Religion, Politics and World Events They make great dinner conversation, don't you think? plus Political Film

USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

Old 07-15-15, 11:14 AM
  #251  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: MA
Posts: 5,848
Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?

Originally Posted by grundle View Post
Here are 29 reasons why I would not be surprised if it turned out that Obama really did want Iran to use nuclear bombs to destroy Israel:

1) When Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State, Obama allowed Russians who had donated to her foundation to buy American uranium.

Charity Navigator, the United States’ most influential charity watchdog, said that legitimate charities spend at least 75% of their donations on their mission. However, according to Clinton’s foundation’s tax forms for the years 2009 through 2012, of the more than $500 million that was donated to the foundation, only 15%, or $75 million, was spent on programmatic grants. More than $25 million was used for travel expenses. Almost $110 million was spent on employee salaries and benefits. $290 million, almost 60 percent, was reported as “other expenses.” Because of this, Charity Navigator put Clinton’s foundation on its “watch list.”

If these Russians were truly interested in helping the causes of AIDS, famine, clean water, global warming, etc., there are plenty of other charities that they could have given to, which would have spent 75% of the money on these causes, instead of 15%.

2) The countries of Oman, Qatar, Kuwait, and Algeria all donated money to Clinton’s Foundation when Clinton was Secretary of State, at a time when these countries were attempting to conduct business with the U.S. government.

Article I, Section 9, Clause 8 of the U.S. Constitution states:

"No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States: and no person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state."

In addition, the State Department had the following rules when Clinton was Secretary of State:

"Executive branch employees are subject to restrictions on the gifts that they may accept from sources outside the Government. Unless an exception applies, executive branch employees may not accept gifts that are given because of their official positions or that come from certain interested sources ('prohibited sources')."

"A prohibited source is a person (or an organization made up of such persons) who: is seeking official action by, is doing business or seeking to do business with, or is regulated by the employee’s agency, or has interests that may be substantially affected by performance or nonperformance of the employee’s official duties."

Donations that foreign governments had given to Clinton’s foundation were used to pay for first class flights for Clinton, even though she was not an employee of the foundation when those flights took place. This is a clear and obvious violation of the Constitution’s prohibition against federal officials accepting money or gifts from foreign governments.

3) In 2011, the Obama administration criticized Algeria’s government for imposing “restrictions on freedom of assembly and association,” tolerating “arbitrary killing,” “widespread corruption,” and a “lack of judicial independence.”

However, in 2012, after the Algerian government donated $500,000 to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s foundation, the Obama administration authorized the Algerian government to buy “toxicological agents, including chemical agents, biological agents and associated equipment” from the U.S.

4) Boko Haram is a Nigerian terrorist organization. Gilbert Chagoury is a Nigerian businessman and diplomat. After Chagoury donated between $1 million and $5 million to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s foundation, Clinton’s State Department avoided putting Boko Haram on its terrorist watch list. After Clinton resigned and John Kerry became the new Secretary of State more than two years later, Kerry put Boko Haram on the State Department’s terrorist watch list.

5) In 2013, a passenger who wanted to fly from New York to London on Kuwait Airways was illegally rejected by the airline for being an Israeli Jew. The passenger filed a discrimination complaint with the Obama administration. The Obama administration dismissed the complaint, claiming that the airline was subject to Kuwaiti law, and not U.S. law, even though the flight originated in the U.S.

6) In July 2014, the the Obama administration banned U.S. flights to Israel, based on the Obama administration’s false claim that Hamas rockets were being fired at the Israeli airport. Once this lie was exposed, the flight ban was lifted.

7) In February 2015, the Obama administration declassified and published a top secret document from 1987 which confirmed the existence of Israel’s nuclear weapons program. However, the Obama administration did not declassify or publish other parts of the document, which pertained to Italy, France, West Germany, and other NATO countries. Prior to this, Israel had never officially confirmed or denied that it had a nuclear weapons program, and the U.S. had remained silent on the matter as a gesture of good will toward Israel.

8) In May 2015, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the IRS and the Justice Department had illegally discriminated against a U.S. charity because of its pro-Israel views.

9) After Nidal Malik Hasan shouted “Allahu Akbar!” and murdered 13 people on U.S. soil, instead of referring to it as “Islamic terrorism,” Obama said that it was “workplace violence.”

10) Mohamed Elibiary is a member of the Department of Homeland Security Advisory Council. In October 2013, a Twitter user asked him:

“show me just ONE example of an Islamic country where non Muslims are treated with equality.”

Elibiary responded by Tweeting:

“America and yes I do consider the United States of America an Islamic country with an Islamically compliant constitution. Move On!”

11) Although the Fort Hood shooter, the shoe bomber, and underwear bomber, and 100% of the 9-11 terrorists were all radical Muslims, the Obama administration enacted a ban on associating terrorism with radical Islam during training exercises of anti-terrrorism agents.

12) In January 2014, Commander-in-Chief Obama began allowing U.S. soldiers to wear Islamic beards, turbans, and hijabs as part of their military uniform.

13) In June 2014, Commander-in-Chief Obama banned Bibles but forced U.S. soldiers to adhere to Ramadan rules.

14) In September 2014, Obama said the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant “is not Islamic.”

15) When Muhammad, the prophet of Islam, was 53 years old, he raped a girl who was either nine or ten years old at the time.

However, in September 2012, Obama said:

“The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.”

16) In 2009, Obama said:

“My job is to communicate to the American people that the Muslim world is filled with extraordinary people who simply want to live their lives and see their children live better lives.”

However, there is nothing in the U.S. Constitution which says that that is part of the President’s job.

17) In January 2015, an Islamic terrorist named Ahmedy Coulibaly murdered four Jews at Hyper Cacher, a kosher supermarket in France.

The Jerusalem Post reported:

"Coulibaly called a French TV station from the kosher supermarket and said he was an al-Qaida terrorist and that he chose the kosher supermarket because he wanted to kill Jews."

However, Obama said the murders were “random.”

18) In July 2010, Charles Bolden, the administrator of NASA, said that Obama had told him that the primary purpose of NASA was “to reach out to the Muslim world.”

Although I can't prove that Obama actually said this, I can't think of any reason why Bolden would lie about it. Given Obama's behavior in so many other instances, I am inclined to think that Bolden was probably telling the truth.

19) In September 2012, the Obama administration phoned YouTube to complain about an anti-Muslim video.

Ben Wizner of the ACLU said that of this:

“It does make us nervous when the government throws its weight behind any requests for censorship.”

Eva Galperin of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said of this:

“I am actually kind of distressed by this… Even though there are all these great quotes from inside the White House saying they support free speech….by calling YouTube from the White House, they were sending a message no matter how much they say we don’t want them to take it down, when the White House calls and asks you to review it, it sends a message and has a certain chilling effect.”

20) In June 2013, Rasmussen conducted a poll to find out what people considered to be the “nation’s top terror threat.” Reporting on the results of the poll, Rasmussen wrote:

“Among those who Strongly Approve of the president, more fear the Tea Party than radical Muslims.”

21) In May 2013, the Obama administration sued Star Transport, Inc., a trucking company based in Morton, Illinois, because it fired Muslim truck drivers who had refused to drive trucks that were carrying alcoholic beverages.

22) The Muslim Brotherhood is a terrorist organization. In April 2012, the Obama administration allowed members of the Muslim Brotherhood to skip TSA screening.

Meanwhile, the Obama administration gave a very invasive patdown to a three-year-old boy in a wheelchair, which caused the boy to tremble in fear. The Obama administration gave an aggressive patdown to a seven-year-old girl with cerebral palsy. The Obama administration said that a four-year-old girl was a “high security threat.” The Obama administration placed an 18-month-old girl on its no fly list. The Obama administration gave a patdown to Henry Kissinger. The Obama administration forced a 95-year-old cancer patient to remove her adult diaper and fly without it. The Obama administration ripped open the urostomy bag of a 61-year-old bladder cancer survivor, and forced him to fly covered in his own urine. The Obama administration harassed a sick 3-year-old boy, and caused him to miss his flight.

23) Sheikh Mohammad Rateb al-Nabulsi is a Muslim preacher from Syria who has called for homosexuals to be executed. In March 2014, Obama gave him a visa so he could spread his message to mosques in 17 U.S. cities.

24) In June 2009, Obama said:

“If you actually took the number of Muslim Americans, we’d be one of the largest Muslim countries in the world.”

However, at the time Obama made his statement, there were 57 countries that had more Muslims than the U.S.

25) In June 2009, Obama said there were

“nearly 7 million American Muslims in our country”

However, in June 2009, PolitiFact wrote:

"We are using numbers from the CIA Online World Factbook, a highly regarded government source for global statistics. It’s updated twice a month, and we’re relying on the latest version. By the World Factbook’s count, Muslims in the United States make up about 0.6 percent of the population. That’s around 1.8 million."

26) The Obama administration used taxpayers’ money to refurbish Muslim mosques in other countries.

27) Obama misquoted the Quran to give the false impression that it did not support murder.

28) In June 2011, Obama asked a Jewish singing group to remove its video from the internet.

29) In November 2014, after Palestinian terrorists murdered four Jews at a synagogue in Jerusalem, Obama said, “too many Palestinians have died.”

no shit?
Deadman31 is offline  
Old 07-15-15, 11:26 AM
  #252  
DVD Talk Hero
 
JasonF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 39,114
Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?

No -- shit.

Let's look at grundle's #29, partly beause it caught my eye (it's at the bottom of his list), and partly because he links to a reputable source (The Washington Post).

So I followed grundle's link -- the one he reports as saying that Obama said "too many Palestinians have died."

Here's the full quote:

"Too many Israelis have died; too many Palestinians have died. At this difficult time I think it's important for both Palestinians and Israelis to try to work together to lower tensions and reject violence."

Very different from what grundle presents.

Most of the rest of grundle's links are to disreputable right-wing muckraking websites that take things out of context in order to gin up outrage among the gullible.
JasonF is offline  
Old 07-15-15, 12:04 PM
  #253  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Ky-Fi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Cape Ann, Massachusetts
Posts: 10,921
Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?

Well on one hand, you've got to give Obama credit. He's making some very impressive strides in bringing the Arabs and Israelis together.
Ky-Fi is offline  
Old 07-15-15, 12:12 PM
  #254  
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: In mourning
Posts: 26,218
Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?

Mod Note:

I am inclined to remove the off topic, and offensive, posts to their own thread, but will refrain for now.

In the meantime, please stop from the really off topic discussion of President Obama lies and his potential happiness with the extermination of Israel.

grundle,

If you want to continue to line of "discussion", (and I use that word as lightly as possible), do so in another thread. However, discontinue taking things wholly out of context, especially when used to validate something as disgusting as the suggestion that the President of the United States would be happy with another nation being attacked with nuclear weapons. Stop it.
Pharoh is offline  
Old 07-15-15, 12:19 PM
  #255  
DVD Talk Godfather
 
DVD Polizei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 52,178
Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?

Originally Posted by JasonF View Post
No -- shit.

Let's look at grundle's #29, partly beause it caught my eye (it's at the bottom of his list), and partly because he links to a reputable source (The Washington Post).

So I followed grundle's link -- the one he reports as saying that Obama said "too many Palestinians have died."

Here's the full quote:

"Too many Israelis have died; too many Palestinians have died. At this difficult time I think it's important for both Palestinians and Israelis to try to work together to lower tensions and reject violence."

Very different from what grundle presents.

Most of the rest of grundle's links are to disreputable right-wing muckraking websites that take things out of context in order to gin up outrage among the gullible.
Didn't notice the mod note, but I'll bring this around if that's ok, Pharoh.

Hold on a second here, JasonF.

How many Palestinians worshiped at the Jerusalem synagogue.

Why would Obama even make a statement like that when it wasn't Palestinians who got killed, and when few would even worship at a Jewish Synagogue. That's the point. He's re-directing, and minimizing the attack, while if a Palestinian attack from Israeli soldiers happened...he would criticize Israel.

You wanna talk about inciting hatred and creating controversy, Obama loves to put himself right in the middle of it. He has a history of it, and he won't come out and say things so it's obvious.

He did it with Trayvon, Brown, Gray, etc., but then doesn't say a fucking word to a white woman being killed by a minority in San Fran. Complete fucking silence from Washington.

Believe what you want. Obama is not about peace. He loves to plant little seeds of distrust between cultures and different ethnic backgrounds of people.

---

So with Iran, Obama is doing this again. He's stomping around in Israel's backyard--on purpose--creating a deal that makes everyone less safe. Even Saudi Arabia doesn't like it.

Obama knows he can't send Eric Holder to Israel and place fines on them and put Mossad under Federal Control, like they did in Ferguson and the rest of the US (it could be argued now). Israel thinks the Obama Administration is a joke and has said as much (and justifiably so--Kerry is an idiot. Knows nothing about foreign relations).

So what does Obama do in response?

Simple.

To irritate Israel, he makes a deal with Iran. This will not help fight ISIS. This will not help policy between Israel and The Palestinians. And this deal will certainly not help tensions in the Middle East.

Time will tell. Obama loves to DIVIDE PEOPLE, not UNITE THEM.

Last edited by DVD Polizei; 07-15-15 at 12:36 PM.
DVD Polizei is offline  
Old 07-15-15, 12:21 PM
  #256  
DVD Talk Ruler
 
General Zod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Santa Clarita, CA
Posts: 21,170
Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?

Originally Posted by Pharoh View Post
In the meantime, please stop from the really off topic discussion of President Obama lies
If it's in regards to his lying about how good this "deal" is it's completely on topic - would you not agree?
General Zod is offline  
Old 07-15-15, 12:41 PM
  #257  
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?

Originally Posted by General Zod View Post
If it's in regards to his lying about how good this "deal" is it's completely on topic - would you not agree?
I would agree.
classicman2 is offline  
Old 07-15-15, 12:41 PM
  #258  
DVD Talk Legend
 
wishbone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 20,580
re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread



Bremmer and other observers believe that the administration is willing to take a bet — even if it loses — that Iran will become more open to the West.

The reasons? Obama and his team want a foreign-policy win, a legacy item, and a reward for putting in the effort they have. And if the deal falls apart, it will be immensely difficult to maintain the biting levels of sanctions of the past decade, especially given the dispositions of China and Russia. Furthermore, the US is slowly becoming less aligned with Israel and Saudi Arabia while also becoming less dependent on Middle East oil.

And then there's the prospect of a more open Iran.

That "is the most uncertain of the reasons precisely because it's destabilizing for the mullahs, and they're very much aware of that," geopolitical expert Ian Bremmer, the president of Eurasia Group, previously told Business Insider. "But Iran is much more likely to open given an end of sanctions, [foreign direct investment] coming in, the diaspora community traveling, and the rest than if the deal falls apart.

"If it turns out Iran maintains its present orientation in the international environment," Bremmer said, "all the other reasons supporting a deal still hold."
http://www.businessinsider.com/a-qui...ar-deal-2015-7

Apparently this what we were negotiating at the start of this year.
The main components of the agreement, according to the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies, would look something like this:

- The 9,500 centrifuges now currently operating would be cut to about 6,000–7,000.
- All other centrifuges, including the 9,000 that are installed but not operating, would be placed in secure domestic storage under the seal of the IAEA.
- Iran’s 8,000kg stockpile of LEU would be substantially reduced by exporting much of it to Russia and by converting some of it into oxide. This is crucial: the more LEU Iran has to ship out the fewer centrifuges it will need to give up.
- Changes to the cascade configuration of the remaining centrifuges would be made that would impede production of highly enriched uranium (HEU)—the weapons-grade stuff. Although such changes can be reversed, it would take time to do and would signal Iran was breaking other commitments.
- There would also be changes to the design of the Arak heavy water reactor to ensure it can produce no more than 1kg of plutonium a month, rather than the 8kg it has been designed to do (plutonium offers a another route to a nuclear weapon).
- The full range of restraint measures would remain in force for ten years, after which there would be a staged relaxation. However, some restraints would last for 20 years or more.
http://www.economist.com/blogs/democ...erica-and-iran
wishbone is online now  
Old 07-15-15, 01:11 PM
  #259  
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

I bet Hillary wishes the 'agreement' hadn't occurred at this inopportune moment.
classicman2 is offline  
Old 07-15-15, 01:18 PM
  #260  
DVD Talk Hero
 
CRM114's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 42,726
Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?

Originally Posted by grundle View Post
In 1995, when Obama was running for state senator in Illinois, Obama held a fundraiser in the living room of Bill Ayers’s home.
Regardless of his past transgressions, all charges were dropped and Ayers went on to become a member of polite society.

"William C. Ibershof, formerly the lead federal prosecutor in the Weather Underground case, wrote in 2008: "Although I dearly wanted to obtain convictions against all the Weathermen, including Bill Ayers, I am very pleased to learn that he has become a responsible citizen."

"He is a retired professor in the College of Education at the University of Illinois at Chicago, formerly holding the titles of Distinguished Professor of Education and Senior University Scholar."

"Wall Street Journal columnist Thomas Frank praised Ayers as a "model citizen" and a scholar whose "work is esteemed by colleagues of different political viewpoints."[71] Studs Terkel called Ayers' memoir "a deeply moving elegy to all those young dreamers who tried to live decently in an indecent world."

Wikipedia
CRM114 is offline  
Old 07-15-15, 01:20 PM
  #261  
DVD Talk Hero
 
CRM114's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 42,726
Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?

Originally Posted by classicman2 View Post


I wonder how Hillary will campaign on this issue? I can't believe that she will be in support of this deal.
Originally Posted by Hillary Clinton
"I support this agreement because I believe it is the most effective path of all the alternatives available to the U.S. and our partners to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon."
Admit it, you don't like the deal because Obama crafted it.

Last edited by CRM114; 07-15-15 at 01:25 PM.
CRM114 is offline  
Old 07-15-15, 04:04 PM
  #262  
DVD Talk Hero
 
slop101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: So. Cal.
Posts: 38,792
re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

Could you imagine if Obama had been secretly selling arms to Iran this whole time - the GOP would lose their shit!

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/R67CH-qhXJs" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
slop101 is offline  
Old 07-15-15, 04:06 PM
  #263  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Why So Blu?'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 29,198
re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

Originally Posted by slop101 View Post
Could you imagine if Obama had been secretly selling arms to Iran this whole time - the GOP would lose their shit!

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/R67CH-qhXJs" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Can you imagine if Obama granted blanket Amnesty to 6 million illegal immigrants?
Why So Blu? is offline  
Old 07-15-15, 04:19 PM
  #264  
DVD Talk Godfather
 
DVD Polizei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 52,178
re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

Making a statement (with pics, too!) that Republicans did it...and therefore Democrats should as well...is a rather interesting presentation.

I thought the point of Democrats was to not be like Republicans.

Guess I was wrong on that one. Carry on, Democrats!
DVD Polizei is offline  
Old 07-15-15, 04:54 PM
  #265  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 11,747
re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

Originally Posted by slop101 View Post
Could you imagine if Obama had been secretly selling arms to Iran this whole time - the GOP would lose their shit!
Yes, yes, and meanwhile the Dems would be applauding it as a brilliant, visionary move that will empower Iranian moderates.

Okay, now that we've established that partisans behave in a partisan manner, could we discuss the deal on its merits?
dork is offline  
Old 07-15-15, 05:02 PM
  #266  
DVD Talk Hero
 
slop101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: So. Cal.
Posts: 38,792
re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

Originally Posted by DVD Polizei View Post
Making a statement (with pics, too!) that Republicans did it...and therefore Democrats should as well...is a rather interesting presentation.

I thought the point of Democrats was to not be like Republicans.

Guess I was wrong on that one. Carry on, Democrats!
Um, no. My point is that Obama's being raked through the coals by the GOP for something that's nowhere near as bad as what Saint Reagan did. If you think I'm saying Obama should do what Reagan did, you've completely misunderstood my point, and/or building a straw-man.
slop101 is offline  
Old 07-15-15, 05:23 PM
  #267  
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?

Originally Posted by CRM114 View Post
Admit it, you don't like the deal because Obama crafted it.
I don't care who crafted it - it's a bad deal.

I suspect the GOP controlled Senate will take up the matter.
classicman2 is offline  
Old 07-15-15, 06:49 PM
  #268  
DVD Talk Ruler
 
General Zod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Santa Clarita, CA
Posts: 21,170
Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?

Originally Posted by CRM114 View Post
Admit it, you don't like the deal because Obama crafted it.
Honestly I think if Obama had been at the table himself.. this deal would not have been like this. I said Obama shouldn't be lying about how good a deal this is (because it isn't) but I never said it's what he wanted. In fact even Obama a month ago said he'd walk away from a deal like this. I think this was the best Kerry could get so they are trying to polish this turd all they can.
General Zod is offline  
Old 07-15-15, 07:35 PM
  #269  
DVD Talk Hero
 
JasonF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 39,114
re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

Originally Posted by dork View Post
Okay, now that we've established that partisans behave in a partisan manner, could we discuss the deal on its merits?
The history of this forum would suggest we can't.
JasonF is offline  
Old 07-15-15, 07:55 PM
  #270  
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: In mourning
Posts: 26,218
re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

Originally Posted by slop101 View Post
Um, no. My point is that Obama's being raked through the coals by the GOP for something that's nowhere near as bad as what Saint Reagan did. If you think I'm saying Obama should do what Reagan did, you've completely misunderstood my point, and/or building a straw-man.
I would say it is a matter of opinion which is worse. I don't think they are close, giving the long term constitutional and security implications of this deal.



I do though like the twin straw man arguments being put forward by the administration and all those who parrot their talking points. The first that it was this deal or nothing. The second, that those who are opposing the deal are doing so out of complete ignorance or due to extreme bellicosity.
Pharoh is offline  
Old 07-15-15, 09:16 PM
  #271  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Sean O'Hara's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Vichy America
Posts: 13,535
re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

Originally Posted by Pharoh View Post
I do though like the twin straw man arguments being put forward by the administration and all those who parrot their talking points. The first that it was this deal or nothing.
What's the third option, though? Bomb Iran?
Sean O'Hara is offline  
Old 07-15-15, 09:43 PM
  #272  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Ghostbuster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 3,700
re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

Originally Posted by Pharoh View Post
I would say it is a matter of opinion which is worse. I don't think they are close, giving the long term constitutional and security implications of this deal.
What are the long-term implications of this deal? What is the likelihood that your prediction will be correct?
Ghostbuster is offline  
Old 07-15-15, 11:14 PM
  #273  
DVD Talk Hero
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 29,143
Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?

Originally Posted by DVD Polizei View Post
So what does Obama do in response?

Simple.

To irritate Israel, he makes a deal with Iran.
Considering that Bibi has tried to embarrass the US admin every chance he got that's hilarious. It's like US conservatives believe Bibi is their President and they want him to run US foreign policy in the Middle East...

You woudn't tolerate such behavior from any other head of state, but because it's Israel, oh well... it's fine! It's fascinating, and not in a good way...
eXcentris is offline  
Old 07-15-15, 11:30 PM
  #274  
Political Exile
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,017
Re: Attack on Iran nuclear facilities "imminent"?

Originally Posted by Pharoh View Post
Mod Note:

I am inclined to remove the off topic, and offensive, posts to their own thread, but will refrain for now.

In the meantime, please stop from the really off topic discussion of President Obama lies and his potential happiness with the extermination of Israel.

grundle,

If you want to continue to line of "discussion", (and I use that word as lightly as possible), do so in another thread. However, discontinue taking things wholly out of context, especially when used to validate something as disgusting as the suggestion that the President of the United States would be happy with another nation being attacked with nuclear weapons. Stop it.

I don't think my statements were offensive, but I will respect your wishes as a moderator.

I hope it is OK with you if I respond to the people who took the time to read my list and comment on it.
.

Originally Posted by General Zod View Post
If it's in regards to his lying about how good this "deal" is it's completely on topic - would you not agree?

Thank you.

.

Originally Posted by classicman2 View Post
I would agree.

Thank you.

.


Originally Posted by JasonF View Post
No -- shit.

Let's look at grundle's #29, partly beause it caught my eye (it's at the bottom of his list), and partly because he links to a reputable source (The Washington Post).

So I followed grundle's link -- the one he reports as saying that Obama said "too many Palestinians have died."

Here's the full quote:

"Too many Israelis have died; too many Palestinians have died. At this difficult time I think it's important for both Palestinians and Israelis to try to work together to lower tensions and reject violence."

Very different from what grundle presents.

Most of the rest of grundle's links are to disreputable right-wing muckraking websites that take things out of context in order to gin up outrage among the gullible.

I think it's accurate, and on topic, to point out that Obama released the "Taliban five" terrorists without giving the legally required 30 day notification.

I also think it's accurate, and on topic, to point out that Obama favored releasing a terrorist who had been convicted of murdering 270 people.

In the particular incident that you cited from my list, the only people who were killed were Jews.

.

Originally Posted by CRM114 View Post
Regardless of his past transgressions, all charges were dropped and Ayers went on to become a member of polite society.

"William C. Ibershof, formerly the lead federal prosecutor in the Weather Underground case, wrote in 2008: "Although I dearly wanted to obtain convictions against all the Weathermen, including Bill Ayers, I am very pleased to learn that he has become a responsible citizen."

"He is a retired professor in the College of Education at the University of Illinois at Chicago, formerly holding the titles of Distinguished Professor of Education and Senior University Scholar."

"Wall Street Journal columnist Thomas Frank praised Ayers as a "model citizen" and a scholar whose "work is esteemed by colleagues of different political viewpoints."[71] Studs Terkel called Ayers' memoir "a deeply moving elegy to all those young dreamers who tried to live decently in an indecent world."

Wikipedia

I think this one is on topic.

The charges were dropped because the police did not have a warrant when they obtained the info, not because Ayers was innocent.

The fact that Ayers has been a model citizen since he did those things does not change the fact that those things were reprehensible.

.

Originally Posted by DVD Polizei View Post
Didn't notice the mod note, but I'll bring this around if that's ok, Pharoh.

Hold on a second here, JasonF.

How many Palestinians worshiped at the Jerusalem synagogue.

Why would Obama even make a statement like that when it wasn't Palestinians who got killed, and when few would even worship at a Jewish Synagogue. That's the point. He's re-directing, and minimizing the attack, while if a Palestinian attack from Israeli soldiers happened...he would criticize Israel.

You wanna talk about inciting hatred and creating controversy, Obama loves to put himself right in the middle of it. He has a history of it, and he won't come out and say things so it's obvious.

He did it with Trayvon, Brown, Gray, etc., but then doesn't say a fucking word to a white woman being killed by a minority in San Fran. Complete fucking silence from Washington.

Believe what you want. Obama is not about peace. He loves to plant little seeds of distrust between cultures and different ethnic backgrounds of people.

Thank you.

Last edited by grundle; 07-15-15 at 11:36 PM.
grundle is offline  
Old 07-15-15, 11:45 PM
  #275  
DVD Talk Hero
 
slop101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: So. Cal.
Posts: 38,792
re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

I swear to god, if Obama cured cancer tomorrow, you and the wing-nuts would say that he's putting oncologists out of work...

How sad it must be for these people to walk through life every day knowing that Obama is president and Hillary will probably be the next President. And just imagine, no matter how many comments and articles they write about it online, it does nothing. No effect at all.
slop101 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.