Obama: Critics of Iran nuclear deal 'selling a fantasy'

[JingerBen]

Appeasment in our time.

Bottom line my friends. I-Ran wants to wipe Israel off the map and any Infidel that gets in it's way.

It is interesting to note that all the posters that absolutely HATE Israel, the same ones who obsessively demonize it, lie about its history and call for its destruction are all FOR THE CRAZY DEAL 100%.

Actually, it is not all that surprising.

Which posters have called for the destruction of Israel?

There are always lively debates in every topic that involves Israel and Palestine.

The accusations of racism, demonization, and over-the-top rhetoric usually come from the supporters of Israel.

If you were dealing with facts instead of propaganda those offensive denunciations wouldn't be necessary.

[Ulysses G.]

Were your ears turning red?

[JingerBen]

Were your ears turning red?

Come now, you can do better than that.

[Seastallion]

Were your ears turning red?

Come now, you can do better than that.

You're just being nice for the sake of it.

Edited August 6, 2015 by Seastallion

[Seastallion]

Appeasment in our time.

Bottom line my friends. I-Ran wants to wipe Israel off the map and any Infidel that gets in it's way.

It is interesting to note that all the posters that absolutely HATE Israel, the same ones who obsessively demonize it, lie about its history and call for its destruction are all FOR THE CRAZY DEAL 100%.

Actually, it is not all that surprising.

I don't think I have read any posts from any members that indicate an "absolute HATE for Israel". Certainly no posts from the regular and long-term members.

Are you sure another member who may be fond of OTT drama queen rhetoric and CAPITALISING hasn't hacked your account? This just doesn't sound like the UG we have come to know.

No-one in particular in mind, though

[ggt]

If I ever needed a lawyer...to take to liars court...Obama would be the man...smooth...smiles as he sticks it to you...a very polished showman...

The problem with the Iran deal...is the same with most all of Obama's initiatives...the man has a propensity for prevarication...arrogantly disassembles his opposition as being dumb warmongers...or ignorant malcontents...simply not true...

The countdown is on...unless the man declares martial law to continue the carnage...he will be dismissed from his post and fade into oblivion...if we are lucky...

[Ulysses G.]

I don't think I have read any posts from any members that indicate an "absolute HATE for Israel".

What a load of crap. Add that to a long list of dishonest statements that you have posted on this forum.

[HasipHasip5]

 

Every single US government official who opposes the Iran deal is either 1) a hawk from a weapons-producing state 2) a hawk who gains from warfare a'la Cheney or 3) is from a state or district where they coddle to the powerful Jewish lobby.

They are really upset that their drumbeats to send everyone else's kids to war have been interrupted.

War pigs.

They are really upset that their drumbeats to send everyone else's kids to war have been interrupted.

Try to catch up with this century.

The US military is an all volunteer force.

"everyone else's kids" will not go to war.

The kids of the 1% will not go to war.

Nor of the 5%.

What exactly is your point? Again as iterated, the US armed forces is made up of 100% volunteers. It remains to be seen whether your hero's progeny will volunteer or not. Their choice...what percentile do they fall under?

[chuckd]

Nice try. Obama isn't basing anything on facts. It is promise to do something. No facts involved. It is called a dictionary. Thereby smearing.

Fact: The connection between those that criticise this deal and those that supported the blunderous Iraq war.

Here's another fact.

From the OP:

"While Obama was an early opponent of that war, several of his top foreign policy advisers voted to authorize the conflict, including Vice President Joe Biden, Secretary of State John Kerry and former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, the front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination."

The "blunderous Iraq war" would never have happened without the support and votes of 82 Democratic members of the House of Representatives and 29 Democratic Senators, including the infamous three listed in the OP.

Both parties are equally responsible for the Iraq war and no amount of rewriting history can change that simple "fact".

Is 82 votes in the HoR and 29 votes in the senate half? If not, then it's not "equally".

Which brings us nicely back on topic and the OP...that these people sell fantasies (code for "lies") as they did back then when they swayed those Dems.

The Republicans had a small majority in the House and the Senate was evenly split at 50-50.

One Democrat in the Senate could have stopped the war by using the filibuster. The Republicans did not have enough votes to invoke cloture.

The Republicans did not have enough votes to pass the legislation without the support of the Democrats.

This isn't nuclear physics. One vote often halts legislation in its tracks.

"Tis better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt."

A. Lincoln

[Seastallion]

Fact: The connection between those that criticise this deal and those that supported the blunderous Iraq war.

Here's another fact.

From the OP:

"While Obama was an early opponent of that war, several of his top foreign policy advisers voted to authorize the conflict, including Vice President Joe Biden, Secretary of State John Kerry and former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, the front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination."

The "blunderous Iraq war" would never have happened without the support and votes of 82 Democratic members of the House of Representatives and 29 Democratic Senators, including the infamous three listed in the OP.

Both parties are equally responsible for the Iraq war and no amount of rewriting history can change that simple "fact".

Is 82 votes in the HoR and 29 votes in the senate half? If not, then it's not "equally".

Which brings us nicely back on topic and the OP...that these people sell fantasies (code for "lies") as they did back then when they swayed those Dems.

The Republicans had a small majority in the House and the Senate was evenly split at 50-50.

One Democrat in the Senate could have stopped the war by using the filibuster. The Republicans did not have enough votes to invoke cloture.

The Republicans did not have enough votes to pass the legislation without the support of the Democrats.

This isn't nuclear physics. One vote often halts legislation in its tracks.

"Tis better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt."

A. Lincoln

The first part of my post was a question, which you have answered, so I'm not sure what your quote refers to (unless it was a subliminal confession?). So now you're saying that the Dems were equally responsible because they didn't filibuster. That's like saying abstentions are votes for. That's silly.

But, as usual, you miss the point, (which fortunately is the bit of my post that's on topic) which is the Reps sold fantasies and lies, as they are trying to do now.