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

USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

Old 07-30-15, 08:58 AM
  #351  
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
Re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

Originally Posted by CRM114 View Post
It will be impossible for Iran to build a nuclear weapon over the next 10 years? That puts a damper on nuclear war, don't you think?
Why is it impossible?
classicman2 is offline  
Old 07-30-15, 10:01 AM
  #352  
Psi
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Psi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Texas
Posts: 8,959
Re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

Originally Posted by The Bus View Post
Why read <i>Foreign Policy</i> when I can just read this thread?
That's right

Such a panel of illustrious commentators we have!
Psi is offline  
Old 07-30-15, 01:51 PM
  #353  
DVD Talk Legend
 
spainlinx0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: NJ
Posts: 14,606
Re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

Originally Posted by JasonF View Post
Yes, let's assume the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff isn't a dumbass. How generous of you.

Maybe if the man applies himself, he could someday know as much about international relations as a cop who spends his free time trolling a DVD message board.
I believe he's a cop apologist, but not a cop.
spainlinx0 is offline  
Old 07-30-15, 08:10 PM
  #354  
DVD Talk Hero
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 29,313
Re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

Originally Posted by DVD Polizei View Post
Dempsey probably doesn't even know what the deal encompasses
Oh the irony...

I'm still waiting to hear intelligent, specific, detailed arguments from those against this deal. You know, something that goes beyond "but Obama!!!".
eXcentris is offline  
Old 07-30-15, 08:18 PM
  #355  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 52,192
Re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

Other than Iranian officials straddling nuclear weapons and pointing them at Israel, what do you want?

Even then you'd probably still want more evidence.

Russia sells weapons to Iran. Who's money is now going to be used for these transactions.

Put in loves this deal.

Waiting for the "Reagan did it!" response.
DVD Polizei is offline  
Old 07-30-15, 08:24 PM
  #356  
DVD Talk Hero
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 29,313
Re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

And... there you have it. As I expected, DVD Polizei has no clue whatsoever as to what is in this deal.
eXcentris is offline  
Old 07-30-15, 08:57 PM
  #357  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Troy Stiffler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Under an I-10 Overpass
Posts: 21,105
Re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

Originally Posted by classicman2 View Post
Why is it impossible?
Not enough equipment. Not enough raw materials. Of course, they can lie about it. Anyone can lie about it. There could be a warehouse in Phoenix somewhere building nukes right now.

The biggest opposition is in the form of paranoid speculation. On the other side, you have the optimists with a treaty. It's the same paranoia where Obama takes our guns. Obama is going to take over Texas this month. Or 9/11 truthers. Or any of the other inane arguments that have been created and validated by the media. The idea that those sneaky Iranians are going to two-time us, smuggle uranium, plutonium, and 15000 centrifuges (or manufacture in-house), and start stockpiling nuclear weapons. And that they're not using their program for energy infrastructure (nuclear power).

The voice of nonsense far worse now than I've ever known it. The 2000-2008 era of truthers and other neo-con conspiracies is nowhere near as organized and loud as the nonsense we're experiencing right now. I've written before, that I think this has something to do with the internet becoming more widely used (and the less intelligent were the last to get online). There is nothing this administration can do to satisfy these people. And Obama is doing the right thing by not responding and validating these people. Republicans are instigating, provoking and reacting the way their voters want them to. The big joke is that we're hurting ourselves far more than any foreign policy. The divide and resulting poor productivity is worse than ever.
Troy Stiffler is offline  
Old 07-30-15, 09:10 PM
  #358  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Troy Stiffler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Under an I-10 Overpass
Posts: 21,105
Re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

Here's a nifty chart from CNN's website.



The idea of using nuclear weapons on each other is absurd. Especially from a place like Iran. If Iran were to launch on anyone, Iran will be a crater.
Troy Stiffler is offline  
Old 07-30-15, 09:16 PM
  #359  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Troy Stiffler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Under an I-10 Overpass
Posts: 21,105
Re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

Some more infographs (from that sneaky White House, who is secretly starting an nuclear arms race, by the way ... they're all coming for me *paranoid tick*).









Troy Stiffler is offline  
Old 07-30-15, 09:27 PM
  #360  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Troy Stiffler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Under an I-10 Overpass
Posts: 21,105
Re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

I have a trade question that I don't quite understand... So "sanctions" are lifted. When does that take effect? Does that mean I can start doing normal business exports to Iran (just as thought it were the UK)? Before, I believe you had to be setup with a third party in UAE to perform such a transaction.

I know we're probably won't see "Made in Iran" products anytime soon. But it makes me happy that the people and businesses of Iran can buy-and-sell at will with the international community. Living without that freedom must be terrible.
Troy Stiffler is offline  
Old 07-30-15, 10:19 PM
  #361  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Ghostbuster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 3,737
Re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

Originally Posted by Troy Stiffler View Post
Here's a nifty chart from CNN's website.



The idea of using nuclear weapons on each other is absurd. Especially from a place like Iran. If Iran were to launch on anyone, Iran will be a crater.
Standing in the way of rapid, nearly complete nuclear disarmament should be considered a crime against humanity. The leaders of many nations, the US and Russia in particular, are grossly negligent. I'm unable to put into words the level of contempt I have for leaders who oppose disarmament.

Most modern Republicans, of course, do not emphasize disarmament. They talk a lot about Reagan and projecting strength, even though Reagan was in favor of COMPLETE global disarmament. See the collection of Reagan quotes below.

Ronald Reagan, Republicans, and Nuclear Weapons at HuffingtonPost.com

Perhaps the most audacious whopper is that of many Republican candidates who claim the legacy of President Ronald Reagan and do not espouse his policies. In order to set the record straight, and in the hopes that some Republicans will indeed take up the Reagan mantle, or that some "mainstream" media will challenge candidates who claim Reagan as their model, I have gathered some quotes of his on the abolition of nuclear weapons. It should be clear that he was not just concerned that bad people or countries should have the weapon, but that the weapon itself is bad.
"We seek the total elimination one day of nuclear weapons from the face of the Earth." -- Ronald Reagan, Inaugural Address, 1985

"Our moral imperative is to work with all our powers for that day when the children of the world grow up without the fear of nuclear war." -- Ronald Reagan, from "Reagan's Secret War" by Martin and Annelise Anderson

"A nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought. The only value in our two nations possessing nuclear weapons is to make sure they will never be used. But then would it not be better to do away with them entirely?" -- Ronald Reagan, 1984 State of the Union

"I know that there are a great many people who are pointing to the unimaginable horror of nuclear war... To those who protest against nuclear war, I can only say, 'I'm with you.'" Lettow also quotes Reagan as stating, "My dream is to see the day when nuclear weapons will be banished from the face of the Earth." -- Ronald Reagan, from "Ronald Reagan and His Quest to Abolish Weapons," by Paul Lettow

"I can't believe that this world can go on beyond our generation and on down to succeeding generations with this kind of weapon on both sides poised at each other without someday, some fool, or some maniac, or some accident triggering the kind of war that is the end of the line for all of us. And I just think of what a sigh of relief would go up from everyone on this Earth if someday-- and this is what I have-- my hope, way in the back of my head-- is that if we start down the road to reduction, maybe one day in doing that, somebody will say, 'Why not all the way? Let's get rid of all these things'." -- Ronald Reagan, May 16, 1983

"My central arms control objective has been to reduce substantially and ultimately to eliminate nuclear weapons and rid the world of the nuclear threat. The prevention of the spread of nuclear explosives is to additional countries is an indispensable part of our efforts to meet this objective. I intend to continue my pursuit of this goal with untiring determination and a profound sense of personal commitment." -- Ronald Reagan, March 25, 1988, Message to Congress on the NPT

"It is my fervent goal and hope... that we will someday no longer have to rely on nuclear weapons to deter aggression and assure world peace. To that end the United States is now engaged in a serious and sustained effort to negotiate major reductions in levels of offensive nuclear weapons with the ultimate goal of eliminating these weapons from the face of the earth." -- Ronald Reagan, Oct. 20, 1986

Ronald Reagan once said that nuclear weapons were "totally irrational, totally inhumane, good for nothing but killing, possibly destructive of life on earth and civilization." -- Ronald Reagan as quoted by "A World Free of Nuclear Weapons," By George P. Shultz, William J. Perry, Henry A. Kissinger and Sam Nunn

"Most of the people have been hearing in political dialog from one side, since we've been here in the three-and-a-half years, that I somehow have an itchy finger and am going to blow up the world. And that has all been duly reported by so many of you that that is the tone that the people have been getting. And it doesn't do me any good to tell you that, having seen four wars in my lifetime, I don't know of anyone, in or out of government, that is more determinedly seeking peace than I am. And my goal is the total elimination of nuclear weapons. If we can get those fellows back to the table and get them to start down that road of mutual reduction, then they might find out what common sense it would mean to eliminate them." -- Ronald Reagan, Press Conference, May 22, 1984

"As I have indicated in previous statements to the Congress, my central arms control objective has been to reduce substantially and ultimately to eliminate nuclear weapons and rid the world of the nuclear threat. The prevention of the spread of nuclear explosives to additional countries is an indispensable part of our efforts to meet this objective. I intend to continue my pursuit of this goal with untiring determination and a profound sense of personal commitment." -- Ronald Reagan, March 25, 1988

"For the eight years I was president I never let my dream of a nuclear-free world fade from my mind." -- Ronald Reagan's memoirs, "An American Life"
Ghostbuster is offline  
Old 07-30-15, 10:52 PM
  #362  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 52,192
Re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

Originally Posted by JasonF View Post
Yes, let's assume the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff isn't a dumbass. How generous of you.

Maybe if the man applies himself, he could someday know as much about international relations as a cop who spends his free time trolling a DVD message board.
Yes, let's assume John Kerry is the Great Peacemaker and knows all about foreign relations. Let's also assume Obama Knows Best, and why skirt a legal system (running directly to the UN to get approval) to get a fair representation of how voters and their representatives feel about the issue.

Yeah, that's completely normal.

I'm also not talking about how General Dempsey was. It's who he is NOW. Just like John McCain. Who are these people NOW. What are they doing for Americans, TODAY.

If Dempsey isn't what I described as...then maybe he's a coward.

Which is it.

Either he's completely incompetent in his position or he's just going along with flow, afraid of the chain of command.

I don't know which is worse, given his military position.

What I do recall, is Dempsey referring to our military as almost (if not now) incapable of an actual war as our military is just not what it used to be.

Ok, let's assume that. If he and those around him just sit around, watching everything go to shit (like refusing to respond to a basic rescue like we had in Libya)...and when a group like ISIS finally gets such a strong hold in the Middle East, and launches intelligent strikes in the US, who is going to be responsible for this?

Dempsey is no Patton.

He is so far from being a General Norman Schwarzkopf, Jr.

Dempsey lacks planning, it's rather apparent, and he just blames his failure on excuses such as "they wouldn't get their in time." It's his job to get the shit together.

What the fuck is the US going to do if we have another 9/11? I can only imagine the blame games by people like Dempsey and Obama, and Kerry. Obama will blame all the police departments in the US for not responding appropriately and Dempsey will blame the failure on soldiers not having enough training (so why send them to fight?).

Fucking shame.
DVD Polizei is offline  
Old 07-31-15, 06:45 AM
  #363  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: MA
Posts: 5,904
Re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

It just feels like the Middle East is constantly playing us for fools. I don't think Iran would ever nuke Israel. I think it's more likely they are in bed together.
Deadman31 is offline  
Old 08-03-15, 07:10 PM
  #364  
DVD Talk Hero
 
slop101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: So. Cal.
Posts: 39,062
Re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

I don't even care if someone trusts Slate or not, just reading the transcript from these hearings ought to convince a sane, reasonable American that Ted Cruz has no business being an elected representative.

Not Fit to Lead

The Iran hearings have shown how the Republican Party can no longer be trusted with the presidency.


If Republicans win the White House next year, they’ll almost certainly control the entire federal government. Many of them, running for president or aspiring to leadership roles in Congress, are trying to block the nuclear deal with Iran. This would be a good time for these leaders to show that they’re ready for the responsibilities of national security and foreign policy. Instead, they’re showing the opposite. Over the past several days, congressional hearings on the deal have become a spectacle of dishonesty, incomprehension, and inability to cope with the challenges of a multilateral world.

When the hearings began more than a week ago, I was planning to write about the testimony of Secretary of State John Kerry and Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz. But the more I watched, the more I saw that the danger in the room wasn’t coming from the deal or its administration proponents. It was coming from the interrogators. In challenging Kerry and Moniz, Republican senators and representatives offered no serious alternative. They misrepresented testimony, dismissed contrary evidence, and substituted vitriol for analysis. They seemed baffled by the idea of having to work and negotiate with other countries. I came away from the hearings dismayed by what the GOP has become in the Obama era. It seems utterly unprepared to govern.

If you didn’t have time to watch the 11 hours of hearings conducted on July 23, July 28, and July 29, consider yourself lucky. Here are the lowlights of what you missed.

1. North Korea. In all three hearings, Kerry explained how the inspection and verification measures in the Iran deal are designed to rectify flaws that led to the failure of the North Korean nuclear agreement. He spent much of his opening statement outlining these differences. This made no impression. When the Senate held its next hearing a week later, Sen. John McCain of Arizona, the presiding Republican, dismissed the Iran agreement with a quip: “How did that North Korean deal work out for you?”

2. Israel. As evidence that the Iran deal is bad, Republicans point to criticism from Israel. But they seem more interested in the rhetoric of Israeli politicians than in the judgments of Israeli security experts. At the July 23 hearing, Kerry read from an article that quoted supportive statements about the deal from the former leaders of two Israeli intelligence agencies. Republicans batted the quotes away. Sen. John Barrasso of Wyoming scoffed, “That wasn’t even in the newspaper. That was a blog post.” Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina dismissed the statements as irrelevant because they didn’t come from elected officials. Why listen to experts when you can rely instead on quotes from politicians?

3. The IAEA’s “secret deal.” Kerry and Moniz have repeatedly explained that the International Atomic Energy Agency, which enforces nuclear conduct agreements, publicly evaluates each country’s compliance but keeps some details about inspection logistics private. The IAEA briefs other governments about its procedures but doesn’t give them the logistical documents. Republicans, having shrugged at this policy for decades, are suddenly outraged. Many of them seem to think the Obama administration is colluding with Iran and the IAEA. They claim that Susan Rice, Obama’s national security adviser, has seen the IAEA’s Iran documents but won’t show them to Congress. In the House hearing on Tuesday, Rep. Ted Poe of Texas asserted that Rice “said that she has seen this deal with the IAEA.” Kerry corrected him: “Susan Rice’s quote is, ‘We know their contents, and we’re satisfied with them. We will share the contents of those briefings in full and classified sessions with Congress.’ She has not seen them. She has been briefed on them.”

Kerry’s clarification should have settled the matter. But it didn’t. The next day, Sen. Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma grilled Kerry:

Inhofe: Secretary Rice [sic] said she has seen the deal with the IAEA. … Did you see it at the same time, or prior to the time, that Secretary Rice saw it?

Kerry: Senator, National Security Adviser Rice has not seen it.

Inhofe: Well she said she did yesterday ...

Kerry: No. She has been briefed on it. I had—I gave her exact quote to Congressman Poe. … She has been briefed on it but has not actually seen it.

Inhofe: OK, I will give you her quote and make sure it is in the record here. … “She said six days ago she had seen it and reviewed it, and that Congress will get to see it in a classified session.”

Kerry: Senator, you are quoting Congressman Poe, and—

Inhofe: Who is quoting her. This is quotation marks.

Republicans can be forgiven for misinterpreting Rice’s original statement. But why would they cling to that interpretation after being corrected? And why would they quote their own misinterpretations rather than what Rice said?

4. EMPs. In the July 23 Senate hearing, Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin asked Moniz about a 2008 commission report on EMPs, electromagnetic pulses, which could be triggered by nuclear detonations and could knock out the U.S. power grid. Moniz, the former chairman of MIT’s physics department, has spent his career working in nuclear science. He told Johnson that he was unfamiliar with the report but that “if you look at our Quadrennial Energy Review published in April, we do identify EMP as a risk to transformers, and we are beginning to try to work up a response to that.”

In the hearing on Wednesday, Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas used this exchange to portray Moniz as an idiot:

Cruz: You told the United States Senate you hadn’t read the congressionally mandated commission on EMPs and that you didn’t know what an EMP was.

Moniz: That is incorrect. I said I did not know this 2008 report recommendations. I said I was quite familiar with the issue, and we all know about EMPs from airburst nuclear weapons.

Cruz: Secretary, let me read the testimony verbatim so that I don’t mischaracterize you. … “Senator Johnson: ‘Are you familiar with the EMPs commission 2008 report?’ ‘No, I am not, sir.’ ‘You’re not? Do you know—do you know what an EMP is?’ ‘You’ll have to explain it to me, please.’ ” I find that stunning. …

Moniz: That was about the report. If you read further in the testimony, you will see my explicit statement. Of course I know about the issue.

Cruz: Do you agree that an EMP detonated by Iran in the atmosphere could kill tens of millions of Americans? …

Moniz: It depends upon the specifics. These are highly variable—

Cruz: Does that mean, yes, it could?

Moniz: I said it is highly variable in its—

Cruz: OK. You’re refusing to answer the question.

The most disturbing thing about this exchange isn’t Cruz’s obnoxiousness. It’s his intellectual confidence in the face of his own ignorance. He doesn’t know the slightest fraction of what Moniz knows about EMPs. Either Cruz doesn’t understand this difference between himself and Moniz, or he doesn’t care. He hasn’t even taken the trouble to read the full transcript. And when he’s given a complex scientific answer to a simplistic, politically crafted question, he rejects it. Can any thinking person, after reading this exchange, feel comfortable with Cruz as president?

5. Sanctions. Kerry uses the phrase snapback to describe how sanctions are automatically re-imposed if any permanent member of the U.N. Security Council (the United States, United Kingdom, France, China, or Russia) decides Iran has violated its obligations. At the Wednesday hearing, Sen. Dan Sullivan of Alaska berated Kerry for using this term, since, although the agreement outlines this procedure, it doesn’t literally include the word snapback. Sullivan also argued that the term was misleading because, in originally building the sanctions, it “took years to get countries to divest out of the Iranian economy. It’ll take years to do it again.” But Sullivan ignored the implication of his own argument: As Kerry has said all along, the unhappiness of our allies about having to enforce these sanctions, let alone China and Russia, is why the sanctions won’t last if we reject these countries’ terms for the deal.

6. Pariahs. Republicans accuse Kerry and Obama of isolating them by agreeing to terms that suit our allies but don’t suit Congress. In the July 23 hearing, Sen. Bob Corker of Tennessee told Kerry, “You have turned Iran from being a pariah to now Congress being a pariah.” Sen. James Risch of Idaho offered the same complaint: “These negotiations have taken us from a situation where we had Iran exactly where we wanted them to now, if we don’t go along with this, then we are going to be the isolated pariah character.”

These Republicans speak as though they don’t understand that the Iran talks involved seven countries. The obtuseness isn’t confined to backbenchers. Corker chairs the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Rep. Ed Royce, who protested at the Tuesday hearing that the deal gave Russia and China “a say in where inspectors can and cannot go,” chairs the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Do Republicans understand that international sanctions require international support and that when everyone else in the talks finds terms they can agree on, we can’t hold out for our own terms and expect sanctions to persist?

7. Bad guys. Republicans think that because Iran is dangerous, we shouldn’t negotiate with it. Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas, one of the most outspoken critics of any deal, has consistently hammered this point. At the House hearing, Rep. Randy Weber of Texas repeatedly used the phrase “bad actor” to dismiss Iran and the idea of negotiating with it. Rep. Dave Trott of Michigan invoked a motto from his business career: “You can’t do a good deal with a bad guy.”

Have any of these men heard of Ronald Reagan? The Soviet Union? Red China? Do they understand that bad guys are exactly the sorts of people you end up negotiating with, particularly over nuclear weapons?

8. Indifference. Republicans think it’s weak and softheaded to care what Iran thinks. At the Tuesday hearing, Rep. Scott Perry of Pennsylvania told Kerry we should demand a better deal, “and if the ayatollah doesn’t like it and doesn’t want to negotiate it, oh, ‘boo-hoo.’ We’re here for America.” Weber, speaking for others in his party, ridiculed Kerry’s concerns about Iranian distrust of the U.S.: “Me and my colleagues were up here thinking, ‘Who cares?’ ” When Kerry replied that the Iranians wouldn’t have negotiated on Weber’s terms, the congressman scoffed, “Oh, my heart pains for them.” These lawmakers don’t seem to understand that much of a negotiator’s job consists of understanding, caring about, and accommodating the other side’s concerns.

9. Winning. Graham is running for president as a foreign-policy expert. But three hours of testimony on Wednesday about the difficulties of using military force to stop Iran’s nuclear program taught him nothing. Wrapping up the hearing, Graham demanded that Defense Secretary Ashton Carter answer a simple question: “Who wins the war between us and Iran? Who wins? Do you have any doubt who wins?” When he didn’t get the prompt answer he wanted, Graham thunderously answered the question himself: “We win!” He sounded like a football coach delivering a pep talk. The differences between football and war—what “winning” means, and what it costs—didn’t enter into his equation.

10. Patriotism. You might think that Kerry’s service in Vietnam—a Silver Star, Bronze Star, and three Purple Hearts—would deter Republicans from challenging his patriotism. But you’d be wrong. At the House hearing, Rep. Lee Zeldin of New York lectured Kerry: “A lot of Americans have fought and died to make our country the greatest nation in the world. And you, sir, respectfully, you don’t have the power to surrender our greatness.” Cruz, who has never served a day in uniform, ended the Wednesday Senate hearing with this remarkable assault on the secretary of state:

Cruz: Gen. Soleimani, the head of the al-Quds forces, has more blood of American service members on his hands than any living terrorist. Under this agreement, the sanctions under Gen. Soleimani are lifted. Now, Secretary Kerry said to the families of those men and women who gave their lives, who were killed by Gen. Soleimani, we should apologize. …

Kerry: Sir, I never said the word apology. I never mentioned apologize. I said we should thank them for their extraordinary service. I never said the word apologize. Please, don’t distort my words.

Cruz: Secretary Kerry, it is duly noted you don’t apologize to the family members of the service members who were murdered by the Iranian military.

Kerry: That’s not what I said, senator. [I said] I thank them for their extraordinary service and I would remind them that the United States of America will never take the sanctions off Qasem Soleimani.

Cruz: Sir, I just want to clarity. Do you apologize or not?

There’s plenty more I could quote to you. But out of mercy, and in deference to the many dead and retired Republicans who took foreign policy seriously, I’ll stop. This used to be a party that saw America’s leadership of the free world as its highest responsibility. What happened? And why should any of us entrust it with the presidency again?
"...his intellectual confidence in the face of his own ignorance..."

Probably the best line to describe the current state of the GOP.
slop101 is online now  
Old 08-03-15, 11:10 PM
  #365  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 52,192
Re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

I won't disagree with you on Cruz.

Some (of us) referred to him as The Cruz Missile.
DVD Polizei is offline  
Old 08-05-15, 12:36 PM
  #366  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 52,192
Re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

Obama: "Iran won't get nukes...under my watch."

You have 26 months left, bruh.

I feel sooooooo safe.
DVD Polizei is offline  
Old 09-02-15, 06:44 PM
  #367  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Ghostbuster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 3,737
Re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

It's more or less official. Republican Senators will be unable to override Obama's veto of a bill opposing the Iran nuclear deal -- more specifically, reduction of sanctions on Iran. They may be unable to pass the bill itself. House Republicans probably will also fail in their attempts to override a veto.

As with the ACA, Republicans lack a viable alternative. Of course, that won't stop them from trying to sabotage diplomacy. They're itching for another war.
Ghostbuster is offline  
Old 09-02-15, 06:55 PM
  #368  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 52,192
Re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

A viable alternative, in this case, is simply go back to what we were doing, and standing up straight with a resolving glare in our eyes.

A little different than ACA, where I did expect a viable alternative than just saying, "Obamacare doesn't work."
DVD Polizei is offline  
Old 09-02-15, 07:10 PM
  #369  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Ghostbuster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 3,737
Re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

Bush's Iran policy has failed at WashingtonPost.com (November 2008)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/28/AR2008112802369.html

Absent some last-minute fireworks, President Bush will leave office with a kind of double failure on Iran: Administration hard-liners haven't checked Tehran's drive to acquire nuclear-weapons technology, and moderates haven't engaged Iran in negotiation and dialogue.
To see how the strategic situation with Iran has worsened, it's useful to recall what has happened over the past eight years. Graham Allison, the director of Harvard's Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, suggested this accounting during a meeting last week in Cambridge.

Let's start with centrifuges, the crucial technology for enriching the uranium fuel needed for a bomb. When Bush took office in 2001, Iran had no known centrifuges in operation. Today, Iran is operating about 3,850 centrifuges, with plans to add approximately 3,000, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency.

Now let's consider the enriched uranium itself. When Bush took office, Iran had none. By this month, the IAEA reported, the Iranians had 1,390 pounds of low-enriched uranium. That's enough to make one nuclear weapon, after this feedstock has been enriched further with additional passes through the centrifuges.

What about the missile systems that could deliver a nuclear weapon? Iran has continued over the past eight years to expand its arsenal of ballistic missiles. The Shahab-3 has a range of about 1,300 miles, which could allow it to target Israel and countries in Eastern Europe. Iran is also developing a longer-range, Shahab-6 intercontinental ballistic missile with a range of 6,200 miles that could, in theory, reach parts of the United States.

Last edited by Ghostbuster; 09-02-15 at 07:16 PM.
Ghostbuster is offline  
Old 09-02-15, 07:12 PM
  #370  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Why So Blu?'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 29,452
Re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

Gobama!
Why So Blu? is offline  
Old 09-02-15, 07:46 PM
  #371  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Rockford IL
Posts: 5,773
Re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

Originally Posted by DVD Polizei View Post
Obama: "Iran won't get nukes...under my watch."

You have 26 months left, bruh.

I feel sooooooo safe.
I forget - was his second term nearly five years, or was it the first?
emanon is offline  
Old 09-02-15, 08:18 PM
  #372  
DVD Talk Hero
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 29,313
Re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

Well Dick Cheney said that the Iran deal would lead to the apocalypse so of course we should believe him.

Well, maybe not:

http://www.salon.com/2015/08/28/dick..._at_all_costs/
eXcentris is offline  
Old 09-02-15, 09:11 PM
  #373  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Troy Stiffler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Under an I-10 Overpass
Posts: 21,105
Re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

Originally Posted by Ghostbuster View Post
Of course, that won't stop them from trying to sabotage diplomacy. They're itching for another war.
Yup'. Republicans (and their controlling special interest financiers) have openly sabotaged and obstructed the Obama administration at every turn. And they salt the Earth behind them. They love war. They despise environmentalism. They endorse union-busting (union workers are the only middle-class who will ever see retirement). They believe that the poor are poor because they choose it. They hate dirty immigrants. They sabotage marriage equality.

Republicans have become punk-rock nihilists.
Troy Stiffler is offline  
Old 09-02-15, 09:34 PM
  #374  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Why So Blu?'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 29,452
Re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

Bhengazi!!!!!!1!
Why So Blu? is offline  
Old 09-03-15, 02:53 PM
  #375  
DVD Talk Legend
 
kenbuzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Bloomington, IN
Posts: 20,850
Re: USA / Iran Nuclear Megathread

Originally Posted by Troy Stiffler View Post
Some more infographs (from that sneaky White House, who is secretly starting an nuclear arms race, by the way ... they're all coming for me *paranoid tick*).
I think you missed one:

kenbuzz 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.