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.
how solid is the Iran nuke treaty?
the volume of treaties and cheers and declarations of peace just prior to WWII was deafening.
as was the crash of smashing glass as they were all broken.
Kerry probably told them, I say you can't and you agree to it, but I'll make believe I didn't know you spent the money on terrorism to kill our troops and allies".
'Yeah, I was all about everyone paying their fair share but I hid my yacht in RI to avoid MA taxes." "We expect you to cheat and its okay!". "We''ll just them the US people we have to pass it to find out what is in it". "Please stop laughing and yes they are that dumb...of course we really have to thank the media propaganda machine". 'We'll use them in this situation too, no problem". "Let me know if you need any condiments. The wife has wharehouses full"
Despite what critics of the agreement say, Iran is not allowed to spend its unfrozen assets on Hezbollah, Shiite militias in Iraq or Houthi rebels in Yemen, Kerry continued.
“They’re not allowed to do that outside even of this (nuclear) agreement,” he said, adding that U.N. resolutions state as much.
How is that any different than what the OP stated, that you claimed was incorrect?
Reminder:
Quote:
Originally Posted by MUTGR
...they will receive almost immediately to fund terrorism...
LOL...last time I checked the shiitte militia, hezbollah, and houthi rebels would be considered terrorist...
Are they not? Your link back ups exactly what the OP stated...
kerry very clearly stated: (This is from the link you provided, BTW) "Despite what critics of the agreement say, Iran is not allowed to spend its unfrozen assets on Hezbollah, Shiite militias in Iraq or Houthi rebels in Yemen, Kerry continued."
The OP indicated
" they will receive almost immediately to fund terrorism"
There are already sanctions in place outside this agreement regarding funding of certain terror groups.
People keep bringing up the point that their unfrozen assets will go to terrorism, they have bigger problems and more important issues.
The problem with war mongering conservatives is you are always quick with the criticism but slow with the constructive ideas. Sanctions aren't effective. What would you do? Bomb the only viable ally we have in the region against ISIS and worldwide Sunni terrorism?
Ally?
The problem with Iran and ISIS is that only one side can lose.
No matter how much money the Iranians spend they will never be as effective at creating terrorists as our Air Force's program of Death from the Skies with remote controlled drone programs. We kill more innocents than terrorists with this program in an insane quest to kill all the terrorists. The families of those innocents or is that merely "collateral damages" have kids, brothers and friends that become "terrorists" to obtain revenge or just satisfaction. Iran does not have to pay these people.
We are the greatest recruiters of terrorists in the world. We are also the greatest terrorist in the world.
No matter how much money the Iranians spend they will never be as effective at creating terrorists as our Air Force's program of Death from the Skies with remote controlled drone programs. We kill more innocents than terrorists with this program in an insane quest to kill all the terrorists. The families of those innocents or is that merely "collateral damages" have kids, brothers and friends that become "terrorists" to obtain revenge or just satisfaction. Iran does not have to pay these people.
We are the greatest recruiters of terrorists in the world. We are also the greatest terrorist in the world.
You offered your opinion of the situation, there's nothing to refute. There are many others who disagree with your opinion and take it as little but fear-mongering.
Nobody has yet charged me with fear - mongering. Somebody did challenge me to prove my 'opinion' but refuses to counter claim theirs. I wonder who that may be? I'm alone on these forums, I bring some interesting points to talk about but nobody counters anything. But we sure have a mouth full about evil Israel though...
So is this deal going to precipitate a nuclear arms race? Will this deal further destabilize the Middle East? Will Iran now expand is influence even further in the region? Obama says no but did he also draw red lines in Syria for the use of chemical weapons?
Its not about how YOU preserve the deal but how other actors in the world react to it. YOU see it one way, Egypt, Israel, KSA, Turkey, France, Russia, blah blah will all see it in their unique individual way. It is not in the interests of Russia for Iran to have nuclear weapons. Its not in the interests of the U.S for the Sunni's to acquire nuclear weapons either. These countries will not counter Iran's nuclear superiority with conventional arms.
So you want more opinions? After 12 years of diplomatic efforts, Iran got everything it wanted. The P5+1 legitimized its violations and wrong doings of the NPT and UNSC resolutions. Sanctions which brought them to the table in the first place, will be lifted over a period of time. They continue to create ICBM's ( Which has nothing to do with magical gardens or medicine). And at the very end of the day, Iran's full nuclear program will still not be disclosed to all and surprise inspections have be capitulated by Obama. So how is the deal a good deal?
So Burdell, grow some gonads and show your intellect with a well crafted response. No more challenging people on facts, spewing non sense then leaving the scene by using the opinion excuse.
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.