Colbert's Shocking Attack on Trump Leaves Media Stumbling

If you use your brain and think you will see... he did.


No where in The Iran nuclear deal does it say Iran has "the right to build nukes", as you keep stating.

You have not posted anything showing The Iran nuclear deal says Iran has "the right to build nukes".You repeatedly post articles showing Iran has the capability to violate the treaty and build nuclear weapons but violating the treaty to build nuclear weapons and the treaty giving Iran "the right to build nukes" as you keep stating is not the same thing.
 
You expect the unratified treaty to say... Iran can build nukes?
What the fuck is wrong with your team?
you have to look at what the treaty does.
It allows Iran to get to near zero breakout time.
That is the right to build nukes.

It takes an above 120 IQ to think in systems. Can you do it?
Can you think systematically? We are talking about nuclear bombs in the hands of people who said they would use them. Do you see how grave the situation is in North Korea.

Don't act stupid to protect obama here. its dangerous.
tell the people paying you to get real.


Prior to the Obama treaty Iran was bombed to prevent them from going nuclear.
Now they have a right to get to a near zero breakout time.

That is the right to have nukes at the end of 10 years. Plus obama gave them the money and tried to give them the uranium.



No where in The Iran nuclear deal does it say Iran has "the right to build nukes", as you keep stating.

You have not posted anything showing The Iran nuclear deal says Iran has "the right to build nukes".You repeatedly post articles showing Iran has the capability to violate the treaty and build nuclear weapons but violating the treaty to build nuclear weapons and the treaty giving Iran "the right to build nukes" as you keep stating is not the same thing.
 
Last edited:
Whereas in absence of the treaty the world could have gone in their and stopped them...
Now it will be almost ultra vires or a violation of international law to stop them as long as they stay in compliance. How will Isreal stop them with this treaty in place. Imagine Trump telling the world that Obama's treaty was void?

Look I agree it was a terrible deal, but legally, it is not a treaty. A treaty requires senate ratification. Not only was this deal never ratified, it only escaped a senate disapproval motion when 34 democrats backed a filibuster. http://www.nationalreview.com/article/423515/

Legally, it is not binding on Trump. Obama lacked authority to set in stone the foreign policy of the next administration. To do that, you require an actual treaty.

The problem is Iran received the vast majority of its benefits up front. News flash, they're not giving the 100 billion back. And our European and Asian allies will never agree to another sanctions regime. I never thought Obama would backstab the King of Saudi Arabia like that, but he did. Who knows why?
 
I wrote ... unratified up there before I saw this.




Look I agree it was a terrible deal, but legally, it is not a treaty. A treaty requires senate ratification. Not only was this deal never ratified, it only escaped a senate disapproval motion when 34 democrats backed a filibuster. http://www.nationalreview.com/article/423515/

Legally, it is not binding on Trump. Obama lacked authority to set in stone the foreign policy of the next administration. To do that, you require an actual treaty.

The problem is Iran received the vast majority of its benefits up front. News flash, they're not giving the 100 billion back. And our European and Asian allies will never agree to another sanctions regime. I never thought Obama would backstab the King of Saudi Arabia like that, but he did. Who knows why?
 
You expect the unratified treaty to say... Iran can build nukes?
.


YOU keep saying Obama and the Iran deal gives Iran "the right to build nukes" . After all this back and forth I'm glad you finally realize the Iran deal DOES NOT give Iran the right to build nukes.It specifically forbids it.
 
you have to look at what the treaty does.
It allows Iran to get to near zero breakout time.
That is the right to build nukes.


That is not a right to build nukes,that is the ability to violate the agreement they made and signed with The US ,United Kingdom, Russia, France, China and Germany not to build nuclear weapons.
 
this articles explains even the limits on iran are almost impossible to enforce...

https://www.usnews.com/opinion/arti...ar-deal-is-an-unforgivable-betrayal-of-israel

then by the way as one of his last deals Obama gave around enough natural uranium to make 10 nuclear bombs...


here is an article saying a side deal on tha treaty which allows Iran a faster route to building nukes faster...
http://www.investors.com/politics/e...-faster-route-to-an-a-bomb-and-didnt-tell-us/


Again jem,there is a difference between the right to build nukes and the ability to build nukes.

As far as the uranium,Iran has the right to nuclear power under the deal,not nuclear weapons
 
not to those on the receiving end.
not to 8 million people in South Korea with nukes pointed at them.
not to us in CA when North Korea has ICBM.

you are talking spin bullshit. I am talking reality.
Obama himself... near zero breakout time.
you arguing against obama himself.



Again jem,there is a difference between the right to build nukes and the ability to build nukes.

As far as the uranium,Iran has the right to nuclear power under the deal,not nuclear weapons
 
Back
Top