What, you'd like us to take the bait? That limp noodle approach seems to be working quite well and the neocons can't stand it. How appropriate!

Originally Posted by Guest

What, you'd like us to take the bait? That limp noodle approach seems to be working quite well and the neocons can't stand it. How appropriate!

At least you have now formally articulated your recommended foreign policy approach ... the Liberal Limp Noodle Doctrine. How insightful.

Originally Posted by Guest

I don't wish that any country had nuclear weapons. I don't wish that Iran develop them, nor did I prefer the USSR, France, UK, Israel, Pakistan, India, nor North Korea develop them. But where does this nation get the right to tell another country what they can do? We can say we won't trade with you, we will freeze your currency, we will not allow your citizens in to our country, we will make you miserable in many ways, but under what concept of law does the USA get to tell Iran what it can or cannot do internally? I believe that one of our nation's early answers when the powerful nations across the sea tried to tell us what to do was to declare that not only could these world powers not tell the US what to do but they could not even interfere anywhere in the Western Hemisphere (see Monroe doctrine). So I flip the question.. Do you believe that because we have a legal basis to tell any nation that they cannot go forward? Your fear that Iran will sneak a bomb into the US, which you seem to believe is a certainty, is not a reason that I will accept. By the way, the Iranians were certainly not afraid of Reagan. The Iranians wanted Carter to loose and Reagan to win. This would prove that they could over through a US leader as the US had done with implanting the Shah.

New Reports Say 1980 Reagan Campaign Tried to Delay Hostage Release - NYTimes.com

Reagan later certainly was involved in a hostages for military equipment deal with the Iranians (see Iran Contra). Either Reagan knew or a huge US policy decision specifically prohibited by US law was being made without the knowledge of Reagan.

Dear Guest: The reason that a country(s) must have the right to prevent certain other countries from developing weapons of mass destruction is instructive as to the same argument, as weapons in the wrong hands, and not the weapons themselves..

I strongly believe in 2nd Amendment rights but I know that weapons in the hands of a few (not all) people with mental illness is not a good thing nor is it a good thing if they are criminals.

Iran has made it clear their thinking and their hatred for Jews and Christians alike since the early 1970's. Frankly they convinced me when they stormed the US Embassy back then and Carter did his thing...or not.

As to this thread and Obama's sea adventures again the past is instructive because well.... simply stated I loved to play poker with Obama because I easily win the rights to the next three fictional books he writes about his adventures as president....in fact most would


Personal Best Regards:

Hard to imagine a better endorsement for Obama's Iran policy than being bashed by George W Bush, the gift that keeps on giving for democrats.



George W. Bush Bashes Obama on Middle East - Bloomberg View

Originally Posted by Guest

Hard to imagine a better endorsement for Obama's Iran policy than being bashed by George W Bush, the gift that keeps on giving for democrats.[/url]

Nipping the XXX kool aide again?

Originally Posted by Guest

Hard to imagine a better endorsement for Obama's Iran policy than being bashed by George W Bush, the gift that keeps on giving for democrats.



George W. Bush Bashes Obama on Middle East - Bloomberg View

Thanks for posting ... for anyone who actually reads the link, Bush makes some excellent points and critiques regarding Obama's unwise policy to appease Iran.

Originally Posted by Guest

Thanks for posting ... for anyone who actually reads the link, Bush makes some excellent points and critiques regarding Obama's unwise policy to appease Iran.

Bush made a point either it was written for him or personally approved by the war criminal Cheney himself!

Originally Posted by Guest

Bush made a point either it was written for him or personally approved by the war criminal Cheney himself!

Almost every single time you post, you sound like some deranged old woman, wrapped in her shawl, and foaming at the mouth while yelling "Faux News! Faux News!"

as opposed to all the originality of Obama and his advisors that all oh so original in thought process

Or any right wing blog, or tea party endorsed rag, they can plagiarize. A couple on here haven't demonstrated any brain power other than being able to cut and paste, which is a clear violation of policy, but who cares. Their lies rule their lives and they have never been influenced by pesky rules!

Originally Posted by Guest

Or any right wing blog, or tea party endorsed rag, they can plagiarize. A couple on here haven't demonstrated any brain power other than being able to cut and paste, which is a clear violation of policy, but who cares. Their lies rule their lives and they have never been influenced by pesky rules!

You seem to have significant difficulty in crafting a coherent sentence, much less a coherent thought. At least you're consistent.