Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by AdonisSMU, Jan 16, 2016.
HuffPo: Iran releases American Prisoners
NYT: Iran complies with Nuclear Deal Terms
This entire deal over prisoners and the Nuke thing is the biggest fail ever.
Tell that to all the sailors who were released in under 24 hours earlier this week.
they would probably echo my comments. I'm not a Navy guy but tons of my friends still serving echo it.
Idk man, all the navy guys I had in my bed this week seemed to disagree.....
Iran got what they wanted out of those prisoners.
And $100 billion
Lets see if you can do better hot shot. It's not a fail. Obama got a Iran to show real progress on dismantling it's nuclear program and a prisoner swap. Thats good. There was never going to be an unconditional deal where Iran gives the US everything it wants and the US doesn't give Iran some of the things they want. Sometimes cooler heads need to prevail so things can get done.
I love how the Republican party criticizes Obama for a prisoner exchange but has 100% memory failure regarding the Iran-Contra arms for hostages gig during Saint Ronnie Reagan's administration at a time of embargo on arms sales to Iran...
That may be the biggest exaggeration ever.
Of all the fails ever, that was the biggest?
Then it's great they didn't have to negotiate the agreement, and even better they didn't have to sign off on it. I do sincerely appreciate the hard work of people in our armed forces, and further think civilian control of the military's assignments is a sensible attribute of democratic government.
This entire incident was handled appropriately by all parties involved.
Electing a Bush ... either one.
Well I don't know where in the f*** you think you are, but here on PRSI that sort of agreeable talk won't be tolerated.
But in fact that 100 Billion is in reality there own money, which the USA froze, it's not like you are giving them anything.
Let me see: Iran promptly returns US service people who strayed into its territorial waters. Iran releases US journalists and academics held in its prisons. Iran eliminates 98% of its nuclear weapons capability. Iran starts selling oil to Europe - further lowering world price of oil. Iran spends its released funds upgrading its airplane fleet and petrochemical infrastructure - creating thousands of jobs for US and European engineering and aerospace companies.
If there is a bad outcome here, I'm not seeing it.
What, exactly, would meet the Republican definition of a good deal?
A bombing run?
The Republicans want nothing less than war with Iran. Gotta keep the cash flowing into defense contractors.
I don't think its that cut-and-dried.
It seems to me that the Republicans antipathy to any rapprochement with Iran is purely for domestic political consumption.
There is no reason to get all starry-eyed about Iran. We have to be realistic that there are still powerful forces within Iran with a vested interest in opposing the US. Iran's Revolutionary guard still has the potential to cause trouble in the region. The ruling mullahs in Iran seemed intent on maintaining a level of despotic control over Iranian civil society. And Iran's military continues to develop ballistic missiles that pose a risk to their neighbors - and to US ships operating in the region.
But it seems to me that most of the Iranian people would welcome normalized relations with the US, and a normal position in world society. And the Iranian Government that they've elected seems to be doing its best to bring Iran back into the world community. How much financial relief, and economic growth, they can wring out of the end of international sanctions is, IMHO, going to be key. If the normal Iranian starts seeing a noticeable economic benefit from the end of sanctions, its going to simply accelerate the pace at which Iran turns its back on its aggressive, terrorist-sponsoring past.
In what way?
I realize that not many people understand this, but, I view cheap oil as a bad outcome. I do see a lot of positives in most of what has happened.
I'm sure there are some neocons who will never be satisfied with any outcome. However, I admit that there is one thing missing so far. An end to the Revolutionary Guard rallies organized around the "Death to Israel" theme.
More broadly than just "Death to Israel" (or the U.S., or even Russia), Iran has wedged itself into a place where the existing political structure is built upon the perceived existence of powerful external threats. There is a real struggle going on in Iran between those who want to move forward from that, and, those who don't.
This is a positive change. I'm cautiously optimistic.
Because its going to make it harder for the US fracking industry and Canadian tar-sands operations to turn a profit?
To a certain extent, I agree with you: Cheap oil will definitely delay, or at least slow, the pace with which the US and the rest of the world implement green; renewable energy technology: electric cars; solar and wind power; etc.
The flip side is this: I think everybody knows that oil will not stay below $30/bbl for ever. And I think another ~5 years may see technology develop to the point that we will have viable alternatives. But in the meantime, cheap oil will help the US economy grow to the point that we can afford to start buying electric cars and install more solar panels and wind turbines.
Thats the problem with environmental initiatives in developing economies such as China and India. Really, the big battlegrounds in the fight against global warming: the Chinese and Indians, at this point, can't afford to explore green alternatives the way rich countries like Germany, Britain, and Norway can.
Good post. Iran could be one of our best assets in fighting ISIS as well. They're one of the only large middle east nations that's majority Shiia.
Toyota and Ford have affordable hybrid technology that really works to dramatically cut fuel use where it matters most: in stop-and-go urban/suburban driving. The problem with cheap oil is that on Friday, the news reports were full of stories about suburban consumers demanding more heavy low efficiency trucks and SUVs again. Those gas hogs will typically live up 12-20 years, and, the urban poor will be driving them for the latter half of their lives. What we need now is for wealthy consumers to be buying fuel-efficient vehicles now, so that 10-20 years from now, the poor can be using those vehicles.
The Toyota patent issue is a legitimate sore point for many people (Ford developed a similar system independently and then Toyota/Ford agreed to cross-license):
but, it is also true that the Toyota and Ford systems were both developed at great cost, and, are very efficient.