BoogeyMan 0 #176 January 12, 2012 QuoteQuote But the Chinese would not in their right minds jeopardize their cash flow from the US for the Iranians. What would the Chinese do if the US simply said..... We ain't paying you guys. Attack the US? Not in this universe. You have to remember that the bonds China has purchased do not have their name on them. The US cannot default on some bonds without defaulting on all of them. Otherwise the Ohio Teachers' pension fund would find that some of their bonds are the ones that the treasury has decided not to honour. This is simply not a credible threat. Of course not. That China would side with Iran against the US is also not credible. I have faith that the crooks in the US Treasury are as skilled as the crooks in China or anywhere else. They could make it work, I'll wager. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #177 January 13, 2012 i can see war with iran being a big issue in the coming election. the war drums beat louder and louder... QuoteThe escalating neocon demands for an ever-harder U.S. line against Iran — and Israel’s apparent campaign of killings and sabotage inside Iran — come at a time when President Barack Obama and some of his inner circle appear to be looking again for ways to defuse tensions. But the Post’s editorial – and similar neocon propaganda – have made clear that any move toward reconciliation will come with a high political price tag. Already, a recurring Republican talking point is that Obama’s earlier efforts to open channels of negotiation with Iran and other foreign adversaries proved his naivete and amounted to “apologizing” for America. Obama also has faced resistance within his own administration, especially from neocon-lites such as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. For instance, in spring 2010, a promising effort – led by Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Brazil’s then-President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva – got Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to agree to relinquish Iranian control of nearly half the country’s supply of low-enriched uranium in exchange for isotopes for medical research. The Turkish-Brazilian initiative revived a plan first advanced by Obama in 2009 – and the effort had the President’s private encouragement. But after Ahmadinejad accepted the deal, Secretary Clinton and other U.S. hardliners switched into overdrive to kill the swap and insist instead on imposing harsher sanctions against Iran. http://www.commondreams.org/view/2012/01/13-1stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #178 January 13, 2012 well, it's nice you use the single thread and refresh it each day, rather than open one a day. As to the contents of today - I wonder if you recall the dialogue with North Korea when they "absolutely weren't making a bomb." Let's get past this silly debate about whether or not they're doing it and focus on the questions of 1) is it right for them and 2) what should our response be? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BoogeyMan 0 #179 January 13, 2012 Quotewell, it's nice you use the single thread and refresh it each day, rather than open one a day. As to the contents of today - I wonder if you recall the dialogue with North Korea when they "absolutely weren't making a bomb." Let's get past this silly debate about whether or not they're doing it and focus on the questions of 1) is it right for them and 2) what should our response be? Good luck getting an answer/opinion out of Dreamdancer. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BoogeyMan 0 #180 January 14, 2012 Quotei can see war with iran being a big issue in the coming election. the war drums beat louder and louder... QuoteThe escalating neocon demands for an ever-harder U.S. line against Iran — and Israel’s apparent campaign of killings and sabotage inside Iran — come at a time when President Barack Obama and some of his inner circle appear to be looking again for ways to defuse tensions. But the Post’s editorial – and similar neocon propaganda – have made clear that any move toward reconciliation will come with a high political price tag. Already, a recurring Republican talking point is that Obama’s earlier efforts to open channels of negotiation with Iran and other foreign adversaries proved his naivete and amounted to “apologizing” for America. Obama also has faced resistance within his own administration, especially from neocon-lites such as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. For instance, in spring 2010, a promising effort – led by Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Brazil’s then-President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva – got Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to agree to relinquish Iranian control of nearly half the country’s supply of low-enriched uranium in exchange for isotopes for medical research. The Turkish-Brazilian initiative revived a plan first advanced by Obama in 2009 – and the effort had the President’s private encouragement. But after Ahmadinejad accepted the deal, Secretary Clinton and other U.S. hardliners switched into overdrive to kill the swap and insist instead on imposing harsher sanctions against Iran. http://www.commondreams.org/view/2012/01/13-1 This article is ridiculous....... The out of touch whackos at commondreams actually and in print declare that Hillary Clinton is a neocon, and a hardliner? That you quote and post this drivel is astonishing. Despite what others have posted, you must be better than this. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrig 1 #181 January 14, 2012 Quote Quote i can see war with iran being a big issue in the coming election. the war drums beat louder and louder... Quote The escalating neocon demands for an ever-harder U.S. line against Iran — and Israel’s apparent campaign of killings and sabotage inside Iran — come at a time when President Barack Obama and some of his inner circle appear to be looking again for ways to defuse tensions. But the Post’s editorial – and similar neocon propaganda – have made clear that any move toward reconciliation will come with a high political price tag. Already, a recurring Republican talking point is that Obama’s earlier efforts to open channels of negotiation with Iran and other foreign adversaries proved his naivete and amounted to “apologizing” for America. Obama also has faced resistance within his own administration, especially from neocon-lites such as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. For instance, in spring 2010, a promising effort – led by Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Brazil’s then-President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva – got Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to agree to relinquish Iranian control of nearly half the country’s supply of low-enriched uranium in exchange for isotopes for medical research. The Turkish-Brazilian initiative revived a plan first advanced by Obama in 2009 – and the effort had the President’s private encouragement. But after Ahmadinejad accepted the deal, Secretary Clinton and other U.S. hardliners switched into overdrive to kill the swap and insist instead on imposing harsher sanctions against Iran. http://www.commondreams.org/view/2012/01/13-1 This article is ridiculous....... The out of touch whackos at commondreams actually and in print declare that Hillary Clinton is a neocon, and a hardliner? That you quote and post this drivel is astonishing. Despite what others have posted, you must be better than this. I agree! Taking-up band-width with that shit? Spreading crap like that, no wonder we have so many whackos. Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
