God Bless Donald Trump!!

It will be fine

Well-Known Member
But they don't have free reign. The agreement gives Iran 3 weeks notice before inspections take place. The argument is Iran won't be able to hide that kind of activity. What it doesn't do is insure Iran won't develop secret facilities elsewhere to continue development.
Is there a reasonable solution that could 100% ensure they don't develop secret facilities?
 

MrFedEx

Engorged Member
It's striking how the right wing spent nearly a decade complaining about Obama and yet now with the presidency and both houses of Congress, they have no substantive policies or proposals ready to roll out.

Yes, it is. All talk, no action.
 

vantexan

Well-Known Member
Is there a reasonable solution that could 100% ensure they don't develop secret facilities?
If you can't trust a gov't to stick to it's word about not developing nuclear weapons then you don't lift sanctions and you don't give them $150 billion dollars. Our team didn't even ask for the release of Americans held prisoner in Iran on bogus charges but did send almost half a billion dollars worth of Euros and Swiss Francs on an unmarked plane in the middle of the night to secure their release.
 

MrFedEx

Engorged Member
Why? The government is not a business. It does business, but it isn't a business.

Deplorables equate our government with a business, so according to them, sound business principles should apply.

This is nonsensical, because government is not a business. Simple fact.
 

It will be fine

Well-Known Member
If you can't trust a gov't to stick to it's word about not developing nuclear weapons then you don't lift sanctions and you don't give them $150 billion dollars. Our team didn't even ask for the release of Americans held prisoner in Iran on bogus charges but did send almost half a billion dollars worth of Euros and Swiss Francs on an unmarked plane in the middle of the night to secure their release.
So your alternative is we should have stayed the course with sanctions? They would have a nuke right now had we done that. And they just demonstrated they have the capability to deliver it. Before they agreed to this deal they were close, they used that as bargaining power for a deal. The option was let them have a nuke or come to a deal. The deal is better for all of us. Yes they got paid but of course they are going to want something valuable in exchange for not becoming a nuclear power. It's hard to prevent countries from acquiring 80 year old military technology.
 

vantexan

Well-Known Member
So your alternative is we should have stayed the course with sanctions? They would have a nuke right now had we done that. And they just demonstrated they have the capability to deliver it. Before they agreed to this deal they were close, they used that as bargaining power for a deal. The option was let them have a nuke or come to a deal. The deal is better for all of us. Yes they got paid but of course they are going to want something valuable in exchange for not becoming a nuclear power. It's hard to prevent countries from acquiring 80 year old military technology.
Why do you think they came to the table? Sanctions. They were in danger of being toppled by restless citizens, millions of whom don't agree with the extremist radical views of their leaders. The mullahs came to the table and agreed to everything thrown at them with no intention of honoring the deal. They wanted that money for immediate relief from civil strife and long term relief from no sanctions. Obama was so concerned about his legacy he gave them what they wanted. And they're still developing the bomb. 80 year old technology? If it were so easy they'd have had it a long time ago. The agreement was supposed to stop all of this. It didn't. Do we give up trying to stop it because it might ultimately lead to a war?
 

It will be fine

Well-Known Member
Why do you think they came to the table? Sanctions. They were in danger of being toppled by restless citizens, millions of whom don't agree with the extremist radical views of their leaders. The mullahs came to the table and agreed to everything thrown at them with no intention of honoring the deal. They wanted that money for immediate relief from civil strife and long term relief from no sanctions. Obama was so concerned about his legacy he gave them what they wanted. And they're still developing the bomb. 80 year old technology? If it were so easy they'd have had it a long time ago. The agreement was supposed to stop all of this. It didn't. Do we give up trying to stop it because it might ultimately lead to a war?
You and I have no idea if they are still developing a bomb. It's not that hard to do. My high school physics class could work out the basics. You are sounding like W, inspectors say there are no WMDs in Iraq, but I know better. Let's start an unfunded unnecessary land war!
 

vantexan

Well-Known Member
You and I have no idea if they are still developing a bomb. It's not that hard to do. My high school physics class could work out the basics. You are sounding like W, inspectors say there are no WMDs in Iraq, but I know better. Let's start an unfunded unnecessary land war!
Bush went on intel provided by our's and every other major intel service in the world. Same Intel every major Democrat signed off on too. If Iran was developing a bomb before the agreement they'd already have one. Afterall it's so easy high schoolers can do it. Wonder why they're testing ballistic missiles? Kicks and giggles? Yep, let's kick back and see what they come up with. Surely they aren't willing to use it, right?
 

It will be fine

Well-Known Member
Bush went on intel provided by our's and every other major intel service in the world. Same Intel every major Democrat signed off on too. If Iran was developing a bomb before the agreement they'd already have one. Afterall it's so easy high schoolers can do it. Wonder why they're testing ballistic missiles? Kicks and giggles? Yep, let's kick back and see what they come up with. Surely they aren't willing to use it, right?
You honestly believe there is any state power that lacks the scientific knowledge to make a bomb? Iran absolutely has the knowledge. They can mine their own uranium. The only chance at preventing them is through diplomacy and inspectors.
 

MrFedEx

Engorged Member
You honestly believe there is any state power that lacks the scientific knowledge to make a bomb? Iran absolutely has the knowledge. They can mine their own uranium. The only chance at preventing them is through diplomacy and inspectors.

This. Unfortunately, they believe that pissing them off will prevent them form developing more weapons.
 

vantexan

Well-Known Member
You honestly believe there is any state power that lacks the scientific knowledge to make a bomb? Iran absolutely has the knowledge. They can mine their own uranium. The only chance at preventing them is through diplomacy and inspectors.
Then why haven't they built one already? It takes quite a bit to enrich uranium. Most countries don't have access to uranium, plutonium, heavy water, or the wealth necessary to build ballistic missile systems. Do you think our gov't would've bothered to try to negotiate an agreement to stop development if building just one bomb is so easy? You make it sound like it can be done in a garage when extensive facilities are used to do this.
 

vantexan

Well-Known Member
CONSPIRACY! CONSPIRACY! CONSPIRACY!

OF ONLY THEY WOULD GIVE THE DONALD EVERYTHING HE ASKED FOR!!

C'mon van. Time to admit the president is in way over his head and has no clue what he's doing.
By the way, remember the initial start up of the Obamacare website? Were you saying this about Obama at the time? Remember when Obama lied his head off on television to get Obamacare passed? What were you saying then? There's a learning curve for every new administration. I remember when NYC got all upset with Obama because shortly after his first inauguration his team sent Air Force One in a low flyover for a photo op without informing anyone. People really got upset thinking another attack was happening. Yep, let's sweep all that under the rug, time to attack the new president of the other party.
 

It will be fine

Well-Known Member
Van, Here is a link to a group started by veteran and former MO Secretary of State Jason Kander. Most suits have a state party (like SOS or AG) in these voter suppression lawsuits. This just started today, but will be a good resource for you going forward. I do not know all of the issues it will address.
Jason Kander Launches Let America Vote To Fight Voter Suppression Laws Across The Country[UNIQID
Van doesn't believe in voter suppression. Like most republicans he thinks all the voter ID laws and limiting of early and absentee voting just happens to disproportionately effect poor and minority voters. Republicans are in favor of fewer people voting.
 
Top