Originally Posted By Donny Obama seems to be alone in his stance to not come down on Iran both DEM'S and REP'S in Congress in a bipartisan effort to increase pressure on Iran. <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/09/congress-iran-sanctions_n_1138919.html" target="_blank">http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...919.html</a>
Originally Posted By barboy The US should levy the harshest sanctions possible against Iran. And all Iranian nationals who are not permanent residents or under political asylum should be deported immediately. An Iranian holding a permanent resident status in the US should have his re-entry privilege revoked. Simple: if you go back to your homeland then don't come back.
Originally Posted By Donny I wouldn't completely agree with that but I do think any Iranian over staying their visa should be sent home
Originally Posted By dshyates So Donny, you would rather Pres. Obama obviously pander to the Jewish-American vote than to do what is internationally considered prudent. Congress' pandering is political posturing for OUR upcoming election and has NOTHING to do with REAL foreign policy. Donny, please stop the "I am mad at Obama because I was told to be mad Obama" crap and think for yourself for once.
Originally Posted By SuperDry Oh boy. Someone finally said it. Superdry is stocking up on sodas and popcorn - this will be quite a show.
Originally Posted By Donny Besides Obama himself the vast majority in both houses are not on the same page as the President.So I don't think I am off the mark with this one.
Originally Posted By skinnerbox Donny... what is the goal for you posting this stuff? Are you trying to convince posters here in WE not to vote for Obama in 2012?
Originally Posted By DyGDisney From the article: "Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, in a Dec. 1 letter to senators, said the administration opposed the measure in its current form because it would undermine its effort to bring international pressure on Iran. He also warned that the penalties could actually boost oil prices and benefit Iran financially. "Iran's greatest economic resource is its oil exports," Geithner wrote. "Sales of crude oil line the regime's pockets, sustain its human rights abuses and feed its nuclear ambitions like no other sector of the Iranian economy."" It seems to me that the president is doing what he thinks best for our country. No backing down (I hope). This is what the president should do, what we elect him to do. He is just a man and can make mistakes, but he makes those decisions with more knowledge than we can ever have or hope to have. We do not elect a president hoping that he compromises to appease congress, or the lobbiests, or other countries. If President Obama goes against all of Congress then he does so because he thinks it is best for our country.
Originally Posted By barboy ///I wouldn't completely agree with that but I do think any Iranian over staying their visa should be sent home/// Visas? Forget Visas. The US State Dept. should not be issuing any---Iran is our sworn enemy. Kick all of the enrolled students out too whether they finished final exams or not. For the wealthy ladies looking to get nose jobs in the US go do it in Mexico or Colombia, not here.
Originally Posted By barboy ///Obama obviously pander to the Jewish-American vote than to do what is internationally considered prudent./// And what would international prudence towards Iran look like? .....can't wait to see your response. By the way since Iran is our enemy, I'd like to see all emabassy personnel in New York pack up and leave also, and take their ugly flag with them.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <Visas? Forget Visas. The US State Dept. should not be issuing any---Iran is our sworn enemy.> So was the Soviet Union, and we had students from there. When I was at Oxford (i.e. Britain - also officially an enemy of the S.U. in the cold war at the time), there were students from all over the Soviet Bloc as well as us westerners. Most of them, when you got them alone, were anything but backers of the regimes in question, and going to the west to study only amplified those feelings in them.
Originally Posted By Goofyernmost Stop it Dabob2. Don't introduce logical thinking into this post...it will ruin the ambiance.
Originally Posted By Labuda "When I was at Oxford" Whoa! Hold up! Did you go to Oxford on vacation or something or did you GO TO Oxford?
Originally Posted By barboy ///So was the Soviet Union, and we had students from there./// That's not a legitimate reason.....you're trying to justify your position based on precedent. The US should not have entertained tourists from enemy states back then and certainly not today either. I still can't believe that we allowed the Iron Shiek of Iran and Nicolai Volkoff of the USSR to come over and bad mouth the USA back in the early 80's.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 "When I was at Oxford" <Whoa! Hold up! Did you go to Oxford on vacation or something or did you GO TO Oxford?> I was there for a semester (studying British history). I was NOT a Rhodes scholar or anything like that! Just one term, in a (great) international program with people from all over the world, including the former Soviet bloc. I'm still in touch with some great people from literally every continent as a result. It was really intense, both in terms of the level of scholarship required (far above my US university, which had a fine rep itself), and just being in this heady atmosphere with brilliant people from all over the world. It rocked! <///So was the Soviet Union, and we had students from there./// <That's not a legitimate reason.....you're trying to justify your position based on precedent.> Precedent is often a useful tool for looking at the present, for goodness sake. <The US should not have entertained tourists from enemy states back then and certainly not today either. > Well, I was talking students, not tourists, but the point remains. By exposing those students to the west, we only fortified their ideas that a). the west wasn't so bad, and b). their own regimes weren't very good. Case in point: one of the guys I met at Oxford that I was in touch with for a while was a Pole who wound up working for Solidarity and opposing the communist regime there. <I still can't believe that we allowed the Iron Shiek of Iran and Nicolai Volkoff of the USSR to come over and bad mouth the USA back in the early 80's. > That, at least, tells me that perhaps you're re-thinking your original position?
Originally Posted By barboy I was joking about the Sheik and Volkoff....I'm not sure if you know who they are. But just in case, they were wrestling stars of the WWF back in the day whose 'shtick' was to wave their respective Iranian and Soviet flags in the ring and put down the USA.
Originally Posted By barboy ///Well, I was talking students, not tourists,/// And I'm talking about all nationals from enemy states except for those who seek asylum and permanent US residents(but I also say we should revoke the 'in-and-out' privileges of 'green card holders'). Let's talk import students for a moment. I have problem when they go there and take desired spaces at public universities. I have an even bigger problem when they show up illegally, overstay visas or come from enemy states like Iran and take coveted public university spots.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 It's obvious you have a problem with this. But nationally, it would amount to shooting ourselves in the foot. Exposing those from enemy states to our reality has been, for at least 60 years, a very canny way of subverting the propaganda they get at home. And immigration, despite the hysteria around it, has always been a net plus to us - particularly attracting the "best and brightest" among immigrants, who tend to pay us back in spades. And yes, that includes students.
