The U.S. Will Withdraw From Iran Nuclear Deal, Trump Tells Macron : NY Times

Reactions :

Joint statement from May, Merkel & Macron

Our governments remain committed to ensuring the agreement is upheld, and will work with all the remaining parties to the deal to ensure this remains the case including through ensuring the continuing economic benefits to the Iranian people that are linked to the agreement.

We urge the US to ensure that the structures of the JCPoA can remain intact, and to avoid taking action which obstructs its full implementation by all other parties to the deal. After engaging with the US Administration in a thorough manner over the past months, we call on the US to do everything possible to preserve the gains for nuclear non-proliferation brought about by the JCPoA, by allowing for a continued enforcement of its main elements.

We encourage Iran to show restraint in response to the decision by the US; Iran must continue to meet its own obligations under the deal, cooperating fully and in a timely manner with IAEA inspection requirements. The IAEA must be able to continue to carry out its long-term verification and monitoring programme without restriction or hindrance. In turn, Iran should continue to receive the sanctions relief it is entitled to whilst it remains in compliance with the terms of the deal

***
Donald Tusk

✔
@eucopresident

Policies of @realDonaldTrump on #IranDeal and trade will meet a united European approach. EU leaders will tackle both issues at the summit in Sofia next week.
8:31 PM - May 8, 2018

449 404 people are talking about this

***
Emmanuel Macron

Emmanuel Macron
✔
@EmmanuelMacron

We will work collectively on a broader framework, covering nuclear activity, the post-2025 period, ballistic activity, and stability in the Middle-East, notably Syria, Yemen, and Iraq.
8:25 PM - May 8, 2018

1,703 1,031 people are talking about this

***

Emmanuel Macron

Emmanuel Macron
✔
@EmmanuelMacron

France, Germany, and the UK regret the U.S. decision to leave the JCPOA. The nuclear non-proliferation regime is at stake.
8:29 PM - May 8, 2018

9,0616,760 people are talking about this

****

Maga = Making America Alone Again

originally posted by: Gothmog
a reply to: Kharron

Listen, you guys

That right there....
Nullifies and negates anything after that.

Why would it, lol?

Why would that negate any facts, that is so silly? Because you're looking for any reason you can find to ignore facts?

Ok fine, ignore that I said 'listen guys' and just focus on the facts below.

Edit: And I'm sorry if you're a girl, I meant that in a generalized way.

Emmanuel Macron
✔
@EmmanuelMacron

We will work collectively on a broader framework, covering nuclear activity, the post-2025 period, ballistic activity, and stability in the Middle-East, notably Syria, Yemen, and Iraq.
8:25 PM - May 8, 2018

1,703 1,031 people are talking about this

Well there, slipped that one up. One could almost read that as a guarantee of Trump being POTUS for both terms. I always knew this would be the case, even if I did doubt for a brief moment after Tillerson was let go.

a reply to: Cassi3l

Another campaign promise fulfilled.

I can find zero fault with this correction of a past wrong.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: Cassi3l

Another campaign promise fulfilled.

I can find zero fault with this correction of a past wrong.

Aside from spitting in the face of America's European allies? For what? Just because the deal was negotiated on Obama's watch?
No, another campaign rant screwed up.

a reply to: Cassi3l

So tell me how this is complying?

On 22 July 2015, Abbas Araghchi, Iran’s deputy foreign minister who led the negotiations, made an announcement on state-controlled television that the recently reached nuclear deal with the world powers did not include limitations on Iran’s weapons capabilities or missile power and that Tehran would keep arming its regional allies. "We have told them [the P5+1 world powers] in the negotiations that we will supply arms to anyone and anywhere necessary and will import weapons from anywhere we want and we have clarified this during the negotiations," Araghchi said

They used this to lift sanctions to allow the US under Obama to give them back seized monies...with interest...
from a deal made in the laste 70's.

So, if you read the above, those seized monies can and/or will be used for weapons. A lot of people also seem to forget we also traded prisoners with Iran during this time.

a reply to: Kharron

Edit: And I'm sorry if you're a girl, I meant that in a generalized way.

Why would you feel sorry I am a girl
That sounds like a VERY BIGOTED statement.
I think you just outted yourself to ATS
Quick
Edit that out....

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

Iran is still a state sponsor of terrorism and a self-proclaimed enemy of the USA, as such there was no reason the US ever should have entered into any deal with them. It was a self debasing, idiotic deal.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: AngryCymraeg

Iran is still a state sponsor of terrorism and a self-proclaimed enemy of the USA, as such there was no reason the US ever should have entered into any deal with them. It was a self debasing, idiotic deal.

It could have been a worse deal.

No one went to war.

We shall see if something better can happen.

Just for the record giving iran a billion bad and giving billions and billions to corporations good. all on the citizens back.

originally posted by: FredT

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
The "deal" wasn't a binding treaty, wasn't approved by congress, and Iran has probably violated it. Now watch as Western masochists tell us how much they love been walked on.

Even mattis said they were compiling with the treaty which was better than none mind you.

If I was Crazy Kim, there is ZERO change I would give up his nukes now since the US cannot be trusted to comply with deals. There has been ZERO proof they have continued to enrich uranium so far. Just alot of supposition by anti deal types but no proof.

If I was Iran, I would start those centrifuges back up and start making bombs

Of course you would. It’s easy to side with theocratic state terrorists when you hold the US in such low regard.

What would be the point of North Korea signing any agreements with the US after this ?

originally posted by: Cassi3l
It's very simple to understand :
This deal was mutually agreed upon by all of our Allies and by Iran
The agreement was being complied with fully
It remains in the best interest, at least for the Middle East,
for keeping Iran from developing nuclear weapon capabilities.

What's going to replace it ?
John Bolton and Mike Pompeo's empty threats?

Trump is no leader, only unbridled recklessness
Trump has no foreign policy experience whatsoeve
Trump is a no-Nothing about the Middle East or it's history

And yet he still pulls this stuff off
All because of some, made-up-on-the-spur campaign promise?


This is Making America Great Again ?
Really !?

The US will rue the day that they elected this idiot

Gas prices will be going down, taxes down, defect down, unemployment down. But it's all bad because you don't like the guy. Tough sell, pal.

originally posted by: Cassi3l
What would be the point of North Korea signing any agreements with the US after this ?

Because I am pretty sure that Trump will level that place if they don't comply to his wishes. Since he has the ability to do it, it would be sensible for them to make peace for their own sake.

You're only interested in your own back yard ...
a reply to: bender151

a reply to: MRinder
Are we sure that China wants a toxic, nuclear, wasteland next door ?

a reply to: howtonhawky

Yeah, it forced them to buy weapons with our money. Brilliant!

originally posted by: Cassi3l
You're only interested in your own back yard ...
a reply to: bender151

And what exactly is wrong with that? Some of us are a little sick of taking it from behind for the collective. Why is it expected of us to go against our best interests just to keep the Europeans from pissing and moaning about it.

originally posted by: Cassi3l
a reply to: MRinder
Are we sure that China wants a toxic, nuclear, wasteland next door ?

We don't and won't use nuclear weapons unless the North Koreans do first. We can level that place with conventional weapons in a matter of weeks. As far as the China goes, what are they going to do about it? The most they could do is come down and take control of the land, but Kim and his family have pretty much wrecked the place up to this point so what use is it to anyone? China only views it as a buffer zone between them and South Korea. The very most they could do is stop loaning us money and selling us junk.

M'okay, but ... this is all about other stuff than that
hint : Trump gives flying bird to foreign allies over Iran 'issue'
a reply to: MRinder

a reply to: howtonhawky

Well that's a ringing endorsement for maintaining a deal if I ever heard one... "it could have been a worse deal."

I don't see anyone involved in this calling for billions and billions of citizens' money to be paid to corporations so please, pick up the straw man and carry him yonder to a topic where he actually is pertinent.