Obama accepts a Nuclear Iran - radical change of policy

From the Washington Times:

Report Alters Iran Nukes Outlook
Intelligence Chief to Face Senate Panel This Week
9:16 p.m., Monday, March 7, 2011

"An annual intelligence report to Congress has dropped language stating that Iran’s nuclear weapons ambitions are a future option.

The revision comes as U.S. intelligence agencies recently altered a controversial 2007 intelligence assessment that said Iran halted work on nuclear arms in 2003 and was keeping open its options for building an atomic weapon.

The deleted language also had stated for two years that Iran was keeping open the option to build atomic weapons. However, the latest report to Congress, which was made public Feb. 23, no longer states that Iran’s building a weapon is an option."


www.washingtontimes.com...

reply to post by boondock-saint


You all have been dooped so badly LOL

Do you in all honesty think Obama would suddenly (over night) policy switch on Iran without "other" plans for Iran?

Come on, I'm sure there are some intelligent people among you!!! Use a brain for pete's sake!

This isn't a news report, it's an opinion piece making a lot of inferences and conjectures masquerading as news. Statements made by Obama and the state department would seem to contradict the substance of this article, which appears to be based on the Israeli neo-con world-view that if we're not constantly beating the drums of war against Iran, then we must be somehow in league with them.

Originally posted by Billmeister
I'll be waiting for additional sources before I believe in an actual change in U.S. policy.

My confusion lies with considering Saudi Arabia and Israel allies.

We know that they enjoy great benefits form American tax dollars, but there does not seem to be any sort of quid pro quo. I mean, what have they ever done for the U.S. to be considered allies?

Yes, Saudi Arabia is a supplier of oil, but they do not give it away, in fact, they make a very handsome sum of money selling it to the U.S. As for Israel, I'm not quite sure what they have provided to the U.S. in exchange for this "allied" status.

Seems like "friends" who never buy when it is their round, sleep on your couch, mooch all your food and leave the next morning without saying thanks or helping with the dishes.

the Billmeister

Ahh now youre thinking for yourself and reassessing the meaning and designation of 'ally', and realizing one may trust but one MUST verify. These wonderful 'allies' have done not a single greatful act of friendship other than choosing to, periodically, decrease the rate of parasitism, and I for one dont see a decrease in the rate of destruction an especially endearing, good or friendly thing, if an ally is judged by not being at any time an abuser and destroyer to begin with.

Originally posted by bluemirage5
reply to post by boondock-saint

 

You all have been dooped so badly LOL

Do you in all honesty think Obama would suddenly (over night) policy switch on Iran without "other" plans for Iran?

Come on, I'm sure there are some intelligent people among you!!! Use a brain for pete's sake!

edit on 10-3-2011 by bluemirage5 because: (no reason given)

Wow.

After having participated in this thread, and having reread the contributions by others, it is obvious that no one has questioned any part of the article and we all consider this the source of absolute truth.

boondock-saint did not consider this to be an interesting discussion point, rather he considers the source to be the official voice for all international policy.

Obviously, we all need to achieve the higher level of intelligence that you have attained in order to understand any and all intricacies of world diplomacy. I bow down to your superior enlightenment.

the Billmeister

p.s.
/sarcasm if it wasn't clear enough.

reply to post by TheWalkingFox


If you pay attention, it's pretty obvious that Iran's been given a pass to do what it wants. If The pakis can make one, the nk's can make one, the indians cand make one, the ranians will be able too.
Much immature thinking to be found on threads like these, where partisans demand that proof of chicanery and conspiracy are verified in full, that the accused issue full legal disclosure of their true intent and operations. The world doesnt work that way and most of what makes the real difference in policy is done in secret with other agents sent forth in advance to distract and deny so that the majority of an ignorant or deluded population of their intended victims, which are fools or worse, will be manipulated to over power and delay those with the wisdom and esperienc to read the signs, apply principles of human nature and assess interactions with various operative belief systems to predict the ultimate outcome. The intent by bammy is to make chaos inevitable and it is, but narcissists like to see the results of their machinations as soon as possible, not satisfied knowing only that they set the course for some distant impact. Bammy will fiddle with his girly golf swing while America burns.
Bammy knows the ranians gonna get to their promised land and he's doing nothing and distracting the whole milleau focusing on pressing issues such as bullying and such.

so CNN is not a reliable news source,
neither is Fox, neither is MSNBC,
neither is the BBC, neither is Russia Today
and now we can add
Debka to the unreliable list.

So can anybody tell me exactly
what news source IS reliable
for news???

I just found the article and posted it
for discussion. Don't shoot the poster !!!

This is apart of a new global strategic policy initiative to no longer be the bully on behalf of Israel. Israel has been threatening Iran and everyone else for far too long and people are quite frankly sick of it.

Still think Israel can do no wrong? Now, if Israel launches against Tehran it will be dealt with.

Originally posted by FriedrichNeecher
If you pay attention, it's pretty obvious that Iran's been given a pass to do what it wants.

Pay attention to what? A news outlet that gets all its information from the Israeli military, usually unsourced and unverified? Posters like you, who just make up crap that sounds scary because it wins stars on a goofy intrnet message board?

If The pakis can make one, the nk's can make one, the indians cand make one, the ranians will be able too.

Neither Pakistan nor India had ever signed the Nonproliferation Treaty (nor, for that matter, has Israel). North Korea withdrew from the treaty before declaring its nukes. Iran remains within the treaty, and has incentive to remain so; North Korea was completely isolated before withdrawing, and had nothing to lose. Iran has substantial amounts to lose if it wither breaks the treaty or withdraws.

Much immature thinking to be found on threads like these, where partisans demand that proof of chicanery and conspiracy are verified in full, that the accused issue full legal disclosure of their true intent and operations.

As I just said, Iran has plenty to lose by screwing around on this. On the other hand, you do not. When Iran says "We're not looking for nuclear weapons," a stance they have maintained, provably maintained for over thirty years, both pre- and post-revolution, a nation that faces MASSIVE fallout if they do otherwise, I'm going to lend them a little more trust than some dude who spends his time trying to drum up fear about Muslims on the internet, often making stuff up to do so.

Could Iran be lying? Sure they could. So could any number of other NPT nations Hell, Sweden might have a massive stockpile of nukes. They say they don't, there's no evidence otherwise, so I'm going to go ahead and take the Swedes at their word.

The world doesnt work that way and most of what makes the real difference in policy is done in secret with other agents sent forth in advance to distract and deny so that the majority of an ignorant or deluded population of their intended victims, which are fools or worse, will be manipulated to over power and delay those with the wisdom and esperienc to read the signs, apply principles of human nature and assess interactions with various operative belief systems to predict the ultimate outcome.

Wow. Use some periods, man. Phew!

A fool is someone who believes an internet scare-monger over the IAEA. You tell me that the scary evil lying hook-nosed Muslim bad guys have nukes, the IAEA says they don't. You present no evidence to back your claim, other than hoping i jump on your bandwagon of being scared of the scary evil lying hook-nosed Muslims. The IAEA was actually in Iran, and found nothing pointing to nuclear weapons.

I'd have to be kind of dumb to buy your story, even without the conflict from a more credible source.

The intent by bammy is to make chaos inevitable and it is, but narcissists like to see the results of their machinations as soon as possible, not satisfied knowing only that they set the course for some distant impact. Bammy will fiddle with his girly golf swing while America burns.

Evidence? Again, there is absolutely nothing backing up the claim in the OP. Nothing. You have contributed absolutely nothing of value, and your whole argument, as I said, relies on your audience joining you in just assuming that the scary evil lying hook-nosed Muslims are being scary evil lying hook-nosed Muslims.

Bammy knows the ranians gonna get to their promised land and he's doing nothing and distracting the whole milleau focusing on pressing issues such as bullying and such.

Well, when American kids are getting killed over a situation in America being caused by other Americans, I kind of expect the American president to give it some priority. Common sense, right?

reply to post by TheWalkingFox


..common sense, right?

Nope. None that I can see. Youre wrong in your assessments and analysis in almost every point. But so what? Of no matter and you are welcome to them. Of interest it seems to me your post is based upon trusting what should questioned and questioning what should be known!
I neither care for or have any value in cutesy pavlovian emoticons,stars or flags or attaboys of whatever juvenile accolades may be assigned here for developing or maldeveloped psyches. What I mine for is the mature responsible mind because , as it turns out, they are very rare commodities. Things will come to a point soon enough that all one can hope to find solace in is the understanding of a compatriot. Whatever else you foresee, is at variance with what I know to be.
Regardless, Be of good cheer

Obama's actual NEW policy is. . . .
"LALALALALALA I can't hear you, I can't hear you" while putting fingers in his ears.

Obama could give a tinkers damn about nukes or security of the western world. His foreign policy is clearly evident of that. He wants to cede the remaining superpower of the globe to the UN, the EU, and put all of Amrica on an even keel with the rest of the world.
His "appeasement and apology" strategy is working wonderfully.

Egads! What did you clowns VOTE for??!!

Originally posted by Immortalgemini527
and who the hell cares if Israel gets hit any way, its not the usa, so why worry about it.

Great point. Let's also nuke Iran Syria and Turkey because they are not the USA, so why worry about them?

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
Now, if Israel launches against Tehran it will be dealt with.

Just how do you know this (lol, waiting for the answer so bad), and in what way will Israel be dealt with?

While I firmly believe that Obama's administration has no intention of preventing a nuclear Iranian state, the source is dubious AT BEST. DEBKA has released a lot of BS material in the past and, my guess is, they are doing so with this "article" as well.

The best thing one can do with DEBKA is to wait for corroborating sources that are independent of DEBKA entirely.

Originally posted by IsraeliGuy

Originally posted by Immortalgemini527
and who the hell cares if Israel gets hit any way, its not the usa, so why worry about it.

Great point. Let's also nuke Iran Syria and Turkey because they are not the USA, so why worry about them?

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
Now, if Israel launches against Tehran it will be dealt with.

Just how do you know this (lol, waiting for the answer so bad), and in what way will Israel be dealt with?

edit on 12-3-2011 by IsraeliGuy because: (no reason given)

Imagine if New Hampshire invaded Texas and you get what I am saying.

reply to post by adifferentbreed


I prefer him over a gung-ho cowboy in the White House.

Seriously, is there more to life than just war, death and destruction to you hawks?

reply to post by FriedrichNeecher


Well, that was utterly insubstantive and hyperbolic.

U mad bro?

He mad.

reply to post by TheImmaculateD1
As leader of your beloved country, how you not defend, or spew a minimal bulliism(spelling) when this man routinely threatens this little sliver of a nation to the the sound of total annilation, and consequently(brain dead tonight based on yummy sleep narcotics) bulldozed into the see.........WOW, sounds like another leader I recall n roughly 1939........Any guesses? O.K. I'll shut up know -devils advocate-

Originally posted by radpetey
reply to post by TheImmaculateD1

 

As leader of your beloved country, how you not defend, or spew a minimal bulliism(spelling) when this man routinely threatens this little sliver of a nation to the the sound of total annilation, and consequently(brain dead tonight based on yummy sleep narcotics) bulldozed into the see.........WOW, sounds like another leader I recall n roughly 1939........Any guesses? O.K. I'll shut up know -devils advocate-

edit on 17-3-2011 by radpetey because: (no reason given)

edit on 18-3-2011 by radpetey because: (no reason given)

This is Israel's problem and not the USA, the US is not the broadsword of Israel.

Originally posted by IsraeliGuy

Originally posted by Immortalgemini527
and who the hell cares if Israel gets hit any way, its not the usa, so why worry about it.

Great point. Let's also nuke Iran Syria and Turkey because they are not the USA, so why worry about them?

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
Now, if Israel launches against Tehran it will be dealt with.

Just how do you know this (lol, waiting for the answer so bad), and in what way will Israel be dealt with?

edit on 12-3-2011 by IsraeliGuy because: (no reason given)

Further condemnation, further exposure of how they have an unnatural taste for blood. As stated previously that would be like if New Hampshire invaded Texas.

reply to post by boondock-saint


its about time dammit. somebody should have told them to kiss our arse long,long ago. now if someone would nudge them off our tit, we could save billions a year towards our own economy. what do they do for us to deserve billions in funding from U.S. taxpayers every damn year? we are not the empire, or the worlds police and really wish we would act as such and start following our darn constitution as that is what it was meant for.