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.
Obama is desperate to make a deal with a hostile regime STILL coordinating attacks in Iraq that are killing our soldiers.
Quote:
"Iran is still supporting, funding and training surrogates inside Iraq," Odierno told reporters at his base outside Baghdad. "I think many of the attacks in Baghdad are in fact done by individuals supported by Iran."
The weapons are among the main killers of U.S. troops in Iraq.
What was that obama said about talking to Iran if only they would "unclench their fists"?
Location: Democratic Peoples Republic of Redneckistan
11,078 posts, read 15,079,627 times
Reputation: 3937
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanrene
Absolutely he has. He has, in his silence, firmly entrenched himself with the mullahs and nutjob - all for the express purpose of thinking he has a chance to deal with them on the nuclear issue.
The world's greatest democracy (republic) should always be on the side of democracy advocates.
No,if he had done that,he would have entrenched himself in the GOP....THAT'S were our "mullahs" and nutjobs reside.
It is so totally mind-boggling to me that the very same people who would have had us/Israel bombing Iran not a month ago are suddenly that country's greatest protectors, all just to make the President look bad.
Somehow Iran's nuclear capabilities are no longer a threat?
Somehow the 'Butcher of Beirut' is a better alternative than the current Iranian president?
And what exactly would you have the President do?
I know - let's just rush headlong into another war with another sovereign country 'cause, you know, that's worked out so well so far.
Location: Democratic Peoples Republic of Redneckistan
11,078 posts, read 15,079,627 times
Reputation: 3937
Quote:
Originally Posted by TigerLily24
No.
It is so totally mind-boggling to me that the very same people who would have had us/Israel bombing Iran not a month ago are suddenly that country's greatest protectors, all just to make the President look bad.
Somehow Iran's nuclear capabilities are no longer a threat?
Somehow the 'Butcher of Beirut' is a better alternative than the current Iranian president?
And what exactly would you have the President do?
I know - let's just rush headlong into another war with another sovereign country 'cause, you know, that's worked out so well so far.
mullah nukes. "“It is clear to all concerned that when it comes to nuclear weapons, we have reached a decisive point. This is not simply about America’s interests. It is about preventing a nuclear arms race in the Middle East that could lead this region and the world down a hugely dangerous path.” Barack Obama (still only words)
[URL="http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=4&url=http%3A%2F%2Fw ww.voanews.com%2Fenglish%2F2009-05-20-voa59.cfm&ei=xxxKStyrKo6OMbSnsLAC&usg=AFQjCNE5o5B-Cn3j0St1XErFeb3pVV6dQA&sig2=PMd3-gUfFH8lWgvBMPXDiQ"]Clinton: Middle East May Start Arms Race If Iran Gets Nukes[/URL]
[URL="http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=8&url=http%3A%2F%2Fo nline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB123776572203009141.htm l&ei=xxxKStyrKo6OMbSnsLAC&usg=AFQjCNEcqy4xOkyruCvN Y5VQFIFMnfNiQQ&sig2=VLvnDxHzCywOeQVJ5joMyQ"]Amir Taheri Says Iran Has Started a Mideast Nuclear Arms Race - WSJ.com[/URL]
Your ideological neoisolationism is dangerous.
Newtoli says "And what exactly should he "DO" in regards to Iran?
Send our military in?"
You didn't read what I said earlier on this thread: "And it's not a choice of military action or nothing. The congress is in the process of trying to pass a bill which would give Obama the ability to impose sweeping gasoline sanctions on the mullah regime. Obama has not expressed any support or interest.
He has actually done nothing. And it looks as though that what he plans on continuing to do."
It is Israel that started the Middle East nuke arms race. It should be obvious to everyone that Iran wants them because Israel already has them, and Iran wants a "balance" of power with regards to it.
All calls for a "nuclear-free Middle East" will have to start with Israel, otherwise it's doomed to failure and it's morally unjust.
no i think the "true americans" have turned their back on their president.
our keeping our nose out has helped immeasurably the iranian sane people trying to improve their country.
As long as he gets OUR freedoms restored,OUR economy restored and fixes the rest of Bush's screw ups with OUR nation then I'll be happy....I couldn't give two craps less about ANY other country at this point and if he never even so much as TALKED to another foreign leader the whole time he was in office and concentrated soley on this country I'd be happy with him.**** on Iran,let their people rise up against tyranny like our fore fathers did and take care of themselves.Your man's failed foreign policies are a major reason we are stuck in the quicksand today.
************************************************** ********
Yep...that's a plateful for Obama. Odd that people don't seem to have noticed that our Secretary of State has been under the radar for quite some time....you don't suppose that she's working through diplomacy to broker some sort of peace agreement, do you? President Obama has handled this situation correctly; nothing would give Ahmadinejad more street cred with the extremists than overt American intervention. He has
stated that we stand with those seeking liberty in Iran; anything more would be a recruiting tool for terrorist groups.
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.