Page 6 of 9 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 81
Thanks Tree26Thanks

Thread: Iran nuclear: Trump extends Obama's 'worst deal ever'

  1. #51
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    58,898
    Thanks
    31156

    From
    in my head
    Quote Originally Posted by Macduff View Post
    Speaking of pretending, you keep insisting that a nuclear Iran was an inevitability with no evidence.
    They had all the components and the education level to create them. I see no reason to doubt them. We slowed them down by holding and threatening their scientists and through digital attacks, but why would you think they wouldn't develop that technology when so many others have?
    My alternative is a deal negotiated by an adequate diplomat who didn't have this idea that if he just gave the mullahs everything they wanted then they would fall in love with the US. Maybe someone who actually acts like this is a rogue nation and an avowed enemy of the US. This whole "sanctions will not hold" is just another excuse for yet another Obama foreign policy failure. There's no evidence of that.
    I think there's considerably evidence. Just the fact that other countries had more to lose from those sanctions than we did suggests that their commitment to them was less than our own. There were legal challenges to the sanctions on banking--from Europe--and the (very likely) prospect of eventual high oil prices again, Iran would certainly be able to market it's oil. Did you ever see a sanction against crude oil that actually worked when prices are high? OPEC can't keep its own members in line to avoid selling it. Give me a break.
    There is no alternative to offer at this point. The Iran Deal has pretty much made a nuclear Iran an inevitability. So thanks Obama for an Iran that is richer, stronger and with even more influence who will get those nukes.
    There never was another alternative except to keep doing what we were doing.

    And Iran nukes are no more inevitable now than they were before. What changed? You really think the Iranians were going to let a poor economy keep them from developing nukes? Seriously? Iran's GDP was 600B in 2010. NK's GDP was $12.38 billion in 2011.

  2. #52
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    58,898
    Thanks
    31156

    From
    in my head
    I remember another country we were going to bring to it's knees with sanctions: Cuba. Took two generations before we figured out that wasn't going to work.

  3. #53
    RNG
    RNG is offline
    Moderator RNG's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    5,522
    Thanks
    3752

    From
    Canada, West Coast
    Quote Originally Posted by Macduff View Post
    https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/19/w...ners.html?_r=0
    The evidence is the lack of evidence that the sanctions were in any danger until Obama came along. I truly don't understand this position of "Welp, Iran is going to get nukes sooner or later so we might as well make sure they're as financially well off as possible when they do."
    Seriously, if this deal was supposed to prevent war, then what sense did lifting weapons and missile embargoes on them make?
    I can't directly go to a NYT link directly without a subscription since my "free" visits limit is blown. But I did find this one.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/23/o...som-story.html

    The first thing to know about the latest controversy over the Iran nuclear deal is that the Obama administration did not pay $400 million in “ransom” to secure the release of three American detainees. Yet that’s the story critics are peddling in another attempt to discredit an agreement that has done something remarkable — halted a program that had put Iran within striking distance of producing a nuclear weapon.

    The truth is that the administration withheld the payment to ensure Iran didn’t renege on its promise to free three detainees — a Washington Post journalist, a Marine veteran and a Christian pastor. That’s pragmatic diplomacy not capitulation.

    The controversy erupted when The Wall Street Journal reported that the United States delivered $400 million in cash to Iranian officials after Tehran released the American detainees. It has provided an irresistible opportunity for Iran-bashing and Obama-bashing.

    What really happened was this: President Obama announced the $400 million payment along with the release of the Americans in January, the day that the nuclear deal was implemented. But the money was part of a separate negotiation over funds the United States has owed Iran since its 1979 Islamic Revolution.
    And then there was https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/19/w...ners.html?_r=0

    The State Department conceded for the first time on Thursday that it delayed making a $400 million payment to Iran for several hours in January “to retain maximum leverage” and ensure that three American prisoners were released the same day.
    Were either of these your link?

  4. #54
    Junior Member
    Joined
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    1,086
    Thanks
    258

    From
    Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by Macduff View Post
    Good thing Hillary wasn't elected. We'd still have Obamacare and the Iran deal.
    The thing is Trump is still better than Hillary. She would sell off the entire country piecemeal to whoever would donate to her "charity". Twenty percent of U.S. uranium to Russia, then twenty percent to North Korea, then twenty percent to Iran... I wonder how much she could get for Manhattan.

  5. #55
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    58,898
    Thanks
    31156

    From
    in my head
    Quote Originally Posted by Otto Throttle View Post
    The thing is Trump is still better than Hillary. She would sell off the entire country piecemeal to whoever would donate to her "charity". Twenty percent of U.S. uranium to Russia, then twenty percent to North Korea, then twenty percent to Iran... I wonder how much she could get for Manhattan.
    Hillary is no longer an argument. She's in the rear view.
    Thanks from Friday13

  6. #56
    You just made the list! Macduff's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    79,164
    Thanks
    20170

    From
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Quote Originally Posted by Rasselas View Post
    They had all the components and the education level to create them. I see no reason to doubt them. We slowed them down by holding and threatening their scientists and through digital attacks, but why would you think they wouldn't develop that technology when so many others have?
    I think there's considerably evidence. Just the fact that other countries had more to lose from those sanctions than we did suggests that their commitment to them was less than our own. There were legal challenges to the sanctions on banking--from Europe--and the (very likely) prospect of eventual high oil prices again, Iran would certainly be able to market it's oil. Did you ever see a sanction against crude oil that actually worked when prices are high? OPEC can't keep its own members in line to avoid selling it. Give me a break.
    There never was another alternative except to keep doing what we were doing.

    And Iran nukes are no more inevitable now than they were before. What changed? You really think the Iranians were going to let a poor economy keep them from developing nukes? Seriously? Iran's GDP was 600B in 2010. NK's GDP was $12.38 billion in 2011.
    So let me get this straight. The enforcement mechanism of the Iran Deal is the snap back. That we can snap back to sanctions. So the Obama administration engineered a deal where the enforcement mechanism was something they don't think was working to begin with?
    God help us. I can only hope that when Iran goes nuclear that we have adequate leaders instead of the leadership that gave us this mess.

  7. #57
    You just made the list! Macduff's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    79,164
    Thanks
    20170

    From
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Quote Originally Posted by RNG View Post
    I can't directly go to a NYT link directly without a subscription since my "free" visits limit is blown. But I did find this one.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/23/o...som-story.html



    And then there was https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/19/w...ners.html?_r=0



    Were either of these your link?
    So they handed over money in return for freed hostages. I'm no diplomacy expert but that sounds a lot like paying a ransom to me.

  8. #58
    You just made the list! Macduff's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    79,164
    Thanks
    20170

    From
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Quote Originally Posted by Otto Throttle View Post
    The thing is Trump is still better than Hillary. She would sell off the entire country piecemeal to whoever would donate to her "charity". Twenty percent of U.S. uranium to Russia, then twenty percent to North Korea, then twenty percent to Iran... I wonder how much she could get for Manhattan.
    It's he? Because if Trump has shown himself to be one thing, it's incompetent. A corrupt person can choose not to be corrupt. An incompetent person can't choose to be competent.

  9. #59
    Veteran Member MaryAnne's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    39,712
    Thanks
    28554

    From
    Englewood,Ohio
    Quote Originally Posted by Macduff View Post
    Good thing Hillary wasn't elected. We'd still have Obamacare and the Iran deal.
    Sarcasm,Mcduff? LOL

  10. #60
    Veteran Member MaryAnne's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    39,712
    Thanks
    28554

    From
    Englewood,Ohio
    Quote Originally Posted by Macduff View Post
    So they handed over money in return for freed hostages. I'm no diplomacy expert but that sounds a lot like paying a ransom to me.
    Their own money we held.

    Latest talk,James Brien Comey for President!

Page 6 of 9 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Iran Nuclear Deal Isn't A Bad Deal After All; It's No Deal
    By ptif219 in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 12th December 2015, 12:27 PM
  2. Replies: 194
    Last Post: 3rd September 2015, 07:47 PM
  3. Replies: 15
    Last Post: 28th August 2015, 01:12 PM
  4. Iran Nuclear Deal
    By Friday13 in forum Current Events
    Replies: 493
    Last Post: 25th July 2015, 01:29 PM
  5. House sends Iran nuclear deal bill to President Obama
    By bajisima in forum Current Events
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 14th May 2015, 01:42 PM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed