Sanctions drive Iranian currency down 25-40% in a week

Sanction are working. Poor Bibi is mad because he cannot play with his wily coyoty toys. He reminds of dick cheney.

• Link
• Report this comment

I didn’t know Iranian currency HAD any value outside of Iran……..

• Link
• Report this comment

Fred — “I didn’t know Iranian currency HAD any value outside of Iran……..”

There are still plenty of countries that do business with Iran. Our sanctions aren’t universal.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanctions_against_Iran

• Link
• Report this comment

Wonder how much it will cost them to pop Israel with their first nuke?

Wonder how long it will take for Obama to apologize to Hamoud because he just knows that they just “had an accident”, and that somehow its all George Bush’s fault??

Wonder how many American jews will support BO after that?

Wonder how long after the election wil it take BO to come out of the closet and admit he’s a muslim?

• Link
• Report this comment

Fred — “I didn’t know Iranian currency HAD any value outside of Iran……..”

Why wouldn’t it? Its backed by oil.

I heard this story on NPR this morning. Apparently sanctions DO work. Thank God we don’t have the previous administrations retarded foreign policy, and thank God Romney is toast so we won’t return to it either.

• Link
• Report this comment

This is what happens when the whole world, for a change, presents a united front. These sanctions would fail as most others have if someone was willing (Russia, China, et al) to ignore these sanctions. It appears that they, too, fear Iran getting nuclear capabilities….

• Link
• Report this comment

Bud Wiser

October 2nd, 2012
12:37 pm

Wonder how much it will cost them to pop Israel with their first nuke?

Wonder how long it will take for Obama to apologize to Hamoud because he just knows that they just “had an accident”, and that somehow its all George Bush’s fault??

Wonder how many American jews will support BO after that?

Wonder how long after the election wil it take BO to come out of the closet and admit he’s a muslim?
++++++++++++++++++++

I wonder how long it would take Bud Wiser to become educated if he were ever weaned from lying talk radio hosts? Would he EVER get over his fear and come out from under his bed with out one talk show host of the other fear mongering him 24/7?

• Link
• Report this comment

“Wonder how much it will cost them to pop Israel with their first nuke?”

Look who crawled out from under his bed… jut for a moment though… that one Iranian nuke will be a doozy… it’ll be big enough to explode all of Israel and all of the US in one fell swoop. No wonder you quake in your boots and hide under the bed.

• Link
• Report this comment

saywhat?

October 2nd, 2012
12:38 pm

Fred — “I didn’t know Iranian currency HAD any value outside of Iran……..”

Why wouldn’t it? Its backed by oil.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Nope. It’s backed by a dictatorship which TELLS the people of the Country how much it’s worth………

• Link
• Report this comment

Ah, ……………… the kind of sanctions that make them more desparate and angry without stopping their efforts to have a nuclear weapon.

• Link
• Report this comment

Now we need to kick the UN out of the US. I’m sick and tired of seeing this Ahmanutjob come in here and put his fingers in his ears and wiggle them at us.

Anyhow, I won’t buy Iran’s oil. I like that oil from Venezuela. Might as well do business with friends, at least till we can put a oil well in every back yard and get the coal fires going.

Have a good p.m. everybody and be Patriotic and knock the towel off of some Arab’s head today.

• Link
• Report this comment

Fred, if they, as you put it, “pop” Israel, they’ll be hitting a lot of Palestinians at the same time. If they hit Jerusalem, then they’ll be hitting Islamic holy places. Either way, they’d be, literally, toast.

• Link
• Report this comment

We have been at war with Iran for quite some time now. An economic war. No telling how many lives would have been saved if this had been the plan in Iraq.

• Link
• Report this comment

Mr. Imadinnerjacket

Better currency at 75 -60% value than your nation in ashes.

Don’t worry be happy!

We’ll keep Bud Wiser at home….

• Link
• Report this comment

Hoover is my Hero:

“Fred, if they, as you put it, “pop” Israel, they’ll be hitting a lot of Palestinians at the same time.”

Yep ……………… kind of like they killed a lot of Muslims on 9/11 in the World Trade Towers.

• Link
• Report this comment

0311 — “Ah, ……………… the kind of sanctions that make them more desparate and angry without stopping their efforts to have a nuclear weapon.”

Witness the Conservative Argument About Iraq, circa 2003.

• Link
• Report this comment

Tough sanctions were imposed on Germany after WW I . How’d that work out?

• Link
• Report this comment

More misery caused by the great global terrorist – the US government.

So when the sanctions have killed millions as they did in Iraq and terrorists come to this country and kill thousands in response, will a future president blame “our freedom” for their hatred? And will the stupid american people believe him then too??

Iran has the right under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty to enrich uranium for energy purposes. To date even the CIA says that they are not building a bomb. Israel on the other hand has hundreds of nuclear weapons (mostly stolen from us or certainly using stolen technology from us), has never even admitted that they have them, has never signed the non-proliferation treaty, and has set up an appartheid state in which existing Palenstinians are daily kicked off their property and imprisoned in literal ghettos. All with the full support of the US.

But we are all just supposed to believe that the government is acting in our best interests? yeah right.

• Link
• Report this comment

GG — “We’ll keep Bud Wiser at home….”

Come now. We can let Mr. Wiser and 0311 take the point in the military action they seem to crave so much.

Tip of the spear, gents, tip of the spear.

• Link
• Report this comment

…and a petition signed by 10,000 Iranian factory workers complaining about the conditions has been delivered to the Labor Ministry…

Somebody better start preparing a big hole, about six feet deep, out in the desert.

• Link
• Report this comment

0311 — “and the central bank has supplied enough hard currency to finance imports”

And there’s where the inflation is coming from.

If it’s that bad already, it seems to me that Iran’s in much more dire straits than they’d like to admit.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay,

Can you please let us all know how many times in the past economic sanctions have worked to dissuade a nation from developing nuclear weapons? How did those sanctions work for Korea?

• Link
• Report this comment

“Just to be clear, that was if Ahmadinejad were to be removed by outside assassination. Other means of removal may or may not produce that same outcome.”

Hedging at its very finest.

• Link
• Report this comment

There is a sad parallel between the run up to the war of choice in Iraq and the neocon’s relentless pressure for the U.S. to either initiate or condone military action against Iran.

Then, Bush successfully forced U.N. weapons inspections, but didn’t want to give the U.N. weapons inspectors a chance finish their jobs for fear that Hans Blix and associates might actually demonstrate something that neocons didn’t want to hear–there are no WMDs. Similarly, neocons don’t want to give the sanctions against Iran a chance to work for fear that such sanctions might accomplish something that the neocons don’t want to accomplish…at least not without military intervention.

John Bolton, Dan Senor, and the rest of the Bush military establishment that is now advising the Romney campaign don’t care about results. To the contrary, they’re trigger-happy chicken-hawks who will do whatever it takes to grow the military industrial complex primarily for the benefit of their wealthy benefactors.

As always…”Enrich the rich. Vote Republican.”

• Link
• Report this comment

Off topic, but…this is funny, considering…

http://xfinity.comcast.net/articles/sports-nfl/20121001/20121001160647128684108/

• Link
• Report this comment

Granny:

Big difference ………….. after our revolution things began to get better for women and it continues to this day.

In that culture …………. it gets worse.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Iran’s foreign minister said Monday that Iran acquiring a nuclear weapon would not increase Iran’s security or regional stability.

Ali Akbar Salehi, the MIT-educated PhD engineer who previously served as Iran’s longtime envoy to the UN atomic watchdog agency, said that Iran acquiring one or two nuclear bombs would dramatically increase the threats Iran faces, and not be a deterrent to nuclear powers with far larger nuclear stockpiles.

“Had Iran chosen to [go] nuclear in the sense of weaponization, it would not be a deterrent for Iran,” Salehi, speaking in English, told foreign policy experts at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York Monday. “It would attract more threats from the other side.”

“Because suppose we wanted to go nuclear and manufacture one or two bombs,” Salehi continued. “Who on the other side of Iran …can we ever be in equal footing with in this regard? Any country that challenges us with nuclear weapons …who would we use against? We have 15 neighbors, we have the best of relations with them. So we are not threatened by our neighbors.”

Read more: http://backchannel.al-monitor.com/index.php/2012/10/2403/iran-fm-salehi-iran-nuclear-bomb-would-destabilize-iran/#ixzz288E7nNpb

This guy might replace iamanutjob.

• Link
• Report this comment

Granny:

“Revolution ain’t for the soft.”

Ever been actually involved in one? I have.

• Link
• Report this comment

td

October 2nd, 2012
12:52 pm
Jay,

Can you please let us all know how many times in the past economic sanctions have worked to dissuade a nation from developing nuclear weapons? How did those sanctions work for Korea?

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I agree with your premise. The regime is hell-bent and determined to get “Da Bomba” and suffering by the citizenry will mean little to the mullahs and that saw-offed twirp, right up to the point of being overthrown.

• Link
• Report this comment

Shawny, the value of the dollar is determined by the old law of supply and demand. Now, you’d think that increasing the supply would knock the value down; however, the demand for the dollar has gone up faster than the supply, so we haven’t seen devaluation. The value of the dollar against other major currencies has gone up quite a bit since Obama took office. It helps that investors still see the US as the leading economy in the world and, of course, that those investors don’t listen to Rush and Fox.

• Link
• Report this comment

Kamchak – “Wonder when unicorns will start pooping Skittles”

Ah, yes. I see Kamchak is still using his old one liners.

This is no doubt a favorite of his, just like, for example, when the group is discussing that 47% of people don’t pay taxes, he’ll jump all over someone and start citing all the taxes that those 47% do pay…acting as if he didn’t know said person was only talking about Federal taxes.

Yep, that’s our Kammie.

• Link
• Report this comment

td — “Can you please let us all know how many times in the past economic sanctions have worked to dissuade a nation from developing nuclear weapons? How did those sanctions work for Korea?”

That’s not the method that was being used with North Korea.

We had been using the Clinton Agreed Framework, and it was working quite well. Then Bush unilaterally threw that out and within a couple of years, North Korean kaboom.

So if you want to talk about approaches that don’t work, yes, absolutely, the Bush approach didn’t work at all.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Granny:

“Revolution ain’t for the soft.”

Ever been actually involved in one? I have.”

And did 100% of the events that occured subsequently turn out to your liking? Then what’s your point?

• Link
• Report this comment

Comparing iran to germany after world war 1 is like comparing grapes to apples. Not even remotely in the same ballpark…

• Link
• Report this comment

I suppose Obama deserves a pat on the back for supporting these sanctions against Iran. Although, I have to wonder, how many times did he scoff at the idea before even folks like Harry Reid were like, “Dude, this will really work, you gotta do.”

You know, like the whole Osama assassination thing.

• Link
• Report this comment

Heading back to the meeting, so little risk of the “rath” for posting this nugget of depravity:

Q. Do you know why they call the camel the “ship of the desert”?

A. Because it is full of Iranian seamen.

(Aw’ come on folks; I just passed it along, I didn’t come up with it)

• Link
• Report this comment

Nice Guy

make that FEDERAL INCOME… Seems that being specific would cut out the line of attack that you don’t like to hear.

• Link
• Report this comment

“When civilized man can no longer stand the horror of war
and refuses to fight then he will surely be killed or enslaved
by the uncivilized who can!” Author Unknown”

So us not starting a war of choice with another sovereign nation to instill our beliefs is “refusing to fight”??? Do you fear Iran’s big bomb as well?

Remember, “if we don’t fight them over there, we’ll have to fight them on our shores”?

• Link
• Report this comment

Joe Hussein Mama

October 2nd, 2012
12:57 pm

That’s not the method that was being used with North Korea.

We had been using the Clinton Agreed Framework, and it was working quite well. Then Bush unilaterally threw that out and within a couple of years, North Korean kaboom.

So if you want to talk about approaches that don’t work, yes, absolutely, the Bush approach didn’t work at all.

A little revisionist history there my friend. If my memory serves then Bush changed his approached after NK was busted still developing weapons at a different place.

• Link
• Report this comment

“You know, like the whole Osama assassination thing”

W did that, didn’t you hear? Obama was too busy poring over embassy guard schedules and duty rosters…

• Link
• Report this comment

JAY,

My concern is that the suppressive nature of the government in Iran will result in only the general population being hurt by these sanctions…I’m not sure it’s enough to simply punish those folks…they are probably looking at the mass killings at the hands of government to suppress revolution and that scares them more than what has historically already been an iron fisted policy..

Wouldn’t shock me if government converted or otherwise had a currency policy to minimize this impact to those in power…

• Link
• Report this comment

td — “A little revisionist history there my friend. If my memory serves then Bush changed his approached after NK was busted still developing weapons at a different place.”

Your memory doesn’t serve you well. Bush had *already* thrown out the Agreed Framework; that’s why the Norks were moving forward with weapon development.

While we were operating under the Clinton-era Agreed Framework, the Norks behaved (amazingly). It wasn’t until Bush decided that he didn’t like sending shiploads of food and fuel oil to them thar dirty commies (and terminated the agreement) that the Norks shrugged and started back to developing their bomb.

Read up on it sometime.

• Link
• Report this comment

“a petition signed by 10,000 Iranian factory workers complaining about the conditions”

Like a totalitarian government really cares about what factory workers think…or anyone else, for that matter.

“they have good reason to change whatever they have in hand into currencies whose value is sustained internationally”

I’m sure the Chinese will be happy to oblige.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay

October 2nd, 2012
1:02 pm

td, they worked against South Africa, Iraq and Libya.

South Africa had 6 Nuclear bombs before they changed governments, Iraq had a Nuclear plant before Israel bombed it and Libya was so scared of GWB that they voluntarily gave their program up. Tell us again how sanctions made these countries not nuclear?

• Link
• Report this comment

dB

Nah, we can’t have the moocher meme getting tossed aside. I get a good laugh from the almost word for word regurgitations we see on a daily basis. Herd mentality is very fun to observe.

• Link
• Report this comment

But if you do that, maybe the “moocher” meme becomes completely useless and we can’t have that.

And that is the whole point of repeating the x% PAY NO TAXES AT ALL lie.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Know what else is redundant?

Sock-puppets.

Socialism — BOO!

• Link
• Report this comment

td loves him some w disaster.

• Link
• Report this comment

Hmmm, lets see are the sanctions working. Are they still building and pursuing nuclear weapons?

• Link
• Report this comment

td — “South Africa had 6 Nuclear bombs before they changed governments”

South Africa is the *only* nation on earth to have developed nuclear weapons and then VOLUNTARILY given them up. You can thank economic sanctions for that.

“Iraq had a Nuclear plant before Israel bombed it”

In the 1980s. You must have forgotten that we didn’t start sanctioning Iraq until the *1990s.* And after Desert Storm, no nuclear plant or nuclear weapon development.on Iraq’s part.

“and Libya was so scared of GWB that they voluntarily gave their program up.”

Nope. The UK talked them out of it by pointing out how much Libya stood to gain by trade with the US and UK if they abandoned the program. It’s a popular conservative meme that Bush did it all by his lonesome, but the fact of the matter is that the UK did almost all of the talking and the sanctions did the rest of the work.

“Tell us again how sanctions made these countries not nuclear?”

Game, set and match.

• Link
• Report this comment

Nice Guy

I see your point. I still think that simply citing specifics when talking about that group undercuts the “gotcha” game altogether. You can’t walk into a known trap and get angry when it springs on you. At least that’s how I see it.

—————————

Regnad Kcin

I don’t think it goes that far. It’s just a case of using “shorthand” if you want to call it that as opposed to typing out everything whenever referring to that group.

• Link
• Report this comment

“When that x% don’t contribute anything of value to receive their welfare check, “they” didn’t pay anything…they took it from one taxpayer-funded bucket and put it in another bucket.”

——————-

I know those goalposts were around here somewhere…

• Link
• Report this comment

When that x% don’t contribute anything of value to receive their welfare check

To a yellow snake-sticker guy, of course, being a breadwinner and raising a family of American citizens fails to qualify as “anything of value.”

• Link
• Report this comment

“As it is now, we’re paying them to kill us.”

Maybe we should impose sanctions…

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay, please show which experts you are referring to in Iraq. Being that we were able to go in and remove the regime and Saddam I would say that was much more impactful.

• Link
• Report this comment

Hey, Bookman…did Debbie Wasserman Schultz tell you to get out the information about Iran to make Obama look good or is it your idea?

Based on the Benghazi cover-up now all over the news, I think your timing is suspiciouly predictable. Based on the upcoming debate about foreign policy, I think your timing is also childish.

First of all, it shows how you Democrats operate. Out comes the snake oil and smoke-and-mirrors that are typical in covering your incompetence and mistakes of governance.

Secondly, it is proof positive that Democrat foreign policy administration is a joke and is naive of world affairs. The cover-up is compounding Obama’s failing position to side-step manslaughter on his watch,just like Ted Kennedy’s joy ride on Chappaquiddick. You people are reprehensible and shameless.

Oh, by the way…I just love your little myrmidon’s snarky comments about Bibi Netanyahu. Another mirrored reaction to their commander-in-chief’s low class opinion of the Jewish leader of Isreal.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Therefore, they have good reason to change whatever they have in hand into currencies whose value is sustained internationally, or into gold bullion which they can throw into a suitcase if they want to hop aboard a flight and leave the country.”

America 2025

• Link
• Report this comment

this guy down at the harbor said if you listen to a flock of seagulls,
they would tell you everything you need to know about Iran.
sounds crazy to me…

• Link
• Report this comment

donovan,

What would you say if the Dems played politics right after 9/11 and refused to unite to get the terrorists?

• Link
• Report this comment

I know those goalposts were around here somewhere…

Don’t look for ‘em ’round here.

They’re a ¼ mile away, attached to Cruz Pedregon’s Funny Car.

• Link
• Report this comment

JAY,

What do you think about the possibility of the sanctions only truly affecting general population? The same folks who will be shot for speaking against Almondine et al..

• Link
• Report this comment

“Secondly, it is proof positive that Democrat foreign policy administration is a joke and is naive of world affairs”

Wow, Jay, I bet you didn’t know your blogs had so much power!

• Link
• Report this comment

Regnad Kcin

October 2nd, 2012
1:24 pm

“Backwards Nick LOL your name drives me crazy.”

Sorry.

google “nick danger, third eye”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Keith Christmon? Is that you? I think I’ll change MY name to wahsdarB .tL

• Link
• Report this comment

Hey, *I* totally get the connection between Iran and an automobile accident from 43 years ago, don’t you guys?

• Link
• Report this comment

stands for decibels

October 2nd, 2012
1:37 pm

Hey, *I* totally get the connection between Iran and an automobile accident from 43 years ago, don’t you guys?
++++++++++++++++++++

Sadly it makes more sense than MOST of what he posts……………

• Link
• Report this comment

“myrmidon”

Isn’t that one of Kneel Boortz’ words?

• Link
• Report this comment

alittlecommonsense — “They are not universally effective in acheiving our ends – see North Korea and Cuba.”

In what way do you think that economic sanctions were ineffective in North Korea?

• Link
• Report this comment

“In what way do you think that economic sanctions were ineffective in North Korea?”

Maybe because they still have nuclear weapons and are working on the missiles to deliver them?

• Link
• Report this comment

In what way do you think that economic sanctions were ineffective in North Korea?

Um… The leader is still named Castro and you can still go to jail for talking bad about him. It’s still a communist human rights hellhole. Was that a serious question??

• Link
• Report this comment

Don’t Tread — “Maybe because they still have nuclear weapons and are working on the missiles to deliver them?”

As I explained to td, economic sanctions were not the method we used with North Korea.

• Link
• Report this comment

Castro is in N. Korea?

The things I learn on this blog….

• Link
• Report this comment

alittlecommonsense — “Um… The leader is still named Castro and you can still go to jail for talking bad about him. It’s still a communist human rights hellhole.”

North Korea’s leader isn’t named Castro. Look again.

“Was that a serious question??”

Yes, it was. Because, as I am now explaining for the third time on this thread, economic sanctions were not the method used to deal with North Korea.

• Link
• Report this comment

Great Jay- checker flag and pop the champagne

On another note:

The Federal Reserve Open Market Committee (FOMC) has made it official: After its latest two day meeting, it announced its goal to devalue the dollar by 33%.

So in this case the FOMC is the “world” and the US taxpayer is “Iran”. Very sinister.

Local news or silly little diatribes about how shameful romney is please. Oh and some travelin’ music.

• Link
• Report this comment

alittlecommonsense — “Sorry, I misread the question – N Korea would have pretty much the same answer as Cuba.”

Except that it wouldn’t be the same answer. We have and continue to use economic sanctions against Cuba. Whereas economic sanctions were *not* the method we used in dissuading North Korea from developing atomic/nuclear weapons.

• Link
• Report this comment

I think it’s highly possible for sanctions to have that effect, but I wouldn’t go so far as to call it likely. Maybe 50/50 or so?

Fair enough. I would say 50/50 is pretty optomistic based on sanctions effectiveness with other dictatorships. Dictators seem to have an endless capacity to allow suffering in their populations. The dictators always seem to still be able to live quite comfortably while the population starves. Still sanctions are a useful tool in some situations. They just have their limitations like any other tool.

• Link
• Report this comment

Joe Mama – You seem to think North Korea is no longer pursuing their nuclear ambitions. That’s news to me. Would you like to cite your references?

• Link
• Report this comment

Iran; a third-world cess-pool with a beady-eyed rat for a prime minister. Hopefully, sanctions will work. If not, let Israel make ‘em a sand box. If Israel had been left alone during the six-day war, chances are we would not have quite the problems we have today. Way to go, LBJ!

• Link
• Report this comment

JAY,

I think we should simply get out of the middle and let them decide between them…why on earth we feel the obligation to extent our brand of democracy across the world is beyond me…did the founders envision this? I think we all agree we have much more important security issues at home…say the deficit?

• Link
• Report this comment

alittlecommonsense — “Joe Mama – You seem to think North Korea is no longer pursuing their nuclear ambitions.”

I neither said, thought nor implied any such thing. I simply pointed out that we didn’t use economic sanctions as our means of dissuading them from developing them.

“Would you like to cite your references?”

Perhaps you could first show us *your* references that claim we were using economic sanctions to dissuade the North Koreans from developing atomic/thermonuclear weapons.

• Link
• Report this comment

Stop the nation building baloney; bring all of our brave troop’s home. Once we figure out how to fix our borders, then we can help out the countries who request help…..

• Link
• Report this comment

Perhaps you could first show us *your* references that claim we were using economic sanctions to dissuade the North Koreans from developing atomic/thermonuclear weapons.

Really? Try wikipedia.

• Link
• Report this comment

They are working to make living miserable for the middle class of Iran………… thats all they are hurting……

the govt and elite in Iran are not hurting………

Sherman taught us about a hundred years ago – If you bring the horrors of war to the “common man” they will soon tire of it. The big wigs, as you say, won’t get tired because they are in their hideouts and palaces. but the common man who has to bleed and die while his family starves and suffers, will soon abandon the tenets of war for peace.

You make the middle class suffer, (as we’re doing right now under Bush’s Tax Cuts), when they get enough of suffering, they’ll make the government make changes.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay — “Joe Mama, I’d have to disagree. Economic sanctions ARE part of our response to North Korea’s nuke program”

Part, but a small part, Jay.

For most of the 90s and until 2002, we had been operating under Clinton’s Agreed Framework, in which we agreed to help the DPRK develop light-water nuclear reactors — and to provide them with food and fuel oil — in exchange for the suspension of their atomic weapons program. Providing them with nuclear reactors, food and fuel doesn’t strike me as being ‘economic sanctions.’

“and on those occasions when NK seemed to make a deal to stop, a relaxation of those sanctions was part of why they said yes.”

To which occasions do you refer, Jay? For all the hullabaloo about the development of WMDs, the North Koreans actually seemed to respond *constructively* to the Agreed Framework.

It should also be pointed out that the agreement broke down in late 2002 over unproven accusations that the North Koreans were cheating. As it turned out, our evidence was ambiguous and inconclusive, but the damage to the agreement was already done. With the Agreed Framework essentially trashed, it took North Korea under four years to perform a test (a fizzle, as it turned out).

I don’t think that the Agreed Framework could be characterized as “sanctions” at all.

• Link
• Report this comment

alittlecommonsense — “Really? Try wikipedia.”

Really? Try looking at it yourself. I suggest you start here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agreed_Framework

• Link
• Report this comment

“Hey, Bookman…did Debbie Wasserman Schultz tell you to get out the information about Iran to make Obama look good or is it your idea”?

Hey Donovan did FOX News tell you to come in here and quote their propaganda verbatim? Polly want a cracker?

• Link
• Report this comment

The coalition of one Bushcons have no cred in terms of foreign policy.

None.

A blustering bunch of deadly (to American service personnel) swiftboating, shameless, torturing incompetents who had priorities other than military service and who embarrassed us on the world stage.

Unfit to lead.

And fortunately for our children, Flip and Eddie are not going to get the chance…

• Link
• Report this comment

Joe Mama – As the argument that sanctions are having such a great effect in N. Korea, you linked to an agreement from 1994. In the first paragraph, the article states the agreement broke down in 2003.

Not real strong evidence. You have nonsense arguments, so I’m done with you. Goodbye.

• Link
• Report this comment

marisol
its funny how you describe republicans paying back their campaign contributors

can you admit that democrats do the same?

• Link
• Report this comment

alittlecommonsense — “Joe Mama – As the argument that sanctions are having such a great effect in N. Korea,”

I didn’t say that “sanctions are having such a great effect in N. Korea.” That’s a position and an argument *you* dreamed up and ascibed to me.

My position is that economic sanctions *aren’t being used* in North Korea for the purpose of dissuading them from developing atomic/thermonuclear weapons. There *are* American economic sanctions in place against the DPRK, but almost every one of them dates from the 1950s. So unless you want to argue that we’ve been applying economic sanctions against the Norks for sixty-odd years — even before the Chinese had developed the bomb — then you go right ahead.

“you linked to an agreement from 1994. In the first paragraph, the article states the agreement broke down in 2003.”

You’re not reading. You need to read it closely. And not just the Wiki piece.

“Not real strong evidence.”

Said the person who still hasn’t provided *any* evidence that the US is using economic sanctions to dissuade the North Koreans from developing atomic/nuclear weapons. (giggling)

“You have nonsense arguments”

You have *no* argument. (laughing)

“so I’m done with you.”

Why am I not surprised?

“Goodbye.”

I didn’t think you’d provide your sources. Primarily because you haven’t *got* any. (laughing)

• Link
• Report this comment

correction to 2:27 above — should read as follows:

So unless you want to argue that we’ve been applying economic sanctions against the Norks to dissuade them from developing atomic/thermonuclear weapons for sixty-odd years — even before the Chinese had developed the bomb — then you go right ahead.

• Link
• Report this comment

“so I’m done with you. Goodbye.”

Surrendered and raised the white flag.

• Link
• Report this comment

No sanctions; a lot of innocent people will be hurt.

Drop H-Bombs instead.

• Link
• Report this comment

Yes I can Jose. But I’d rather pay back theirs than see another war take the life of another of my brothers or any other American soldier in another unwinnable war that we will pay for in blood and tax dollars. Republicans and their war pig defense contractor buddies can take those no bid contracts and shove em up where the sun don’t shine.

• Link
• Report this comment

redneck idiots sure do miss kyle, huh?

• Link
• Report this comment

sheepdawg — “JHM- Please go live with your idol Noot Ginrich on the moon”

Better clear the fur from your eyes, sheepdawg. You’ve misread me as badly as alittlecommonsense did.

“we are growing very tired of your childish rants.”

Who’s this “we” you speak of? I don’t think you speak for anyone but yourself, Champ.

• Link
• Report this comment

-25-40% – now that’s rial money

• Link
• Report this comment

“can you admit that democrats do the same?”

Yes.

Next…

• Link
• Report this comment

“Almost 2,400 Millionaires Pocketed Unemployment Benefits.” …”Eliminating the federal share of unemployment benefits for millionaires would save $20 million in the next decade, the congressional researchers said in their report.”20 million in a decade! That’s two whole million dollars a year. Or about .0002 percent of a 1.1 trillion deficit.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-10-02/almost-2-400-millionaires-pocketed-unemployment-benefits.html

• Link
• Report this comment

**khomeni came to power because the Shah tried to both modernize and westernize a population that did not want that at the time**

Incorrect…khomeni came to power because the iranians were pissed off that the cia installed the shah to power in the 50’s. Furthermore, they were really pissed off about the shah’s secret police and their brutality. All this was the result of the blowback from us meddling in their internal affairs. We are not the masters of the universe…

• Link
• Report this comment

“Wonder how long after the election wil it take BO to come out of the closet and admit he’s a muslim?”

About the same amount of time it will take for you and you ilk to admit you are morons.

• Link
• Report this comment

nice try mick
but step out of the noam chomsky closet

The revolution was unusual for the surprise it created throughout the world:[16] it lacked many of the customary causes of revolution (defeat at war, a financial crisis, peasant rebellion, or disgruntled military),[17] produced profound change at great speed,[18] was massively popular,[19] and replaced a westernising monarchy with a theocracy based on Guardianship of the Islamic Jurists (or velayat-e faqih). Its outcome—an Islamic Republic “under the guidance of an extraordinary religious scholar from Qom”—was, as one scholar put it, “clearly an occurrence that had to be explained”.[20]

• Link
• Report this comment

The leveling of economic sanctions is a nonviolent approach to solving world problems. It serves two positive outcomes. One, world leaders join together as one in defining their goals and priorities, and two, they learn to trust solving mutual problems through the relatively nonviolent means of economic sanctions.

I am reminded of MLK’s nonviolent approaches to changing consciousness and solving social problems through nonviolent tactics. The economic boycott he led in the Montgomery Bus Boycott of 1955 comes quickly to mind, as an analogy to learn from today – in buidling global consciousness and in solving global problems – in its social and economic effectiveness.

Americans have a clear choice betweem our two presidential candidates in their separate world visions, as reflected in their differing parties’ perceptions, as to how to solve world problems. Romney’s is the vision of the dominant America that leads by intimidation. Obama’s is the vision of world partnership that leads, as much as possible, through relatively nonviolent, economic sanctions.
Obama’s approach models to some degree MLK’s vision and, thus, his is a more spiritually sound approach than one of intimidation. As a result, it will have a more lasting effectiveness.

• Link
• Report this comment

JHM, my bad, I meant to include it, just because I love knowing that the con’s heads explode when the info is directly from the most popular right wing web site on the Innertubes…

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/GOP-Romney-Worries/2012/10/02/id/458411

• Link
• Report this comment

Almost all democrats (exception Obama, whose own Afghan war is going just splendidly) voted in favor of ground war (having shared intelligence briefings with Bush admin).

Liar.

• Link
• Report this comment

And who Jose, do you think the Iraqi people blame for the hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians that got in the way of that war? Who do you think they blame for the lack of basic services that have never been rebuilt? Who do you think they blame for the doors kicked in and the family members dragged off to who knows where? Most of them were broke to begin with and live detached from most everything but their village and province. They’ll blame the West. Not. Saddam…”the guy that tried to kill my daddy”. But given the choice between dying and sanctions what do think is preferable to them.

• Link
• Report this comment

Mary Elizabeth – Does your love of sanctions include the five that the U.N. levied against North Korea under GW Bush, or just the one levied under Obama? Because it seems to me that you just want to say Republicans bad / Democrats good. Even when they both do the same thing.

• Link
• Report this comment

JamVet — “I love knowing that the con’s heads explode when the info is directly from the most popular right wing web site on the Innertubes…”

SWEET!

• Link
• Report this comment

Jose

Dont forget about the Shah’s Savak. You know the folks who made people “disappear when they spoke too loudly and often about the regime and some of its oppressive tactics………

Not much unlike the clowns currently in power

Don’t be fooled that the Shah was a “good guy” just because he was on the St Department and CIA payroll

• Link
• Report this comment

Jose, 3:06 pm

Jose, please notice my words carefully. I deliberately wrote “relatively nonviolent means.” The word “relatively” connotes that economic sanctions inflicted on people are more nonviolent that the killing and maiming of them that will occur in war.
————————————

Mary Elizabeth: “. . .two, they learn to trust solving mutual problems through the relatively nonviolent means of economic sanctions.”

• Link
• Report this comment

As an aside, just got off the phone with my son who is due to go back to Afghanistan in December. He has served in both Iraq and Afghanistan many, many times (7). He is always telling me “don’t worry mom, I’m intelligence, I’m always covered”. This time I hear “it’s getting hot (not as in temperature) over there right now, I’m getting sick of wars, I don’t need the extra money”. I reminded him to make sure he votes (lives in Germany). We don’t need to be talking about the “next” war, we need to be talking about the best way to avoid war – something we have failed to do recently.

• Link
• Report this comment

“MARY E believes starving children and letting them die through sanctions is non violent

nobel peace prize anyone?”

It’s much better to bomb them and snuff out their little miserable, brown skinned lives instantly. It’s the godly, humane way to end their suffering, right?

• Link
• Report this comment

THEY BOTH SUCK

i never said he was a good guy……….. and it is well known he was another dictator propped up by the WEST to prevent communism

dont mistake educating a situation to ENDORSING a dictator

its a known fact we set up and trained Saddam Hussein……..

or we supported DICTATORS in South Vietnam …….. etc.

i know and ackowledge all that

the point is that WE WILL NEVER FULLY UNDERSTAND AND SEE FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF ISLAM

it is a belief system that we cannot relate too……….. just because in the US we have some modernized and westernized muslims do not mean that the rest of ISLAM believes like they do………..

just like many violent and angry protestors in those countries do not reflect the beliefs of all of ISLAM

however, it is ARROGANT of the LEFT to think that OBAMA is modeling MLK and that the world will love us because our intentions are pure

its bull and we all know it

its evolution and survival of the fittest………..

if we are too strong or come across as too weak we have problems

we have gone from one extreme to another

• Link
• Report this comment

What I know Jose is that it’s not the democrats rattling their sabers and itching for another unwinnable war in the middle east. Tell me Jose, just what the hell have we gained? The problems just move. And it’s debatable whether Saddam Hussein was a problem to begin with. I can tell you what we lost that we can’t get back. The lives of our sons daughters sisters brothers fathers mothers.

My oldest brother is a West Point Grad on his 4th tour in Afghanistan. In Paktika Province right now and still might not make it back. My little brother came back from Helmand province in a box. He graduated from Texas A&M got commissioned, went to Afghanistan and 4 months later at 22 years old was dead. For what? So hell yes I prefer sanctions. Furthermore if anybody named Romney, or Cheney, or assorted other cowards had to spill their blood there would be some sheathed sabers for sure.

• Link
• Report this comment

we have gone from one extreme to another

There’s your sign.

• Link
• Report this comment

Soldier Mom — “As an aside, just got off the phone with my son who is due to go back to Afghanistan in December. He has served in both Iraq and Afghanistan many, many times (7). He is always telling me “don’t worry mom, I’m intelligence, I’m always covered”. This time I hear “it’s getting hot (not as in temperature) over there right now, I’m getting sick of wars, I don’t need the extra money”.

As a fellow veteran, I would like to express my appreciation for your son’s service and my sincere hope that he and everyone in his unit makes it back home hale, hearty and in one piece.

• Link
• Report this comment

JAMVET @ 2:38

Despite the commentary you offered, I don’t think this assessment will result in less votes or less turnout for Romney…they may be unhappy about their candidate, but they will not sit home and they will not vote for BO…they don’t want KENMITTDOLL in as much as they want BO out..

If voters turnout for BO in 2008 fashion, its over…this is an assumption by all polls but rasmussen who blends 2008, 2004 and 2000…

• Link
• Report this comment

marisol

what have we gained

do you not see that FREE ELECTIONS are OCCURING all over the middle east
that the people of these countries are exercising SELF DETERMINATION

THAT IS THE AMERICAN IDEAL

its beautiful

we might not like the outcomes
but its WHAT WE BELIEVE IN

• Link
• Report this comment

Fred – Just helping th elibs to acknowledge theri feminne leanings. You don’t have to be gay, just being emascualted by your wife or mother will do fine. The researchers found that libertarians had the most “masculine” psychological profile, while liberals had the most feminine, and these results held up even when they examined each gender separately, which “may explain why libertarianism appeals to men more than women.”

http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB10000872396390444358804578016291138331904-lMyQjAxMTAyMDAwMTAwODE3Wj.html?mod=wsj_valetleft_email

• Link
• Report this comment

Jose

October 2nd, 2012
3:06 pm
MARY E believes starving children and letting them die through sanctions is non violent

nobel peace prize anyone?

.
.
.
.

No use your logic Jose….I guess we can say

Jose prefers millions be instantly be vaporized and the land contaminated for hundreds of years instead of diplomacy.

• Link
• Report this comment

mm your 2:48 is classic. LMAO!

• Link
• Report this comment

FRED,

I love that word asshat..reminds me of my daughters first boyfriend who has the distinction of having been born with his ass where his head should have been…I call him buttface…prefer your moniker..

SOLDERMOM,

Hope your son returns healthy and in good spritual condition….I’m rooting for him..you should be very,very proud..

I don’t want to discount the work of our troops, I simply wish a more critical situation existed to justify putting our kids l lives on the line…we are getting no return from our investment in either war IMO…

• Link
• Report this comment

Fred – “While you on the other hand remain the asshat you have always been. Since you fail to understand the post you quoted, a better tack would have been to ignore it.”

Fred you have hurt my feeling with your name calling. What an impressive Internet tough guy you are. LOL

• Link
• Report this comment

Personally I won’t be happy until all Iranians act like Michigan State professors.

http://www.mlive.com/lansing-news/index.ssf/2012/10/student_michigan_state_profess.html

Just look at Amadinnerjacket and the mullahs and you can tell that the embargo on shaving materials is working.

Bring back The Shah.

• Link
• Report this comment

Kudos RIghtwing Troll you’re making fools of all of them today.

• Link
• Report this comment

SHEETS!

• Link
• Report this comment

SR, it is hard to say who is more turned off by their candidate, and who will not show up.

But thanks to the depraved Rush and plenty of other equally moronic misogynists in the GOP, I suspect that the sluts, prostitutes and FemiNazis are NOT going to stay home this November.

Which is always very bad news for the GOP…

• Link
• Report this comment

Stevie

Birch is just pathetic. I do not think it has anything to do with politics. It is just manifested through his version of right leaning political views……..

• Link
• Report this comment

Many of the top anaylists are predicting another recession. Will this one be Bush’s fault as well?

• Link
• Report this comment

Turn Israel loose….make a big old sandbox.

• Link
• Report this comment

Sorry, Fred. Apparently you were quoting an earlier post and I thought is was yours. Good thing I didn’t have nukes.

• Link
• Report this comment

alittlecommonsense, 3:06 pm

“Mary Elizabeth – Does your love of sanctions include the five that the U.N. levied against North Korea under GW Bush, or just the one levied under Obama? Because it seems to me that you just want to say Republicans bad / Democrats good. Even when they both do the same thing.”
===================================

You raise a valid question. To answer your question, I would assert that, in my opinion, the Democratic vision is MORE a vision of communication and dialogue – before deciding on using the brutality of weapons of war – than is the Republican vision. So, I see that the difference in the two parties, in this regard, is one of degree. Obama would more likely try to lead by collaboration than by domination. Here are Obama’s words June 4, 2009 at Cairo University in Cairo, Egypt:

President Obama: “For human history has often been a record of nations and tribes subjugating one another to serve their own interests. Yet in this new age, such attitudes are self-defeating. Given our interdependence, any world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will inevitably fail. So whatever we think of the past, we must not be prisoners of it. Our problems must be dealt with through partnership; progress must be shared.”
=========================================

Also, notice Jay’s words, below, at 1:22 pm, which, imo, give facts which demonstrate that the Republican Party’s vision is one that believes that a militaristic approach is a MORE effective one in obtaining peaceful results, ultimately, than a collaborative approach. I do not think that most Democrats would agree with that position. Both parties will use both approaches, i.e., you mention that Bush II used sanctions in persuasion with in N. Korea, and we know that Obama has used drone attacks in fighting Al Quaida. However, I believe that the overriding vision the Democrat Party has is to lead – as much as possible – by collaboration rather than by intimidation because those tactics will, ultimately, have more lasting peaceful ends.

Jay Bookman: “Many Bush administration officials have emphasized the U.S.-led 2003 invasion of Iraq, as well as the October 2003 interdiction of a ship containing nuclear-related components destined for Libya, as key factors in Tripoli’s decision. But outside experts argue that years of sanctions and diplomatic efforts were more important.”

• Link
• Report this comment

Jose you miss my point. I don’t give a rat’s butt who gets us out. We shouldn’t have been there in the first place. It’s the people that get them started that concerns me. And I bet given the choice of having their electricity and sewer systems back and voting they’d take the lights and water. Most of these people are so detached from the government it doesn’t matter who the government is..

• Link
• Report this comment

I just posted a link to a WSJ piece about psychologial studies relating to political ideologies. Not surprisingly, libertarians had the most logical, masculine profile, and liberals the most feminine. What surprises me is how many of you immediately became defensive and insulting, reacting as if YOUR masculinity had been threatened. You would be better served to embrace your compassionate view of the world.
And again I ask you to expaalin why you have more compassion and tolerance for an Arab half a world away that probably either hates, fears, or envys you, than a hard working fellow Americzan who happens to have opinions different from your own? What your actions say clearly, as opposed to your words, is you are really only tolerant of people who think like you. And, as th eprofiles above support, you react emotionally by insulting me an calling me names, rather than rationally explaining yourselves.
Have a great day.

• Link
• Report this comment

MARISOL

i think you are mistaken if you think they want HUSSEIN back

• Link
• Report this comment

George “Take It Elsewhere, Buster” Will.

Too funny!

• Link
• Report this comment

Stevie Ray – I am guessing that “sheets” means Jay has posted a new topic…

• Link
• Report this comment

JHM – I’m quilty of a little trolling I admit. but in total seriousness I’d love if all foreign issues could be solved by negotiation and sanctions. But I don’t think that’s realistic. What Jay posted today suggests sanctions are working by putting pressure on the economy of Iran. Fine, but is that making them more or less likely to develop and even possibly use a nuclear weapon?
I wouldn’[t say the approah is working because their currency is devalued. I’d say it is working when they come to the UN, announce they won’t develop nuclear weapons if we will ift the sanctions, an allow inspectors in for verification. Until them all we’ve don is piss them off some more.
BTW, contrary to Jam’s rant I do know what the inside of a recruiting office looks like. Trid to enlist, twice, but as you certainly remember the Navy was pretty seletive back in the day. Got tuirned down twice and then probably the only diference between you and me is I went to college and had a deferment until I got a high (305) lottery number.

• Link
• Report this comment

So Jose…tell me if you were in their shoes and your wife and children were graveyard dead you’d prefer them dead to having Saddam Hussein. COME ON MAN!

• Link
• Report this comment

Thanks for all the good wishes from all of you. I didn’t throw that out there for well wishes, but I will pass them onto my son. Question for all you vets, did you ever go back in thinking, “I dont’ want to do this anymore”? That’s what concerns me. The voice is different this time. We have been through this alot – but the sound is different. And now we want to talk about war with Iran and poor Bibi and we have to show the world who we are. I ask – why?

• Link
• Report this comment

Soldier Mom — “Question for all you vets, did you ever go back in thinking, “I dont’ want to do this anymore”?

In what respect? I don’t understand the question. Can you elaborate, please?

• Link
• Report this comment

SR,

Obama Derangement Syndrome.

Sheets means a new thread is up. (as in fresh sheets.)

• Link
• Report this comment

No Jose…only a couple hundred thousand. You saying their lives are irrelevant? I bet you can make them all feel better with that logic.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jose get real. How long will that last after we leave? It’s high time that Americans get it through our thick skulls that we are not policemen to the world. We’re not nation builders. We’re not the final determiner as to what is best for any country outside our own borders. You can use all the fuzzy logic the neocons feed you but the truth is all nations are not candidates for democratization. If they want democracy let them get it the way we did. Didn’t we take on the most powerful Army in the world with basically nothing but the will to do so?

• Link
• Report this comment

Yes Jose I’m so ignorant that I have a degree from the University of Texas and own my own ranch running 200 head of Santa Gertrudis cattle that I started with 20 head. I employ 6 entire families. So yeah I’m dumber than a box of rocks compared to you. I guess the difference in my worldview and yours is that everyday when I go out to check my herd I have to pass my little brothers brother’s grave. Dead at 22 because of ideologies like yours. Next time we have a good war Jose take your butt down to the recruiting station and go fight it. Better yet send your kids. Then come back and call me ignorant.

• Link
• Report this comment

Is this helping the situation in Libya?

• Link
• Report this comment

Welcome, 6:48 pm

I’ll repeat what I had said earlier to Jose in response to you. If you had read further in my post, you would have noticed that I subsequently used the word “relatively” before the word “nonviolent.”

Mary Elizabeth to Jose: “Jose, please notice my words carefully. I deliberately wrote “relatively nonviolent means.” The word “relatively” connotes that economic sanctions inflicted on people are more nonviolent that the killing and maiming of them that will occur in war.
————————————

Mary Elizabeth: “. . .two, they learn to trust solving mutual problems through the relatively nonviolent means of economic sanctions.”
=============================================

Welcome, again, I think that you are more of a purist in your thinking than I am. In handling world problems which could escalate to global confrontations in which millions if not billions of people might be killed, one could either consider using bombing or economic sanctions as leverage to stop this massive destruction of human life from occurring. (I think that there are other means of leverage than simply these two, but those have been the two most frequently compared.)

In that case, most would agree that economic sanctions would cause less violence than bombing – hence my use of the word phrase “relatively nonviolent means.”

Of course there is the option of doing nothing and we know from the history (WWII – British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain) what doing nothing may lead to.

As I recall, during the Civil Rights Era in Georgia, many white people considered that the nonviolent tactics of Martin Luther King, Jr. were, in fact, violent tactics because they considered that by actively engaging in nonviolent confrontation, MLK had created situations in which violence occurred. I disagreed with the thoughts of those white people. I believe MLK used nonviolent tactics to fight an inherently violent social system, of first slavery and then of Jim Crow.

Most situations in life should be qualified by “relatively,” don’t you think? I look at possibilites, given what is realistically possible at the time. I am not the purist you are. In that sense, I am more like Obama in my thinking. I want to see the world evolve toward nonviolence, but that will take time and, in the meantime, we do not have the luxury of WWIII. However, I am optimistic that the world can achieve nonviolence, in a more pure version, in time. I never thought that I would see Apartheid end in South Africa in my lifetime, nor see an African-America as President of the U.S. Nevertheless, those two events happened even in the span of 60 years from Jim Crow to the ending of Apartheid in South Africa and President Obama’s election. Thus, I believe that a more pure version of nonviolence throughout the world may happen sooner than one might imagine.

• Link
• Report this comment