[old curmudgeon]

It has been reported that part of the deal with Iran requires that they deal with ISIS.

There are two major questions that arise from this part of the deal.

First, when one takes on such a huge and dangerous project, payment is expected and the payment for this would necessarily be very big. The only reasonable conclusion is Thai they have been promised that they can proceed with building the bomb.

Second, and most importantly an exposure of who our president really is, the right or duty to pursue ISIS gives Iran a blank check to put troops in every single nation in the Middle East, for ISIS is in every one of them.

So in effect, with in short time the world map will show that Iran is the only country in that part of the world.

It is hard to accept that we have a president that would make such a deal and even more impossible to understand how our congress would allow it.

Shame on any dim who would support such a man.

[bert]

the GCC will not allow what you postulate

[Pappy Smear]

The thing I don't get, is this apparent arse-kissing we are doing with Iran. However, the Saudis, it would appear, are not friends of Iran. And it seems to me, that the Saudis are the people that "control" the US political system. I can't imagine the Saudis are down with a nuclear Iran. Is Captain Zero backstabbing the Saudis?

As we know, it was Saudis that flew into the WTC. Why didn't we go after them? Something smells about all this, but it is not just Iran. I think something else is going on, but not really sure what it is.

[NonValueAdded]

Outsourcing the defeat of ISIS to Iran is like outsourcing the security of our Libyan facilities to The February 17 Martyrs Brigade ... oh, wait ...