Tolken

It really stings Obama (because it is true) that he is the greatest supplier of funds to a terrorist network (Iran) than anyone of all time. I would hope that everyone realizes that this money is frozen assets belonging to Iran...the tone makes it sound like Obama is issuing taxpayer money for Iran.

shiloh357 - The way the Iranians are only increasing their defiant attitude toward the US... Justifiably so, is that not true?

"...Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei on Saturday vowing to defy American policies in the region despite a deal with world powers over Tehran's nuclear program..." Doesn't seem to have anything to do with the nuclear deal...just with the America, which one can understand. It really is simple as concerns the nuclear deal they defy or violate then sanctions are back in place. Also, consider our relationship with China 50 years ago...and even after Nixon.

Shiloh357 - Israel has addressed the Palestinian issue. Yes they have, Netanyahu - No Palestinian state on my watch!

shiloh357 - How much of Iran's conventional weaponry comes from Russia? Iran's weaponry is quite diverse with some from the US, France, China, and Russia. Their military capability to directly attack the US, or even Israel, is not at all formidable. For the most part "We will trample on America" is simply rhetoric, the belief is that the US and Israel will simply politically rot...Israel because they won't address the Palestinian issue. (and now would be the perfect time )

shiloh357 - The more I read about this "deal" the worse it gets. Depends on what one chooses to read. First let us not forget who initiated the nuclear program in Iran, and also many experts have claimed that Iran could have produced nuclear weapon material for years. And let us not distort the facts 24/7 IAEA oversight at nuclear facilities, it is military sites that require notice. Again, many experts claim how virtually impossible it would be to "hide" nuclear endeavors in such a short time frame. It really is difficult to be objective ... and given that the general consensus here is that our administration can't be trusted than why should Iran? or is that IAEA can't be trusted also?

Morning Glory wrote - I've heard all of the above before but, before you go blaming the conditon of the world on the U.S., YOU need to reread history. My points and info were quite specific to the Middle East, please point out to me the information asserted that was factually and historically incorrect? When I criticized my children’s behavior or decision making it was not out of hate...I can criticize the SJC overstepping it’s bounds with both abortion, citizens united, and ss marriage without hating all judiciary. I can support certain of Obama's policies and criticize others... and I don't need to use pejorative labels. oldzimm – haven’t had kool-aid in 50 years...should probably try it again for old time sake. To the point to a degree I do defend some of the particulars with Obama only because it is so very tiring listening to the ill-informed blame most everything on this current administration. shiloh357 wrote - can't really defend Obama so his only recourse is to try to shame former presidents, as if that somehow justifies Obama. I am not going to baited into a such a ridiculous line of argumentation. Yes, I very well am able to defend Obama on particular issues, and you weren’t “baited” you could have responded to the information as opposed to simply name calling Obama. “Trying to shame former presidents” really? My point again and again is that our current situation is the culmination of past ill advised actions so no intent to “shame” simply asserting the facts. I notice that nobody questioned the info by asserting opposing information. It is interesting does anyone actually read other people’s posts? Also, “All Obama wanted was a deal”...you do realize that there were 5 other countries involved, don’t you. In fact somewhere I had read that France was pushing Iran hard on a particular part ... so characterize or mischaracterize it as you want. Further, there are innumerable experts that think it is a good deal, ...and it was to deal with nuclear issues nothing else. I would think Christians would pray and be hopeful that this new direction could work and that over time things might change. And Major Garrett asked a stupid question...the negotiations concerned nuclear restraints, anyone who can’t understand or comprehend that fact, and beyond that this is a possible first step that could resolve other issues such as hostages. So I guess I’m pro-Muslim because I firmly believe it is time we looked to other solutions other than aggression.

oldzimm and shiloh357 – Let me me be very clear as I do not consider Obama a “saint” or a great president, I do however think much of the criticism is simply unwarranted. The specific point is the Nuclear “deal” with Iran, the opposition to this is either through hatred of Obama or simply hatred of Iran...the details and merits of the deal are inconsequential. Most won’t admit to the fact that few will hold an objective view. As to your list oldzimm it can be easily turned around: How many unborn babies did Reagan or either Bush save? (Obviously I’m opposed to abortion but there were more abortions under Reagan, Bush, Clinton, and GW Bush than Obama’s – meaningless but a point nonetheless) Healthcare has been out of control for years and doubling as a percent of GDP (and a continuing higher percent of personal income), so I believe ACA is a great first step and if reasoned non-partisan minds would work together the system could be made better. As for “Fast and Furious” consider this http://fortune.com/2012/06/27/the-truth-about-the-fast-and-furious-scandal/ Yes, WMDs were found, and known about because they were old chemical weapons stores from the 80’s which the UN inspectors knew about all along. It was covered up because a) it didn’t amount to a justification for war/occupation, and b) the weapons were built in collaboration with the US. If one chooses to fact check they will find the Obama administration to be no more “scandal ridden” than previous administrations, which in the overall says much about our dysfunctional government . One should also consider that as shiloh357 and others promote as the appropriate view on economics to be “People don't go into business to make peanuts and if folks don't like what they are getting paid, then go work somewhere else. No one has a gun to their head and telling them to stay.” therefore shiloh357 should give credit to Obama for the all time high wealth and corporate profits...the top 1% is growing exponentially, a good thing. As I have noted time and again we have 50 plus years of failed policy and misguided intervention in the Middle East. Call it “pro-muslim” if you like but I think a worthwhile tact is to pursue diplomatic solutions rather than aggressive reactions. The viewpoint from any side is decidedly skewed. We only view the radicals and terrorists and government rhetoric but the everyday people have little interest in war, hate, confrontation, and really only seek to “live life” in peace. (In Russia even in unbelievably difficult economic times Putin is able to cast the blame elsewhere, promote nationalism, and gain high approval ratings) We are inculcated by our various governments to believe what they want us to believe, unfortunately like sheep - but following the wrong Shepherd. As for our leadership I prefer objective evaluations, and prayer to vitriol. I think from all that I have read it is a good deal, and the alternatives portend much worse outcomes. We either turn the page to a cautious change in policy direction or use the same manual that has led us nowhere.

shiloh357 wrote - We don't have a failed military. We have a leftist and a failure in the White House. Stuff like this is a good example as to why we don't need another socialist, pro-Muslim, pro-gay liberal in charge. Obama didn't support the repressive regime of the Pahlavi, Obama didn't supply the materials for chemical weapons to Iraq to use on Iran, Obama wasn't involved with Iran/Contra, Obama didn't start the Iraq war on false premises and then turn the country to chaos, ...so tell us about the republican failures that started this mess. Tell me too why Iran should have any trust in the United States that supplied the material and supported the use of nerve and toxic gases that took the lives of tens of thousands of Iranians? Of course everyone, mostly repubs, were eager to bomb Syria for using chemical weapons ... such hypocrites. I appreciate the myopia and extreme bias that causes one to neglect history and heap all of the ills domestically and in the world on the current administration but some rational people are capable of a more objective view.

oldzimm -... but we know in the end who the winner is, Jesus the King of kings. Blessings oldzimm..............

oldzimm - Failed military??? If there is a failure in any war we were involved in it would be because politicians thought they knew more about war than the warriors. So true, wasn't that the case with Vietnam. Our involvement in the ME whether by conflict or support of repressive regimes has prompted the chaos we see today. The initial "wars" were a success but in the long term they were decidedly a failure. Our support of repressive regimes gave rise to the extremists first as a local issue but because of the US support there rose strong hatred towards America. The roots of ISIS originated in 2004, and even had the US committed to an endless occupation I doubt things would turn out much different. You so accurately state that the politicians stay out of it ... but their politicians, they know best!

shiloh357 - A reasonable alternative would have been to give them NO nuclear capacity at all and simply turn the sanction screws even harder on them. Yes, and then in all likelihood many countries will simply lift sanctions on their own. They were persuaded to abide by the sanctions as a diplomatic solution was sought...a rejection will have countries lifting sanctions, and "turning the sanction screws" will have the same effect of countries dropping out.

oldzimm - you could say I slept with one eye open. Now you may be thinking Oldzimm you are paranoid and you are right in a way, though I wouldn't call it being paranoid, I call it being cautious. Fair enough, it is also true that Iran has little reason to trust the US. The deal isn't built on trust but verification...again, I should think we would be tired of failed military and at least attempt another approach.

shiloh357 - I am not hoping he is like Chamberlain. He IS just like Chamberlain. Well at least there are a total of 6 Chamberlain's...and I have yet to hear any reasonable alternatives.

shiloh357 wrote - Chamberlain all over again. http://www.jewishjournal.com/opinion/article/why_critics_of_the_iran_deal_should_hope_obama_is_like_neville_chamberlain Onelight wrote - This only pushed the seriousness to another president and off Obama's back. Time will tell how Iran will move on this peaceful mission. Yes, exactly what Presidents have been doing for 50 plus years with their failed Middle East policies. I agree time will tell whether there is any gain from this, but certainly we should realize how military intervention has failed in the past...and miserably.