This Is Difficult For Neo-cons

[TLK Valentine]

So Obama's decision to allow Iran to have the bomb, despite repeated assurances from both his and Bush's administrations that this would never be permitted, doesn't find favor with you?

It certainly wouldn't if that was actually what Obama did.

 

[Albion]

It certainly wouldn't if that was actually what Obama did.

When does the "Obama made us all rich and you can keep your doctor, too!" get trotted out...if we're now going to disregard everything factual for the sake of having a snappy retort?

 

[JustOneWay]

So Obama's decision to allow Iran to have the bomb, despite repeated assurances from both his and Bush's administrations that this would never be permitted, doesn't find favor with you?

Apparently you have been listening to the Obama hate machine which has lied to you about Iran and it's attempt to build nukes.

Obama did not allow Iran to have a bomb, Iran could have built one without Obama's OK. What Obama did was choose to delay their bomb production by a decade instead of invading another country.

I think somebody needs to educate themselves on the deal.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...fact-sheet-6-things-know-about-iran-nuclear-/

 

[Albion]

Apparently you have been listening to the Obama hate machine which has lied to you about Iran and it's attempt to build nukes.

Iran doesn't want to have nuclear weapons in your imagination, then? All that information has simply been misunderstood.

I think somebody needs to educate themselves on the deal.

I certainly agree. Oh, and I too can find a link that agrees with me, just as you can find one that's safely on the far left.

 

[TLK Valentine]

When does the "Obama made us all rich and you can keep your doctor, too!" get trotted out...if we're now going to disregard everything factual for the sake of having a snappy retort?

Well, your retort was neither factual nor snappy, so apparently there's no need to trot it out just yet.

 

[wing2000]

Iran doesn't want to have nuclear weapons in your imagination, then? All that information has simply been misunderstood.

A lot of countries want nuclear weapons.

Actually having a nuclear weapon with the capability to deliver it is another matter. We already fought one unnecessary war based on neo-con propaganda.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Iran doesn't want to have nuclear weapons in your imagination, then? All that information has simply been misunderstood.

of course they want them... but what does that have to do with what you're going on about?

 

[Albion]

A lot of countries want nuclear weapons.

Actually having a nuclear weapon with the capability to deliver it is another matter. We already fought one unnecessary war based on neo-con propaganda.

Yes, but you can't seriously be saying that our treaty with Iran prevents Iran from getting a bomb, as the Obama administration no less than the Bush administration said we'd never allow.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Yes, but you can't seriously be saying that our treaty with Iran prevents Iran from getting a bomb,

Nothing short of an invasion is going to stop Iran from getting a bomb... are you proposing that?

It's only a question of when...

as the Obama administration no less than the Bush administration said we'd never allow.

The treat delays them by ten years... plenty of time for a friendlier regime to take over...

 

[Albion]

A lot of countries want nuclear weapons..

Most aren't capable of making them, however, or close to it.

 

[Albion]

The treat delays them by ten years... plenty of time for a friendlier regime to take over...

No one (with the exception of people posting on this forum) believes that. Not even the liberal media.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Most aren't capable of making them, however, or close to it.

There's little need to make them when an ally already has them.

 

[TLK Valentine]

No one (with the exception of people posting on this forum) believes that. Not even the liberal media.

Well, that's their problem -- and yours.

Meanwhile, my first question still stands: Nothing short of an invasion will stop Iran from getting the bomb -- are you proposing one?

 

[mark46]

No one (with the exception of people posting on this forum) believes that. Not even the liberal media.

The 10 year delay is very real. Absent the beginning of negotiations, Iran would already have the bomb. 98% of nuclear material has been destroyed. When Iran starts to come close again, we will have the same options as when we started negotiations and will have bought considerable time.

Iran is not going likely to become a country that agree that only its enemies should have the bomb.

 

[TLK Valentine]

The 10 year delay is very real. Absent the beginning of negotiations, Iran would already have the bomb. 98% of nuclear material has been destroyed. When Iran starts to come close again, we will have the same options as when we started negotiations and will have bought considerable time.

Iran is not going likely to become a country that agree that only its enemies should have the bomb.

Plus, a lot can happen in 10 years... 60% of Iran's population is under 30 years old, and the old guard is having a devil of a time keeping them under control... when those kids grow up, Iran's going to look very different.

http://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/01/16/youth-in-iran-inside-and-out/?_r=0

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=131514

http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/25/middleeast/iran-election-youth-tehran/

http://www.wsj.com/articles/irans-legions-of-weary-young-people-push-against-the-old-ways-1436323115

 

[JustOneWay]

Iran doesn't want to have nuclear weapons in your imagination, then? All that information has simply been misunderstood.


I certainly agree. Oh, and I too can find a link that agrees with me, just as you can find one that's safely on the far left.

I never said Iran did not want nukes. Those are your words you shoved into my mouth.

What is misunderstood is your understanding of the Iran deal.

Your sidestepping of your own ignorance on the subject coupled with your attempt to make me the one it the wrong has been noted.

The only way to stop Iran is to invade and conquer. Is this what you want?

 

[JustOneWay]

Most aren't capable of making them, however, or close to it.

Iran is within a few months of getting nukes, and now thanks to Obama, it got pushed back 10 years.

You should be applauding Obama, but it is understood that the right just cannot give Obama any credit for anything good.

 

[JustOneWay]

Yes, but you can't seriously be saying that our treaty with Iran prevents Iran from getting a bomb, as the Obama administration no less than the Bush administration said we'd never allow.

There is either a treaty or war. Apparently you want war.

 

[TLK Valentine]

There is either a treaty or war. Apparently you want war.

Of course they want war... it's the only tool the neocons know how to use.

You know the saying, "when all you have is a hammer..."

 

[Albion]

The 10 year delay is very real. Absent the beginning of negotiations, Iran would already have the bomb. 98% of nuclear material has been destroyed. When Iran starts to come close again, we will have the same options as when we started negotiations and will have bought considerable time.

That seems to be the administration's line, all right. It's not taken seriously by anyone else.