Trump announces pulling out of Iran deal and imposing sanctions

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: Konduit
a reply to: Annee

What exactly do you mean by respect?

You dont see the difference here? One is pure propaganda to influence a easily persuaded person. The bottom is China knowing that BS from the first doesnt work.

The crowds were yuge, did you see them all, they were all cheering twump, Twump is wery good ,you should have seen them all, and I was very happy to see them....

That’s not racist at all...

a reply to: Pyle

China disrespected Obama but not even bothering to meet him at the tarmac. They barely acknowledged his visit to China. Obama capitulated to China and they knew it. They were caught red handed stealing top secret information and what did he do? Trump is the fly in the ointment his childlike ego makes him a wild card. So as crazy as it sounds foreign governments treat him with respect out of fear what could happen if they dont.

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: Middleoftheroad

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: Middleoftheroad

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: Middleoftheroad

Actually, IIRC, Iran made deals with both Airbus and Boeing to replace their aging civilian airliners....then the deal was struck, both in Europe and the U.S..

P.S. That could be one form of retaliation Iran could make, cancelling the Boeing purchase.

Sure, but I’m not to concerned about replenishing Boeing’s and Airbus’s aging airliners. The EU has a lot more than that deal to be concerned about though.

How so?

Here ya go: The Hill

Very interesting article. Kind of depressing in it's way. Makes me wonder why the EU signed onto the sanctions in the first place?? Very strange.

That raises the question of what happens if the majority of the EU nations refuse to go along with the sanctions? Obviously there's always someone who will violate them, but if the majority do, what then?

The other question that comes up is if there's so much trade going on between the EU and Iran, why should Iran be so desperate to have the agreement stay in place? It's not like they rely on U.S. trade and from that sense wouldn't suffer whatsoever.

That leaves only one answer I can come up with and that is iran is desperate to develop those nukes. To not be where 'the line in the sand' is reasserted. That would leave them, Persians, as long term a non-nuclear power.

Is there some aspect I'm missing here or does that make sense based on the information to hand?

Why would Europe follow the US on this one? The whole point was to relax sanctions (in order to get Iran back into the global market and diplomacy to reduce the need of Nukes) and prevent the further progress to nuclear weapons. If the sanctions goes back on even though they were in compliance with the deal the only route they have left is Nukes. Look what it got NK a sit down with US president...

The EU will go along with it, like it or not, because their choice will be do business with Iran you will lose business with the U.S. Some don't do much business with the U.S. and will continue to trade with Iran. Not the bigger ones. It would cost them too much in lost revenues from the U.S..

No, there is one other option rather than nukes and a likely war with the U.S.- and an almost certain war with Israel- and that is negotiate for real. The negotiations with NK worked only after extreme pressure was placed on them. The same mechanism might work with Iran. It may not.

I've posted this again and again in this thread. The biggest plus in this move is takes the almost certainty of war between Israel and Iran and chills it out. From what I can see, it was close. Real close.

Trump has placed the U.S. in between the two nations. Israel will not move during this process unless Iran moves first. Iran is in a similar situation as NK was. A non-winning one. Hopefully, it works out similarly.

Russia and China were both players in the NK gambit. They are again in the Iranian play...surprise, surprise.

We shall see.

I don’t know if I’ve ever been so torn on forming an opinion on a matter. Both sides, in my very unbiased and neutral opinion, are making great points on whether this is either a good move, or a bad move on Trumps part.

It’s times like this that I wish trumps credibility wasn’t lacking as a result of his very chaotic presidency and the media’s obsessive pursuit to undermine him. It would be easier to zero in on what’s real and what’s not. Because, at the moment, there’s no way for me, personally, to form an opinion.

I will say I did not like the majority of Obama’s presidency. I despise our leftist media. Trumps influence on foreign affairs is actually pretty solid thus far. Iran has been a royal pain in the international a$$, and based on their reaction to it all...I tend to want to see this as a good move.

Beyond that, I have nothing to offer to this discussion. But I have enjoyed hearing the perspective of both sides of the conversation.

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: Pyle

China disrespected Obama but not even bothering to meet him at the tarmac. They barely acknowledged his visit to China. Obama capitulated to China and they knew it. They were caught red handed stealing top secret information and what did he do? Trump is the fly in the ointment his childlike ego makes him a wild card. So as crazy as it sounds foreign governments treat him with respect out of fear what could happen if they dont.

That's the way Trump is playing it.

a reply to: dragonridr

So as crazy as it sounds foreign governments treat him with respect out of fear what could happen if they dont.

There are few things more dangerous that a fool with power. Though, if they treat him with respect and fear him, why do foreign leaders have no problem publicly denouncing his words and actions?

I wonder if this fear and respect is more a creation in the minds of his supporters, than actually exists within the international community.

a reply to: bastion

There's lots of evidence they are breaking the treaty. If you paid attention they even admitted it. They said they could have full uranium production in weeks. And a promise not to enrich uranium to weapons grade is a silly concept. But the Israelis showed everything Iran has done and said was a lie. How could anyone claim they were following the rules of the treaty while working towards building nukes. Unless of course said treaty was useless there was no violations and it can't stop them from attaining nukes

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: dragonridr

So as crazy as it sounds foreign governments treat him with respect out of fear what could happen if they dont.

There are few things more dangerous that a fool with power. Though, if they treat him with respect and fear him, why do foreign leaders have no problem publicly denouncing his words and actions?

I wonder if this fear and respect is more a creation in the minds of his supporters, than actually exists within the international community.

Perhaps equally possible, the same could be said for his detractors...all in their minds. Does the truth of it lie somewhere in between?

a reply to: nwtrucker

Perhaps equally possible, the same could be said for his detractors...all in their minds. Does the truth of it lie somewhere in between?

Depends on what his detractors are saying.

The truth is the truth and it may not lie somewhere in the middle, if one side has gone to absurd extremes.

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: bastion

There's lots of evidence they are breaking the treaty. If you paid attention they even admitted it. They said they could have full uranium production in weeks. And a promise not to enrich uranium to weapons grade is a silly concept. But the Israelis showed everything Iran has done and said was a lie. How could anyone claim they were following the rules of the treaty while working towards building nukes. Unless of course said treaty was useless there was no violations and it can't stop them from attaining nukes

The Israeli claims are the lies I'm on about. They were cut and pasted from the annexed section of the IAEA report no new content, it was debunked within hours as sexxed up nonsense from 2003 was explained in the 2015 report on project Amad (which concluded there'd been no advancement since the 2003 attempts and subsequent abandonment of trying to develop a trigger for a nuclear weapon.

Trumps administration has repeatedly stated Iran is abiding by the agreement. It was only last week they announced Iran wasn't currently making any attempt at developing nukes to correct the statement made earlier in the day to a 'clerical error' mixing up past and present tense

originally posted by: enkilo
a reply to: nwtrucker
PLease then educate me on the Hegelian dialectic please oh great sage.

Sarcasm noted. Look, I don't 'know' squat. I'm a damned truck driver...well a just retiring truck driver, what do I know?

100% honest post here, if you missed it....

It will remain 100% honest. What I get from your posts is your conviction of Zionist/Israeli manipulation, control and influence over the U.S.. I cede 'influence'. On occasion, manipulation. Control? Nope. Not even close. I also feel the same applies to the U.S. over Israel. Exactly the same. Plenty of evidence. Both will act independently of the others wishes, 'influence' and attempts to manipulate if the circumstances are seen to justify it.

Hegelian Dialectic. A cute, pedantic concept that may or may not be applicable or even necessary. One can use Occam's Razor, my favorite, and even that one can be used either way. Supporting or negating a specific point of view.

My point, and belief, is both or any other such mechanism is used as an argument/talking point to support a specific view, goal or agenda. No more, no less.

But then again, what do I know?

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: nwtrucker

Perhaps equally possible, the same could be said for his detractors...all in their minds. Does the truth of it lie somewhere in between?

Depends on what his detractors are saying.

The truth is the truth and it may not lie somewhere in the middle, if one side has gone to absurd extremes.

Now there's no surprise.

originally posted by: bastion

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: bastion

There's lots of evidence they are breaking the treaty. If you paid attention they even admitted it. They said they could have full uranium production in weeks. And a promise not to enrich uranium to weapons grade is a silly concept. But the Israelis showed everything Iran has done and said was a lie. How could anyone claim they were following the rules of the treaty while working towards building nukes. Unless of course said treaty was useless there was no violations and it can't stop them from attaining nukes

The Israeli claims are the lies I'm on about. They were cut and pasted from the annexed section of the IAEA report no new content, it was debunked within hours as sexxed up nonsense from 2003 was explained in the 2015 report on project Amad (which concluded there'd been no advancement since the 2003 attempts and subsequent abandonment of trying to develop a trigger for a nuclear weapon.

Trumps administration has repeatedly stated Iran is abiding by the agreement. It was only last week they announced Iran wasn't currently making any attempt at developing nukes to correct the statement made earlier in the day to a 'clerical error' mixing up past and present tense

Lord, you can generate the stuff fast, can't you. Peace be with you.

a reply to: nwtrucker
you claimed my explanations of what Hegelian dialectic is wrong when I told you that both right and left at the top serve the same masters. You might not agree with my conclusion but you cannot say that what I said it not a classic example of Hegelian dialectic. If you do not know what Hegelian dialectic is then you in no position to claim I am wrong. You say that tHE ZIONIST has no control of the US' political system and yet there is no other country on earth who will go against its own interest to serve Israel like the US will. It's pathetic really. Think about it, what is the benefit for the USA recognizing Jerusalem as Israel capital. None expect to serve Israel interest. The USA becomes more hated in the middle east is the only benefit. What the benefit of USA letting Israel have nuclear weapons for itself when it is providing Israel with billions for defense as well as the protection of the world most powerful army if anyone does attack it. The so-called patriot in America does not realize that the Zionist agenda include the destruction of the USA since it the only superpower who can stand up to their insane plan for global dominations. By the time you Americans realize that the Zionist would have completely neutered your power. Sad really as I think the American people are great but have sadly let the zionist blinded them.

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: bastion

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: bastion

There's lots of evidence they are breaking the treaty. If you paid attention they even admitted it. They said they could have full uranium production in weeks. And a promise not to enrich uranium to weapons grade is a silly concept. But the Israelis showed everything Iran has done and said was a lie. How could anyone claim they were following the rules of the treaty while working towards building nukes. Unless of course said treaty was useless there was no violations and it can't stop them from attaining nukes

The Israeli claims are the lies I'm on about. They were cut and pasted from the annexed section of the IAEA report no new content, it was debunked within hours as sexxed up nonsense from 2003 was explained in the 2015 report on project Amad (which concluded there'd been no advancement since the 2003 attempts and subsequent abandonment of trying to develop a trigger for a nuclear weapon.

Trumps administration has repeatedly stated Iran is abiding by the agreement. It was only last week they announced Iran wasn't currently making any attempt at developing nukes to correct the statement made earlier in the day to a 'clerical error' mixing up past and present tense

Lord, you can generate the stuff fast, can't you. Peace be with you.

Generate what? Facts are facts. The report from 2015 is here www.un.org... . It was headline news just last week. Used to be a defence correspondent so been following this stuff for 20 years now.

There's a good BBC article here that covers the whole topic: www.bbc.co.uk...

How has the IAEA reacted?
It pointed out that one of its own reports from 2015 had identified some Iranian activities in 2003 "relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device".

There had been "no credible indications of activities in Iran relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device after 2009", according to that report.


Ho has the US reacted?

'The White House initially responded to Mr Netanyahu's allegations by saying they were consistent with its understanding that Iran "has" a "robust, clandestine nuclear weapons" programme.

However, it later corrected the statement by changing the tense of the verb to "had", blaming a "clerical error".'

originally posted by: enkilo
a reply to: Gothmog
Elaborate on that, please. Do not just makes a statement and then not back it up. Why do you think Trump is not a zionist puppet?

What is a Zionist ?
I did not make the statement. You did.
It is not my onus to prove.
All you , bud
Back it up or .......

originally posted by: bastion


Generate what? Facts are facts. The report from 2015 is here. It was headline news just last week.

There's a good BBC article here that covers the whole topic: www.bbc.co.uk...


How has the IAEA reacted?
It pointed out that one of its own reports from 2015 had identified some Iranian activities in 2003 "relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device".

There had been "no credible indications of activities in Iran relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device after 2009", according to that report.

There are just a couple of problems with this take on the Israeli relevations:

- Iran has never admitted to a nuclear weapons program (still doesnt), despite Israels relevations or earlier IAEA findings in 2011
- Iran was supposed to come clean about their past weapons program under the nuclear deal, yet failed to do so
- the is no reason for Iran to preserve and hide the documents of an illegal weapons program if they dont plan on developing a bomb in the future
- the fact that IAEA doesnt have any evidence for a continued weapons program post 2009 doesnt mean there is none
- While IAEA had some evidence of the Iranian weapons program, Israel basically aquired the entire thing, showing it as more advanced than previously thought
- Israels relevations yet again show how the IAEA failed to uncover the scope of the Iranian weapons program

But sure, saying "Iran doesnt build a bomb NOW!!11!! Bibi is full of it" is so much easier

originally posted by: enkilo
a reply to: nwtrucker
you claimed my explanations of what Hegelian dialectic is wrong when I told you that both right and left at the top serve the same masters. You might not agree with my conclusion but you cannot say that what I said it not a classic example of Hegelian dialectic. If you do not know what Hegelian dialectic is then you in no position to claim I am wrong. You say that tHE ZIONIST has no control of the US' political system and yet there is no other country on earth who will go against its own interest to serve Israel like the US will. It's pathetic really. Think about it, what is the benefit for the USA recognizing Jerusalem as Israel capital. None expect to serve Israel interest. The USA becomes more hated in the middle east is the only benefit. What the benefit of USA letting Israel have nuclear weapons for itself when it is providing Israel with billions for defense as well as the protection of the world most powerful army if anyone does attack it. The so-called patriot in America does not realize that the Zionist agenda include the destruction of the USA since it the only superpower who can stand up to their insane plan for global dominations. By the time you Americans realize that the Zionist would have completely neutered your power. Sad really as I think the American people are great but have sadly let the zionist blinded them.

You completely avoid the point of my post. Off the top, what 'point' did the U.S. have in fighting Germany when it had Japan to deal with? Germany wasn't in any position to attack the U.S.. it was to help the U.K. and Europe overall.

Helping an ally. Gee, what a foreign concept. Can't give validation to Israel to compensate the bigotry from Europe, the U.N. and the Muslim community.

The Zionists. Gee, Let's see, the current situation is Eygpt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia are all on good terms and/or are working directly with Israel. Yep, the Zionists run those nations too, I assume.

Again you use merely use Hegelian Dialectic as a tool to promote your view of this.

I could, and probably should, say YOU are the result of the Hegelian Dialectic. You've bought into it. You are responding exactly as desired and predicted.

You're a good boy!

a reply to: mightmight

It's not just my opinion, iut's the consensus of the international community and IAEA.

The IAEA detailed them in the Annexed section of the report.

Covert surveilance is used to detect any form of breaking the 2015 agreement, as per the agreement. This years report is realeased in July but last years like every year before it shows no evidence. Personally though I'm not a fan of the heavy water reactor agreement as the modified version could quite quickly be retrofitted to standard and produce Plutonium very quickly should an agreement break down.

The plans to develop a 1-5Kt yeild warhead up until 2009 were known about and were seen as a good sign, as bizzare as that sounds, because it showed they were further away and less ambitious in their attempts/yeildfs than back in 1985.

The inspection controls mean there's no way to move the radioactive material out of the control zones to start developing any covert programme - however this doesn't rule out the sourcing of yellowcake on the blackmarket which isn't too hard if reports from Belarus are to be believed.

While I'm completely opposed to the Iranian regime and have no doubt they have and would seek to develop nuclear weapons at some point, at the time being there's no evidence they're up to anything.

a reply to: nwtrucker

It will remain 100% honest. What I get from your posts is your conviction of Zionist/Israeli manipulation, control and influence over the U.S.. I cede 'influence'. On occasion, manipulation. Control? Nope. Not even close. I also feel the same applies to the U.S. over Israel. Exactly the same. Plenty of evidence. Both will act independently of the others wishes, 'influence' and attempts to manipulate if the circumstances are seen to justify it.

Right....the foreign aid the US gives to Israel probably has no effect to the tune of 37 billion in military aid.

You give naive a new definition, perhaps your Occam Razor could scrape off some of the partisanship.