The Overlooked Flaw in the Iranian Deal

Townhall.com ^ | July 26, 2015 | Bruce Bialosky

[arthurus]

The major flaw in everyone's analysis is the failure to consider the high likelihood that the deal has been "negotiated" by a Sunni head of state who intends to damage or destroy Sunni Islam's three primary enemies, Israel, Shia Iran, and the United States. This deal bids fair to accomplish much of that.

If the mullahs stay in character they will go full speed on their nuke and delivery system acquisition and then launch against Tel Aviv and either DC or New York. Iran will cease to exist shortly thereafter as the IDF subs all launch their Samsons. Israel will be crippled and subject to immediate invasion from its neighbors unless those Dastardly Jews have anti missile capability we know not yet of.

[arthurus]

The author is ̣stipulating that Kerry was negotiating in Good Faith and that all on our side are earnest and honest simpletons, while pointing out how even with all their claims granted, it is still a disaster.

[Ray76]

The top pic looks like that Heaven’s Gate leader.

[Kaslin]

Are you saying that Iran and 0bama are likable? That is what says in Merriam Webster dictionary.com

[Kaslin]

Exactly

[Ray76]

They like each other.

[varon]

That man glows with optimism.

and his actions will have the rest of us glowing from radiation!

[adorno]

The Overlooked Flaw in the Iranian Deal

There are many flaws with the 'treaty'.

One of the big ones noticed and that is being discussed, is that, sanctions will be lifted as soon as the treaty takes effect. The problem with lifting sanctions is that, once they are lifted, Iran will, for certain, violate one or more of the agreements within the treaty, and the sanctions will not be reimposed. That's a biggie, and Iran knows that they can get away with it.

The other 'overlooked' problem, is that, IRAN WILL NOT STOP DEVELOPING THEIR NUCLEAR BOMBS. Why should they, since, the treaty is just a means to try to delay Iran's development of the bomb. In essence, the treaty is giving Iran permission to develop and build their nuclear arsenal. Iran's rationalization for continuing to develop the bomb, is that, why would it be wrong to continue work on the bomb immediately, if they have written permission to build the bomb anyway in 10 years? What's the effing difference? If Iran is deemed rational enough to build the bomb 10 years from now, why would they not be as rational today? So, that part of the 'deal' is the biggest flaw and fraud in the treaty.

[sport]

Does anyone know when the 60 day countdown or debate period begins? If so, would they please post it?

[Kaslin]

You're certainly right about that, but there is a huge difference between liking each other and being likable. Which neither one is. Correct?

[Ray76]

I never said they were likable.

[Kaslin]

But that is what it means. Go check it out yourself *rme*

[Ray76]

I said “Iran and Obama are simpatico”, meaning they agree with each other. It would be different if I said “Iran and Ray76 are simpatico” or “Obama and Ray76 are simpatico” either of which cause me to keel over dead.

being on the same wavelength
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/simpatico

like-minded
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/simpatico

Having or characterized by shared attributes or interests; compatible
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/simpatico

[ETL]

there is a huge difference between liking each other and being likable. Which neither one is. Correct?

Where did you ever get the idea that he (Ray76) was trying to say or imply that Iran was "likeable"?

[Ray76]

No worries!

[Ray76]

No worries!

[wastoute]

We seem to have forgotten how all this played out with the Norks. The Iranians haven’t. In fact, they were taking notes.