Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
and then

Bibi to US Congress: Iran Cheats

18 posts in this topic

http://www.timesofisrael.com/israel-will-seek-to-discredit-obama-on-iran/?utm_source=The+Times+of+Israel+Daily+Edition&utm_campaign=f297475b99-2013_12_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_adb46cec92-f297475b99-54430521

I'll say one thing for him, he's a fighter. Bibi has told the Mossad and the IDF intel types to find proof of Iranian subterfuge and infractions to the as yet not implemented "deal" in Geneva. A deal that the two sides cannot agree they agreed upon :unsure2:

Said evidence to be produced before a congress that is basically on the side of Israel - in a bipartisan way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Bibi has told the Mossad and the IDF intel types to find proof of Iranian subterfuge"

Well, heavens, I shouldn't have thought that'd be too difficult. Whether there is any or not, I'm sure they'd have no difficulty finding some. :whistle:

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Bibi has told the Mossad and the IDF intel types to find proof of Iranian subterfuge"

Well, heavens, I shouldn't have thought that'd be too difficult. Whether there is any or not, I'm sure they'd have no difficulty finding some. :whistle:

Well, they do say necessity is the mother of invention! :innocent:

Edited by Leonardo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Said evidence to be produced before a congress that is basically on the side of Israel - in a bipartisan way."

Looks like the conclusion has already been made, regardless of what the actual truth of the matter is. I thought intelligence gathering was supposed to be about evidence. Asking police to find proof that a particular person is guilty of something is bad police work and bad justice(which is to say, no justice at all). Asking medical scientists to find proof that a certain drug is the most effective is bad medicine and bad science. Why is the intelligence gathering community exempt? And what if they don't find anything? Do you really think Mossad is going to come back empty handed when given an order from their boss?

And does it bother you at all, AndThen, that Netanyahu has essentially ordered his intelligence agency to undermine democracy in your own country? Or that he opposes an act of peace that would lift sanctions on 76 million Iranians?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Said evidence to be produced before a congress that is basically on the side of Israel - in a bipartisan way."

Looks like the conclusion has already been made, regardless of what the actual truth of the matter is. I thought intelligence gathering was supposed to be about evidence. Asking police to find proof that a particular person is guilty of something is bad police work and bad justice(which is to say, no justice at all). Asking medical scientists to find proof that a certain drug is the most effective is bad medicine and bad science. Why is the intelligence gathering community exempt? And what if they don't find anything? Do you really think Mossad is going to come back empty handed when given an order from their boss?

And does it bother you at all, AndThen, that Netanyahu has essentially ordered his intelligence agency to undermine democracy in your own country? Or that he opposes an act of peace that would lift sanctions on 76 million Iranians?

That is the point Almagest. To actually find EVIDENCE. Of course to those who blindly follow Iran, licking the fingers of the mullahs, NO proof would ever be enough. But this is a political chess match between Oby and Bibi. The congress wants to be convinced PUBLICLY with evidence they can point to when they insist on new sanctions. It seems a reasonable strategy - and far better for Israel than simply launching aircraft to delay the assembly of a nuke.

The Iranians are disputing key aspects of what the agreement is that they made days ago. Sad thing is that in THIS aspect I trust their version more than my own government. I have NO doubt Obama's team will lie about crucial details of any plan they want to push along without public disapproval. They think we are all stupid.

Not asking the police to do ANYTHING is worse no? As to Netanyahu subverting democracy - when did providing evidence of a broken agreement do anyone a harm? Or is it your contention that it is impossible that Iran could be playing the west as fools here? Impossible? Netanyahu is attempting to stop the creation of a weapon system in a country that REGULARLY alludes in poetic or vague language to a desire to see the Zionist state GONE. He believes fervently that his nation faces an existential threat from a rabid government of religious radicals bent on bringing the world to the edge of an abyss so that their Mahdi will come again. It makes no difference if either of us accept their version of eschatology - the point is these leaders DO. And they will have the keys. If he sees the last play in this game as using these 6 months (whenever the clock actually starts ticking on it) to stop them with diplomacy before starting a regional conflagration then I applaud his patience and hope he can twist my president's arm to the breaking point to avert that war as long as possible.

Edited by and then

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is the point Almagest. To actually find EVIDENCE. Of course to those who blindly follow Iran, licking the fingers of the mullahs, NO proof would ever be enough. But this is a political chess match between Oby and Bibi. The congress wants to be convinced PUBLICLY with evidence they can point to when they insist on new sanctions. It seems a reasonable strategy - and far better for Israel than simply launching aircraft to delay the assembly of a nuke.

The Iranians are disputing key aspects of what the agreement is that they made days ago. Sad thing is that in THIS aspect I trust their version more than my own government. I have NO doubt Obama's team will lie about crucial details of any plan they want to push along without public disapproval. They think we are all stupid.

I agree with what joc stated in another thread, that this is a chess match between the Obama and Putin. Netanyahu is just clamouring to be part of the action. It seems to me in his mind a strike on Iran is a foregone conclusion. If the weapons inspectors returned with a completely spotless report, it would do nothing to stop Netanyahu's sabre rattling. He has already said he will act alone if he has to. He won't be satisfied until there is nothing left of Iran to threaten Israel, until the next perceived existential threat emerges. If sanctions actually worked wouldn't we have witnessed their collapse by now? The fact is sanctions do nothing but harm the Iranian people. When the entire world has conspired to keep them in suffering they are less likely to focus their anger on the theocrats who turned a fairly modern kingdom into one of the worst dictatorships of the twenty-first century, and more likely to focus it on the West, or the UN. We owe it to those people to exhaust every avenue of peace. Netanyahu doesn't even seem to want to give peace a chance in this situation. The treaty hasn't even been finalised and he's seeking means to overturn it.

And how can you possibly say that Obama and the Iranians lie, but Netanyahu doesn't? He's a politician, isn't he? I must be missing the element that exempts him from a politicians favourite pastime.

Not asking the police to do ANYTHING is worse no?

Funnily enough the song Hurricane by Bob Dylan was playing as I read your post. You're asking would a miscarriage of justice be better than no justice at all. Frankly, I don't know. This is a higher up, the man who holds the coin purse essentially, telling you to bring him proof of something. Would you return to him empty handed?

As to Netanyahu subverting democracy - when did providing evidence of a broken agreement do anyone a harm? Or is it your contention that it is impossible that Iran could be playing the west as fools here? Impossible? Netanyahu is attempting to stop the creation of a weapon system in a country that REGULARLY alludes in poetic or vague language to a desire to see the Zionist state GONE.

Iran could easily be deceiving us all. But as I said, why is any other nation exempt from deception? Obama has left so many lies and broken promises in his wake it's difficult to decide quite where to rank him in terms of presidential duplicity. Is Netanyahu any better?

Yet as bad as their rhetoric and behaviour towards Israel has been, it's been so much worse towards the Sunnis. This is a government that has fostered insurgencies in every war zone around them in order to kill Sunni Muslims. Khomenei engaged in a brutal and pointless war with Iraq that lasted a decade. I think a nuclear armed Iran is more of a threat to their Islamic neighbours than Israel. Just look at Saudi Arabia's recent pursuit of a nuclear deterrent. Any remotely rational person would recognise that a nuclear attack against Israel would result in the complete annihilation of Iran. The international community would get behind Israel at the drop of a hat.

He believes fervently that his nation faces an existential threat from a rabid government of religious radicals bent on bringing the world to the edge of an abyss so that their Mahdi will come again. It makes no difference if either of us accept their version of eschatology - the point is these leaders DO. And they will have the keys. If he sees the last play in this game as using these 6 months (whenever the clock actually starts ticking on it) to stop them with diplomacy before starting a regional conflagration then I applaud his patience and hope he can twist my president's arm to the breaking point to avert that war as long as possible.

But doesn't such a conflict feature in your own Christian eschatology, that you've espoused many times on these forums? You've made quite a few allusions to Damascus being destroyed overnight. There are end-times fanatics in Iran, Israel and the United States. Their influence being completely removed from the scenario would make things so much easier to deal with. Frankly I find all kinds of eschatology absolutely reprehensible. I love the world, (most of) the people in it, and I'd like for it to carry on as long as possible. I've developed quite an interest in Persia lately, and I feel strongly for the people forced to live under this regime. Nothing would sadden me more than seeing war erupt in the region, nuclear or otherwise.

To me the ideal solution would be this - pursue peace with their government while doing what we can to empower the people to cast it off. If foreign powers were to invade they'd see it as an insult to their national sovereignty and would be more likely to embolden the people against Israel. Remember that foreign intervention in their affairs was one of the reasons they had the Revolution in the first place. Who is to say taking out the Ayatollahs and causing great havoc in the nation won't set up another violent and oppressive dictatorship twenty or fifty years down the road?

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Bibi has told the Mossad and the IDF intel types to find proof of Iranian subterfuge"

Well, heavens, I shouldn't have thought that'd be too difficult. Whether there is any or not, I'm sure they'd have no difficulty finding some. :whistle:

Mossad I am sure are very adept in the Manufacturing department.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chess matches between bureaucrats should not determine relationships in the world.

Sarkozy to Obama: "Netanyahu is a liar."

It goes from there,

I shouldn't care

what "Bibi" says.

Obama is a known liar. Israel owns the Congress, but the bipartisan Congress 95% full of liars all singing out of the same hymn book when it comes to Israel are running out of time to keep their big dupe afloat. Meanwhile there's a chess match between two liars. Taking such a dishonest spectacle seriously is a waste of time; it's great lunch meat for the red and blue partisans to monger over though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with what joc stated in another thread, that this is a chess match between the Obama and Putin. Netanyahu is just clamouring to be part of the action. It seems to me in his mind a strike on Iran is a foregone conclusion. If the weapons inspectors returned with a completely spotless report, it would do nothing to stop Netanyahu's sabre rattling. He has already said he will act alone if he has to. He won't be satisfied until there is nothing left of Iran to threaten Israel, until the next perceived existential threat emerges. If sanctions actually worked wouldn't we have witnessed their collapse by now? The fact is sanctions do nothing but harm the Iranian people. When the entire world has conspired to keep them in suffering they are less likely to focus their anger on the theocrats who turned a fairly modern kingdom into one of the worst dictatorships of the twenty-first century, and more likely to focus it on the West, or the UN. We owe it to those people to exhaust every avenue of peace. Netanyahu doesn't even seem to want to give peace a chance in this situation. The treaty hasn't even been finalised and he's seeking means to overturn it.

And how can you possibly say that Obama and the Iranians lie, but Netanyahu doesn't? He's a politician, isn't he? I must be missing the element that exempts him from a politicians favourite pastime.

Funnily enough the song Hurricane by Bob Dylan was playing as I read your post. You're asking would a miscarriage of justice be better than no justice at all. Frankly, I don't know. This is a higher up, the man who holds the coin purse essentially, telling you to bring him proof of something. Would you return to him empty handed?

Iran could easily be deceiving us all. But as I said, why is any other nation exempt from deception? Obama has left so many lies and broken promises in his wake it's difficult to decide quite where to rank him in terms of presidential duplicity. Is Netanyahu any better?

Yet as bad as their rhetoric and behaviour towards Israel has been, it's been so much worse towards the Sunnis. This is a government that has fostered insurgencies in every war zone around them in order to kill Sunni Muslims. Khomenei engaged in a brutal and pointless war with Iraq that lasted a decade. I think a nuclear armed Iran is more of a threat to their Islamic neighbours than Israel. Just look at Saudi Arabia's recent pursuit of a nuclear deterrent. Any remotely rational person would recognise that a nuclear attack against Israel would result in the complete annihilation of Iran. The international community would get behind Israel at the drop of a hat.

But doesn't such a conflict feature in your own Christian eschatology, that you've espoused many times on these forums? You've made quite a few allusions to Damascus being destroyed overnight. There are end-times fanatics in Iran, Israel and the United States. Their influence being completely removed from the scenario would make things so much easier to deal with. Frankly I find all kinds of eschatology absolutely reprehensible. I love the world, (most of) the people in it, and I'd like for it to carry on as long as possible. I've developed quite an interest in Persia lately, and I feel strongly for the people forced to live under this regime. Nothing would sadden me more than seeing war erupt in the region, nuclear or otherwise.

To me the ideal solution would be this - pursue peace with their government while doing what we can to empower the people to cast it off. If foreign powers were to invade they'd see it as an insult to their national sovereignty and would be more likely to embolden the people against Israel. Remember that foreign intervention in their affairs was one of the reasons they had the Revolution in the first place. Who is to say taking out the Ayatollahs and causing great havoc in the nation won't set up another violent and oppressive dictatorship twenty or fifty years down the road?

I have no doubt that Bibi is quite capable of lying. He IS a politician. And according to my eschatological view of the end times I really have not seen where Israel will ever be destroyed by a nuke. In fact, neither is Iran though when they come against Israel along with a confederation of nations (possibly including Russia) they will be sorely chastened. Of all the forces who attack only about 1 in 6 return home. And Israel is said to be totally alone in that conflict except for their reliance on God.

My issue with the thought of an Iranian bomb becoming a reality is actually more about the damage it might do to my own country. America, for all our military might is very vulnerable to asymmetric attack by EMP. We could be ended as a world power with just a couple of high bursting nukes. Of course we would destroy utterly the group or country that did it - provided we could even Identify them, but at that point I wouldn't want to slaughter millions for revenge. Frankly, America is due a judgement unless we turn from the way we are acting as a country. I do not hate Muslims in general OR especially the Persian people. They were once great friends of our's until Islam of the most virulent nature took hold there. I also do not wish for what is coming on the world. I am no ghoul sitting awake nights praying for mass death and suffering. The difference is that I actually believe what scripture says and in so doing I have to tell whoever will listen what is coming. What they do with the knowledge is up to them. You mention that you love the world. I guess what you mean is that you love life. The world is a battered, broken hellish place for most of it's inhabitants. We in the west are the only ones who basically have escaped that fate that so many share here in this existence and even we are miserable for the most part. Love is the answer but too many are unwilling to let go the hate and it WILL be ended at some point simply because it cannot continue and we survive as a species.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chess matches between bureaucrats should not determine relationships in the world.

Sarkozy to Obama: "Netanyahu is a liar."

It goes from there,

I shouldn't care

what "Bibi" says.

Obama is a known liar. Israel owns the Congress, but the bipartisan Congress 95% full of liars all singing out of the same hymn book when it comes to Israel are running out of time to keep their big dupe afloat. Meanwhile there's a chess match between two liars. Taking such a dishonest spectacle seriously is a waste of time; it's great lunch meat for the red and blue partisans to monger over though.

Chess matches between bureaucrats should not determine relationships in the world.

Sarkozy to Obama: "Netanyahu is a liar."

It goes from there,

I shouldn't care

what "Bibi" says.

Obama is a known liar. Israel owns the Congress, but the bipartisan Congress 95% full of liars all singing out of the same hymn book when it comes to Israel are running out of time to keep their big dupe afloat. Meanwhile there's a chess match between two liars. Taking such a dishonest spectacle seriously is a waste of time; it's great lunch meat for the red and blue partisans to monger over though.

blah, blah, blah - and when Israel finally HAS to act those who think as you do will simply add one more thing to the list to hate them for. The difference THEN will be that Iran has to basically begin again with their work. That seems to be worth the hundreds, possibly thousands of lives it will cost to achieve. You believe (I guess) fervently that Israel is wrong and is illegitimate as a state. Join a very large club. THEY however seem willing to light up the whole world if they are to be burned again. A rational person might want to find a way to avoid such a thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

blah, blah, blah - and when Israel finally HAS to act those who think as you do will simply add one more thing to the list to hate them for. The difference THEN will be that Iran has to basically begin again with their work. That seems to be worth the hundreds, possibly thousands of lives it will cost to achieve. You believe (I guess) fervently that Israel is wrong and is illegitimate as a state. Join a very large club. THEY however seem willing to light up the whole world if they are to be burned again. A rational person might want to find a way to avoid such a thing.

I simply suggest neutrality in this chess game of liars, and this is the response I get.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

blah, blah, blah - and when Israel finally HAS to act those who think as you do will simply add one more thing to the list to hate them for. The difference THEN will be that Iran has to basically begin again with their work. That seems to be worth the hundreds, possibly thousands of lives it will cost to achieve. You believe (I guess) fervently that Israel is wrong and is illegitimate as a state. Join a very large club. THEY however seem willing to light up the whole world if they are to be burned again. A rational person might want to find a way to avoid such a thing.

The rational person might wonder who is the most dangerous one in this scenario; and perhaps a rational person might conclude that it was the one that was willing to take the whole world down with them. They seem to be the ones that see things in this fire & brimstone apocalyptic fashion. They seem to be the ones that constantly believe that they're facing an existential threat. A rational person might try very hard to find ways to keep this unpredictable and potentially dangerous nation under control somehow. And in that respect, perhaps America's military and economic alliances with Israel are useful, in keeping Israel's fear and insecurity under restraint to some degree at least.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The rational person might wonder who is the most dangerous one in this scenario; and perhaps a rational person might conclude that it was the one that was willing to take the whole world down with them. They seem to be the ones that see things in this fire & brimstone apocalyptic fashion. They seem to be the ones that constantly believe that they're facing an existential threat. A rational person might try very hard to find ways to keep this unpredictable and potentially dangerous nation under control somehow. And in that respect, perhaps America's military and economic alliances with Israel are useful, in keeping Israel's fear and insecurity under restraint to some degree at least.

The US HAS been doing this for about 35 years. You can minimize the threat to them if you like but it makes that threat no less real. Did it ever occur to you that if their neighbors would simply sit down with them, sign an agreement (and honor it) that plainly stated that YES Israel has the right to be recognized as a state of Jewish character within "these" (whatever they decide on) boundaries, that all this madness might finally end? That is one no one here ever is willing to really address. WHAT is so difficult about allowing these people a home that they can depend on? One that is not in constant jeopardy of attack and destruction because of hatred? They live in a guarded camp and keep a clamp on the Palestinians because the Palestinians OPENLY call for their destruction, teach their children Jews are sub human and worthy of death and attack them randomly at every opportunity. What is so hard about this solution Colonel? Why not just accept them (the Jews) as neighbors and finally live next to them without trying to kill them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've no argument against either Israel or the Jews or anyone else. It just seems to me that Israel, by adopting this fire and brimstone "mess with us and you'll face biblical retribution" approach, might not be its own best friend here, and in fact this approach may be their own worst enemy. What they, or perhaps what the argument put forward in this thread, seems to be threatening is that if Israel did consider that it faced an existential threat, then they could take the whole world down with them. This could easily be seen as at best hollow bluster, and at worst could provoke someone into considering that it's imperative to take out this threat to the survival of the world before it can carry out its threats. Therefore this approach could actually be counter-productive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've no argument against either Israel or the Jews or anyone else. It just seems to me that Israel, by adopting this fire and brimstone "mess with us and you'll face biblical retribution" approach, might not be its own best friend here, and in fact this approach may be their own worst enemy. What they, or perhaps what the argument put forward in this thread, seems to be threatening is that if Israel did consider that it faced an existential threat, then they could take the whole world down with them. This could easily be seen as at best hollow bluster, and at worst could provoke someone into considering that it's imperative to take out this threat to the survival of the world before it can carry out its threats. Therefore this approach could actually be counter-productive.

I agree in part. It certainly isn't apt to win any friends. But the world has a way of pushing Jews out - over and over. Taking their possessions, blaming them for all the ills of the countries they resided in and about 65 years ago actually trying to END them in Europe. Israel does not bluster and threaten others with their weapons. They simply make it known that if they aren't threatened all will be well. If they are they will fight - every time. And before they will allow themselves and their children to be annihilated they will exact a price on all those responsible for allowing such an injustice to happen. There is nothing radical or even unfair in that. They are human beings and have a right to life the same as any other tribe, group or nation on this planet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's not forget this either:

Arms Sale: Israel's Link to the Khomeini Regime

By Bishara Bahbah

As the Iranian drama rapidly unfolds, Israel's leaders are seeking to play down the centrality of their role by stating that Israel sold all of the arms, including American-manufactured weaponry, to the Khomeini regime with US knowledge and permission. Whether or not that is the case, Israel's arms sales to the Khomeini regime, Israel's avowed enemy, date back to 1979, the year Israel's close friend and ally, the Shah of Iran, was dethroned.

Arms Sales to the Shah and Khomeini

In the time of the late Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, Israel was one of Iran's principal arms suppliers, riding the crest of the Shah's military expansion program. Iran bought about $500 million per year in arms from Israel at that time. Israeli ties to the Shah extended well beyond arms sales, however, and included an ambitious $1 billion project to develop jointly a surface-to-surface missile capable of carrying a nuclear warhead. Close cooperation also existed between the intelligence services of the two countries. Moreover, Iran was one of the very few countries publicly willing to sell oil to Israel, since other producers in the area were reluctant to defy the Arab oil boycott.

The Israeli press has reported that the cancellation of arms sales agreements to Iran as a result of the internal turmoil that accompanied the fall of the Shah cost Israel some $225 million in 1978 and a similar amount in 1979. In fact, some Israeli arms manufacturers had to lay off thousands of workers "because of the Iran revolution."

Only months later, however, a new and somewhat secretive relationship began to emerge between the Khomeini regime and the Israeli government. The Israelis were interested in restoring an important market for their arms industry, and in the fate of Iran's 50,000 Jews. To do so they sought to maintain ties with whatever Iranian military contacts had survived the massive purges by Khomeini's revolutionary guards. An arms agreement was negotiated in Paris between Israeli Deputy Defense Minister Mordechai Zipori and representatives of the Ayatollah Khomeini. Ironically, the agreement was signed in early 1980, soon after the execution of an Iranian Jewish leader accused of spying for Israel. It provided Iran with a large selection of Israeli arms at market prices, and Iranian Jews a guarantee of protection and free departure.

MORE...

Edited by GoSC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's not forget this either:

Arms Sale: Israel's Link to the Khomeini Regime

By Bishara Bahbah

As the Iranian drama rapidly unfolds, Israel's leaders are seeking to play down the centrality of their role by stating that Israel sold all of the arms, including American-manufactured weaponry, to the Khomeini regime with US knowledge and permission. Whether or not that is the case, Israel's arms sales to the Khomeini regime, Israel's avowed enemy, date back to 1979, the year Israel's close friend and ally, the Shah of Iran, was dethroned.

Arms Sales to the Shah and Khomeini

In the time of the late Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, Israel was one of Iran's principal arms suppliers, riding the crest of the Shah's military expansion program. Iran bought about $500 million per year in arms from Israel at that time. Israeli ties to the Shah extended well beyond arms sales, however, and included an ambitious $1 billion project to develop jointly a surface-to-surface missile capable of carrying a nuclear warhead. Close cooperation also existed between the intelligence services of the two countries. Moreover, Iran was one of the very few countries publicly willing to sell oil to Israel, since other producers in the area were reluctant to defy the Arab oil boycott.

The Israeli press has reported that the cancellation of arms sales agreements to Iran as a result of the internal turmoil that accompanied the fall of the Shah cost Israel some $225 million in 1978 and a similar amount in 1979. In fact, some Israeli arms manufacturers had to lay off thousands of workers "because of the Iran revolution."

Only months later, however, a new and somewhat secretive relationship began to emerge between the Khomeini regime and the Israeli government. The Israelis were interested in restoring an important market for their arms industry, and in the fate of Iran's 50,000 Jews. To do so they sought to maintain ties with whatever Iranian military contacts had survived the massive purges by Khomeini's revolutionary guards. An arms agreement was negotiated in Paris between Israeli Deputy Defense Minister Mordechai Zipori and representatives of the Ayatollah Khomeini. Ironically, the agreement was signed in early 1980, soon after the execution of an Iranian Jewish leader accused of spying for Israel. It provided Iran with a large selection of Israeli arms at market prices, and Iranian Jews a guarantee of protection and free departure.

MORE...

Indeed, and don't forget the whole Iran-Contra business, which is still pretty opaque, or at best translucent, but basically involved the US persuading Israel to sell arms to the Revolutionary Guard, and Israel would then give the money they were paid by Iran to the US who'd give it to the Contras in Nicaragua. :blush: Principles took second place to the all-important task of preventing the Commies taking over the world. :innocent:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These nuke talks with Iran is a joke.they want Iran to keep there nukes

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.