oh well, WW3 starts when the nukes hit Israel... obarry is just a born loser, i can't believe the liberals are that stupid...

http://humanevents.com/2012/01/19/day-after-iran-tests-the-bomb/


http://www.theguardian.com/world/julian-borger-global-security-blog/2011/jun/08/iran-blogging

The day after Iran's first nuclear test is a normal day'
A bizarre article on a Revolutionary Guard website breaks a taboo by anticipating the impact of an Iranian bomb

http://www.boston.com/news/world/asia/articles/2010/06/15/iran_cleric_wants_special_weapons_to_deter_enemy/?camp=pm

yea, i posted that here... they can't shut up, can they... they really want the world to hate Israel..

Then put them on Panther Hall.

http://thepeoplescube.com/peoples-blog/peace-in-our-time-iran-nukes-t16161.html

Finally, they agree on something




N.Korea has been threatening direct nuclear strikes against America and S.Korea for the last 15yrs and America does nothing. They(NK) launched missile strikes, blew up a S.K navy ship, killed crewmen... STILL NOTHING!

Yet the US considered dropping 30000lbs Boeing bunkerbusters on Iranian enrichment facilities, preemptive strikes, for Israel???

http://hotair.com/archives/2015/04/03/the-us-surrendered-to-iran-on-nuke-deal-says-france/

The US surrendered to Iran on nuke deal, says. France

How's that for a confidence builder, eh? While Barack Obama tried to put a sunny spin on the interim agreement with Iran in his Rose Garden speech, the Wall Street Journal found out that the final act of the negotiations mainly rested on American retreat at the bargaining table. In fact, the concessions began almost immediately in September 2013 and never stopped:

The White House decided a less ambitious agreement would be pursued. As soon as we got into the real negotiations with them, we understood that any final deal was going to involve some domestic enrichment capability, a senior U.S. official said, referring to the production of nuclear fuel, which has both civilian and military uses. But I can honestly tell you, we always anticipated that.

Crucially, the goal of the talks shifted away from dismantling structures and toward a more complex set of limitations designed to extend the time Iran would need to break out and make a dash toward a nuclear weapon.

The end result left everyone puzzled about the value of the deal. A former IAEA inspection chief wonders why the US would leave Iran on the brink of making a nuclear weapon, even if they stay at that point for the next ten years:

I'm a little puzzled by the political agreement, said Olli Heinonen, a previous inspections chief at the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency.You're going to leave Iran as a threshold state. There is't much room to maneuver.

This was confirmed earlier today by Laurent Fabius, the French representative to the talks. Fabius told Europe1 Radio that France wanted to reject the deal, but Kerry preferred to capitulate to Iranian demands to get his success, an admission also noted by Arutz Sheva:

On Friday, French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius told Europe 1 radio that France had rejected an original of the deal outline as not solid enough, and had held out for firmer conditions. However, Fabius told the radio station that the Iranian delegation had responded by threatening to walk out of the talks.

The French delegation was considered by observers to be one of the hardest bargainers of the P5+1 countries, a group which also included the U.S., Britain, Germany, Russia and China. Fabius told Europe 1 that France wants a firm deal to prevent other countries in the Gulf such as Saudi Arabia from embarking on nuclear proliferation.

Fabius said his rejection was of the same deal, the day before Kerry accepted it:

French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius, who represented France in the nuclear talks between Iran and world powers, revealed on Friday that his nation had rejected an original version of the deal reached the day before for not being solid enough.

Jeff Dunetz reminds us that the French have been unhappy with Kerry and the US in these negotiations for quite some time, as they saw the deal developing:

France felt the Americans were keeping France and the other negotiating partners in the dark about the talks. Rather it being P5+1, it has really been the U.S. only talking to Iran. And the French negotiators complained in private the Americans were trying to force them to make concessions on issues like the number of centrifuges allowed or sanctions.

The French ambassador to the US tweeted his displeasure at the beginning of March, We want a deal. They need a deal. The tactics and the result of the negotiation should reflect this asymmetry.
Instead, it reflects the asymmetry of Barack Obama's political woes here in the US, especially on foreign policy. The Iranians, whose economy had been choked off by sanctions and whose mullahs faced serious unrest as a result, should have been the desperate party. Instead, Obama and Kerry came into the negotiations determined to cut a deal at any cost, as long as it had enough fig-leaf coverage to last past Obama's exit from the White House.

It's not fooling too many people not Israel, not the Sunni nations that will come under Iran's thumb, and not the Washington Post, either. It's certainly not fooling the mullahs.



When France says you retreated, the expert in historical retreats, you know it's bad,really bad.

Israel says any agreement with Iran must include "right to exist" for Israel, I agree. THAT should have been chapter 1? Considering who we're dealing with?


If the Iranians can't commit to this, No Deal!

The sooner, the better.

Here's the deal, as I see it.

Iran keeps all their stuff but promises to only enrich with 6,000 odd centrifuges. We can inspect them if we give sufficient notice.

Iran has areas we don't know about and cannot inspect.

Iran gets the sanctions lifted.

After ten years, there are no restrictions.

We do not get to inspect their nuclear military program.

Iran gets to advance forward with missiles.

Iran gets to advance forward in nuclear weapons research (enrichment).

Iran continues to be the world leader in terror support.

Iran continues with the "death to Israel and America" program.

What part of this did I get wrong?

you got it pretty much on the Button!
Yet all over Politicians are howling what a good Deal the West got!Guess it must be at least equivalent to the one Chamberlain got from Hitler!

I think we need a lottery on how long it takes Iran to do their first underground bomb test. How long did it take North Korea?

Only my opinion but when did we start negotiating anything with terror groups? In this case it's worse seeing that we are speaking about an entire country who openly wants Israel and America removed from the map.
What happened to this country.....people have very short memories. Again, only my opinion

Why not just kill them all, Israel included, and let god sort em out?

Instead of all the "Israel first" BS in the press and our congress, why not America first for a change!

Perhaps because Israel is the only ME nation with the power and capability to actually nuke us?

And they are NOT signers of the NPT, or subject to inspections.... which Iran is!

Doesn't anyone get it? THE MEDIA LIES! at best, it does as it's told.

wrong, check your Israel facts before bashing... India never signed it either...

from wiki: Opened for signature in 1968, the Treaty entered into force in 1970. On 11 May 1995, the Treaty was extended indefinitely. More countries have adhered to the NPT than any other arms limitation and disarmament agreement, a testament to the Treaty's significance.[1] A total of 191 states have joined the Treaty, though North Korea, which acceded to the NPT in 1985 but never came into compliance, announced its withdrawal in 2003.[2] Four UN member states have never joined the NPT: India, Israel, Pakistan and South Sudan.

But Israel is the only nuclear power on that list of non-signers

Israel has allowed itself to become Mini Me to the US..... or is it the other way around? No problem when it comes to the people of Israel, but its leadership ......

Their lobby has more power over the US congress than it does over its own country, and has pulled and conflicted us into more BS in the ME by dictating our foreign policy thru deception and bribery than I care to think about.

All this Israel First BS gives me a genuine a$$ ache!

Obozo sux, but I don't think him wrong about attempting to keep Israel at arms length. Corrupt govts hate competition!

They call themselves "Gods Chosen People" or "The Holy Land"....then why do they need us and our BILLIONS in welfare to protect their a$$e$?

because they are surrounded by hate... name one border of Israel with a "friendly" nation...

Cause and affect! Why is that our problem exactly?

An ally yes, but we seem to have a few problems with our own borders we're not very good at solving