Barack Obama's Response To The US Withdrawal From The JCPOA

Russ103 · May 9, 2018

Steve N said: ↑

Obama is trying to save his legacy and not look like a fool.
Click to expand...

And he’s failing at both, ain’t that great?

Yulee · May 9, 2018

Grokmaster said: ↑

View attachment 68575
Click to expand...

Sorry but calling BS on #1 and #7

He isn’t remotely conservative.

And he is missing many of the Lords teachings to say he exalts God.

Russ103 said: ↑

And he’s failing at both, ain’t that great?
Click to expand...

Ad long as pre existing condition is no longer a thing, his legacy rides on.

perotista · May 9, 2018

Ericb760 said: ↑

While I do not disagree in principle, the fact remains that it is, or was, in place, and it is much easier to amend an agreement than trash it altogether, especially when we have so many allies on board.

No, this is chickenhawk Bolton's doing. He's had a hard on for going to war with Iran for 30 years. This is stage one of his plan.

I'm too old to go to war, and my kids are too young. And for that I am thankful. It's going to be messy and will take a lot more blood and treasure than either Iraq or Afghanistan did.
Click to expand...

I don't buy the idea that the agree Obama-Iran agreement was the only thing keeping us from going to war with Iran. I also don't believe doing away with it guarantees war. I do agree that amending it, if possible, if Iran was willing would have been easier than starting from scratch if starting from scratch is what Trump has in mind. One never knows about him. What he wants or thinks one minute can be the complete opposite the next.

I do think where the deal was wrong was that there basically was no way to verify if Iran was keeping it part of the deal other than Iran's word. So it boiled down to do you trust Iran? Then too, there is the question was the agreement in both countries interests? Was it an agreement we made just to say we made an agreement or was it concrete and useful? I don't know the answers.

I suppose it comes down to the question of who do you trust. With Iran, do you trust them? With North Korea, do you trust Kim Jong-un? Did you trust Obama when he made the deal? Do you trust Trump now? A lot of that depends on how one views the world, on one's ideology and on one's partisanship.

This country is much more divided today than it was 10 or 20 years ago. It has become polarized. The division has grown to be as big as the Grand Canyon. It seems to me that Trump and the Republicans want to undo everything Obama and the Democrats want to do nothing else than destroy Trump. The Iran deal is part of that. So too was Obamacare. Perhaps even the TPP, Obama and NAFTA, Bill Clinton. Perhaps being a Republican or Democrat has become much more important than being an American. Especially since both major parties have shrunk big time which leaves just the hard core ideologues in charge of each.

icehole3 · May 9, 2018

doombug · May 9, 2018

Ericb760 said: ↑

Read it. Every. Single. Word.

This withdrawal is a prelude to war.

There are few issues more important to the security of the United States than the potential spread of nuclear weapons, or the potential for even more destructive war in the Middle East. That’s why the United States negotiated the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in the first place.

The reality is clear. The JCPOA is working – that is a view shared by our European allies, independent experts, and the current U.S. Secretary of Defense. The JCPOA is in America’s interest – it has significantly rolled back Iran’s nuclear program. And the JCPOA is a model for what diplomacy can accomplish – its inspections and verification regime is precisely what the United States should be working to put in place with North Korea. Indeed, at a time when we are all rooting for diplomacy with North Korea to succeed, walking away from the JCPOA risks losing a deal that accomplishes – with Iran – the very outcome that we are pursuing with the North Koreans.

That is why today’s announcement is so misguided. Walking away from the JCPOA turns our back on America’s closest allies, and an agreement that our country’s leading diplomats, scientists, and intelligence professionals negotiated. In a democracy, there will always be changes in policies and priorities from one Administration to the next. But the consistent flouting of agreements that our country is a party to risks eroding America’s credibility, and puts us at odds with the world’s major powers.

Debates in our country should be informed by facts, especially debates that have proven to be divisive. So it’s important to review several facts about the JCPOA.

First, the JCPOA was not just an agreement between my Administration and the Iranian government. After years of building an international coalition that could impose crippling sanctions on Iran, we reached the JCPOA together with the United Kingdom, France, Germany, the European Union, Russia, China, and Iran. It is a multilateral arms control deal, unanimously endorsed by a United Nations Security Council Resolution.

Second, the JCPOA has worked in rolling back Iran’s nuclear program. For decades, Iran had steadily advanced its nuclear program, approaching the point where they could rapidly produce enough fissile material to build a bomb. The JCPOA put a lid on that breakout capacity. Since the JCPOA was implemented, Iran has destroyed the core of a reactor that could have produced weapons-grade plutonium; removed two-thirds of its centrifuges (over 13,000) and placed them under international monitoring; and eliminated 97 percent of its stockpile of enriched uranium – the raw materials necessary for a bomb. So by any measure, the JCPOA has imposed strict limitations on Iran's nuclear program and achieved real results.

Third, the JCPOA does not rely on trust – it is rooted in the most far-reaching inspections and verification regime ever negotiated in an arms control deal. Iran’s nuclear facilities are strictly monitored. International monitors also have access to Iran’s entire nuclear supply chain, so that we can catch them if they cheat. Without the JCPOA, this monitoring and inspections regime would go away.

Fourth, Iran is complying with the JCPOA. That was not simply the view of my Administration. The United States intelligence community has continued to find that Iran is meeting its responsibilities under the deal, and has reported as much to Congress. So have our closest allies, and the international agency responsible for verifying Iranian compliance – the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

Fifth, the JCPOA does not expire. The prohibition on Iran ever obtaining a nuclear weapon is permanent. Some of the most important and intrusive inspections codified by the JCPOA are permanent. Even as some of the provisions in the JCPOA do become less strict with time, this won’t happen until ten, fifteen, twenty, or twenty-five years into the deal, so there is little reason to put those restrictions at risk today.

Finally, the JCPOA was never intended to solve all of our problems with Iran. We were clear-eyed that Iran engages in destabilizing behavior – including support for terrorism, and threats toward Israel and its neighbors. But that’s precisely why it was so important that we prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Every aspect of Iranian behavior that is troubling is far more dangerous if their nuclear program is unconstrained. Our ability to confront Iran’s destabilizing behavior – and to sustain a unity of purpose with our allies – is strengthened with the JCPOA, and weakened without it.

Because of these facts, I believe that the decision to put the JCPOA at risk without any Iranian violation of the deal is a serious mistake. Without the JCPOA, the United States could eventually be left with a losing choice between a nuclear-armed Iran or another war in the Middle East. We all know the dangers of Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon. It could embolden an already dangerous regime; threaten our friends with destruction; pose unacceptable dangers to America’s own security; and trigger an arms race in the world’s most dangerous region. If the constraints on Iran’s nuclear program under the JCPOA are lost, we could be hastening the day when we are faced with the choice between living with that threat, or going to war to prevent it.

In a dangerous world, America must be able to rely in part on strong, principled diplomacy to secure our country. We have been safer in the years since we achieved the JCPOA, thanks in part to the work of our diplomats, many members of Congress, and our allies. Going forward, I hope that Americans continue to speak out in support of the kind of strong, principled, fact-based, and unifying leadership that can best secure our country and uphold our responsibilities around the globe.

https://www.facebook.com/barackobama/posts/10155854913976749
Click to expand...

Dickhead obama is whining because Trump is erasing the stench of his legacy. Suck it Barry!

icehole3 · May 9, 2018

It does my heart good this morning to know ..somewhere Valerie Jarret is upset about the breaking of the Iran deal.

MrTLegal · May 9, 2018

ocean515 said: ↑

If Iran wants a nuclear bomb, it will get it, regardless of the "deal" Obama and the other Nations put in place. NK has proven that course can be followed.

I have no doubt the US will put pressure on the other Nations to either withdrawal, or work with the US to toughen up what was originally negotiated.

However, the "deal" wasn't just between Iran and the US. There are what 5 other nations/groups party to the agreement. Unless there is a all or nothing provision, why would Iran risk their more important economic ties with Europe, just because the US back out?

In the end, IMO, this Nuclear Navy deal could be far more ominous than the charade that has been paraded as a good deal for all.

Really, no military facility inspections? Seems to me that's a great place to hide activities this deal was designed to stop.
Click to expand...

Ok, first off, the Iran deal absolutely permits military facility inspections. The closest that you are to being correct on this issue is that military sites are subject to a 10 day notification that the inspectors suspect illegal nuclear activity is taking place there prior to the inspection. And no, 10 days is not enough time to hide the type of activity that the inspectors would be able to uncover and declare Iran was no longer in compliance.

But here's the other problem, would you like to take a guess as to which locations become off-limits should this deal fall through completely?

And Iran does not want to risk their important economic ties to Europe. Instead Trump's decision will raise the potential that Europe is at risk of losing its important economic ties to Iran. And when Europe falls through, there is no reason for Iran to continue with the deal at all. Like I said, Trump's decision to unravel one of the most important and best anti-arms deals in history, a decision made against the wishes of every ally - save Netanyahu - makes it more likely that Iran will obtain a nuclear weapon.

MrTLegal · May 9, 2018

perotista said: ↑

I don't buy the idea that the agree Obama-Iran agreement was the only thing keeping us from going to war with Iran. I also don't believe doing away with it guarantees war. I do agree that amending it, if possible, if Iran was willing would have been easier than starting from scratch if starting from scratch is what Trump has in mind. One never knows about him. What he wants or thinks one minute can be the complete opposite the next.

I do think where the deal was wrong was that there basically was no way to verify if Iran was keeping it part of the deal other than Iran's word. So it boiled down to do you trust Iran? Then too, there is the question was the agreement in both countries interests? Was it an agreement we made just to say we made an agreement or was it concrete and useful? I don't know the answers.

I suppose it comes down to the question of who do you trust. With Iran, do you trust them? With North Korea, do you trust Kim Jong-un? Did you trust Obama when he made the deal? Do you trust Trump now? A lot of that depends on how one views the world, on one's ideology and on one's partisanship.

This country is much more divided today than it was 10 or 20 years ago. It has become polarized. The division has grown to be as big as the Grand Canyon. It seems to me that Trump and the Republicans want to undo everything Obama and the Democrats want to do nothing else than destroy Trump. The Iran deal is part of that. So too was Obamacare. Perhaps even the TPP, Obama and NAFTA, Bill Clinton. Perhaps being a Republican or Democrat has become much more important than being an American. Especially since both major parties have shrunk big time which leaves just the hard core ideologues in charge of each.
Click to expand...

The bolded is absolutely wrong. The deal subjected Iran to the most intrusive and invasive nuclear inspection regime in the world. We absolutely had a great deal more information to rely upon to determine whether Iran was in compliance beyond "their word."

ocean515 · May 9, 2018

MrTLegal said: ↑

Ok, first off, the Iran deal absolutely permits military facility inspections. The closest that you are to being correct on this issue is that military sites are subject to a 10 day notification that the inspectors suspect illegal nuclear activity is taking place there prior to the inspection. And no, 10 days is not enough time to hide the type of activity that the inspectors would be able to uncover and declare Iran was no longer in compliance.

But here's the other problem, would you like to take a guess as to which locations become off-limits should this deal fall through completely?

And Iran does not want to risk their important economic ties to Europe. Instead Trump's decision will raise the potential that Europe is at risk of losing its important economic ties to Iran. And when Europe falls through, there is no reason for Iran to continue with the deal at all. Like I said, Trump's decision to unravel one of the most important and best anti-arms deals in history, a decision made against the wishes of every ally - save Netanyahu - makes it more likely that Iran will obtain a nuclear weapon.
Click to expand...

Absolutely permits military facilities to be inspected?

Really?

You claim this despite the fact that Iran is on record claiming it doesn't, and a multitude of articles have stated the same?

Please provide a link to documents/policy that contradicts what Iran has said, and what has been reported.

As to your other point, why would Iran destroy it's economic ties with Europe?

And please, save the hyperbole about best anti-arms deals in history. That's just making you look silly.

Mac-7 · May 9, 2018

Ericb760 said: ↑

Read it. Every. Single. Word.

This withdrawal is a prelude to war.

There are few issues more important to the security of the United States than the potential spread of nuclear weapons, or the potential for even more destructive war in the Middle East. That’s why the United States negotiated the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in the first place.

The reality is clear. The JCPOA is working – that is a view shared by our European allies, independent experts, and the current U.S. Secretary of Defense. The JCPOA is in America’s interest – it has significantly rolled back Iran’s nuclear program. And the JCPOA is a model for what diplomacy can accomplish – its inspections and verification regime is precisely what the United States should be working to put in place with North Korea. Indeed, at a time when we are all rooting for diplomacy with North Korea to succeed, walking away from the JCPOA risks losing a deal that accomplishes – with Iran – the very outcome that we are pursuing with the North Koreans.

That is why today’s announcement is so misguided. Walking away from the JCPOA turns our back on America’s closest allies, and an agreement that our country’s leading diplomats, scientists, and intelligence professionals negotiated. In a democracy, there will always be changes in policies and priorities from one Administration to the next. But the consistent flouting of agreements that our country is a party to risks eroding America’s credibility, and puts us at odds with the world’s major powers.

Debates in our country should be informed by facts, especially debates that have proven to be divisive. So it’s important to review several facts about the JCPOA.

First, the JCPOA was not just an agreement between my Administration and the Iranian government. After years of building an international coalition that could impose crippling sanctions on Iran, we reached the JCPOA together with the United Kingdom, France, Germany, the European Union, Russia, China, and Iran. It is a multilateral arms control deal, unanimously endorsed by a United Nations Security Council Resolution.

Second, the JCPOA has worked in rolling back Iran’s nuclear program. For decades, Iran had steadily advanced its nuclear program, approaching the point where they could rapidly produce enough fissile material to build a bomb. The JCPOA put a lid on that breakout capacity. Since the JCPOA was implemented, Iran has destroyed the core of a reactor that could have produced weapons-grade plutonium; removed two-thirds of its centrifuges (over 13,000) and placed them under international monitoring; and eliminated 97 percent of its stockpile of enriched uranium – the raw materials necessary for a bomb. So by any measure, the JCPOA has imposed strict limitations on Iran's nuclear program and achieved real results.

Third, the JCPOA does not rely on trust – it is rooted in the most far-reaching inspections and verification regime ever negotiated in an arms control deal. Iran’s nuclear facilities are strictly monitored. International monitors also have access to Iran’s entire nuclear supply chain, so that we can catch them if they cheat. Without the JCPOA, this monitoring and inspections regime would go away.

Fourth, Iran is complying with the JCPOA. That was not simply the view of my Administration. The United States intelligence community has continued to find that Iran is meeting its responsibilities under the deal, and has reported as much to Congress. So have our closest allies, and the international agency responsible for verifying Iranian compliance – the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

Fifth, the JCPOA does not expire. The prohibition on Iran ever obtaining a nuclear weapon is permanent. Some of the most important and intrusive inspections codified by the JCPOA are permanent. Even as some of the provisions in the JCPOA do become less strict with time, this won’t happen until ten, fifteen, twenty, or twenty-five years into the deal, so there is little reason to put those restrictions at risk today.

Finally, the JCPOA was never intended to solve all of our problems with Iran. We were clear-eyed that Iran engages in destabilizing behavior – including support for terrorism, and threats toward Israel and its neighbors. But that’s precisely why it was so important that we prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Every aspect of Iranian behavior that is troubling is far more dangerous if their nuclear program is unconstrained. Our ability to confront Iran’s destabilizing behavior – and to sustain a unity of purpose with our allies – is strengthened with the JCPOA, and weakened without it.

Because of these facts, I believe that the decision to put the JCPOA at risk without any Iranian violation of the deal is a serious mistake. Without the JCPOA, the United States could eventually be left with a losing choice between a nuclear-armed Iran or another war in the Middle East. We all know the dangers of Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon. It could embolden an already dangerous regime; threaten our friends with destruction; pose unacceptable dangers to America’s own security; and trigger an arms race in the world’s most dangerous region. If the constraints on Iran’s nuclear program under the JCPOA are lost, we could be hastening the day when we are faced with the choice between living with that threat, or going to war to prevent it.

In a dangerous world, America must be able to rely in part on strong, principled diplomacy to secure our country. We have been safer in the years since we achieved the JCPOA, thanks in part to the work of our diplomats, many members of Congress, and our allies. Going forward, I hope that Americans continue to speak out in support of the kind of strong, principled, fact-based, and unifying leadership that can best secure our country and uphold our responsibilities around the globe.

https://www.facebook.com/barackobama/posts/10155854913976749
Click to expand...

Why didnt obama submit the agreement to the US senate as a treaty?

Its just a worthless scrap of paper unless the American people stand behind it

BestViewedWithCable · May 9, 2018

Its a shame obama doesnt give Trump the same respect GWB gave obama.

He should just ****, and go back to counting his billions.

Mac-7 · May 9, 2018

mdrobster said: ↑

Dude, either your memory is very bad, or once again you making the BS as you go!!!

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/iran-deal-survives-first-vote-in-congress/
The Iran nuclear deal survived, as a result of the Senate vote Thursday, when Democrats blocked the Republicans' resolution of disapproval.
Click to expand...

Its not a treaty

Obama forced it onto the American people without our approval

MrTLegal · May 9, 2018

ocean515 said: ↑

Absolutely permits military facilities to be inspected?

Really?

You claim this despite the fact that Iran is on record claiming it doesn't, and a multitude of articles have stated the same?

Please provide a link to documents/policy that contradicts what Iran has said, and what has been reported.

As to your other point, why would Iran destroy it's economic ties with Europe?

And please, save the hyperbole about best anti-arms deals in history. That's just making you look silly.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I meant to say it was one of the most successful. Here is a Slate article (I know, you don't care) from which I lifted the label.

Similarly, in relation to the inspection of military facilities, here is a report from a source that is critical of the deal. It notes that the deal permits inspection of military sites after a 21 day (sorry) day notification, but that Iranian officials made public statement that appear to contradict their willingness to abide by that portion of the agreement. So, I think it is fair to say that "absolutely" is true only in the sense that the document they signed permits such access. Whether Iran would have agreed to every provision in practice remains to be seen.

Aphotic · May 9, 2018

Steve N said: ↑

Congress voted against this deal and Obama went through with it anyway. Also, big corporations stood to make fortunes with having this deal go through and lobbied Obama to do it - with you guys being liberals and all, that alone should tell you something.
Click to expand...

Keep shoe boxing me in with liberals. It just shows how politically blind you truly are, partisan.

MrTLegal · May 9, 2018

Mac-7 said: ↑

Why didnt obama submit the agreement to the US senate as a treaty?

Its just a worthless scrap of paper unless the American people stand behind it
Click to expand...

The agreement carried the full force and law of the American Government and had the support of the American people as recently as this week when a majority polled said that they did not want Trump to vacate the deal.

And he did not submit it for a treaty because such a submission was both unnecessary and would not have passed a Republican controlled Senate in the leadup to an election.

MrTLegal · May 9, 2018

doombug said: ↑

Dickhead obama is whining because Trump is erasing the stench of his legacy. Suck it Barry!
Click to expand...

I can see why you haven't been declared the "undisputed debate champion" since 2014. Your skills have deteriorated dramatically.

Aphotic · May 9, 2018

BestViewedWithCable said: ↑

Its a shame obama doesnt give Trump the same respect GWB gave obama.

He should just ****, and go back to counting his billions.
Click to expand...

Trump sort of threw that whole thing under the bus with his incessant blame shifting, insulting, constant twitter slander, etc.

Can't blame the man for speaking up after the past how many ****ing years of hearing the orange anus vomit forth its slanderous accusations?

Egoboy · May 9, 2018

doombug said: ↑

Dickhead obama is whining because Trump is erasing the stench of his legacy. Suck it Barry!
Click to expand...

Great argument for violating a working international deal.... Just superb.... Filled with facts and logical arguments...

Maybe Trump can get rid of the Emancipation Proclamation next week.... Suck it Abe....

On topic, Obama's statement is brilliant and accurate (if you had bothered to read it).... Trump's entire team of losers couldn't cobble together, over a period of weeks, a decent rationale to justify this decision compared to this Obama defense...

I'll ask in this thread the question NOBODY on your side would or could answer on the pre-decision thread..... It's 6 simple words.....How is this good for America?? (I won't ask you to justify how it's good for the world as that's more complex)

If somebody can make a case for that, I'll listen... otherwise... stick to barbs and jabs at Obama, as it's really all your side can handle...

BestViewedWithCable · May 9, 2018

Aphotic said: ↑

Trump sort of threw that whole thing under the bus with his incessant blame shifting, insulting, constant twitter slander, etc.

Can't blame the man for speaking up after the past how many ****ing years of hearing the orange anus vomit forth its slanderous accusations?
Click to expand...

wow, thats exactly what obama did when he was president.

He blamed GWB for everything for 8 consecutive years.

icehole3 · May 9, 2018

Egoboy said: ↑

Great argument for violating a working international deal.... Just superb.... Filled with facts and logical arguments...

Maybe Trump can get rid of the Emancipation Proclamation next week.... Suck it Abe....

On topic, Obama's statement is brilliant and accurate (if you had bothered to read it).... Trump's entire team of losers couldn't cobble together, over a period of weeks, a decent rationale to justify this decision compared to this Obama defense...

I'll ask in this thread the question NOBODY on your side would or could answer on the pre-decision thread..... It's 6 simple words.....How is this good for America?? (I won't ask you to justify how it's good for the world as that's more complex)

If somebody can make a case for that, I'll listen... otherwise... stick to barbs and jabs at Obama, as it's really all your side can handle...
Click to expand...

You'll probably do what you say conservatives are doing and that's throw jabs at the argument or debate. Anyway here is a video you may want to look at.

ocean515 · May 9, 2018

MrTLegal said: ↑

Sorry, I meant to say it was one of the most successful. Here is a Slate article (I know, you don't care) from which I lifted the label.

Similarly, in relation to the inspection of military facilities, here is a report from a source that is critical of the deal. It notes that the deal permits inspection of military sites after a 21 day (sorry) day notification, but that Iranian officials made public statement that appear to contradict their willingness to abide by that portion of the agreement. So, I think it is fair to say that "absolutely" is true only in the sense that the document they signed permits such access. Whether Iran would have agreed to every provision in practice remains to be seen.
Click to expand...

Given Slates mission and objectives, including that of the author, Kaplan, I'm not surprised by the slant they have taken.

What they fail to address is why all other parties to the deal would suddenly be ignored by Iran. I still haven't seen any objective reasoning applied to that question. It's as if those countries are meaningless to the agreement. If they don't count, why even have them included?

Since you have confirmed the same thing I have, that Iran has refused to allow inspections of military sites, I think it's fair to say you are absolutely struggling to save face in light of your original claims about those inspections, and the willingness of Iran to abide by the deal.

Texas Republican · May 9, 2018

This treaty was never ratified by the senate, as required under American law.

goofball · May 9, 2018

MrTLegal said: ↑

Ok, first off, the Iran deal absolutely permits military facility inspections. The closest that you are to being correct on this issue is that military sites are subject to a 10 day notification that the inspectors suspect illegal nuclear activity is taking place there prior to the inspection. .
Click to expand...

You don't know WTF you are talking about.

http://www.latimes.com/world/asia/la-fg-iran-nuclear-20170830-story.html

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-iran-nuclear-usa-idUSKCN1B918E

mdrobster · May 9, 2018

Mac-7 said: ↑

Its not a treaty

Obama forced it onto the American people without our approval
Click to expand...

no he didnt

Grokmaster · May 9, 2018

icehole3 said: ↑

It does my heart good this morning to know ..somewhere Valerie Jarret is upset about the breaking of the Iran deal.

Click to expand...

Talk about a WIN/WIN !!!!

Log in or Sign up

Barack Obama's Response To The US Withdrawal From The JCPOA

Russ103 Well-Known Member Past Donor

Yulee Well-Known Member

perotista Well-Known Member Past Donor

icehole3 Well-Known Member

doombug Well-Known Member

icehole3 Well-Known Member

MrTLegal Well-Known Member

MrTLegal Well-Known Member

ocean515 Well-Known Member Past Donor

Mac-7 Banned

BestViewedWithCable Well-Known Member

Mac-7 Banned

MrTLegal Well-Known Member

Aphotic Banned

MrTLegal Well-Known Member

MrTLegal Well-Known Member

Aphotic Banned

Egoboy Well-Known Member Donor

BestViewedWithCable Well-Known Member

icehole3 Well-Known Member

ocean515 Well-Known Member Past Donor

Texas Republican Well-Known Member Past Donor

goofball Banned

mdrobster Well-Known Member

Grokmaster Well-Known Member Past Donor

Share This Page

Log in or Sign up

Barack Obama's Response To The US Withdrawal From The JCPOA

Russ103 Well-Known Member Past Donor

Yulee Well-Known Member

perotista Well-Known Member Past Donor

icehole3 Well-Known Member

doombug Well-Known Member

icehole3 Well-Known Member

MrTLegal Well-Known Member

MrTLegal Well-Known Member

ocean515 Well-Known Member Past Donor

Mac-7 Banned

BestViewedWithCable Well-Known Member

Mac-7 Banned

MrTLegal Well-Known Member

Aphotic Banned

MrTLegal Well-Known Member

MrTLegal Well-Known Member

Aphotic Banned

Egoboy Well-Known Member Donor

BestViewedWithCable Well-Known Member

icehole3 Well-Known Member

ocean515 Well-Known Member Past Donor

Texas Republican Well-Known Member Past Donor

goofball Banned

mdrobster Well-Known Member

Grokmaster Well-Known Member Past Donor

Share This Page

Useful Searches