Trump expected to decertify Iran nuclear deal, official says

[Golgota]

3 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Are we talking about North Korea?  LOL

I am not sure north korea is really recovering...Iran on the other hand is..plenty of foreign investors already come back there..

[dunroaming]

32 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

It's exactly how Trump negotiates. Create chaos, keep the other side guessing and off guard. I don't think he's itching for war. But he's an unknown. Exactly how he likes it.

It may be how he likes it but for the rest of us it just shows how unfit he is to be POTUS.

[Morch]

4 hours ago, Golgota said:

The one itching for war is Trump himself... Every statement he makes recently shows he is a warmonger... And it is not a part of his "art of the deal"

 

Trump talks a lot, that's for sure. But so far, when it comes to things military, he tends to rely on the advice of those around him - and so far they seem to balance his nonsense. Pretty much the same with everything else he does - big talk meets reality, crashes.

 

And, of course, there are them counterparts in countries like Iran (and North Korea) employing a similar rhetoric.

[Morch]

1 hour ago, Golgota said:

You seem to be in the minority by thinking like this.

Why on hell a country with a recovering economy, would want to ruin it for a fight they will lose?

So far the european leaders think it is a good deal, Iran thinks it is a good deal, companies tbink it is a good deal, iranian people think it is a good deal, democrats think it is a good deal and even a part of the republicans.. The only ones thinking it is not is the Tangerine guy and a couple of warmongers. Also the main point is : the deal is respected. Usa will isolate itself, look untrustable when it comes to deals and one more time the moron in the oval office lools like a clueless fool..

 

 

Eh?

 

Iran got into this situation by opting to break agreements and by choosing a certain path. If it hadn't the very same economic future would already been a reality. Similarly, it wasn't forced to drag this for as long as it did, that's another choice made and another path taken. If Iran's decisions were purely motivated by economic consideration, then this whole situation would have been avoided.

 

There are two (perhaps seemingly contradictory) points which should be considered. The first is that the monitoring regime isn't going anywhere, and that it's not exactly correct to say that Iran could have "the bomb" just after the first phase of the agreement expires. The second, based on accumulated experience with Iran's conduct is that it will use opportunities, loopholes and engage in deception while formally complying with terms. How things will look like in a decade is anyone's guess.

 

That doesn't mean that opting out of the deal is a good move. Hardly. It's just that there's not a whole lot of trust involved, and future prospects should be kept realistic.

[twix38]

Golgota,

 

Fine with me if I am in the minority. 

I don't think we should NOW scrap it as it's in place and more pressing concerns. 

 

I simply say it was a bad and terrible deal.

 

That Europe likes it is fine. Bunch of appeasing liberal politically correct fools content for peace now and deal again for the next administration. Companies like it for the commercial profit motive it opens up.

 

Iran will persue nuclear weapons for the same reason as others under duress or who have ideological or fundamental differences and a lack of trust . Do you truly believe Iran will not seek to exploit options when they are no longer under inspection in a decade? That their word can be trusted or that they will not look to stop being bossed around by having the ultimate deterrent. They will do it under the radar without inspections and deny it as they always do.

 

Those who think it's a good deal are those who think so because it's the best they could get and they did just enough to sell it as workable if you ignore the lack of stopping Iran but instead just slowing them down. Best chance we had was to strike a hard deal after sanctions but we bottled it and postponed it.

 

Iran actually sees the deal as allowing them complete freedom once it expires . Their view is they are free to proceed unless of course they have such a great economy they choose not too. Lmao

 

I do not have any doubt at all that Iran have in mind to get the bomb and be an equal player and on a level playing field. No longer having to respect others because of their ultimate power.They just played the long game and won.

 

Edited October 6, 2017 by twix38

[Morch]

1 hour ago, Golgota said:

This deal has been violated by Iran? In the past Iran was ruled by hard liners, and coming from the USA the "violated the spirit of the deal" seems more like a 4 yrs old tantrum..

 

There were various violations, infringements and instances of non-compliance. Some of these were discussed on past (and even recent) topics. Doubt such things weren't expected, this is how such things go. Question is more to do with a point where such violations etc. cross a threshold and require action. Most parties monitoring the agreement seem to feel that these do not amount to something meriting action.

 

The whole "spirit of the agreement" argument is irrelevant. That the USA got other issues with Iran's regional activities does not come under the current agreement.

 

As for "in the past Iran was ruled by hard liners", again eh? Iran is ruled by hard  liners. The current government, which is often seen as the opposite of that, is appointed by a hard liner, and a council of hard liners. The opposition, both political and within the military is rather powerful, and definitely hard liner - not as clear cut as presented.

[boomerangutang]

6 hours ago, Andaman Al said:

Donald needs a war to survive. Iran is much easier than N Korea. With Iran the USA will have Israel, Saudi and the UAE. It will cost thousands of US lives but won't be as bad as the immediate slaughter in Korea. Donald WILL have his war, it's the only way to try and stop the Russia investigation.

A war in either place would be very bad.  

 

6 hours ago, Golgota said:

Iran is NOT building atomic weapons. They respect the deal. Trump says they do not respect "the spirit" of the deal...which is stupid and i am quite sure Tangerine#45 just wants to get rid of anything "Obama"  

Iran wants to build Nukes. It's understandable.  Some of their neighbors have them.  

Iran is allowed a few centrifuges in accordance with the Nuke deal.  Yet it's ordered significantly more than the magic number - claiming most of the centrifuges they get are flawed.  Maybe that's true, or maybe they're saving them for a rainy day, or putting them in clandestine places.

 

The US and other members of the Nuke club are trying to micro-manage who gets to join, and who doesn't.  It's not working.  The only reasonable policy is ZERO NUKES WORLDWIDE.  Zero in Russia, zero in the US, zero in China, and so on.  Same as mustard gas and small pox.   Anything less is problematic, which is what's happening now with N.Korea and Iran.  

[boomerangutang]

7 hours ago, Golgota said:

The one itching for war is Trump himself... Every statement he makes recently shows he is a warmonger... And it is not a part of his "art of the deal"

 

He didn't even write "Art of the Deal."  It was ghost-written.  Trump is only a deal-maker when it comes to conniving more money for himself, and screwing investors.   He did it with the Taj Mahal, Trump U, Trump Water, Trump Air, Trump Steaks, Trump Magazine, Trump Vodka, and several other Trump businesses that have all gone belly up.  He is to making good deals what Mike Tyson is to being a ballerina.

 

4 hours ago, Golgota said:

Usa will isolate itself, look untrustable when it comes to deals and one more time the moron in the oval office lools like a clueless fool..

Speaking of isolating itself in the lunatic corner, Trump has already isolated the US from the rest of the world re; The Paris Accord.   He's doing everything he can to drop kick the US into an isolationist shit pie.