I am confused I thought the deal was to some how slow down Irans Uranium Enrichment program.
They stated that they will in next week increase their enrichment so if they can make that claim how did Obama’s deal slow them down at all?
Sure, they developed a delivery system. Same as Iran is working on. And which we failed to address either previously or currently.
Why would Iran address anything we want them to address now? They won’t and have little incentive now that we are going to implement prior and new sanctions. The leverage we had was a threat of withdrawal if they refused to redress issues that Trump rightfully raised regarding the prior agreement. Walking away eliminated that leverage, without even an attempt to renegotiate. So now what? War?
Sure, subjective but based on logic and reality of the current situation. Do you disagree? Do you have insight of a secret development of nuclear warhead capability that is unknown? Or like the rest of us, do you know what Mattis, Pompeo, Coates, and others have agreed to, that the prior arrangement was preventing them from taking strides towards nuclear capability? 
I gave you a good reason. Let me repeat it. Staying in the bad deal does NOTHING to stop Iran from eventually getting a nuke and it does NOTHING to stop their bad behavior all over the ME - both of which should have been the goals of the Obama administration. The WIN is hopefully we can stop Iran from getting to a place where they can threaten either us or our allies with a nuke.
And Bolton is NOT the president.
M
What? Why would Iran address anything if they already have a deal in place?
Can you name one country that wanted nuclear weapons and didn’t get them?
That’s not actually a reason at all. Removing the only leverage we had that was preventing them from pursuing a nuclear weapon that would threaten American national security because the deal did not stop them from engaging in other bad behavior that did not directly impact our affect American national security, makes zero sense when it comes to American national security.
The “win” as you call it, was that we have hastened the chance that they now secure nukes that are capable of threatening us and our allies. That’s a weird victory man.
1 Like
Libya.
There is no guarantee they would. But by removing the only leverage we held, we guaranteed they won’t now. And we have our allies working against us versus with us. Which is other leverage we voluntarily abdicated.
Funny. You forgot another possibility - in fact, a likelihood: We will eventually get our allies to cut in with us and Iran will have to knuckle under and accept that they will NOT be allowed to make a nuke - not ten years from now, not ever. AND they will not be allowed to continue to be an international pariah with their proxy wars and terrorism support all over the world.
I fully EXPECT the hardliners to say what you’re saying they will say. So what? We do not ACCEPT their view and do not craft foreign policy based on their view - unless you are Obama.
M
What leverage?
Economic sanctions from the international community. Same thing that brought them to the table initially.
Have to run, grandson is coming over. Have a good evening my friend.
He didn’t want them.
What leverage?
Because the deal simply didn’t do what it was supposed to do and even our allies know that. We need a deal that actually will WORK for now and forever.
Trump offered to listen to proposals that might fix this. None were apparently forthcoming. Instead, our allies simply tried to change his mind and stone-wall.
We need an approach that STOPS any hope of them ever getting a nuke, STOPS their development of intercontinental delivery systems and STOPS their adventures all over the Middle East threatening all our allies and destroying any hopes of peace.
M
How has it worked? Iran never shut down it’s production of weapons, continued ballistic missile development and has continued expanding it’s influence throughout the region as well as remaining a state sponsor of terror.
It solved nothing we were told it was going to solve at the time.
It never even provided for adequate verification and inspectors are barred from any nuclear or missile sites that belong to the Iranian Military.
Overall Iran is a greater threat today than it was when the agreement was signed so it didn’t accomplish anything of value.
At least now we can push for a better agreement that actually addresses the problems and includes a reasonable verification regime.
1 Like
So, you’re saying we should abandon our allies all over the region in order to forestall Iran getting a nuke AND an international delivery system 5 to 10 years from now, when they are free to enrich to their heart’s content again? They are free to make missiles NOW.
Why should we do that??
They will be then able to threaten EVERYONE in the region AND us. They will also create a nuclear arms race all over the Middle East.
Our only course of action for our safety and the safety of millions of others is to stop this NOW and reverse course, hard and fast. Thank God we have a president wanting and willing to do so.
M
I was listening to someone in favor of boxing the deal earlier today and his main points were: Iran can have nukes in five years because of the sunset clause, we can’t trust Iran, and we can get a better deal, which is an odd stance given that he says this deal is crap because we can’t trust Iran.
Their ability to threaten the use of nukes will extend far beyond the region by that point in time.
They already have developed missiles capable of reaching Europe.
There’s no basis to call that a “likelihood.” The other countries made this agreement in good faith (as did the US). Unless Iran itself reneges on it, our allies in this agreement are not likely to act like Trump, and dishonor their country’s bond. You seem to be engaged in some serious unrealistic wishful thinking.
So what? you ask. I get that you’re full of bluster, but the reality is that if the view that the US is an unreliable negotiating partner dominates in Iranian leadership, a view that the US worked hard to combat, than on what slender thread do you place all your confidence that Iranian leadership will come to a new agreement?
The other countries were following Obama’s lead. Now they are invested and will need time to retreat. There is evidence that Iran has been dishonoring their bond and they have certainly dishonored the spirit of the agreement with their continuing to develop international delivery systems. Those are always offensive weapons. They would not need them to protect themselves in an attack.
I’m sorry but the view that the US is a reliable negotiating partner was shattered LONG ago when the US made a deal with South Vietnam and then reneged on it when the Dems in Congress decided to leave 'em hanging.
And recently, when the deal that Bush made with Gadaffi in Libya was completely thrown out by Clinton/Obama when they helped to depose Gadaffi.
Trump just has to do what is in our best interest and the best interest of the entire region and FORCE Iran to comply - not ask them to believe us.
I don’t care if they tell us they will not believe us. What is important is that they believe we will not back down.
M
LMAO.
Short of war with Iran there will never be a deal again. Once we put new sanctions on them the deal is caput as there is no reason for them to honor it.
Plus, NK now has the upper hand in any negotiation because the US is no longer a reliable actor.
Trump is a ■■■■■■■ moron.
Oh, because you think Iran can weather anything we do to them?
Iran is ALREADY having trouble with their hold on the people because of their economic troubles. Much more and they may be facing a revolution in the streets.
Why do you think NK is at the table now - because we could not do to them what we wanted to? They are just GENEROUS with their comity?
Get real. What it always takes is commitment. Reagan proved that once and Trump is proving it again. What NEVER works is resignation and accomodation. Clinton, Bush and Obama proved that in NK and Obama proved that in Iran.
M
