A Neocon Admits the Plan to Bomb Iran: By Robert Parry "Not exactly known for truthfulness, U.S. neocons have been trying to reassure the American people that sinking a negotiated deal...

payne1000

By Robert Parry

"Not exactly known for truthfulness, U.S. neocons have been trying to reassure the American people that sinking a negotiated deal with Iran to limit its nuclear program would be a painless proposition, but at least one prominent neocon, Joshua Muravchik, acknowledges that the alternative will be war and he likes the idea."

Read more . . . http://consortiumnews.com/2015/03/16/a-neocon-admits-the-plan-to-bomb-iran/

Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA

payne1000 wrote:

By Robert Parry

"Not exactly known for truthfulness, U.S. neocons have been trying to reassure the American people that sinking a negotiated deal with Iran to limit its nuclear program would be a painless proposition, but at least one prominent neocon, Joshua Muravchik, acknowledges that the alternative will be war and he likes the idea."

Read more . . . http://consortiumnews.com/2015/03/16/a-neocon-admits-the-plan-to-bomb-iran/

You get reports beamed into your molar every time an unknown 'Neocon Theorist' makes a statement?

Got a lot of time on your hands, do you?

straightUp Loc: California

Super Dave wrote:

You get reports beamed into your molar every time an unknown 'Neocon Theorist' makes a statement?

Got a lot of time on your hands, do you?

That "unknown" neoconservative theorist made his statement on the Washington Post, one of the most widely-read papers on the right.

Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA

straightUp wrote:

That "unknown" neoconservative theorist made his statement on the Washington Post, one of the most widely-read papers on the right.

So an unknown theorists that has no power to do anything makes a statement in a paper that probably gets about 1/100th as many eyeballs as Drudge gets......... Can I get a woopty do?

Its' true that this moronic deal does increase the chances of attacking Iran. There's no doubt about it.

But then again, that's clearly the intent of the plan. Everyone knows that when you give an extra $100Billion and a guaranteed right to nuclear weapons( including nuclear ICBMs) to the world's largest state terror sponsor, you're more likely to have to attack them at some point (after Obama leaves office).

DASHY

payne1000 wrote:

By Robert Parry

"Not exactly known for truthfulness, U.S. neocons have been trying to reassure the American people that sinking a negotiated deal with Iran to limit its nuclear program would be a painless proposition, but at least one prominent neocon, Joshua Muravchik, acknowledges that the alternative will be war and he likes the idea."

Read more . . . http://consortiumnews.com/2015/03/16/a-neocon-admits-the-plan-to-bomb-iran/

So, according to Perry our choice is clear. We can join the neocons who oppose the deal with Iran aimed at constraining its nuclear program, and proceed militarily with the international crime of a perpetual US bombing campaign against Iran. Or, we can support our President in his efforts to achieve a peaceful solution. When we approve the Iran deal we also join Iran's efforts in combating Sunni terrorists. This choice feels like a win/win.

payne1000

Super Dave wrote:

So an unknown theorists that has no power to do an... (show quote)

Since you mention "Drudge," it 's more obvious now which source is responsible for your sadly misinformed views.

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

Israel/Mossad is the biggest state sponsor of terrorism. Assassinations, you name it.

Super Dave wrote:

So an unknown theorists that has no power to do an... (show quote)

Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA

payne1000 wrote:

Since you mention "Drudge," it 's more obvious now which source is responsible for your sadly misinformed views.

I see you ignore my post since it destroyed the premise of your tin-hat theory.

-- Newsflash -- Drudge is mostly linking to a vast array of news sites, such as the one that just a minute ago you thought was important.

You'd be better off staying in your bubble than looking at a wide range of news sources. Ignorance being bliss, and all...

nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

eagleye13 wrote:

Israel/Mossad is the biggest state sponsor of terrorism. Assassinations, you name it.

Hell, Israel invented and refined modern day terrorist techniques. LOL!!!

They are the absolute best at it, bar none. Behind closed dorrs they instruct us on how they do it. They are at the very heart of what all the laypersons think the 007 world is like, subterfuge, violence. Thing is, they let honor cloud their thinking except when dealing with the really big stuff. They'd be better off just attacking Iran out right and daring ISIS to come and get them, which they won't, cause ISIS is against Iran. Israel totally over throws Iran, puts into practice the violent tendencies of their God and they are sitting pretty in Iran. Fear will keep out the rest. They ARE pretty much the only nuclear power in the region.

Even the US gov would have their hands tied because we think we need that ally in the area so badly.

Israel is the key to all that is violent in the world. Its their history, their legacy. But hey, they can at least say they were under orders from the supreme being of the universe! LOL!!!

payne1000

Super Dave wrote:

I see you ignore my post since it destroyed the premise of your tin-hat theory.

-- Newsflash -- Drudge is mostly linking to a vast array of news sites, such as the one that just a minute ago you thought was important.

You'd be better off staying in your bubble than looking at a wide range of news sources. Ignorance being bliss, and all...

Your post didn't include any accurate information. The money Iran gets is their own money which was being withheld from them by banks.
The agreement does not allow Iran to build nuclear weapons or have nuclear weapons. If "Drudge" tells you otherwise, you need to seek other sources.

payne1000

nwtk2007 wrote:

Hell, Israel invented and refined modern day terro... (show quote)

Since Brazil, Russia, India and China are supporters of Iran, and three of those countries have nuclear stockpiles, I doubt Israel will be attacking Iran soon. They think they can get the U.S. to do it so they can sit back and watch like they did in the other Middle East wars. Think of all the money they are saving since we taxpayers are paying the bills.

nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

payne1000 wrote:

Since Brazil, Russia, India and China are supporters of Iran, and three of those countries have nuclear stockpiles, I doubt Israel will be attacking Iran soon. They think they can get the U.S. to do it so they can sit back and watch like they did in the other Middle East wars. Think of all the money they are saving since we taxpayers are paying the bills.

They only offer political support and possibly small amounts of conventional weapons, for a price. Otherwise, they sneer at the Muslims, Sunni or Shiite.

payne1000

nwtk2007 wrote:

They only offer political support and possibly small amounts of conventional weapons, for a price. Otherwise, they sneer at the Muslims, Sunni or Shiite.

I haven't heard that the BRIC countries sneer at Iranian Muslims. What is your source of that info?

nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

payne1000 wrote:

I haven't heard that the BRIC countries sneer at Iranian Muslims. What is your source of that info?

The BRIC countries are similar only in their economic development. They prefer the US and typically don't like terror or "God" based regimes. I would have to say that my source for that is unpublished but accepted.

payne1000

nwtk2007 wrote:

The BRIC countries are similar only in their economic development. They prefer the US and typically don't like terror or "God" based regimes. I would have to say that my source for that is unpublished but accepted.

"unpublished but accepted?" That means it's hearsay.
What evidence do you have that the BRIC countries prefer the U.S.? I'm sure Russia doesn't. Since there has been so much adverse publicity about China in the U.S. media, I doubt that they prefer the U.S. either.

Is the U.S. not a God based regime? How many atheists are elected to political office in the U.S.?