tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3820377390281203107.post7764482219611134027..comments2024-03-07T02:17:34.434-08:00Comments on Tom In Paine: Dr. Strangedeal: Or How Obama Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Iran's
Bomb.Marc Rubinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10746456438052849715noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3820377390281203107.post-19860880145633287032015-07-26T13:40:05.056-07:002015-07-26T13:40:05.056-07:00"And why do people have such a sudden hard-on..."And why do people have such a sudden hard-on for Iran, nowadays? It's 35 years since the Iranians kicked out the Shah."<br /><br />Welcome back! Obviously you've been in a coma for the last 30 years. So let me fill you in and hopefully it wont be a shock to your system. Iran is the largest sponsor of terrorism in the world proving money and weapons to Hezbolla, Hamas,and Yemen. They have threatened to wipe Israel off the face of the earth and have promised "Death to America". They claimed they were never trying to get a nuclear weapon and were caught lying repeatedly trying to build a nuclear weapon. Any of this sound familiar? <br /><br />As for Obama given that he couldnt stand up to the health insurance lobby and sold out healthcare reform. caved in to Wall Street, Assad, Putin, and said Isis was the junior varsity,no one expected Obama to stand up to Iran. Obama couldnt negotiate a deal with a an eskimo for a handwarmer. Maybe youd like to explain why Obama gave in to Iran on allowing them to have ICBMs which are only used to deliver a nuclear war head when his own Chairman of the Joint Chiefs said it should never happen? Good idea? When it was Iran on the ropes being strangled by sanctions? What do you think ICBM's are used for? Flower pots? To go with Barracks imagined leadership powers?<br /><br /><br /><br />Marc Rubinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10746456438052849715noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3820377390281203107.post-16352121899998290712015-07-26T09:57:29.671-07:002015-07-26T09:57:29.671-07:00So, other than Invasion what was going to stop Ira...So, other than Invasion what was going to stop Iran?<br /><br />And why do people have such a sudden hard-on for Iran, nowadays? It's 35 years since the Iranians kicked out the Shah, the Western Lapdog and brutal dictator. Is it because we've been unable to fuck with Iran and exploit them as Europe did so much of the world circa 18-19th centuries.<br /><br />And why oh why is the fact that Iran was massively empowered by the Iraq War while also seeing the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq as a pincer movement by the West never a factor?<br /><br />It's as though this Iran deal is out of the blue, with ZERO history going before and zero realization of the actual global facts at play.<br /><br />If only Barack had used his magic leadership pony unicorn powers to extract a better deal! I'm sure that' what President Scott Walker would done!Grung_e_Genehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01894879088472559055noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3820377390281203107.post-65098561915613004372015-07-18T11:56:02.348-07:002015-07-18T11:56:02.348-07:00"What you (and the other critics) fail to rec..."What you (and the other critics) fail to recognize is that strangling Iran's economy was never going to keep from them getting a bomb. "<br /><br />This statement alone shows how farcical the U.S. negotiating position was. You forget that Iran claimed it has NEVER tried to develop a bomb and had no intention of doing so. So we agreed to lift an arms embargo, will allow them to get ICBMs and lift the sanctions to stop them from doing something they claim they never did in the first place? And if as everyone knows they are lying we could have used that as a negotiating tool, forcing them to prove their claims and we'd lift the sanctions or force them to admit they were lying and use THAT as part of the negotiations to hold Iran accountable take a tougher deal on OUR terms not theirs. Remember they wanted the deal and needed the deal and we didnt.<br /><br />The other thing you dont seem to be aware of is that the reason Iran wanted the talks over the last couple of years in the first place is because its only been since 2012 that the sanctions have really started devastating Iran's economy. We had them on the ropes and let them off. And it wouldnt matter what the other countries did, it's the U.S. sanctions hurting Iran the most. The deal was not just bad it was stupid and no one can argue Iran didnt take the U.S. to the cleaners. Unless congress kills the deal which may happen.Marc Rubinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10746456438052849715noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3820377390281203107.post-62894569778973628962015-07-18T11:41:06.231-07:002015-07-18T11:41:06.231-07:00"So continuing the sanctions as before was si... "So continuing the sanctions as before was simply not a realistic option."<br /><br />The sanctions that matter most were and are the U.S. sanctions. First, all of Iran's assets hat were in the U.S. at the time the sanctions were imposed are frozen. Second neither Russia nor China is remotely the economic power the U.S. and its our sanctions that Iran wants lifted the most. Why do you think it was the U.S. who were the lead negotiators? Because we lead and the sanctions Iran needs lifted are the U.S. sanctions. It was not only a realistic option it was the best option in forcing Iran to accept OUR terms not the other way around because we could have easily, and still might if the Congress gets its way, increase them. Marc Rubinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10746456438052849715noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3820377390281203107.post-32288886680847833822015-07-16T06:30:11.309-07:002015-07-16T06:30:11.309-07:00tdraicer: Only adding that neither the sanctions o...tdraicer: Only adding that neither the sanctions or the agreement are just American, and Russia and China had already made it clear they were unwilling to continue the sanctions as before without what THEY judged as a good faith effort by the US to reach a deal. So continuing the sanctions as before was simply not a realistic option. That may be unfortunate, but the US doesn't run the world, even when the world might be better off if it did. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3820377390281203107.post-25498593352957551532015-07-15T12:14:05.459-07:002015-07-15T12:14:05.459-07:00tdraicer:
>Because the alternative to strangli...tdraicer:<br /><br />>Because the alternative to strangling Iran's economy with sanctions which is what was done for the last ten years, was to continue strangling Iran's economy with sanctions if they didn't agree to a tougher deal. <br /><br />What you (and the other critics) fail to recognize is that strangling Iran's economy was never going to keep from them getting a bomb. This deal may fail, but the bottom line remains: if Iran is determined to get nuclear weapons, it will, and short of invading Iran, nothing will stop them. If they aren't so determined, this deal will likely work as well any other. It is, imo, the one real accomplishment-and act of political courage-of Obama's entire career. And I note, Hillary apparently agrees.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3820377390281203107.post-42539582920678524732015-07-15T11:43:54.341-07:002015-07-15T11:43:54.341-07:00I just really don't get why Obama / Kerry had ...I just really don't get why Obama / Kerry had such a, pardon my French, hard-on for this deal - for exactly the reasons you state and which played out with the response of our allies and our enemies. And right about 2003. Such short memories. So we could barely get anything in this deal because of lack of will? We'll never get anywhere, so let's capitulate? This is all very dangerous for Israel. I'm a liberal but knew Obama was insincere about supporting Israel from his 2007 AIPAC speech. Lip service and shallow at best. Lady Boomer NYCnoreply@blogger.com