The ballroom is not on hold and will be paid for by "others", except for security upgrades, which will be funded by taxpayers. Point being Trump is keeping his many campaign promises.
I stand corrected, permission has been given for work to continue. However, from my reading it appears that the $1b proposal for the tax payer to fund various aspects has since been dropped.
He was a JAG, a military law expert, no one has proven him wrong.
His view is at odds with the views of other military legal experts.
If anything is destroyed it can be resurrected/rebuilt, duh.
Not if it has been obliterated. That is not exactly the same as destruction.
Tempest fugit means time moves, things happen, you can't keep posting as if time stood still
The Latin term does not mean that. It is to remind us of the transitory nature of time. It flees it does not stand still.
True, I simply opined that paying Iran for their enriched uranium works for me.
You do seem to like picking up tabs.
Prove it wrong. Until then its correct.
That remark suggests a degree of petulance. I will take Yale over CoPilot
By Sven-Eric Fikenscher For the time being, JCPOA-related restrictions will keep Iran relatively far away from the nuclear weapons option, but Iran could undermine those restraints by cheating. U.S. policy vis-à-vis Iran should be informed by the likelihood that cheating takes place and sh
www.yalejournal.org
Of course once Trump withdrew the USA from the agreement it was null and void.
Point being operational security and the "need to know".
If a nation is going to start an offensive operation and it wants its allies to support it it needs to build case.
I simply said NK does not appear to be as dangerous as Iran. You side-step, I don't.
Why would Iran threaten the region with a nuclear weapon? That appears to be your fear.
We said they "were under rubble" and are being excavated and rebuilt.
Being under rubble is not being
obliterated. There is a difference.
As we said, "months to 2 years" from having nukes. A decision was made to enforce the ban.
Negotiations were taking place and according to Trump last June, the nuclear sites had been "totally obliterated". Gabbard who was not, I grant you, the most competent of NSA Directors, stated that
"As a result of Operation Midnight Hammer, Iran's nuclear enrichment program was obliterated. There has been no efforts since then to try to rebuild their enrichment capability."
While her own competence may be questioned one assumes the Intel she was being given was accurate. However, Trump decided she was wrong.
You can't critique' the agreement until we actually see it.
I have not critiqued anything and have offered no formal analysis or presentation.
There is a war. Stop whining about a small bump in the price of gas.
You seem very unconcerned about the impact of the rise in oil and its wider economic effects. It is not just about the price of gas at the pump.
If you want gas lower send escorts to help the US open Hormuz.
Why should we help Trump get of the mess he started? He did not show us the courtesy of discussing his offensive with us prior to commencing it yet he later whined that we were not helping him.
So the economy is still growing, not headed for a recession, and Kevin Warsh will probably hold interest rates steady the rest of 2026 until gas prices normalize. No problem.
Who has mentioned a recession?
Apparently more-so than whoever put the EU in its current energy predicament.
The EU is not a homogenous entity with regard to its energy sources.
No you have not. Here it is again, 3rd try:
"do you want Iran to have nuclear weapons and ICBMs or not?" (Yes or No answer please)
I have answered that question. You may not care for the answer but there its.
No the JCPOA was NOT succeeding. Iran was cheating on it
Not while it was in place. Once Trump withdrew the USA Iran had no reason to continue to comply.
, and it would have ended in 2025 anyway.
And one assumes had it run its course further negotiations would have ensured either its continuation or a new agreement being introduced.
Trump opted for sanctions in 2018, and opted for a military prohibition in 2026. Iran appears determined to get nuclear weapons and ICBMs even today.
I can understand why Iran wants that military power. It would stop the USA from bullying it or threatening to invade.
International law needs an enforcement arm. If its not enforced uniformly it doesn't exist.
Are you content to see a situation of rogue nations, international piracy, rejection of Geneva Conventions, and general brutality?
Adopting your attitude why did the Allies bother with the Nuremberg Trials? Why did the US put Saddam Hussein on trial? Why did the ICC try and convict Radovan Karadžić and Ratko Mladić?
See, another dodge or side-step to the question. Here it is again:
Is forcibly closing the Strait of Hormuz (an International Strait) a violation of International Law?
As you consider that international law does not apply to the USA why are you exercised about it applying to any other nation?
If so, what does the ICC or ICJ intend to do about it? Hint: nothing.
The ICC does not deal with nations. The ICJ deals with legal disputes submitted to it by nation states.
We could, if the ship owners want to move thru it.
I think the insurance might be an issue.
My old answer still stands.
No matter, the US is not under the ICC or ICJ anyway, so stop whining about "international law".
And you have demonstrated several times that you do not comprehend the difference between international law and the ICC.
"Geopolitical Influence", another term for US taxpayers protecting the EU from the Soviet Union and Russia.
Oh please do read up on the global situation post WW2.
Another dodge or side-step. Facts aside, here is the question again, please recall your "Nuremberg" threat to all who violate international
See my above comment on Nuremberg.
...why don't you get the ICC or ICJ to arrest Iran's leaders for closing the Strait of Hormuz, an "International Strait"?????
A nation state would have to bring a case against Iran for the ICJ to be involved. The ICC was established to try rogue leaders responsible for atrocities. There are warrants out for Netanyahu and Gallant. Bringing them to trial is another matter.
