Trump wants nuclear accord with Putin by election

a reply to: Southern Guardian

While it is generally great that some sort of accord is reached, little seems to be considered about what concessions are granted in such negotiations.

Take for instance, the recent pact between Israel and UAE. While it is a win for publicity sake, what was bargained with, to get the Saudi's to relent?

Perhaps the UAE congratulating Netanyahu for "halting the annexation of Palestinian territories" is code for the old city and the Temple Mount being now 'owned' by the Palestinians and Israel dropping claims to them. Something I'm sure would displease the evangelical right if they realized what they've lost.

originally posted by: AlaskanDad
a reply to: Southern Guardian

Trump just needs more private talks with his master, Putin. A nuclear accord is just an excuse, if we see one signed it's obviously, just Putin, attempting to get Trump back into the election. Fake treaty to buy votes for the donald, how sad for the US of A

Quoted for a hysterical level of hypocrisy, considering the ties and money involved between the Democratic party and Russia.

Y'all need to get better at this part of your ideology...



Because the past few years you simply suck at it.

Nobody believes you anymore but yourselves.

a reply to: Southern Guardian

I don't believe there will never be a nuclear free world. The most the great powers can do is prevent, or at least mitigate, the chances of a global nuclear war.

If anything while the great powers may agree to lessen their stockpiles, regional powers will likely continue or start weapons development.

There is increasingly the prospect of a nuclear armed Turkey. A nation ever more isolated from the West whose expedition in Syria has destroyed any prospect of a Turkey aligned with Russia. While Israel & Pakistan have nuclear weapons Iran will likely not end their own program. Israel won't disarm because of it's, shall we say tempestuous relations with it's neighbours.

There has even been talk of Saudi Arabia obtaining nuclear weapons under Crown Prince Mohammad. They would certainly not be short of funding for such a project.

That is all within one geopolitical area.

To date, the only country that has unilaterally dismantled their nuclear arsenal is South Africa.

Good move.

However, this little part really interest me...

Russia has rejected anything that explicitly pressures China, so the U.S. is trying to find language both sides can live with, the source familiar says.

Why would the Russia heel to the Chinese so aggressively? I do know they have substantial deals and they certainly aren't going to do anything that takes away from their position, the Russians do things that benefit them.

Honestly, if Trump can pull this off without lifting sanctions, art of the deal. However, this move, to include China, may require the lifting of sanctions and some tariffs.

I get it, M.A.D, but still, this way, markets open up, money flows in, it’s a win win anyways, so...art of the deal.

originally posted by: Ohanka
a reply to: Southern Guardian

I don't believe there will never be a nuclear free world. The most the great powers can do is prevent, or at least mitigate, the chances of a global nuclear war.

If anything while the great powers may agree to lessen their stockpiles, regional powers will likely continue or start weapons development.

There is increasingly the prospect of a nuclear armed Turkey. A nation ever more isolated from the West whose expedition in Syria has destroyed any prospect of a Turkey aligned with Russia. While Israel & Pakistan have nuclear weapons Iran will likely not end their own program. Israel won't disarm because of it's, shall we say tempestuous relations with it's neighbours.

There has even been talk of Saudi Arabia obtaining nuclear weapons under Crown Prince Mohammad. They would certainly not be short of funding for such a project.

That is all within one geopolitical area.

To date, the only country that has unilaterally dismantled their nuclear arsenal is South Africa.

That’s only under the assumption that no other Super weapon arises that cancels out Nuclear weapons.

Space based lasers bro, I think that’s the ultimate platform to have. Equip them with all kinds of tech, those lasers can wipe out ICBMs an nuclear launches. Ugh, who am I kidding? If they were so OP, they would have built these things already, so meh...*shrugs*

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: Southern Guardian

While it is generally great that some sort of accord is reached, little seems to be considered about what concessions are granted in such negotiations.

Take for instance, the recent pact between Israel and UAE. While it is a win for publicity sake, what was bargained with, to get the Saudi's to relent?

Perhaps the UAE congratulating Netanyahu for "halting the annexation of Palestinian territories" is code for the old city and the Temple Mount being now 'owned' by the Palestinians and Israel dropping claims to them. Something I'm sure would displease the evangelical right if they realized what they've lost.

Palestinians were and are not on the table... They are align with Iran and this Abraham Accords Peace Agreement is actually against Iran. I think the ME is tired of the Palestinians.... Peace for peace...not peace for land...not going to happen.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: Southern Guardian

While it is generally great that some sort of accord is reached, little seems to be considered about what concessions are granted in such negotiations.

Take for instance, the recent pact between Israel and UAE. While it is a win for publicity sake, what was bargained with, to get the Saudi's to relent?

Perhaps the UAE congratulating Netanyahu for "halting the annexation of Palestinian territories" is code for the old city and the Temple Mount being now 'owned' by the Palestinians and Israel dropping claims to them. Something I'm sure would displease the evangelical right if they realized what they've lost.

Palestinians were and are not on the table... They are align with Iran and this Abraham Accords Peace Agreement is actually against Iran. I think the ME is tired of the Palestinians.... Peace for peace...not peace for land...not going to happen.

The details of exactly what went into the Isreal-UAE deal have not been made public. Why?

Clearly, someone made a compromise, somewhere, and mention of "halting the annexation of Palestinian territories" means that the Palestinians, while not at the table, were involved in the deal and that there was a concession in regard to Palestinian claims.

Remember that the Old City, which includes the Temple Mount, is currently 'Palestinian Occupied Territory' according to UNSC Resolution 478 (and a number of older resolutions). The UN considers the entire West Bank behind the 'green line' to be Palestinian.

The fact that non-Muslims are not allowed to enter eleven of the 12 gates to the Temple Mount from a Palestinian perspective, and that there is a Rabbinic prohibition on "any person" entering the Temple Mount, is a true indication of the situation.

a reply to: Southern Guardian

Russia has rejected anything that explicitly pressures China

Well if it's a deal with Russia I don't see why that would be part of the deal, but I think Russia needs to pick a side. It seems like the Putin government prefers to side with their communist neighbor China, yet the entire Russian election conspiracy was based on the Russian government trying to get Trump elected. It also seems to me like a large fraction of the Russian population really likes Trump. My advice for Russia is just get aboard the liberty train, drop the shackles of Communism and enjoy the freedom and economic advantages that come with it. Perhaps it's because Russians live under a system which doesn't provide them the same rights as Western nations that they respect leaders such as Trump just like the Hong Kong protesters, or maybe they just don't like corrupt politicians such as Hillary, I'd be interested to hear from any English speaking Russians on this subject to get a better understanding of it. Either way, if there's anyone capable of reaching an understanding with Russia it is Trump, he has already shown that he can work with Russian forces to fight terrorist groups. If he makes this happen it will be yet another historic peace deal but I do have my doubts because Russia and China are very stubborn.

originally posted by: chr0naut
The details of exactly what went into the Isreal-UAE deal have not been made public. Why?

Clearly, someone made a compromise, somewhere, and mention of "halting the annexation of Palestinian territories" means that the Palestinians, while not at the table, were involved in the deal and that there was a concession in regard to Palestinian claims.

Not clearly...You are speculating... Great have fun with that.

Remember that the Old City, which includes the Temple Mount, is currently 'Palestinian Occupied Territory' according to UNSC Resolution 478 (and a number of older resolutions). The UN considers the entire West Bank behind the 'green line' to be Palestinian.

I believe both Israel and America doesn't recognize 478...so what is your point?

The fact that non-Muslims are not allowed to enter eleven of the 12 gates to the Temple Mount from a Palestinian perspective, and that there is a Rabbinic prohibition on "any person" entering the Temple Mount, is a true indication of the situation.

Its call security... What ever they have in your so called concessions it will not have anything for the Palestinians, if that is what they want to be called. You do know there really isn't a Palestine, right, its kind of made up. You could call everyone in the region that and they were nomads for very long time with no borders stretching across a number of the countries there that was once the Ottoman empire. The Kurds have a much better claim to a country, and were a part of the French/Britain creation of the area, but there was no group to work with to establish a country for them so they became part of Iraq. This group is basically refugees that no one wanted to include Egypt and Jordan who at times had control over those areas too. With Israel taking over the area from war the PLO have become cannon fodder for Iran to push an anti-Israel agenda.

The PLO wants no concessions other than to see Israel completely disappear as a country, so whatever Israel does it would not be enough, so the Abraham Accords have nothing to do with PLO or the UN....

Every country that has Nuclear weapons should be involved, Including Israel, no more special treatment.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: chr0naut
The details of exactly what went into the Isreal-UAE deal have not been made public. Why?

Clearly, someone made a compromise, somewhere, and mention of "halting the annexation of Palestinian territories" means that the Palestinians, while not at the table, were involved in the deal and that there was a concession in regard to Palestinian claims.

Not clearly...You are speculating... Great have fun with that.

So you don't think that there was anything negotiated, then?

LOL. No wonder you guys elected him.

Remember that the Old City, which includes the Temple Mount, is currently 'Palestinian Occupied Territory' according to UNSC Resolution 478 (and a number of older resolutions). The UN considers the entire West Bank behind the 'green line' to be Palestinian.

I believe both Israel and America doesn't recognize 478...so what is your point?

The UAE does.

The fact that non-Muslims are not allowed to enter eleven of the 12 gates to the Temple Mount from a Palestinian perspective, and that there is a Rabbinic prohibition on "any person" entering the Temple Mount, is a true indication of the situation.

Its call security... What ever they have in your so called concessions it will not have anything for the Palestinians, if that is what they want to be called. You do know there really isn't a Palestine, right, its kind of made up. You could call everyone in the region that and they were nomads for very long time with no borders stretching across a number of the countries there that was once the Ottoman empire.

If you knew some of your Biblical history, the Hebrew people were taken into captivity and exile by the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar for 490 years (70 times seven), demolishing the city of Jerusalem to ensure that they wouldn't just fortify and hunker down.

During that half a millennia, people from other areas transplanted by the Babylonian and Assyrian empires (who did similar things with their subjugated peoples, to break national unity and prevent revolt) settled and thought of the country as their own. These people weren't Hebrews, but they did live there for hundreds of years. Also, when the Medo-Persian empire defeated the Babylonians, they allowed national groups to return and re-fortify their lands but they also allowed the existing dwellers to fortify and build cities. It meant that the vassal city-states were beholden to the Medo-Persian rulers and that the fortified areas could not easily be retaken by the dual enemies of The Medo-Persian empire, Egypt and Greece.

Although the Hebrews returned to build Jerusalem, they didn't push out the interlopers like they did when they originally took their "promised land" from the Caananites, and the Nation of Israel never achieved its previous independence. It bounced from conquering nation to conquering nation for thousands of years, almost up until modern times.

The Kurds have a much better claim to a country, and were a part of the French/Britain creation of the area, but there was no group to work with to establish a country for them so they became part of Iraq. This group is basically refugees that no one wanted to include Egypt and Jordan who at times had control over those areas too. With Israel taking over the area from war the PLO have become cannon fodder for Iran to push an anti-Israel agenda.

The PLO wants no concessions other than to see Israel completely disappear as a country, so whatever Israel does it would not be enough, so the Abraham Accords have nothing to do with PLO or the UN....

I agree that the PLO want, rather unreasonably, to wipe out Israel.

Israel, on the other hand, has been fairly lenient in allowing their tiny territory to be carved up and handed to opponents.

originally posted by: AlaskanDad
a reply to: Southern Guardian

Trump just needs more private talks with his master, Putin. A nuclear accord is just an excuse, if we see one signed it's obviously, just Putin, attempting to get Trump back into the election. Fake treaty to buy votes for the donald, how sad for the US of A

Dad, you need to remove those blinders and put the Kool Aid cup down. the rest of the entire world now knows there was no Russia-Trump link, only a Hillary-Russia link. I'm sorry to break it to you so harshly, but damn, it's called a clue, look into it.

originally posted by: Bluntone22

originally posted by: Southern Guardian
a reply to: carewemust

Vladimir Putin endorsed Joe Biden last week.

What does this have to do with the OP?

Really?

If Putin endorsed biden last week, why would he be doing trump a political favor to help his reelection chances a month before the election?

Seems like a valid point on the topic.

Since 2008 Russia have openly backed all sides on international elections and Putin openly funds his domestic rivals election campaigns to keep their true motives hidden and to sow doubt in democracy and similar notions through non-linear asymmetric warfare.

a reply to: chr0naut

It's all public but I don't know of any articles that write up the whole series of events.

The meetings took place in Warsaw on February 13th and 14th 2019. Initially the US wanted to host a 'War Room' for planning how to tackle Iran (called the Middle Eastern Strategic Alliance) but no country other than the US and host Poland) had planned to attend so 48 hours before the meeting they dropped those plans and copy/pasted the pan-Arabic-Israel deal (which Palestinians weren't involved in).

This month, US secretary of state Mike Pompeo announced that the United States and Poland would jointly host a summit that will include “an important element of making sure that Iran is not a destabilising influence” in the Middle East. Due to take place in Warsaw on 12-13 Feburary, the conference is viewed as controversial both in European capitals and Tehran. It could signal a gradual unravelling of European unity on Iran policy.

www.ecfr.eu...

Prior to Warsaw Europe and the Pan-Arabic Alliance were onboard the peace deal totaling 63 countries. All but four of these countries dropped out of the new deal. Partially because the new plans made little sense but mainly due to the deal never including Palestine and Palestine/Hamas having sought out it's own deal with Northern Arabic countries to counteract the new alliance - i.e Turkey have offered citizenship to any Hamas militants.

originally posted by: chr0naut

So you don't think that there was anything negotiated, then?

LOL. No wonder you guys elected him.

I didn't say that... I said whatever it may be it will have nothing to do with the Palestinians or land... I have said this a number of times and it seems you keep missing it. I'm not going to speculate as you do as to the rest.

The UAE does.

OK, but it seems they see Iran as a bigger threat than Israel is now...Maybe they changed their mind, maybe they see this as a different event all together than the Palestinians issue. In the past were they actually for the Palestinians or just against anything Israel was doing. The over all view of Israel in the ME is changing for the good.

Although the Hebrews returned to build Jerusalem, they didn't push out the interlopers like they did when they originally took their "promised land" from the Caananites, and the Nation of Israel never achieved its previous independence. It bounced from conquering nation to conquering nation for thousands of years, almost up until modern times.

There were no countries there as it was all part of the Ottoman empire, but after WWI the Treaty of Versailles around 1920 created 6 new countries in EU and 3 new countries in the ME. EU worked out well, but ME was a total mess, and is still a mess today. Israel also fought 3 countries for their independence too and won... Funny how in every case the land goes to the victor, well except in Israel case it seems. For the UN to suggest Israel doesn't have rights to all of it is like saying 6 countries in EU and 3 or more counties in ME do not have the same rights too. Before the war of 1967 Jordan control the West Bank and Egypt controlled Gaza Strip. Both counties annex off these areas from their own country as they saw the people living there as undesirables that they would not take in as citizens. Why didn't they make them countries back when Jordan and Egypt basically owned the land? Hell, Jordan was the Arab Palestine, but they were like ah hell no...



After the war Israel not only took these areas, but most of Egypt northern oil fields, Syria's southern oil fields and Jordan's western oil fields. Being the victor Israel could be about 10x larger than it is today with a huge amount of oil...But they basically gave it all back on the agreed point they keep the West Bank due to the religious value it has to them. As far as Gaza Strip goes I'm not sure if Israel really wanted it and Egypt didn't want it back as they basically walled it all off from them already when they did own it. Because of this it has basically been left alone and life there is actually pretty good for the 1.5 million Palestinians that live there. West Bank is nothing but warlords working for Iran...I do think it is a sad state, but much of their suffering is self-inflicted.

Israel, on the other hand, has been fairly lenient in allowing their tiny territory to be carved up and handed to opponents.

You should get off you island and visit it... I spent about 2 years of my life there. ME is basically an insane asylum... The sanest of the insane is Israel and Jordan right now with Saudi being basically psychopaths but workable psychopaths...It is hard for us in the West to truly understand their culture.

originally posted by: Southern Guardian

I'd like other nuclear powers to be involved again - India, Britain, France (EU) and Pakistan. Pakistan is of great concern as it is in my opinion to least developed and most unstable country to hold these weapons. I'm surprised more focus hasn't been put on them for their possession. It's a terrorist hotspot.

Couldn't agree more with the above.

Russia and the US have historically been the focus of nuclear proliferation negotiations, but both sides have more or less capitulated to the concept of MAD, and have made strides in reduction of nuclear stockpiles and weapons testing.

The "newer" members of the nuclear arms club are the ones that should demand the most attention IMO. Do they have a time-tested process of launch authentication measures, and a robust series of checks/balances to prevent inadvertent/erroneous launch in response to say, faulty diagnostics, incorrect radar readings, etc? The US and Russia have been playing this game for 70+ years and have developed very reliable fail-safes to prevent launches with incomplete or incorrect information in hand. I an vert skeptical that newer members have the learning base from past incidents to understand the risk of an inadvertent launch, and ways to ensure it could not happen.

Also none of this touches on technological gaps and older weapons technologies many of the non US/Russia nations are sure to be deploying; without massive defense budgets to upgrade weapons and monitoring equipment, it's very likely some of the nuclear club members have old and decaying infrastructure that is simply not trustworthy to manage.

Furthermore, both US and Russia seem to have come to grips that nearly ANY nuclear exchange will lead to a chain of events resulting in a catastrophic loss of life and infrastructure world-wide, basically meaning MAD just about eliminates 95%+ of scenarios where nuclear weapons might be brought to bear, What about Israel and India? And more to the point Pakistan? Do these countries share our view that the unimaginable loss of civilian life makes using nuclear weapons almost out of the question? Hopefully there are no 'kamikaze elements' of these nations military structures, but I wouldn't bet on it.

This is a worthwhile exercise, but IMO US and Russia shouldn't be the focus of curbing nuclear proliferation.

Well maybe for once the Word Great and the word Job may acutely mien something when it comes to Trump .
BUt Trump also let NK build even More missiles to fire more Nuks and hey dont you know kims a great guy v?
Trump is so easily played all Putin has to do is say how great trump is and Trump will fall all oevr him self to Kiss teh mans but .

Russia has signed alot of agreements so has the Us both sides Just keep right on doing teh same stuff anyway .

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: chr0naut

So you don't think that there was anything negotiated, then?

LOL. No wonder you guys elected him.

I didn't say that... I said whatever it may be it will have nothing to do with the Palestinians or land... I have said this a number of times and it seems you keep missing it. I'm not going to speculate as you do as to the rest.

The UAE does.

OK, but it seems they see Iran as a bigger threat than Israel is now...Maybe they changed their mind, maybe they see this as a different event all together than the Palestinians issue. In the past were they actually for the Palestinians or just against anything Israel was doing. The over all view of Israel in the ME is changing for the good.

Although the Hebrews returned to build Jerusalem, they didn't push out the interlopers like they did when they originally took their "promised land" from the Caananites, and the Nation of Israel never achieved its previous independence. It bounced from conquering nation to conquering nation for thousands of years, almost up until modern times.

There were no countries there as it was all part of the Ottoman empire, but after WWI the Treaty of Versailles around 1920 created 6 new countries in EU and 3 new countries in the ME. EU worked out well, but ME was a total mess, and is still a mess today. Israel also fought 3 countries for their independence too and won... Funny how in every case the land goes to the victor, well except in Israel case it seems. For the UN to suggest Israel doesn't have rights to all of it is like saying 6 countries in EU and 3 or more counties in ME do not have the same rights too. Before the war of 1967 Jordan control the West Bank and Egypt controlled Gaza Strip. Both counties annex off these areas from their own country as they saw the people living there as undesirables that they would not take in as citizens. Why didn't they make them countries back when Jordan and Egypt basically owned the land? Hell, Jordan was the Arab Palestine, but they were like ah hell no...

After the war Israel not only took these areas, but most of Egypt northern oil fields, Syria's southern oil fields and Jordan's western oil fields. Being the victor Israel could be about 10x larger than it is today with a huge amount of oil...But they basically gave it all back on the agreed point they keep the West Bank due to the religious value it has to them. As far as Gaza Strip goes I'm not sure if Israel really wanted it and Egypt didn't want it back as they basically walled it all off from them already when they did own it. Because of this it has basically been left alone and life there is actually pretty good for the 1.5 million Palestinians that live there. West Bank is nothing but warlords working for Iran...I do think it is a sad state, but much of their suffering is self-inflicted.

Israel, on the other hand, has been fairly lenient in allowing their tiny territory to be carved up and handed to opponents.

You should get off you island and visit it... I spent about 2 years of my life there. ME is basically an insane asylum... The sanest of the insane is Israel and Jordan right now with Saudi being basically psychopaths but workable psychopaths...It is hard for us in the West to truly understand their culture.

Israel–United Arab Emirates normalization agreement
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Joint Statement of the United States, the State of Israel, and the United Arab Emirates - White House.gov (Note paragraph 4).

Pres ident Donald J. Trump’s Vision for Peace, Prosperity, and a Brighter Future for Israel and the Palestinian People - White House.gov Note bullet points 9, 14, 16, 17, 21 and 22.

The deal was significantly about a Palestinian state, and the Temple Mount is now under Palestinian authority by terms of the agreement.

originally posted by: chr0naut

The deal was significantly about a Palestinian state, and the Temple Mount is now under Palestinian authority by terms of the agreement.

There is a vison in place to demilitarize the area over 4 years, while not to annex more off, they could get their own state but it seems they are pissed over it all anyways. As I said they do not want peace, even if Israel holds out a olive branch. Israel is willing to invest 50 billion, maybe if other countries can match and they get rid of the warlords the West Bank can be more like Gaza Strip. This also seems to be about the same with no changes as it was before the accord...

JERUSALEM AND HOLY SITES: Israel will continue to safeguard Jerusalem’s Holy Sites and will guarantee freedom of worship for Jews, Christians, Muslims, and people of all faiths.
The status quo at the Temple Mount/Haram al-Sharif will be preserved.
The special and historic role of the King of Jordan with regard to the Muslim Holy Shrines in Jerusalem will be preserved.
All Muslims are welcome to peacefully visit al-Aqsa Mosque.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: chr0naut

The deal was significantly about a Palestinian state, and the Temple Mount is now under Palestinian authority by terms of the agreement.

There is a vison in place to demilitarize the area over 4 years, while not to annex more off, they could get their own state but it seems they are pissed over it all anyways. As I said they do not want peace, even if Israel holds out a olive branch. Israel is willing to invest 50 billion, maybe if other countries can match and they get rid of the warlords the West Bank can be more like Gaza Strip. This also seems to be about the same with no changes as it was before the accord...

JERUSALEM AND HOLY SITES: Israel will continue to safeguard Jerusalem’s Holy Sites and will guarantee freedom of worship for Jews, Christians, Muslims, and people of all faiths.
The status quo at the Temple Mount/Haram al-Sharif will be preserved.
The special and historic role of the King of Jordan with regard to the Muslim Holy Shrines in Jerusalem will be preserved.
All Muslims are welcome to peacefully visit al-Aqsa Mosque.

They should have included concessions to allow the Israeli's rights over Mount Olympus in the agreement too. They aren't going to set foot there either.

a reply to: network dude

Ah gee are you getting triggered because not everyone follows the Hillary fabrication?

I guess Trumps just been blowing Putin in those secret meetings; sorry but The Donald is owned by Putin, it's called Kompromat.

Magamaniacs and their blind defense of Trump is so pathetic.