doublegunshop.com - home Forums Know the Enemy

As a pragmatic liberal, I "side with" what serves the world and country best, flexibility and compromise for a common good without which we have the US example of stuck, gears stripped, parlous governance.

No one likes what happened with Iran but it was the best the big players and Germany could come up with Iran holding good cards and, while desperate from sanctions, could easily hold out long enough to make bombs.

The naysayers say it's better to wait for Iran, an influential political player and prospective regional balancer of power, to cease and desist from its nuclear program. The big players said we're not playing chicken.

There's a lot more in this than the bomb. Civil enough?

I guess you do make my point. The appearance of civility on some issues, pragmatically advances the left wing agenda for all issues.

Take this issue alone. It seems the big 'players' aren't really Iran's neighbors, but actually do look to assert terroristic influence from across big ponds, like our peaceful friends the russians.

More unfortunate, you do admit the sanctions are working. I wonder if the extreme left would take to supporting these proiranian marching orders if bo had woke up one morning and decided sit back and spectate while the horizon well damaged the gulf or his epa oopsied a bunch of the wild west's water supply.

If libs and dems can be stirred into action with so little substance, why would someone insist that R's have to follow some play book, which dems don't have follow, when they are trying to sort themselves out from a large primary crowd.

That is because some politicians care about the United States. Going against this agreement means United States will be on its own (the agreement was ratified by the United Nations). Furthermore no agreement virtually assures development of nuclear weapons by Iran.
The members of the opposition to this agreement want to ruin United States. The ultimate goal of many is invasion of Iran and Pakistan after that. Their war mongering knows no end.

Throwing spitballs or bombs won't get you far today. Left and right engage in civility on the big stage. They have to to survive, to diminish dangerous hot spots---as they're meeting today on Ukraine---and improve trade. No one makes a living today by taking in their neighbours' wash, or making barriers to the world, saying just leave me alone.

Pigs in a blanket, fry 'em like bacon. Just a bunch-o bucanettes, not even worthy of bucaneer status, eh. Yea, I'm watching you, I know your type. Where o where is the upper third bestest dude when we need him to unite.

We all know that Obama can do no wrong in King Brown's foolish old eyes. What else could we expect from someone so agenda driven and so totally dishonest?

Jagermeister is a complete idiot. His statement above is just more proof. King and Jagermeister both claim that the U.S would be going it alone without this so-called treaty. Gary corrected them and reminded them that Israel, Saudi Arabia, and several other Middle East neighbors are against this. And we could easily have exerted pressure on any ally that wished to go against us. France and Germany get more in trade from us than they will ever get from dealing with Iran. More Liberal bullshit from Liberal bullshitters. The sanctions were indeed working, and only needed the noose tightened to get either an agreement that actually had some teeth, or regime change in Iran. Obama and Kerry gave it all away.

We didn't even get our U.S. prisoners being held there. How's that for tough and savvy negotiating?

Jagermeister laments that the ultimate goal of treaty detractors is the invasion of Iran and Pakistan. Nobody has said anything about Pakistan although it is clear they were harboring Osama bin Ladin and have worked against us. Iran vows to destroy Israel and the Great Satan United States.

I guess that does not count as war mongering to Jagermeister, and we should just wait like fools to see a mushroom cloud over Manhattan before we do anything. You can't fix stupid, and you can't expect a pathological lying sociopath like King Brown to admit the truth.

And you can always expect a liberal coward to cry "war monger" as an excuse to not place themselves in harm's way as they would rather lick the boots of a tyrant for their pathetic existence than take a stand and fight. There were those in colonial times who wanted to submit to England rather than resist..fortunately, there were more patriots who chose liberty over submission. Unfortunately for the boot-lickers, the Brits torched their homes and lands and made no distinction between the two.
Iran and ISIS will do exactly the same; they will make no distinction between an appeaser and one who resists.
What part of "Death to America" do the liberals not understand?
I will not mention the Muslim's second battle cry of "Death to Israel" as spineless liberals could care less about anyone except themselves.
The school bully will continue to take your lunch money and push you around until you kick his nads up under his jaw.
As an aside, Israel would have already bombed hell out of Iran's nuke facilities if anyone except the Muslim Brotherhood admirer was in the White House. I strongly suspect Kerry admonished Bibi that Obama would stand with Iran if that happened.

GaryW, thank you for your brave awe inspiring service to the people of the United States.

Jagermeister, thank you for proudly voting for Barack Hussein Obama twice and doing your part to jeopardize our gun rights.

iran gets 150 billion its oil open to the world market china being a customer for oil, Russia supplying weapons.enough money to ramp up there support of terrorist.the most idiotic deal on supervising the Iranian nuclear program,when Iran gets bombs Saudi's get a bomb then turkey ,and what do we get by we i mean the us ,jager who cares what another country says if it goes against our national interest.and how does it make us safer.if obamma has the answer it must have been a stupid question.