Panetta admits Iran not developing nukes

[mrjarrell]

I guess if anyone in the government would know, it would be him. Not that it'll shut up the idiots that are banging the war drums.

Panetta admits Iran not developing nukes | The Raw Story

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

I guess if anyone in the government would [STRIKE]know[/STRIKE] carry Obama's water, it would be him. [STRIKE]Not that it'll shut up the idiots that are banging the war drums.[/STRIKE]

Panetta admits Iran not developing nukes | The Raw Story

FTFY

It's interesting that someone as distrustful of government as you are would hang your hat on the baseless claims of an Obama cabinet secretary.

 

[Destro]

I guess if anyone in the government would know, it would be him. Not that it'll shut up the idiots that are banging the war drums.

Panetta admits Iran not developing nukes | The Raw Story

your so silly!

 

[dross]

FTFY

It's interesting that someone as distrustful of government as you are would hang your hat on the baseless claims of an Obama cabinet secretary.

Read his posts. He often defends the Obama administration and his criticisms of Democrats are mostly to compare them to Republicans.

 

[longbow]

They don't need to....... They either have the design for NK or Paki. So I would say he is not saying anything that is not wrong.

 

[mrjarrell]

Read his posts. He often defends the Obama administration and his criticisms of Democrats are mostly to compare them to Republicans.

Often? Not even close. They get defended when they deserve to be defended, but I more often criticise them and their policies. Comparing dems and reps is easy, since they're essentially two wings of the same party, as evidenced by the last 20 years or better of their policies. You can go on pretending there's a significant difference if you wish, but it won't change my opinion or that of thousands of others who realise the truth of the matter.

As for Panetta's statements, I'll take him at his word since he's got access to intel that you obviously don't. Until, and if he's proven wrong.

 

[dross]

Often? Not even close. They get defended when they deserve to be defended, but I more often criticise them and their policies. Comparing dems and reps is easy, since they're essentially two wings of the same party, as evidenced by the last 20 years or better of their policies. You can go on pretending there's a significant difference if you wish, but it won't change my opinion or that of thousands of others who realise the truth of the matter.

As for Panetta's statements, I'll take him at his word since he's got access to intel that you obviously don't. Until, and if he's proven wrong.

If there's one thing I know about this forum and its regulars, it's that I'll never change your opinion.

No doubt Panetta knows way more about this issue than I. Policy and politics often trump knowledge.

You believe the Bush administration let their politics trump the facts. In their case, they were inclined to go to war. Obama has demonstrated he's not inclined to go to war in Iran.

Putting aside which of the above you agree with, don't you think it's just as likely the Obama administration would lie to support their own political ends as it is for the Bush administration to lie to support theirs?

If that's the case, why aren't you skeptical of Panetta? Neither of us can KNOW. I'm skeptical of everyone. Your skepticism seems much stronger towards Republicans.

 

[Destro]

As for Panetta's statements, I'll take him at his word since he's got access to intel that you obviously don't. Until, and if he's proven wrong.

Panetta is not going to let anything "slip", and it was on Face the Nation; nothing is going to "slip out" on face the nation.

I think you only wanna believe him becaise he is saying what you wanna hear. If next week he lets it slip that Iran has 4 ICBM's pointed at Hawaii....you would probably go back to accusing him of "banging war drums"

 

[z0mb13_m0nk3y]

Putting aside which of the above you agree with, don't you think it's just as likely the Obama administration would lie to support their own political ends as it is for the Bush administration to lie to support theirs?

Amen!!!

 

[rambone]

Obama's agenda is the same as Bush's. When the globalists are ready for a war on Iran, it won't matter what party is in power or what the truth of the matter is. This idea that Obama is anti-war should be well out the window by now.

 

[Destro]

Obama's agenda is the same as Bush's. When the globalists are ready for a war on Iran, it won't matter what party is in power or what the truth of the matter is. This idea that Obama is anti-war should be well out the window by now.

i always forget, it was our poor trade policy that made Japan bomb Pearl Harbor

 

[rambone]

i always forget, it was our poor trade policy that made Japan bomb Pearl Harbor

Totally lost me, bro.

 

[J_Wales]

An... Panetta says so.

Good. I'm glad that's settled.

I'm so thankful to have statists like Panetta watching out for me.

Now if Panetta would come out and declare that allies of Iran were not supplying them with technology for nuclear weapons the world could relax and go to sleep and dream of sunshine and lollipops!

Thanks for watching out for me Panetta.

 

[Lead Head]

Often? Not even close. They get defended when they deserve to be defended, but I more often criticise them and their policies. Comparing dems and reps is easy, since they're essentially two wings of the same party, as evidenced by the last 20 years or better of their policies. You can go on pretending there's a significant difference if you wish, but it won't change my opinion or that of thousands of others who realise the truth of the matter.

As for Panetta's statements, I'll take him at his word since he's got access to intel that you obviously don't. Until, and if he's proven wrong.

Nice response and the whole "dems and repubs" thing is a distraction from the truth. We need a viable and well funded third party to break their hold.

So, that would make me one of those "thousands of others who realise the truth of the matter". We need more than just a few.

 

[88GT]

Nice response and the whole "dems and repubs" thing is a distraction from the truth. We need a viable and well funded third party to break their hold.

So, that would make me one of those "thousands of others who realise the truth of the matter". We need more than just a few.

We've been over this before. A third party will merely supplant one of the existing major parties of our "two-party" system. At best, within a few election cycles it will become the new second party.