Trump is responsible if Iran builds a nuke

[TheDoctorIsIn]

As I said. This isn’t about personalities.

This country can break any treaty it wants.

[peek-a-boo]

Iran continues to fund terrorism and still represents an existential threat to region stability. The status quo, as defined by the flawed agreement, really wasn’t an option.

[MidwestIndy]

Maybe they will, maybe they wont but I dont see any circumstance where poking a bear would be a wise choice in any circumstance

[TheDoctorIsIn]

Except we’re right back to the status quo that existed for decades before the agreement - except now we’re in a worse situation.

[peek-a-boo]

Here is a recent example. The ABM treaty included language allowing an exit after 6 months notification.

https://fedsoc.org/commentary/publications/can-the-president-terminate-the-abm-treaty

[peek-a-boo]

Decades ago, Iran didn’t have the knowhow or wherewithal to build a bomb. That is no longer the case.

[TheDoctorIsIn]

This is not relevant to my point. I am not talking about the mechanisms inherent in treaties and agreements.

I’m saying that both treaties and agreements stand until one side or the other decides it’s no longer in their best interest.

[TheDoctorIsIn]

They’ve been working on a nuke for decades.

[TheDoctorIsIn]

I think one of two things will happen now.

Iran will posture, but not go too far, until Trump is out of office. Depending on who the next President is, Iran will either come back to the table in a much stronger position than they were in when Obama signed the deal, or go for broke to build a bomb as fast as they can.

Or Bolton and Co. will win the day, and we’ll spend the next decade or two sending more American kids to die in the desert.

[STODR]

I disagree. I think it wss good to get out. All it did at best was kick it down the road. But in my belief with no verifications they just went more underground with it and they were getting funds to support it. People believed sanctions brought them to the table last time. It will again.

[TheDoctorIsIn]

…how is this not kicking it down the road as well?

Unless you’re itching for war.

[SottoVoce]

So, hopeful waiting while they continue to enrich uranium. You’re much more optimistic than I am.

[JayJay]

@peek-a-boo

From the article:

Briefing reporters at the Pentagon, Gilday, the Joint Staff director, did not provide direct evidence to back up claims tying Iran to the attacks. He told reporters the conclusions were based on intelligence and evidence gathered in the region, and officials said they are trying to declassify some of the information so that it could be made public.

“This is truly operations driven by intelligence,” Gilday said, adding that the U.S. continues to see intelligence suggesting that Iran is actively planning attacks against the U.S. and partners in the region by the Revolutionary Guard and Iranian proxies in Yemen and Iraq.

As real as the intelligence that Saddam has WMDs back in 2002?

LOL…now we’re supposed to believe intelligence reports.

[JayJay]

@peek-a-boo

Treaties typically have language that allows a legal exit. That’s what we saw with the NAFTA renegotiations. There is specific language in that treaty driving the administration’s actions. Trump can’t arbitrarily just decide to do things on his own.

Sure he can, since this particular agreement was not an official treaty but an executive agreement.

There’s nothing in an executive agreement that binds future executives to that agreement.

So yes- Trump could simply unilaterally withdraw…like he did.

PS Never mind- you knew it was an exec agreement.

[Forcefield]

@Yossarian

But they weren’t…

Yeah about to say that. We had a 10+ year hold on development. Now they’re back to going full bore with impunity. Trump ■■■■■■ this up just to spite Obama.

[Forcefield]

@STODR

disagree. I think it wss good to get out. All it did at best was kick it down the road. But in my belief with no verifications they just went more underground with it and they were getting funds to support it. People believed sanctions brought them to the table last time. It will again.

All agreements and diplomacy and treaties are in effect “kicking something down the road”. You can’t guarantee the future, but we had a pretty good hold on a decade, which was a pretty good deal.

[STODR]

Except they are not getting the billions in revenue they would have. Thought that was pretty obvious from the post.

[TheDoctorIsIn]

So we’ve returned to the status quo that existed before the deal.

How has that worked out for us?

[STODR]

I disagree agree it was a good deal. If we could verify stuff then yes it would have been an so so deal.

[TheDoctorIsIn]

See, the thing is - we could verify stuff.

We have spy satellites, drones, people on the ground. We have spies everywhere, watching what comes in and comes out. On top of that, we had UN inspectors and all the above-board stuff.

This isn’t a Bond film. It’s not possible to build a nuclear bomb without putting some pretty clear signs out there.