Politics Obama has been purposely withholding key information about a nuclear deal with Iran from Congress

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

magnifier661

B-A-N-A-N-A-S!
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
59,328
Likes
5,588
Points
113
http://conservativetribune.com/netanyahu-bombshell-obama/

The Obama administration has accused the Israeli prime minister of playing politics over Iran — but a bombshell allegation has just revealed that it might actually be the White House that is playing games.

A senior aide to Benjamin Netanyahu recently announced that President Barack Obama has been purposely withholding key information about a nuclear deal with Iran from Congress.


“We (Israel’s leaders) know many details from the agreement being put together, details that we feel members of Congress are unaware of,” the Israeli official told members of the media.

“According to the information we have, the deal currently taking shape will leave Iran with the capability to build a nuclear weapon, if (Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali) Khamenei make a decision to do so,” continued the official.

If true, that information is very different from what Obama has told the American people and members of Congress.

The president has repeatedly insisted that Iran would not have the capability or will to build nuclear weapons, which could then directly threaten Israel.

It is no secret that Iran despises the nation of Israel. Leaders within the rogue country have repeatedly expressed their disdain for the Jewish state, and even threatened to wipe it off the map. (H/T The Blaze).

Netanyahu was in Washington, D.C., on Tuesday to speak to Congress about the dangers of a nuclear-armed Iran and to petition for sanctions against the Middle Eastern country.

However, Democrats have harshly criticized the Israeli leader’s address to the joint session of Congress, even though Netanyahu was officially invited by Speaker of the House John Boehner.

If the latest information is correct and Israel actually knows more about the pending U.S.-Iran deal than do members of Congress, there would be some explanation for the White House’s objections.

Barack Obama may have been withholding important information the entire time. Not being honest with the American people is bad enough, but putting the security of a key ally at risk for petty political reasons is even worse.
 
Not surprising. I'm waiting for Nancy Pelosi to come to the lectern to once again say, "You have to pass it to find out what's in it."
 
The president has repeatedly insisted that Iran would not have the capability or will to build nuclear weapons

If you like your insurance, you can keep it.
If you like your Doctor, you can keep your doctor.
Red lines.
Bush did it!

Hey, I saw him blame Bush again yesterday. ISIS is now Bushes fault, right straight out of his lips, no third party hearsay, straight from the horse.

This man will have a special page, unique from all other leaders, in the history of the United States. He is hell bent on out doing FDR who gave away the Victories in Europe after the military won WWII.
 
I don't understand how anyone could say that a country doesn't "have the will" to possess or manufacture nuclear weapons.

“And if in fact what they claim is true, which is they have no aspiration to get a nuclear weapon … in fact, according to their Supreme Leader, it would be contrary to their faith to obtain a nuclear weapon,” stated the president

190M Muslims in Pakistan and another 170M in India just became infidels? Turkey? All of whom have "obtained" nuclear weapons?

Additionally, according to their Supreme Leader:
Referring to Israel, Khamenei added, “This event is a sample of the ‘violent policies with iron fist’ which the fake and illegitimate regime [Israel] in its 66 years of existence has repeatedly and proudly conducted.”
He then emphasized, “As said by Imam Khomeini [the founder of the Islamic Republic of Iran] Israel must be destroyed…However, until that time with the help of God for this cruel and murderous regime to be destroyed, strong confrontation with steadfast armed resistance is the only solution against this destructive regime.”
Khamenei then mocked Israel for looking for a ceasefire agreement, stating that Israel is powerless against the resistance of Hamas, and once again, strongly attacked America for supporting Israel.
“We believe that the West Bank needs to be armed just like Gaza and those interested in the future of Palestine must become active in this field [guerrilla warfare] so that the suffering of the Palestinian people through their strength and their weakness due to the Zionist regime is reduced,” he said. “Some Western countries including America and filthy England defend with clarity the crimes that no ordinary person would. The President of America in the face of these child killings, destruction, torture and suffering of the people in Gaza, with a comical logic states that Israel has the right to defend itself! Don’t the Palestinians have the right to defend their lives and security?”

Is that contrary to their faith?
 
As usual, someone is selectively quoting here. I wonder why?

Obama said:
And if in fact what they claim is true, which is they have no aspiration to get a nuclear weapon, that in fact, according to their Supreme Leader, it would be contrary to their faith to obtain a nuclear weapon, if that is true, there should be the possibility of getting a deal. They should be able to get to yes. But we don’t know if that’s going to happen.

Kinda has a different meaning than what is suggested above.

barfo
 
As usual, someone is selectively quoting here. I wonder why?
Kinda has a different meaning than what is suggested above.
barfo
I would imagine that the article "selectively quoted" because the author is being a big meanie towards the president. However, since what the president claims is true is absolutely not true (and if I know it, then the President does) then we know it's not going to happen.
 
I would imagine that the article "selectively quoted" because the author is being a big meanie towards the president. However, since what the president claims is true is absolutely not true (and if I know it, then the President does) then we know it's not going to happen.

The president didn't make any claims. The president quotes claims the Iranians made and says "IF" they are true, then...

It's like me saying "If conservatives are fair-minded and keep quotes in context, then they won't appear to be partisan yahoos".

barfo
 
fair-minded
I am very fair minded. I don't want anyone mistaking me for a Democrat. I am not really a good Republican but never mind that, not Democrat is for sure correct. That and Conservative.

I do note that Obama has not told the American people what he is about to do. Nor has he consulted with any of my represenitives or yours.
 
Last edited:
I don't understand how anyone could say that a country doesn't "have the will" to possess or manufacture nuclear weapons.



190M Muslims in Pakistan and another 170M in India just became infidels? Turkey? All of whom have "obtained" nuclear weapons?

Additionally, according to their Supreme Leader:


Is that contrary to their faith?

To be fair, India and Pakistan aren't ruled by Mullahs. I read Obama's words in that article, and it says to me that the mullah ruling Iran says it would be contrary to their faith. If he is the authority for his state, run by religion, then what other Muslims do is irrelevant.

I don't think Obama is taking the guy at his word, as the article claims (unsubstantiated).

The scenarios for Iran peacefully having a nuclear program looks like the UN oversight of the weapons grade material, third party nations already nuclear power doing the things for Iran that could be a threat, and lifting of sanctions.

Nixon made peace with the Russians. We were at the brink of nuclear war just a few years earlier. Nixon made peace with China, too. Reagan called the USSR an evil empire, yet made peace with them.

You can't make peace without the two sides talking. I'm all for Obama trying his best community organizer skills.
 
there's a difference between someone saying "we just want a peaceful energy program and never would build a nuclear weapon" and what Iran is doing.

You can have a reactor with single-digit enrichment of the uranium. To be weapons-grade, you need much, much more. Which is why there's kind of a big line between "neutrons for peace" and "the weapon to finally annihilate Israel".

I tried to do a quick open-source search for some of the issues with what they're doing and found this from a think tank. It's a decent primer:
http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/...nge-of-containing-irans-enrichment-activities

I don't think anyone is saying Iran shouldn't have power plants.
 
You can't make peace without the two sides talking. I'm all for Obama trying his best community organizer skills.
Not that I'm advocating it, but we didn't say a word to Hitler or Hirohito. And those who did didn't end up well.
 
I don't see Iran as having been any worse in their region than the USA in our own hemispshere.

I think I'd rather we find a way to make peace with them. Obama is CiC, let him try. Bush didn't exactly succeed.
 
there's a difference between someone saying "we just want a peaceful energy program and never would build a nuclear weapon" and what Iran is doing.

You can have a reactor with single-digit enrichment of the uranium. To be weapons-grade, you need much, much more. Which is why there's kind of a big line between "neutrons for peace" and "the weapon to finally annihilate Israel".

I tried to do a quick open-source search for some of the issues with what they're doing and found this from a think tank. It's a decent primer:
http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/...nge-of-containing-irans-enrichment-activities

I don't think anyone is saying Iran shouldn't have power plants.

This doesn't say they're very close to having a nuke. Well, theoretically close enough to make one that is "so bulky and otherwise impractical that it would hardly qualify as a bomb)."

Is that something to fear, go to war over, etc.? Is their nuclear clock at 11:59 like we've been told for the past 15 years?
 
Yeah, well maybe they can only make one crappy little 20 kiloton weapon. Perhaps they can test it on San Diego to see if they need to spin some more shit.
Go Obama, Denny's in.
 
Last edited:
It looks to me like whatever bomb they could make would be less effective than some dynamite and some medical waste.

I respect what Brian says about this, though. He's the actual rocket scientist when it comes to this stuff.
 
there's a difference between someone saying "we just want a peaceful energy program and never would build a nuclear weapon" and what Iran is doing.

You can have a reactor with single-digit enrichment of the uranium. To be weapons-grade, you need much, much more. Which is why there's kind of a big line between "neutrons for peace" and "the weapon to finally annihilate Israel".

I tried to do a quick open-source search for some of the issues with what they're doing and found this from a think tank. It's a decent primer:
http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/...nge-of-containing-irans-enrichment-activities

I don't think anyone is saying Iran shouldn't have power plants.

That's kind a funny right there. Obama will let them over spin up power plant fuel. But I bet you can't get approval to build a Nuclear Power Plant in this county from the DEQ. Now that I think that out a little, can't get a power plant period, Nuke, coal, oil. Yep, Obama much wiser than the combined Senate, wise enough to be King!
 
Is there an S2 bomb shelter anywhere we can go to? ;)
 
That's kind a funny right there. Obama will let them over spin up power plant fuel. But I bet you can't get approval to build a Nuclear Power Plant in this county from the DEQ. Now that I think that out a little, can't get a power plant period, Nuke, coal, oil. Yep, Obama much wiser than the combined Senate, wise enough to be King!

Of course you are wrong about that, there are new nukes being built in the US right now. Google Vogtle if you don't believe me.

barfo
 
Of course you are wrong about that, there are new nukes being built in the US right now. Google Vogtle if you don't believe me.

barfo
So you are saying OBAMA is authorizing the build of nukes?
 
So you are saying OBAMA is authorizing the build of nukes?

OBAMA personally? No, I think the NRC approves them. But the new approvals did happen 'on his watch'.

Then in 2012, the NRC approved construction of four new reactors at existing nuclear plants. Construction of the Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Generating Station Units 2 and 3 began on March 9, 2013. A few days later, on March 12, construction began on the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant Units 3 and 4. In addition, TVA's new reactor at the Watts Bar Nuclear Generating Station is at an advanced stage, after construction was resumed after being halted in 1988.

barfo
 
Well shit Marazul, you should switch your boat from wind power to nuke power. I never understood why you wanted to power your boat with green energy anyways.
 
Government regulation makes nuclear energy too expensive.
 
Back
Top