[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Pelosi says House will vote on Iran resolution this week to restrict Trump’s ability to attack Iran (Page 3 of 5)
|
Quoted: No source, my brother sent me this from a small blog he reads. Supposedly from Daniel Greenfield. But the $1.7 BILLION in cargo-palletloads of physical, printed, cash currency (even the richest South American Drug Kingpins don't keep that much around in cash) would have been another matter. No single bank--even the largest international banks in Zurich, London, or New York--would ever keep that much physical cash laying around, therefore by definition uninvested and not "working," in its vaults. And certainly, no bank could ever, possibly, come up with that much currency to deliver on short notice. I'm sure it took a consortium of the largest banks, and some arm-twisting phone calls from Obama and his Secretary of the Treasury, to find, collect, compile, and deliver that huge mountain of currency in Euros and Swiss Francs, which he bought from them with direct electronic payment in U.S. Dollars taken from our own Treasury, and then converted into Euros and Swiss Francs to evade U.S. law--that is, from us, the citizens and taxpayers of the United States. I hope, at least, that he negotiated a good exchange rate. NO legitimate, innocent, law-abiding individual or company EVER needs anything close to that amount, for lawful purposes, in cash currency. We know, with absolute certainty, that that huge pile wasn't going to roads, schools, hospitals, or widows and orphans. It was going to TERRORISTS, as untraceable cash. Draw your own conclusions about what Obama's (and Kerry's) intentions were in "negotiating" this "deal." |
|
Quoted:
[url=https://nypost.com/2020/01/06/nancy-pelosi-says-house-will-vote-on-iran-resolution-this-week/]Nancy Pelosi says House will vote on Iran resolution this week[/url] The US House of Representatives will vote on a resolution this week to restrict President Donald Trump’s ability to attack Iran, according to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
The War Powers Resolution “reasserts Congress’s long-established oversight responsibilities by mandating that if no further Congressional action is taken, the Administration’s military hostilities with regard to Iran cease within 30 days,” the Democratic Speaker wrote in the letter. If she emboldens Iran with this nonsense and one American dies because of it she needs to go to gitmo for aiding and abetting a terrorist nation. |
|
Quoted:
I called it. I am convinced that the dems to include Obama want Iran to have nuclear weapons and for other ME countries to follow so we can no longer exert our power in the region. And diversity in nuclear weapons proliferation. It's only fair. |
|
the funny part is these are the same people outraged that tump didnt start a war over that drone being shot down and for not going to war in syria over the "gas attacks"
and have done everything to keep us from pulling out of shithole 1&2 we been in for 20 years |
|
Quoted:
It's called equality. And diversity in nuclear weapons proliferation. It's only fair. Quoted:
Quoted:
I called it. I am convinced that the dems to include Obama want Iran to have nuclear weapons and for other ME countries to follow so we can no longer exert our power in the region. And diversity in nuclear weapons proliferation. It's only fair. Luckily they lost in 2016 or that garbage "agreement" would still exist. |
|
Quoted:
If a foreign country killed our vice president who they considered a terrorist would you not consider that an act of war? 8nBAIT Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Attacking Iran would be Neocon stupidity. Don't give a shit who stops it. Fuck the war-mongers and as Ike said: "the military-industrial complex" that puts its "interests" over those of the American people and of our Constitution. 8nBAIT |
|
Quoted:
Wonder if they could do something to try to have him removed from office since he's such a big threat. Like impeachment. I've heard of such things. It's imperative, right? Something we shouldn't delay? Quoted:
Quoted:
He has to be contained. he's off the leash. He can't see the bigger picture. Like impeachment. I've heard of such things. It's imperative, right? Something we shouldn't delay? |
| Someone needs to get right in Nancy Pelosi's face with cameras rolling and ask her "How many Americans will you allow to be killed before we as the most powerful nation on earth say no more? Is it ten at one time, one hundred at one time, is it one thousand at at time. How many dead Americans will it take for you to say that Iran's reign of terror must be answered, it must be stopped. |
|
Quoted:
Neocon stupidity never quits. Also, just in case anyone missed the memo: Their active duty MAJOR GENERAL was on foreign soil of an enemy (IRAQ), engaging in leadership of military activity intending to kill locals and Americans, when he was killed! |
|
Quoted:
Someone needs to get right in Nancy Pelosi's face with cameras rolling and ask her "How many Americans will you allow to be killed before we as the most powerful nation on earth say no more? Is it ten at one time, one hundred at one time, is it one thousand at at time. How many dead Americans will it take for you to say that Iran's reign of terror must be answered, it must be stopped. The Iranians need their blood sacrifices. Historical grievances. She's working to keep those numbers down as low as possible. It's the only civilzed thing to do. We've done so much wrong in the world. Things we must repent for. In blood sacrifices. |
|
Quoted:
Apparently stupidity knows no single ally. To suggest Iran essentially HASN'T been at war with us for the last 40 years, is pretty much stupidity. The shit they have been pulling and the Americans they have been killing, is all warfare. Also, just in case anyone missed the memo: Their active duty MAJOR GENERAL was on foreign soil of an enemy (IRAQ), engaging in leadership of military activity intending to kill locals and Americans, when he was killed! Quoted:
Quoted:
Neocon stupidity never quits. Also, just in case anyone missed the memo: Their active duty MAJOR GENERAL was on foreign soil of an enemy (IRAQ), engaging in leadership of military activity intending to kill locals and Americans, when he was killed! |
|
Quoted:
LOL These people can't decide what they want. Trump tries to leave Syria (part of it anyway) and he's "abandoning our allies." Trump kills a guy who's killing our people and now he's a dangerous warmonger. Involvement means occasionally killing people. Non-involvement means leaving people who were on our side. Can't have it both ways. Truth is, Democrats don't have a problem with war and killing as long as it's their war and killing, and any conversation with them is pointless because they're never negotiating in good faith. |
|
Quoted:
Attacking Iran would be Neocon stupidity. Don't give a shit who stops it. Fuck the war-mongers and as Ike said: "the military-industrial complex" that puts its "interests" over those of the American people and of our Constitution. |
|
Quoted:
@MarsRising A United States embassy (U.S. soil) was attacked by a known entity which is funded and commanded by a nation other than the host nation of said embassy. What would you have our government do about such an attack? You may disagree with our having the embassy there at all, but it does not change the above facts. |
|
Quoted:
the funny part is these are the same people outraged that tump didnt start a war over that drone being shot down and for not going to war in syria over the "gas attacks" and have done everything to keep us from pulling out of shithole 1&2 we been in for 20 years Trump stated: Iran "made a very big mistake" in shooting down a US military surveillance drone over the Strait of Hormuz, President Donald Trump says. However, he told reporters it could have been the result of human error, saying: "I find it hard to believe it was intentional." Iran said the drone had violated Iranian airspace, but the US military denied this. The incident comes amid escalating tension between the two countries. Iran's Foreign Minister Javad Zarif said Iran would take its complaint that the US "encroaches on our territory" to the UN. What we know about Gulf tanker attacks The Iran nuclear crisis in 300 words Profile: Iran's Revolutionary Guards Iran's UN ambassador Majid Takht Ravanchi said the drone was engaged in a clear spying operation in what he called a blatant violation of international law. In a letter to the UN secretary-general and the Security Council, Mr Ravanchi said that while Iran was not seeking war, it reserved the right to to defend its territory against hostile acts. What did Trump say? Speaking at the White House, he called the drone's downing a "new fly in the ointment". Mr Trump said it was "documented" that the unmanned drone had been over international waters and not in Iranian airspace. "I think probably Iran made a mistake - I would imagine it was a general or somebody that made a mistake in shooting that drone down," he said. "It could have been somebody who was loose and stupid," he added. |
|
Quoted:
That’s a very interesting point Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Maybe We should send Iran a plane load of cash. How is that not criminal ? But the $1.7 BILLION in cargo-palletloads of physical, printed, cash currency (even the richest South American Drug Kingpins don't keep that much around in cash) would have been another matter. No single bank--even the largest international banks in Zurich, London, or New York--would ever keep that much physical cash laying around, therefore by definition uninvested and not "working," in its vaults. And certainly, no bank could ever, possibly, come up with that much currency to deliver on short notice. I'm sure it took a consortium of the largest banks, and some arm-twisting phone calls from Obama and his Secretary of the Treasury, to find, collect, compile, and deliver that huge mountain of currency in Euros and Swiss Francs, which he bought from them with direct electronic payment in U.S. Dollars taken from our own Treasury, and then converted into Euros and Swiss Francs to evade U.S. law--that is, from us, the citizens and taxpayers of the United States. I hope, at least, that he negotiated a good exchange rate. NO legitimate, innocent, law-abiding individual or company EVER needs anything close to that amount, for lawful purposes, in cash currency. We know, with absolute certainty, that that huge pile wasn't going to roads, schools, hospitals, or widows and orphans. It was going to TERRORISTS, as untraceable cash. Draw your own conclusions about what Obama's (and Kerry's) intentions were in "negotiating" this "deal." Source: Me. I've dealt with couriers handling hundreds of millions of dollars in cash. |
|
Quoted: You're in the Philippines? Your mom's apron is getting a bit threadbare while the US dicks around with non-contenders in the ME. South China Sea wake up call gramps. Congrats on the new dentures. ?Are you capable of original thought or do you just vomit anti American clichés like a string pulled talking doll? I can smell you lack of education kiddo. No one is keeping you from serving in our great Military, & no one is forcing you to join.But, those who have served have earned the right to call you out. for your failure to man up. So go hide you coward & attempt to justify your cowardice with political double speak As I said there are real men out there who are doing the job you are unfit to do yourself. So keep your canned opinions to yourself & let the soldiers do the job you can not. |
|
If I read the “War Powers Act” correctly......
“The resolution was passed by two-thirds each of the House and Senate, overriding the veto of the bill by President Richard Nixon. It has been alleged that the War Powers Resolution has been violated in the past–for example, by President Bill Clinton in 1999, during the bombing campaign in Kosovo. Congress has disapproved all such incidents, but none has resulted in any successful legal actions being taken against the president for alleged violations.” Does this mean Numb nuts Nancy can pass a resolution in the house but without senate approval it fails ? |
|
Quoted:
If I read the "War Powers Act" correctly...... "The resolution was passed by two-thirds each of the House and Senate, overriding the veto of the bill by President Richard Nixon. It has been alleged that the War Powers Resolution has been violated in the pastfor example, by President Bill Clinton in 1999, during the bombing campaign in Kosovo. Congress has disapproved all such incidents, but none has resulted in any successful legal actions being taken against the president for alleged violations." Does this mean Numb nuts Nancy can pass a resolution in the house but without senate approval it fails ? Congress has two ways to deal with a president who wages war against their approval: the budge and impeachment. The War Powers Act is on its face unconstitutional. |
Not responding the theocracies attacks just asks for a second September 11th, 2001 attack. We've suffered a whole series of Iraq's nonsense for the last 10 or so years and they needed to get their nose bloodied. Like people said in those posts they made here concerned about Obama's 110 missile strike in Libya, and the ones in Yemen that killed 120, and the ones in Somalia ... "the military-industrial complex"  like something out of a 1960's novel.You deal with these rouge states now on their soil or later on ours. Fuck the pansies in the left want nothing to do with actually protecting the US and who would do ANYTHING to make Orange Man look bad. The estrogen soaked girly men want Americans at risk. The soft bleeding heart liberals that run NYC and attempt to run the rest of the nation in a liberal and cowardly way ... the Obama way. They're the ones with their own interests destroying the American Republic. |
|
Quoted:
is GD back to fellating neocons even after 18 constant years of failures?  Quoted:
Quoted:
<- DU is that way, Farhad We have more options than “do absolutely nothing” and “all out war.” There’s nothing “neocon” about limited action to protect your people and assets. |
|
Year, after year, the left mafia was devoring US economic, political and social fabric.
They have been loundering money through relatives and through charities, through strange real-estate transactions, and book/documentary signing deals. They have been protecting wealthy pedophiles, they took bribes from domestic businesses as well as from terrorists, and drug cartels. They have built a shadow law enforcement, judicial and political sytems to support the above activities. No, they do not just 'want to make Trump look back', -- they want to stay out of jail, and they want to continue doing what they were doing before.... They realize that there is an honest police officer in the country now. And they will do anything to destroy him, his family and his supporters. They will plant fake evidence, they will flood court systems with garbage lawsuits to leverage their planted judges, they will take every media channel they can and flood it with gossip, lies and selective outrage. They will try to sabotage public opinion and law enforcement by creating hoaxes, they will plant their saboteurs in every branch of law enforcement at local/state and federal levels. The stakes are really that high, the winners will take it all. Quoted:
The dems will do anything to make Trump look bad, they don't care if they sell out this country and kill Americans. |
|
Quoted:
If a foreign country killed our vice president who they considered a terrorist would you not consider that an act of war? 8nBAIT |
|
Quoted:He has to be contained. he's off the leash. He can't see the bigger picture. 
That thing needs to be re-written because I can't be the only fool that recalls hearing that claim about every Republican president going back decades. |
|
Quoted:
Attacking Iran would be Neocon stupidity. Don't give a shit who stops it. Fuck the war-mongers and as Ike said: "the military-industrial complex" that puts its "interests" over those of the American people and of our Constitution. |
|
Quoted:
The democrat party is an anti-American party. There's NOTHING they stand for that does America any good. Without their direct ownership of the NYC media they'd be gone. They are the party of the weak, the foolish, the gullible, the appeasers ... and need to stay out of the way while men are working less they get hurt. |
|
Quoted: The standard liberal line from their playbook ... I heard it during the Reagan, both Bush administrations, and now during the Trump administration.
That thing needs to be re-written because I can't be the only fool that recalls hearing that claim about every Republican president going back decades. |
| The liberals remember those days with fondness. |
[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Pelosi says House will vote on Iran resolution this week to restrict Trump’s ability to attack Iran (Page 3 of 5)
Join the Community
Your next conversation starts here.
Create your free account to join discussions, share your experience, save topics, and connect with the AR15.COM community.
- Join discussions
- Follow topics and replies
- Connect with fellow enthusiasts
Already a member? Sign in
Stay informed by subscribing to our Newsletter