First of all, I agree simple political affiliation to one party does not give the best answer. It depends on the candidate. For example, I would vote for Jim Webb for a lot of reasons but never Hillary or Bernie for foreign policy reasons. The latter increase risk by either appeasement or lack of resolve.

I also get your point about Russia and China ... hey, sounds good to me. But, you still have not responded to my earlier question. Do you mean to say you think the US should simply withdraw its forces worldwide, starting say in the Mideast?? What do you think would happen if we did that?

Remember when the USA, Russia and Syria agreed in 2013 that Syria would destroy and not use chemical weapons again. Solid deal we were told....great negotiations by all we were told.

Today, May 6, the NY Times reports Syria is once again using chemical weapons.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/07/wo...=top-news&_r=0

These are very difficult issues to deal with, without a doubt. But, i's even tougher when you don't know what you're doing, eg Kerry and Obama, whocan be counted upon to tell us things they know are not true just to get the issue temporarily resolved.

That's a polite way of saying they lie to us.

This should make things really interesting... Israel and Saudi Arabia announced they have been meeting secretly to oppose Iran.

These are sworn enemies who fear Iran...they are also the two countries that have the most to fear from Iran, yet they have no seat at the negotiations with Iran. Dore Gould of Israel...

"Gold went on to say that Iran is now outfitting groups such as Hezbollah in Lebanon with precision-guided missiles, as opposed to the unguided rockets Iran has traditionally provided its allies in Lebanon. He also said Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps forces propping up the Bashar al-Assad regime are now close to the Israeli-Syrian border."

A few years ago, it was mainly Israel that rang the alarm about Iranian expansionism in the Middle East. It is significant that now Israel is joined in this campaign by Saudi Arabia, a country that has wished for its destruction since 1948.

The two nations worry today that President Barack Obama's efforts to make peace with Iran will embolden that regime's aggression against them."


Israelis and Saudis Reveal Secret Talks to Thwart Iran - Bloomberg View

The ongoing fear that any deal with Iran could bring about a nuclear race in the Middle East springs to mind; it is not mentioned in this article, but these two countries are sworn enemies and they fear Iran enough to form this pact because of what Iran is DOING already.

I sincerely hope that I just do not get it and my fear of this deal is unfounded, but in addition to the above, the date of June 30 approaches quickly and that date is of itself the subject of conversation now....

"The question of timing is thorny for Obama and his top negotiator with Iran, Secretary of State John Kerry, who was injured in a cycling accident last weekend and whose travel schedule may be affected. On one hand, they are under pressure from those who say that Iran is simply dragging out the talks with no intention of agreeing to severe restrictions on its nuclear program. But others argue that the greater danger is the prospect of concessions made under an artificial deadline."

"With a June 30 deadline for a nuclear deal with Iran approaching, western experts and foreign allies — including a top Israeli official — are urging the Obama administration not to treat that date as sacred for fear of giving Tehran leverage in the high-stakes talks.
“The Iranians are using delay tactics. It seems they want to come close to the deadline without an agreement,” Yuval Steinitz, Israel’s energy minister, who is in Washington this week for meetings with top Obama officials, told POLITICO on Thursday. If that happens, Steinitz said, “there will be no time to close all the loopholes and clarify all the details. And this will serve the Iranians.”


Read more: Deadline for nuclear talks with Iran may be softening - Michael Crowley and Nahal Toosi - POLITICO

You never know what is really happening but just for info these two things caught my eye.

I recall when the point of what they(IRAN) had done in the past in moving toward nuclear weapons was a "deal breaker". That we had to now how far they had gone in the past and in fact, in March, this was jn the Wall St Journal...


"Without Iranian disclosure of past illicit activities, including nuclear enrichment and weaponization research, it’s hard to see how the Obama Administration can honor its core pledge to strike a deal that would give the West a one-year warning if Iran decides to build a bomb. As Olli Heinonen, the former Deputy Director-General for Safeguards at the IAEA, told us, “you need to have that baseline. You want to understand what they were doing.” An Iran that has the know-how to rapidly weaponize highly enriched uranium or plutonium may need only months to assemble a bomb."

Iran Keeps Its Nuclear Secrets - WSJ

Now today we have this......


"Washington (CNN)Secretary of State John Kerry acknowledged Tuesday that the Iran nuclear deal most likely won't require the country to detail suspected past efforts to develop a nuclear weapon, a concession sought by Tehran.

"We are not fixated on Iran specifically accounting for what they did at one point in time or another," Kerry told reporters Tuesday by remote video from Boston, where he has been recuperating from a broken leg."

Iran likely to score concession on nuclear deal - CNNPolitics.com

I find this contrast very amazing.

Are we this desperate ?

What is going on in this country ? How can we do what we are doing with Iran

As mentioned above we are giving to Iran on knowing their past successes, something we said we had to have. Do we just accept their word on what the basis will be on this deal ? How many of what, and we will take their word.

This is our Secy of State, in APRIL of this year....on PBS

"JUDY WOODRUFF: Still, another issue; the International Atomic Energy Agency has said for a long time that it wants Iran to disclose past military-related nuclear activities. Iran is increasingly looking like it’s not going to do this. Is the U.S. prepared to accept that?

JOHN KERRY: No. They have to do it. It will be done. If there’s going to be a deal; it will be done.

JUDY WOODRUFF: Because it’s not there now.

JOHN KERRY: It will be done.

JUDY WOODRUFF: So that information will be released before June 30th, will be available.

JOHN KERRY: It will be part of a final agreement. It has to be.


John Kerry’s ludicrous statements on Iran and Syria - The Washington Post

NOW...WE see he has backed off. And lest you think this is unimportant...

"Former CIA chief Michael Hayden says Kerry’s newest position is indefensible. “I’d like to see the DNI or any intelligence office repeat that word for me. They won’t. What he is saying is that we don’t care how far they’ve gotten with weaponization. We’re betting the farm on our ability to limit the production of fissile material.” Now, if they want to make that bet, they can, but the administration should level with us and not insist revelations of PMDs are unimportant. Instead, Hayden says, “He’s pretending we have perfect knowledge about something that was an incredibly tough intelligence target while I was director and I see nothing that has made it any easier.”

Mark Dubowitz, the widely respected sanctions guru from the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, agrees with Kerry’s original statement. “For Secretary Kerry to claim we have absolute knowledge of Iran’s weaponization activities is to assume a level of U.S. intelligence capability that defies historical experience. That’s why he, President Obama, Undersecretary Sherman, and IAEA chief Amano all have made PMD resolution such an essential condition of any nuclear deal,” Dubowitz tells me. “The U.S. track record in detecting and stopping countries from going nuclear should make Kerry more modest in his claims and assumptions. The U.S. missed the Soviet Union, China, India, Pakistan, Israel, and North Korea. Washington underestimated Saddam’s program in 1990. Then it overestimated his program in 2003 and went to war to stop a nonexistent WMD program. Given this track record, the Obama administration’s abandonment of yet another nuclear demand, especially one as critical as a resolution of Iran’s weaponization past and present, is inexplicable.” Well, it is inexplicable except if one believes the president is frantic to make a deal no matter how bad.


WHAT ARE WE DOING ?

Amazing how these same guys keep answering themselves in their repetitive posts, isn't it?

Keep talking to yourselves, guys, no one else is listening to you. We are bored with your yadda, yadda, yadda.

Now, I expect a rant from this poster about being a troll and a crony. Ho Hum! Once again, yadda, yadda, yadda.

Okay, give it your best:ohdear:with your troll & crony lambast. We await your usual.

If the remainder of the Gang of Six (now down to three) want to chime in, do it.

We're very proud of you!! You've finally had the self insight and come out of the closet and identified yourself as "the" chief troll of TOTV .. a rare honor.

Nope, not "The Chief". Just an admirer of The Chief. We meet weekly to decide which of the Gang of Three we will take apart with snark and mirth on their spittle covered rants.

Have a good day, stay cool and keep hydrated with plenty of water.

Amazing the pride shown in being what 99.9 % of people try to avoid.

This is written by a man,Aaron David Miller, who has served both political parties negotiated on behalf of the USA in the Middle East, and is considered a public policy scholar.
[B]

"Once Iran learned how to make a nuke, there wasn’t much chance for a really good and reassuring deal on the nuclear issue. The agreement being negotiated now may well be the least bad of the terrible options available to slow Iran’s nuclear program. But we should be clear-eyed about what else we may be getting from this deal: a richer and stronger Iran, one pushing for a Middle East more hostile to the U.S.–and one that will still retain the capacity to build nuclear weapons

"Once Iran learned how to make a nuke, there wasn’t much chance for a really good and reassuring deal on the nuclear issue. The agreement being negotiated now may well be the least bad of the terrible options available to slow Iran’s nuclear program. But we should be clear-eyed about what else we may be getting from this deal: a richer and stronger Iran, one pushing for a Middle East more hostile to the U.S.–and one that will still retain the capacity to build nuclear weapons.

It’s the cruelest of ironies that this issue is now the pathway offering Iran a way in from the cold. It would be fine if the agreement could truly end Iran’s ability and motivation to have a nuclear-weapons option. But it hardly lays to rest those concerns.

Iran will agree to what will likely be a smaller, more easily monitored nuclear program. But there can be no real assurance, let alone guarantee, that this will be the “forever” deal Secretary of State John Kerry referred to. What is guaranteed–what will be the new normal in the Middle East–is that Iran will emerge as a state with the right to enrich uranium and continue R&D while maintaining some nuclear infrastructure. Iran has played us and its card well, profiting from sanctions relief without abandoning its nuclear-weapons aspirations, let alone its repressive policies at home or its expansionist aims abroad.

The Obama Administration argues that regardless of Iran’s behavior in the region, constraining Tehran’s nuclear program is important in its own right. But Iran is not Japan, a nuclear threshold state that respects international principles. It’s impossible to separate the nuclear issue from Iran’s regional aspirations. Keeping the world on edge about Iran’s nuclear-weapons capacity and ensuring that the U.S. remains an adversary are still vital for the regime’s survival–and this agreement isn’t going to make Iran a moderate anytime soon.

The nuclear deal will bring Iran money and legitimacy in a turbulent region. Iran has influence on just about every issue the U.S. confronts in the Middle East: Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, ISIS, Yemen. And while Tehran is prepared to cooperate when that serves its interests, its view of the region is not Washington’s. Far from constraining Iran’s power, the deal may well enhance it as it directs more resources to its Iraqi Shi’ite, Yemeni Houthi, Syrian Alawite and Hizballah allies and surrogates. And the opening to Iran has alienated Saudi Arabia and Israel, U.S. allies who fear Iran’s rise."

Iran Nuclear Deal Will Not Be Good for the U.S.

While the troll element on here objects to reading and staying informed, this is a serious deal we are about to venture into. We often talk about learning from the past. This is an opportunity to understand clearly what we are doing before we do it for the wrong reasons.

While the reading on this is extensive, this deal may well impact our lives, and certainly this of our children and grandchildren.

Repeating this section...

".... the deal may well enhance it as it directs more resources to its Iraqi Shi’ite, Yemeni Houthi, Syrian Alawite and Hizballah allies and surrogates. And the opening to Iran has alienated Saudi Arabia and Israel, U.S. allies who fear Iran’s rise."

If those trolls tire when reading, or experience an overload when digesting facts, I am sorry.

I am not going to apologize to anyone for being a concerted American, who wants to deal with facts, instead of spin.

You guys really need to call an emergency staff meeting. You have rarely been able to take anything apart intellectually or based on factual evidence ... that's what so funny about your post.

The only thing you can do is call names and attempt to shut down the debate but, even when you attempt that, it's done poorly and sometimes unintelligibly.

Please, do something to up the level of your game. :)

This reminds me of early high school/elementary school. A group of young men who just can't belong, sneaking around to make fun of those who are normal.

Keep in mind that these trolls are ADULTS (chronologically) and live nearby and are our neighbors.

This from that TOPIX site again (posted this morning).... I knew he would be on there again because he sounded angry this morning and last evening.

This post from Topix is in answer to someone, who supposedly asked if The Villages was near Ocala.

"Yep, if you're a tea ****** or kkk member with a dog you'll fit right in. Be sure and visit totv political forum and meet my buds the gang of six. We don't like libtards and burn crosses weekly at our beloved tea party meetins. Then we brag about it on totv political forum. We only allow Fox News on all our tvs."

This could be your neighbor, across the street, someone you met at the squares. They DO IN FACT post on the regular forums and often mention how they visit the squares.

This time I did not go looking. We were out most of the morning but when i returned, I had a phone message from up North telling me to visit there. We have lots of folks who get their entertainment, and many barbs for me, from reading here and on Topix. Nice to have these trolls make us look bad, but after all...that is what they are after.

Which reminds me...why do the trolls even come on the political forum ? Never participate in discussions...only mock. Really makes you wonder !

The guy who posted what you highlighted in bold is obviously, and clearly, mentally deranged, coupled with making up total fabrications designed to smear his opponents. He can't duel or engage intellectually so he resorts to literally the crudest form of epithets.

What does one do with a crazy person when all is said and done?? At least that guy has not pestered the TOTV boards in a while that I've seen. You can tell who he (or she?) is by the tenor and vitriol of his posts. He really does need to be medicated ... ie no kidding about this.