Netanyahu: Iran Still Pursuing Nukes

Discussion in 'Politicants' started by Tenacious D, May 1, 2018.

  1. Tenacious D

    Tenacious D The law is of supreme importance, or no importance

    Weird.

    Totally weird, even.


    Link: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2018/0...ligence-about-iran-nuke-deal-report-says.html
     
  2. Tenacious D

    Tenacious D The law is of supreme importance, or no importance

    I would love to learn more about this.

     
  3. Tenacious D

    Tenacious D The law is of supreme importance, or no importance

    Thank heavens.

     
  4. Tenacious D

    Tenacious D The law is of supreme importance, or no importance

  5. IP

    IP Super Moderator

    Thread title unrelated to thread content? The linked story didn't have a quote saying they were pursuing it now, unless I missed it. The point is they lied about the fact that they did. Which we knew. And apparently they didn't destroy the things they lied about not having.

    Political theater.
     
  6. JayVols

    JayVols Walleye Catchin' Moderator

    Exactly. Netanyahu is Israel's version of a neo-con. The pictures used in the 2nd grade level powerpoint used (to appeal to Trump) were pictures taken prior to the inspections carried out as a result of the Iran Nuclear Deal. It's an attempt by Netanyahu to drag the US into a war he wants under false pretenses. And the sycophants trip over their hard-ons falling for the bullshit.

    Sarah Huckabee Sanders issued this statement this evening:

    "These facts are consistent with what the United States has long known: Iran has a robust, clandestine nuclear weapons program that it has tried and failed to hide from the world and from its own people."

    Oh really? Not according to international inspectors. Later in the evening, SHS issued an amended statement:

    "Iran had a robust, clandestine nuclear weapons program that it has tried and failed to hide from the world and from its own people."

    So, in a matter of hours, we go from basically setting the stage for military intervention in Iran to a statement that everyone already knew. A "clerical error" was blamed for the mistake...
    This bunch would [uck fay] up a wet dream.

    This is John Bolton/Iraq part deux, ladies & gentlemen.

    http://thehill.com/business-a-lobby...that-said-iran-has-secret-nuclear-weapons?amp
     
  7. Tenacious D

    Tenacious D The law is of supreme importance, or no importance

    They’ve never given up their plans / documents toward the successful achievement of a nuclear weapons program.

    The inspectors couldn’t know this, because they haven’t seen the trove of nuclear weapons-related documents which Iran continues to possess.

    Iran continues to possess these documents because the Iranians have moved and kept the documents hidden from inspection.

    They’ve kept them hidden because they continue to pursue nuclear weapons.

    These are all flagrant violations of the Iran Nuclear Deal.
     
  8. Tenacious D

    Tenacious D The law is of supreme importance, or no importance

    Now every time I ask you for a little cash...
     
  9. IP

    IP Super Moderator

    So where is the thread title in the linked fox news story?
     
  10. JayVols

    JayVols Walleye Catchin' Moderator

    Show me this info from a non-Fox/Gateway Pundit type echo chamber.
    Why does Mattis support it then?
     
  11. Volst53

    Volst53 Super Moderator

    To be fair they have given it to Germany and France and they’ve done a lot to build those alliances that I don’t see them risking it by just throwing shit at the wall.

    It’s not that crazy to think that Iran has resumed or never stop their work at getting a nuclear weapon.
     
  12. JayVols

    JayVols Walleye Catchin' Moderator

    Show me proof. Evidence. Whatevet.
     
  13. IP

    IP Super Moderator

    That wasn't what was claimed. What was claimed was that they didn't destroy their docs and research, and lied about not ever having a program. The presentation did not include anything that indicated they are actively doing anything.

    Ironically, NK still has active testing sites. Iran doesn't. But the war drums are beating for the one Obama engaged.
     
    JayVols likes this.
  14. Volst53

    Volst53 Super Moderator


    I don’t think it’s war drums but mostly political posturing to make sure the heat stays turned on them.
     
  15. fl0at_

    fl0at_ Humorless, asinine, joyless pr*ck

    Having the capacity is the same as pursing?
     
  16. IP

    IP Super Moderator

    I'm good with that, if that is what it is. But all evidence suggests they are complying.

    I think their actions in syria is pissing of israel, and so Israel is looking for a reason to hit them. Which doesn't need to be our fight.
     
  17. bostonvol

    bostonvol Chieftain

    I don’t know if I’d use the word support. When the deal was reached in July 2015, he told Peter Robinson in an interview that he wouldn’t comment on it until he read the agreement in full. After doing so, he said he wouldn’t have entered into it avd thought it was a bad deal for the country. However, he now says, as he did before before becoming SecDef, that we as Americans are people of our word, so we shouldn’t back out of the deal.
     
  18. IP

    IP Super Moderator

    I wish he were right, but we break our word often.
     
    JayVols likes this.
  19. JayVols

    JayVols Walleye Catchin' Moderator

    Mattis is much more supportive than what you're letting on. From his sworn testimony at a recent Senate Armed Services hearing:


    Emphasis mine.

    Mattis' statements are in direct contrast to Trump's "worse deal ever" comment while flailing his arms and hands in the air. They are also incompatible with Netanyahu's dog and pony slideshow complete with misleading pictures, lots of simply worded slides about Iran lying, meaningless props and an abundance of misleading charts and graphs for any particular non-reader that just might be watching him on TV.

    What's best for our national security interest is the only thing that should matter, not that it was negotiated by the Obama administration, not one man's ego and certainly not a foreign leader's desire to have us lead the way in a war he's always wanted, close ally or not.

    http://thehill.com/policy/defense/385094-mattis-defends-iran-deal-as-trump-considers-withdrawal
     
  20. kptvol

    kptvol Super Moderator

    I mean, right there in your quote he says it's valid to question not whether it's good or great, but merely sufficient. I think bostonvol is pretty right on. Support seems like a pretty strong word for his take, just based on the few quotes I've seen here.
     

Share This Page