- Joined
- Oct 16, 2009
- Messages
- 76,757
- Reaction score
- 10,596
Your scared Iran is going to attack Maine?I'm alarmed about both!
Your scared Iran is going to attack Maine?I'm alarmed about both!
yes, its false.But what about what is said in the blog? Is it all false or is it accurate information?
Your scared Iran is going to attack Maine?
The Russians and Chinese supported the deal because they prefer that over the US possibly attacking and sanctioning Iran. Russia and China stand to gain if sanctions are not applied broadly under the guise of the UN. The Europeans also want to tap into the lucrative Iranian market. Actually American companies also want a piece of that action. But Israeli defacto agents in the US prevents a rational and measured US response.
So Trump went from America First to Israel First.
First the Jerusalem move and now a possible scuttling of the Iran deal.
No, I'm afraid they'll attack US allies and get us into another war.Your scared Iran is going to attack Maine?
Hey, the only place you get Maine lobster is off the coast of maine. Don't let those dirty Canadians who fish our waters tell you otherwise.Like most wars, it will be caused by resources. Lobster from the Persian gulf tastes like oil and falafel.
I meant before the deal but I for one liked he idea of letting Russia run their plants
The blog accuses Iran of breaking the deal because they test fired a missile, which the blog claims has the capacity of delivering nuclear weapons. The terms that the blog accuses Iran of violating, can be found here, on page 99 in the PDF file. Iran denies this though, and the countries, while not happy about the missile test, never said that Iran violated the term. Also all the countries diplomats were in agreement that they didn't violate the terms.But what about what is said in the blog? Is it all false or is it accurate information?
You’re missing me. We had talked about letting them have nuclear plants ran by Russia at one point. While I don’t trust any of them that was the best option at the time. Sanctions being reimposed to broker a better deal isn’t bad. Might be fun to just back out of the whole thing and not answer he phone when the inevitable Happens s thoughhi cincymma79,
Russia did not "run" Iran's nuclear plants or "run" their program for developing WMD.
that's not the point.
i was trying to explain why the US cannot impose sanctions with teeth without the other nations agreeing (which they won't). therefore, your desire to see the sanctions re-imposed is nonsensical.
DO YOU UNDERTAND?
- IGIT
You’re missing me. We had talked about letting them have nuclear plants ran by Russia at one point. While I don’t trust any of them that was the best option at the time.
Sanctions being reimposed to broker a better deal isn’t bad.
Hey, the only place you get Maine lobster is off the coast of maine. Don't let those dirty Canadians who fish our waters tell you otherwise.
Plus a lot of blueberries and maple syrup comes from up here.
Mock me if you will, but imagine a world without those 3 things.
The blog accuses Iran of breaking the deal because they test fired a missile that has the capacity of delivering nuclear weapons. Which you can find here, on page 99 in the PDF file, but the countries involved never directly said that, merely implied it. Also all the countries diplomats were in agreement that they didn't violate the terms.
The latest report from the IAEA found here about Iran shows that they're still compliant, and transparent.
Oooh you messed up my name!hello m23105,
its occured to me that Seano probably has an inexhaustible set of links to hawkish claims of Iran violating the agreement, and will prove fiercely resistant (or willfully oblivious) to the numerous pieces that debunk these charges.
if someone wants to believe something, ya gotta let'm, i figure.
- IGIT
he literally ran on this promise 'it's the worst deal I've possibly ever seen'.......
Settle down. I googled it because I'm not an expert on the topic and got 1000's of matches. I asked like literally a dozen times for people telling me it was false to clarify it.hello m23105,
its occured to me that Seano probably has an inexhaustible set of links to hawkish claims of Iran violating the agreement, and will prove fiercely resistant (or willfully oblivious) to the numerous pieces that debunk these charges.
if someone wants to believe something, ya gotta let'm, i figure.
- IGIT
Which we've done.Settle down. I googled it because I'm not an expert on the topic and got 1000's of matches. I asked like literally a dozen times for people telling me it was false to clarify it.
he literally ran on this promise 'it's the worst deal I've possibly ever seen'.......