Iranian Nuclear treaty
- Thread starter Torpedo
- Start date
- Status
Can not blame one administration for past administration failures these policies were set years ago with no reversal in sight. Trickle down economics/Money in politics/Deregulation the list goes on.
The American people have been the victims sold out by corporate greed and career politicians in congress.
The one thing in the 2008 market bubble taught us is nothing were doomed to repeat it.
The American people have been the victims sold out by corporate greed and career politicians in congress.
The one thing in the 2008 market bubble taught us is nothing were doomed to repeat it.
I have to agree with you on that. The direction that our Federal government has taken had some of the groundwork laid in the 1930's through the 1950's
....The current Republican platform continues to openly support "cutting taxes at the top, and cutting entitlements on the other end" ... that is Supply Side-Trickle Down-Voodoo economics. Most economists now agree that our 30+ years of this practice is what has resulted in the Nat'l Debt, decimation of the middle class, the huge income disparity, etc. The Federal Tax Codes didn't reach 17,000+ pages because of entitlements to the poor, that's for damn sure. Wall Street bonuses amounted to $28.5 billion in 2014, more than 2x as much as all full-time minimum wage earners of $14 billion.
....Conservatives have implemented revenue cuts without adjusting spending cuts because liberals have resisted the cuts. Many of the tax cuts should never have been implemented once it was clear no adjustments to spending would happen. The problem is, however, IF conservatives indeed attain the Trifecta in Washington, the decimation of the working middle class worker will most assuredly become the Rich (1%) and the Poor because the Republican's constituent base is upper income & corporate; they can't serve the majority of the population and keep their voter base happy. Plus, we'll most assuredly find our country in yet ANOTHER overseas war or two.
....I just wonder how many here have read either of the (current report) attachments on Trickle-Down I provided above; probably none who support top-down tax cuts.
Last edited:
You certainly do enjoy riding "Trickle Down". There are two significant problems with the Federal government the first is that it has it fingers in place it doesn't really need to be, and going things it really doesn't understand. If you want to count this as two things feel free. The other thing is that it doesn't do a very good job of keeping track of where the money goes.
The real strength in an economy comes from small business. Big business only responds to the economy it is the small business owners that make the country go. Last year we had more small businesses close than started,this is truly a bad sign.
The Federal government has become good at grand sweeps. ACA is a good example. One of the consequences was for medium sized and larger businesses was that it became cheaper to hire additional part time help than pay the cost of health care for employees working 30 or more hours. A few years ago prior to HIPAA and ACA I was watching a magazine program, I don't recall which one. The subject was inaccurate medical billing. Toward the end of the piece they asked the woman that owned bill auditing company how many of the bills had errors? She replied"They all did". She was then asked how many were in favor of the patient and how many were in favor of the hospital. She smiled and said "They are always in favor of the hospital". Three years after my wife died I was still getting bill every month or so. It was never very much usually less than $75.00 I finally called up the hospital and said that I thought what they were doing was fraudulent and it I got any more bills I was going to talk to the local DA. I didn't get anymore bills. I don't know if it stopped or they just didn't send me a copy anymore. From the insurance companies standpoint it is cheaper to pay a small bill than it is to investigate it. HIPAA has turned out to be better for the insurance companies and hospitals than it has for the people it is supposed to protect. I think it is safe to say that more people have been hacked in the last few years than haven't. That means that a lot of people have their information medical and otherwise out there in cyberspace. They are not longer protected. But if any entity wants any type of explanation about how things are in the health care industry HIPAA comes up very frequently
The War on Poverty started 50 years ago with the best of intentions it really hasn't went too well. In 1964 the poverty rate was around 19% today it is about 14.5%. That's a 4 1/2% improvement in 51 years They start a program then spend years putting band aids on it try to fix it. Recently I read a headline that said something to effect that "ACA is here to stay, now lets fix it" If you stop and think about it that is a rather interesting business plan. I can promise it would not work in the private sector.
I know of a lot of contractors that don't deal with private parties only the Government and not just at the Federal level. Why? Because that is where the money is. In a town near where I live they built a new public library. I was talking to banker in the town and he said he couldn't believe how much it cost. He claimed he could have built the same building for a third the cost.
A while back I read about a clinic that had been collecting millions of dollars in mostly Federal money and when somebody decided to actually visit the address all that was there was a tobacco shed.
A very significant part of out taxes dollars are squandered or outright stolen and little gets done. The IRS can track someone down that owes them $20.00 but they can't seem to be able to stop paying billions in refunds on fake tax returns. But it seems that we are always moving on to the next program and not taking care of what has already been done.
I support the treaty because I am tired of the US getting involved in the middle east.
Some of the information on this forum is not true. Iraq has attacked other countries. In my opinion the only way we decline is if we follow the Bush course and keep fighting WW1 over and over again.
I also want to point to some things others have missed. Iraq has gone to war other counties.
There was this crazy thing in the 1980's called the Iran-Iraq war. http://www.history.com/topics/iran-iraq-war
Iraq also sponsors terrorist organizations in other countries such as Syria and Yemen.
Some of the information on this forum is not true. Iraq has attacked other countries. In my opinion the only way we decline is if we follow the Bush course and keep fighting WW1 over and over again.
I also want to point to some things others have missed. Iraq has gone to war other counties.
There was this crazy thing in the 1980's called the Iran-Iraq war. http://www.history.com/topics/iran-iraq-war
Iraq also sponsors terrorist organizations in other countries such as Syria and Yemen.
Stop telling these lies. Saudi Arabia is the most extremist country in the world and they're a US ally
Read your history lady, or guy, or whoever you are. Iran of Modern Day is the Persian Empire of yesteryears. The sole purpose of their existence has been to dominate the world especially the west. If you want to understand the persians, think of this, they invented the game of chess.
Saudi Arabia is run by Wahabi Muslims. They are a small ultraconservative sect is Islam. Though they are very strict in their interpretation of Islam they have a long history of negotiation to keep themselves in power. The alliance between Saudi Arabia and the United States is simply a matter of mutual convenience.
As to lies about Iran. I am not aware that I have told any. They are a well known sponsor of terrorism and have made it clear they hate the West in general and the United States specifically. The Shi'ites have a long history of using lies and deception. And they have also made it clear that they would like to create a new Persian Empire.
The treaty that was just negotiated is for all intents and purposes unenforceable. Under the terms of the agreement they can actually increase their enrichment capacity. The one thing that makes them the most dangerous is that they are a theocracy and really believe they are on a mission for God or in their case Allah. If they acquire nuclear weapons they are much more likely to use them than anyone else.
My apologies for accusing you of telling lies. I meant to say perpetuating as it is not your intent to mislead anyone. I wonder if you have ever actually lived in the Middle East because I have. You see all that you have pointed out is indeed an accurate picture of what anyone looking at the ME sees from a distance. The truth runs a lot deeper and is a lot more complicated than that. Beyond the vehement anti-western rhetoric it might shock you to find that Iran is in fact the most moderate country in the ME. Did you know for example that while Jewish communities all over the Arab world have been persecuted to extinction Iran still has a thriving Jewish community? Do some research on this. Now this is at odds with their often touted "death to Israel mantra". Talking about the Sunni/Shi'a divide, name me 5 Shi'a terrorist groups and I'll match that with Sunni counterparts 5 times more violent and extremist in nature
Iran has given support including financing, training and weapons to various terrorists Palestinian groups including Hamas in Gaza. The support of these groups has been a significant obstacle to peace. Iran has been a long time supporter of Hizballah. The Iranian government has admitted sending IRGC troop to Syria, in 2013 two senior commanders of those forces were killed in action. Despite claiming to support stabilization in Iraq they continue to support Shia insurgent groups. Also in 2013 an Iranian dhow as seized off the coast of Yemen. It carrying advanced weapons for insurgents there. I can go on at considerably more length if you would like. One point that you should bear in mind is that Israel and Saudi Arabia are both opposed to the treaty as it stands. When was the last time the Saudi's and the Israeli's agreed on anything? Just the fact that both of these countries are opposed to treaty as it stands should raise a serious red flag
Probably because you quit and I don't.
Nothing is black and white. Saudi and Israel are not interested in peace as it's not in their best interests. Saudi prefers to maintain a Sunni hegemony spearheaded by them which is why they spend billions of petrodollars financing insurgencies all over the place. Hamas and Hizbollah may apply terror tactics to achieving their aims but they're not extremists groups and are not trying to convert anyone anywhere... go ahead show me one fundamentalist Shi'a militia. Israel on the other hand thrives on the insecurity in the Middle East. It keeps American billions in defense aid coming its way; the trumped up threats of annihilation keeps them relevant and lastly; the mass regional conflict dehumanizes the region ensuring that Israel's gross human rights abuses pale in contrast and go unnoticed. So my dear friend, nothing is black and white as you seem to think and that black and white approach is the cause of continuous foreign policy failure from the US and its western allies.
D
Daphne&D
Guest
Try the League of the Righteous (or Asaib al Haq), the Mahdi Army spin-off Promise Day Brigade, and the Hezbollah Brigades (or Kataib Hezbollah) Which by the way puts paid to your claim that Hezbllah are not extremists I'm afraid. Just because the US removed them from the US list of terrorist organisations doesn't mean they are not still l considered so.
Try reading, this rather eye opening. aljazeeraalarabiamodwana.blogspot.nl/2014/09/shia-terro_20.html
Last edited:
Saudi Arabia is basically a family owned country. Despite their ultraconservative Wahabi roots they survive by constant negotiation and some heavy handedness to remain in power.
The framework for a Jewish state and a Palestinian goes back nearly 100 years. The Jewish state was founded after WWII but the Palestinian is still waiting to happen. Iran's support of of Hamas and other terrorist/insurgent groups does nothing to help the process. Israel will likely require significant pressure to go along with a Palestinian state but they will never do that until they have some assurance of peace within Gaza. Iran has made it clear that nothing less than the destruction of Israel is their long term goal. The real biggest danger is that when Iran get a few nuclear weapons they will attack Israel. Israel will respond with their nuclear weapons. Israel's nuclear capability is probably one of the poorest kept secrets in the world. Bear in mind that they likely have nuclear capability for at least 30 years and likely longer they have never used that capability
1. I do understand that there has always been a framework for the creation of a Palestinian state - an opportunity which the Palestinians themselves squandered at the time. However, Israeli actions with regards to Palestinian territories so far have reflected a consistent pattern of subtle displacement all in the name of security. I have always been against Palestinian violence against Israel because it really makes no sense attacking a way more powerful country. But please go ahead an explain to me how ****** evictions and settlements expansions help the cause of peace or provide assurances of security for the Israelis except they're working towards a secure future that somehow is totally exclusive of any Palestinian existence.
2. A stated motive of destroying Israel? well it is a bit childish on the part of US policymakers to pretend not to realize that the chants of "death to Israel" and "death to America" are mere rhetoric which they have no intent of following through. North Korea has made similar threats basically every other month for the last few years to the US. Please tell me you do not ACTUALLY believe Iranian leaders would be stupid enough to launch a nuclear attack against Israel and risk retaliation which would cost millions of Iranian lives? Besides how does an Iranian nuclear attack (realistically) help the Palestinian cause?
3. About the Saudis, their commitment to spreading their strict Wahabbi interpretation of Islam accounts for a lot of the religious extremism we see around the world today
2. A stated motive of destroying Israel? well it is a bit childish on the part of US policymakers to pretend not to realize that the chants of "death to Israel" and "death to America" are mere rhetoric which they have no intent of following through. North Korea has made similar threats basically every other month for the last few years to the US. Please tell me you do not ACTUALLY believe Iranian leaders would be stupid enough to launch a nuclear attack against Israel and risk retaliation which would cost millions of Iranian lives? Besides how does an Iranian nuclear attack (realistically) help the Palestinian cause?
3. About the Saudis, their commitment to spreading their strict Wahabbi interpretation of Islam accounts for a lot of the religious extremism we see around the world today
easyuk
Male
So I understand from a lot of the comments that the deal with Iran was terrible for various "obvious" reasons for anyone who is "educated" and not "stupid". Taking that to be true, what should the strategy and end game be without the Iranian deal?
Apologies to Mac if I still sound like a politician
Apologies to Mac if I still sound like a politician
Last edited:
We USE TO BE a country that wouldn't start a war, but would finish one ... but with GW Bush, that all changed, and it changed the way the rest of the world looks at the USA as well. Other than Israel, we seem to be the only country expressing disappointment in the Iran deal. Even if all this 'deal' has done is push the inevitable into the future 10 years or so, maybe we should look at it as an opportunity to change the relationship between Iran and the US, and to think of the number of families that will get to keep their military sons & daughters alive a little longer. I wonder, if Republicans held the White House (Mitt Romney), if we'd still be in Afghanistan and Iraq? And I wonder how many thousands more of our military would have lost their lives if we had. I think the majority of Iranian citizens (even some of those yelling hate to the US) do not want war, and instead, would like to see a long period of peace. I think we should give the Iranian government that opportunity to disappoint us, first.
(1)There isn't any easy solution to the creation of a Palestinian state. It really should have been addressed when Israel came into existence. However outside influences like Iran only inflame the situation. Any violence from the Palestinians just give Israel a reason to displace the Palestinians. At some point there will be a Palestinian state of that I have little doubt. A lot of what is going on now is jockeying for territory so when the real negotiations take place each side will want to have the best position. Instead of jockeying for position and poking each other in the eye with sharp sticks they need to be sitting down, declare peace and reach an agreement. What they should do is each send a single negotiator to a neutral place. Each side would need to pledge support of what the two negotiators agree on. The two negotiators negotiate as long as it takes to reach an agreement.
(2)That would probably have been a good argument prior to 9/11/2001. Bin Laden had threatened to bring the war to America and he did. The leader if ISIS has stated a desire to fly his flag over the White House, prior to 9/11/2001 everyone would have likely laughed, not anymore. I wouldn't be all that surprised if Iran attacked Israel, Iran is a theocracy. If the decide to act on Allah's behalf and believe their mission is divinely inspired then any of their own dead aren't victims they are martyrs. As to the little toad in North Korea, he understands manipulation, but he really doesn't grasp the resources and the power of those he is messing with. He might do something stupid but I think there is much more of a likelihood of Iran using nuclear weapons than North Korea.
(3) Religious extremist regardless of their faith are the greatest danger that we face. Nothing would be worse that have some religious fanatic that thinks that he/she is on a divine mission from God, Allah or whatever they call their deity and give them access to any Weapons of Mass destruction. Given all the turmoil in the Mideast I think the Saudi's are more concerned about protecting their own asses than they are about exporting terrorism.
- Status
