Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page:  « First  ‹ Previous  3 4 5 6 7  Next ›  Last »  (15 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DavidMG
Conservation is safest cheapest energy
10:08 AM on 10/21/2012
I am sure the Times is proud of its scoop, but I don't think its helping our diplomacy here.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Joseph Veverka
11:20 AM on 10/21/2012
Exactly..sometimes all a scoop does is come up with poop.

Obama/Biden 2012
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cheeky1
a disenchanted idealist
10:03 AM on 10/21/2012
does anyone else get startled when these rogue videos start which have no controls to turn the sound off? I've noticed this and it sucks when others may be trying to sleep.
10:02 AM on 10/21/2012
The real question is while both people around the world and in America all suffer from wars,

who are benefiting from the perpetual war mongering and endless wars of Afghan, Iraq, Iran ?
caveman06
Citizens Against Virtually Everything
10:06 AM on 10/21/2012
Tell me more! Who benefits?? Is it our leaders in office?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Katrin55
A man's reach should exceed his grasp
10:22 AM on 10/21/2012
We all know Dick Cheney and GW Bush benefited enormously in a financial way.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
IsotelusMaximus
Great North Special, were you on board?
10:41 AM on 10/21/2012
No you don't and no, they didn't.
09:57 AM on 10/21/2012
BO unlikey to pursue this before the election. He's been chumped by iran's leader several times, and knows he'll get chumped again (we all reember BO's famous 'agreement' on missile development with Iran, that led to Iran's firing their missiles a few days after the 'agreement'.) Obama is all about himself, the election, his show biz image, not about doing things right. When you allow a salesman w/o portfolio to take on the presidency, this is what you get.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
10:38 AM on 10/21/2012
And how would you describe Mitt's stated policies? Will he send his sons in the first wave of troops to hit the Iranian coastline, or parachute them into Teheran to secure a toehold?

Iran's been developing their nuclear facilities long before BO came into office. How responsible if George Bush & Co. for that? Or doesn't that count?
11:39 AM on 10/21/2012
You make inane comments befitting a Demozombie, tied to the Obama jibberish.

And kudos to you for including George W. Bush as the blame guy.. Gets you a medal of honor from BO showing you are as capable of diversion as is he.

Side comment-nowhere in my first comment was there a war game proposal. President BO failed from day 1 in gaining what would have been a huge Iranian positive when he laid himself out as an appeaser. The Middle East knows a weakling when they see one. They know a posterior busser, too, and that has been this presidents' Middle East 'policy'.
09:57 AM on 10/21/2012
Stooping to a new, all time low. 2 days before debate. Today's NYT has not 1 story on Benghazi, but many LIE stories on new , and false, talks. My God, why not just re-name the paper to the OBAMA DAILY
09:49 AM on 10/21/2012
Well we saw Obama whisper in Putins ear, Wait untill my second term ,i'll have more flexability"
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
CraigVale
09:48 AM on 10/21/2012
Can anyone explain to me what international law is being circumvented or outright being ignored by Iran's decision to seek a nuclear weapon ? As a sovereign nation Israel has chosen to acquire them and there is little doubt they indeed have them despite no official acknowledgment one way or the other by that government. As a sovereign nation, what international law prevents the acquisition of such a weapon by Iran. We hear all this rhetoric that the international community will not allow it and more specifically that the west, the US in particular, will prevent it. By what right, by what law,by what reason?
To think that people in the streets of Tehran are not paranoid about missiles in Tel Aviv being pointed at their cities is risible. Of course they are in fear of them ! Why doesn't Iran have the right to do what they see as being in their best security interests as does Israel ? Odd too,that Iran is a signatory to the non-proliferation treaty and Israel is not. No one else see the contradiction there?
Thus far we have used the carrot and stick approach to defuse the situation but I would argue we have to legal right to be wielding the stick. Iran is a sovereign nation with bonafide security concerns and I have yet to see what international law is being violated.Can someone point one out to me ? Seems to me we should be negotiating and NOT threatening !
10:30 AM on 10/21/2012
I agree entirely with your post, CraigVale. International law should be applied equally to all nations. If Iran is denied nuclear capability, then so should Israel. If they want to exclude the biggies, i.e., China, Russia, the USA, then that has to be defined and confirmed. I don't think anyone should be excluded. Get rid of all Nuclear weapons. No exceptions.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
CraigVale
10:52 AM on 10/21/2012
Sadly, the Genie is out of the bottle and the escape took place in the early 50s when Russia tested their hydrogen Bomb. There is no putting it back in the bottle. The best we can hope for is embodied in the Non Proliferation Treaty, but unless EVERYONE, and that would include Israel, is prepared to abide by it, it is all for naught. I remember the predictions of Armageddon when Pakistan acquired the capability. Years on, a plausible argument can be made that the situation vis-a-vis India/Pakistan, though tense, has not resulted in all out conflict. That may not have been the case had Pakistan not had the bomb. The logic may seem a bit twisted but the idea of mutually assured destruction (MAD) does have its merits.
What bothers me is that the International Law re: the right of one nation to have the nukes while denying another the same " right" is non existent. We in the West seem to think it is our right to choose who has that right while ignoring the legitimate concerns of nations seeking to protect themselves by leveling the playing field as do their adversaries.In the case of Israel, they ignored everyone and armed themselves anyway. Why doesn't Iran have that same right too?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
10:42 AM on 10/21/2012
As usual, you make things up. "little doubt", "missles in Tel Aviv",

You argue about our "legal rights"

When was the last time Isreal threatened to wipe Iran off the face of the earth, or all of the other things they say in their press, and at world meetings at the UN?

Mitt's threatening, what does he tell you?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
CraigVale
10:58 AM on 10/21/2012
Israel doesn't need a public proclamation in threatening Iran. It is implied and you know that. The rhetoric to make Iran the Middle East's boogieman was born in Israel NOT in Iran. Folks like you claim these rights of nuclear weaponry for Israel without the law to back you up and then claim Iran is not entitled to these same rights because they called you a bad name! Grow up and smell the yellow cake in Tel Aviv.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
CraigVale
11:12 AM on 10/21/2012
You still dodge the legal question, why is that?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cmaj71625
I'm just here to observe and report.
09:47 AM on 10/21/2012
The White House has to deny this on the eve of the foreign policy debate how would it look to admit that we have trashed 50 years of not negotiating with terrorists in order to appease a ruthless regime and an egomaniacal ruler who harbors terrorists, supplies arms to our enemies, denies the holocaust and vows to eradicate Israel from the face of the earth and is desperately seeking a nuclear weapon to do just that.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
whitenoise007
John 13:30
10:28 AM on 10/21/2012
50 years minus that little incident with iran contra under saint ronnie, right? or all those donald rumsfeld meetings with saddam hussein under saint ronnie? or supplying weaponry under saint ronnie to the extremists who later became al queda and the taliban in afghanistan in the 1980s? or normalizing relations with kaddafi's libya under dubya? right. we don't "negotiate with terrorists."
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wustner
there are now cowards among us
09:46 AM on 10/21/2012
We live in a country where you can not believe anyone
Paulo1
Thanks for reading, (even if you disagree)
09:45 AM on 10/21/2012
Bah,
Israel has nukes, does anyone really think Iranians are stupid enough to get into a war where both sides are tossing them at each other? At least Israel has its vaunted anti missile defense. Iran would be all gone in a few minutes. Best to keep that in mind, the Iranians certainly do.
10:12 AM on 10/21/2012
You ever hear of a suicide bomber? That's all it would be.
10:59 AM on 10/21/2012
The unelected Twelver religious fanatics who illegally and illegitimately rule Iran don't care if they kill some Muslims if they get to annihilate Israel. To them martyrdom is a price that they are willing to pay.

Look at what their former president had to say:

"One of Iran’s most influential ruling cleric called Friday on the Muslim states to use nuclear weapon against Israel, assuring them that while such an attack would annihilate Israel, it would cost them 'damages only'.

"If a day comes when the world of Islam is duly equipped with the arms Israel has in possession, the strategy of colonialism would face a stalemate because application of an atomic bomb would not leave any thing in Israel but the same thing would just produce damages in the Muslim world", Ayatollah Ali Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani told the crowd at the traditional Friday prayers in Tehran."

http://www.iran-press-service.com/articles_2001/dec_2001/rafsanjani_nuke_threats_141201.htm

Can you blame Israel for being a little nervous?

One Holocaust Was Enough.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
shankapotomus
09:38 AM on 10/21/2012
Probably just another leak to try and make O look good.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dr Juan
We built America without BO
09:34 AM on 10/21/2012
Israel is just itching to bomb them back to the stone age. Well not Israel, but all their hawks and they have plenty of them.

If the US were smart, we would offer to build reactor power for them and run it so there would be no weapons grade fuel getting into their hands - It would be a lot more civilized than the Israel approach. But you know where we are headed: bomb baby bomb.
photo
dgrich
Can't spend your way out of debt.
09:30 AM on 10/21/2012
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would rather have a weak president like Obama to negotiate then a rough President like Romney.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
CraigVale
09:54 AM on 10/21/2012
" A rough president like Romney" Are you delusional ? Mittens has ZERO credibility in international affairs and if his trip to England is any measure of his skill set., we are in deep doo doo. Mitten's wants John Bolton for secretary of defense and that guy was born with his finger on the trigger and was breastfed a mix of gunpowder and C-4.
Mitten's and his cadre are a threat to peace and his braggadocio would end up costing yet more American lives. Typical of the Republican Reich war mongers who NEVER served a day in the military but are more than happy to send our youth off to their deaths.
photo
OooZzzzz
OooZzzzz
09:28 AM on 10/21/2012
Just another Republican attempt to try and skew the conservation; develop another drummed up negative debate point against the President before Monday night's final debate about foreign policy.

Republicans know that the use of fear, repeated lies, rhetoric and their hatred for the President drives their base and knowing that Romney has zero foreign policy experience especially after his disaster of a 3 nation overseas trip this past summer that pissed of all 3 of those nations and his sabre rattling of Iran with future military action, they are now in "do what we need to do" mode to help Romney who has no respect from our allies and don't want him to be President and Commander-In-Chief because they know he just another George W. Bush.
09:27 AM on 10/21/2012
Iran wants obama for president because he's a pushover
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Freenation
09:34 AM on 10/21/2012
And Israel wants Mitt because he already outsourced ME policy to them...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cheeky1
a disenchanted idealist
10:08 AM on 10/21/2012
thank you! It had to be said, it needs to be out there. Mitt has already committed to Israel who will start wwIII. It's already on the agenda. If per chance that Mitt and Munster doesn't win the fair vote, they will seek other solutions. I've already resigned myself to this. They owe way too much right now. Sad what this once great nation has become that an honest man who works for the greater good has no leverage when it comes to fairness.
09:48 AM on 10/21/2012
SURE. Just ask Bin laden how that worked out for him.