---"the best is yet to come.."
blue eyes & ronnie
Printable View
---"the best is yet to come.."
blue eyes & ronnie
You mean he's finally going to buy a made-in-Massachusetts bike?
I bumped into Kerry at Belmont Wheelworks a few years ago. Back when they still sold Seven and IF. And there was Kerry with his Serotta. At this point, I would think he'd be a candidate for a Parlee...Quote:
Originally Posted by jscott
I've had the opportunity to ride with him briefly a few times at PMC. He usually had the Serotta, though I think once I saw him on a Cervélo. Every time I'd think he was missing a major opportunity to promote his home state.
Anyway, Ronnie, I know I'm being a goof on a serious topic. I'm happy to hear good news out of the talks, and I hope that translates into something that helps the people of Iran.
--- damn.., secy of state Kerry was riding his off-orange serotta with his iranian counter-part..
had a gear problem and stopped in local bike shop --- speaks fluent french.., all fixed up.., no funds wanted, but the man paid a nice tip and a thank you --- then off he goes..
& he is 71 years old --- "a man's man & statesman.."
louis & ronnie "oh what a wonderful world.." oh yah
What are we thanking Kerry for exactly?
Wwiii?
--- let's just say.., i am thanking him for being a intellectual rider of a "ben" at 71 years of age -- ronnie soon to be 72, & he can speak fluent french which i am unable..
ronnie with a smile
The problem is you can't even use the sidewalk if you are closer than 500m than him. Sure he ride bikes but his function makes that he bother the 99.99999999% of other riders when doing so. The bonus point comes from his security team forced to do some exercise.
Agreed in regard to security, please stop vacationing on Nantucket. No one wants your entourage and waving like a king.
I was behind him in line at a stereo repair store once. He was dropping off his receiver, all on his own. This was back in the late '80s, I'd guess. Before Teresa. But he was already my United States Senator.
And now I'm moving this to OT where we can have a civil discussion on the merits of the proposed agreement.
The security is about the office, not the holder. I'm pretty sure he doesn't like it, either, but given the number of death threats those guys get, it's better than the alternative. My cousin was a 'B' celebrity new anchor, and got death threats every day -- couldn't send the kids to a normal school (as though rich people want to), couldn't just go jogging, etc.
That said, I didn't enjoy almost getting run over by Clinton's motorcade in NYC back in '96, or getting shoved out of my seat at the Green Mill when John Major's SAS guards showed up. OTOH, they did clear away the panhandlers in an 8 block area, so it was a tossup.
It's been a tough couple of days for the far right. For some folks there is no better way to celebrate the resurrection of Christ than to hate gays and make war. And now the president is earning that Nobel prize he was previously given. They should give him another and really drive the nutters crazy.Quote:
Originally Posted by davids
In all seriousness, we are not even across mid field yet. So much more work to be done. I hope both sides realize peace can be good for all of our cultures and the nutters here and there don't get a chance to scuttle this. Maybe, just maybe if we can agree towards a de-escalation then at some point we can address a much larger goal of stability in the region which might help the moderates in Israel move that country towards a two state solution. I really do think this is the domino that needed knocking over first and the politics and anxiety around this nuclear deal kinda proves that. At the end of the day we will at least know who stands for peace and who doesn't. I support the president. His willingness to approach Cuba and Iran has been a net positive and potentially transformative wrt foreign policy.
losing the election to bush? i'm so confused.Quote:
Originally Posted by gggross
This kind of outreach is more in line with Washington's original vision for international relations for the country that he outlined in his Farewell Address.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan
Lots to be done, but this is an incredibly positive development, imo. Kind of surprising given our, um, complicated history with Iran.
As SecState, I'd expect a new bike choice would be heavily scrutinized. I suggest not just a Parlee but one of models made in Korea a nod to our trade and military ally in northeast Asia and perhaps a subtle message to Japan and China. Lightweight wheels from Germany, FMB tires from France (of course) and with Campy parts as a nod to Italy as the current leaders of the EU.Quote:
Originally Posted by TTX1
Maybe a brooks saddle to acknowledge the "special relationship" with the UK, too.
I don't see this deal doing anything but accelerating Iran's nuclear weapons programs. Do you have access to some details that I don't ?
How can a deal accelerate things any more than no deal? With no deal they do whatever they want, no inspections, nothing.
With a deal at least there are some limits on what they will do and where they do it.
It's not as if lifting economic sanctions (slowly) suddenly allows them to import nuclear warheads from Pakistan or Russia. If they were going to do that they'd do it sanctions or not.
Lifting sanctions allows Iran access to materials and equipment necessary to expedite their development of weapons.
As well as aiding the funding of such programs.
And they didn't have access to any of that during the sanctions?
Regardless, I thought they practically had the bomb anyway? The image below was over four years ago, in Sept of 2012, when folks were just about to start bombing the Iranians because they supposedly were soooo close. I guess lifting the sanctions will be tantamount to lighting that fuse...
http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/...-Netan-015.jpg
The best, most important item that will help Iran develop nukes is funding. Removing the sanctions will allow Iran to sell an enormous amount of oil and support & accelerate this program.
I answered your question twice. Now tell me what was gained ?
The fact that Iran doesn't already have a bomb speaks to the relevance and success of multi national sanctions. That are about to go away.
The United States is not able to unilaterally maintain or impose sanctions. Russia and China only reluctantly agreed to continue sanctions to allow for continued negotiations. In the event they or any other country perceives the United States as overreaching or failing to negotiate in good faith, those countries can resume trade with Iran.
I think they were already using as much money as they wanted for their nuclear programs. It isn't as if they're a democracy and have to go to congress every year to justify the budget. If it's purely a budget thing, I doubt the deal will have a significant effect one way or the other on changing the rate at which they approach getting a bomb. The military probably gets whatever it want for that.
What is gained is that the Iranians are agreeing to limits on the number, quality and output of their centrifuges. Without any deal they keep operating as they have in the past.
And they haven't. For years.
Iran is cash starved due to the sanctions. That's why they are negotiating.
Reducing the number of centrifuges is silly, as more are needed for a true peaceful nuclear power program and less would be needed for a weapons program.
So what's better, them having 19,000 centrifuges, or 1000 centrifuges?
The framework also provides for extensive inspection and access rights that would not otherwise exist.
So we leave Iran without enough centrifuges to run a peaceful nuclear power program. We leave only enough to run a nuclear weapons program. You define that as success?
Would your definition of success have been more of the same as we have now?
Or if you don't like that, sending in the bombers then the Marines?
Neither of those situations seems to be that great to me.
recently saw a video tape with netanyahu... dated 1992.
his quote was... something like...
iran is 2 years away from having a nuclear bomb..
sure its lives on u-tube.
1992.
More of the same??
Yes. Hell yes. The same is currently a nuclear free Iran. Due to UN & EU sanctions.
If you suppose Iran is not trying to build nuclear weapons, ask yourself why an oil-rich country would need a "peaceful " nuclear power generation program.Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveP
Because killing gays is boring.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daltex
Right on, John. I couldn't agree with you more (both paragraphs).Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan
Silly. Thanks for your non-participation on a serious topic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daltex
Here's a question for you...
Iran has had the capability and knowledge to build a nuclear weapon since the 60's and the hardware to build it since 1989. The engineering and scientific capability is the fastest growing in the world. They've had support from one of the only other nations in the world with a verified nuclear weapons program.
Why don't they have the weapons? The knowledge and hardware to build the weapons is the exact same stuff given to Best Korea and Pakistan (matter of fact, sold by the same guy). They both are nuclear powers. Matter of fact, our ally Pakistan is the largest nuclear proliferator in the world.
Given that Iran:
1) has the knowledge
2) has the capability
3) has the prerequisites (given to them by the United States, ironically)
What is stopping them?
In a related question, if they do want to build a bomb, why might they want it?Quote:
Originally Posted by quickag
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mabouya
You get it...