Posted on 04/02/2015 4:40:54 PM PDT by Dave346
So, now we read via Drudge that the Iranians say that Obama is lying about the deal. That the bullet points that Kerry laid out are non-existent, that Iran didn’t agree to any of that. The real agreement is not what is in writing.
Then, on O’Reilly we heard that there is no agreement, that they just kicked the can down the road to June 30. “If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor”
That would be good. A broader coalition will not only help militarily, but also for legitimacy. But they better hurry. Obama will do everything possible to stop any attack and he clearly is trying to set up a partnership with a newly empowered Iran as the dominant regional power.
I agree 100%.
Since they were not involved in the talks, we'll never know, will we?
Iran framework threatens Israel’s existence
Thing is...obama doesn’t care what happens to Israel. It’s up to the American people to protect this ally of ours...however we can.
The Iran problem will be solved eventually.
Israel knows they’re alone now. And we the U.S. (and the rest of the world) are cursed for it.
Very well done. I especially like the radioactive symbols on Mr. Wizard. This is like a Superman movie gone bad.
BiBi's response to Obama
Netanyahu ... "a deal based on this framework would threaten the survival of #Israel."
When Iran targets the U.S. with a nuke, tell them to just send one nuke...to Obama’s residence wherever that is...
So how is Obama going to back this up if there isn't a deal in June?....the people are celebrating the lifting of sanctions.
Exerts:
If and when a detailed verification plan is agreed for an Iran nuclear agreement, the inspectors will have less access than in Iraq....(And we know how Saddam played the Inspectors and paid many to close their eyes)
The world may point to them as credible investigators—and they are. But whatever they report will go through the kaleidoscope ‘of the Security Council’. It will not be the IAEA that decides to reimpose sanctions. It will be the Security Council....(which includes Russia).
Putin will not give up his right to a veto. Nor will other members. Russia (and others) will have a stake in sustaining access to Iran’s markets, not reimposing sanctions. The track record of Putin and Lavrov in the Iraq case suggests that they will be working bi-lateral deals with Tehran.
... Director of National Intelligence James Clapper will get tough questions in closed hearings, not just on whether American intelligence and IAEA inspectors can reliably detect prohibited Iranian nuclear activities, also what deals Moscow or Beijing or others may have with Tehran.
If I were John Kerry, I would not want to be defending a deal that depends upon Vladimir Putin.
Correct
Then I said, "Iran won't get nukes!"
Unless Iran figures out a way to neutralize the nuclear missiles on Israel’s submarines, I doubt Iran will exist following any attack on Israel.
Don’t put it past Obama to provide targeting information or direct attack where he has plausible deniability, i.e. destroyed an unknown target or even allege it was an Iranian sub.
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.