Tuesday, 8 May 2018

Donald Trump pulls the United States out of the nuclear deal with Iran, renews sanctions

quote [ President Trump abrogated the Iran nuclear agreement Tuesday and re-imposed sanctions on Tehran, a decision likely to anger allies who fear the prospect of a nuclear arms race in the heart of the Middle East. "The Iran deal is defective at its core," Trump said during a speech at the White House. ]

What a fucking idiot. Now Bolton can get his war with Iran.

[SFW] [history] [+10 WTF]
[by HoZay@6:39pmGMT]

Comments

steele said @ 10:43pm GMT on 8th May [Score:3 Funsightful]
knumbknutz said @ 5:05pm GMT on 9th May
Don't forget "BABIES TORN FROM INCUBATORS!" An oldie but Bush-1 era goodie.

Unfortunately Boeing just lost $20 billion in contracts because of the US pulling out of the Iran deal as of this morning.
1111 said @ 2:52pm GMT on 9th May [Score:-3]
filtered comment under your threshold
bbqkink said[1] @ 8:17pm GMT on 8th May [Score:1 Yep ]
I would like just one of these ...people... to explain how this makes anybody any safer or better off. Most folks I have to talked to on the right still think we can put the same sanctions on Iran as we had before...and have no idea how any of this will effect the world. Have no idea it took years to get to where we have got or don't care or understand just how bad this makes us look to anybody who may consider making a deal with us...sad.

If you think Iran is hard to deal with now just add nuclear weapons to the mix. The only logical expatiation is that Israelis want war. That is what caused the deal in the first place...they threatened to attack...so we got this deal. Then they fraught it every step of the way.
HoZay said @ 8:35pm GMT on 8th May
Trump has no understanding of how any of this works, except if this was associated with Obama, then Trump's against it.
C18H27NO3 said[1] @ 9:02pm GMT on 8th May
They are forcing a fabricated world view on. . . the world.

They don't care that the negotiated deal was working. it doesn't fit with their ideology, so all else be damned. And add to that Jared, who is bibi's direct access to pulling the puppet strings. After all, Ivanka is dumpster darling and incestuous fantasy.

The tactics that worked for the election are being applied to foreign policy.
norok said @ 10:25pm GMT on 8th May
Are you sure that the people were for it were not just so because of Obama? I have a hard time believing that they were not pursuing nuclear weapons now and always. I don't know that for a fact; I just know it's true. I look at things from a realpolitik lens. Using that lens though I'm also very conflicted about the whole thing.

I find it ironic that the US would push for and receive compliance of disarmament and then within a decade foster the overthrowal of said regime. I'm speaking of Libya. Ghadaffi was a bad dude and all but that really set a bad diplomatic precedent in what happens if you go along with what America wants. Every other nation can look at that fact and not pursue their own self interests despite whatever the US says.

N. Korea got them despite sanctions and the world hasn't ended. It's a bad thing for anyone to have nuclear weapons but so far history has shown that people smart enough to build them don't use them in anger. Unless they are America.

To bbqkink's point I'm not a huge fan of Israel but they stick to the stance that their continued existence is non-negotiable and they will unilaterally defend themselves if need be. I'd personally like it if we just stayed out of the whole Middle East but Democrat or Republican, neo-con or liberal, America plays World Police.
bbqkink said[3] @ 10:29pm GMT on 8th May [Score:2 Underrated]
I have a hard time believing that they were not pursuing nuclear weapons now and always.

This was the best regulated most verified nuclear agreement of all time ...and trump just pissed it away.

Whats more is they have nothing to replace it with and can't even tell you why they thought it was bad in the first place...

"Any jackass can kick down a barn, but it takes a good carpenter to build one." - Sam Rayburn

their continued existence is non-negotiable and they will unilaterally defend themselves if need be.

Their existence is now under considerable more threat than it was this morning...and there is no plan to change any of that...hell there is no plan at all.

I could go on about how many things this puts in danger. Not least of which is using the dollar as international currency but the point is and let me be clear about this...There is no benefit to anyone from doing this neither you or Trump or anyone elses can make that case...WTF do you think we or the world gained by this?

Bernie Responds to Trump's Decision on Iran Nuclear Deal
conception said @ 1:50am GMT on 9th May
Republicans just want to kill Iranians so badly. Most forget that we had an opportunity to work with them (everyone really) after 9/11 and fucked that up -

"In the days after the 9/11 attacks, Ryan Crocker, the American Ambassador to Iraq from 2007 to 2009 (then a senior State Department official), and other senior U.S. State Department officials flew to Geneva to meet secretly with representatives of the government of Iran. For several months, Crocker and his Iranian counterparts cooperated on capturing Al Qaeda operatives in the region and fighting the Taliban government in Afghanistan. These meetings stopped after the "Axis of Evil" speech hardened Iranian attitudes toward cooperating with the U.S."

We brokered another historic deal to mend relations and here they go again, shitting on any chance for middle east peace. Probably a good time to buy stock in whatever Blackwater is calling itself now and Halliburton.

Kama-Kiri said @ 2:45am GMT on 9th May [Score:2 Underrated]
"Republicans just want to kill Iranians so badly."

To misunderstand the rationale of your opponent is to lose the argument.

There are two sides in the Middle East, Sunni and Shia, Saudi Arabia and Iran. The Republican US hardliners and military industrial complex supports Saudi Arabia in this grand geopolitical struggle, Russia support Iran and Syria. Israel has its own interests, is the enemy of Iran, and commands huge influence with the US government.

There are a lot of vested interests who want to see this deal fail which have nothing to do with killing anyone in particular, but a lot to do with money and political influence.
Hugh E. said @ 5:06pm GMT on 9th May [Score:1 Underrated]
There are two sides in the Middle East, Sunni and Shia the U.S. and Russia.
bbqkink said @ 2:55am GMT on 9th May
Just head someone saying that this may just be an attempt to get the lobbyist to make a beeline to anybody with influence with Trump with their checkbooks open to make sure their company is exempt from the sanctions..."It is all about the money" makes sense
cb361 said @ 8:30pm GMT on 8th May [Score:1 Funsightful]
bbqkink said[2] @ 10:16pm GMT on 8th May
It still amazes me how often the Onion gets it right on the money.

When this is all over Putin will get the credit he deserves for the the best espionage move of all history...and the world will be amazed at just how cheap he got control of the oval office..not one drop of blood split, and for a few million dollars.
bbqkink said @ 1:11am GMT on 9th May [Score:1 Insightful]
“Walking away from the JCPOA turns our back on America’s closest allies, and an agreement that our country’s leading diplomats, scientists, and intelligence professionals negotiated,” Obama said in the statement. “In a democracy, there will always be changes in policies and priorities from one Administration to the next. But the consistent flouting of agreements that our country is a party to risks eroding America’s credibility, and puts us at odds with the world’s major powers.”


Reveal
Barack Obama
5 hours ago

There are few issues more important to the security of the United States than the potential spread of nuclear weapons, or the potential for even more destructive war in the Middle East. That’s why the United States negotiated the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in the first place.

The reality is clear. The JCPOA is working – that is a view shared by our European allies, independent experts, and the current U.S. Secretary of Defense. The JCPOA is in America’s interest – it has significantly rolled back Iran’s nuclear program. And the JCPOA is a model for what diplomacy can accomplish – its inspections and verification regime is precisely what the United States should be working to put in place with North Korea. Indeed, at a time when we are all rooting for diplomacy with North Korea to succeed, walking away from the JCPOA risks losing a deal that accomplishes – with Iran – the very outcome that we are pursuing with the North Koreans.

That is why today’s announcement is so misguided. Walking away from the JCPOA turns our back on America’s closest allies, and an agreement that our country’s leading diplomats, scientists, and intelligence professionals negotiated. In a democracy, there will always be changes in policies and priorities from one Administration to the next. But the consistent flouting of agreements that our country is a party to risks eroding America’s credibility, and puts us at odds with the world’s major powers.

Debates in our country should be informed by facts, especially debates that have proven to be divisive. So it’s important to review several facts about the JCPOA.

First, the JCPOA was not just an agreement between my Administration and the Iranian government. After years of building an international coalition that could impose crippling sanctions on Iran, we reached the JCPOA together with the United Kingdom, France, Germany, the European Union, Russia, China, and Iran. It is a multilateral arms control deal, unanimously endorsed by a United Nations Security Council Resolution.

Second, the JCPOA has worked in rolling back Iran’s nuclear program. For decades, Iran had steadily advanced its nuclear program, approaching the point where they could rapidly produce enough fissile material to build a bomb. The JCPOA put a lid on that breakout capacity. Since the JCPOA was implemented, Iran has destroyed the core of a reactor that could have produced weapons-grade plutonium; removed two-thirds of its centrifuges (over 13,000) and placed them under international monitoring; and eliminated 97 percent of its stockpile of enriched uranium – the raw materials necessary for a bomb. So by any measure, the JCPOA has imposed strict limitations on Iran's nuclear program and achieved real results.

Third, the JCPOA does not rely on trust – it is rooted in the most far-reaching inspections and verification regime ever negotiated in an arms control deal. Iran’s nuclear facilities are strictly monitored. International monitors also have access to Iran’s entire nuclear supply chain, so that we can catch them if they cheat. Without the JCPOA, this monitoring and inspections regime would go away.

Fourth, Iran is complying with the JCPOA. That was not simply the view of my Administration. The United States intelligence community has continued to find that Iran is meeting its responsibilities under the deal, and has reported as much to Congress. So have our closest allies, and the international agency responsible for verifying Iranian compliance – the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

Fifth, the JCPOA does not expire. The prohibition on Iran ever obtaining a nuclear weapon is permanent. Some of the most important and intrusive inspections codified by the JCPOA are permanent. Even as some of the provisions in the JCPOA do become less strict with time, this won’t happen until ten, fifteen, twenty, or twenty-five years into the deal, so there is little reason to put those restrictions at risk today.

Finally, the JCPOA was never intended to solve all of our problems with Iran. We were clear-eyed that Iran engages in destabilizing behavior – including support for terrorism, and threats toward Israel and its neighbors. But that’s precisely why it was so important that we prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Every aspect of Iranian behavior that is troubling is far more dangerous if their nuclear program is unconstrained. Our ability to confront Iran’s destabilizing behavior – and to sustain a unity of purpose with our allies – is strengthened with the JCPOA, and weakened without it.

Because of these facts, I believe that the decision to put the JCPOA at risk without any Iranian violation of the deal is a serious mistake. Without the JCPOA, the United States could eventually be left with a losing choice between a nuclear-armed Iran or another war in the Middle East. We all know the dangers of Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon. It could embolden an already dangerous regime; threaten our friends with destruction; pose unacceptable dangers to America’s own security; and trigger an arms race in the world’s most dangerous region. If the constraints on Iran’s nuclear program under the JCPOA are lost, we could be hastening the day when we are faced with the choice between living with that threat, or going to war to prevent it.

In a dangerous world, America must be able to rely in part on strong, principled diplomacy to secure our country. We have been safer in the years since we achieved the JCPOA, thanks in part to the work of our diplomats, many members of Congress, and our allies. Going forward, I hope that Americans continue to speak out in support of the kind of strong, principled, fact-based, and unifying leadership that can best secure our country and uphold our responsibilities around the globe.
knumbknutz said @ 7:11pm GMT on 8th May
Yep...and Bolton was stage left smiling like the cat that ate the canary. Looks like the war profiteers are fixing to have a great upcoming year
cb361 said @ 8:28pm GMT on 8th May [Score:5 Underrated]
If NK is perversely refusing to play ball, I guess Iran is Plan B.
1111 said @ 1:27pm GMT on 9th May [Score:-2 Boring]
filtered comment under your threshold
cb361 said @ 6:25pm GMT on 10th May [Score:0 Funny]
That's unfair. Upon seeing Trump's many successes, I already conceded that we should "elect paranoid narcissists to all positions of public office"
1111 said[1] @ 9:54pm GMT on 10th May

In politics successful narcissists do better than humble failures.

In this instance, by freeing wrongly jailed men, and bringing them home.

cb361 said @ 5:25pm GMT on 12th May
Yep. Paranoid Narcissists are known for enjoying rich and rewarding personal lives, and for enriching the lives of everybody they interact with.
1111 said @ 6:06pm GMT on 12th May

He enriched the lives of Kim Dong-cheol, Kim Sang-deok and Kim Hak-seong.

A diplomatic triumph for the president and salvation for three innocent men.

Good news all around.
cb361 said[1] @ 7:27pm GMT on 12th May
PARANOID NARCISSISTS FOR THE WIN!
BUGGERLUGS123 said @ 7:12pm GMT on 8th May
Can smell Dick Chaney and his private contractors getting their gear all ready for world war 3.
Kama-Kiri said[1] @ 11:42pm GMT on 8th May
Seems to be the Paris accord redux, and Trump's standard "deal-making" modus operandi; noisily claim the deal is bad, pull out, renegotiate for better terms.

The Iran deal was probably sweeter for Iran than the US, or at least that is a valid argument. It can also be said that it was in America's long term interest to see it through despite this. The cynical view is that he deal wouldn't have changed much anyway: Iran is on Russia's and Syria's team, and will continue to act against US allies on multiple fronts.

If you take the latter position, which I tend to, then the US is just giving up leverage by making overtures now without getting further concessions above and beyond just the nuclear program. At least Israel seems to think so, and that's who is calling the shots on this anyway.
SnappyNipples said @ 5:26am GMT on 9th May
mechanical contrivance said @ 1:49pm GMT on 9th May
It looks like it's made of cheese.
SnappyNipples said @ 4:47pm GMT on 9th May
Actually its made of corn. PLA filament.
bbqkink said @ 5:45pm GMT on 9th May

It’s nearly unanimous: foreign policy experts think Trump made the wrong choice on Iran
94 percent of scholars disapprove of Trump’s decision to pull out of the nuclear deal


No, the explanation for this level of unanimity is clearer. A close look at the details of the Iran deal suggests it was actually working to contain Iran’s nuclear program. Pulling out does little to improve America’s bargaining position and creates a risk of yet another nuclear crisis.

The reason experts disapprove of Trump’s withdrawal from the deal is because it likely is, on its merits, a very bad idea.
bbqkink said @ 10:54pm GMT on 9th May
Saudi Arabia Says It Will Build Nuclear Bomb if Iran Does

And they don't have to build one from scratch...They have already paid Pakistan for it years ago.
HoZay said @ 1:09am GMT on 10th May
Putin will probably be able to hook Iran up.
bbqkink said @ 11:16pm GMT on 9th May
1111 said[1] @ 11:28am GMT on 11th May

Interesting to note that former Canadian prime minister Stephen Harper, former Australian prime minister John Howard, Nobel Peace Prize winner and former Northern Ireland first minister David William Trimble, etc. have taken the unusual step of backing the US President with a full-page in the New York Times.




bbqkink said @ 8:53pm GMT on 11th May
1111 said[1] @ 12:16am GMT on 9th May [Score:-3]
filtered comment under your threshold
Taxman said @ 12:38am GMT on 9th May
Does this work both ways? Do you applaud democrats that promise and fulfill those promises?
1111 said[2] @ 12:57am GMT on 9th May [Score:-2 Unworthy Self Link]
filtered comment under your threshold
Taxman said[1] @ 1:36am GMT on 9th May
Then nope, it’s just me!

However, you agree you applaud democrats that keep their promises.

I applaud you sir.



Oh and burning down a house that someone else spent time building is not something that should be applauded, even if you promised it. Just my opinion.
C18H27NO3 said @ 8:23pm GMT on 10th May
Lets all turn a blind eye to what is really happening behind the scenes, and suck dumpster dick because he said he did this.

Yaaahhhh, Riiiiiiight.
1111 said @ 10:42pm GMT on 10th May

Because he said he did what?

I don't follow your line or reasoning.

Can you explain?

Taxman said @ 12:44am GMT on 13th May
He’s saying that doing “good” things does not absolve you of the “bad” things you have done (are doing).

So that we all may know you better, let us ask this about your morality numbers.

Just an example not a comparison:
If a drug dealer invests in a community with his wealth, is he/she a good person? If they build hospitals and schools but launder money and murder their competition, do the two things cancel out in your mind?
arrowhen said @ 2:24am GMT on 9th May [Score:0 Yep ]
Ah, the old "but at least I was honest" defense. It can be pretty effective if you're a seven year old fessing up to breaking a window. A little less so when you're a grown man flirting with nuclear catastrophe.

But I suppose if our expectations are really so low that we have to applaud politicians every time they achieve basic adult levels of integrity, then I owe the guy some props...

"Atta boy, Mr. President, you did a thing you said you would!"

There. Now that he's been properly applauded for the honesty of his action, do you have any thoughts on its wisdom? After all, just because someone promises to do something stupid doesn't make it any less stupid when they actually do it.

(Also, not to put words into the mouth with which you kiss your whore of a mother, but I think you might have meant "tenet".)
Hugh E. said @ 5:25pm GMT on 9th May [Score:1 Insightful]
After all, just because someone promises to do something stupid doesn't make it any less stupid when they actually do it.
"You knew I was a snake before you took me in." - Trump (often) quoting Oscar Brown lyric
Donald Trump Does Dramatic Reading Of ‘The Snake’ | MSNBC
1111 said @ 12:04pm GMT on 9th May [Score:-5 Boring]
filtered comment under your threshold
eggboy said @ 5:03am GMT on 10th May [Score:-3]
filtered comment under your threshold
1111 said[1] @ 11:17am GMT on 10th May [Score:-3]
filtered comment under your threshold

Post a comment
[note: if you are replying to a specific comment, then click the reply link on that comment instead]

You must be logged in to comment on posts.



Posts of Import
4 More Years!
SE v2 Closed BETA
First Post
Subscriptions and Things
AskSE: What do you look like?

Karma Rankings
arrowhen
ScoobySnacks
HoZay
lilmookieesquire
XregnaR