President Obama made a good deal

[shanm]

Originally Posted by WombRaider

And you can apologize for making fun of mentally challenged people at any fucking point in this discussion.

To get LustyTurd to apologize for the innumerable mistakes hes made is harder than getting the earth to collide with the sky. Don't expect any decency or etiquette from this weasel. He's made it his bidness to be factually incorrect on every turn, have his ass handed to him and then meltdown into a fucking douche asswipe. If this halfwit had to apologize for all the incorrect, indecent, irrelevant or incoherent shit he posts on a daily basis, his entire life would be a giant bumbling apology.

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by shanm

To get LustyTurd to apologize for the innumerable mistakes hes made is harder than getting the earth to collide with the sky. Don't expect any decency or etiquette from this weasel. He's made it his bidness to be factually incorrect on every turn, have his ass handed to him and then meltdown into a fucking douche asswipe. If this halfwit had to apologize for all the incorrect, indecent, irrelevant or incoherent shit he posts on a daily basis, his entire life would be a giant bumbling apology.

Lookee here, folks - Another fine example of libtard botspam (refer also to my post #116). Notice how broad and generic it is. It's actually nothing more than a ready-made, off-the-shelf, one-size-fits-all insult that says nothing about nothing. The beauty is how it can be used anytime, anywhere, on anybody. All you need to do is upload a name and you're good to go. Shamfucker and undercunt have bucketloads of this libtard botspam shit. And they keep shoveling it out because they know that posting anything intelligent or original in this forum is just toooo fuuuccckkking haaarrrrd!

.

[WombRaider]

Originally Posted by lustylad

Lookee here, folks - Another fine example of libtard botspam (refer also to my post #116). Notice how broad and generic it is. It's actually nothing more than a ready-made, off-the-shelf, one-size-fits-all insult that says nothing about nothing. The beauty is how it can be used anytime, anywhere, on anybody. All you need to do is upload a name and you're good to go. Shamfucker and undercunt have bucketloads of this libtard botspam shit. And they keep shoveling it out because they know that posting anything intelligent or original in this forum is just toooo fuuuccckkking haaarrrrd!

.

You have finally spun right off this sphere we call home. Ready-made? This is the person who has taken to posting the same post over and over, maybe inserting a few new insults here and there. But basically the same thing. What you have is bucketloads of guilt. Bucketloads of the abuse and pettiness. I don't know who it was that tortured you so, but you can break the cycle. You don't need to perpetuate these actions. That dream you once had. The one that's locked up all by itself, can be freed.

[JD Barleycorn]

Originally Posted by WombRaider

That's very astute reasoning. Somewhere on a college campus, they're studying a brain in a jar that most likely resembled that way of thinking. Trying to figure out how to breed out such ignorance.

Have you ever heard of a document called the US Constitution? It is pretty impressive and it has all the rules that our government is supposed to follow. Like this rule, if a president negotiates the treaty then it has to be approved of by the US Senate or it is not valid. That is what the GOP told the Iranians since by their words they thought that Obama was a king. Wonder where they got that idea?
Now the Congress did something different to Reagan. The passed a law that told the president before hand that a power given by the Constitution was not to be used by him. That is preemptive and illegal. They did not inform someone of the constitutional authority of the president but they were trying to tell the president how to do his job. As I said, Reagan was not charged and the law was never challenged by the democrats to force the Supreme Court to decide the issue. They knew that they were wrong.

[shanm]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Now the Congress did something different to Reagan. The passed a law that told the president before hand that a power given by the Constitution was not to be used by him. That is preemptive and illegal. They did not inform someone of the constitutional authority of the president but they were trying to tell the president how to do his job. As I said, Reagan was not charged and the law was never challenged by the democrats to force the Supreme Court to decide the issue. They knew that they were wrong.

Please explain what constitutional law allows the president of the United States to sell weapons to a terrorist state in order to fund a questionably terrorist and incorrect rebellion in a different country? You ASSinine buttwipe.

Reagan circumvented the Boland amendment AFTER it was passed. Meaning he gave fuck all about the law you claim he clung dearly to. That is why he had to hide behind the skirt-tails of his NSC.

You are such a fucking amateur JD, with the political acumen of a 5 year old.Move along and play with your friend, LustyTurd, you'll feel right at home. You both have the collective IQ of a rejected peanut.

[WombRaider]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Have you ever heard of a document called the US Constitution? It is pretty impressive and it has all the rules that our government is supposed to follow. Like this rule, if a president negotiates the treaty then it has to be approved of by the US Senate or it is not valid. That is what the GOP told the Iranians since by their words they thought that Obama was a king. Wonder where they got that idea?
Now the Congress did something different to Reagan. The passed a law that told the president before hand that a power given by the Constitution was not to be used by him. That is preemptive and illegal. They did not inform someone of the constitutional authority of the president but they were trying to tell the president how to do his job. As I said, Reagan was not charged and the law was never challenged by the democrats to force the Supreme Court to decide the issue. They knew that they were wrong.

Lot of words. Lot of wrong. Let's get started.

1. the Executive branch is the sole branch responsible for negotiating foreign policy. I'll copy and paste this next portion for your reading pleasure. In it, you will find that the president does INDEED have the power to negotiate and ratify a treaty, all on his own.

"In the United States, the term "treaty" is used in a more restricted legal sense than in international law. U.S. law distinguishes what it calls treaties from congressional-executive agreements and sole-executive agreements.[1] All three classes are considered treaties under international law; they are distinct only from the perspective of internal United States law. Distinctions among the three concern their method of ratification: by two-thirds of the Senate, by normal legislative process, or by the President alone, respectively."

So, as you can read, you were quite incorrect. The republicans also, were incorrect. Now, let's continue. At no point did the Iranians think Obama was a king. Those are words you have concocted.

[dirty dog]

Originally Posted by wellendowed1911

So why does every country have to give in to our demands? They don't and I never said they did but the fact remains that 5 other countrys some with stronger sentiments against (France) agree with the US's opposition You ever wonder why the U.S is hated globally? I know exactly why its called 50 years of nation building and meddling in other people business Iran should have the right to pursue a nuke to protect their nation. Aren't nukes designed to be great deterrents??? No they are designed to be very effective killing weapons, the result of that is that they are a deterrent. The difference here is that Iran is the only nation I am aware of that has stated they if they had the weapon they would us it offensively in the destruction of another country.
I assure you that Pakistan and India would have had full blown war by now if both countries didn't have nuclear arsenal. This is probably the case

Speaking of Pakistan- isn't that nation far more radical than Iran? Since 9-11 Pakistan has been a safe haven for Al-queada operatives and was the home to OBL. Pakistan is also home to a Taliban sect that is far more brutal than their afghan version. How many coup attempts and Presidential assassinatins has Pakistan had in the last 20 years alone? I am sure there is concern about Pakistan, but they already have the Nuke, Iran has yet to accuire it.

Iran has has no coup attempts since the revolution in 1979 nor are they home to any more terror organizations yet you guys who is you guys, I make a statement in support of what the President has done and that makes me a you guy? have no problem with Pakistan having nukes but want to go ape shit crazy if Iran gets a nuke.

Also, why Israel is butt fucking Republicans and pull their strings- I don't know anything about butt fucking or gay sex. I don't any talk of Israel relinquishing it's nukes. It's been a known secret that Israel has had nukes since the early 80's- oh some of you may say- well Israel is surrounded by enemies... which I agree- but have you been paying attention to the middle east? Iran is surrounded by enemies as well- they are the only SHIITE Theocracy in the middle east. Both Al-Queada and ISIS don't consider Shiites as true muslims and will kill them on the spot- Are you seriouslytrying to say that Iran has wanted nukes because of their fear of ISIS and Al Queada Iran has every right to protect it's border and defend it's land just like any other sovereign nation.

I agree that every country has the right to protect themselves, but are you arguing that there should be more Nukes in the world instead of less. Personally I would prefer no one had them to include the USA. I also have a problem with any country who is openly hostile and who has threatened the destruction of any other country getting them. My comment was a response to how the president did on this subject. I explained how I thought he did and the reason I thought he did it. I am not advocating for or against it. All you cocksuckers are an example of whats wrong with this country. So polarized and sunk down in the my side rights, your sides wrong, name calling bullshit nothing gets done, there is middle ground and I pray/hope/dream someday this country will learn how to find it again

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by dirty dog

My comment was a response to how the president did on this subject. I explained how I thought he did and the reason I thought he did it. I am not advocating for or against it.

The following is not argumentative at all.

Since I have not seen one news report containing an official copy of any agreement approved by the "participants" (all of them) in the "negotiations" I cannot make a determination as to whether or not "the president" .... "did" a good job or a bad job. So as a consequence it is IMPOSSIBLE for me to draw any conclusions, or even offer an "opinion," on whether or not "he" (actually John Kerry) did "good" or "bad" or "indifferent."

Would you please post a link TO THE DOCUMENT SIGNED BY ALL THE PARTICIPANTS THAT SETS FOR THE SO CALLED "FRAMEWORK" OF THE NEGOTIATED "AGREEMENT" ..... so I, and perhaps others, like Congressmen and Senators, can review the same and draw their own conclusions.

Given the track record of this administration of .... "passing" things so they can see how it works out later ... and it doesn't!!!! ... and given the past performance under oath of John Kerry, who fraternized with the enemy while still an LT in the Navy, you can probably understand why I am skeptical about the "deal" being good for the U.S. Also...

I noticed on the news yesterday the Iranians are backing away with threats.

I don't like asking for "links," but I don't know how else to effectively do it on here without taking up a lot of bandwidth. And for the sake of integrity and brevity, please ... please ... not link to a blog or some reporter's fantasy.

I want to review .... "IT"!

[gnadfly]

Are you saying "There's no there, there?" Turn on every news station save Fox and you'd think the agreement's been "saucered and blown."

How could the P5+1=7 Nations allow such a thing?

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by wellendowed1911

Iran has has no coup attempts since the revolution in 1979 nor are they home to any more terror organizations....

Gee wimpyendowed, what a mind-bendingly stupid statement you just made! Not home to terror? Then why has Iran been on the US list of State Sponsors of Terrorism since Jan. 1984?

For your information and just to clarify the historical record, they were put on the list soon after the 1983 bombing of the US Marine barracks in Beirut. They also spawned the bombing of the Jewish center in Buenos Aires in 1994. And the bombing of US troops in Saudi Arabia (Khobar towers) in 1996. Their pals in Hezbollah have carried out numerous terrorist bombings such as Bulgaria (Burgas resort) in 2012. They unsuccessfully plotted to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the US (at a DC restaurant) in 2011. They've been pulling this shit all over the world for more than 30 years.

And you come on here and babble and spout your nonsense saying Iran is NOT a home to terror? What planet do you live on? How willfully blind and delusional can a person be???

.

[WombRaider]

Originally Posted by lustylad

Gee wimpyendowed, what a mind-bendingly stupid statement you just made! Not home to terror? Then why has Iran been on the US list of State Sponsors of Terrorism since Jan. 1984?

For your information and just to clarify the historical record, they were put on the list soon after the 1983 bombing of the US Marine barracks in Beirut. They also spawned the bombing of the Jewish center in Buenos Aires in 1994. And the bombing of US troops in Saudi Arabia (Khobar towers) in 1996. Their pals in Hezbollah have carried out numerous terrorist bombings such as Bulgaria (Burgas resort) in 2012. They unsuccessfully plotted to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the US (at a DC restaurant) in 2011. They've been pulling this shit all over the world for more than 30 years.

And you come on here and babble and spout your nonsense saying Iran is NOT a home to terror? What planet do you live on? How willfully blind and delusional can a person be???

.

I wasn't aware hezbollah was headquartered inside Iran. And I'm sure the US has never meddled in other countries' affairs before...

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by dirty dog

....are you arguing that there should be more Nukes in the world instead of less?

Bingo - that's exactly what WimpyEndowed is arguing! He is a visionary! He thinks if the Pakis have nukes, then the Persians deserve them too. And if the Persians have them, then the Saudis and the Egyptians and the Turks should have them as well!

We should appoint WimpyEndowed to be Odumbo's global ambassador to promote nuclear proliferation! He will tear up the Non-Proliferation Treaty and let us all proliferate away! That will make the whole world a much safer and more stable place!

What a great global strategist and visionary WimpyEndowed is!!!

.

[WombRaider]

Originally Posted by lustylad

Bingo - that's exactly what wimpyendowed is arguing! He is a visionary! He thinks if the Pakis have nukes, then the Persians deserve them too. And if the Persians have them, then the Saudis and the Egyptians and the Turks should have them as well!

We should appoint wimpyendowed to be Odumbo's global ambassador to promote nuclear proliferation! He will tear up the Non-Proliferation Treaty and let us all proliferate away! That will make the whole world a much safer and more stable place!

What a great global strategist and visionary WimpyEndowed is!!!

.

Has there been a bomb dropped since we did it?

[WombRaider]

Originally Posted by lustylad

Gee wimpyendowed, what a mind-bendingly stupid statement you just made! Not home to terror? Then why has Iran been on the US list of State Sponsors of Terrorism since Jan. 1984?

For your information and just to clarify the historical record, they were put on the list soon after the 1983 bombing of the US Marine barracks in Beirut. They also spawned the bombing of the Jewish center in Buenos Aires in 1994. And the bombing of US troops in Saudi Arabia (Khobar towers) in 1996. Their pals in Hezbollah have carried out numerous terrorist bombings such as Bulgaria (Burgas resort) in 2012. They unsuccessfully plotted to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the US (at a DC restaurant) in 2011. They've been pulling this shit all over the world for more than 30 years.

And you come on here and babble and spout your nonsense saying Iran is NOT a home to terror? What planet do you live on? How willfully blind and delusional can a person be???

.

The Saudi attempt has no hard evidence tying it to the government. It's all speculation. Of course the little problem of fact or evidence seems of no import to you.

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by WombRaider

I wasn't aware hezbollah was headquartered inside Iran. And I'm sure the US has never meddled in other countries' affairs before...

Originally Posted by WombRaider

The Saudi attempt has no hard evidence tying it to the government. It's all speculation. Of course the little problem of fact or evidence seems of no import to you.

Go fuck yourself, you lying piece of shit. Not only are you a totally two-faced fraud who spams this board under multiple handles and is too much of a PUSSY to come clean after he has been caught red-handed, you are also a fucking APOLOGIST FOR IRANIAN TERRORISM. There are buckets of irrefutable hard-as-nails evidence of Iranian senior government involvement in every incident I cited. You need to be locked up in a room with all of the victims' relatives from the IRANIAN bombings in Beirut (299 deaths), Buenos Aires (85 murdered), Khobar (19 US servicemen killed) et al. so we can let them tear your fucking worthless torso apart one limb at a time!

.