Trump's pyrrhic victory: The US opts for path that can only lead to war

[Billy_Kinetta]

There was never a valid agreement between the United States and Iran.

The agreement was with Obama, and Obama alone.

Wow..wtf do you call lifting the sanctions? This for that. It's a deal. Maybe you should read trumps book. I heard the sequel is coming out after the midterms, "The art of breaking the deal."

You've got to know when to hold them and know when to fold them. The US is not breaking the deal, it's withdrawing from the deal.

It's breaking the deal. Trump said in not so many words that he expected our European allies to follow and already began pressuring. Its not good for trump to be playijg our allies like this. Although, i hope the remaining signatories stay on and it continues because it's actually not a bad agreement. I think Iran's leadership understands they are risking being overthrown if they allow a return to the pre 2015 sanctions.

Since JCPOA is non binding, it is simply leaving the deal. The only way to prevent the return of the sanctions, is for the E3 and Iran to quickly agree to enter good faith negotiations to form new agreements to provide more comprehensive and rigorous control over Iran's nuclear program as well as its missile program, its imperialist adventures and its support of terrorism. When Macron visited the US he said this is what he wanted to do, keep JCPOA but add new agreements to correct its flaws and add new agreements to cover these other items. Now President Trump has given him a powerful new tool with which to try to get Iran to the negotiating table.

The fact that the US leaving leads directly to re-instating the sanctions means it's binding in effect.

That makes no sense.

The E3 on their own is significantly less powerful than the US, Russia, China, which at this point do not appear to be at the renegotiation table. Russia and China have said they won't renegotiate or bring back the sanctions, a critically relevant aspect.

They play their game, we play ours. Explain the relevance.

You must have missed trump's speeches where he said his new most powerful sanctions will target allies doing business with Iran, a specific threat to the E3, and he called out German business by name.

As well he should.

He also was saying that we won't be threatened with nukes. Does he understand that Iran has not recently instigated anything towards us and is not a threat to us?

"Death to America!" since 1979.

Trump needs to understand that he and our country are 1 in many. Doing all this stupid shit to antagonize our allies and adversaries is burning through patience and diplomatic capital. There's little stopping them from simply walking away from us as a former leader.

Au contraire, there is much stopping them.

 

[jc456]

The whole reason why Iran wants nukes is because they want use them to destroy Israel.
The Iranians don't want nukes for defense, they want them for offense.

You think Iran would drop a nuke on Israel? Really? Why would they want to do that?

really?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

You’d love that, it’s obvious.

No.

We now have a choice, either militarily wrestle the nuke they are going to develop from them or allow them to have it. That is the path we are now on. Last week, we were on a different path.

No, we were always on the same path. That other make believe path was totally a fabrication of the left and their media.

Sadly, you're mistaken.

I am absolutely correct but of course you will believe whatever you want to. It’s easier than exercising the maturity of admitting you are wrong.

Its not even a question of you being right...clearly you're not even remotely clued in on how far off base you are. It's more a question of how soon we will have to send troops into Iran.

There is no reason to send troops into Iran unless we intend to annex it.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

a non binding one.
If it was so important, and such a good idea, obamas ass should have done it the right way.

Well, if Russia, China, France, Germany, UK, Iran, and the U.N. all thought it was a real agreement and actually did what the agreement said they should do, and if everyone except the U.S. is now treating it as a broken agreement, I don't think the excuses matter. They are only to make Trump look acceptable in doing this.
If it brings Iran around, I'll be glad. It sure doesn't look that way right now. I'm beginning to wonder if the gossip about Israel and S.A. might be true--they just want us on their side in a war with Iran. Iran and Israel gave it a good kickoff last night.

you still don't get it. It's a lost subject for you. when you don't understand what you're talking about, it's tough to have a discussion. just saying. If you can't accept that trump had the authorization to do it, you're beyond objectivity and not worth any further debate. It's obvious you can't accept the fact that trump had the authorization.

You misunderstood me. I am not arguing Trump COULDN'T do this; of course he could. What I am hearing from just about everyone who knows stuff about Iran and the Middle East in general is that he SHOULDN'T have. I don't know how this will end anymore than you do. But right now I don't see Trump proceeding to a well thought out Plan B. I don't think he's got one. Meanwhile, Iran and Israel took the opportunity to lob missiles at each other a couple days ago. Yesterday the Trump administration said that if Israel goes to war with Iran, America will support them. What does that say to you?

except the people who live there - well they love it that trump has done this but you won't hear that in US media on either side really.

i can dig up links or just google and find some of your own. saudis were thrilled about it. other countries were thanking god. while europe russia and china are "not happy" - they don't live there. all the people who live there aside from iran and their friends, are happy about it.

so "should" would seem to be which direction you want to go. do we pretend that iran isn't making a bomb or trying to or do we admit they are and do something about it? why people seem to think iran has zero intentions to create a bomb that will "kill the infidels" is beyond me at times, but i'll keep talking to try and understand.

if the "treaty" had zero way to enforce, we shouldn't have done it. i felt the same way about the global warming "treaty" that had no teeth and all $$$ from the US.

I truly don't see any evidence that Iran is still building their nuclear weapons. The inspectors can't find it. If Israel knew where every Iranian installation in Syria was, and if the US knew where all the chemical weapons sites in Syria were, do you really think we wouldn't know if Iran was building a nuclear weapon? We know where NoKo was building theirs. Are we that stupid? The stuff Netanyahu said about Iran lying was from over a decade ago, prior to the JCPOA.
I don't pretend to know a whole lot about it, so if you've got a reputable source showing that Iran is in actuality continuing its nuclear weapon program, like with evidence or specifics at least, please link.

I truly don't see any evidence that Iran is still building their nuclear weapons. The inspectors can't find it.

Inspectors? What inspectors? Where?

The stuff Netanyahu said about Iran lying was from over a decade ago, prior to the JCPOA.

Wait, Iran lied? About nuclear facilities? Then how can you trust them now?

 

[grainbely]

Wow..wtf do you call lifting the sanctions? This for that. It's a deal. Maybe you should read trumps book. I heard the sequel is coming out after the midterms, "The art of breaking the deal."

You've got to know when to hold them and know when to fold them. The US is not breaking the deal, it's withdrawing from the deal.

It's breaking the deal. Trump said in not so many words that he expected our European allies to follow and already began pressuring. Its not good for trump to be playijg our allies like this. Although, i hope the remaining signatories stay on and it continues because it's actually not a bad agreement. I think Iran's leadership understands they are risking being overthrown if they allow a return to the pre 2015 sanctions.

Since JCPOA is non binding, it is simply leaving the deal. The only way to prevent the return of the sanctions, is for the E3 and Iran to quickly agree to enter good faith negotiations to form new agreements to provide more comprehensive and rigorous control over Iran's nuclear program as well as its missile program, its imperialist adventures and its support of terrorism. When Macron visited the US he said this is what he wanted to do, keep JCPOA but add new agreements to correct its flaws and add new agreements to cover these other items. Now President Trump has given him a powerful new tool with which to try to get Iran to the negotiating table.

The fact that the US leaving leads directly to re-instating the sanctions means it's binding in effect.

That makes no sense.

The E3 on their own is significantly less powerful than the US, Russia, China, which at this point do not appear to be at the renegotiation table. Russia and China have said they won't renegotiate or bring back the sanctions, a critically relevant aspect.

They play their game, we play ours. Explain the relevance.

You must have missed trump's speeches where he said his new most powerful sanctions will target allies doing business with Iran, a specific threat to the E3, and he called out German business by name.

As well he should.

He also was saying that we won't be threatened with nukes. Does he understand that Iran has not recently instigated anything towards us and is not a threat to us?

"Death to America!" since 1979.

Trump needs to understand that he and our country are 1 in many. Doing all this stupid shit to antagonize our allies and adversaries is burning through patience and diplomatic capital. There's little stopping them from simply walking away from us as a former leader.

Au contraire, there is much stopping them.

You're going to have to see the conversation for relevance.

The deal is binding in effect (not legally) because leaving isn't just leaving. It includes automatically re-instituting the sanctions, jeopardizing the whole thing, and requiring at least some effort and cost on our part. You should be able to understand that. If leaving had no consequence it would be a different story.

Saying Death to America is a rejection of western ways for them. We just blew wind into those sails. There has been little to link that with a threat of new military instigation towards us. Like with North Korea, it's a sign of strength to stand up to what those guys consider the world bully.

You'll need to explain how the world can't walk away from us as a leader with further deterioration of international agreements to come. The deals Trump has withdrawn from that the US was once a leader in are continuing. TPP, Paris Accord, and I think the Iran deal will survive in some fashion too. The Korean deal will not be negotiated by the US based in what I've read.

Trump is sowing discord which is not an appealing trait in a potential partner. The Korean conflict taking a 180 like it did makes me think there is an agenda at play. NK never planned to attack anyone. Nukes are a bargaining chip that the US and others accept as currency. Iran sees how that is playing out for them, very well.

 

[iceberg]

Well, if Russia, China, France, Germany, UK, Iran, and the U.N. all thought it was a real agreement and actually did what the agreement said they should do, and if everyone except the U.S. is now treating it as a broken agreement, I don't think the excuses matter. They are only to make Trump look acceptable in doing this.
If it brings Iran around, I'll be glad. It sure doesn't look that way right now. I'm beginning to wonder if the gossip about Israel and S.A. might be true--they just want us on their side in a war with Iran. Iran and Israel gave it a good kickoff last night.

you still don't get it. It's a lost subject for you. when you don't understand what you're talking about, it's tough to have a discussion. just saying. If you can't accept that trump had the authorization to do it, you're beyond objectivity and not worth any further debate. It's obvious you can't accept the fact that trump had the authorization.

You misunderstood me. I am not arguing Trump COULDN'T do this; of course he could. What I am hearing from just about everyone who knows stuff about Iran and the Middle East in general is that he SHOULDN'T have. I don't know how this will end anymore than you do. But right now I don't see Trump proceeding to a well thought out Plan B. I don't think he's got one. Meanwhile, Iran and Israel took the opportunity to lob missiles at each other a couple days ago. Yesterday the Trump administration said that if Israel goes to war with Iran, America will support them. What does that say to you?

except the people who live there - well they love it that trump has done this but you won't hear that in US media on either side really.

i can dig up links or just google and find some of your own. saudis were thrilled about it. other countries were thanking god. while europe russia and china are "not happy" - they don't live there. all the people who live there aside from iran and their friends, are happy about it.

so "should" would seem to be which direction you want to go. do we pretend that iran isn't making a bomb or trying to or do we admit they are and do something about it? why people seem to think iran has zero intentions to create a bomb that will "kill the infidels" is beyond me at times, but i'll keep talking to try and understand.

if the "treaty" had zero way to enforce, we shouldn't have done it. i felt the same way about the global warming "treaty" that had no teeth and all $$$ from the US.

I truly don't see any evidence that Iran is still building their nuclear weapons. The inspectors can't find it. If Israel knew where every Iranian installation in Syria was, and if the US knew where all the chemical weapons sites in Syria were, do you really think we wouldn't know if Iran was building a nuclear weapon? We know where NoKo was building theirs. Are we that stupid? The stuff Netanyahu said about Iran lying was from over a decade ago, prior to the JCPOA.
I don't pretend to know a whole lot about it, so if you've got a reputable source showing that Iran is in actuality continuing its nuclear weapon program, like with evidence or specifics at least, please link.

I truly don't see any evidence that Iran is still building their nuclear weapons. The inspectors can't find it.

Inspectors? What inspectors? Where?

The stuff Netanyahu said about Iran lying was from over a decade ago, prior to the JCPOA.

Wait, Iran lied? About nuclear facilities? Then how can you trust them now?

i do get what you're saying and for the most part, agree. but if we're to say people change, then using 10+ year old documents isn't the smoking gun it's being sold as.

i do think in the past they lied and hard about their nuclear ambitions. on one hand most would or face being stomped out before you can defend yourself. if we didn't have them and were making them and china or russia said "hey, you making nukes" would we say "gosh yes."

or lie?

i don't think any of us know the whole story but i hope if we pulled out, regardless of whether or not this was a binding treaty, it would be for better reasons than unearthing old information and rehashing it.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

You've got to know when to hold them and know when to fold them. The US is not breaking the deal, it's withdrawing from the deal.

It's breaking the deal. Trump said in not so many words that he expected our European allies to follow and already began pressuring. Its not good for trump to be playijg our allies like this. Although, i hope the remaining signatories stay on and it continues because it's actually not a bad agreement. I think Iran's leadership understands they are risking being overthrown if they allow a return to the pre 2015 sanctions.

Since JCPOA is non binding, it is simply leaving the deal. The only way to prevent the return of the sanctions, is for the E3 and Iran to quickly agree to enter good faith negotiations to form new agreements to provide more comprehensive and rigorous control over Iran's nuclear program as well as its missile program, its imperialist adventures and its support of terrorism. When Macron visited the US he said this is what he wanted to do, keep JCPOA but add new agreements to correct its flaws and add new agreements to cover these other items. Now President Trump has given him a powerful new tool with which to try to get Iran to the negotiating table.

The fact that the US leaving leads directly to re-instating the sanctions means it's binding in effect.

That makes no sense.

The E3 on their own is significantly less powerful than the US, Russia, China, which at this point do not appear to be at the renegotiation table. Russia and China have said they won't renegotiate or bring back the sanctions, a critically relevant aspect.

They play their game, we play ours. Explain the relevance.

You must have missed trump's speeches where he said his new most powerful sanctions will target allies doing business with Iran, a specific threat to the E3, and he called out German business by name.

As well he should.

He also was saying that we won't be threatened with nukes. Does he understand that Iran has not recently instigated anything towards us and is not a threat to us?

"Death to America!" since 1979.

Trump needs to understand that he and our country are 1 in many. Doing all this stupid shit to antagonize our allies and adversaries is burning through patience and diplomatic capital. There's little stopping them from simply walking away from us as a former leader.

Au contraire, there is much stopping them.

You're going to have to see the conversation for relevance.

The deal is binding in effect (not legally) because leaving isn't just leaving. It includes automatically re-instituting the sanctions, jeopardizing the whole thing, and requiring at least some effort and cost on our part. You should be able to understand that. If leaving had no consequence it would be a different story.

Again, you make no sense. The agreement was not binding at any level. We are simply returning status quo to its state prior to the ersatz agreement fostered by Obama. Should the Iranians insist upon pursuing their nuclear goal, other methods to convince them are on the table.

Understand. The agreement was not with the United States, but with Obama. The Iranians never signed it. That congressional Democrats approved it is of no consequence. It was sloppy work, and it died with his presidency.

You'll need to explain how the world can't walk away from us as a leader with further deterioration of international agreements to come.

Right off the top, Western Europe and our allies in SE Asia are in no position to handle their own security.

The deals Trump has withdrawn from that the US was once a leader in are continuing. TPP, Paris Accord, and I think the Iran deal will survive in some fashion too.

Obama fueled. Gone. Any "survival" will require full re-negotiations.

The Korean deal will not be negotiated by the US based in what I've read.

Source?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

you still don't get it. It's a lost subject for you. when you don't understand what you're talking about, it's tough to have a discussion. just saying. If you can't accept that trump had the authorization to do it, you're beyond objectivity and not worth any further debate. It's obvious you can't accept the fact that trump had the authorization.

You misunderstood me. I am not arguing Trump COULDN'T do this; of course he could. What I am hearing from just about everyone who knows stuff about Iran and the Middle East in general is that he SHOULDN'T have. I don't know how this will end anymore than you do. But right now I don't see Trump proceeding to a well thought out Plan B. I don't think he's got one. Meanwhile, Iran and Israel took the opportunity to lob missiles at each other a couple days ago. Yesterday the Trump administration said that if Israel goes to war with Iran, America will support them. What does that say to you?

except the people who live there - well they love it that trump has done this but you won't hear that in US media on either side really.

i can dig up links or just google and find some of your own. saudis were thrilled about it. other countries were thanking god. while europe russia and china are "not happy" - they don't live there. all the people who live there aside from iran and their friends, are happy about it.

so "should" would seem to be which direction you want to go. do we pretend that iran isn't making a bomb or trying to or do we admit they are and do something about it? why people seem to think iran has zero intentions to create a bomb that will "kill the infidels" is beyond me at times, but i'll keep talking to try and understand.

if the "treaty" had zero way to enforce, we shouldn't have done it. i felt the same way about the global warming "treaty" that had no teeth and all $$$ from the US.

I truly don't see any evidence that Iran is still building their nuclear weapons. The inspectors can't find it. If Israel knew where every Iranian installation in Syria was, and if the US knew where all the chemical weapons sites in Syria were, do you really think we wouldn't know if Iran was building a nuclear weapon? We know where NoKo was building theirs. Are we that stupid? The stuff Netanyahu said about Iran lying was from over a decade ago, prior to the JCPOA.
I don't pretend to know a whole lot about it, so if you've got a reputable source showing that Iran is in actuality continuing its nuclear weapon program, like with evidence or specifics at least, please link.

I truly don't see any evidence that Iran is still building their nuclear weapons. The inspectors can't find it.

Inspectors? What inspectors? Where?

The stuff Netanyahu said about Iran lying was from over a decade ago, prior to the JCPOA.

Wait, Iran lied? About nuclear facilities? Then how can you trust them now?

i do get what you're saying and for the most part, agree. but if we're to say people change, then using 10+ year old documents isn't the smoking gun it's being sold as.

i do think in the past they lied and hard about their nuclear ambitions. on one hand most would or face being stomped out before you can defend yourself. if we didn't have them and were making them and china or russia said "hey, you making nukes" would we say "gosh yes."

or lie?

i don't think any of us know the whole story but i hope if we pulled out, regardless of whether or not this was a binding treaty, it would be for better reasons than unearthing old information and rehashing it.

i do get what you're saying and for the most part, agree. but if we're to say people change, then using 10+ year old documents isn't the smoking gun it's being sold as.

You think the mullahs change?

 

[iceberg]

You misunderstood me. I am not arguing Trump COULDN'T do this; of course he could. What I am hearing from just about everyone who knows stuff about Iran and the Middle East in general is that he SHOULDN'T have. I don't know how this will end anymore than you do. But right now I don't see Trump proceeding to a well thought out Plan B. I don't think he's got one. Meanwhile, Iran and Israel took the opportunity to lob missiles at each other a couple days ago. Yesterday the Trump administration said that if Israel goes to war with Iran, America will support them. What does that say to you?

except the people who live there - well they love it that trump has done this but you won't hear that in US media on either side really.

i can dig up links or just google and find some of your own. saudis were thrilled about it. other countries were thanking god. while europe russia and china are "not happy" - they don't live there. all the people who live there aside from iran and their friends, are happy about it.

so "should" would seem to be which direction you want to go. do we pretend that iran isn't making a bomb or trying to or do we admit they are and do something about it? why people seem to think iran has zero intentions to create a bomb that will "kill the infidels" is beyond me at times, but i'll keep talking to try and understand.

if the "treaty" had zero way to enforce, we shouldn't have done it. i felt the same way about the global warming "treaty" that had no teeth and all $$$ from the US.

I truly don't see any evidence that Iran is still building their nuclear weapons. The inspectors can't find it. If Israel knew where every Iranian installation in Syria was, and if the US knew where all the chemical weapons sites in Syria were, do you really think we wouldn't know if Iran was building a nuclear weapon? We know where NoKo was building theirs. Are we that stupid? The stuff Netanyahu said about Iran lying was from over a decade ago, prior to the JCPOA.
I don't pretend to know a whole lot about it, so if you've got a reputable source showing that Iran is in actuality continuing its nuclear weapon program, like with evidence or specifics at least, please link.

I truly don't see any evidence that Iran is still building their nuclear weapons. The inspectors can't find it.

Inspectors? What inspectors? Where?

The stuff Netanyahu said about Iran lying was from over a decade ago, prior to the JCPOA.

Wait, Iran lied? About nuclear facilities? Then how can you trust them now?

i do get what you're saying and for the most part, agree. but if we're to say people change, then using 10+ year old documents isn't the smoking gun it's being sold as.

i do think in the past they lied and hard about their nuclear ambitions. on one hand most would or face being stomped out before you can defend yourself. if we didn't have them and were making them and china or russia said "hey, you making nukes" would we say "gosh yes."

or lie?

i don't think any of us know the whole story but i hope if we pulled out, regardless of whether or not this was a binding treaty, it would be for better reasons than unearthing old information and rehashing it.

i do get what you're saying and for the most part, agree. but if we're to say people change, then using 10+ year old documents isn't the smoking gun it's being sold as.

You think the mullahs change?

not at all but my own views are not all encompassing or i'd likely be better off in life than i am.

do you think using documents we've known about for what, 15+ years, is a reason to suddenly back out of the agreement?

i'm glad we backed out but that's gut feeling. i hope if trump makes any other agreement with them he follows process and doesn't do the EO bullshit. but my main point is that i hope we have more justification for it than freaking out all over again over things long since understood.

 

[PredFan]

You’d love that, it’s obvious.

No.

We now have a choice, either militarily wrestle the nuke they are going to develop from them or allow them to have it. That is the path we are now on. Last week, we were on a different path.

No, we were always on the same path. That other make believe path was totally a fabrication of the left and their media.

Sadly, you're mistaken.

I am absolutely correct but of course you will believe whatever you want to. It’s easier than exercising the maturity of admitting you are wrong.

Its not even a question of you being right...clearly you're not even remotely clued in on how far off base you are. It's more a question of how soon we will have to send troops into Iran.

I misunderstood. I thought we were still talking about North Korea. Apologies.

 

[PredFan]

Why does the US need to get anything? The world got peace. Trump saved the world.

Trump saved the world? Shoot you better get your wives and daughters meat sheathes out for trump the twitpaler. World peace is great, dog. We'll have to ask the military industrial colonialists why our economy and international presence needs to be so intimate with war.

You need this:
View attachment 193009

Dude. I'm not helping you apply that to your man psy.

Learn to read you illiterate moron.

Learn to have an adult conversation. I'm tired of playing daycare with you orally fixated autists.

How can I have an adult conversation with someone who obviously cannot read at an adult level?

 

[PredFan]

The left has been wrong on everything, they are wrong on this too.

Sit back and watch Trump win again.

The only question is what spin the insane left will put on his victory.

We're waiting. So far he's managed to tear up deals, huge investments in time and energy, but no one is rushing to him to sign anything. They know he's an unstable non-genious. I bet that trump continues to have zero new deals made through the end of 2018 but manages to tear up at least one more because he can't handle an actual involved diplomatic negotiation.

He’s made many deals already, including the deal to release prisoners in NK and to bring them to the table. Of course you idiots don’t have the maturity to admit this plain truth.

 

[PredFan]

That anti-American non-treaty was instituted by 0bama by himself. He would never have gotten it through Congress so he did it himself. Iran did not sign the treaty so it was just the idiot 0bama doing whatever the **** he wanted to do. Trump was and is right.

 

[grainbely]

It's breaking the deal. Trump said in not so many words that he expected our European allies to follow and already began pressuring. Its not good for trump to be playijg our allies like this. Although, i hope the remaining signatories stay on and it continues because it's actually not a bad agreement. I think Iran's leadership understands they are risking being overthrown if they allow a return to the pre 2015 sanctions.

Since JCPOA is non binding, it is simply leaving the deal. The only way to prevent the return of the sanctions, is for the E3 and Iran to quickly agree to enter good faith negotiations to form new agreements to provide more comprehensive and rigorous control over Iran's nuclear program as well as its missile program, its imperialist adventures and its support of terrorism. When Macron visited the US he said this is what he wanted to do, keep JCPOA but add new agreements to correct its flaws and add new agreements to cover these other items. Now President Trump has given him a powerful new tool with which to try to get Iran to the negotiating table.

The fact that the US leaving leads directly to re-instating the sanctions means it's binding in effect.

That makes no sense.

The E3 on their own is significantly less powerful than the US, Russia, China, which at this point do not appear to be at the renegotiation table. Russia and China have said they won't renegotiate or bring back the sanctions, a critically relevant aspect.

They play their game, we play ours. Explain the relevance.

You must have missed trump's speeches where he said his new most powerful sanctions will target allies doing business with Iran, a specific threat to the E3, and he called out German business by name.

As well he should.

He also was saying that we won't be threatened with nukes. Does he understand that Iran has not recently instigated anything towards us and is not a threat to us?

"Death to America!" since 1979.

Trump needs to understand that he and our country are 1 in many. Doing all this stupid shit to antagonize our allies and adversaries is burning through patience and diplomatic capital. There's little stopping them from simply walking away from us as a former leader.

Au contraire, there is much stopping them.

You're going to have to see the conversation for relevance.

The deal is binding in effect (not legally) because leaving isn't just leaving. It includes automatically re-instituting the sanctions, jeopardizing the whole thing, and requiring at least some effort and cost on our part. You should be able to understand that. If leaving had no consequence it would be a different story.

Again, you make no sense. The agreement was not binding at any level. We are simply returning status quo to its state prior to the ersatz agreement fostered by Obama. Should the Iranians insist upon pursuing their nuclear goal, other methods to convince them are on the table.

Understand. The agreement was not with the United States, but with Obama. The Iranians never signed it. That congressional Democrats approved it is of no consequence. It was sloppy work, and it died with his presidency.

You'll need to explain how the world can't walk away from us as a leader with further deterioration of international agreements to come.

Right off the top, Western Europe and our allies in SE Asia are in no position to handle their own security.

The deals Trump has withdrawn from that the US was once a leader in are continuing. TPP, Paris Accord, and I think the Iran deal will survive in some fashion too.

Obama fueled. Gone. Any "survival" will require full re-negotiations.

The Korean deal will not be negotiated by the US based in what I've read.

Source?

Japan, China and South Korea are 'in sync' on North Korea, Japanese official says | The Japan Times

There are multiple articles on this summit. Take your pick. They are steering clear of Trump, who is indirectly cedeing leadership of the area to the regional powers and China. It's not surprising considering Trumps unhinged twitter spats over the conflict. Negotiating a strong deal would do better without that sort of distraction. I think it has potential to be a good thing for the region for them to work it out together, personally, but it does not coincide with our reactionary "winning" attitude. Economically, the US has a lot to not gain from this, probably some to lose too. It's an expected consequence of Trump's protectionist agenda. This was one of the big warnings about leaving the TPP. China will happily and intimately replace us where possible over there.

For my point, it's immaterial that it was the Obama admin and not the US that entered the Iran deal. What proves you wrong in your feigned misunderstanding is that the consequential sanctions are bound to our presence in the deal. That's a hard and strict consequence. It's the mechanical and functional motivation of the entire deal. When Trump says they are not abiding so we will exit and allow the sanctions to return, he is re-inforcing my statement. It's not legally binding but it's also not just casually leaving the agreement.

The wind down of the Korean war would reduce the need for our military presence in the area. Not entirely or maybe even substantially, but what else is going on there now besides China's South China Sea activity and sporadic ISIS activity? Our economic alliances are dependent on our military alliances in some places. The middle East will remain hot. Posturing with Russia and China and the threat of cyber warfare will remain warm to hot. International peace would undoubtedly lead to some withdrawal of our military colonialism.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

except the people who live there - well they love it that trump has done this but you won't hear that in US media on either side really.

i can dig up links or just google and find some of your own. saudis were thrilled about it. other countries were thanking god. while europe russia and china are "not happy" - they don't live there. all the people who live there aside from iran and their friends, are happy about it.

so "should" would seem to be which direction you want to go. do we pretend that iran isn't making a bomb or trying to or do we admit they are and do something about it? why people seem to think iran has zero intentions to create a bomb that will "kill the infidels" is beyond me at times, but i'll keep talking to try and understand.

if the "treaty" had zero way to enforce, we shouldn't have done it. i felt the same way about the global warming "treaty" that had no teeth and all $$$ from the US.

I truly don't see any evidence that Iran is still building their nuclear weapons. The inspectors can't find it. If Israel knew where every Iranian installation in Syria was, and if the US knew where all the chemical weapons sites in Syria were, do you really think we wouldn't know if Iran was building a nuclear weapon? We know where NoKo was building theirs. Are we that stupid? The stuff Netanyahu said about Iran lying was from over a decade ago, prior to the JCPOA.
I don't pretend to know a whole lot about it, so if you've got a reputable source showing that Iran is in actuality continuing its nuclear weapon program, like with evidence or specifics at least, please link.

I truly don't see any evidence that Iran is still building their nuclear weapons. The inspectors can't find it.

Inspectors? What inspectors? Where?

The stuff Netanyahu said about Iran lying was from over a decade ago, prior to the JCPOA.

Wait, Iran lied? About nuclear facilities? Then how can you trust them now?

i do get what you're saying and for the most part, agree. but if we're to say people change, then using 10+ year old documents isn't the smoking gun it's being sold as.

i do think in the past they lied and hard about their nuclear ambitions. on one hand most would or face being stomped out before you can defend yourself. if we didn't have them and were making them and china or russia said "hey, you making nukes" would we say "gosh yes."

or lie?

i don't think any of us know the whole story but i hope if we pulled out, regardless of whether or not this was a binding treaty, it would be for better reasons than unearthing old information and rehashing it.

i do get what you're saying and for the most part, agree. but if we're to say people change, then using 10+ year old documents isn't the smoking gun it's being sold as.

You think the mullahs change?

not at all but my own views are not all encompassing or i'd likely be better off in life than i am.

do you think using documents we've known about for what, 15+ years, is a reason to suddenly back out of the agreement?

i'm glad we backed out but that's gut feeling. i hope if trump makes any other agreement with them he follows process and doesn't do the EO bullshit. but my main point is that i hope we have more justification for it than freaking out all over again over things long since understood.

do you think using documents we've known about for what, 15+ years, is a reason to suddenly back out of the agreement?

What agreement? Did they agree to let us inspect?

 

[toomuchtime_]

There was never a valid agreement between the United States and Iran.

The agreement was with Obama, and Obama alone.

Wow..wtf do you call lifting the sanctions? This for that. It's a deal. Maybe you should read trumps book. I heard the sequel is coming out after the midterms, "The art of breaking the deal."

You've got to know when to hold them and know when to fold them. The US is not breaking the deal, it's withdrawing from the deal.

It's breaking the deal. Trump said in not so many words that he expected our European allies to follow and already began pressuring. Its not good for trump to be playijg our allies like this. Although, i hope the remaining signatories stay on and it continues because it's actually not a bad agreement. I think Iran's leadership understands they are risking being overthrown if they allow a return to the pre 2015 sanctions.

Since JCPOA is non binding, it is simply leaving the deal. The only way to prevent the return of the sanctions, is for the E3 and Iran to quickly agree to enter good faith negotiations to form new agreements to provide more comprehensive and rigorous control over Iran's nuclear program as well as its missile program, its imperialist adventures and its support of terrorism. When Macron visited the US he said this is what he wanted to do, keep JCPOA but add new agreements to correct its flaws and add new agreements to cover these other items. Now President Trump has given him a powerful new tool with which to try to get Iran to the negotiating table.

The fact that the US leaving leads directly to re-instating the sanctions means it's binding in effect. The E3 on their own is significantly less powerful than the US, Russia, China, which at this point do not appear to be at the renegotiation table. Russia and China have said they won't renegotiate or bring back the sanctions, a critically relevant aspect.

You must have missed trump's speeches where he said his new most powerful sanctions will target allies doing business with Iran, a specific threat to the E3, and he called out German business by name. He also was saying that we won't be threatened with nukes. Does he understand that Iran has not recently instigated anything towards us and is not a threat to us? This leads to a key part of the problem. He's mistakenly putting us in bed with Israel's agenda of Iran's destruction.

Trump needs to understand that he and our country are 1 in many. Doing all this stupid shit to antagonize our allies and adversaries is burning through patience and diplomatic capital. There's little stopping them from simply walking away from us as a former leader.

A very foolish and dishonest, not to mention bigoted, post. JCPOA is non binding. Obama's State Department said it was merely a political agreement and was non binding. JCPOA, itself, makes clear that any member can leave at any time for any reason.

Leaving does not lead directly to the imposition of sanctions. To have the US sanctions, as opposed to US sanctions, reimposed the US would have to go through all the steps specified n the dispute resolution mechanism section of JCPOA.

The US is not threatening any of its allies, or other countries, with its sanctions. The sanctions are directed toward companies, not countries, and if those companies do business with Iran in proscribed ways, they lose access to the US market, but President Trump has given those companies that are presently doing business in Iran three to six months to wrap up affairs so that the don't suffer losses once the sanctions kick in.

It is only three days since the President announced the US was leaving JCPOA and reimposing its sanctions, so it is silly to try to discern what positions other countries will take by what they are saying now. What they should all be saying is, "How could we be so stupid and incompetent! He has been telling us for over a year that this would happen so what kind of horses asses are we to have been surprised by this?" Since there is no way for other countries to save the Iranian economy from the effects of the US sanctions, it is likely that they will try to join President Trump in trying to get Iran to the negotiating table. Macron had already agreed that France had the same goals as the US but wanted to build on top of JCPOA, and President Trump agreed it was worth looking into, so now the US has given Macron a powerful new tool to use in this endeavor.

There is no rational basis for claiming Israel wants to destroy Iran. Just the opposite is true, Iran has for decades threatened to destroy Israel and has been attacking Israel through its proxies for decades, but the Israeli government has never threatened to destroy Iran. Israel has only two issues with Iran, to end Iran's proxy war against Israel and to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. If you were not a mouth breathing, knuckle dragging bigot, you would not feel the need to try to blame the Jews for everything you don't like.

What you need to try to understand is that there is clear evidence Iran is continuing its nuclear weapons program despite the limitations on it enrichment activities - the fact that it continues to lie about ever having a nuclear weapons program and that it is investing heavily in the development of long range missiles, which are enormously expensive and of little value without nuclear warheads - and is carrying out imperialist wars across the ME and is a stated sponsor of terrorism, and that the President's move was the only way to deal with these issues.

 

[iceberg]

I truly don't see any evidence that Iran is still building their nuclear weapons. The inspectors can't find it. If Israel knew where every Iranian installation in Syria was, and if the US knew where all the chemical weapons sites in Syria were, do you really think we wouldn't know if Iran was building a nuclear weapon? We know where NoKo was building theirs. Are we that stupid? The stuff Netanyahu said about Iran lying was from over a decade ago, prior to the JCPOA.
I don't pretend to know a whole lot about it, so if you've got a reputable source showing that Iran is in actuality continuing its nuclear weapon program, like with evidence or specifics at least, please link.

I truly don't see any evidence that Iran is still building their nuclear weapons. The inspectors can't find it.

Inspectors? What inspectors? Where?

The stuff Netanyahu said about Iran lying was from over a decade ago, prior to the JCPOA.

Wait, Iran lied? About nuclear facilities? Then how can you trust them now?

i do get what you're saying and for the most part, agree. but if we're to say people change, then using 10+ year old documents isn't the smoking gun it's being sold as.

i do think in the past they lied and hard about their nuclear ambitions. on one hand most would or face being stomped out before you can defend yourself. if we didn't have them and were making them and china or russia said "hey, you making nukes" would we say "gosh yes."

or lie?

i don't think any of us know the whole story but i hope if we pulled out, regardless of whether or not this was a binding treaty, it would be for better reasons than unearthing old information and rehashing it.

i do get what you're saying and for the most part, agree. but if we're to say people change, then using 10+ year old documents isn't the smoking gun it's being sold as.

You think the mullahs change?

not at all but my own views are not all encompassing or i'd likely be better off in life than i am.

do you think using documents we've known about for what, 15+ years, is a reason to suddenly back out of the agreement?

i'm glad we backed out but that's gut feeling. i hope if trump makes any other agreement with them he follows process and doesn't do the EO bullshit. but my main point is that i hope we have more justification for it than freaking out all over again over things long since understood.

do you think using documents we've known about for what, 15+ years, is a reason to suddenly back out of the agreement?

What agreement? Did they agree to let us inspect?

not gonna play this open ended narrow focus game on either side.

 

[OldLady]

Well, if Russia, China, France, Germany, UK, Iran, and the U.N. all thought it was a real agreement and actually did what the agreement said they should do, and if everyone except the U.S. is now treating it as a broken agreement, I don't think the excuses matter. They are only to make Trump look acceptable in doing this.
If it brings Iran around, I'll be glad. It sure doesn't look that way right now. I'm beginning to wonder if the gossip about Israel and S.A. might be true--they just want us on their side in a war with Iran. Iran and Israel gave it a good kickoff last night.

you still don't get it. It's a lost subject for you. when you don't understand what you're talking about, it's tough to have a discussion. just saying. If you can't accept that trump had the authorization to do it, you're beyond objectivity and not worth any further debate. It's obvious you can't accept the fact that trump had the authorization.

You misunderstood me. I am not arguing Trump COULDN'T do this; of course he could. What I am hearing from just about everyone who knows stuff about Iran and the Middle East in general is that he SHOULDN'T have. I don't know how this will end anymore than you do. But right now I don't see Trump proceeding to a well thought out Plan B. I don't think he's got one. Meanwhile, Iran and Israel took the opportunity to lob missiles at each other a couple days ago. Yesterday the Trump administration said that if Israel goes to war with Iran, America will support them. What does that say to you?

except the people who live there - well they love it that trump has done this but you won't hear that in US media on either side really.

i can dig up links or just google and find some of your own. saudis were thrilled about it. other countries were thanking god. while europe russia and china are "not happy" - they don't live there. all the people who live there aside from iran and their friends, are happy about it.

so "should" would seem to be which direction you want to go. do we pretend that iran isn't making a bomb or trying to or do we admit they are and do something about it? why people seem to think iran has zero intentions to create a bomb that will "kill the infidels" is beyond me at times, but i'll keep talking to try and understand.

if the "treaty" had zero way to enforce, we shouldn't have done it. i felt the same way about the global warming "treaty" that had no teeth and all $$$ from the US.

I truly don't see any evidence that Iran is still building their nuclear weapons. The inspectors can't find it. If Israel knew where every Iranian installation in Syria was, and if the US knew where all the chemical weapons sites in Syria were, do you really think we wouldn't know if Iran was building a nuclear weapon? We know where NoKo was building theirs. Are we that stupid? The stuff Netanyahu said about Iran lying was from over a decade ago, prior to the JCPOA.
I don't pretend to know a whole lot about it, so if you've got a reputable source showing that Iran is in actuality continuing its nuclear weapon program, like with evidence or specifics at least, please link.

I truly don't see any evidence that Iran is still building their nuclear weapons. The inspectors can't find it.

Inspectors? What inspectors? Where?

The stuff Netanyahu said about Iran lying was from over a decade ago, prior to the JCPOA.

Wait, Iran lied? About nuclear facilities? Then how can you trust them now?

Because of the inspectors.

 

[Slade3200]

You will have to excuse my lack in confidence in your understanding about how Muslims think. Perhaps you can provide me a little background which gives you such insights?

Tell me what you know about 12'ver Shia.

I don’t know anything about it. Please do explain

'12th Imam,' Key Facet Of Islamic Prophecy, Fuels Middle East Turmoil


.

That’s an interesting read but I did find it odd that the source of much of its information came from a evangelical baptist Christian (Wagner). Wouldn’t you find an explaination from an actual Muslim, perhaps both a Shiite and a Sunni, to be a little more interesting and accurate when trying to explain their own point of views and interpretations?

The 12th Imam seems to be a similar story as the 2nd coming of Jesus which is a popular Christian belief.

------------------------------------ and as well as my explanation in post number 194 you will find that muslims are big practitioners of a muslim and 'mohamad' approved form of lying called 'taqiyah' where they will happily lie as a way of furthering 'islams' goal of making the world a 'house of peace' for and under 'mohamad' rule Slade .

Have you ever had a personal relationship with a Muslim? Friend, coworker, roommate etc? Have you ever spent time in a Muslim country, been to a mosque, and tried to learn about their culture/religion first hand? Or is your information based on what you hear and read?

 

[dannyboys]

There was never a valid agreement between the United States and Iran.

The agreement was with Obama, and Obama alone.

Oh, that's brilliant, Billy.
Who told you that?

The agreement itself. Was it ratified by the Senate? No, it was never presented as a treaty.

Did Iran sign it? No, Obama did not insist Iran sign it.

Anything else?

The mullahs were using 'Stolen Valour' John Kerry's 'agreement as asswipe before Kerry boarded his plane back to the warm embrace of the pickle lady before Kerry's private jet took off from Tehran.
The Iranians has been to allowed to 'self-inspect' their bomb making sites. The IAEA has NEVER been allowed to inspect ANY Iranian military base.
Where the **** would YOU all put your nuclear bomb making facilities??????????