unilaterally attack Iran, their oil fields or otherwise. We dont, even the ignoramus (GW) understood that we need coalitions. The coalition on Iran is against us. That's also why Bush inserted us in the negotiations in the first place.

 

[cnm]

bedowin62

Translation?

 

[bedowin62]

So the alternative to doing something sane and logical is to do what you think. Right. Iran is a modern country that can be brought into submission to a civilized world through sanctions. We don't have to bargin with supporters of terrorism. We have the power to tell them to f..k off and if they don't like it then we will just start taking out their oil fields. If these islamo radical countries want to live in the 15th century so be it but we are not going to allow them to have any influence in a modern world. They have already stated that they will continue to support terrorism and once they get their 120 billion they will go on a military build up. For what reason, if what you say is true they have no enemies that are going to attack them.

If you wish to be a modern Neville Chamberlain then so be it. I perfer not to have to worry about a suitcase nuke.

You don't seem qualified to identify sane and logical actions. This is particularly evidenced by your "taking out their oil fields" comment. Do your parents know you are on the internet?

I thought we didn't need their oil, since Obozo is switching us to green energy to fight global cooling.

It's not about the oil its about the idea that we have a right to unilaterally attack Iran, their oil fields or otherwise. We dont, even the ignoramus (GW) understood that we need coalitions. The coalition on Iran is against us. That's also why Bush inserted us in the negotiations in the first place.

um no genius. we absolutely have a right to attack iran to protect our interests, either unilaterally or otherwise

 

[bedowin62]

"the coalition on iran is against us...."?????????????????????????

what does this even mean???

are you saying for their own selfish interestsmeaning OIL, our so-called friends in Europe would rather do nothing or make some smoke and mirror "deal"????


oh say it aint so!!!

wow i mean really??

 

[cnm]

um no genius. we absolutely have a right to attack iran to protect our interests, either unilaterally or otherwise

Is that under the UN Charter or the Nuremberg Principles?

 

[cnm]

"the coalition on iran is against us...."?????????????????????????

what does this even mean???

It means they think you are batshit crazy.

 

[Obiwan]

"the coalition on iran is against us...."?????????????????????????

what does this even mean???

It means they think you are batshit crazy.

So does that mean Obozo is going to let them join the illegals and dead folks in voting in our next election???

 

[cnm]

Oh, absolutely...

 

[rdean]

Obama is "in charge of the deal". That's why there's no deal.

Go sleep it off, you insolent drunkard.

Why would you say that?

 

[rdean]

If someone else were in charge of the deal? You know the one sponsored by 7 countries? They like to think Obama is weak which is why concessions were made, but it's completely stupid to think Iran, under any circumstance, would do whatever the **** repubs want. It's so nauseatingly ignorant.

Enough with the whole "well if St. Reagan was in charge of that deal derp, derp, derp!"

This deal is better than no deal. Get over it.

There is no deal. It is a farce and yet another Obama deception.

And you. Why would you say something so ignorant?

 

[rdean]

I still can't understand why the majority of Reps like Reagan so much. He was just a living vegetable who didn't understand what was happening around him. And it's not he had done anything worthwhile during his presidency.

Republicans needed a hero. In the 90's, they started the "Ronald Reagan Legacy Project". Republicans involved simply rewrote history. They turned Reagan into something he wasn't. His has been the only right wing president not involved in some major scandal or some awful fiasco, so he was the only one they could "use".

Google

 

[cnm]

His has been the only right wing president not involved in some major scandal or some awful fiasco, so he was the only one they could "use".

Not like he sold weapons to finance death squads or anything.