My comment was a response to how the president did on this subject. I explained how I thought he did and the reason I thought he did it. I am not advocating for or against it.
Originally Posted by dirty dog
The following is not argumentative at all.
Since I have not seen one news report containing an official copy of any agreement approved by the "participants" (all of them) in the "negotiations" I cannot make a determination as to whether or not "the president" .... "did" a good job or a bad job. So as a consequence it is IMPOSSIBLE for me to draw any conclusions, or even offer an "opinion," on whether or not "he" (actually John Kerry) did "good" or "bad" or "indifferent."
Would you please post a link TO THE DOCUMENT SIGNED BY ALL THE PARTICIPANTS THAT SETS FOR THE SO CALLED "FRAMEWORK" OF THE NEGOTIATED "AGREEMENT" ..... so I, and perhaps others, like Congressmen and Senators, can review the same and draw their own conclusions.
Given the track record of this administration of .... "passing" things so they can see how it works out later ... and it doesn't!!!! ... and given the past performance under oath of John Kerry, who fraternized with the enemy while still an LT in the Navy, you can probably understand why I am skeptical about the "deal" being good for the U.S. Also...
I noticed on the news yesterday the Iranians are backing away with threats.
I don't like asking for "links," but I don't know how else to effectively do it on here without taking up a lot of bandwidth. And for the sake of integrity and brevity, please ... please ... not link to a blog or some reporter's fantasy.
I want to review .... "IT"!