What dumbass thought it would be a good idea you might ask?
Just the Chairman of the U.S. Armed Services Committee... DEMOCRAT Carl Levin. LOL Just your typical know nothing.
:
UK foreign secretary is going to be there for the opening.
Does wing nuts realize the deal is done whether the Republican do nothing Congress approves it or not.
May be the Republicans will vote for sanctions against UK. By the way, Germany and France opened their embassies already. All of them are interested establishing relations to take advantage of trade and development while Republicans keep hyper ventilating and misleading their ardent dumb followers.
And you do realize numerous Dems have come out against the deal, right?
Or do you only get Pravda where you live?
the Iran deal, what will happen in the unlikely event Congress has a veto proof vote against it?
Do you really believe that these countries would change their minds and not only reimpose the old sanctions but agree to tougher ones? Russia has already agreed to sell a new missile system to Iran even before the agreement deadlines allow.
And there will not be enough votes to override a veto. You are seriously asking Congress to vote against an imperfect but still potent agreement on grounds that an imaginary tougher agreement could be negotiated?
There are even a number of Jewish groups who support the deal.
It is over, Jack
Please explain that to me.
How the fk did we go from needing "anywhere, anytime" to "24 day notice" to now the Iranians will police themselves?????
And how did you fold in less than 24 hours???
Let's just hand them a bomb from our arsenal. That will save us time from the inevitable.
Israel now certain to act.
Will Obama shoot down their planes?
would need to go to war. Look at this list of military and Mossad officials who supported the deal as of August 5. I'd guess the list is even longer now that these guys had the courage to break with Benji publicly. Remember Benji barely got re-elected. Sorry Doctor Gonzo but it is time for some new thinking in Israel just as is needed in Iran.
As for the Iranian self inspection we still need to get the facts. But Adm Kirby came right out today and said the AP report was not accurate and the UN agency head also criticized it.
But you keep ignoring the real problem that I pointed out to you last month. The most we would be able to do is reimpose US sanctions - the rest of the world is not going to go along. In effect, we would be cutting US firms out of the Iran market and Iran will get plenty of cash just from selling their floating oil inventory on the spot market.
It is over, Jack
I gave you my plan and Iran would be begging us to stop if it were imposed.
An already joke of a deal is all the worse today. You saw the WH reaction yesterday. They would have been breathing fire if that AP report didn't contain some validity to it.
You even commented how fked up there reaction was.
The Israeli people are now solidly against this plan. As are the American people. As is the majority of their government, as is the majority of ours. That's quite a coalition Obama has managed to build AGAINST himself.
Israel will take out this program one way or the other Mari. They know now Obama fked them over completely.
Did you catch Hillary's '08 chair of her campaign come out against the deal today? Many more will follow.
Iran dictated this deal with ZERO leverage and Obama did what he does best. Capitulated.
Just like in Iraq. Just like with the Taliaban. Just like Syria.
Notice a theme here?
Remember that major faux pas of yours? LOL
Yeah, I'll keep that just bewtween us. 
I truly believe Iran has lied and connived their way to getting everything they wanted out of this; the end of sanctions, the resumption of commerce that will bring in hundreds of billions of dollars into their coffers and the continuation of their efforts to develop a nuclear arsenal will continue unabated.
Their abominable rhetoric vis a vis Holocaust denial and the extermination of the State of Israel will continue unabated.
They will continue and even increase their financial support of Hamas and Hezbollah, they will continue their proxy battles against the Saudi's in Yemen and eventually the entire Saudi peninsula in line with their goal of a true Persian Hegemony under Shiite Muslim rule in the Middle East and Africa. Once they control Yemen, its a short hop across the channel to Djibouti, Eritrea and the Sudan none of whom can stand up to the Iranians and their satellite proxies. Their long range goal is nothing less than the restoration of the Persian Empire to all its glory.
Meanwhile, Israeli covert agents will continue their efforts to stall and damage the Iranian nuclear program via cyber-warfare, covert commando missions, and targeted assasinations. They will continue to be villified publicly even though in the back rooms where politicians hide, even the Saudi princes will cheer the results of Israel's bravery and cunning. Eventually, the cancer of Persian Hegemony will metastasize across the land and EVERYONE will finally realize they are a far greater threat to the world than settlements built in disputed territory.
And when its all said and done, even Planet Stupid will be forced to admit that Doc Gonzo was right all along. I just hope it doesn't take an actual exchange of nuclear weapons to do the convincing. At least the Israeli's are close to a breakthrough in the treatment of radiation poisoning.
That's how I see it.
As for the Iranian self inspection we still need to get the facts. But Adm Kirby came right out today and said the AP report was not accurate and the UN agency head also criticized it.
But you keep ignoring the real problem that I pointed out to you last month. The most we would be able to do is reimpose US sanctions - the rest of the world is not going to go along. In effect, we would be cutting US firms out of the Iran market and Iran will get plenty of cash just from selling their floating oil inventory on the spot market.
It is over, Jack.
And what would the target be, Doctor Gonzo?
“Israeli covert agents will continue their efforts to stall and damage the Iranian nuclear program via cyber-warfare, covert commando missions, and targeted assassinations.”
The agreement that cuts Iran’s enriched uranium by 97%; will Mr. Netanyahu send commandoes to get that 3% Iran is allowed to keep? How will they find it?
Iran has 10 years to phase out its centrifuges and to store excess centrifuges. Is Israel going to risk lives and try and destroy them now anyway?
Fordow will be converted into a nuclear, physics and technology center with international collaboration. Should cyberwarfare be used to screw up the computers?
Targeted assassinations – you mean of the Iran nuclear experts who are doing these conversions?
Arak is to be rebuild as a heavy water research reactor. Same questions.
So while I think you have a more realistic view of what Israel MAY do if the Iran agreement is ratified than Jack – who thinks Mr. Netanyahu will “scramble the jets” and start a naval blockade LOL- you are overlooking that we no longer have a target rich environment for these countermeasures. Iran is allowed to have a nuclear program. And the risk reward ratio is all out of whack – Mr. Netanyahu is not going to risk Israeli lives, Iran retaliatory measures, and world condemnation to eliminate the imperfections in the agreement.
So once again my friend we are in complete disagreement here
When did I ever say Netanyahu "would start a naval blockade?"
Remember I had to educate you that that idea would NOT originate in the Persian Gulf, or be any where near it? Remember you hiding from that argument like a frightened turtle and running away like a hare? LOL
If THAT wasn't embarrassing enough for you, remember when you told us the Iranians could wipe out our navy?
Laughable.
No need to wade into the swimming hole of dishonesty. It just makes your argument all wet. I thought you were above that nonsense.
Like said, I don't give credence to anything coming out of Fox. As far as getting news, BBC, Al Jazeera, Washington Post, Times, The Guardian, Times of India. No, I don't get news from any single source or do I watch Faux Fake News or the Confused News Network. Both are 7x24 news comedy for unintelligent, partially educated sheep population.
Thank you for asking
However, the Republican's and a few Democrats with a large Jewish voting blocks do. That's why they can beat their chests and talk about how tough they are. They know they've got nothing to lose!
You think a deal that Obama capitulated on, with secret side deals not all known, with a terrorist state that has a history of not honoring its deals, that has killed US soldiers with its technology, and us giving it $150bn to fund their terrorism, and allowing them to have advanced missile technology with NO dismantling of their nuke problem and NO American hostage release is a GOOD deal Matt?
Do you really believe that? Because the American people, who first did, now don't when they found out what was in the deal.
And Matt says????
Nice try. You give me a choice of whether it's a good deal or a bad deal. And, on what basis does one make that judgement. One criterion would be whether it de-incentivize the Iran's significantly enough that they slow or stop development of a nuclear weapon. Neither one of us will know, for a while, whether it will. Given that you can't prove there can be a better deal made, and that I have no faith in your proposed solutions to stopping their nuclear capabilities, and because it's a done deal, I will hope the it works. I would hope that you would hope so too!
Not only is it a bad deal, but it's pretty obvious Obama lied once again to the American public to ram a deal through he KNEW the American public would not accept if they knew the facts.
It's plain that we aren't going to do anything to stop the Iranians from getting a nuke, maybe Israel will have the stones to do what we won't and take out Iran's capabilities before Iran can go out and spend their windfall on a new air force, ballistic missiles, etc.
Yes, we can "hope" all we want, Matt. But history tells me appeasing evil always works out badly for people of goodwill.
But hope isn't a good thing when you are dealing with terrorists who want to get a bomb that would achieve the very goal they speak of constantly: wiping Israel off the map.
I'll leave you with this thought then I have to find a happy hour. LOL
Claire McCaskill said today that "...no one trusts the Iranians." Direct quote and yes she spoke in absolutes.
She proceeded to tell us she is voting "aye" on the deal.
We entered into a deal where "no one" trusts our dealing partner and yet we put measures in the agreement which will allow Iran to wait 24 days for an inspection, even though Sec. Moniz told us a few months ago that wasn't nearly good enough.
All we have now is hope, Matt, as logic and resilience to evil died about a month ago.
Anyway, enjoy your weekend bro.
Jack.
treaties or international agreements. Seldom, if ever, do both sides trust each other!
When negotiating a peace or reducing a conflict, neither side fully trusts each other. And, neither side is or should eliminate their vigilance. Do you think the means of knowing the Iranian's the state of the Iranian nuclear program is better now than what it would be under the proposed agreement. If you exercise your Naval block, or bomb their oil refineries, do you think you will have any better verification of their nuclear program. If you bomb their nuclear sites, will you have any better verification of the state of their nuclear program, in the years that follow. If they want a bomb, and they will definitely want one, even more, if you carry out your plans, will you have any better verification process in place.
So, don't assume, pretend or intimate that I trust the Iranians!
Apparently, that is not part of his "plan" anymore, or at least not if Israel goes alone. Apparently, we were suppose to know this. So I'm lost- Jack is sure Israel will do "something" if the Iran agreement is ratified
but we don't know what that is and i don't think Jack does either. LOL
but it would certainly not surprise me that if Israel is convinced that sooner or later, most likely sooner, Iran is going to get nukes, and that sooner or later they are going to try to make good on their threats to wipe Israel off the map. It would make a LOT more sense to take them on now, before they can use their upcoming financial windfall to rearm themselves and make themselves a MUCH more formidable enemy.
Whoever said "don't kick a man when he's down" has never had a fight with a mortal enemy. "kicking them when they are down" makes a lot more sense than trying to take them on when they are strong.
It's the protection it gives Hamas and Hezbollah knowing they have a nuke on their side.
Who doesn't think that would embolden those terrorist groups, and make rocket launches much more common and energize them to cause more havoc, more killings/kidnappings on a day in and day out basis?
Israel feels more and more isolated due to Obama's total capitulation. They are paranoid, with good reason, and have a long track record of pre-emptively attacking their enemies (e.g. Syrian and Iraqi nuke sites) when they feel threatened.
No, I don't know what they will do either. But history and logic tells me they will do something before the Iranian bomb becomes operational.
Imo, they will do whatever it takes.
And we can count on one thing. Whatever they do, the present POTUS, and many of the Left here, will be leading the chorus condemning Israel
What dumbass thought it would be a good idea you might ask?
Just the Chairman of the U.S. Armed Services Committee...
DEMOCRAT Carl Levin. LOL
Just your typical know nothing. :
should “consider” a naval blockade? Iran has installed batteries of Sun Burn anti ship missiles along the Persian Gulf and Strait of Hormuz and if, you believe this report, is now mass producing a new generation of long range anti ship cruise missiles.
So the military “considered” the idea and told Levin “are you crazy?” If there is war – and a blockade is an act of war – we have no ability to protect our billion dollar ships from these missiles.
That is why you do not hear anyone else talking about a naval blockade these days. At best, you would have to set it up outside of the range of the coastal batteries but because these missiles can be fired from aircraft and ships, even that would not protect you. I suspect we have some Patriot missile type defenses but we don’t know how effective they would be against the Sun Burn and this new generation of cruise missile.
Give it up Jack it is a bad, bad idea. And of course I notice you have no answer to the real reason why Israel is not going to do anything militarily – there is no longer any identifiable target that would justify the risk. Since Iran is getting rid of 97% of its enriched uranium, why in the hell would Israel try to destroy it by military action? You really think they would bomb to get the remaining 3%?
You are not thinking
You first said that a blockade was "1960's thinking." So your absurd argument is that it's "2012 thinking" now? What, did you warp into a time machine and launch yourself 50 years into the future? Smart of you to backtrack though as you were embarrassing yourself with that nonsense.
At least I got you to concede that the blockade would take place out at sea and NOT in the Persian Gulf and NOT in the straight of Hormuz, that you ridiculously thought previously, so I see me educating you is having some effect.
But I have to tip you off to something. There is a new thing, I think the military calls it "radar". Lol.
The Iranian ships and/or aircraft you're so scared shitless about would be detected and destroyed LONG before they reached their firing point. And our capital ships would be NO where in the vicinity to begin with and WELL out of their range.
Only you would think the US navy doesn't have the capability of placing the afformentioned assets outside of the "incredible" Iranian's Air Force and missiles.
And furthermore, it is MUCH smaller vessels, like frigates and destroyers, that would be the front line of any blockade, something else you screwed up.
But I beleive I have tortured you enough re: this matter.
I'll considered it closed unless you need to be educated further? LOL
-- Modified on 8/23/2015 7:27:39 PM
Can you name two international agreements Iran has not honored?
Truth is the other way around?
Facts not Fo