I think in the end obama will use Iran to cast the final blow to the U S

Originally Posted by Guest

I think in the end obama will use Iran to cast the final blow to the U S

I think Obama is waging strategic jihad against the US, and this is one way of doing it.

I wish the voices in your head would tell you how ridiculous you sound!

Once we have a Republican President and Congress in 2016, life in America will revert to the level of idyllic perfection we saw under previous Republicans. That's what the voices in my head told me.

TOTV has been amenable enough to allow political opinion to be discussed and you all show your appreciation with this drivel. Discuss topics, but leave this childish Talk to the playground. Let's discuss WHO can do WHAT to fix problems, not the past. Ggggggeeeeeeezzzzzz.

The fact is that Iran can cut and has cut better deals with Russia and China. We can rattle all the sabers we want. The final blow to America will be the result of our policy of intervention in the Middle East which got us into this quagmire. This is regardless of the religious affiliation (real or imagined) of the seated President.

Originally Posted by Guest

The fact is that Iran can cut and has cut better deals with Russia and China. We can rattle all the sabers we want. The final blow to America will be the result of our policy of intervention in the Middle East which got us into this quagmire. This is regardless of the religious affiliation (real or imagined) of the seated President.

So please explain your policy solution... pull all US forces out of the Middle East, South Korea, Germany, and elsewhere? How would that work and, more importantly, what do you think would happen as a result? Would peace break out worldwide as a result?

Picture this. China has no armed forces in the Middle East. They have cut deals with Iraq and Iran for oil. Do some research on that. They deal with Russia and NK. They have not invested Armed Forces in any of those countries yet, they benefit from them. Ask a veteran of the war in Iraq what his perception of the Shiite and Sunni civil war is. Ask how much are the Iraqi's into the fight.
Even Dick Cheney was against going into Iraq after the First Gulf War. More American soldiers died from accidents and friendly fire than combat in that conflict.
My policy solution would be to examine the reality of what some of the most powerful other countries in the world do to achieve their goals. China got where it is today because the U.S.of A. had no problem shipping jobs, technology and $$$$ to them.
Of course we can't pull US Forces out of these other countries. They would lose billions in US financial aid and might start dealing with the communists! Oops! They already do!

Originally Posted by Guest

Picture this. China has no armed forces in the Middle East. They have cut deals with Iraq and Iran for oil. Do some research on that. They deal with Russia and NK. They have not invested Armed Forces in any of those countries yet, they benefit from them. Ask a veteran of the war in Iraq what his perception of the Shiite and Sunni civil war is. Ask how much are the Iraqi's into the fight.
Even Dick Cheney was against going into Iraq after the First Gulf War. More American soldiers died from accidents and friendly fire than combat in that conflict.
My policy solution would be to examine the reality of what some of the most powerful other countries in the world do to achieve their goals. China got where it is today because the U.S.of A. had no problem shipping jobs, technology and $$$$ to them.
Of course we can't pull US Forces out of these other countries. They would lose billions in US financial aid and might start dealing with the communists! Oops! They already do!

First of all, you get credit for a very clever non-reply to my questions. Your last paragraph in particular, while cynical, is entertaining.

But, I don't think you have a real answer, and I suspect you know you don't. The Middle East is screwed up ... we can all agree on that. In a perfect world, I would be happy to just let the whole sorry lot shoot each other up and not have one American service member in the area. However, until that perfect world is reached (ie never) we are, like it or not, in a power politics game. The only criterion I have is what is in American's national interest, especially from a security perspective?. We need strong leadership to succeed and that is obviously missing at present. Even the best leaders will not always get it right, but the good ones will at least not screw something up even worse.

The best example we have of what happens when American power is withdrawn precipitously is the rise of ISIS when Obama blundered and, going against the advice of all his generals, pulled our troops out after Iraq was reasonably stabilized. He created a power vacuum, and ISIS filled it. Look also at Syria, and Libya. Crappy presidential eadership has created the refugee crisis in Italy, as another example, but no one connects the dots.

I'm an isolationist at heart, but am forced to be a realist, especially with the increasing ascendancy of Radical Islam, both Sunni and Shia. This is even more the case with the latter being allowed to developed a nuclear capability by our (spiritual Islamic) political leader.

Deep down, I truly believes Obama thinks it's "unfair" for us to have nukes and Iran not to. This is mixed with his "who are we to say they can't have them when we do" and related mental infirmities exhibited by the extreme Left wing ideology.

BUT we can be assured that Iran can be trusted.....

"(Reuters) - Britain has informed a United Nations sanctions panel of an active Iranian nuclear procurement network linked to two blacklisted firms, according to a confidential report by the panel seen by Reuters.

"The UK government informed the Panel on 20 April 2015 that it 'is aware of an active Iranian nuclear procurement network which has been associated with Iran's Centrifuge Technology Company (TESA) and Kalay Electric Company (KEC)'," the Panel of Experts said in its annual report. The panel monitors Iran's compliance with the U.N. sanctions regime.

KEC is under U.N. Security Council sanctions while TESA is under U.S. and European Union sanctions due to their suspected links to banned Iranian nuclear activities.

Iran, which is has been under sanctions for years, has a long history of illicit nuclear procurement using front companies and other methods of skirting sanctions."

Exclusive: Britain told U.N. monitors of active Iran nuclear procurement - panel | Reuters

This is today's news ! Wondering if it gets any play at all ?

I am also curious about feelings on Rubio wanting to insist that on ANY agreement, Iran would be required to recognize Israel as a state. Lots of Democrats are very upset at this, but is it not reasonable that if Iran is requiring immediate lifting of all UN sanctions, and promising that body such honesty and compliance, that they should recognize Israel who is a member of that body ? Do not have to love them, but when does someone stand up for the basics.

Allowing a member of the UN to publicly profess a wish for, and intent to destroy that nation.....well, it seems that rewarding that nation by allowing it to,procure the weapons to carry out that destroyal, NO MATTER THE TIME FRAME, is a bit...let's say hypocritical.

Originally Posted by Guest

...

Allowing a member of the UN to publicly profess a wish for, and intent to destroy that nation.....well, it seems that rewarding that nation by allowing it to,procure the weapons to carry out that destroyal, NO MATTER THE TIME FRAME, is a bit...let's say hypocritical.

Absolutely correct! in fact, your making this point highlights just how ridiculous this whole "deal" with Iran is. If the country signing the agreement still publically claims it will destroy Israel, it's obviously a deal not worth signing.

It's like we're negotiating in some type of Twilight Zone alternative universe. American leadership used to employ common sense before negotiating hugely important deals like this one. Now, however, Obama and Kerry find nuance where only fools would seek to find it.

Will testosterone hurt my iPad? Please Hawks take a deep breath.

Originally Posted by Guest

Will testosterone hurt my iPad? Please Hawks take a deep breath.

If the Kool-Aid hasn't, then the testosterone probably won't.

Originally Posted by Guest

Will testosterone hurt my iPad? Please Hawks take a deep breath.

If we're hawks, seems to me in the case of Iran, that makes you an ostrich.

Originally Posted by Guest

First of all, you get credit for a very clever non-reply to my questions. Your last paragraph in particular, while cynical, is entertaining.

But, I don't think you have a real answer, and I suspect you know you don't. The Middle East is screwed up ... we can all agree on that. In a perfect world, I would be happy to just let the whole sorry lot shoot each other up and not have one American service member in the area. However, until that perfect world is reached (ie never) we are, like it or not, in a power politics game. The only criterion I have is what is in American's national interest, especially from a security perspective?. We need strong leadership to succeed and that is obviously missing at present. Even the best leaders will not always get it right, but the good ones will at least not screw something up even worse.

The best example we have of what happens when American power is withdrawn precipitously is the rise of ISIS when Obama blundered and, going against the advice of all his generals, pulled our troops out after Iraq was reasonably stabilized. He created a power vacuum, and ISIS filled it. Look also at Syria, and Libya. Crappy presidential eadership has created the refugee crisis in Italy, as another example, but no one connects the dots.

I'm an isolationist at heart, but am forced to be a realist, especially with the increasing ascendancy of Radical Islam, both Sunni and Shia. This is even more the case with the latter being allowed to developed a nuclear capability by our (spiritual Islamic) political leader.

Deep down, I truly believes Obama thinks it's "unfair" for us to have nukes and Iran not to. This is mixed with his "who are we to say they can't have them when we do" and related mental infirmities exhibited by the extreme Left wing ideology.

Because no one in the Republican or Democratic Party who is running for President has presented a plan for the Middle East, I'll presume we will vote for the next President based on past performance. Apparently my reference how the other powers in the world deal with the Middle East wasn't clear. China and Russia get the resources with no armed military there. In other words our foreign policy has cost us lives and billions and they get it all for free. They cut deals with Muslim countries without military intervention. Russia must have learned from their invasion of Afghanistan. They left because of our aid to Muslims like Bin Laden. Remember the Iran Iraq War. Who did we provide aid to then?
I think the danger in our conversations is that we believe political affiliation to one party or another gives the best answer to the Middle East crisis.