Iran nuclear deal and the White House credibility gap

  • Thread starter Viligant_Warrior
  • Start date
  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
V

Viligant_Warrior

Guest
#1
There is a clear disconnect between what Obama and SecState Kerry claim about their "Iran deal," and the truth.J ust days after this "deal that isn't a deal yet," it is revealed that Iran is perhaps less than 90 days from completing the work necessary to build a nuke, but Obama wants us to believe he's bought us anywhere from 10-15 years.

Obama says Iran time to build nuke could drop after 13 years

WASHINGTON (AP) — Iran could be able to obtain a nuclear weapon much more quickly after the first 13 years of the emerging nuclear deal, President Barack Obama acknowledged Tuesday. Yet he said that with no deal, the world would be even less equipped to stop it.

"Essentially, we're purchasing for 13, 14, 15 years assurances that the breakout is at least a year," Obama said in an NPR News interview. "And then in years 13 and 14, it is possible that those breakout times would have been much shorter. But at that point we have much better ideas about what it is that their program involves.

Breakout time refers to how long it would take to build a bomb if Iran decided to pursue one full-bore — in other words, how long the rest of the world would have to stop it. U.S. intelligence officials estimate Iran's breakout time is currently two to three months.
They're two to three months now from acquiring a nuclear weapon, but the agreement is for them to be kept at least a year from that point?? How are they going to manage that? Do they honestly think Iran is going to back down off their research and development that drastically? As Cal Thomas said yesterday, believing that makes us April fools.

Cal Thomas Commentary: Iran nuclear deal and the White House credibility gap

Too bad the “framework” of a nuclear weapons deal with Iran didn’t come four days earlier on April Fools’ Day. It would have been more appropriate.

The United States is being asked to foolishly believe promises by a regime that is religiously motivated to eliminate Israel and ultimately the United States, is the premier sponsor of terrorism in the world, has a record of breaking promises, including past promises about nuclear weapons, and still holds American prisoners, including a Christian minister (Pastor Saeed Abedini), a Washington Post reporter, a former Marine and Robert Levinson, a retired DEA agent taken hostage in 2007.
Not only have Obama and Kerry completely ignored the plights of Pastor Abedini, Post reporter Jason Rezaian, former Marine Amir Hekmati, and Levinson, they have repeatedly acquiesced to Iran's demands in exchange for getting a deal -- any deal, regardless of how bad.

Between 2008 and 2012, as cited in Atlantic Monthly, Obama stated publicly over twenty times that under his watch, Iran would never get a nuclear weapon. The last three years, Obama has taken an obviously different tack. He is either clueless about Iran -- highly unlikely -- or he is completely unconcerned about Iran acquiring a nuke.

Either way, his approach to Iran is frightening.
 
Last edited:
K

kennethcadwell

Guest
#2
First I would like to ask what source are you basing your understanding that Iran could have a nuclear weapon in less then 90 days???

A few including Netanyahu have been saying a few months to a couple years back since Bill Clinton was president, and here we are many years later without them having one.

Second this is pretty much refuted by Iran that any deal will be done, as they just came out yesterday and today and said no deal will get signed unless all sanctions are lifted. That is not going to happen unless they follow the guidelines of the deal first, but they want the restrictions lifted first so it is still a stale mate no matter what is being said.


Third it was reported this morning that Iran has just moved some of their war ships of the coast of Yemen, so the conflict is headed to the final end time destruction scene of places God says will face judgment in the OT prophecies for the end times.........


Iran deploys warships off Yemen’s coast - Yemen conflict a fault line in Iran-Saudi rivalry - Kuwait Times | Kuwait Times
 
V

Viligant_Warrior

Guest
#3
First I would like to ask what source are you basing your understanding that Iran could have a nuclear weapon in less then 90 days???
It is linked in the post.

A few including Netanyahu have been saying a few months to a couple years back since Bill Clinton was president, and here we are many years later without them having one.
Only because Clinton and Bush 43 hammered them with sanctions that have severely slowed them in acquiring the outside sources for technology and materials necessary to complete their project. Obama has been of little hindrance to them.

Second this is pretty much refuted by Iran that any deal will be done, as they just came out yesterday and today and said no deal will get signed unless all sanctions are lifted.
Which gives them a clear path to a nuke. I don't know how this "negates" anything. It in fact speeds up their process.

That is not going to happen unless they follow the guidelines of the deal first, but they want the restrictions lifted first so it is still a stale mate no matter what is being said.
It won't be a stalemate. Without an agreement, Iran feels free to proceed as they've intended all along.

Third it was reported this morning that Iran has just moved some of their war ships of the coast of Yemen, so the conflict is headed to the final end time destruction scene of places God says will face judgment in the OT prophecies for the end times.........
Glad you brought that up, because my OP was getting too long to go into the details of Iran's refusal to sign an agreement without the world lifting the sanctions, or the conflict in Yemen. Both are necessary to how the final scenarios play out toward the revelation of antichrist.

Islam will not be destroyed any time soon. In fact, as it is quite likely antichrist arises out of Islam, from that portion of the world that was formerly the old Roman Empire, Islam will appear to prevail over much of the Old World, just not over Israel.
 
K

kennethcadwell

Guest
#4
It is linked in the post.

Only because Clinton and Bush 43 hammered them with sanctions that have severely slowed them in acquiring the outside sources for technology and materials necessary to complete their project. Obama has been of little hindrance to them.

Which gives them a clear path to a nuke. I don't know how this "negates" anything. It in fact speeds up their process.

It won't be a stalemate. Without an agreement, Iran feels free to proceed as they've intended all along.

Glad you brought that up, because my OP was getting too long to go into the details of Iran's refusal to sign an agreement without the world lifting the sanctions, or the conflict in Yemen. Both are necessary to how the final scenarios play out toward the revelation of antichrist.

Islam will not be destroyed any time soon. In fact, as it is quite likely antichrist arises out of Islam, from that portion of the world that was formerly the old Roman Empire, Islam will appear to prevail over much of the Old World, just not over Israel.

That clear path to an nuke is what people are saying about the deal Kerry has in place with Iran, yet that deal does not lift the sanctions immediately as Iran wants done. Therefore the deal is not agreed on as has been reported because sanctions are not going to be lifted right away.
The deal has sanctions being removed over time based on if they keep with the deal, which is not what Iran wants.
So it is a stalemate and will lead to war because no deal will get done and Iran will proceed with making nuclear weapons which will cause Israel and the U.S. both to come against them.

Yes I know Islam will not be destroyed anytime soon because it will be the system that follows the man of sin (antichrist) because the bible in the OT prophesies show the places associated. The place that I have been saying along that we need to keep an eye out on is Turkey, as there are many prophecies that point to that country including Revelation.
Revelation 2:13, 13:2 show that satan's seat/throne is in Turkey and the man of sin is given his seat/throne.

There is also one thing I have noticed when it comes to scripture when they collaborate with each other, as God's Word works in unison. Look at both the numbers in those scriptures for satan's seat, as they 13 and 2 are just reversed.
 
V

Viligant_Warrior

Guest
#5
That clear path to an nuke is what people are saying about the deal Kerry has in place with Iran, yet that deal does not lift the sanctions immediately as Iran wants done.
Which is meaningless if Iran won't sign a deal that doesn't lift the sanctions immediately. Do you suppose Iran is going to sit quietly, not touching their nuclear program -- something you can be absolutely assured they are not doing now -- while new talks are scheduled?
 
K

kennethcadwell

Guest
#6
Which is meaningless if Iran won't sign a deal that doesn't lift the sanctions immediately. Do you suppose Iran is going to sit quietly, not touching their nuclear program -- something you can be absolutely assured they are not doing now -- while new talks are scheduled?

All I am saying is that I would be happy if we had on the spot inspectors keeping an eye on their production then just sitting back and not placing inspectors over there and just keeping sanctions on them. If no deal gets done that would be just as bad if not worse then at least trying to get the previous deal on the table in place which I do not believe will get done. Because you have Iran on one hand wanting the sanctions lifted immediately, then you have congress on the other hand who many members said they would fight the deal and want more sanctions put in place.

Even Netanyahu said he was in favor of a deal but just wanted a better deal then the one that is on the table now.
I even saw Netanyahu on an interview he did yesterday, and once again he restated how Israel and the U.S. still have a strong relationship and he and Obama have a good standing with each other.

He was asked by the reporter if he trusted Obama, and he said that he did they just have this one misunderstanding with this deal on Iran. So all these reports that Obama and Netanyahu do not get along and have severed ties is false, as Netanyahu stated he had a good over an hour long conversation with Obama just the other day.
 
3

3Scoreand10

Guest
#7
All I am saying is that I would be happy if we had on the spot inspectors keeping an eye on their production then just sitting back and not placing inspectors over there and just keeping sanctions on them. If no deal gets done that would be just as bad if not worse then at least trying to get the previous deal on the table in place which I do not believe will get done. Because you have Iran on one hand wanting the sanctions lifted immediately, then you have congress on the other hand who many members said they would fight the deal and want more sanctions put in place.

Even Netanyahu said he was in favor of a deal but just wanted a better deal then the one that is on the table now.
I even saw Netanyahu on an interview he did yesterday, and once again he restated how Israel and the U.S. still have a strong relationship and he and Obama have a good standing with each other.

He was asked by the reporter if he trusted Obama, and he said that he did they just have this one misunderstanding with this deal on Iran. So all these reports that Obama and Netanyahu do not get along and have severed ties is false, as Netanyahu stated he had a good over an hour long conversation with Obama just the other day.
What Netanyaha said is only polical speak. He is to smart to trust Obama.
The only people who really trust Obama are fools.
 
V

Viligant_Warrior

Guest
#8
All I am saying is that I would be happy if we had on the spot inspectors keeping an eye on their production then just sitting back and not placing inspectors over there and just keeping sanctions on them.
I'd be happy with inspectors on-site too. Ain't gonna happen with Khamenei, who is the real power in Iran.

If no deal gets done that would be just as bad if not worse then at least trying to get the previous deal on the table in place which I do not believe will get done.
Vehemently disagree. No deal is better than a bad deal, because a bad deal endorses Iran's actions, even if the European powers and the U.S. want to claim it does not. Any deal that delays Iran's acquisition of a nuke deal is a tacit acknowledgement that they are eventually going to get it. Better much, much later than 90 days from now. The problem is, we have no guarantees either way. Iran will sign any deal and still intentionally proceed toward building a nuke.

Because you have Iran on one hand wanting the sanctions lifted immediately, then you have congress on the other hand who many members said they would fight the deal and want more sanctions put in place.
That's exactly what needs to happen. Iran will not honor any deal regardless of what piece of paper they sign.

Even Netanyahu said he was in favor of a deal ...
Netanyahu said he was more in favor of no deal than a bad deal.

... but just wanted a better deal then the one that is on the table now.
There is no "deal on the table now." There is a deal to make a deal, and it is a bad one, regardless.

I even saw Netanyahu on an interview he did yesterday, and once again he restated how Israel and the U.S. still have a strong relationship and he and Obama have a good standing with each other.
He's talking to Republicans and the next president, not Obama, who has abandoned Israel.

He was asked by the reporter if he trusted Obama ...
Mmmm, not quite. He said he "trusts Obama is doing what he thinks is best for the U.S., which doesn't even mean what he's doing is actually best for the U.S.

... and he said that he did they just have this one misunderstanding with this deal on Iran.
That is the entire basis for the relationship between Israel and the U.S. -- Israel's security. It isn't just "this one misunderstanding", it is a misunderstanding of the past 67 years of history between the U.S. and Israel.

So all these reports that Obama and Netanyahu do not get along and have severed ties is false, as Netanyahu stated he had a good over an hour long conversation with Obama just the other day.
[/quote]Netanyahu won't be inviting Obama to the next grandchild's bar mitzvah and he certainly won't be trusting any farther than he can throw him. Obama worked feverishly to get Netanyahu defeated -- fortunately, it didn't work. The issues betweent hem are irreparable, because Obama doesn't believe in Israel's right to exist.