Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

I like you, you’re my kind of trouble.

Technically true, but collectively nonsense

And we’re all out of bubblegum.

Putting aside our relentless self-interest because the moral imperative is crystal clear.

Do not shrug your shoulders and accept the normalization of untruths.

Despite his magical powers, I don’t think Trump is thinking this through, to be honest.

fuckem (in honor of the late great efgoldman)

Accountability, motherfuckers.

This blog will pay for itself.

But frankly mr. cole, I’ll be happier when you get back to telling us to go fuck ourselves.

Wow, I can’t imagine what it was like to comment in morse code.

So it was an October Surprise A Day, like an Advent calendar but for crime.

Reality always lies in wait for … Democrats.

Only Democrats have agency, apparently.

A last alliance of elves and men. also pet photos.

They traffic in fear. it is their only currency. if we are fearful, they are winning.

Conservatism: there are some people the law protects but does not bind and others who the law binds but does not protect.

Since when do we limit our critiques to things we could do better ourselves?

Too often we confuse noise with substance. too often we confuse setbacks with defeat.

Let’s delete this post and never speak of this again.

It may be funny to you motherfucker, but it’s not funny to me.

No one could have predicted…

The cruelty is the point; the law be damned.

“Everybody’s entitled to be an idiot.”

You are here: Home / Politics / President Obama’s Remarks On Iran Deal

President Obama’s Remarks On Iran Deal

by | 62 Comments

This post is in: , , ,

I thought I’d drop this here in case you missed it. Once again, the Republicans are OUTRAGED at how diplomacy works. Fuck them.

I’ll try and find the actual video to embed, but until then, click this link for the video and the outline.

UPDATE: Try this video, looks like it’s the entire speech.

.

Reader Interactions

62Comments

  2. 2.

    feebog

    We were well on the way to the same outcome with North Korea during the Clinton administration. Then the Supreme Court appointed Shrub and he couldn’t drop negotiations soon enough. As a result, North Korea now has nuclear bombs. But of course none of that matters because IOKIYAR.

  3. 3.

    raven

    WASHINGTON — The Obama administration announced Sunday that it was imposing new, more limited sanctions on some Iranian citizens and companies for violating United Nations resolutions against ballistic missile tests. The move came less than 24 hours after the White House lifted broader sanctions against Iran for its nuclear program.

  4. 4.

    D58826

    Or you can listen to Chuckles interview Marco the magnificent. Marco explained how as a STRONG president Iran would not have dared due any of the evil things that they have done under the WEAK Obama. As a STRONG president he would have told the Iranians to release the hostages before he would refuse to talk to them any way. He would follow in the example of Saint Ronulus the Unenlightened in his dealings with Iran . Chuckles did not ask the obvious follow up question – would Marco send a chocolate or vanilla cake to the Iranians as part of his STRONG president policy.

  7. 7.

    smintheus

    I was deeply impressed when Hillary decided she needed to take a potshot at the Obama administration’s success in negotiating with Iran.

    Clinton said, as president, her policy toward Iran would be to “distrust and verify.

    The former secretary of State said the U.S. should not “thank” Iran for releasing prisoners unjustly held or for following through on its obligations.

    “The treatment of our Navy sailors earlier this week was offensive, including the release of demeaning and provocative videos,” she added, referring to the brief capture of 10 sailors who inadvertently crossed into Iranian waters.

    Nothing says ‘serious’ like adopting Republican belligerent rhetoric.

  8. 8.

    D58826

    And in this corner another LEADER is heard from:

    WASHINGTON — Ted Cruz on Sunday stood by his claim that the U.S. should “carpet bomb” the Islamic State group out of existence and falsely stated that the George H.W. Bush administration carpet bombed Iraq during the first Gulf War.

    “You wanna know what carpet bombing means?” Cruz said, invoking the first Iraq War in 1991. “We were launching 1100 air attacks a day. We were carpet bombing.” As a result of this bombing campaign, Cruz said, U.S. troops “mopped up the remains of the Iraqi army” with ease.

    The United States did not carpet bomb Iraq or Kuwait during the 1991 Gulf War. The airstrikes were highly targeted and thus highly effective, as military experts told The New York Times. “Carpet bombing” is not even a term used by the American military. But it is generally understood to be the indiscriminate bombing of large geographic areas without regard for potential civilian casualties.

    Trump is probably correct but totally unaware that it applies to him as well – the US is the laughing stock of the world with clowns like these running for president.

  10. 10.

    Baud

    @smintheus:

    Nothing says ‘serious’ like adopting Republican belligerent rhetoric.

    Yeah, really Republican.

    Clinton on Saturday praised President Obama for securing the safe return of four U.S. citizens and implementing the Iranian nuclear deal, but warned that all concerns about Iran are not assuaged.

  12. 12.

    D58826

    first time I’ve seen this – IIOOVIN (If it’s Obama our vote is NO). But then I spend a lot of time looking for ink for my quill pens

  16. 16.

    smintheus

    @Baud: Did you read all of her comments? Quite in line with the 2008 candidate who decried Obama for saying that he’d be willing to negotiate with Iran without preconditions.

  17. 17.

    Baud

    @smintheus:

    You mean like this one

    Clinton also said the nuclear agreement marks an “important achievement of diplomacy” between Iran and the international community.

    “Implementation marks an important step forward in preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon,” she said. “Iran has dismantled centrifuges, disabled a reactor, and shipped out almost all of its enriched uranium.

    “These are important steps that make the United States, our allies, and the entire world safer,” she added. “I congratulate President Obama and his team, and I’m proud of the role I played to get this process started.”

    Wait, was that Clinton or Ted Cruz. I can hardly tell the difference?

  18. 18.

    ThresherK (GPad)

    Waiting for someone to tweak Reagan’s speech in 1981 on the subject, pass it off as Obama’s,and see if the RWNJs can tell the difference

  19. 19.

    I'mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet

    @smintheus: One thing to wary of – TheHill is a very strongly “inside baseball” publication. Almost everything there has a strong underlying slant – either pro-Teabagger or pro-Lefty/Leftist/whatever-term-you-want-to-use. They have pundits on both sides of the divide.

    Don’t take their reporting at face value. Even quotes can be slanted by the framing and the editing.

    In this case, it is clear that someone is pushing the “Hillary is a hawk!!1” meme.

    FWIW.

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  20. 20.

    smintheus

    @Baud: Thus she’s for the diplomatic successes but against Obama’s diplomatic restraint. What part of the comments I quoted do you find impressive coming from a Democrat?

  22. 22.

    MattF

    The underlying theme of Republican foreign policy is that premature ejaculation is actually a good thing.

  23. 23.

    smintheus

    @I’mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet: Fair enough, it could be The Hill is sand-bagging Clinton by misconstruing her comments. But those comments per se, especially the complaint about thanking Iran for releasing sailors whom they supposedly mistreated, are nauseating.

  25. 25.

    Baud

    @smintheus:

    Whether I’m impressed or not has nothing to do with whether Clinton is adopting Republican rhetoric, which is what you claimed. It’s as stupid as anyone saying Sanders has adopted the Republican rhetoric on guns.

  27. 27.

    Eolirin

    Hillary, at least when talking to US audiences, definitely comes across as more aggressive than Obama, but there seems to be very little space between them in terms of actual approach on these issues.

  31. 31.

    Baud

    @smintheus:

    Cool. You found someone on the internet who agrees with your wrong position.

    And I guess Obama is worse than Trump too since he just imposed new sanctions on Iran. At least own up to the consequences of your viewpoint.

  32. 32.

    smintheus

    @Eolirin: She didn’t just advocate sanctions, did she? Clinton decried weakness in diplomatic responses to Iran; what part of that is hard to understand?

  34. 34.

    Shell

    John Bolton is particularly moronic. “Diplomatic Debacle” for the US, indeed. I think he’s incapable of framing anything except in apocalyptic terms. (Or is that most Republicans) In 2008, he said if Obama was elected, Iran would have a nuclear bomb because diplomacy had failed!

  35. 35.

    Baud

    @smintheus:

    You haven’t answered even one of my questions.

    I saw nothing in the article you linked to that explains how Clinton’s position is Republican or even how it significantly differs from Obama’s. Does that answer your question?

  36. 36.

    Eolirin

    @smintheus: Um decried weakness is a much more specific claim than what you’ve provided evidence for. Saying ‘this is good progress but there is more left to do yet’ isn’t decrying weakness. Saying ‘we shouldn’t thank people for doing the right thing’ doesn’t amount to claiming we’re on the wrong track diplomatically.

    ETA: You are basically arguing over tone, and not actual proposal or tactics. Hillary is not suggesting we carpet bomb people or that we not pursue a sanctions and diplomacy centric approach to Iran. All of the republicans are.

  37. 37.

    I'mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet

    @smintheus: I agree with you that her rhetoric often seems over-the-top when i comes to things like Iran:

    The first debate this cycle:
    Q: Which enemy are you most proud of?
    Clinton: Well, in addition to the NRA, the health insurance companies, the drug companies, the Iranians.

    2008:
    “In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them,” she said.
    “That’s a terrible thing to say but those people who run Iran need to understand that because that perhaps will deter them from doing something that would be reckless, foolish and tragic,” Clinton said.

    :-/

    It’s hard to know how much of that is bluster, how much of it is calculation on her part, how much of it is over-compensating for being a woman, etc. It’s disconcerting.

    But we need to look at what she did as SoS, and the actual positions she’s advocating now, as well the bluster.

    FWIW.

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  39. 39.

    john fremont

    @D58826: I remember a press conference with Gen Schwarzkopf during Desert Storm where he addressed the term carpetbombing when asked by about it by a reporter. Schwarzkopf replied he didn’t know what that term meant and gave the same answer the article you referenced. The conservatives had a field day with it mocking the librul namby pamby reporter knowing nothing about military doctrine and Stormin Norman setting her straight! Today, Ted Cruz can be a contender for the GOP presidential nomination, what a change.

  40. 40.

    gene108

    @smintheus:

    But despite her concerns, Clinton said she was happy to hear of the release of the four Americans.

    “I am greatly relieved by the safe return of American prisoners from Iran,” Clinton said in a statement. “Their families and our country have waited and prayed for this day to come.”

    Clinton also said the nuclear agreement marks an “important achievement of diplomacy” between Iran and the international community.

    “Implementation marks an important step forward in preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon,” she said. “Iran has dismantled centrifuges, disabled a reactor, and shipped out almost all of its enriched uranium.

    “These are important steps that make the United States, our allies, and the entire world safer,” she added. “I congratulate President Obama and his team, and I’m proud of the role I played to get this process started.”

    TAGS:Iran, Hillary Clinton, Jason Rezaian

    From the rest of your link. Clearly a copy of Republican talking points, by congratulating President Obama and praise of the nuclear deal.

  42. 42.

    gene108

    @smintheus:

    But in the end Team Obama did not negotiate without pre-conditions. Team Obama brought crippling sanctions on Iran. As a condition for negotiating a relief of sanctions, the US and its allies had conditions Iran had to comply with, with regards to its nuclear program.

  43. 43.

    El Caganer

    I wonder if anybody in Washington is delusional enough to think that other countries will follow our lead with these new sanctions on Iran. The concern about Iran’s ballistic missile program was that they would develop missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads. Since they don’t have and apparently aren’t going to have nuclear warheads, who cares about their ballistic missile program? Several of their neighbors already have ballistic missiles (the Israelis have nuclear-tipped ones), and we’re not shitting ourselves about that.

  44. 44.

    Baud

    @El Caganer:

    I don’t know the answer to that question, but according to the excerpt raven quoted at #3, it was a UN resolution that Iran violated.

  45. 45.

    El Caganer

    @Baud: Yes, it was a UN resolution, but that resolution was passed before Iran had agreed not to develop nuclear weapons. I don’t see any benefit in these new sanctions, other than the rather dubious one of being able to say we stuck a finger in Iran’s eye. It seems to me that we’re undercutting our own diplomatic successes.

  47. 47.

    Patricia Kayden

    If Rightwingers hate something, that automatically mean that it is good and sensible. They can go kick rocks. No one cares about their constant outrage that a Black man is in the White House.

  49. 49.

    D58826

    @El Caganer: I suspect that the Iranians knew these were coming and don’t care. I think they are on suppliers and businesses and not directly on Iran. So probably more for show than anything else. Obama has to do a bit of chest thumping.

  51. 51.

    WaterGirl

    @TaMara (BHF): You guys worry too much about stepping on someone else’s post. We are capable of being in two or more threads at once! In fact, that’s when BJ is the most fun.

    Anne Laurie, stop scaring the other front pagers. :-)

  53. 53.

    WaterGirl

    @Baud: “…but warned that all concerns about Iran are not assuaged.”

    Like President Obama is so dumb that he doesn’t know that? Right now we should be really happy about the way things played out with the 4 Americans who have just returned. What’s to be gained by not thanking Iran for doing the right thing and then saying “but we don’t trust you anyway”?

    :: apparently grouchy about Clinton today ::

  54. 54.

    FlyingToaster

    @El Caganer: I’m pretty sure it’s about the whole “we’re allies with the Saudis so stop building missles that can hit them” thang. Once nukes are off the table, the next issue is who is destabilizing the neighborhood more, Iran or Saudi Arabia. Which list used to include Iraq and Syria, and look what’s happened to them.

  57. 57.

    D58826

    ouch two different football games. first half Panthers 31-0. second half so far seahawks 21-0. They switch uniforms at the half??

  58. 58.

    jackmac

    Has Rafael “Carpet Bomb ‘Em Back to the Stone Age” Cruz ever served a day in any military service — U.S. or Canadian?

  59. 59.

    NorthLeft12

    Funny, the CBC website had a story about Pres. Obama “boasting” about what he was able to accomplish with Iran without a war. A little odd wording I thought, but you know what? I agree with Ali [I think] who said, “It’s not bragging if you can do it.”

    Thank Dog that the US had a President with intelligence, confidence, and self-control in charge at this time. I can barely imagine the shitshow that would have occurred under any of the idiot Republican candidates for President.

  60. 60.

    gelfling545

    @WaterGirl: This is a thought I have had. I hate it that one post is deemed “dead” as soon as the next one, possibly on a completely different topic, appears. Most other blogs feature several posts all happily existing at the same time.

  62. 62.

    Cain

    @NorthLeft12:

    Thank Dog that the US had a President with intelligence, confidence, and self-control in charge at this time. I can barely imagine the shitshow that would have occurred under any of the idiot Republican candidates for President.

    Well likely a U.S. with a flaming hole for a money, a scaling back of all social programs if not elimination, and then finally war with as many 4-5 adversaries. At the end, they will then blame democrats even though they hold all branches of government and will also call us spineless traitors and likely will begin a purge to get rid of us all, because you know, you can’t fail conservatism, you can only fail at implementing it, and if we remove all obstacles (e.g. democrats) we will have prosperity for a million years as we all become serfs and love that life, as we work the land for pittance, while having all the guns passed on by our ancestors, but have no money to buy any bullets.

    The End.

Comments are closed.