Now House writes Iran letter to Obama on Iran

a reply to: xuenchen

I think Iran should be made to use only oil and natural gas for their electric generators.

Why? There is no evidence that that want to use their nuclear program for anything but peaceful purposes. Besides they signed the NPT and have a right to use nuclear energy if they want.

a reply to: buster2010

Nuclear energy is proven dangerous to Humans.

Even Germany says so.

If that power station in Japan had been using oil and gas, we wouldn't be contaminated now would we.

Iran is contributing to Human extinction.

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: buster2010

Nuclear energy is proven dangerous to Humans.

Even Germany says so.

If that power station in Japan had been using oil and gas, we wouldn't be contaminated now would we.

Iran is contributing to Human extinction.

So why doesn't America get rid of their nuclear program? If we are so hot and heavy about the dangerous nuclear energy then why not place sanctions on these nations that have illegal nuclear programs and don't allow inspections of them? At least Iran's program will be monitored. Are Iran's plants built on a fault zone like Japan's was?

Glad someone has some balls and takes a stand.....297 to 1....seems like a consensus to me !

Writing to Obama is the proper way to go, not Iran, that was tactless.

a reply to: buster2010

Iran, monitored, good joke.

If Iran was about safe nuclear energy they would be looking into Thorium, which can only be used for peaceful purposes.

That's a thoughtful comment on ATS?,,,on anywhere?

If keyboards had needles in the letters, you may not be here on ATS. But I'm a diabetic, so the sun burns hot.

There, does that satisfy your intellectual "insert Big word and commas here"?

a reply to: xuenchen

originally posted by: DuckforcoveR

There, does that satisfy your intellectual "insert Big word and commas here"?

No.

Not satisfied.

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
a reply to: xuenchen

Is it just me or does it seem that there are a lot of opposing issues converging that can only be defended by hypocritical rhetoric . co2 climate change, clean energy, national sovereignty , and probably others ? He is american right ? He is the president right ? He is the guy that makes these decisions ,the decider right ? what is the problem ?

So the president in your eyes has total control........The president has little power according to the constitution. Thankfully for the PTB many people have little clue what the core values of this countries founding are.



I just want to add the US is not a democracy.

This is nearly two weeks old.

It lists the senators concerns over what is to be negotiated with Iran.

foreignaffairs.house.gov...

This is not a reaction to or any way connected to "Tehran" Tom Cotton's letter that was sent directly to Iran. The "Examiner" is remiss in their headline, making it appear that the House letter is a reaction to the Senate letter, or that the House letter followed the Senate letter.

Personally I see no problem with the House letter, and it is the proper way to handle concerns of US foreign policy - keep it internal. Cotton made a gross error in judgement by sending his letter directly to a foreign leader urging him to abandon negotiations.

No star, no flag, because again, the title "Now House writes a letter" is misleading.

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

shh, don't tell the other guys, but the usa had the eagle before the nazis. hehe

a reply to: xuenchen

Iran is a sovereign country.

What right does the U.S. of arrogant A have to dictate to another country there energy policy.

Telling them they should only use gas and coal while you sit in America with nuclear power if hypocritical

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: xuenchen

Iran is a sovereign country.

What right does the U.S. of arrogant A have to dictate to another country there energy policy.

Telling them they should only use gas and coal while you sit in America with nuclear power if hypocritical

North Korea is a sovereign country.

ISIS certainly wants to be a sovereign country.

Is being a "sovereign country" the stopping point for any intervention?

Should we just sit back and wait until a country uses a nuclear device and millions die before we do something?

Just curious, mind you. Neither one of us is a world leader, and in my humble opinion, the US is working to allow Iran a nuke in any case.

a reply to: beezzer

Should we just sit back and wait until a country uses a nuclear device and millions die before we do something?

You just keep repeating the "they are trying to build the bomb" propaganda don't you? Every intelligence agency including the Mossad says they are not trying to build a bomb. So why are you willing to believe the lie Israel's warmongering PM keeps telling? He has told nothing but lies to America to get what he wants like when he lied to America to get the Iraq war started. So how many Americans do you want to die for Israel? Because if a war breaks out between America and Iran you can sure bet Israel will be nowhere near the fighting just like in Iraq. They are nothing but cowards that can only fight women and children.

Just curious, mind you. Neither one of us is a world leader, and in my humble opinion, the US is working to allow Iran a nuke in any case.

No America is not working to allow Iran a nuke because that would violate the NPT. You really should stop listening to Benny and start paying attention to the real world.

a reply to: buster2010

So you are right and I am wrong.

Didn't realize that you were from Iran (though that would explain a lot).

What proof do you have that Iran has no desire to build a nuclear weapon?

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: xuenchen

Iran is a sovereign country.

What right does the U.S. of arrogant A have to dictate to another country there energy policy.

Telling them they should only use gas and coal while you sit in America with nuclear power if hypocritical

North Korea is a sovereign country.

ISIS certainly wants to be a sovereign country.

Is being a "sovereign country" the stopping point for any intervention?

Should we just sit back and wait until a country uses a nuclear device and millions die before we do something?

Just curious, mind you. Neither one of us is a world leader, and in my humble opinion, the US is working to allow Iran a nuke in any case.

Yes being a sovereign country should mean not being interfered with from the outside.

Unless Iran clearly break international law and actually make a nuke they should be left be.

Why should the USA get to run its own affairs but not Iran?

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: buster2010

So you are right and I am wrong.

Didn't realize that you were from Iran (though that would explain a lot).

What proof do you have that Iran has no desire to build a nuclear weapon?

And what proof do you have that they do?

Are the USA to start wars and bomb people on scetchy limited half cocked intelligiance ?

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: xuenchen

Iran is a sovereign country.

What right does the U.S. of arrogant A have to dictate to another country there energy policy.

Telling them they should only use gas and coal while you sit in America with nuclear power if hypocritical

North Korea is a sovereign country.

ISIS certainly wants to be a sovereign country.

Is being a "sovereign country" the stopping point for any intervention?

Should we just sit back and wait until a country uses a nuclear device and millions die before we do something?

Just curious, mind you. Neither one of us is a world leader, and in my humble opinion, the US is working to allow Iran a nuke in any case.

Yes being a sovereign country should mean not being interfered with from the out .

Unless Iran clearly break international law and actually make a nuke they should be left be.

Why should the USA get to run its own affairs but not Iran?

So is making a nuke a bad thing or is USING the nuke a bad thing?

Should everyone have nukes?

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: buster2010

So you are right and I am wrong.

Didn't realize that you were from Iran (though that would explain a lot).

What proof do you have that Iran has no desire to build a nuclear weapon?

And what proof do you have that they do?

Are the USA to start wars and bomb people on scetchy limited half cocked intelligiance ?

I have just as much proof that they are, as you do that they aren't.

So, should we just sit back and wait until millions die before doing something?

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: buster2010

So you are right and I am wrong.

Didn't realize that you were from Iran (though that would explain a lot).

What proof do you have that Iran has no desire to build a nuclear weapon?

What proof do you have that they are trying to build them? Oh yeah that's right you have none just Benny's word for it.

Ten Reasons Iran Doesn't Want the Bomb

Ayatollah Khamenei’s religious edict or fatwa, the use of nuclear weapons and all other types of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) is forbidden or haram—constituting a sin, while being useless, costly, harmful and a serious threat to humanity. Iran’s authorities were informed about this religious view in 1995, eight years prior to Iran’s enrichment program became known to the West