JacobEzra.
Dr. Greenthumb
It's a good start.
Could the future hold a possibility of normal connections ith Iran? Maybe, maybe not
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Iran Nuclear Agreement
- Thread starter Jake1001
- Start date
Could the future hold a possibility of normal connections ith Iran? Maybe, maybe not
Yes, it's a great start. Everything that has been made public about the agreement so far looks good. Let's hope for the best and keep the inspectors on the ground.
Btw, I like your avatar JacobEzra, significance ?
*** Mod Post: Thread moved to Middle Eastern Politics ***
Could it simply be the more common stereotype of a clever yet callous politician maneuvering for a better deal?
esmith
Veteran Member
I think you better reconsider your statement
"
In actuality Congress will have 60 days to review the accord and could try to reject it by passing a resolution of disagreement. However, Obama has veto power over this action, then it would take a 2/3 majority to override the veto.
The deal with Iran is certainly no panacea. It is however far more than one would hope for, and incredibly better than no deal at all.
If I somehow lacked reason to trust Netanyahu's sanity and honesty before, I would seriously doubt both now. His statements are utterly misleading and irresponsible. The man has no business whatsoever having any political power, much less in Israel.
If I somehow lacked reason to trust Netanyahu's sanity and honesty before, I would seriously doubt both now. His statements are utterly misleading and irresponsible. The man has no business whatsoever having any political power, much less in Israel.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Bibi wants the whole enchilada, and the nuke issue with Iran is only one fraction of that enchilada from his perspective. However, he's not going to get it because there's so much at stake with other countries who do not want war but who do want Iran's oil and potential markets. It's unfair, no doubt, but that's the hand that the U.S. and the other countries involved in negotiations have been dealt.
IMO, we need to "give peace a chance", but if it doesn't work out, and there's a very good chance it won't, then future actions may become necessary.
I agree, but I think it should be emphasized that Netanyahu's attitude is only hurting the perspectives for the future.
Seriously, why are such people even elected? It is really depressing.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
He's doing what all political leaders tend to do, and that's tying to do what's best for his own people. Iran does pose many very serious problems, not only for Israel, but also for other countries in that region. I don't question his sincerity for the welfare of the country, but I just believe that it is not realistically possible that he's going to be able to have the entire enchilada.
Is it too much to ask for voters not to support dreams of militaristic supremacy and warmongering?
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
We've discussed this many times before, but I do not share "warmongering" charges against Netanyahu. Matter of fact, at the end of the Gaza conflict last year, many Israelis were very upset with him that he didn't go further to try and neutralize Hamas, and polls had it that his popularity dropped significantly because of that. But let's not beat this dead horse again, OK?
Ok. Of course, I will take that as a "yes".
True, except a 2/3 override is unachieveable. So it's a done deal.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
You can take it any way you want, but you'll not get good answers if you ask bad questions.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
I'm not certain of whether a veto could be sustained, but I think it's likely it would. This is an emotionally charged issue, and public opinion can sway politicians one way or the other.
So you see it as a bad question?
I am sorry to have to disagree - emphatically at that. It is an important, necessary question, and that it is ultimately answered "yes" scares me white.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
The reason why it's a bad question is because it was "loaded"-- sorta like if I ask you if you've stopped beating your wife?
Well, have you???
The reason why it's a bad question is because it was "loaded"-- sorta like if I ask you if you've stopped beating your wife?
Well, have you???
Uh? It is not loaded at all.
It seems to me that questions like this do little to advance the discussion.
Not an unreasonable question. It will take some develpment for me to give a response, so please bare with me.
Let's say you live in a small country, let's say Brazil, for instance. Let's say a large neighbor, like the US, has nuclear weapons, and what if this country became unstable. Irrational leadership, etc. If you were in the small country, would you not try to do everything in your power, to prevent the large country from having nukes ? More....