Michael Ramirez for April 04, 2015

He should do a cartoon of us bombing Iran, killing innocent civilians and getting involved in another Middle East trillion dollar war that will cost thousands of young Americans their lives and tens of thousands of injuries.

Don’t fret, sad conservatives! If you get a guy in there, maybe he can start issuing bellicose banalities and arrange for the inspectors to get kicked out so you can claim the process isn’t working and send a few thousand more of our kids off to kill a few more tens of thousands of their kids, so the old guys in Congress who will never serve can feel better about themselves again and turn an entirely new generation of formerly hopeful citizens into terrorists and martyrs for years to come. it was such a screaming success last time!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/poll-2-to-1-support-for-nuclear-deal-with-iran/2015/03/30/9a5a5ac8-d720-11e4-ba28-f2a685dc7f89_story.htmlMakes you feel sorry for the MIC?

The similarities with CHAMBERLIAN are really uncunning; Hitler had no intentions of keeping his word, neither do the Iranians. While Hitler was talking peace to the British, he was fully prepared to invade Poland and Chekoslavakia, Iran still wants to destroy Israel and any one opposed to Islam. The only thing that Chamberlain’s paper did was to give time to Hitler prepare for his world domination. Now Iranian leaders are desperate to be the head honcho in the Middle East. Although, before they atact Israel, they will try to destroy Saudi Arabia as a distraction to world attention, especially since the Saudies are the big honchos now, as Russia was before WWII and before Hitler invaded them.“Peace in our times indeed”

Ramirez and others choose to ignore that the U.K., france, Germany, Russia, and China were also party to the negotiations with Iran. Willful ignorance can be deadly in this world — consider Bush/Cheney in Iraq!

@denis1112Why do you ignore the fact that North Korea has had nuclear weapons for some time?

@HarleyquinnAny particular reason that you left out France, Germany, and the U.K.? Are they also “in on it?”

At the very least, your technical expertise is almost totally lacking here. You absolutely not only have to have the nukes, you also have to have a viable delivery system to place them upon an “enemy” at the same time. This is fact, NOT opinion!

You also seem to lack a general knowledge of geography as well. Iran is located at least some 10,000 miles from the nearest point in the USA to Iran. So, such a delivery system for its nukes would have to have the sophistication of very large rockets to even have a hope of hitting the USA at all.

Now, Iran still has more than enough wealth to afford to buy suitcase style nuclear weapons, and has had this capability fo rmany years. And such weapons are available for very large sums of money. So, if Iran has not already attacked the USA with such a weapon, what makes you so certain that they will do so in the future?

Heck, even the extremist Islamic fanatical organizations could do this at any time. So, why don’t they?

The answer to that one is relatively simple. ANY entity, governmental or private, that would do that, would then be wiped off of the face of the Earth by all of the civilized countries of the Earth, not just the USA, as this would be a threat to to ALL of human civilization, not just the USA (or any other country so attacked for that matter).

Nuclear weapons were shown to be so horrible in their use at the end of WWII, that Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD for short) was a viable policy of both the USA and its supposed greatest enemy in the USSR, that the world made it all though the Cold War without humanity destroying itself.

In fact, war itself, is the most stupid, barbaric, and downright evil activity of all of human kind! And that my friendly debate opponent is THE biggest fact of all!!

Every time I hear the toon’s argument, I have to ask: how many treaties signed with native American tribes did the United States government comply with? (hint – 0)

With five partner nations this isn’t just us, but the largest nations on the planet working together, as opposed to our decades long policy of only listening to one of the smallest.

http://thebulletin.org/why-framework-nuclear-agreement-iran-good-both-sides8152

Obama Chamberlain is waving the piece of paper, declaring “peace in our time!”

None of these little countries needs the bomb. Studies show if india and Pakistan lob 5 of thier nukes apiece life would get pretty miserable for the rest of us with radiation dust and such but would sure stop global warming on the plus side also solve the population problem

drdon1 ask “Why do you ignore the fact that North Korea has had nuclear weapons for some time?” that is because china controls them

Have you asked any Kenyan Christians what the think of jihad lately?

Sure, make fun of the peace efforts. You Neocons can always find some poor persons’ sons to fight your wars while you sit home in comfort.

“Let us never negotiate out of fear, but never let us fear to negotiate.” — John F. Kennedy

Chamberlain bought time for the UK to gear up, including making appropriations. Haven’t you been paying attention to the GOP’s new budget, which calls for lots more military spending? I think we’re spending too much already, but if you are going to bring up Champberlain and connect him with the president, then you should follow where that leads.

Hmm, my son was in Iraq under both Bush and Obama; your idea of “under control” with Bush was like saying in a chariot race at the Roman games, you had your four horse hitch under control, even when you were under them getting stomped.

Same guy that traded a US Deserter for 5 hard-core Islamist Terrorist leaders that will go back to killing Americans.Big Surprise!