I didn't think it was chilling; I thought it was great. Simple, truthful presentation. No one can say the world wasn't told.

Vladimir Putin is 10K times the leader than O. Those of us that realized he was totally incompetent during the last two elections just got called racists for our troubles. To add insult to injury, there is talk of Kerry getting the Nobel prize.....would be like giving it to Neville Chamberlain for "Giving us peace in our time"!

When Netanyahu speaks, people must confront their contradictions. A = A.

Help me walk through some logic. And this is going to be a potentially unpopular question, but I want to understand how to get "from A to B".

We are all here, ostensibly, because we prefer small government that doesn't interfere with the rights of its citizens to engage in commerce, etc., etc.

How are sanctions consistent with that philosophy, and so why do we (seemingly, from the comments) lament their having been eliminated?

Is this a case where we dislike/distrust/etc. a nation-state so much that we carve out little exemptions to our philosophy so we can still have a gov't preventing commerce?

I'm not saying necessarily I want Iran to engage in commerce and grow big and strong and become a pain in our ass, but how do we reconcile our desires to not have that happen with our philosophy that says the gov't shouldn't be able to prevent it from happening?

A people as a whole, Israel has the great leader it deserves.
A people as a whole, the USA has . . .

Yep...pretty quiet there.

That's right, sir. You are going to be blown up. Now...what are you going to do about it?

I wonder if mankind will completely destroy itself in my lifetime? Could happen, I think.

The loudest statement he made, was 44 seconds of silence.

And what did America say about that ? Oh wait, they were not there, they had to take a phone call.

But SofS Kerry and the ambassador were both there for the Hamas representative speech.

I find no fault with the man yet, seems to be spot on so far.
As always, I remain observant and objective.

Every time I read about the Iran deal, I think of a movie called "Seven Days In May". It involved a nuclear disarmament treaty with Soviet Russia, and had some very appropriate quotes:
“I think the signing of a nuclear disarmament pact with the Soviet Union is at best an act of naivete, and at worst an unsupportable negligence. We've stayed alive because we've built up an arsenal, and we've kept the peace because we've dealt with an enemy who knew we would use that arsenal. And now we're asked to believe that a piece of paper will take the place of missile sites and Polaris submarines, and that an enemy who hasn't honored one solemn treaty in the history of its existence will now, for our convenience, do precisely that. I have strong doubts, gentlemen."
"I'm suggesting, Senator, there hasn't been a single piece of paper written in the history of mankind that could serve as a deterrent to a Pearl Harbor. I sometimes wonder why we haven't learned that lesson by now. Every twenty years or so we have to pick ourselves up off the floor bleeding, and have to pay for that mistake. And I might add, Senator, those mistakes are delivered to us C.O.D. by peace-loving men. And bought and paid for with the lives of other men. Men in uniform.”
“Your course of action in the past year has bordered on criminal negligence. This treaty with the Russians is a violation of any concept of security. You're not a weak sister, Mister President, you're a criminally weak sister. And if you want to talk about your oath of office, I'm here to tell you face-to-face, President Lyman, that you violated that oath when you stripped this country of its muscles, when you deliberately played upon the fear and fatigue of the people, and told them they could remove that fear by the stroke of a pen. A year and nine months from now, I don't think there will be an electorate, let alone an election. I think we'll be sitting in our own rubble, a minimum of one hundred million dead. And on the gravestone we can carve, “They Died For President Lyman's Concept Of Peace”.”

The problem here is that it was the UN who carved up the so-called "holy lands" and gave half to the Jews, who were so hated after WW2 that no one wanted them. Who know WHY they were hated, but it fed the whole auschwitz fiasco as well as much other anti-semitism. The issue was that the UN tossed out the arabs in the area and put in the jews. Now, what would you expect to happen- the arabs would want the jews OUT. That was over 60 years ago, and that hatred isnt abating.

What the UN put in place helped the Jews. If the UN allows Iran to have nuclear weapons, maybe that doesnt help them, although I really doubt Iran is going to nuke Israel and poison the whole of the middle east for many, many years like chernobyl.

He would get my vote in a heart beat!

That's the way to tell them about deafening silence. I saw that.

Only why does he still look as if he's begging? He should annex Judea and Samaria and have done with it. Enough fooling around.

Love that man. I just hope that the US stands with him if he defends himself from an impending nuclear attack. It's not a given anymore.

I'm just worried that in 3 years, the map of the world will have a large area marked "Uninhabitable Zone" from the eastern border of Egypt to the western border of India.