Type to search

Any Fool Can Start A War With Iran

Featured Post Memo Pad Middle East Top News

Any Fool Can Start A War With Iran

Share

Right now, it’s beginning to look as if President Obama will end up deserving the Nobel Peace Prize he so prematurely received in 2009.

Perhaps you recall how, during the 2008 Democratic primary campaign, Obama’s opponents treated his expressed willingness to speak with the leaders of unfriendly countries such as Cuba and Iran as a sign of immaturity.

“Irresponsible and frankly naïve,” was how Hillary Clinton put it.

Joe Biden said it was important for an inexperienced president not to get played by crafty foreigners.

Obama was unrepentant. “The notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment to them—which has been the guiding diplomatic principle of [the Bush] administration,” he said, “is ridiculous.”

And so it was. Only ridiculous people talk that way now. With hindsight, it’s become clear that Obama wasn’t simply repudiating the GOP’s melodramatic “Axis of Evil” worldview, but expressing his own considerable self-regard.

Also his confidence in America as he sees it through his unique personal history as a kind of inside-outsider, capable of being more than ordinarily objective about our place in the world. When you’re the most powerful economic and military power on Earth, he keeps saying with regard to the Iran deal, it’s important to act like it: strong, calm, and confident. Able to take risks for peace because your strength is so overwhelming.

President Obama told the New York Times’ Thomas Friedman that if Ronald Reagan could reach verifiable arms agreements with the Soviet Union, a country that posed “a far greater existential threat to us than Iran will ever be,” then dealing with the Iranians is “a risk we have to take. It is a practical, common-sense position.”

As we saw in 2003, any damn fool can start a Middle Eastern war. And while hardly anybody in the United States wants one, even Iranian hardliners should have no doubt who would win such a conflict.

“Why should the Iranians be afraid of us?” Friedman asked.

“Because we could knock out their military in speed and dispatch if we chose to,” Obama said.

That’s the same reason Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu (and his allies in the U.S. Congress) need to cool it with the Chicken Little rhetoric. Obama thinks it’s “highly unlikely that you are going to see Iran launch a direct attack, state to state, against any of our allies in the region. They know that that would give us the rationale to go in full-bore, and as I said, we could knock out most of their military capacity pretty quickly.”

Of course Netanyahu knows that perfectly well. But here’s the kind of thinking that he and his allies on the evangelical right really object to:

“Even with your adversaries,” Obama said, “I do think that you have to have the capacity to put yourself occasionally in their shoes, and if you look at Iranian history, the fact is that we had some involvement with overthrowing a democratically elected regime in Iran. We had in the past supported Saddam Hussein when we know he used chemical weapons in the war between Iran and Iraq, and so…they have their own…narrative.”

Demonizing Iran serves Netanyahu’s short-term political purposes. Ditto Republican presidential candidates. But Obama has a wider audience and a longer view in mind. Much of what he said was directed over the heads of his domestic audience. Besides, GOP war talk makes it easier for Democrats to support Obama.

“Iran will be and should be a regional power,” he told Friedman. “They are a big country and a sophisticated country in the region. They don’t need to invite the hostility and the opposition of their neighbors by their behavior. It’s not necessary for them to be great to denigrate Israel or threaten Israel or engage in Holocaust denial or anti-Semitic activity. Now that’s what I would say to the Iranian people.”

He also focused upon the common enemy:

“Nobody has an interest in seeing [the Islamic State] control huge swaths of territory between Damascus and Baghdad,” Obama said. “That’s not good for Iran.”

Indeed not. More than the Turks, more than Saudi Arabia, more than anybody but the Kurds, Iranian forces are fighting ISIS on several fronts.

The president’s words were grudgingly noted in Tehran. In his own carefully crafted speech expressing guarded blessings for the arms control agreement, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei assured hardliners that he hadn’t gone soft on America.

However, he also alluded to Obama’s conciliatory remarks.

“He mentioned two or three points, but did not confess to tens of others,” Khamenei complained.

Which is how conversations begin.

This deal isn’t the end. But it’s an excellent beginning—of what, remains to be seen. Iran has essentially purchased anti-invasion insurance, while the U.S. and its allies have bought relative stability in the Persian Gulf.

Could things go wrong? Things can always go wrong.

But there’s always time to start a war.

Photo: U.S. President Barack Obama speaks during a news conference about the recent nuclear deal reached with Iran, in the East Room of the White House in Washington July 15, 2015.   REUTERS/Joshua Roberts 

Tags:
Gene Lyons

Gene Lyons is a political columnist and author. Lyons writes a column for the Arkansas Times that is nationally syndicated by United Media. He was previously a general editor at Newsweek as wells an associate editor at Texas Monthly where he won a National Magazine Award in 1980. He contributes to Salon.com and has written for such magazines as Harper's, The New York Times Magazine, The New York Review of Books, Entertainment Weekly, Washington Monthly, The Nation, Esquire, and Slate. A graduate of Rutgers University with a Ph.D. in English from the University of Virginia, Lyons taught at the Universities of Massachusetts, Arkansas and Texas before becoming a full-time writer in 1976. A native of New Jersey, Lyons has lived in Arkansas with his wife Diane since 1972. The Lyons live on a cattle farm near Houston, Ark., with a half-dozen dogs, several cats, three horses, and a growing herd of Fleckvieh Simmental cows. Lyons has written several books including The Higher Illiteracy (University of Arkansas, 1988), Widow's Web (Simon & Schuster, 1993), Fools for Scandal (Franklin Square, 1996) as well as The Hunting Of The President: The 10 Year Campaign to Destroy Bill and Hillary Clinton, which he co-authored with National Memo Editor-in-Chief Joe Conason.

  • 1

83 Comments

  1. duif100 July 22, 2015

    Any fool Can Start A War With Iran but it takes a criminal mind to give nuclear weapons to Iran!

    Reply
    1. FireBaron July 22, 2015

      So, I guess that makes the Russian Federation and People’s Republic of China fools, as they have been supporting Iran’s nuclear development program for decades.

      1. duif100 July 22, 2015

        Depends which side you are on.
        The two you mention are not USA supporters and by my definition are criminal minds!.

        1. FireBaron July 22, 2015

          What? You mean our biggest trading partner is NOT one of our supporters? Why, I am shocked, shocked I say!

          1. duif100 July 22, 2015

            If you are shocked that can only be because you are misinformed or ignorant!

          2. plc97477 July 22, 2015

            Project much?

          3. TheSkalawag929 July 23, 2015

            Yes. All the time.

          4. ham hock July 22, 2015

            You are one of the biggest idiots ive ever seen. You have yet to state anything other than regurgitated conservative conspiracies. Just shut up before you look even more retarded.

          5. duif100 July 22, 2015

            You have never seen me!
            The burden of informing biased liberals is unreasonably high but someone has to try to save the poor souls!

          6. TheSkalawag929 July 23, 2015

            The burden you bear is trying to convince Liberals that the BS you’re trying to peddle isn’t BS. Your main problem with that is that FACTS and TRUTH are not on your side. They tend to have a liberal bias.

        2. TheSkalawag929 July 22, 2015

          So, in your mind, because Russia and China are not “USA supporters” they should not be considered of a criminal mind for supporting Iran’s nuclear endeavors?

          1. duif100 July 22, 2015

            Learn to read first!
            It is obvious that your reading comprehension is below third grade level!

          2. TheSkalawag929 July 22, 2015

            Obviously your reasons for being on this thread are to be a troll and to unambiguously show everyone here how big a fool you are and that you have no idea about that which you write.

    2. TheSkalawag929 July 22, 2015

      Who, pray tell, are you accusing of giving Iran nuclear weapons?

      1. Eleanore Whitaker July 22, 2015

        That would be Reagan who handed over arms to IranContras knowing they were involved in a terrorist attack on a DC street that killed two people. The GOP has wanted sanctions on Iran’s oil supply to prevent oil prices from dropping.

        1. duif100 July 22, 2015

          If Reagan gave nuclear weapons to Iran, they would have been a nuclear power before North Korea.
          What kind of idiot are you?

          1. TheSkalawag929 July 22, 2015

            She didn’t say anything about nuclear weapons which makes asking you YOUR question more appropriate.

          2. duif100 July 22, 2015

            She responded to YOUR question:Who, pray tell, are you accusing of giving Iran nuclear weapons?
            So yes she was also talking about nuclear weapons.
            Don’t you read the nonsense you spit out?

          3. TheSkalawag929 July 22, 2015

            You see a lot of things that aren’t there. She was responding more to you than my question.
            You don’t comprehend much of what you read. That’s why you are wrong so much of the time.

          4. Eleanore Whitaker July 22, 2015

            The arms that Reagan provided to Iran, listed than as a terrorist country by his own State Dept. were long missiles, not nukes.

            And, from 1986 to 1990, the US licensed companies to export $600 million worth of advanced technology and materials used by Iraq to make mustard gas. This was found by a Senate investigation in 1994. This incorporates the time frame of the Reagan and Bush ’41 presidencies.

          5. charleo1 July 22, 2015

            You are working/harping on a false premise. Get some facts. For example: You do know who put the first nuclear reactor in Iran? Eisenhower. And you do realize the military option with respect to Iran was essentially taken off the table, when a Shea Government was installed in Bagdad. And we were unwilling to spend the money necessary to commit as many as 500,000 troops for an indefinite period of years, to control the sectarian violence that spread throughout the Country, post invasion. If you fail to acknowledge these facts, then you have no alternative reality base solutions, but what we have. Which is not as you describe anyway. Else, why would our staunchest allies have also signed the agreement? What we risk is isolating ourselves, while Iran carries on as usual.

          6. duif100 July 22, 2015

            All I can see is a maneuver by Obama to delay Iran a little, so that he cannot be blamed for Iran becoming a nuclear power while he was in office for an absolute guarantee to make Iran a nuclear power a few years later.

          7. Eleanore Whitaker July 22, 2015

            All you see two-bit twisted turd is how much you hate Obama. He isn’t delaying anything. He knows the US can’t afford to support your befrigged state which relies on the rest of the country for support. Get of the welfare track asshat.

          8. duif100 July 22, 2015

            That was a very informative, well articulated response as only can be construed by idiotic, liberal followers of Obama who cannot think for themselves.
            Just for your info: Unlike you, I have never collected any welfare!

          9. browninghipower July 23, 2015

            Why is it that morons of your ilk always resort to to impugning a liberal who rightly att

          10. duif100 July 23, 2015

            Who rightly does what?

          11. Eleanore Whitaker July 23, 2015

            Right Wing Asshat Translation: “I am wrong. I’m not man enough to admit it when I’m wrong. So, let’s just pretend I’m always right.”

            True right wing dipshit…you just prove it every time you post.

          12. duif100 July 23, 2015

            I have been trying to respond in kind to your vitriolic ramblings and although i speak 4 languages, I cannot find the words to match your hate for other people, especially the ones who disagree with you.

          13. charleo1 July 22, 2015

            I’ll put to you this way. Given that there are no perfect answers
            to this. Only bad ones, and terrible ones like the military option. That would involve thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands being killed, millions more displaced, and trillions more being borrowed to fund it. If you were Obama, and your only concern was your legacy. Would you rather people blame you for that, or
            Iran going nuclear? When we think of George W. Bush, do we think of N. Korea going nuclear, or the invasion he launched to prevent WMDs in Iraq that didn’t exist? And again, I point out those five other Countries, China and Russia among them, that also signed, and back the deal. Do we suppose they too are concerned about Obama’s legacy? Sometimes I think our domestic politics have become so corrosive, so paralyzing, and so utterly self destructive. That we can’t get out of our own way to do even the most obvious things, clearly in in our own, and the World’s best interests. Or, avoid that war some seem so hell bent on prosecuting. That, #1, we would fight by mostly, if not entirely by ourselves. That #2, China might finance for the right interest rate. And war that would primarily serve the best interests of the oil rich, and religiously fanatic Sunnis of Saudi Arabia. Furthermore having the effect of insuring ISSL. prevails in Syria, neighbor to Egypt, overlooking Israel at the Golan Heights, advances to Bagdad in Iraq, threatens Jordan at it’s border. And perhaps with the U.S. bogged down, and Europe basically saying, we told you so. They get that little Islamic Caliphate they’re so hot to create.

          14. Eleanore Whitaker July 22, 2015

            What kind of asshat are you think you don’t know Reagan and Bush ’41 were involved in IranContraGate? First of all, I didn’t post that they were “nuclear” weapons…Don’t you dipshits of the right EVER read?

            From the book by author Joe Conason, “Big Lies,” (who by the way is a National Memo contributor),:

            “The most notorious example is the Iran-Contra scandal, first exposed in 1986. At the center of that bizarre episode in conservative statesmanship was a scheme to sell high-tech missiles to the theocratic dictatorship governing Iran–in exchange for that government’s assistance in obtaining the release of American hostages by their kidnappers, the Iranian-controlled, Hezbollah terrorists in Lebanon.

            Approved by President Ronald Reagan and his national security staff, this lunatic plan clearly violated US laws prohibiting arms sales to Iran, one of several nations officially listed by the State Department as a sponsor of terrorism.”

            Got that dipshit? Ronald Reagan approved the sames of arms to a country they knew was listed by the State Dept. as a terrorist nation. And further, Iraq was not listed by the State Dept. as a terror sponsor between 1982 and 1989. Richard Perle’s 1987 warning against the US alliance with Saddam Hussein, include that Iraq protected terrorists Abu Nidal and Abu Abbas.

            Next time, shut your pie hole…You’re just another “ignernt” with a big mouth and no brains.

          15. duif100 July 22, 2015

            Learn to read before responding idiot.
            The question you responded to was about nuclear weapons.
            Conventional weapons had nothing to do with the issue.
            Do you irrelevant rantings and ravings somewhere else.
            Is your ex-husband going to apologize for you again?
            Poor man!

          16. Eleanore Whitaker July 22, 2015

            Listen you obnoxious sand flea…the thread is entitled, “Any Fool Can Start a War With Iran.” I know you think being obnoxious puff out your testicles…but it only proves what a pathetic loser you are.

            Show me where in the title of that thread it mentions “nukes? You bag of feces. I’m a woman…not a man. Which you’d know is your befrigged parents had not screwed up your hateful little brain.

            Get help…I provided evidence I can prove…You provided BS that your Big Daddy taught you when you were learning how to be an obnoxious, useless turd.

          17. TheSkalawag929 July 23, 2015

            Speaking of North Korea, why weren’t you republicans all up in arms when Kim Jong-un was ACTUALLY working to build a bomb. And after North Korea developed nuclear weapons capablity you sit quietly in the corner on your hands. No gumption to take on a REAL threat. You conservatives like to make up stuff to fight against.

      2. duif100 July 22, 2015

        Obama and Kerry!

        1. TheSkalawag929 July 22, 2015

          You’re saying that by preventing Iran from being able to enrich fissile material, shutting down the majority of their centrifuges and being able to inspect suspected sites that President Obama and Secretary of State Kerry are giving Iran nuclear weapons.
          I have to ask you to explain your reasoning.
          How did you come to that conclusion? Or are you just repeating stupid stuff you heard?

          1. duif100 July 22, 2015

            Iran is allowed to continue to enrich nuclear material.
            Iran does not have to shut down a single centrifuge.
            Iran does not have to allow inspections and if they do, there is no American representation on the inspection teams.
            Any more stupid questions?

          2. TheSkalawag929 July 22, 2015

            Yes Iran can continue to enrich uranium but not to weapons grade. And you are wrong on every other point.

          3. duif100 July 22, 2015

            That is why they are allowed the newer more efficient centrifuges?

          4. TheSkalawag929 July 23, 2015

            After 10 years.

          5. TheSkalawag929 July 23, 2015

            I have noticed that you conservatives are afraid of just about everything, whatever frightens you you want to summarily kill it without trying to understand and you conservatives are chicken hawks who love to send other people’s children to war.

          6. yabbed July 22, 2015

            That is total nonsense. Iran cannot enrich to weapons grade material and Iran will be under IAEA inspections. Let’s put Israel’s rogue nuclear program under inspection next.

    3. Carolyn1520 July 22, 2015

      Who is giving Iran nuclear weapons?

    4. Sand_Cat July 22, 2015

      Idiot.

  2. FT66 July 22, 2015

    My hat off to my friends good thinkers the Norwegians who decided to give Pres. Obama the Nobel Peace Prize well in advance. It has worked out, though conservatives as they are everywhere, with much noises, costed the leader of the Committee his job. Hello, Siv Jensen, you were quite wrong as always and Tor Bjørn Jagland was extremely quite right.

    Reply
  3. yabbed July 22, 2015

    It is so refreshing and promising to have a rational, intelligent adult in the Oval Office. No more war. We are tired of war. We are tired of being lured by falseness into Middle East wars on behalf of Israel that devastate our financial well being and kill and maim our military members. Diplomacy is always better than war and negotiation should always be the first option. We have no reason to wish war with Iran. They are the most stable country in the region and they offer the potential of being our strongest and most reliable ally in the Middle East. I praise our President for achieving this agreement with the other 5 world powers.

    Reply
    1. FireBaron July 22, 2015

      Ah, but all the Republicans with their draft deferments and no military experience would be more than glad to reconcile this situation and put our service members in the same harm’s way that they refused to do themselves.

      1. yabbed July 22, 2015

        It’s the chest thumpers way of solving issues without resorting to diplomacy. No one who has ever been in ground combat wants to live with that experience again. Mandatory military service would shut these warmongers down in a hurray.

    2. Dominick Vila July 22, 2015

      The most perplexing part of the ongoing debate about the effectiveness of the nuclear weapons development agreement reached with Iran, is that Republicans refer to the homeland of the 9/11 terrorists as our Allies! With friends like the Saudis, who needs enemies?

    3. kenndeb July 22, 2015

      And also with the Emperor Americans have fewer rights and freedoms and procedures and laws are of no consequence to our Tyrant

      1. geraldhoey July 22, 2015

        Kenndeb, are you still trolling here on National Memo? It’s been awhile since I’ve seen one of your teabagger comments here.

        1. Eleanore Whitaker July 23, 2015

          kennyboydebby girl is really Annie Coulter in drag. Permenopause isn’t kind to the middle aged like kennyboydebbygirl.

      2. Eleanore Whitaker July 22, 2015

        And the bigot Boy/Girl transgender is flying the Stars and Bars like Dylan Roof did…and probably with the same result. You haters really need professional help. You hate yourselves so that you have to look around for someone, anyone else to hate rather than admit your own self-loathing…roflmao

        1. kenndeb July 23, 2015

          I see the Jersey catlady is still spouting your liberal hate. I thought you supported LGT rights. Apparently it isn’t on the regimes agenda today. Not an original thought between the lot of you.

          1. Eleanore Whitaker July 23, 2015

            I see you are still looking for attention? I see your right wing BS is still reeking and polluting our country. I see that you are a regime unto yourself like all ratbags of the right.

            Most of us have original thoughts that are always wasted on the brainless right wing clowns who need help changing their Pampers …take the hint hater boy/girl.

      3. Sand_Cat July 22, 2015

        What SPECIFIC “rights and freedoms” do we have fewer of?

        1. neeceoooo July 23, 2015

          I notice that you never did get a response to the questions but name calling

          1. Sand_Cat July 23, 2015

            I hope that doesn’t surprise you, though it looks like he’s talking to Eleanore.
            Unlikely I’d have gotten a coherent response, anyway.

          2. neeceoooo July 23, 2015

            so true

  4. Eleanore Whitaker July 22, 2015

    Unless you understand the GOP motives behind their Iran sanctions, you miss the back room agenda for War with Iran. Since the Nixon CIA nosed around in Iran in their government business, there was a method to everything related to the GOP and Iran. It’s impossible to overlook the Bush Oil interests and that of Texas in Middle East oil. However, the Saudis have been Bush bosom buddies since Daddy Bush was in the CIA.

    The reality is that OPEC and US Big Oil were sidling up to each other to reduce Iran’s position as No. 2 in world supply of oil. Keeping sanctions on Iran was done solely for US Big Oil to keep US oil profits coming.

    Now, OPEC is refusing to reduce oil production and their prices and with Iran sanctions removed the US oil prices will nose dive with 2 major middle eastern oil countries both holding the reins of power.

    Don’t be fooled that the Iran sanctions EVER had anything to do with protecting Israel. In reality, Israel needs to expand their land mass. The proof of this is how Netanyahu allowed the bulldozing of hundreds of Palestinian homes in the West Bank to make additional housing available for Israelis.

    Wouldn’t Israel love to add a whole lot more land as spoils of war from Iran as they did with Lebanon? And, it would certainly be a feather in their US allies cap to access Iran’s No. 2 in the world, supply of oil.

    Reply
    1. duif100 July 22, 2015

      Obama has insured that when war with Iran breaks out, it will be nuclear war.
      It must be easier to kill our soldiers with nuclear weapons compared to conventional weapons. That must be more effective than the current rules of engagement!

      1. FireBaron July 22, 2015

        You mean the war the Republicans will try to drag us into in order to support Israel’s attack on Iranian nuclear facilities?

        1. duif100 July 22, 2015

          That is how Obama planned the destruction of Israel.
          Create a war between Israel and Iran AFTER Iran has been armed to the level that they can destroy Israel!

          1. Sand_Cat July 22, 2015

            Thanks for sharing your delusions. We’ll all know how much credibility your next post has[n’t] without having our intelligence insulted by reading it.

      2. Dominick Vila July 22, 2015

        You should try to familiarize yourself with the issues you discuss before posting opinions. Here are the highlights of the nuclear weapons development agreement reached with Iran:

        Remove two-thirds of installed centrifuges and store them under international supervision

        Get rid of 98% of its enriched uranium

        Accept that sanctions would be rapidly restored if the deal was violated

        Permanently give the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) access “where necessary when necessary”

        Sanctions relief will be gradual, with an arms
        embargo remaining in place for five years and an embargo on missiles for
        eight years.

        Not even Netanyahu, nor Republicans in Congress, are making claims such as the ones you have posted. Their concerns include the fact that lifting sanctions may provide Iran with additional revenue to fund Shia organizations fighting those sponsored by Sunni Saudi Arabia. Interestingly, we consider Saudi Arabia, the homeland of the 9/11 planners, financiers, and the terrorists that attacked our allies, and Iran, a country that has not threatened us, and that is willing to re-establish relations with us, our enemy. Go figure!

        1. Karen Bille-Golden July 22, 2015

          You know Dominick, of course, people don’t need or want facts that get in the way of defending their unrealistic, unintelligent, clung to positions.
          Reaching for a higher ground isn’t their strong suit.

        2. InformedVoter July 22, 2015

          You are wrong about inspections. The US has no right to make any inspections!

          1. bobnstuff July 22, 2015

            Only as part of the UN. We are still a member.

          2. InformedVoter July 24, 2015

            Bob, yes the US is part of the UN, BUT the agreement excludes US participation on the inspection process.

      3. Bill Quigley July 22, 2015

        What a bunch of nonsense. The deal with Iran is to just the opposite of what you have suggested. Iran has the expertise and resources to continue on the path of building nuclear armaments UNLESS we negotiate a settlement to stop them. Think back 30 years or more when Pakistan started building nuclear weapons and we failed to act to prevent it. Go back and read the article more carefully to see why Iran has many more reasons to not trust The USA than for The USA not to trust them. Oil, oil and oil are the reasons The REPUBS are pushing for a war with Iran. Anything to keep the price of oil up and make money for their primary supporters and we the consumers will pay through higher energy prices. Some people will do anything for a buck including making war.

      4. drdroad July 22, 2015

        Baloney. You must not read, just utter!

  5. FT66 July 22, 2015

    Any Fool Can Start The War With Iran!!!. Gosh, are you not aware? The so-called Gov. of Wisconsin has promised to do this first day in the White House, even before learning first how doors operate there.

    Reply
    1. yabbed July 22, 2015

      And that is only one of the reasons that governor will never be President.

  6. Karen Bille-Golden July 22, 2015

    Great article. Like some of the posters here, I lived through the cold war and can remember the drills in grade school when we were marched to the basement, lined up along the walls in a sitting position and taught to cover our heads. I applaud a President willing to seek peaceful solutions. Like the article says, we can always go to war., or we can do the more noble thing,, work toward peaceful solutions. When it comes to Middle Eastern affairs, in the past we have shown ourselves to be our own worst enemy. .

    Reply
  7. Aaron_of_Portsmouth July 22, 2015

    Yes, any fool can start a war, and the “Howdy Doody’s” of the Extreme Right are forever itching to pull the trigger. (And those on the Left who feel similarly inclined do so simply to garner votes). What a pathetic lot on both sides.

    Pragmatism, level-headed thinking, carefully-reasoned responses—these are all mysterious and utterly foreign concepts to those who constantly have a ring of foamy spittle around their mouths. (The Donald currently holds the record, but a host of scurvy knaves are seeking to dethrone him. Someone needs to call “Animal Control” before they do further damage).

    Reply
    1. Dominick Vila July 22, 2015

      The only positive thing I can say about Donald is that he has exposed the ineptitude of most Republican politicians…and they don’t like it!

  8. greenlantern1 July 22, 2015

    Among the holders, of the Nobel Peace Prize, was President Teddy Roosevelt!
    BULLY!!

    Reply
  9. stsintl July 22, 2015

    Only one word describes the motivation of Republican Party war mongers- “ISROIL”

    Reply
  10. yabbed July 22, 2015

    Now is the time to insist that Israel subject to IAEA inspections of their nuclear facilities.

    Reply
  11. lena.cabrale July 22, 2015
    Reply
  12. idamag July 22, 2015

    Any fool can. And those fools who want perpetual wars are not leading the troops on the front line. Wars cost money. Wars cost lives. Wars are the resort of the belligerent. We should only go to war when we are attacked. I am sure much of the world sees us as warmongers and war criminals as it is.

    Reply
  13. InformedVoter July 22, 2015

    Is this story a joke? The leaders of Iran & Hizballah in Lebanon are saying “the agreement will allow us to continue to develop nuclear weapons”. So all the agreement will do is delay when Israel attacks Iran.

    Reply
  14. Adp3d July 23, 2015

    President Obama, given his youth and foreign policy credentials, has the potential to be one of this century’s great statesmen.

    Reply
  15. 2ThinkN_Do2 July 23, 2015

    Any fool can start a war . . . but it takes a special one to be taken advantage of by a nation that despises your nation.

    Reply

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.