Trump pulls out of Iran deal

[Rajoo]

Originally Posted by whell

So you still think this was a "pretty good agreement". Figures.

Of course, considering the alternatives.

Trump's plan, "we will impose the worst ever sanctions on Iran.................', which is pure bullshit, like Trump is ever going get any cooperation from the rest of the world.

Reality. Iran wants nukes and Rocketman has them in abundance.
Lil Kim want oil, Iran has it in abundance.
Iranians, Russian and the Chinese have already been plotting behind our backs. Also just in case, Iran wants to work out a separate agreement with Europe for whatever reason. All this leaves Trump holding the ball and no one to play with. Reminds me of a comic strip from a long time ago.

[donquixote99]

Originally Posted by whell

Why did you do it? Who knows? But you did. I've given up trying to assess or care about your motives, but it is pretty funny.

You are fogging with nonsense. You will keep doing it, too.

[whell]

Originally Posted by Rajoo

Of course, considering the alternatives.

What were the "alternatives"? If the objective was to keep Iran from getting nukes, this agreement didn't do that. So with or without this agreement, Iran get nukes.

[whell]

Originally Posted by Rajoo

Reality. Iran wants nukes and Rocketman has them in abundance.
Lil Kim want oil, Iran has it in abundance.

Reality, Iran can't increase their domestic oil / refinery production in place, and Kim can't help them do that.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

What were the "alternatives"? If the objective was to keep Iran from getting nukes, this agreement didn't do that. So with or without this agreement, Iran get nukes.

If you want to actually develop a better understanding of the JCPOA, here's a good read.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...-nuclear-deal/

On balance, I believe the consensus of most American, European and Israeli foreign and nuclear policy experts is that once this imperfect deal was put in place, it is better to keep it in place rather than blowing it up, particularly by a clueless clown like Trump who has not even given a passing thought to the path forward.

[Chicks]

Originally Posted by whell

What were the "alternatives"? If the objective was to keep Iran from getting nukes, this agreement didn't do that. So with or without this agreement, Iran get nukes.

Step away from the wingnut “news”, pilgrim!

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

On balance, I believe the consensus of most American, European and Israeli foreign and nuclear policy experts is that once this imperfect deal was put in place, it is better to keep it in place rather than blowing it up, particularly by a clueless clown like Trump who has not even given a passing thought to the path forward.

These were the same experts who trusted to live up to its side of the agreement. Israel's recent intel release, subject to verification, puts the lie to that. Plus Iran gets to continue to develop a delivery system for nukes. Keeping a weak, unenforceable agreement in place may serve a role as a symbol, but Iran wants a nuke and doesn't care about symbolism.

Your comments about "not giving a passing thought", that's BS too. I can't read minds like you can. However, it certainly looks like the Administration is begging Iran to look at how the US is dealing with North Korea. They are applying heavy pressure to Iran but also demonstrating how the US can potentially try to work with another two bit, tin pot dictator wanna be.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

These were the same experts who trusted to live up to its side of the agreement. Israel's recent intel release, subject to verification, puts the lie to that. Plus Iran gets to continue to develop a delivery system for nukes.

Damn, you're gullible. Bibi's presentation was a rehash of what we already knew 15 years ago and helped form the basis for what was addressed in the JCPOA. Missile development was not in the scope of the agreement, so your second point is irrelevant.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Damn, you're gullible. Bibi's presentation was a rehash of what we already knew 15 years ago and helped form the basis for what was addressed in the JCPOA. Missile development was not in the scope of the agreement, so your second point is irrelevant.

We knew 15 years ago that Iran had a nuke program that was not exclusively civilian in its objectives? Then why did we enter into an agreement that was predicated on Iran being truthful about the nature of its nuke program?

If you think that the JCPOA was an honest effort to get Iran to give up its nuke program, you're the gullible one.

And the missles are irrelevant? Kerry and Obama knew they couldn't get a deal if Iran's missle program was on the table. But taking it off the table, given Iran's ambitions for its nuke program, was the equivalent of agreeing to shut off Niagra Falls, but any discussion about the water is off the table.