Posted on 04/04/2015 7:39:37 AM PDT by darkwing104
Obama spiked the football in the Rose garden this week when he claimed that Iran and other world powers had agreed on an “historic” framework toward a final nuclear deal. He was doing his best channeling of Neville Chamberlain when he declared “I am convinced that if this framework leads to a final comprehensive deal, it will make our country, our allies and our world safer.” Of course, the key word in Barack’s victory speech is “if;” as in “…if Tehran proves that it is adhering to the agreement.”
Yet nothing is in writing! Maybe The One has gone back to those early administration days of dreaming of chocolate rivers and dancing unicorns. In any event he is foolish to spike the ball before the game has ended. A framework and a final verifiable agreement are two different things.
Talking Points
From John Kerry’s State Department comes: “Iran has agreed to not conduct research and development associated with uranium enrichment for 15 years” and has agreed to reduce by approximately two-thirds its installed uranium enrichment centrifuges.” But Iran is allowed to continue enriching for the next ten years. The terms of the agreement will be monitored by the U.N.’s nuclear watchdog outfit, the International Atomic Energy Agency
Stop the Presses
Not long after Obama and Kerry completed their kabuki, nuclear deal performance they were exposed by Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif who accused the Obama administration of lying to the American People and to Congress!
(Excerpt) Read more at coachisright.com ...
Ted Cruz
Reminds me of my dear Christian friends who read 1 John 1:7 receiving much consolation and reassurance, sort of overlooking the “...if...” at the beginning of the statement!
Neither!
Next question?
“Peace in our time!” history repeats
Would you trust your young son withthis punk?
Who do we believe, Obama or Iran?
Well it ain’t Obama.
Obama to Iran, ...... “If you like your nukes, you can keep your nukes. If you like your terrorism, you can continue to sponsor your terrorism.”
That’s like asking who is more truthful; Stalin or Hitler.
No wait - this is a trick question...right?!
Well it ain’t Obama.
Obama to Iran, ...... “If you like your nukes, you can keep your nukes. If you like your terrorism, you can continue to sponsor your terrorism.”
If i ever heard Obama utter those words it would be the first time i actually believed what he said!
Both have incentive to lie (or the polite term, spin), so I don’t believe either one. Obama wants a legacy item, Iran wants legitimacy, anything I believe needs to be in black and white, signed, and verified to in fact be true.
What is the basis for believing either party? There is more to this than is in the pronouncements of either or than is speculated in the press or on line, I am sure.
“who do we believe, Obama or Iran?”
Neither.
How about...neither.
Much like the “non-aggression: pact signed between Adolf Hitler and Josef Stalin in August of 1939, the most cynical international agreement ever made, this draft of a proposed treaty “limiting” Iran’s right to pursue the development of a nuclear weapon delivery system of only a ploy to meet the immediate needs of each party involved.
It does not even kick the can down the road very far.
Massive widespread war is coming, with unreliable parties on both sides. Some value human life, but the majority stockholder on the Islamic Axis side of the equation does not.
This is what happens when a death cult, or a variety of death cults, gain even temporary supremacy.
That's easy...Iran.
Yeah. All other things being equal, neither. But if they are crowing about how they schooled bammy and crew and got basically a sweetheart deal. Yeah, Iran.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.