Obama To Bypass Congress On Iran Treaty?

originally posted by: Logarock

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: blargo
a reply to: Krazysh0t
That is why I really dislike these process arguments. This is a pretty standard process in the modern era. All the presidents did it. Argue about what is in the agreement and that is fair game. But these process arguments as if Obama or W Bush before are the first to do such a thing is crazy.

What's funny is that literally EVERY argument used to discredit Obama's Presidency has been used before against other Presidents. Even the Birther argument isn't new. This is why I tire easily of political debates. They usually end up with me getting insulted and typecast into the opposing party when I support neither, and no one can recognize political rhetoric and hyperbole anymore. It's really scary when people start using it and don't even know they are using it. They repeat those arguments like they are being insightful.

The real problem with this whole thing is the negotiating about capacity to develop nukes with a nation pushing a regional hegemony as we speak. In fact as we speak Iranian backed and armed militias are fighting ISIS over Sadam's home town. The US didn't get out of the way so Iraq could take care of itself but rather so Iran could step in.

And? It's about time a regional power dealt with a regional threat in its region instead of us coming to the "rescue" all the time. I fail to see a problem with anything you just said here.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Whats regional have to do with anything? Should have let Germany alone, just a fight between locals?

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: Logarock

The difference is that I'm not trying to take sides or anything like that. I don't support Obama and whatever kind of deal or whatever he's got going with Iran. Nor do I side with the Republicans in their ongoing attempt at sabotaging Obama and going to War with Iran.

All I'm saying is that all this internal fighting within our government looks bad. It looks weak to anyone who's our enemy. It looks dysfunctional and corrupt to the rest of America and our allies too. I realize they are going to fight and argue about policy and what not. But there are ways of doing it and ways not to do it. While it may not be Treason it is certainly Mutiny and that is a failure of the command structure.

We cant afford to be monolithic right now. Someone is pulling to hard on the wheel in one direction. Many honestly feel that the administration is overlooking to many things that should be brought to bear on the process. Foremost is the true and obvious nature of Iran's government, its aspirations, its track record, its ongoing activity in the region ect.

a reply to: Logarock

Maybe. Or maybe we just have a bunch zionist hardliners on the right that thirst for more war and will do anything they can to start one with Iran.

After all remember the list of countries in the PNAC that needed to be taken care of???

Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran

Looks like we're right on schedule.

a reply to: mOjOm

After all remember the list of countries in the PNAC that needed to be taken care of???

Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran

Looks like we're right on schedule.

Well, almost on schedule, gol-durn Syria just won't give up. Neocons can't wait on them any longer, so best to just jump to the finale, and start beating the war drums for Iran.

originally posted by: Logarock
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Whats regional have to do with anything? Should have let Germany alone, just a fight between locals?

Please don't institute Godwin's law and compare today's situation to the 1930's and Nazi Germany. The situations are in no way similar. Answer the questions. What is so bad about Iran dealing with a threat in their area? Why is it so necessary for America to solve problems half way around the world for it?

originally posted by: Logarock


We cant afford to be monolithic right now. Someone is pulling to hard on the wheel in one direction. Many honestly feel that the administration is overlooking to many things that should be brought to bear on the process. Foremost is the true and obvious nature of Iran's government, its aspirations, its track record, its ongoing activity in the region ect.

You mean its track record of non-violence for the last 200 years?

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Logarock
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Whats regional have to do with anything? Should have let Germany alone, just a fight between locals?

Please don't institute Godwin's law and compare today's situation to the 1930's and Nazi Germany. The situations are in no way similar. Answer the questions. What is so bad about Iran dealing with a threat in their area? Why is it so necessary for America to solve problems half way around the world for it?

Why not? I see no reason not to. And I have and did answer the question. But will add that Iran's being local has more to do with convenience than anything. Just letting Iran one the lose over there is rather stupid.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Logarock


We cant afford to be monolithic right now. Someone is pulling to hard on the wheel in one direction. Many honestly feel that the administration is overlooking to many things that should be brought to bear on the process. Foremost is the true and obvious nature of Iran's government, its aspirations, its track record, its ongoing activity in the region ect.

You mean its track record of non-violence for the last 200 years?

Need to get that head out of the sand just a bit. A lot to see over there in regards to Iran's machinations.

originally posted by: Logarock

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Logarock


We cant afford to be monolithic right now. Someone is pulling to hard on the wheel in one direction. Many honestly feel that the administration is overlooking to many things that should be brought to bear on the process. Foremost is the true and obvious nature of Iran's government, its aspirations, its track record, its ongoing activity in the region ect.

You mean its track record of non-violence for the last 200 years?

Need to get that head out of the sand just a bit. A lot to see over there in regards to Iran's machinations.

Evidence?

a reply to: Logarock

If you think that this situation is the same as 1930's Europe then you don't understand history and what enabled Hitler to rise to power. Comparing the situation to today is useless fearmongering. America is no better than Iran. We have a WAY scarier history of aggressive policies. You can denounce Iran all you want, but at the end of the day they are better behaved than we are. Next you'll say they finance terrorists. Well so does America.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

They are active anti semites seeking a regional hegemony. They are not well behaved.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Logarock

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Logarock


We cant afford to be monolithic right now. Someone is pulling to hard on the wheel in one direction. Many honestly feel that the administration is overlooking to many things that should be brought to bear on the process. Foremost is the true and obvious nature of Iran's government, its aspirations, its track record, its ongoing activity in the region ect.

You mean its track record of non-violence for the last 200 years?

Need to get that head out of the sand just a bit. A lot to see over there in regards to Iran's machinations.

Evidence?

What? Are you really that out of touch with the realties?

originally posted by: Logarock

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Logarock

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Logarock


We cant afford to be monolithic right now. Someone is pulling to hard on the wheel in one direction. Many honestly feel that the administration is overlooking to many things that should be brought to bear on the process. Foremost is the true and obvious nature of Iran's government, its aspirations, its track record, its ongoing activity in the region ect.

You mean its track record of non-violence for the last 200 years?

Need to get that head out of the sand just a bit. A lot to see over there in regards to Iran's machinations.

Evidence?

What? Are you really that out of touch with the realties?

Well I usually hear these claims but I never see any evidence for Iran being involved in things. So just humor me and provide the evidence.

a reply to: Krazysh0t


You really are krazy.

originally posted by: Logarock
a reply to: Krazysh0t


You really are krazy.

I must be. So evidence?

Krazy dont iran support hezbollah? havent Iranian rockets been used in Israel? ALso Iraninan rpg-7s used on merkava tanks.

Sure iran dont do anything directly these days but they do plenty of proxy stuff.