• Please be aware we've switched the forums to their own URL. (again) You'll find the new website address to be www.steelernationforum.com Thanks
  • Please clear your private messages. Your inbox is close to being full.

Iran

yes, let's look at this, Tibsy

https://www.cnn.com/2013/11/07/world/meast/irans-nuclear-capabilities-fast-facts/index.html

January 29, 2017 - Iran launches a medium-range ballistic missile, its first missile test since Donald Trump became US president, but the test fails, according to information given to CNN by a US defense official. National Security Adviser Michael Flynn says the United States has put "Iran on notice."

February 3, 2017 - In reaction to the January 29 missile test, the US Treasury Department says it is applying sanctions on 25 individuals and companies connected to Iran's ballistic missile program and those providing support to Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps' Qods Force. Flynn says the tests were in defiance of a UN Security Council resolution that bars Iran from taking steps on a ballistic missile program capable of launching nuclear weapons.

September 20, 2017 - Rouhani says "It will be a great pity if this agreement were destroyed by rogue newcomers to the world of politics," in a clear reference to Trump's address to the UN General Assembly on September 19th, where he offered scathing criticism of both Iran and the 2015 international agreement.

October 13, 2017 - Trump decertifies Iran's compliance with the nuclear agreement, declaring that the Obama-era pact was not in US interests and unveiling a tough new policy toward the Islamic Republic. The move stops short of completely scrapping the agreement, instead kicking it to Congress, who then has 60 days to determine a path forward. Congress allows the 60-day deadline to pass without action.

January 12, 2018 - Trump agrees to waive key nuclear-related sanctions against Iran as part of the 2015 deal, but delivers a stark ultimatum to European allies: "Fix the deal's disastrous flaws, or the United States will withdraw." Trump couples his waiver announcement with new sanctions on 14 Iranian individuals and entities that have committed human rights abuses or supported Iran's ballistic missile programs, which are outside the scope of the nuclear deal. The most prominent of the targets in the latest sanctions is Ayatollah Sadeq Amoli Larijani, the head of Iran's judicial system.

May 8, 2018 - Trump announces that the United States will withdraw from the JCPOA and will be imposing "the highest level of economic sanction" against Iran. In Tehran, Rouhani says Iran will take a few weeks to decide how to respond to the US withdrawal, but Rouhani says he had ordered the country's "atomic industry organization" to be prepared to "start our industrial enrichment without limitations."

March 22, 2019 - The US State and Treasury departments sanction 14 individuals and 17 entities linked to SPND, Iran's organization for defense, innovation and research. In announcing the sanctions, senior administration officials suggest repeatedly that the existence of SPND and its subordinate organizations could provide cover for them to continue missile-related activity.

May 8, 2019 - Rouhani announces a partial withdrawal from the JCPOA.

May 16, 2019 - A US official with knowledge of the situation tells CNN that there are multiple images of commercial Iranian ships carrying missiles and other munitions.


--------------

let's understand that The Great O, Bathhouse Barry, Pallets o'Cash Bomma also imposed sanctions on Iran. Unless you want to continue being willfully obtuse and ignorant. As a matter of ******* fact, all this happend under Bomma's watchful line-in-the-sand drawing eye:
----------------


February 20, 2009 - The Institute for Science and International Security reports that Iranian scientists have reached "nuclear weapons breakout capability." The report concludes Iran does not yet have a nuclear weapon but does have enough low-enriched uranium for a single nuclear weapon. An official at the IAEA cautions about drawing such conclusions. The IAEA says Iran's stock of low-enriched uranium would have to be turned into highly enriched uranium to become weapons-grade material.

February 25, 2009 - Iran runs tests at its Bushehr nuclear power plant using "dummy" fuel rods, loaded with lead in place of enriched uranium to simulate nuclear fuel. A news release distributed to reporters at the scene states the test measured the "pressure, temperature and flow rate" of the facility to make sure they were at appropriate levels. Officials say the next test will use enriched uranium, but it's not clear when the test will be held or when the facility will be fully operational.

September 21, 2009 - In a letter to the IAEA, Iran reveals the existence of a second nuclear facility. It is located underground at a military base, near the city of Qom.

October 25, 2009 - IAEA inspectors make their first visit to Iran's newly disclosed nuclear facility near Qom.

February 18, 2010 - In a statement, the IAEA reports that it believes Iran may be working in secret to develop a nuclear warhead for a missile.

August 21, 2010 - Iran begins fueling its first nuclear energy plant, in the city of Bushehr.

December 5, 2010 - Ali Akbar Salehi, Iran's atomic chief and acting foreign minister, announces that Iran's nuclear program is self-sufficient and that Iran has begun producing yellowcake, an intermediate stage in processing uranium.

January 8, 2011 - Salehi reports that Iran can now create its own nuclear fuel plates and rods.

September 4, 2011 - Iran announces that its Bushehr nuclear power plant joined the electric grid September 3, making it the first Middle Eastern country to produce commercial electricity from atomic reactors.

September 5, 2011 - In response to Iran's nuclear chief stating that Iran will give the IAEA "full supervision" of its nuclear program for five years if UN sanctions are lifted, the European Union says that Iran must first comply with international obligations.

November 8, 2011 - The IAEA releases a report saying that it has "serious concerns" and "credible" information that Iran may be developing nuclear weapons.

January 9, 2012 - The IAEA confirms that uranium enrichment has begun at the Fordo nuclear facility in the Qom province in northern Iran.

January 23, 2012 - The European Union announces it will ban the import of Iranian crude oil and petroleum products.

January 29, 2012 - A six-member delegation from the IAEA arrives in Tehran for a three-day visit, shortly after the EU imposes new sanctions aimed at cutting off funding to the nuclear program.

January 31, 2012 - In Senate testimony James Clapper, Director of National Intelligence, says there's no evidence Iran is building a nuclear bomb. CIA Director David Petraeus agrees.

February 15, 2012 - Iran loads the first domestically produced nuclear fuel rods into the Tehran research reactor.

February 21, 2012 - After two days of talks in Iran about the country's nuclear program, the IAEA expresses disappointment that no progress was made and that their request to visit the Parchin military base was denied.

March 28, 2012 - Discussions regarding Iran's nuclear future stall.

April 14, 2012 - Talks resume between Iran and six world powers over Iranian nuclear ambitions in Istanbul, Turkey.

May 25, 2012 - An IAEA report finds that environmental samples taken at the Fordo fuel enrichment plant near the city of Qom have enrichment levels of up to 27%, higher than the previous level of 20%.

June 18-19, 2012 - A meeting is held between Iran and the P5+1 (United States, France, Russia, China, Great Britain and Germany) in Moscow. No agreement is reached.

June 28, 2012 - Iranian negotiator, Saeed Jalili writes to European Union foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton warning world powers to avoid "unconstructive measures" such as the oil embargo that's about to go into effect and that was agreed upon by the EU in January.

July 1, 2012 - A full embargo of Iranian oil from the EU takes effect.

August 30, 2012 - A UN report finds that Iran has stepped up its production of high-grade enriched uranium and has re-landscaped Parchin, one of its military bases, in an apparent effort to hamper a UN inquiry into the country's nuclear program.

September 24, 2013 - During a speech at the UN General Assembly, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani says "Nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction have no place in Iran's security and defense doctrine, and contradict our fundamental religious and ethical convictions."

October 16, 2013 - The latest discussions between Iran and the six world powers center on a proposal put forth by Iran to recognize the peaceful nature of its nuclear energy pursuits. The meeting is described as "substantive and forward-looking."

November 24, 2013 - Six world powers and Iran reach an agreement over Iran's nuclear program. The deal calls on Iran to limit its nuclear activities in return for lighter sanctions.

January 12, 2014 - It is announced that Iran will begin eliminating some of its uranium stockpile on January 20.

January 20, 2014 - Iran's nuclear spokesman Behrouz Kamalvandi tells state-run news agency IRNA that Iran has started suspending high levels of uranium enrichment.

January 20, 2014 - The European Union announces that it has suspended certain sanctions against Iran for six months.

February 20, 2014 - Following talks in Vienna, EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton and Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif announce that a deal on the framework for comprehensive negotiations over Tehran's nuclear program has been reached.

November 24, 2014 - The deadline for a final nuclear agreement between Iran and the UN Security Council's P5+1 countries has been set for July 1, 2015.

April 2, 2015 - Negotiators from Iran, the United States, China, Germany, France, Britain and Russia reach a framework for an agreement on Iran's nuclear capabilities, which includes reducing its stockpile of low-enriched uranium by 98%. The deadline for the complete agreement is July 1.

April 9, 2015 - Rouhani announces that Iran will only sign a final nuclear agreement if economic sanctions are lifted on the first day of implementation.

July 14, 2015 - A deal is reached on Iran's nuclear program. The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) reduces the number of Iranian centrifuges by two-thirds. It places bans on enrichment at key facilities, and limits uranium research and development to the Natanz facility.

July 20, 2015 - The UN Security Council endorses the nuclear deal.

January 16, 2016 - IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano says Iran has completed all the necessary steps agreed under the nuclear deal, and that all participants can begin implementing the JCPOA.

March 8-9, 2016 - Iran test-fires two Qadr ballistic missiles during a large-scale military drill, according to Iran's state-run Press TV. US officials say that the tests do not violate the JCPOA but are very likely in breach of a UN resolution calling on Iran not to undertake ballistic missile activity.


-----

Iran's goal has always been to develop nuclear weapons. Always. If not to use against Israel (whom they've said should be "wiped off the map") then to sell to terrorists to be used in cities in Western countries and Europe. I know you were loving the unicorn farts that Barry belched every time he opened his cockholster for 8 long years, but while he was doing that, Iran was dead-set on developing nukes. No other way around it. Look at the goddamned timeline and see how they used the "deadlines" and lifting of sanctions to their convenience. I'm sure it hurt the innocent Iranian people, but the Iranian government does not give one less of a **** about it's people than you do about your President, Donald J Trump. That should tell you exactly how much their own government loves Iranians.
 
Supe, I still say exiting the deal in the manner Trump did was unwarranted. There is plenty of information out there to back this up.

Look at the three reasons given here for Trump's move. None of them have anything to do with what Iran did or didn't do.

Three reasons behind Trump ditching Iran deal
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-43902372

1. Shredding the Obama legacy
2. A pivot to Netanyahu
3. New faces in the room (war hawks in Trump cabinet)


Trump’s Iran-Deal Exit Delivered More Risk, No Reward
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/05/trumps-iran-deal-exit-delivered-more-risk-no-reward.html

In sum, Washington’s actions over the last year have yielded no actual progress in dealing with the threats Iran poses to nuclear security, regional security, or domestic oppression. And with its threat today, Tehran presents Washington with a nasty dilemma: Move further away from European partners who try to meet Iran’s demands in hopes of keeping its centrifuges silent, or return to the unstable world in which Iran is moving toward nuclear capability.

The deal was far from perfect or ideal. You can criticize it from many angles. But the fundamental notion that the deal was better than no deal remains intact. Having the US step away from it made the world a significantly more dangerous place, and has accelerated Iran's malfeasance.
 
We're not going to war over a ******* drone, even though the Dems are begging for a war to have something besides Joe Bidens racist comments to be the top news of the day

Trump is taking a measured approach, a wise decision

Agree, it's not worth it. Also I think he first talked about military action to see if the Muzzies would stock their areas with women, children, and cameras and that lets him know where to look for leaks.
 
Supe, I still say exiting the deal in the manner Trump did was unwarranted. There is plenty of information out there to back this up.

Look at the three reasons given here for Trump's move. None of them have anything to do with what Iran did or didn't do.

Three reasons behind Trump ditching Iran deal
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-43902372

1. Shredding the Obama legacy
2. A pivot to Netanyahu
3. New faces in the room (war hawks in Trump cabinet)


Trump’s Iran-Deal Exit Delivered More Risk, No Reward
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/05/trumps-iran-deal-exit-delivered-more-risk-no-reward.html



The deal was far from perfect or ideal. You can criticize it from many angles. But the fundamental notion that the deal was better than no deal remains intact. Having the US step away from it made the world a significantly more dangerous place, and has accelerated Iran's malfeasance.

Jesus Christ this ****** can find something to whine about on a daily basis. Why dont you just go build your shrine to Soros and get it over with? You commie ****.
 
Jesus Christ this ****** can find something to whine about on a daily basis. Why dont you just go build your shrine to Soros and get it over with? You commie ****.

giphy.gif
 
Agree, it's not worth it. Also I think he first talked about military action to see if the Muzzies would stock their areas with women, children, and cameras and that lets him know where to look for leaks.
He should use the Tyrion Lannister approach. Put out 3 leaks to 3 sdifferent suspected leakers , and see which ones come to light.
 
LOL! Trump thinking something through? It’s not about that. It’s about angry, compulsive actions that make him and his supporters feel powerful and righteous.

President Obama warned him.
Hillary warned him.
Macron warned him.
Merkel warned him.
The Generals warned him.

But in his stupid quest to undo all things Obama, Trump went and left the Iran agreement. And which should come as a surprise to no one, now we're facing war. Trump has nobody to blame but himself.

Obama, others warned Trump that pulling out of Iran nuke deal could lead to war
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/na...ump-pulling-out-iran-nuke-deal-could-n1020461

"The choice we face is ultimately between diplomacy or some form of war," then-President Barack Obama said in 2015.

WASHINGTON — To supporters of the Iran nuclear deal, it's no surprise that President Donald Trump is now facing a potential war with Iran.

Long before Trump was elected, advocates of the nuclear agreement — including then-President Barack Obama, French President Emmanuel Macron and others — had argued that abandoning the accord carried grave risks that could lead to an armed conflict.

"So let's not mince words. The choice we face is ultimately between diplomacy or some form of war — maybe not tomorrow, maybe not three months from now, but soon," Obama said in a speech in 2015 defending the deal before a congressional vote.

Trump as a candidate vowed to dump what he called "the worst deal ever" and he made good on his promise in 2018. A year later, Trump is openly discussing the pros and cons of bombing Iran.

On Friday, the president said in a tweet that he had ordered and then called off military strikes against Iran after Tehran shot down a U.S. surveillance drone over the Strait of Hormuz.

In his 2015 speech, Obama said that without an agreement limiting Iran's nuclear program in return for sanctions relief, any U.S. administration would be left with only one option to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon — "another war in the Middle East."
 
So Obama et el are saying that unless you give into Iran and allow them to get nukes then you are going to war with them? So if Trump doesn't pull out then Iran gets nukes because there is no way to stop them and if he does pull out he can implement sanctions that would break the backs of the mullas and possibly keep them from getting nukes.

Fact is that they were already in violation of the agreement. They had already started bring in more heavy water than what was allowed in the agreement. The agreement allowed them to get money and sanctions relief. It also allowed them to pay for terrorism throughout the region. Thinking this agreement was going to stop Iran from getting nukes is naive and dangerous.
 
So Obama et el are saying that unless you give into Iran and allow them to get nukes then you are going to war with them? So if Trump doesn't pull out then Iran gets nukes because there is no way to stop them and if he does pull out he can implement sanctions that would break the backs of the mullas and possibly keep them from getting nukes.

Fact is that they were already in violation of the agreement. They had already started bring in more heavy water than what was allowed in the agreement. The agreement allowed them to get money and sanctions relief. It also allowed them to pay for terrorism throughout the region. Thinking this agreement was going to stop Iran from getting nukes is naive and dangerous.

They also were not allowing the required inspections to occur. It was the worst and stupidest agreement ever made in the history of the world. Obama should face treason charges for what he gave to Iran.
 
They also were not allowing the required inspections to occur.

Indy, you are a first-class bullshit artist. But thankfully, we don't all live in Trump's dystopian world of falsehoods. There were some issues regarding Iran test firing mid-range missiles, but by all counts they were in compliance with the Nuclear accord.

January 16, 2016: The IAEA verifies that Iran met its nuclear related commitments. Based on the IAEA report, Zarif and Mogherini announce implementation day, triggering the lifting of sanctions. UN Security Council Resolution 2231, which the Council passed in July to endorse the deal and trigger the lifting of UN sanctions comes into effect. Prior resolutions on Iran's nuclear program are terminated.

February 26, 2016: The IAEA issues its first quarterly report on Iran's post-implementation day nuclear activities. The report notes that Iran is meeting its nuclear obligations, although it slightly exceeded a cap set on the stockpile of heavy water allowed under the agreement. The IAEA notes that Iran had 130.9 metric tons of heavy water, slightly above the 130 metric ton limit set by the deal, but shipped out 20 metric tons on February 24 to stay below the limit.

May 27, 2016: The IAEA issues its quarterly report on Iran's implementation of the nuclear deal. The report shows Iran is abiding by restrictions under the agreement and inspectors have been able to access certain Iranian sites using complimentary access visits.

September 8, 2016: The IAEA releases its third quarterly report since JCPOA implementation day, showing Iran continues to abide by its restrictions under the JCPOA. The report notes that Iran removed 96 IR-1 centrifuges from the storage area at Natanz to replace damaged centrifuges that were enriching uranium.

November 20, 2016: IAEA releases its fourth quarterly report on Iranian nuclear program since JCPOA implementation day. The report notes that Iran had 130.1 metric tons of heavy water, slightly over the 130 metric tons permitted under the deal. The IAEA report says Iran plans to transfer heavy water out of the country.

December 6, 2016: IAEA verifies that all 11 metric tons of heavy water shipped out of Iran have reached their destination and are in storage, bringing Iran back within the limit on heavy water of 130 metric tons established by the JCPOA.

January 12, 2017: In his confirmation hearing for the position of Secretary of Defense, General Jim Mattis tells Congress that, while he believes the JCPOA is an imperfect agreement, “when America gives her word, we have to live up to it and work with our allies.” His remarks echo a previous statement in April, when he noted there is “no going back” on the deal absent a clear violation of the agreement.

January 15, 2017: IAEA verifies that Tehran has taken certain steps to remove infrastructure and excess centrifuges from Fordow within the necessary timeframe required by the JCPOA (one year after Implementation Day). Secretary of Energy Moniz releases a statement noting “Iran successfully met the milestone of removing excess centrifuges and infrastructure from Fordow, demonstrating that the deal continues to limit Iran’s nuclear program so as to provide confidence that Iran is not developing a nuclear weapon and maintain at least a one year breakout time.”

February 24, 2017: IAEA releases its first quarterly report on Iranian nuclear activity in 2017, reporting on the size of Iran’s stockpile of uranium enriched to 3.67 percent for the first time. The report notes that the stockpile was 101.7 kilograms. The limit established by the deal is 300 kilograms.

April 18, 2017: Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, in a letter to speaker of the House Paul Ryan, certifies to Congress that Iran is compliant in meeting its obligations under the JCPOA.

June 2, 2017: The IAEA releases its second quarterly report in 2017 on Iran’s implementation of the JCPOA, reporting that Iran is meeting its obligations under the nuclear deal.

June 20, 2017: The UN Secretary General releases the biannual report on UN Security Council Resolution 2231, affirming that Iran is complying with the JCPOA but raising concerns about Iran’s ballistic missile activity.

July 17, 2017: The Trump administration reluctantly certifies Iran's compliance with the JCPOA, delaying the announcement for hours and issuing new non-nuclear sanctions on Iran the next day.

August 31, 2017: In its third quarterly report, the IAEA finds that as of Aug. 21, Iran’s stock of low-enriched uranium was 88.4 kg (194.89 pounds), well below a 202.8-kg limit, and the level of enrichment did not exceed a 3.67 percent cap. Iran’s stock of heavy water, stood at 111 tons, below the 130 ton limit.

September 20, 2017: The foreign ministers of China, France, Germany, Iran, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States meet on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly for the ministerial meeting of the E3/EU+3 and Iran. In remarks following the meeting, EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini states that all agreed that all sides are implementing the JCPOA.

November 13, 2017: The IAEA issues its fourth quarterly report for 2017 on Iran's implementation of the JCPOA. IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano tells the agency's Board of Governors that the nuclear-related commitments are being implemented and that IAEA inspectors have had access to all locations they have needed to visit.

February 22, 2018: The IAEA issues its first quarterly report for 2018 on Iran's implementation of the JCPOA. IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano tells the agency's Board of Governors that the nuclear-related commitments are being implemented and that IAEA inspectors have had access to all locations they have needed to visit. As of Feb. 12, 2018, the quantity of Iran’s uranium enriched up to 3.67% U-235 was 109.5 kg. The report notes that Iran informed the agency of its intention to pursue naval nuclear propulsion in the future.

April 19, 2018: 500 British, French and German parliamentarians urge U.S. members of Congress to help "keep the JCPOA alive" in a letter.

May 8, 2018: President Trump announces that he is withdrawing the United States from the JCPOA and signs a presidential memorandum to institute the "highest level" of economic sanctions on Iran.
 
They also were not allowing the required inspections to occur. It was the worst and stupidest agreement ever made in the history of the world. Obama should face treason charges for what he gave to Iran.

Which is why the agreement made no sense. It just allowed Obama to get the heat off him and kick the can down the road. The deal itself is setup to give Iran nukes. Just not during Obama's presidency. He knew they would get them within 10 years. He didn't care. The idea that this abortion of a deal would keep Iran from creating a nuclear weapon is moronic and just ignorant. It gave them exactly what they wanted. It gave them sanction relief and tons of cash. How exactly is that a good deal?
 
Seriously Tibs? First off American's can even be on the inspection teams. The teams aren't allowed into the revolutionary guard bases which house the nuclear research teams. The deal gives no ability by the U.N. to find out how advanced their centrifuges have become. There is no way to find them.

The biggest thing missing from this entire debate is that by 2025 most of the "restrictions" are lifted. There is literally no reason why this deal was signed by Obama except to give Iran tons of money and allow them to have the technology after he leaves office.
 
Shocking, I tell you, shocking. Trump was briefed about potential casualties well before he authorized the strikes. His version of how - and why - he walked it back is a bunch of bs. Again, I'm glad he decided against it, it was the right choice. Still, it numbs the mind how extremely dishonest the man is.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr"><a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/FTR?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#FTR</a>: WH officials have CONFIRMED that Trump was briefed on the casualty assessment BEFORE he authorized the potential strike on Iran.<br><br>His elaborate story about how and why he changed his mind at the last minute and nearly started a war is a big, fat LIE.<a href="https://t.co/hh0vpDdOQK">https://t.co/hh0vpDdOQK</a></p>— Cyrus Toulabi (@CyrusToulabi) <a href="https://twitter.com/CyrusToulabi/status/1142247909985005568?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 22, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
*sigh

https://freebeacon.com/national-security/iran-bans-u-s-inspectors-from-all-nuclear-sites/

https://www.latimes.com/world/asia/la-fg-iran-nuclear-20170830-story.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/21/world/middleeast/iran-nuclear-talks-inspections.html

And some details on Obama’s act of treason by aiding a known enemy of America:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/obama-took-lying-to-new-heights-with-the-iran-deal/2018/06/07/b75f72d2-6a7c-11e8-9e38-24e693b38637_story.html?utm_term=.8e335e1f2628

Tibs:

Lover of Muslim terrorists
Defender of baby killers
Views AntiFa as heroes
Likens border security to the Holocaust
Worships Creepy Porn Lawyer
Can not grasp basic economics

That is one ****** up dude.

Why can you only like a post once.
 
The great 0 and his underhanded deal with the mullahs is just one more thing to be cleaned up, so he said, they said, he did, they did, is just wasted bloviating. We're here and now. Stay on this subject matter.

The idea that Trump made his decision ignorantly at the last moment, lacking all the info is just stupid. Has it occurred to any of you that maybe the the war machine had to be pressed for the entire intel on casualties and what comes next? Hear me out. Trump has been battling the entire DC political class since he came down the elevator in June 2015 to announce his candidacy. That's 4 years as of a week ago. For 4 years he's had to make huge decisions literally on his own.

Anyone recall during the debates when he said Iraq was flawed and failed policy? He said so because he believed that flawed intel was given to W. You'll recall the dims too pointed to WMD's as real and substantial threats. Of course, at the time daddy Bush (former head of CIA) was said to still have a hardon for Saddam after the Gulf war, and that would later be the dims reasoning for yet another ill advised republican led campaign to kill innocents in Iraq. See how this works? Stir up conflict politically, point fingers at one another, launch a few rockets making Northrop Grumman, General Dynamics, and a few others terribly rich, and in the ensuing run up to the next election, dispute should we have done that, are we a tyrannical, horrible people because we love our country? Oh the horrah. And on, and on, and on...

No, I give Trump a tremendous amount of props for the constraint he's shown here. We don't need war, we don't need to enrich the MIC, we don't need another battle with ******** dims who hate this great nation and provide them with cannon fodder as we move into another election year. No bombs, no political fodder, no war. Take care of America President Trump.
 
Tibs, the agreement with Iran was not worth the effort to make the paper it was printed on. Nor was it worth the bandwidth for Bomma to e-sign it with his beloved ******* pen.
Iran's own ******* history shows that.

Tell you what... here's an exercise for you.

I voted for Trump.
You assume I will vote for Trump in 2020.
You get signals daily that I intend to do that.
I defend some of Trump's actions.
You negotiate with me to not vote for Trump in 2020
We agree that I'll "keep an open mind" about not voting for Trump in 2020.
I still defend Trump on some things.
We discuss our agreement again.
I assure you that I'm keeping an open mind to not vote for Trump in 2020.
I still defend Trump on some things.
We discuss our agreement again.
I assure you that I'm keeping an open mind to not vote for Trump in 2020.
I still defend Trump on some things.
We discuss our agreement again.
I assure you that I'm keeping an open mind to not vote for Trump in 2020.
I still defend Trump on some things.
We discuss our agreement again.
I assure you that I'm keeping an open mind to not vote for Trump in 2020.
I still defend Trump on some things.
We discuss our agreement again.
I assure you that I'm keeping an open mind to not vote for Trump in 2020.
I still defend Trump on some things.
We discuss our agreement again.
I assure you that I'm keeping an open mind to not vote for Trump in 2020.
Suddenly 2020 rolls around.

Who will I vote for? And why do you think that?
 
no, see, now you're refusing to be realistic.

let's also say that you and I agree that while keeping an open mind on the election, you personally send me a check for $100,000. The night before the election, as a matter of fact. A mere pittance to some, but would be life-changing for others. You do so in an attempt to further influence me to keep an open mind about the elections.

So, who do you think I'll choose, based on my continued backing of Trump despite our continued talks for me to look at other candidates?
 
Top