Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The Iran Deal
#61
If there had been alternative to the USSR other than the USA, we'd have 0 allies. Bandar is right. We're not a friendly, just a user. This is why I have felt Poland and the Baltics should work with Russia more than antagonize Russia, we likely won't be there in a crunch since Russia is not an existential threat like we saw the USSR.

Russia is more steadfast. Syria is about nothing to Russia strategically, but, they are not going to break the bonds when an ally is under assault by western allies.
Reply
#62
(07-20-2015, 10:05 PM)John L Wrote:
(07-20-2015, 08:51 PM)mr_yak Wrote: Do you mean giving it an 'official' seal of approval that Obama can sign off on? ... or simply letting it come to pass by failing to pass legislation? The U.N. vote effectively cuts Congress out of "the deal". They don't like getting cut out of deals. It's possible their spines are flimsy enough to go with the former ... but I'm thinking they will go with the latter.

Actually, what I am talking about it whether or not they will have the guts to actually take serious action against the president, or whatever you want to call him, and his underhanded doings.

And I have no doubt that both Jackasses and Dumbasses alike will not like having their congressional powers usurped. I'm almost positive of this. But I am almost equally certain they will not have the "moral courage", "moxie" "guts", or whatever necessary to put a stop to it.

I guess I'm just a lone wolf howling in the wilderness. But sooner or later, enough voters are going to finally say "Enough".

John,
There is an entire raft of chicanery that would indict Obama. Unfortunately, this deal is probably not in it ... at least not so far. Unless he actually took bribes from the Mullahs ... and I doubt the Mullahs would piss on him if he were on fire.

Foreign policy is the purview of the Executive. The $150B was frozen by and Executive Order and it can get unfrozen by an Executive Order. If the legislature had been on the ball, it would have put this under statute. Obama and KerryME has every right to address and swing the vote in the U.N. (... as if greed needed any grease). The only thing Obama can't do us undo U.S. sanctions which are the current law. If Congress does not approve the deal and he instructs the Justice Department to look the other way while his pals at GE, etc.. start lining up buisness, there is a pretty good case for impeachment. That might actually have a snowballs chance ... as it would be so blatantly obvious and it effectively shoves Congress nose into the toilet water ... I doubt they'll like the taste much ... on either side of the aisle.
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard."
-- Henry Mencken
Reply
#63
As internationalized as major businesses are, Obama nor GE would need to violate the law, they'd just associate with non American corps via funding and secretive deals to make their cash.

The sanctions are a UN deal, not an American deal, because of how internationalized corps now are, IMO.

Exxon could easily have cash or technical means overseas at the disposal say of Total or BP or a Chinese consortium IF they needed them. I doubt they do, but, some Russian firms would although Putin would direct them to avoid US business ties.
Reply
#64
(07-22-2015, 02:03 PM)Palladin Wrote: As internationalized as major businesses are, Obama nor GE would need to violate the law, they'd just associate with non American corps via funding and secretive deals to make their cash.

If it were that easy, it would already be a done deal. There is legislation that precludes U.S. companies doing business with Iran. If Congress doesn't act and change the law ... and they do business even via loosely linked 'associations', they are in violation of federal law (people, in the past, have gone to jail for that sort of thing). The Obama Administration is already lawless ... so it would be nothing new if the Justice Department turned a blind eye ... but that doesn't make it any less illegal. And there are only about 16 month window for this to proceed with much certainty. There's a slight chance that we might elect someone actually interested in upholding the oath of office. And there might be a chance of retroactive prosecution. It would be interesting to see what kind of actuarial number crunching going on within the companies that choose to roll the dice ... personally I hope it tilts the against them and the fines and criminal liability are astronomical. Wouldn't it would be quite ironic ... as this is hailed as "Obama's Historic Deal", if the U.S. were the only country in the world that refuses to abide by it?
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard."
-- Henry Mencken
Reply
#65
Well, at least the individual states can reject the Iran deal, thanks to Ted Cruz, when he was solicitor general for the state of Texas.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"INSIDE EVERY PROGRESSIVE IS A TOTALITARIAN SCREAMING TO GET OUT" - David Horowitz

Reply
#66
The more info we receive, the deal is looking worse. I read today where Iran does the sampling and presents it to the IAEA.

Thing is, Obama will release the cash at any rate it appears. That would simply assist them if he were to do that and the Senate says NO to a deal.

He and Bush and Clinton all need to be arrested anyway and sent to Iraq, Serbia and in Obama's case, we should send him to Libya and then to Damascus. War criminals no less than Hitler was. Just make a war w/o valid justification, only large states get away with it.
Reply
#67
This deal becomes more and more an internal US congress affair than an international issue.

One thing I'm sure of, is that the oil lobbies won't like it. Worse than the cash release to Iran, is the oil release on the market. Oil will lose at least $10 when Iran will start to export as normal.
The Saudis wanted to piss off the US with low oil prices. Now the US is pissing the Saudi with low oil prices. US fracking firms would better not invest yet.

IMO lawmakers will car more about impact on oil prices than the capacity of Iran to build nukes.

The IS was also created originaly to destabilize the region and keep oil prices high. At the same time Saudi didn't have to curb export and still had a good price for their oil. They have two levies at their disposal: Islamic Terror for "up", rising output for "down".

The Iran deal is going to disrupt that. And I think it's good because we should not let all the strings in the hands of the Saudis.

I don't think that more money for Iran would improve their abaility to build nukes because they already have more than enough money, and they are already able to build nukes if they wanted to (but Iran is walking a fine line about that). I can't believe that Iran hasn't all the ingredients yet.

I'm sure that all of you would abundantly applaud what Kerry said today if it was Rubio or Trump who said that.

This deal is like the decision to invade Iraq: It all depends how it's implemented on the ground.
Reply
#68
(07-23-2015, 05:47 PM)Fredledingue Wrote: The Saudis wanted to piss off the US with low oil prices. Now the US is pissing the Saudi with low oil prices. US fracking firms would better not invest yet.

I don't see it that way. Saudis did this because they were afraid they would collapse after oil reached a certain price. They were trying to stave off competition. But that won't work, and they have pretty much realized this and given up.

As for the US fracking firms, the only ones that folded were the inefficient and least productive ones. In other words, all it did was make everyone uncomfortable, and get rid of the weak. S26

Quote:The Iran deal is going to disrupt that. And I think it's good because we should not let all the strings in the hands of the Saudis.

It isn't,.....yet. My guess is that when the Saudis AND the Israeli get going full steam, they will have a solid power block. There's alway a chance I am wrong, but the two are certainly making like closet/back-room lovers, not yet making it official. S5

Quote:I don't think that more money for Iran would improve their abaility to build nukes because they already have more than enough money, and they are already able to build nukes if they wanted to (but Iran is walking a fine line about that). I can't believe that Iran hasn't all the ingredients yet.

But just think of all the extra trouble they can create with more funds? Spiteful

Quote:I'm sure that all of you would abundantly applaud what Kerry said today if it was Rubio or Trump who said that.

Wanna Bet? S6
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"INSIDE EVERY PROGRESSIVE IS A TOTALITARIAN SCREAMING TO GET OUT" - David Horowitz

Reply
#69
(07-23-2015, 06:15 PM)John L Wrote:
Quote:I don't think that more money for Iran would improve their abaility to build nukes because they already have more than enough money, and they are already able to build nukes if they wanted to (but Iran is walking a fine line about that). I can't believe that Iran hasn't all the ingredients yet.

But just think of all the extra trouble they can create with more funds? Spiteful

Eventually, they would probably be able to both ... but it would take much longer. This deal fast tracks and expedites both the nukes and the "extra trouble".

How does anyone ... even a master mouth piece like Kerry waltz around the secret annexes that preclude the 'clock' from even starting on consideration by Congress??
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard."
-- Henry Mencken
Reply
#70
Regarding the super genius Kerry, I am having visions of his flying over to negotiate with ISIS. That would be entertaining, especially if he was to reappear wearing an orange jumpsuit. S13
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"INSIDE EVERY PROGRESSIVE IS A TOTALITARIAN SCREAMING TO GET OUT" - David Horowitz

Reply
#71
(07-23-2015, 09:09 PM)John L Wrote: Regarding the super genius Kerry, I am having visions of his flying over to negotiate with ISIS. That would be entertaining, especially if he was to reappear wearing an orange jumpsuit. S13

Do you really think he'd waste time with (JV team) ISIS when he could be making more nice nice deals in the big leagues ... with Putin? S24
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard."
-- Henry Mencken
Reply
#72
Fred,

Fracking is not expensive, low prices are mainly detrimental to projects that exploit oil formations in tar sands, shale formations, that's the expensive thing.

In fact, fracking is how oil and gas wells have always been completed. The improvement is in the techniques, today we know how to open up larger gaps in the underground so stuff flows to the well easier, it's an old thing to frack a well.
Reply
#73
This is a reasonable view of the Iran deal, IMO:


http://www.theatlantic.com/international...al/399404/
Reply
#74
(07-24-2015, 11:36 AM)Palladin Wrote: This is a reasonable view of the Iran deal, IMO:


http://www.theatlantic.com/international...al/399404/

I disagree with your statement that "This is a reasonable view of the Iran deal." It definitely is NOT.

However, it IS a reasonable view of how we should act internationally. And there is a difference here.

But the deal is worse than reasonable. I'll give you just ONE reason why. When the information first came out, I remember reading that the US agreed to help safeguard the Iranian nuclear program from sabotage. I thought WHAT!? Certainly this is a misprint. So I cataloged it in the back of my brain for future reference.

Well, yesterday, a day that may well live in infamy, that stringbean Idiot admitted that that was exactly what the original article told us. It was True!!!!!

Did you get that? We are committed to keep anyone from defeating their nuclear bomb making program. That's right, we are allying ourselves to those very same "Death To America" Wackos. How to you feel about that?

Kerry Admits U.S. Will Help Protect Iran’s Nuclear Program From Sabotage. And notice that Stringbean has to have someone elselead off for him, so as to parse words most eloquent.

And also note his words, "I assure you that we will be coordinating very, very closely with Israel as we do on every aspect of Israel's security.............." In Washington speak, that means McDaddy and Lurch will be closely keeping an eye on our junior partners, and making certain that they don't go off and do something we deem unsatisfactory. Even including Israel's need to keep its citizens alive from a nuclear holocaust. I'll guarantee you that in the future Israel will be more inclined to coordinate with the Saudis than with us. Would you like to bet on that one?

Certainly one hell of a "Reasonable" view of the Iran deal. S18

Just because you have no love for those "disgusting" Joos over there doesn't mean that they are also Stupid Joos. Most of the Stupid Joos live over Here in the US. They are Stupid Ashkenazis, and even though there are a lot of those same idiots over there, they are outnumbered by more wise thinking Sephardi and Mizrahi, holding rein over them. Those two ethnic groups have had to deal with those Islamic crazies for centuries, and they weren't born last night either.

Now, do you still believe this deal to be "reasonable"?
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"INSIDE EVERY PROGRESSIVE IS A TOTALITARIAN SCREAMING TO GET OUT" - David Horowitz

Reply
#75
Here's what I mean when I talk about all these Stupid Joos "Over Here".

POLL: PLURALITY OF AMERICAN JEWS SUPPORT IRAN DEAL, 49%-31%

While this is indeed outrageous, it just proves my point about Ashkenazis. As a group, they may have the world's highest IQ, but they clearly have one of the lowest coefficients of Wisdom. Many of them Get it, but there are so many with not enough common sense to blow up a gnat's brain.

These people are Brilliant Morons.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"INSIDE EVERY PROGRESSIVE IS A TOTALITARIAN SCREAMING TO GET OUT" - David Horowitz

Reply
#76
If I said that, you'd say I was an anti semite. They may be for this deal because they know war is off the table John, ever consider that? It is not going to happen.

Anyway, this deal doesn't appear to be a good deal, but, again, what is your proposal instead of this deal? More sanctions which have failed to slow Iran at all?

Where is your proposal and I'd like to hear anyone's.
Reply
#77
(07-24-2015, 03:28 PM)Palladin Wrote: If I said that, you'd say I was an anti semite. They may be for this deal because they know war is off the table John, ever consider that? It is not going to happen.

No I wouldn't. Why would I get upset over the truth. Most of these people have no business calling themselves Jews. Most of them are G-dless and don't even bother to "Practice".

As for the "anti-Semite" part, they are not the only Semites out there. Arabs are also Semitic people. And I'm not Anti-Arab either. However, I'm anti-Arab culture, because it is self-defeating.

Quote:Anyway, this deal doesn't appear to be a good deal, but, again, what is your proposal instead of this deal? More sanctions which have failed to slow Iran at all?

Where is your proposal and I'd like to hear anyone's.

While I am not in favor of blanket sanctions, in this case, the best thing would have been to do nothing until they finally see the error of their ways. Now we are about to witness things that we never wanted.

And one of them is going to be the future destruction of Rome. You wait and see.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"INSIDE EVERY PROGRESSIVE IS A TOTALITARIAN SCREAMING TO GET OUT" - David Horowitz

Reply
#78
(07-24-2015, 03:59 PM)John L Wrote: While I am not in favor of blanket sanctions, in this case, the best thing would have been to do nothing until they finally see the error of their ways. Now we are about to witness things that we never wanted.

And one of them is going to be the future destruction of Rome. You wait and see.

John, they'll never see the "error in their ways" ... they only see the error in OUR ways. Their religion is based on fomenting a war that ends this world and brings about their paradise. They won't abandon that end. Bush's approach was effectively what you describe. Don't attack ... but don't facilitate them either ... because that would be stupid. The left keeps spouting that the alternative is war. Perhaps eventually it will be, but it would be best to put it off as long as possible ... and hope the regime can be ended before it finally comes to that. Instead we are infusing $150Billion and presumably guaranteeing their safe passage to a nuclear state. The 10 year plan that everyone is spouting is pathologically optimistic. They've been working feverishly for years. I'm sure they are much closer than that. I believe their scenario for the end of the world involves a fight somewhere in Syria. If Rome is destroyed, it would only be a means to that end.

I would not be surprised if the secret annexes involved 'guarantees' that the U.S. 'cannot' attack Iran. This is Kerryesque idiocy. It's not going to be an actual 'treaty' ... and even if the Congress voted in favor of an agreement with details they are not privy to, it would not be binding. It's one thing to pass legislation that you have to read later ... it's quite another to agree to terms that you aren't privy to and will never be made available. The responsibility for national defense lies with the Executive. Any future President could bomb the hell out of Iran. The Constitution and sovereign Executive power would supersede any ill conceived legislation ... or the U.N.. Ultimately all we have accomplished here is financing Iran's activities and providing the temporary illusion of 'cover' for Iran and faux 'peace' ... that and clearing the path for businesses around the world to start working their own deals with a previously near bankrupt nation ... I predict the Russians and Chinese will clean up on these as they will be apt to negotiate quick, tough, iron clad deals ... mostly to clear Iran's current (and extensive) oil inventory ... and all the other idiots will eventually have their asses handed to them.

Watch Ted Cruz (politely) shred "the deal" ... fifteen minutes ... but well worth it. You get the gist of it in the first five ...


"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard."
-- Henry Mencken
Reply
#79
(07-24-2015, 09:34 PM)mr_yak Wrote:
(07-24-2015, 03:59 PM)John L Wrote: While I am not in favor of blanket sanctions, in this case, the best thing would have been to do nothing until they finally see the error of their ways. Now we are about to witness things that we never wanted.

And one of them is going to be the future destruction of Rome. You wait and see.

John, they'll never see the "error in their ways" ... they see the error in OUR ways. Their religion is based on fomenting a war that ends this world and brings about their paradise. They won't abandon that end. Bush's approach was effectively what you describe.

That's fine. I don't care if they never do. Let them stew, but do what Michael Ledeen has been preaching for over a decade now. That's where Junior really did screw up. "Faster Please, Faster"

Quote:Watch Ted Cruz (politely) shred "the deal" ... fifteen minutes ... but well worth it. You get the gist of it in the first five ...



Yeah, I saw that yesterday, and he continues to greatly impress me. I'd love to see some "One-on-One" debates with him part of the mix. That speech today was a real winner. Unfortunately, the DC elites are not about to give up their power, and will do their best to crush him. They fear him more than "The Donald", because he is more dangerous to their power base.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"INSIDE EVERY PROGRESSIVE IS A TOTALITARIAN SCREAMING TO GET OUT" - David Horowitz

Reply
#80
John,

I don't understand your reply. Sanctions are not slowing Iran down on this nuke thing, right? Do you suggest just keeping on with sanctions or what?

That = an Iranian bomb if they want one doesn't it?

They probably get one anyway, but, the sanctions sure are not helping stop it.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Woolsey Advice on How to Deal With Iran And Russia John L 4 971 07-22-2014, 12:35 PM
Last Post: Palladin
  Iran sanctions 'will not affect' Russia missile deal Kamil 25 4,333 09-25-2010, 08:20 AM
Last Post: John L
  What's The Deal in Iran? Palladin 0 491 05-14-2006, 07:33 PM
Last Post: Palladin
  Pakistan and Israel deal Iran a blow Kamil 3 1,024 09-07-2005, 11:45 AM
Last Post: ag

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)