Trump will withdraw US from Iran deal today, reinstate sanctions

[Doc Savage Fan]

But don't you understand? This is Trump's plan. The Iran deal was only bad because Obama. He wants to make one of his own. And if he succeeds, it will be little different from the previous.

Agree. The "new deal" will likely involve tactical strikes if Iran chooses to continue their nuclear program...I think he's grown a special fondness for this approach.

 

[Thump553]

You can blame Trump all you want but if Obama used proper channel for stuff like iran deal and dreamer, Trump can't just sign a paper and get out of it. Obama deal was never a treaty.

You're forgetting (apparently) about the GOP obstructionism in the House and Senate during the Obama years. The Constitution requires a two-thirds approval to ratify a treaty-an impossible goal back then. Obama would have had an uphill battle on a bill to rename a post office after Saint Ronnie, just out of GOP spite.

Trump's "decision" is a tremendous plus tor European and Chinese manufacturers, especially if Trump gets additional US sanctions laid on. It also opens the door wider for more Russian power in the MidEast, something every US President since Eisenhower has worked to block. The other signatories of the pact are going to continue with the easing of their sanctions and will goggle up all the Iranian orders while US manufacturers will be left out in the cold. MAGA my ass.

 

[K1052]

Chinese or russian plane companies will be very happy about it. Both were not competitive with Boeing and Airbus, but 39billion in planes will definitely help them to get their r&d funded.

For sure going to be a MC-21 vs C919 derby going on soon. I'll give the edge to the Chinese.

 

[HomerJS]

Actually I doubt the oil prices would go higher. Most likely part of this arrangement is that Saudis will increase production

You are naive if you think supply and demand dictates oil prices

 

[HomerJS]

You can blame Trump all you want but if Obama used proper channel for stuff like iran deal and dreamer, Trump can't just sign a paper and get out of it. Obama deal was never a treaty.

Remember Mitch McConnell having a meeting before Obama took office. Republicans were going to vote down anything Obama wanted. If Trump proposed the same JCPOA as Obama GOP would have passed it.

 

[brandonbull]

NK I'm sure learned 2 lessons from the United States. Libya gave up their nukes and Qaddafi wound up dead. Also Trump can't be trusted. He lies almost more then he tells the truth and we will break any agreement to satiate his ego.

Funny you mention Qaddafi. Obama was unable to bring N.K. to negotiations and he also help "remove" Qaddafi from power. Seems like Kim had a good reason not to work with Obama and keep his nukes.

 

[K1052]

Agree. The "new deal" will likely involve tactical strikes if Iran chooses to continue their nuclear program...I think he's grown a special fondness for this approach.

Nobody thinks this would work. At best you'd delay them a bit and how much is an open question.

 

[HomerJS]

Funny you mention Qaddafi. Obama was unable to bring N.K. to negotiations and he also help "remove" Qaddafi from power. Seems like Kim had a good reason not to work with Obama and keep his nukes.

I'm pleased Moon Jae-in was able to accomplish getting Un to the table

 

[Noah Abrams]

Agree. The "new deal" will likely involve tactical strikes if Iran chooses to continue their nuclear program...I think he's grown a special fondness for this approach.

I know the typical conservative loves bombs and missiles (esp if they are rained on brown color people countries), but there are no "tactical strikes" which can eliminate Iran's nuclear program. The only way is it to squeeze and pressure and block them in other ways, financially and otherwise.

 

[K1052]

The only way is it to squeeze and pressure and block them in other ways, financially and otherwise.

Don't think you're going to find a lot of willing partners on the Iranian side now.

If they come back to the table it will be with nukes in their pocket.

 

[fskimospy]

I'm pleased Moon Jae-in was able to accomplish getting Un to the table

Why do people keep saying this? Nobody 'got Kim Jong-Un to the table'. North Korea's stance for decades has been they want to meet with the US president. Decades. The US refused that kind of bilateral meeting unless North Korea behaved better, which of course they never did. Now the US has capitulated on that demand, which is why the meeting is happening.

 

[brandonbull]

I am saying that the source is so totally non-credible that it is not worth addressing. If there are valid points in it they will undoubtedly be brought up by a non-propaganda site.

If someone posts a link from the KKK’s website about how black people are bad do you carefully examine it and weigh each of its points or do you say ‘I bet this is misleading, let’s not waste our time.’? The site boomerang linked is an extreme anti-Islam hate site.

That's an easy way to go through life with your "I don't like the messenger" attitude. No need to apply any effort or supply any evidence, in supporting your position, when you can just disregard any information with a "because I don't like it".

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Nobody thinks this would work. At best you'd delay them a bit and how much is an open question.

I disagree. But even so, isn't that essentially the same thing that the deal gave us...a slight delay?

 

[fskimospy]

That's an easy way to go through life with your "I don't like the messenger" attitude. No need to apply any effort or supply any evidence, in supporting your position, when you can just disregard any information with a "because I don't like it".

No, it's just a rational position on a credible source vs. a non-credible source. The idea that we need to treat all sources equally despite some having an established record for dishonesty is ludicrous.

 

[K1052]

I disagree. But even so, isn't that essentially the same thing that the deal gave us...a slight delay?

Nope. Starting a war with an huge number of potential negative downstream consequences isn't the same thing. Even remotely.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

I know the typical conservative loves bombs and missiles (esp if they are rained on brown color people countries), but there are no "tactical strikes" which can eliminate Iran's nuclear program. The only way is it to squeeze and pressure and block them in other ways, financially and otherwise.

I'm sure there will be much discussion and debate regarding ways to eliminate as many brown people as possible. /s

 

[HomerJS]

Why do people keep saying this? Nobody 'got Kim Jong-Un to the table'. North Korea's stance for decades has been they want to meet with the US president. Decades. The US refused that kind of bilateral meeting unless North Korea behaved better, which of course they never did. Now the US has capitulated on that demand, which is why the meeting is happening.

If it were that simple probably would have been solved years ago. Here's an accounting from someone who went there.

President Bill Clinton didn’t go meet with Kim Jong Un’s father himself, but eager for a diplomatic win at the end of his presidency, he sent Secretary of State Madeleine Albright for the meeting in 2000. Writing in the New York Times in 2017, Albright recalled, “I held two days of intensive talks, during which [Kim Jong Il] appeared willing to accept more significant restraints on the missile programs than we had expected.” But she continued, “Obviously, if this dilemma were easy to resolve, it would have been settled long ago. The fundamental problem is that the North Korean leadership is convinced it requires nuclear weapons to guarantee its own survival.”

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Nope. Starting a war with an huge number of potential negative downstream consequences isn't the same thing. Even remotely.

War with the current regime in Iran is inevitable imo.

 

[fskimospy]

War with the current regime in Iran is inevitable imo.

Why?

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Why?

Israel.

 

[fskimospy]

Israel.

Are you saying that Israel's government has the capacity to force America into a war with Iran? If so, that seems like a good reason to cut them off right now.

Otherwise are you claiming Iran is going to attack Israel in some way? If so, that's highly unlikely. Israel will likely attack Iran, but Iran is unlikely to attack Israel.

 

[Noah Abrams]

The NY Times is sad about Europe Getting Humiliated Again
------
It is by now a familiar, humiliating pattern. European leaders cajole, argue and beg, trying to persuade President Trump to change his mind on a vital issue for the trans-Atlantic alliance. Mr. Trump appears to enjoy the show, dangling them, before ultimately choosing not to listen.
------

Yeah, but Europe has brutalized and humiliated the brown people for centuries. So there is a bit of poetic justice, though this is rather mild compared to what they have done. Plus if you forgo your dignity and chose to become a valet and doormat of another power for decades, humiliation is the just reward for it.

 

[brycejones]

Israel.

So its inevitable if we're idiots? Given the current administration you just might be right unfortunately.

 

[brycejones]

The NY Times is sad about Europe Getting Humiliated Again
------
It is by now a familiar, humiliating pattern. European leaders cajole, argue and beg, trying to persuade President Trump to change his mind on a vital issue for the trans-Atlantic alliance. Mr. Trump appears to enjoy the show, dangling them, before ultimately choosing not to listen.
------

Yeah, but Europe has brutalized and humiliated the brown people for centuries. So there is a bit of poetic justice, though this is rather mild compared to what they have done. Plus if you forgo your dignity and chose to become a valet and doormat of another power for decades, humiliation is the just reward for it.

Derp

As for the lack of influence the biggest problem is those outside the US can't constantly have their lips locked on Trump's ass so yes they less influence with a man who goes with who kissed his ass last and longest as his primary decision making strategy.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Are you saying that Israel's government has the capacity to force America into a war with Iran? If so, that seems like a good reason to cut them off right now.

Otherwise are you claiming Iran is going to attack Israel in some way? If so, that's highly unlikely. Israel will likely attack Iran, but Iran is unlikely to attack Israel.

Israel has carried out 3 attacks against Iranian military assets in Syria in the last 10 days...and have also recently threatened Assad with his life if he doesn't kick Iran out of Syria. Where do you think this is going?