America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 8 years ago by frankj1. 146 replies replies.
3 Pages<123>
Iran Nuclear Deal
Jump to Bottom | Previous Topic | Next Topic
tonygraz Offline
#51 Posted: Fri, Aug 28 2015, 8:37 AM EST
Joined: 08-11-2008
Posts: 20,266
Trust --- do you trust Iran - do you trust Israel ? If you think we can trust Israel, do a search for USS Liberty.
DrafterX Offline
#52 Posted: Fri, Aug 28 2015, 8:39 AM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,555
turn them into glass I say... Mad
gummy jones Offline
#53 Posted: Fri, Aug 28 2015, 8:45 AM EST
Joined: 07-06-2015
Posts: 7,969
tonygraz wrote:
Trust --- do you trust Iran - do you trust Israel ? If you think we can trust Israel, do a search for USS Liberty.


let me give it a shot

1) no you cant trust iran (that cant be a serious question)

2) in the region, israel is the only one we can trust (yes even despite something that happened 50 years ago - wink) but it is tricky because with obama they are well aware that they can no longer trust us
tonygraz Offline
#54 Posted: Fri, Aug 28 2015, 11:12 PM EST
Joined: 08-11-2008
Posts: 20,266
Are you saying they don't trust blacks or just inferring it ?
QMPASH Offline
#55 Posted: Sat, Aug 29 2015, 8:34 AM EST
Joined: 03-15-2011
Posts: 897
victor809 wrote:
Seriously? You don't think the application of knowledge is important? This explains your arguments.

Fine. Lets get down to "common sense" as you so clearly want. You posted the video, you stand by it.

Using only facts stated in the video, state what we are giving up, and what we are gaining from the Iran deal. Explain how we are giving up more than we are gaining (ie, a bad deal).

My opinion is irrelevant in this discussion. I haven't given it and I don't need to give it for the video to be wrong.


Since you like to argue about "logic," try this one for size. Iran has called for "the destruction of Israel," not once, but on many occasions. What do you think the first thing would be that Iran would do with a nuclear bomb, if they had one? The day after the nuclear agreement was announced to the world, people in Iran (egged on by their infallible mullahs) shouted, "Death to America." What do you think the deep, inner meaning of this was? Even before he became Germany's Chancellor and then its dictator; Hitler was calling the Jews the enemies of humanity and calling for their destruction. Do you think he was merely speaking metaphorically? Do you see any parallel between Hitler's statements (in public and in "Mein Kampf") with similar statements from Iran? Asking Iran to monitor its own nuclear facilities is similar to asking a fox to guard the henhouse. Now you can go back to argue about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Boo hoo!
Burner02 Offline
#56 Posted: Sat, Aug 29 2015, 9:39 AM EST
Joined: 12-21-2010
Posts: 12,884
QMPASH wrote:
Since you like to argue about "logic," try this one for size. Iran has called for "the destruction of Israel," not once, but on many occasions. What do you think the first thing would be that Iran would do with a nuclear bomb, if they had one? The day after the nuclear agreement was announced to the world, people in Iran (egged on by their infallible mullahs) shouted, "Death to America." What do you think the deep, inner meaning of this was? Even before he became Germany's Chancellor and then its dictator; Hitler was calling the Jews the enemies of humanity and calling for their destruction. Do you think he was merely speaking metaphorically? Do you see any parallel between Hitler's statements (in public and in "Mein Kampf") with similar statements from Iran? Asking Iran to monitor its own nuclear facilities is similar to asking a fox to guard the henhouse. Now you can go back to argue about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Boo hoo!



Be very careful, you are drawing a parallel to the OP.

Would not want you to confuse anyone.
tonygraz Offline
#57 Posted: Sat, Aug 29 2015, 12:51 PM EST
Joined: 08-11-2008
Posts: 20,266
Q - so why didn't Bush invade Iran ? They were one of the three in the axis of evil. Instead he destroyed their strongest neighbor and made room for Isis.
Burner02 Offline
#58 Posted: Sat, Aug 29 2015, 3:35 PM EST
Joined: 12-21-2010
Posts: 12,884
tonygraz wrote:
Q - so why didn't Bush invade Iran ? They were one of the three in the axis of evil. Instead he destroyed their strongest neighbor and made room for Isis.




Really?
victor809 Offline
#59 Posted: Sat, Aug 29 2015, 7:56 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
QMPASH wrote:
Since you like to argue about "logic," try this one for size. Iran has called for "the destruction of Israel," not once, but on many occasions. What do you think the first thing would be that Iran would do with a nuclear bomb, if they had one? The day after the nuclear agreement was announced to the world, people in Iran (egged on by their infallible mullahs) shouted, "Death to America." What do you think the deep, inner meaning of this was? Even before he became Germany's Chancellor and then its dictator; Hitler was calling the Jews the enemies of humanity and calling for their destruction. Do you think he was merely speaking metaphorically? Do you see any parallel between Hitler's statements (in public and in "Mein Kampf") with similar statements from Iran? Asking Iran to monitor its own nuclear facilities is similar to asking a fox to guard the henhouse. Now you can go back to argue about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Boo hoo!


I asked burner to argue the deal is bad based on facts in the video. And you think a response to that is to say: "Iran hates america and hitler hated the Jews". Really?

As for your argument that we're allowing iran to monitor it's own facilities... first, that's not true, second, it isn't in the video so it's not an argument in the video showing the strength or weakness of the deal.

victor809 Offline
#60 Posted: Sat, Aug 29 2015, 7:57 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Burner02 wrote:
Be very careful, you are drawing a parallel to the OP.

Would not want you to confuse anyone.


You still looking for any facts in that video to support your argument, or did you give up and admit that the video is a steaming pile of bullsh%t.
banderl Offline
#61 Posted: Sat, Aug 29 2015, 8:24 PM EST
Joined: 09-09-2008
Posts: 10,153
banderl wrote:
Prager Pagers?
Burner02 Offline
#62 Posted: Sun, Aug 30 2015, 4:34 AM EST
Joined: 12-21-2010
Posts: 12,884
victor809 wrote:
You still looking for any facts in that video to support your argument, or did you give up and admit that the video is a steaming pile of bullsh%t.



Burner02 wrote:
Bloom’s taxonomy? Really? Is that all you got?

You once again discount what someone has to say because he doesn’t have the academic “pedigree” you think he should to be considered credible. An observation on my part is that your response (which is typical of all your posts) to me avoided any answering of a direct question—do you think the Iranian nuclear deal is a good deal? Instead of really focusing on the issues, you like to lob little intellectual barbs to prove you have some education. What does that add to the conversation? I think what is lacking here on your part is known as common sense. Talking just to talk seems to be your mode of operation.

Carry on.



Vic, you never answered the question in #'s 22 & 38.
victor809 Offline
#63 Posted: Sun, Aug 30 2015, 1:40 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
My opinion on the deal is irrelevant to the video's quality or veracity. You only ask me to distract attention.

You posted a steaming pile of crap, defend it. After that we can have an actual discussion over the deal.
Burner02 Offline
#64 Posted: Sun, Aug 30 2015, 2:30 PM EST
Joined: 12-21-2010
Posts: 12,884
victor809 wrote:
My opinion on the deal is irrelevant to the video's quality or veracity. You only ask me to distract attention.

You posted a steaming pile of crap, defend it. After that we can have an actual discussion over the deal.




You answered the question by not answering the question a third time.

Translation, you are for the deal.

That explains your aggressive belittling of the video because it does not support your views. Not surprising!
victor809 Offline
#65 Posted: Sun, Aug 30 2015, 8:10 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
...or because the video is a steaming pile of crap. You still haven't pointed out a single way in which it argues the deal is bad.
victor809 Offline
#66 Posted: Sun, Aug 30 2015, 8:12 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Are you so messed up in the head that you think a person has to agree with every crappy, poorly constructed argument on a topic, or they must be against that topic?
banderl Offline
#67 Posted: Sun, Aug 30 2015, 8:15 PM EST
Joined: 09-09-2008
Posts: 10,153
banderl wrote:
Prager Schwagers?
tonygraz Offline
#68 Posted: Sun, Aug 30 2015, 8:16 PM EST
Joined: 08-11-2008
Posts: 20,266
The deal is bad for the military-industrial complex and the hawks they own in congress. They were against the deal before it was a deal because they want another war. In fifteen years things may change in Iran and we might even become friends.
tonygraz Offline
#69 Posted: Sun, Aug 30 2015, 8:25 PM EST
Joined: 08-11-2008
Posts: 20,266
What I really wonder about is why Burner doesn't like pizza. Hard to trust anybody that doesn't want to talk about pizza.
Speyside Offline
#70 Posted: Mon, Aug 31 2015, 10:23 AM EST
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
Seems to be a pretty standard inspection agreement. I do not know if these have worked or not historically.
QMPASH Offline
#71 Posted: Mon, Aug 31 2015, 6:13 PM EST
Joined: 03-15-2011
Posts: 897
Let's see: Iran is supporting terrorists all over the world. Iran is holding 4 Americans and nothing was said about them in the negotiations. The day after the "deal" as announced, people were parading in Tehran shouting "death to America." The mullahs and the Iran government have called for the destruction of Israel not once, but many times. The deal allows the Iran government to monitor their own facilities. It is good only for 15 years. The deal only covers known nuclear facilities and does not even mention possible hidden facilities we know nothing about. Nobody even asked the negotiators for Iran how they interpreted the language of the agreement. By comparison, Chamberlain's agreement with Hitler at Munich was a vast improvement. Yeah, we can trust Iran as much as we can trust Hillary.
frankj1 Offline
#72 Posted: Mon, Aug 31 2015, 7:03 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,222
QMPASH wrote:
Let's see: Iran is supporting terrorists all over the world. Iran is holding 4 Americans and nothing was said about them in the negotiations. The day after the "deal" as announced, people were parading in Tehran shouting "death to America." The mullahs and the Iran government have called for the destruction of Israel not once, but many times. The deal allows the Iran government to monitor their own facilities. It is good only for 15 years. The deal only covers known nuclear facilities and does not even mention possible hidden facilities we know nothing about. Nobody even asked the negotiators for Iran how they interpreted the language of the agreement. By comparison, Chamberlain's agreement with Hitler at Munich was a vast improvement. Yeah, we can trust Iran as much as we can trust Hillary.

can I have your copy when you are done reading it?
banderl Offline
#73 Posted: Mon, Aug 31 2015, 7:50 PM EST
Joined: 09-09-2008
Posts: 10,153
tonygraz wrote:
The Prager ragers ?




Poor Tony!
banderl Offline
#74 Posted: Mon, Aug 31 2015, 7:51 PM EST
Joined: 09-09-2008
Posts: 10,153
frankj1 wrote:
can I have your copy when you are done reading it?



Frank, would you pass it on to me when you're done?

TIA
frankj1 Offline
#75 Posted: Mon, Aug 31 2015, 9:41 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,222
banderl wrote:
Frank, would you pass it on to me when you're done?

TIA

sure. if you don't mind, I'll yellow hilite the parts that have Iran's leaders so pizzed.
teedubbya Offline
#76 Posted: Tue, Sep 1 2015, 1:06 AM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
I head an agreement didn't work once so none will ever work again and stuff
Burner02 Offline
#77 Posted: Tue, Sep 1 2015, 4:50 AM EST
Joined: 12-21-2010
Posts: 12,884
frankj1 wrote:
sure. if you don't mind, I'll yellow hilite the parts that have Iran's leaders so pizzed.


Are there pictures?


That may help.
frankj1 Offline
#78 Posted: Tue, Sep 1 2015, 7:41 AM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,222
Burner02 wrote:
Are there pictures?


That may help.

I know you know I'm playing around.

It's some pretty serious stuff and I am amazed to be reading specifics.

But if we hate it and Iran hates it, maybe it has a chance? I'm only half kidding now.
tailgater Offline
#79 Posted: Tue, Sep 1 2015, 8:25 AM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
frankj1 wrote:
I'm only half kidding now.


I thought you were being witty.
Turns out I was only half right.


Herfing
QMPASH Offline
#80 Posted: Tue, Sep 1 2015, 9:14 AM EST
Joined: 03-15-2011
Posts: 897
victor809 wrote:
I asked burner to argue the deal is bad based on facts in the video. And you think a response to that is to say: "Iran hates america and hitler hated the Jews". Really?

As for your argument that we're allowing iran to monitor it's own facilities... first, that's not true, second, it isn't in the video so it's not an argument in the video showing the strength or weakness of the deal.


Unfortunately, it is in the agreement. True, the Europeans can also monitor KNOWN sites with 24 days notice. That would give the Iranians 24 days to remove any suspicuious equipment or products before the inspection. Keep in mind that the Europeans are intent on doing lucrative deals with Iran so how deeply do you think they would dig if they found anything suspicious? Despite who "inspects" the deal lapses in 15 years. Even the most brain-dead, far-left liberal would see that this virtually guarantees that Iran gets the bomb. Saudi Arabia and other countries in the Middle East are hardly likely to allow this to happen, so they will build their own nuclear capability and the delivery systems for them. Voila, a Middle East nuclear arms race, the consequences of which, can only be guessed at. It is NOT a question of whether Iran is evil or not. It's a case of keeping an erratic regime that supports terrorism from getting the bomb. It's a question of whether we are going to support our allies in the region (Israel, Saudia Arabia and Jordan just to mention three) or whether we are going to support an agreement which offers us nothing and gives away the store to Iran. And I never said Iran hates America; the Iranians said that. And, try as you might, you will never see any statement in my post about Hitler (save for the Munich Agreement) or the Jews. Don't try and twist my observations in order to substantiate your ridiculous statements.
victor809 Offline
#81 Posted: Tue, Sep 1 2015, 11:44 AM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
QMPASH wrote:
Unfortunately, it is in the agreement.

I'm assuming you're referring to the AP article which was identified as NOT being accurate? I mean, the IAEA is asking for $10MM funding to monitor the Iran deal... so, I'm pretty sure they're gonna at least make a visit.

Quote:

True, the Europeans can also monitor KNOWN sites with 24 days notice. That would give the Iranians 24 days to remove any suspicuious equipment or products before the inspection.

This is also wrong:
http://www.vox.com/2015/8/19/9176415/iran-deal-inspections-24-days
We continually monitor KNOWN sites. We have access to "unknown" sites within 24 days. That 24 day clock would only be reached if our own allies in the inspection dragged their feet as well.

Quote:

Keep in mind that the Europeans are intent on doing lucrative deals with Iran so how deeply do you think they would dig if they found anything suspicious?

Now your argument is that we can't trust our own inspectors? Then there is no state under which they won't get the bomb. We're using our own inspectors now.

Quote:

Despite who "inspects" the deal lapses in 15 years. Even the most brain-dead, far-left liberal would see that this virtually guarantees that Iran gets the bomb. Saudi Arabia and other countries in the Middle East are hardly likely to allow this to happen, so they will build their own nuclear capability and the delivery systems for them.
Voila, a Middle East nuclear arms race, the consequences of which, can only be guessed at. It is NOT a question of whether Iran is evil or not. It's a case of keeping an erratic regime that supports terrorism from getting the bomb. It's a question of whether we are going to support our allies in the region (Israel, Saudia Arabia and Jordan just to mention three) or whether we are going to support an agreement which offers us nothing and gives away the store to Iran.

The deal allows inspections for 15 years, some other ongoing monitoring for up to 25. You do realize that if we start to think they have a nuclear program after 15 years, we can just re-implement sanctions... right? We don't promise to never implement sanctions again. You're pretending like we're giving them something we can't just take away. And then you're pretending we'd allow the other countries to start building nuclear capability. It's some fantasy world you live in.

Quote:

And I never said Iran hates America; the Iranians said that. And, try as you might, you will never see any statement in my post about Hitler (save for the Munich Agreement) or the Jews. Don't try and twist my observations in order to substantiate your ridiculous statements.


QMPASHpost55 wrote:

Do you see any parallel between Hitler's statements (in public and in "Mein Kampf") with similar statements from Iran?

.... keep on top of your own posts.
frankj1 Offline
#82 Posted: Tue, Sep 1 2015, 12:21 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,222
tailgater wrote:
I thought you were being witty.
Turns out I was only half right.


Herfing

one of my father's favorite lines!
gummy jones Offline
#83 Posted: Tue, Sep 1 2015, 12:37 PM EST
Joined: 07-06-2015
Posts: 7,969
hopefully we can all agree that the un is a toothless organization that relies on american lives and treasure but gives us next to nothing in return

not in response to anyone, just calling a joke a joke
teedubbya Offline
#84 Posted: Tue, Sep 1 2015, 8:09 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
Yup. Their lack of teeth in regards to Israel shows that.
teedubbya Offline
#85 Posted: Tue, Sep 1 2015, 8:10 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
Honest question..., is this deal part of the un or outside it?
DrafterX Offline
#86 Posted: Tue, Sep 1 2015, 8:42 PM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,555
I dunno... will they sell them to us too..?? Huh
teedubbya Offline
#87 Posted: Tue, Sep 1 2015, 8:47 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
We are the ones that sell to Iran to find other wars but that isn't spoken of much lately. We are not supposed to negotiate with Iran like Reagan did.
DrafterX Offline
#88 Posted: Tue, Sep 1 2015, 9:05 PM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,555
well, he did single handidly free the hostages... Mellow
frankj1 Offline
#89 Posted: Tue, Sep 1 2015, 9:10 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,222
teedubbya wrote:
We are the ones that sell to Iran to find other wars but that isn't spoken of much lately. We are not supposed to negotiate with Iran like Reagan did.

find=fund?
teedubbya Offline
#90 Posted: Tue, Sep 1 2015, 9:59 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
Yes.
elRopo Offline
#91 Posted: Tue, Sep 1 2015, 11:20 PM EST
Joined: 02-17-2014
Posts: 905
"Peace in Our Time" Haaaaa Haaaaa Haaaaaaaaa! If this piece of crap agreement is approved we'll be at war with these cone heads within a year or two. And this war will be with nukes! I don't much care anymore, it seems history just keeps repeating itself so why beat a dead horse I just pity the poor bastids that have to live on afterwards. I must be from another planet in some distant galaxy because this sure as hell ain't where I grew up. The whole world is upside down with political correctness, gay this, gimme that, put out that cigarette, cop killers, gun control, ISIS mooslamic maniacs, F-it! they might as well blow it up and give some other life forms a chance.....I'm out.
teedubbya Offline
#92 Posted: Wed, Sep 2 2015, 5:02 AM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
See ya.
DrafterX Offline
#93 Posted: Wed, Sep 2 2015, 7:25 AM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,555
I blame the Russians... Mellow
Burner02 Offline
#94 Posted: Wed, Sep 2 2015, 8:41 AM EST
Joined: 12-21-2010
Posts: 12,884
frankj1 wrote:
I know you know I'm playing around.

It's some pretty serious stuff and I am amazed to be reading specifics.

But if we hate it and Iran hates it, maybe it has a chance? I'm only half kidding now.




Thought maybe pictures would help banderl.
banderl Offline
#95 Posted: Wed, Sep 2 2015, 9:23 AM EST
Joined: 09-09-2008
Posts: 10,153
Well, seeing as you've already gotten your copy of the agreement, could you pass it on when you're finished reading it?
TIA
cacman Offline
#96 Posted: Wed, Sep 2 2015, 11:21 AM EST
Joined: 07-03-2010
Posts: 12,216
Can't stop it now.
Burner02 Offline
#97 Posted: Wed, Sep 2 2015, 8:33 PM EST
Joined: 12-21-2010
Posts: 12,884
banderl wrote:
Well, seeing as you've already gotten your copy of the agreement, could you pass it on when you're finished reading it?
TIA



I will be glad to forward, but you will be disappointed.


No pics!
banderl Offline
#98 Posted: Wed, Sep 2 2015, 8:36 PM EST
Joined: 09-09-2008
Posts: 10,153
I wasn't educated down south, I know how to read.
Burner02 Offline
#99 Posted: Thu, Sep 3 2015, 8:56 AM EST
Joined: 12-21-2010
Posts: 12,884
banderl wrote:
I wasn't educated down south, I know how to read.



A might bigoted, aren't we? Typical liberal behavior--focus on a part of the country that doesn't buy into your agenda and call us uneducated!

Get your own damn copy!
banderl Offline
#100 Posted: Thu, Sep 3 2015, 9:02 AM EST
Joined: 09-09-2008
Posts: 10,153
Just speaking the truth. Liberal?
In some ways, yes. In other ways, no.
Users browsing this topic
Guest
3 Pages<123>
Back to Top