|
|
|
|
We appreciate your help
in keeping this site going.
|
|

03-31-2015, 08:35 PM
|
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 13,135
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobabode
That's rich Whelly, the king of smarm and snark on this forum complains about getting some of his own medicine.
As Noonereal said, 'Go towards the light', dude. 
|
I've learned to emulate your writing style well, huh?
|

03-31-2015, 08:40 PM
|
 |
Reformed Know-Nothing
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: MoCo, MD
Posts: 26,554
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by whell
Given me any evidence, even a shred, that Iran won't proceed with their nuke program even if they sign this deal - whatever the hell the deal is.
|
OTOH, it is guaranteed that they will continue the program full speed without a deal.
__________________
As long as the roots are not severed, all will be well in the garden.
|

03-31-2015, 08:43 PM
|
 |
Loyal Opposition
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Johnson County, Kansas
Posts: 14,401
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by whell
I'm not sure I agree with him. But he does make an interesting point in an historical context. We made a similar decision in WW II about why dropping the bomb on Japan was better than putting US troops on the ground to face the forces of a government that might promote self sacrifice rather than a negotiated peace or surrender.
Your argument runs out of gas however when Hunter states that he would rather see us ratchet up sanctions.
|
Even assuming that the state of conflict toward the end of the second world war is analogous in the slightest way to current circumstances, the remotest suggestion of actual use is nuts. At the end of WWII we were the only one to have nuclear weapons. Any use today, particularly as a preemptive strike, would introduce more than trade sanctions against the US. We would have no friends.
Regards,
D-Ray
__________________
Then I'll get on my knees and pray,
We won't get fooled again; Don't get fooled again
|

03-31-2015, 08:44 PM
|
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: The Open Border
Posts: 5,126
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by finnbow
OTOH, it is guaranteed that they will continue the program full speed without a deal.
|
With no economy.
|

03-31-2015, 08:55 PM
|
 |
Reformed Know-Nothing
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: MoCo, MD
Posts: 26,554
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by djv8ga
With no economy.
|
If need be, yes. North Korea did it with a far worse economy than Iran's.
__________________
As long as the roots are not severed, all will be well in the garden.
|

03-31-2015, 09:12 PM
|
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: The Open Border
Posts: 5,126
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by finnbow
If need be, yes. North Korea did it with a far worse economy than Iran's.
|
I know that. The people of Iran don't seem like they will deal with this lifestyle much longer & will revolt.
North Korea....not so much.
|

03-31-2015, 09:13 PM
|
 |
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: San Diego via Vermilion Ohio and Points Between
Posts: 11,547
|
|
|
I doubt we could destroy a nuclear program by bombing them, and you saw how the insurgents gave us a hard time in Iraq, and how hard it is to dislodged ISIS. Iran is a unified nation 80 million strong.....we couldn't win a land invasion there without WWII scale casualties. We are never going to invade Iran, and no one else is either. This is the only common sense way.
__________________
Never was there a time when I did not exist, nor you, nor in the future shall any of us cease to be.
|

03-31-2015, 09:17 PM
|
 |
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Posts: 20,496
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by whell
This was predictable:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/30/wo...deal.html?_r=1
LAUSANNE, Switzerland — With a negotiating deadline just two days away, Iranian officials on Sunday backed away from a critical element of a proposed nuclear agreement, saying they are no longer willing to ship their atomic fuel out of the country.
For months, Iran tentatively agreed that it would send a large portion of its stockpile of uranium to Russia, where it would not be accessible for use in any future weapons program. But on Sunday Iran’s deputy foreign minister made a surprise comment to Iranian reporters, ruling out an agreement that involved giving up a stockpile that Iran has spent years and billions of dollars to amass.
“The export of stocks of enriched uranium is not in our program, and we do not intend sending them abroad,” the official, Abbas Araqchi, told the Iranian media, according to Agence France-Presse. “There is no question of sending the stocks abroad.”
So, why are we negotiating with these bastards? Maybe I missed it, but did anyone provide a reasonable explanation for why we're over there talking to these idiots?
|
It's how these things always go. A "tentative agreement" becomes a bargaining chip.
__________________
Smoke me a kipper. I'll be back for breakfast.
|

03-31-2015, 09:20 PM
|
 |
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Posts: 20,496
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by whell
Find an elected official in this country who is advocating a US military strike against Iran at this time. Anyone.
|
McCain and Graham both have in the past and have given no indication that they've had a change of heart.
__________________
Smoke me a kipper. I'll be back for breakfast.
|

04-01-2015, 12:00 AM
|
 |
Rational Anarchist
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: DFW
Posts: 7,323
|
|
|
Iran is in the driver's seat here. We are diplomatically engaged with them face-to-face on important issues. Thanks to ISIS, they know we need them more than they need us. Talking with them is a good thing, but there will be a Persian bomb.
__________________
"We have met the enemy and he is us."
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:27 PM.
|