Why A Yes Vote For The Iran Nuclear Deal Is A No-Brainer

well said, being a Vietnam Vet., I never understood why LBJ being the chicken shit he was bailed on the troops who served in Nam Originally Posted by gary5912

I saw the comments regarding the Vietnam War, I'm going to expand what gary5912 said.

Contrary to what has been argued, we won every major battle in Vietnam, including the Tet Offensive. We won the majority of the minor battles/skirmishes. It didn't matter what the rules of engagement were, just read the results of each of the battles.

Our forces were able to take territory, and key terrain features. In almost every instance, the Vietnamese, knowing full well that they couldn't take us on in the battlefield, attempted to utilize an extreme number advantage. There were times when the US military landed in the middle of North Vietnamese AO. Even then, the Vietnamese tactically got there azzes handed to them.

The Kennedy and Johnson administrations ran this politically. They were inefficient when prosecuting this war. We still pulverized the Vietnamese in battle. Someone tried to imply that we "bailed" under Nixon. Not true. When Nixon took over, he took over with the intent to win it, even when he was talking about shifting this to the South Vietnamese.

As someone has already mentioned, the Vietnamese, knowing that they couldn't take us on in the battlefield, resorted to winning in the propaganda arena. Their strategy involved eroding the will of the American electorate to fight. They were keen on the news that was coming from the United States.

The antiwar people, and the Democrats in Congress, gave the Vietnamese hope, and the will to continue. They got to the point to where, reading between the lines coming from the Democrat-controlled Congress, the North Vietnamese decided to back away from the negotiations. It didn't help that the Democrats in Congress were arguing that they would cut funding for the Vietnam War.

The North Vietnamese decided to disregard any kind of negotiations, and to simply wait out the troop pullout.

Nixon, in his capacity as Commander-in-Chief, did not take that too well. He commenced with the military policy to hand the North Vietnamese their hind ends even more. What targets in North Vietnam were previously prohibited, he ordered those bombed. Trails, port cities, supply nodes, strategic nodes, you name it, he bombed it.

It got to the point to where the North Vietnamese decided that it would be in their best interest to get back to the negotiating table. Now, here comes the first tragedy. Despite the increased, and intensive, bombing campaign that Nixon engaged in, he had a time limit. After a certain point, he had to stop. The Democrats in Congress were not going to fund any further efforts.

Meaning, if there was no "deadline", thanks to the Democrat-controlled Congress, Nixon could've continued the bombing runs. A main reason to why the North Vietnamese returned to the negotiating table was because they were near their wit's end. They were demoralized, malnourished, easily prone to getting sick, and truly saw their mortality. Had the bombing runs continued, the North Vietnamese would've surrendered unconditionally.

This means that surrender would've been on our terms. But, that was not to be. US combat forces pulled out of Vietnam in 1973. It was up to the Democrat-controlled Congress to continue funding South Vietnam. They didn't. They defunded the South Vietnamese, cutting them off of in the legs. The result was inevitable. It was only a matter time that the South would fall and that North Vietnam take over everything.

We could thank the Democrats for that. Advance to the 21st century, we have yet another Democrat pulling victory out of the jaws of defeat.

We won the Vietnam War militarily. It ended for us in 1973, per the Paris peace Accords. We lost it politically on the streets of the United States because of the antiwar crowd, and in the halls of the U.S. Congress because of the Democrats.

This is why the victory Museum that the communist Vietnamese built had a section dedicated to the American antiwar movement.

Iran says it has discovered unexpectedly high uranium reserve

Iran has discovered an unexpectedly high reserve of uranium and will soon begin extracting the radioactive element at a new mine, the head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization said on Saturday.

The comments cast doubt on previous assessments from some Western analysts who said the country had a low supply and sooner or later would need to import uranium, the raw material needed for its nuclear program.

Any indication Iran could become more self-sufficient will be closely watched by world powers, which reached a landmark deal with Tehran in July over its program. They had feared the nuclear activities were aimed at acquiring the capability to produce atomic weapons - something denied by Tehran.

"I cannot announce (the level of) Iran's uranium mine reserves. The important thing is that before aerial prospecting for uranium ores we were not too optimistic, but the new discoveries have made us confident about our reserves," Iranian nuclear chief Ali Akbar Salehi was quoted as saying by state news agency IRNA.

Salehi said uranium exploration had covered almost two-thirds of Iran and would be complete in the next four years.
Uranium can be used for civilian power production and scientific purposes, but is also a key ingredient in nuclear weapons.

The July deal between Iran and world powers will lift international sanctions on Iran in exchange for at least a decade of curbs on the country's nuclear activity.

The U.S. State Department said any new reserves of uranium discovered in Iran will be under the same monitoring as existing mines under the nuclear agreement.

"Any violation of that commitment would be met with the appropriate response,” State Department spokesman John Kirby said in a statement.

After decades of effort, Iran - which has consistently said its program is for peaceful purposes - has achieved a full nuclear fuel cycle, ranging from the extraction of uranium ore to enrichment and production of fuel rods for nuclear reactors.

Sanctions on companies taking part in Iran's uranium mining industry will be lifted when the agreement is implemented.

Salehi said uranium extraction was set to begin at a new mine in the central province of Yazd, according to IRNA.
Some Western analysts have previously said that Iran was close to exhausting its supply of yellowcake - or raw uranium - and that mining it domestically was not cost-efficient.

A report published in 2013 by U.S. think-tanks Carnegie Endowment and the Federation of American Scientists said the scarcity and low quality of Iran's uranium resources compelled it "to rely on external sources of natural and processed uranium".

It added: "Despite the Iranian leadership's assertions to the contrary, Iran's estimated uranium endowments are nowhere near sufficient to supply its planned nuclear program."
Iran has repeatedly denied overseas media reports that it has tried to import uranium from countries like Kazakhstan and Zimbabwe.

(Reporting by Bozorgmehr Sharafedin; Additional reporting by Eric Beech in Washington; Editing by Noah Browning, Pravin Char and David Gregorio)

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/iran-says-...104622948.html

If we had won the Viet Nam war, what would we have won that would have been worth 50,000+ American lives plus countless wounded and damaged people? What did we win in Iraq? Afghanistan? Libya? Sudan? And for the Reagan lovers, Grenada?

If we had won the Viet Nam war, what would we have won that would have been worth 50,000+ American lives plus countless wounded and damaged people? What did we win in Iraq? Afghanistan? Libya? Sudan? And for the Reagan lovers, Grenada? Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

We agree. We didn't win a goddamn thing that was worth one American life. When are people going to learn that the MIC is what causes these constant incursions to keep happening. Greed, coupled with religious differences, set off trouble and strife around the globe. Follow the money.

harry reid, in the senate, went nuclear and changed senate rules to stop republicans from trying to save America from disastrous Obama nominees

and mitch mcconnell wont go nuclear in the senate to save america and Israel from iran getting the real nuclear bomb?

We agree. We didn't win a goddamn thing that was worth one American life. When are people going to learn that the MIC is what causes these constant incursions to keep happening. Greed, coupled with religious differences, set off trouble and strife around the globe. Follow the money. Originally Posted by WombRaider

Sing your song, 0zombie...

Iran says it has discovered unexpectedly high uranium reserve



https://ca.news.yahoo.com/iran-says-...104622948.html


Originally Posted by IIFFOFRDB

Having more uranium reserves is NOT an issue. In order to make a nuclear weapon, you need WEAPONS GRADE U-235. As you can see from the chart that was already posted taking Uranium out of the ground and doing the necessary conversion takes years. To date Iran has enriched uranium but does not have any weapons grade U-235, if they did they would already be testing a bomb.

Having more uranium reserves is NOT an issue. In order to make a nuclear weapon, you need WEAPONS GRADE U-235. As you can see from the chart that was already posted taking Uranium out of the ground and doing the necessary conversion takes years. To date Iran has enriched uranium but does not have any weapons grade U-235, if they did they would already be testing a bomb.

Originally Posted by flghtr65

They don't have to test. They know the perameters of criticle mass. Neck, you can probably get the info off the Internet. If they have the correct amount, it will work.

The main reason The U.S. and other Countries continued to test Fission Bombs was mainly in developing triggers for Thermonuclear Bombs and Tacticle Weapons. In short, it is a lot easier to build a big Bomb that will cause a lot of devastation than a smaller Bomb that will do limited damage.

I still believe the Iranians already possess enough enriched Fissionable Material to build some bombs. There is no reason at this time to let the cat out of the bag. After all, we are getting ready to hand them over Billions of Dollars on their promise that they will be good little Muslims and wait 10 years before turning Israel into a cinder.

They don't have to test. They know the perameters of criticle mass. Neck, you can probably get the info off the Internet. If they have the correct amount, it will work.

The main reason The U.S. and other Countries continued to test Fission Bombs was mainly in developing triggers for Thermonuclear Bombs and Tacticle Weapons. In short, it is a lot easier to build a big Bomb that will cause a lot of devastation than a smaller Bomb that will do limited damage.

I still believe the Iranians already possess enough enriched Fissionable Material to build some bombs. There is no reason at this time to let the cat out of the bag. After all, we are getting ready to hand them over Billions of Dollars on their promise that they will be good little Muslims and wait 10 years before turning Israel into a cinder. Originally Posted by Jackie S

If they could turn Israel into a cinder, why have they not done it at any point in the last 20 years?

Having more uranium reserves is NOT an issue. In order to make a nuclear weapon, you need WEAPONS GRADE U-235. As you can see from the chart that was already posted taking Uranium out of the ground and doing the necessary conversion takes years. To date Iran has enriched uranium but does not have any weapons grade U-235, if they did they would already be testing a bomb. Originally Posted by flghtr65

You are like a broken record of naïveté. It is an issue, especially since they've mastered the cycle. If I were Iran, I wouldn't force an Israeli attack by testing a bomb until I had enough material for several bombs. That would avert an attack or accomplish the goal of destroying Israel.

You are like a broken record of naïveté. It is an issue, especially since they've mastered the cycle. If I were Iran, I wouldn't force an Israeli attack by testing a bomb until I had enough material for several bombs. That would avert an attack or accomplish the goal of destroying Israel. Originally Posted by gnadfly

If you were Iran. You AREN'T Iran, dumbshit. You're barely a functioning human being. What you say regarding things you have no knowledge of, is pointless drivel.

If you were Iran. You AREN'T Iran, dumbshit. You're barely a functioning human being. What you say regarding things you have no knowledge of, is pointless drivel. Originally Posted by WombRaider

did you say something, puss in boots?

If we had won the Viet Nam war, what would we have won that would have been worth 50,000+ American lives plus countless wounded and damaged people? What did we win in Iraq? Afghanistan? Libya? Sudan? And for the Reagan lovers, Grenada? Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

First, Asia was a political powder keg that was at risk of "blowing up". Our intervention in Southeast Asia had a "stabilizing" effect. Had the Democrats, in control of Congress, had the right mindset, we could have had a situation to where Vietnam was divided by a capitalist South and a communist North. Or, the entire country being capitalist if we were allowed to continue bombing the crap out of them. They would've been one of the Asian Tigers along with South Korea, Taiwan, and others.

This would have contributed to a more stable Asia than what we have right now.

Second, the Soviets and Chinese were indeed attempting to spread communism throughout all of Asia. Our intervention in Vietnam put a major halt to most of that initiative.

The military won the war in Vietnam, the Democrats lost it politically. You should direct your question to them. As for lives lost, you don't speak for them. The majority of the Vietnam veterans that I've met, including my dad, supported what they did as much as we Iraq war veterans supported what we did in Iraq.

Those guys that died, died believing that the United States can and would prevail. It was not their fault that the Democrats in Congress, and the antiwar people throughout the United States, worked against their achievements to reverse the victory gained in Vietnam. Likewise, it is not our (Iraq War Veterans) fault that there was a lack of will in Washington DC to capitalize preserve our victory.

What I said about Iraq is also applicable to Afghanistan. I explained in more detail, earlier in this thread, why we had to go into those countries. Again, it was up to Washington DC to capitalize on our success, and to capitalize on the results of our success, which included the rise of the Arab Spring.

What did we win in Iraq and Afghanistan? Not only did we win the war with a straight cut victory, we bought Western civilization centuries more of existence as a Western culture/identity. What was required was for Washington DC to capitalize, in our favor, the Arab Spring. That would've been the meat and potatoes of this asymmetrical warfare from our standpoint.

It was the administration sitting in the White House since 2009 that fumbled this ball.

There was much more involved with the Grenada operation, then just the expeditionary deployment that took place. It was a simple matter of weakening/liquidating additional Soviet/Cuban influence in our own backyard. Together with Central America, US policy worked to rollback and eliminate Soviet/Cuban influence throughout our backyard.

We won a greater standing, relative to the Soviet Union, with our involvement in Grenada and in Central America.

This all falls under the greater topic of geopolitical and geostrategic issues. Humanity is consistently playing chess on a global scale. Our status as a superpower is not guaranteed, neither is our security or freedom from coercive influence from other countries.

Understand that when we combat deploy, we know the risks. We would not do so if we were not willing to die in the process. In fact, in those situations where not all units will go into conflict, but some, you would find their commanders in a heated debate with each other as to which one of them gets selected for the job for going in and pulling the trigger. We're talking about the adult version of people "jumping in front of each other" to be selected, by their mutual commander, as the unit that will be engaged in hot war. Meanwhile, the rank-and-file in their units are "praying" hard that they will be selected to do such instead of the other units.

Neither you, nor those on your side of the argument, has a leg to stand on when trying to pontificate about lost American lives.

We agree. We didn't win a goddamn thing that was worth one American life. When are people going to learn that the MIC is what causes these constant incursions to keep happening. Greed, coupled with religious differences, set off trouble and strife around the globe. Follow the money. Originally Posted by WombRaider

You don't have a leg to stand on when talking about lost American life. The vast majority, of the people that combat deployed, including the fallen, did so believing a philosophy very similar to what I have explained on this thread.

Here's an example. This is an interview that a soldier, on R&R during his Iraq deployment, did. He returned to Iraq shortly after he did this interview. He came back in a flag draped coffin. He said this in response to the Democrats, in Congress, attempting to defund the Iraq war... You know, like how they defunded the South Vietnamese after the US pulled out.

This is a copy and paste of what I said to a bunch of libtards that spoke out of their arses about the Iraq war on another message board back in 2007/2008.

Word for word, and every emotion expressed in the video, is reflective of how the vast majority of us, who have combat deployed, regardless of whether we survived or were to ultimately fall, felt about the circumstances surrounding our combat deployment and attitudes back home related to that:

Copy and paste of my 2007/2008 post:

Vick deployed to Iraq Twice. He was a Sergeant First Class. He was in the middle of his second tour when this aired. He returned to Iraq shortly after this, where he subsequently got killed by a roadside bomb.

These are his words.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wh1dW...eature=related

"This Video brought to you by www.savethesoldiers.com"

Here's the transcript:

Trai*tor - noun - [trey-ter]

1. A person who betrays another, a cause, or any trust.

2. A person who commits treason by betraying his or her country.

Rep. Nacy Pelosi -- "Ending these emphasis on a combat mission will allow the phased, redeployment, of our forces from Iraq beginning within the next four to six months.

Rep. Murtha -- "They won't be able to continue, ah, they won't be able to do the deployment, they, they won't be able to have the equipment, they don't have the training, and they won't be able to, to do the, the, ah, the work. The, there's no question in my mind. We have analyzed this and we have come to the conclusion that it can't be done!

Senator Reid -- "Now I believe, myself, that the Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense, and you have to make your own decision as to what the President knows, that this war is lost, and that the surge is not accomplishing anything as indicated by the extreme violence."

HE*RO-NOUN-[HEER-OH]

1. A man of distinguished courage or ability. Admired for his brave deeds and noble qualities.

2. A person who, in the opinion of others, has heroic qualities or has performed a heroic act and is regarded as a model or ideal.

Boortz -- "Ah, Vick is here, Vick, ladies and gentleman, aahhh, pay attention to the man. He's on a, he's on LEAVE from Iraq. He's going back in two days, Hi Vick!

Vick -- "Hi, Good morning sir! How are you?"

Boortz -- "Yes sir, I'm doing fine."

Vick -- "Ah, I really appreciate you tacking my call, ah, I, I ah, I got about 14 days in the hole and I ah tried to stay away from the news and what not. And ah, when ah,"

Boortz -- "I don't blame you, but go ahead"

Vick -- "Heh, heh, heh, yah, ah, last four days I found out why! Ah, I am very upset about the amount of things that were put into the bill, ah, the, the pork barrel spending, the, the, idea that they want to bring home the troops.

And the point that I'm making is they want to, achum, they want to bring home troops, from, set a time, set, set a timeline to bring us home from this war. This is my second tour, I've got, I've got 21 months in the sandbox [Iraq].

SIR, what I, what I'd actually like to see is I would like to finish my job. Ah, we were given a very clear and defined mission. And that was to finish, ah, ah, after the war was "declared" over, to set up a government which could sustain itself, defend itself, and run itself, BY itself.

Now I don't know how you could make that any plainer.

I'm Sergeant First Class,"

Boortz -- "ahuh"

Vick -- "ah, I currently go between ah, Baghdad and Anbar Province, we do clearance sweeps, we work with the Iraqi troops themselves. It's some of the worst duty you could do.

Ah, these Iraqi troops are some of the best troops you could work with. They stand up, they fight. They are not getting up, in the last four days, anything in the News that I have seen, about these troops.

NINE members of my unit, I have carried off in a black bag that I have zipped up. [Fights back tears] I ah, REFUSE to believe, that I am going to have to come home and say that all of that was for nothen.

[Contains frustration] It is NOT RIGHT! That I can not SET that country up, and FINNISH that job!

Boortz -- "um"

Vick -- "I'M A RANGER!"

Boortz --"Yah"

Vick -- "I do not FAIL! I have never FAILED AT ANYTHING!"

"I have spent 21 months of my life in that country."

[holding back tears, containing frustration] "And I love this nation. I love THESE people! And ALL I ask of THESE people, is that they BELIEVE ME! I can do this job! I will FINNISH this JOB!

I will SET that country up, THAT country WILL work, it will have a government, it will have an army, and BY GOD if I HAVE to DIE to do it, it will FUNCTION on its own!"

"If people will just let-me-do-my-job! And the people that DIED to do it, did so because they believed they can!"

"And if the American people will just back us, we'll do it!"

"And the press, and the other people, that are trying to stop us, I BEG you to STOP! And please put the effort into SUPPORTING us!"

"And if I could ask you to please get this message to them, that there are people just like me, who are out there, and all we ask is that you love us they way we love you."

"I don't know how to put it. I, I'm a full grown man that does know what to do, I fight, I will, ah I will, I will die for this country if it will just let me come home proud."

"If they bring me home, those guys that died? Died for nothing. They talk about redeployment. It's, it's nothing more than failure. I, I don't know how to express it. And I can't express to you how much this is killing some of them."

"The men and women that are over there right now believe that we can win! We're winning over there. The, the Iraqis over there are turning the terrorists in! They're fighting over there for their own country! The people over there are dying for themselves!"

"The people just need to believe it, and get behind it!

If, if, people like you, and Sean Hannity, and the Radio Host, would, would, maybe get these kind of messages out, maybe the, the people on the TV would start doing it, and, and they'd get behind this war again, they way they were when it started."

"It was real cool when the bombs were falling, and they could see the explosions and all were gong ho. But our people are dead, and you know what? When the first soldier died, when the first body bag was filled, there wasn't any option of coming home. It HAD to be FINISHED!"

And I don't see why the American people don't SEE it THAT way! I don't understand"

Boortz -- "Vick, listen, God bless you, you have done such a service for your fellow soldiers, men and women over there, by calling up and saying what you've done,"

Vick -- "Thank you for letting me speak sir!"

Boortz -- "hey,"

End copy and paste of my 2007/2008 post.

You're wrong, we won with a straight cut victory in Iraq. The United States military, and its allies, did far more for human rights, women's rights, and freedom, for millions of people in Iraq and Afghanistan, then what nonprofit organizations in the United States have done. We won a fuck ton of things, not just the battles.

Blame the liberals in this country for not capitalizing on that whether that's Vietnam, Iraq, or Afghanistan. Blame attitudes like yours.

No, it's not the Military Industrial Complex that's driving the United States, and other countries, into "incursions" and "conflict." At the end of the day, each individual for-profit organization within that "Military Industrial Complex" are ran by people who have absolutely no time trying to convince the United States to go to war with a specific group of countries.

They are in over their heads trying to take care of business and administrative operations in their own corporations to devote any time trying to play politics on a global scale.

The industries involved with the "military-industrial complex" are not just involved with military related technologies. They are also involved with civilian related technologies. So, these industries benefit regardless of whether we are at war or not.

Only the tinfoil hat Army would believe otherwise.

No, greed has nothing to do with the security threats that arise around the world. The radical Islamic threat that we face, in the world today, is legitimate. Our reaction to it, what we have done so far, is legitimate. This has nothing to do with the military-industrial complex one to make money. It so happens that world events require their military specific services.

Money is going to flow whether it's peace or war. No war going on? Not to worry, there are plenty of commercial opportunities to apply one's technology. The military is always involved with research and development to improve the equipment that they already have. This happens regardless of whether this war or not. Check Boeing's website to see what Boeing is involved with:

http://www.boeing.com/

If corporations are outsourcing many of their mundane tasks to freelancers, I don't see how they would have enough time trying to hobnob with governments to "start wars" so that they can make money.

There is no conspiracy going on.