One of our Congress critters was part of the boycott and I applaud him!

QuickSilver said:
So... If that's the case, what did Netanyahu have to say yesterday that was of any value to that end? To being "ready". What alternatives besides WAR did he champion for? What other "bargain" did he outline? NONE.. It was a pep rally for the Hawks in the congress and to inspire the sanctions that would surely derail any talks in progress for a peaceful co-existence. AND how does it hurt to try a diplomatic solution for a change? Does that make the US any less ready for them if they renig or walk out of the talks?
Click to expand...

As I understood it, he was wanting the US to stand tall and let Iran know that the US would stand for no nonsense if Iran fails to give up their nuclear goals and allow peace to prosper again. Iran is the problem, not the US. Obama has his chance to make his agreements but be ready to watch Iran as they have already given the US some 40 years of aggravation and lies. They even had held our embassy and all its people for several years. The entire UN is aggravated by Iran and their nasty ways. It is much bigger that just the way a few of you folks are trying to make it be as nothing more than what the Republicans want. Very much bigger.
 

BobF said:
As I understood it, he was wanting the US to stand tall and let Iran know that the US would stand for no nonsense if Iran fails to give up their nuclear goals and allow peace to prosper again. Iran is the problem, not the US. Obama has his chance to make his agreements but be ready to watch Iran as they have already given the US some 40 years of aggravation and lies. They even had held our embassy and all its people for several years. The entire UN is aggravated by Iran and their nasty ways. It is much bigger that just the way a few of you folks are trying to make it be as nothing more than what the Republicans want. Very much bigger.
Click to expand...

OK..... stand tall... How? By demanding that Iran capitulate to every single demand made by Netanyahu? Do you really believe that's how negotiations work? Well.. I guess so... that is the Republican way of negotiating.. Someone else accepts ALL the demands made and nothing is given in return... Remember my "can I burn your house down?" example?
 
Well, I read the link on the speech, and if it is correct, I'd like to ask those that are against what is suggested in the speech (keep Iran & nuclear weapons separated) what would the dems have happen instead? That last sentence hit me hardest because dems seem to worry about things like SS, environment, foodstamps, health insurance when what would any of that matter, or even last if some nuts get ahold of nuclear weapons? We'll all be toast anyway?? Priorities, isn't this about priorities?
 

rt3 said:
Not a republican here, maybe one will show up shortly.
Click to expand...

You and several others sure as hell act like, talk like, think like the repubs do so if not in name then in spirit and action you are republicans though I understand your reluctance to wear the badge publicly.
 
nwlady said:
Well, I read the link on the speech, and if it is correct, I'd like to ask those that are against what is suggested in the speech (keep Iran & nuclear weapons separated) what would the dems have happen instead? That last sentence hit me hardest because dems seem to worry about things like SS, environment, foodstamps, health insurance when what would any of that matter, or even last if some nuts get ahold of nuclear weapons? We'll all be toast anyway?? Priorities, isn't this about priorities?
Click to expand...

So tell us... HOW did Netanyahu propose that was to be accomplished? Really.. What options and tactics did he outline? Did he offer a concrete plan? Did he outline the deal he would like to see? I'm interested in what you heard that the rest of us didn't. His speech was all rhetoric and no substance. It was just about exactly the same speech he gave before the Iraq invasion... and we all know how well THAT turned out. lol!!

http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/diplom...re-and-contrast-netanyahu-s-speeches-1.468213

“There is no question whatsoever that Saddam is seeking and is working and is advancing towards the development of nuclear weapons – no question whatsoever,” Netanyahu, then a private citizen, told the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform on September 12, 2002. “And there is no question that once he acquires it, history shifts immediately.”
Click to expand...

There's no question about it. We have heard bibi sing this song a few times before.
 
QuickSilver said:
So tell us... HOW did Netanyahu propose that was to be accomplished? Really.. What options and tactics did he outline? Did he offer a concrete plan? Did he outline the deal he would like to see? I'm interested in what you heard that the rest of us didn't. His speech was all rhetoric and no substance. It was just about exactly the same speech he gave before the Iraq invasion... and we all know how well THAT turned out. lol!!
Click to expand...

Answering a question with a question is not an answer, I'm asking folks like you. Is the reason you don't answer is because you don't have one? That's ok, I'm asking if anyone does? Anyone?
 
nwlady said:
Answering a question with a question is not an answer, I'm asking folks like you. Is the reason you don't answer is because you don't have one? That's ok, I'm asking if anyone does? Anyone?
Click to expand...

NO... YOU are the one making the statement... I'm asking you to back up your opinion. My answer is simple.. Netanyahu is interested in war only. He has no other alternative suggestions. He just wants us to go in and do his dirty work for him and get our kids killed. I think we have been saying this throughout this thread. Now it's your turn.. What other alternative did he offer in his speech???? Tell us.. please
 
QS, you have more excuses then carters got pills for avoiding a direct question. Just move on, maybe I can get an answer out of someone, you don't have one. Umm, last I heard, a statement is different then a question, geez.
 
nwlady said:
QS, you have more excuses then carters got pills for avoiding a direct question. Just move on, maybe I can get an answer out of someone, you don't have one. Umm, last I heard, a statement is different then a question, geez.
Click to expand...

Geez louise lady.... what question are you asking me that I haven't answered over and over.. ?? I answered it.. NOW it's your turn..


Here's your question

Well, I read the link on the speech, and if it is correct, I'd like to ask those that are against what is suggested in the speech (keep Iran & nuclear weapons separated) what would the dems have happen instead? That last sentence hit me hardest because dems seem to worry about things like SS, environment, foodstamps, health insurance when what would any of that matter, or even last if some nuts get ahold of nuclear weapons? We'll all be toast anyway?? Priorities, isn't this about priorities?
Click to expand...

My answer: Continue to allow the President to pursue a peaceful negotiation without interference.

. What does SS, environment, foodstamps, health insurance have to do with this thread? Do you want some cream sauce with your Red Herring??


OK... Your turn.. What did Netanyahu offer in the way of resolution? I mean besides war and fearmongering..
 
QuickSilver said:
Geez louise lady.... what question are you asking me that I haven't answered over and over.. ?? I answered it.. NOW it's your turn..
Click to expand...

That last sentence hit me hardest because dems seem to worry about things like SS, environment, foodstamps. Well, I read the link on the speech, and if it is correct, I'd like to ask those that are against what is suggested in the speech (keep Iran & nuclear weapons separated) what would the dems have happen instead? Foodstamps, health insurance when what would any of that matter, or even last if some nuts get ahold of nuclear weapons? We'll all be toast anyway?? Priorities, isn't this about priorities?
Click to expand...

Sorry, there are 3 questions. Saying "all he wants is war" sort of falls short of answering my questions. This is it though, if you can't answer, I'm not going to play your childish game of "you answer me first, no you,no you". I do invite anyone that has an idea of another way to go with this situation on "to arm Iran, or not to arm". Thanks, Denise
 
AZ Jim said:
You and several others sure as hell act like, talk like, think like the repubs do so if not in name then in spirit and action you are republicans though I understand your reluctance to wear the badge publicly.
Click to expand...
many shades of conservative, just as there are of socialism
 
NO leader of a foreign country should be allowed to stand before our Congress and usurp our President or his policies, I don't care which party he belongs to.

NO party, Democrat or Republican, should be in cahoots with a leader of a foreign country to appear before congress and usurp our President.
 
QuickSilver said:
So... If that's the case, what did Netanyahu have to say yesterday that was of any value to that end? To being "ready". What alternatives besides WAR did he champion for? What other "bargain" did he outline? NONE.. It was a pep rally for the Hawks in the congress and to inspire the sanctions that would surely derail any talks in progress for a peaceful co-existence. AND how does it hurt to try a diplomatic solution for a change? Does that make the US any less ready for them if they renig or walk out of the talks?
Click to expand...
Hmm, all I got was that he wanted a "deal on the table" that was better than giving them, what's it called, sanctions on nuclear weapons? Don't whoever's in control of that decision just say "no" to Iran? Will Iran still war, probably, but at least they wouldn't have nuclear weapons.
 
nwlady said:
Sorry, there are 3 questions. Saying "all he wants is war" sort of falls short of answering my questions. This is it though, if you can't answer, I'm not going to play your childish game of "you answer me first, no you,no you". I do invite anyone that has an idea of another way to go with this situation on "to arm Iran, or not to arm". Thanks, Denise
Click to expand...

suit yourself... I know you can't answer me... that's ok.. It's a complicated topic for sure. But I don't think anyone has been talking about "arming Iran"... It's about keeping them from developing a nuclear bomb.. That's a far cry from "arming them"... don't you agree.
 
Jackie22 said:
NO leader of a foreign country should be allowed to stand before our Congress and usurp our President or his policies, I don't care which party he belongs to.

NO party, Democrat or Republican, should be in cahoots with a leader of a foreign country to appear before congress and usurp our President.
Click to expand...
Didn't Obama allow this guy to speak? What the President says goes right? If so, I'm sure he was prepared, just like I hope he was to take on a hot-seat like Pres. of the US. I don't know why anyone would want that job:(
 
nwlady said:
Didn't Obama allow this guy to speak? What the President says goes right? If so, I'm sure he was prepared, just like I hope he was to take on a hot-seat like Pres. of the US. I don't know why anyone would want that job:(
Click to expand...


The PResident wasn't consulted.. The Republicans did this behind his back...
 
nwlady said:
This all went on without his knowledge?? How could he not know about it??
Click to expand...

Because John Boehner and Netanyahu cooked it up without the president's knowledge.. right in the middle of his negotiations with Iran to keep them from developing a nuclear bomb. It's pretty clear that war is what is wanted by Netanyahu and the GOP.. not peaceful negotiations.
 
Ok, I know I should keep up, but it's too depressing and scarey, but now, if that's what happened, can't the President bring charges against Boehner? If not, why not?
 
Turn around is certainly fair play.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top