Obama promises to keep pressure on Iran

[webfact]

Obama promises to keep pressure on Iran

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama is promising Democratic lawmakers that the U.S. will continue to keep economic pressure on Iran — and keep military options open — if his administration's nuclear deal with Tehran goes through.

Obama says in a letter addressed to New York Democratic Rep. Jerrold Nadler that if Iran rushes to build a nuclear weapon, "all of the options available to the United States — including the military option — will remain available."

The president also says the U.S. will uphold sanctions targeting Iran's non-nuclear activities, such as its support for Lebanon's Hezbollah group and what Obama calls Iran's "destabilizing role in Yemen."

And the letter emphasizes U.S. support for Israel, saying Obama has "consistently viewed Israel's security as sacrosanct."


-- (c) Associated Press 2015-08-21

[ezzra]

And how are you intend of doing that pray tell Mr president? you took the military option of the table, you have

rescinded almost all sanctions against Iran, Russia, China and the EU are all making a bee line to deal with

Iran buying cheap oil and re arming them with long range ballistic missiles and the Chines just dying to

sell them jet fighters, your own people don't believe in your words anymore, so just spare us the empty words

sir and go and have a holiday in Cuba....

[Ulysses G.]

"Pressure" on Iran. You already gave away the store.

[chuckd]

I think he honestly believes what he says. The guy is delusional.

[JakeSully]

Obama will be so happy when Israel is nuked, he won't have to deal with Netanyahu and that will be a huge win for EVERY US CITIZEN who actually pays taxes.

[chuckd]

Obama will be so happy when Israel is nuked, he won't have to deal with Netanyahu and that will be a huge win for EVERY US CITIZEN who actually pays taxes.

Will nuking Israel make you as happy as you claim Obama will be?

[Steely Dan]

Obama will be so happy when Israel is nuked, he won't have to deal with Netanyahu and that will be a huge win for EVERY US CITIZEN who actually pays taxes.

Will nuking Israel make you as happy as you claim Obama will be?

It's nice to see the pro-deal rationale defended by some of our esteemed members laid out so honestly and succinctly. Edited August 21, 2015 by Steely Dan

[arjunadawn]

Yes, Obama took the military option off the table but dissecting his lies leading up to today reveal how profoundly deceitful this liar is. Remember, the alternative to a deal is war. War is off the table and always has been. Obama/Kerry- We will walk away from a bad deal. Here's the rub- they are liars. Either the alternative is not war or war is a viable alternative. Obama making promises is about is dissonant as as Pelosi being Pro-life- its irreconcilable. Judge Obama's ability to fulfill a promise by his past record.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/rulings/promise-broken/

http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/11/list-23-famous-obama-quotes-turned-broken-promises-cold-hearted-lies/

[JakeSully]

I do.. We will kill bin laden. We did.

Withdraw from the stupid war in Iraq which costed us billions. Done.

Health care insurance cost will be lower. It's lower indeed under obamacare.

Support repeal of DOMA. Promise kept.

Provide $30 billion to Israel (I hate this) but he kept the promise.

[NickJ]

I love the HBO series " The Brink". kinda copies Norman Lears approach to whats going on today. With a mix of " Dr Strangelove", blended in.

[ggold]

I do.. We will kill bin laden. We did.

Withdraw from the stupid war in Iraq which costed us billions. Done.

Health care insurance cost will be lower. It's lower indeed under obamacare.

Support repeal of DOMA. Promise kept.

Provide $30 billion to Israel (I hate this) but he kept the promise.

So you will be really happy Obama has promised to up the budget for Israeli defenses if the deal goes through. Just think if the deal had no support!

[JakeSully]

I wish I knew why the congress is so in love with Israel.

What have they ever done for us? Did they help us after 9/11? Did they help us during Iran Hostage Crisis? Did they help us during the Iraq war? How about Vietnam or Afghanistan? Did they ever pay a dime off our national debt?

So why do we care about a country that has no strategic importance for us, yet we allow ourselves to be robbed blind every year by it in our budget.

[Boon Mee]

"Pressure" on Iran. You already gave away the store.

Appeasment in our time...

[uksomchai]

I think he honestly believes what he says. The guy is delusional.

The delusional people are the ones that believe the propaganda spouted about Iran the war monger etc. The last time Iran invaded a country was over 200 years ago if I'm correct. Unlike the US. The last war they had was with Iraq which was supported and backed by the Americans when Saddam was their ally. Right up until he wanted to sell HIS oil in Euro's and not Dollars

[Srikcir]

The G-7 deal moves Iran's nuclear bomb making off 10 years or more. In Middle East history, that's a lifetime of political shifts and fortunes.

What do the Republicans have to offer instead?

BOMBAST

[Scott]

A post with an inflammatory spelling of a politician's name has been removed. There have been numerous public posts about using the correct spelling. Continuing to not comply will result in suspensions.

[Ulysses G.]

So why do we care about a country that has no strategic importance for us, yet we allow ourselves to be robbed blind every year by it in our budget.

Because they are of critical strategic importance to us and we save a lot more money than we contribute by being such close allies. Some people are just too ignorant to realize it.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/107007/us-aid-israel-why-its-must-david-meir-levi

[uksomchai]

Can anyone explain to me why for over 70 years the treat of " mutually Assured Destruction " or MAD has kept the world safe from another nuclear explosion in anger yet suddenly Iran having a nuclear weapon is suddenly going to do the exact opposite ?

Why is Israel stealing the materials and developing a nuclear weapon OK but not Iran ? Surely if it is OK for Israel to have them then it stands to reason other countries surrounding Israel are going to want them for defence because where there is no possibility of mutually assured destruction you lay yourself open to blackmail.

I just get the impression that the US is just using the supposed threat of Iran making a nuclear weapon as an excuse.

The North Korean leader is far more likely to launch a nuclear weapon yet nothing is ever talked about stopping his open weapons development. Why is this ?

[ggt]

If history has taught the US anything about Obama...he always keeps his promises...

[chuckd]

I think he honestly believes what he says. The guy is delusional.

The delusional people are the ones that believe the propaganda spouted about Iran the war monger etc. The last time Iran invaded a country was over 200 years ago if I'm correct. Unlike the US. The last war they had was with Iraq which was supported and backed by the Americans when Saddam was their ally. Right up until he wanted to sell HIS oil in Euro's and not Dollars

I am presuming you are conveniently forgetting the proxy wars they are having Hezbollah and Hamas fight in Iraq and Israel and the Houthi's in Yemen. We won't even try and go into all the terrorist actions they have supported since 1979 but we can mention the US Marine Barracks in Beirut, the Israeli Embassy bombing in Argentina and all those other little incidents.

Hezbollah and Hamas are wholly owned subsidiaries of Iran and the paymaster is about to get an infusion of some $150 Billion to further spread terror.

Your oil for Euro argument is ridiculous.

[Ulysses G.]

I think he honestly believes what he says. The guy is delusional.

The delusional people are the ones that believe the propaganda spouted about Iran the war monger etc.

Iran is the number one state sponsor of terrorism in the world. There is more than one way to wage war.

[uksomchai]

I think he honestly believes what he says. The guy is delusional.

The delusional people are the ones that believe the propaganda spouted about Iran the war monger etc.

Iran is the number one state sponsor of terrorism in the world. There is more than one way to wage war.

That is my whole point. That is what we were told about Saddam but nearly all of it turned out to be a crock of. the same went for Gadaffi. If I remember right it was the Good Old USA that sponsored the Taliban to fight the Russians in Afghanistan. Is that not now seen as state sponsorship of terror or the any amount of other freedom fighters the US has given aid to ?

As for more than one way to wage a war The US has been doing this for decades with sanctions.

Why is it OK for one country to have these weapons and not another ?

What do you think Iran is going to do with a nuclear weapon ?

What about MAD ?

It is fine to just quote that they are the worlds biggest sponsor of terror but try to answer the questions rather than just spouting the official line please

I'm not trying to troll here I am just sick of hearing the same old crap from the same old politicans

[uksomchai]

I think he honestly believes what he says. The guy is delusional.

The delusional people are the ones that believe the propaganda spouted about Iran the war monger etc. The last time Iran invaded a country was over 200 years ago if I'm correct. Unlike the US. The last war they had was with Iraq which was supported and backed by the Americans when Saddam was their ally. Right up until he wanted to sell HIS oil in Euro's and not Dollars

I am presuming you are conveniently forgetting the proxy wars they are having Hezbollah and Hamas fight in Iraq and Israel and the Houthi's in Yemen. We won't even try and go into all the terrorist actions they have supported since 1979 but we can mention the US Marine Barracks in Beirut, the Israeli Embassy bombing in Argentina and all those other little incidents.

Hezbollah and Hamas are wholly owned subsidiaries of Iran and the paymaster is about to get an infusion of some $150 Billion to further spread terror.

Your oil for Euro argument is ridiculous.

Saddam said he was selling his oil in Euros and was invaded, Gadaffi said the exact same thing and lo and behold he is suddenly dead and his once prosperous country just like Iran is a basket case all just a coincidence of course

[chuckd]

Can anyone explain to me why for over 70 years the treat of " mutually Assured Destruction " or MAD has kept the world safe from another nuclear explosion in anger yet suddenly Iran having a nuclear weapon is suddenly going to do the exact opposite ?

Why is Israel stealing the materials and developing a nuclear weapon OK but not Iran ? Surely if it is OK for Israel to have them then it stands to reason other countries surrounding Israel are going to want them for defence because where there is no possibility of mutually assured destruction you lay yourself open to blackmail.

I just get the impression that the US is just using the supposed threat of Iran making a nuclear weapon as an excuse.

The North Korean leader is far more likely to launch a nuclear weapon yet nothing is ever talked about stopping his open weapons development. Why is this ?

I think if you look at history you will find that Israel, although allegedly having nuclear weapons for years, never used one for offensive reasons.

Israel has them as a protection against any overly aggressive Islamic nation, such as Iran, that will try to annihilate them.

When, not if, Iran gets nukes it will start a nuclear race in all the nations of the Middle East. Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Syria (if they still exist) and probably the Emirates will have to have them as well.

Would you really feel secure if all those Arab heads of state had their own little nuclear "football" being carried around everywhere they go?

It might have been nice if Obama had given this some thought before he gave them the farm.

[Scott]

Numerous off-topic posts and replies removed.

[Harry2]

Can anyone explain to me why for over 70 years the treat of " mutually Assured Destruction " or MAD has kept the world safe from another nuclear explosion in anger yet suddenly Iran having a nuclear weapon is suddenly going to do the exact opposite ?

Why is Israel stealing the materials and developing a nuclear weapon OK but not Iran ? Surely if it is OK for Israel to have them then it stands to reason other countries surrounding Israel are going to want them for defence because where there is no possibility of mutually assured destruction you lay yourself open to blackmail.

I just get the impression that the US is just using the supposed threat of Iran making a nuclear weapon as an excuse.

The North Korean leader is far more likely to launch a nuclear weapon yet nothing is ever talked about stopping his open weapons development. Why is this ?

Because it is quite possible that certain Muslims do not fear 'MAD' including those in the Ahmadinejad faction. The preeminent scholar of Islam, Bernard Lewis explains why MAD may not apply in certain Islamic contexts/regimes.

http://madisdead.blogspot.com/2012/05/why-are-bernard-lewiss-views-on-mad.html

[Ulysses G.]

Can anyone explain to me why for over 70 years the treat of " mutually Assured Destruction " or MAD has kept the world safe from another nuclear explosion in anger yet suddenly Iran having a nuclear weapon is suddenly going to do the exact opposite ?

Why is Israel stealing the materials and developing a nuclear weapon OK but not Iran ? Surely if it is OK for Israel to have them then it stands to reason other countries surrounding Israel are going to want them for defence because where there is no possibility of mutually assured destruction you lay yourself open to blackmail.

I just get the impression that the US is just using the supposed threat of Iran making a nuclear weapon as an excuse.

The North Korean leader is far more likely to launch a nuclear weapon yet nothing is ever talked about stopping his open weapons development. Why is this ?

Because it is quite possible that certain Muslims do not fear 'MAD' including those in the Ahmadinejad faction. The preeminent scholar of Islam, Bernard Lewis explains why MAD may not apply in certain Islamic contexts/regimes.

http://madisdead.blogspot.com/2012/05/why-are-bernard-lewiss-views-on-mad.html

Someone has been doing his homework. MAD does not deter the mad Mullahs of Iran.

Particular importance should be attached to the policies, and perhaps still more the attitudes, of the present rulers of Iran, who seem to be preparing for a final apocalyptic battle between the forces of God [themselves] and of the Devil [ the Great Satan--the United States]. They see this as the final struggle of the End of Time and are therefore undeterred by any level of slaughter and destruction even among their own people".

[F430murci]

Can anyone explain to me why for over 70 years the treat of " mutually Assured Destruction " or MAD has kept the world safe from another nuclear explosion in anger yet suddenly Iran having a nuclear weapon is suddenly going to do the exact opposite ?

Why is Israel stealing the materials and developing a nuclear weapon OK but not Iran ? Surely if it is OK for Israel to have them then it stands to reason other countries surrounding Israel are going to want them for defence because where there is no possibility of mutually assured destruction you lay yourself open to blackmail.

I just get the impression that the US is just using the supposed threat of Iran making a nuclear weapon as an excuse.

The North Korean leader is far more likely to launch a nuclear weapon yet nothing is ever talked about stopping his open weapons development. Why is this ?

Because it is quite possible that certain Muslims do not fear 'MAD' including those in the Ahmadinejad faction. The preeminent scholar of Islam, Bernard Lewis explains why MAD may not apply in certain Islamic contexts/regimes.

http://madisdead.blogspot.com/2012/05/why-are-bernard-lewiss-views-on-mad.html

Duh . . . Interesting that uksomchai would even have to ask such a question. These nut bags turn to suicide missions at the drop of a hat to take out just a few innocent women and children. Given the chance, they would love to sacrifice their life just to inflict much more death and destruction on a grand scale.

The problem with these whack-a-mutt countries is that there is no telling who in high places in these whack-a-mcdoodle countries share the same or similar beliefs as the peon banshees running a round with C4 strapped to their butts. These people are just too unpredictable predicated in large part upon their belief system which says acting like a whack-a-mcdoodles is perfectly okay and gets you the big prize and a piece of the pie in the sky nookie den.

Moral of the story . . . Don't give nukes to unpredictable banshees. Shouldn't take a rocket scientist to figure that one out.

[SheungWan]

Was Obama's promise a 'red line'?

[ABCer]

Unlike some posters I do not believe Obama is delusional.

i think he is a secret agent on the Islam side.

When I Google his quotes on Islam I am just lost for words.

I also believe he was quite a Socialist in his younger days. Google is your friend again.

Things like this never go away IMHO.

I think to have a complete set of outcomes Americans need to have

A woman President

A gay President

And these qualities are even not mutually exclusive.

In case our Mods think I'm out of line - this isn't even my original idea.

Wonder if Abnego for President is a concept known to any Sci-Fi readers?

From this point of view alone Trump is no go. A black Muslim physically incapacitated and mentally challenged sexually disoriented person-woman would be the Politically Correct choice of the day!

The days of applying political pressure on Iran or on Islam - didn't have come yet.

But the Israelis can sleep peacefully with MAD Obama's promise in bed.

Edited August 22, 2015 by ABCer