Kaddafi got rid of his nuclear ambitions under Reagan. Since that time, Libya has been a stable country, until Obama and Hillary stirred up the pot in the Middle East.
LIBs seem to be looking to abandon anyone who doesn’t measure up to their standards, consequences be damned. We saw that in Libya, and we are now seeing it in Saudi Arabia.
Its no wonder, Kim isn’t willing to give up the only thing that will keep him in power.
Iran agreed to a treaty that prevented them from attaining nuclear weapons and was backed by the world. And every non talking head(actual nuclear expert) will tell you it was very good at monitoring them. Trump rewarded them by breaking the treaty and leveling sanctions even though Iran was abiding by the treaty. Libya was unfortunate, but ending your nuclear program doesn’t give you carte blanche to massacre your people. That wasn’t part of the deal. Libya was another one of those no good options available scenarios. Like the current Iran one, except Trump actively made this one. Obama didnt want to attack Libya, but sometimes you just have to back your allies. At least we didnt lose thousands of Americans and spend hundreds of billions on Libya.
Iran isn’t stupid.
They know as well as everyone else what happens when you open pandora’s Box.
Wasn’t it like 15 out of 17?
The Iran agreement was never designed to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons. There was no treaty.
This thread is an example of what it’s like to form an inconsistent opinion on policy that you are ideologically required to defend.
So you honestly believe they have no designs on obtaining nuclear weapons for fear of opening Pandora’s box?
I used the wrong term. But it absolutely prevented them from getting nuclear weapons.
I’m not ideologically required to defend anything. I’m simply stating my opinion.
Of course you’re not 
Its all about the end game. Delaying their ability to get nuclear weapons isn’t preventing them from doing so.
Given that there is disagreement on Saudi Arabia amongst Republicans, what ideology do you believe I am defending?
It absolutely prevents them for a time. And then comes time for the next agreement. It’s called being practical. You pride yourself on that. Case in point. Saudi arms sales.
Its called kicking the can down the road. We saw how well that worked in NK.
The one that gives a country that murders journalists and continues to sponsor terrorism, whose citizens happened to perpetrate the largest terrorist attack on US soil in its history, access to US arms, because reasons. I’m not knocking you, it’s ok to be cool with that. You do you peekaboo 
Yeah and kicking the can down the road gave time for Trump to end the North Korean nuclear crisis. He told us it ended. Pushing back the ability for Iran to get nuclear weapons is practical. Worked well for four years.
I wish the world were as simple as you would like it to be, but alas reality sucks. One way or the other, Saudi Arabia will get their arms. We can either allow them to fall into the Russian sphere of influence or we can continue our long standing relationship in order to counter the Iranian threat.
If you recall we made similar choices in WWII. Stalin was every bit as evil as Hitler, but sometimes you have to make those tough decisions.
Call it what you want. Before the “agreement” Iran had enough enriched uranium to build 6 nuclear weapons. After the “agreement” they no longer had enough enriched uranium for a single nuclear weapon. After the US walked away from the “agreement” Iran will soon have enough enriched uranium to build nuclear weapons if they choose.
I think the “agreement” worked just fine. Until we decided to leave.
If we hadn’t kicked the can down the road many years ago, NK wouldn’t have nuclear weapons today. That was a major mistake that would be repeated with the Iran deal. Iran can’t be allowed to have nuclear weapons. Ever.
But of course LIBs would feel that way. You aren’t really saying anything that I don’t already know.
