Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Weak responses bring out the pejoratives. In place of a weak, unenforceable deal that did not have the force of a UNITED States government, President Trump put enforceable sanctions. That is winning.
Weak responses bring out the pejoratives. In place of a weak, unenforceable deal that did not have the force of a UNITED States government, President Trump put enforceable sanctions. That is winning.
The deal was being enforced by an international team, those sanctions are not going to stop their progress towards nuclear capability. This is what is know as losing, we are watching amateur's at work. This administration is not capable of negotiating complicated agreements, but they are good at destroying those already in place.
The deal was being enforced by an international team, those sanctions are not going to stop their progress towards nuclear capability. This is what is know as losing, we are watching amateur's at work. This administration is not capable of negotiating complicated agreements, but they are good at destroying those already in place.
What nonsense.
It was a deal between the Islamist terrorist mullahs running Iran and John Kerry. It had no legal bearing at all, and no country on the planet was investing any time or money in insuring that Iran did anything.
It's like everything else the hapless community agitator put his hands on, it turned to ****.
It was a deal between the Islamist terrorist mullahs running Iran and John Kerry. It had no legal bearing at all, and no country on the planet was investing any time or money in insuring that Iran did anything.
I might add that the IAEA has a very much better track record than Republican presidents when it comes to nuclear material in countries beginning with "Ira".
It was a deal between the Islamist terrorist mullahs running Iran and John Kerry. It had no legal bearing at all, and no country on the planet was investing any time or money in insuring that Iran did anything.
It's like everything else the hapless community agitator put his hands on, it turned to ****.
So there weren’t any inspections for compliance, news to me and the international community. So what is the master plan now, sanction the Ayatollahs children because that is all that’s left. I just know Trump is going to come up with a better agreement, the 5 countries will approve as will congress. It’s a dream come true.
"Iran has abandoned even the pretense that its nuclear program is meant for peace. Iran's ayatollahs are using the threat of nuclear enrichment to extort America into restoring the terrible deal that enriched Iran's military and proxies while imposing zero consequences for their acts of terror."
I don't know where you found that gem, but it's quite silly and a classic example of fear-mongering.
We're talking about Uranium for crying out loud.
If you people don't understand the difference between Uranium and Plutonium, it's because you choose to remain ignorant. It's not like I haven't explained it 10 Million times.
If you think Iran is going to be putting 5 megaton warheads on ICBMs and launching them at Israel and the US that's only possible in your hallucinations.
There's a very good reason why nobody ever used Uranium as a fission trigger for thermonuclear weapons.
There's also a very good reason why nobody ever used gun designs for ICBMs. If you have to ask "Why?" then it's probably because some part of ICBM totally confuses and confounds you. The same holds true for IRBMs.
If Iran ever decided to build nuclear weapons, they'd have little offensive value, unless Iran plans on invading Iraq, Kuwait, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Kazakhstan or Azerbaijan, because those are the only countries Iran could use them against.
They would have tremendous value as a defensive capability.
That's why the US is throwing a hissy fit. The US needs control of Iran, but it can't get control if Iran has nuclear weapons.
You just created a topic saying they weren't complying. lol..
It's not that hard to figure out. There was no treaty between the United States and Iran.
Yes after we withdrew from the deal, why would they remain in compliance since we reneged on the agreement.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
