• Due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software, some users were "banned" when they tried to change their passwords at the end of February. This does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you were affected by this, please us viua the Contact us link in the footer.

Renouncing the Iran Nuclear Deal: Trump's equivalent to Invasion of Iraq ... ?


Beachcomber

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2010
Messages
10,618
I thought Trump's 12 requirements for a new nuclear deal and the lifting of sanctions were very sensible, much more so than the previous 'deal' which was frankly a waste of the paper it was written on.

For example, halting uranium enrichment altogether, as well as ending its development of ballistic missiles, involvement in conflicts elsewhere in the Middle East, and support of terrorist groups...

I mean why should anyone be afraid to ask these mad mullahs for that?!

I'd have thought it's because asking for such things is unrealistic.

The US has done all of those things. Do you think that if another country asked the US to stop doing all of those things that the US would consider doing so?
 


Beachcomber

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2010
Messages
10,618
Trump can learn? Unlikely. I do agree that events have their own momentum and the Yanks could find themselves plunged into something.

And not for the first time.

The chances of this happening are higher because idiot Trump is likely to react based on his gut feelings at some stage, rather than from a rational analysis.
 

Beachcomber

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2010
Messages
10,618
This build-up of US military power is bound to result in some sort of an incident - maybe an unintentional one, or more likely a cloudy incident that was created by US players.

If it's the latter, Trump knows that his supporters will support him no matter what happened in reality. And then there will a shooting war based on some flimsy excuse that "US interests were under attack".
 

Beachcomber

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2010
Messages
10,618
If the US does start a war with Iran, I wonder how the Trump supporters will explain it away?

I'm sure that "Trump the supposed peacemaker" will be forgotten, and instead they will praise Trump for his manly willingness to take on the world's baddies.
 

roc_

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 5, 2009
Messages
6,528
I'd have thought it's because asking for such things is unrealistic.

The US has done all of those things. Do you think that if another country asked the US to stop doing all of those things that the US would consider doing so?
The US can demand those things by putting them in a deep economic rut that threatens the very viability of their rule.
 

Ardillaun

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
11,402
Trump’s advisors knew these demands could not be met by the Iranians; it would to tantamount to surrender to a mortal enemy. They were designed to be rejected so that the trade war could be ratcheted up.
 

owedtojoy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2010
Messages
46,031
If the US does start a war with Iran, I wonder how the Trump supporters will explain it away?

I'm sure that "Trump the supposed peacemaker" will be forgotten, and instead they will praise Trump for his manly willingness to take on the world's baddies.
Fools fooled themselves.

Trump's party is the party of Bush & Cheney - he was always going to appoint unreconstructed Cheneyites like Bolton.

Trump's "dissent" from Bush' foreign policy was always ambiguous - his problem with the Iraq war was that it was not waged viciously enough, and that it was done at a financial loss.

So now what we have is another variation of Bush & Cheney - slavish support for Israel, and then Saudi Arabia, and a drumbeat for war against countries that are threats to US hegemony in the Middle East.
 
Joined
May 2, 2019
Messages
60
Just news I saw on Twitter. The houtis from Yemen just in the last half hour has used drones with explosives to attack oil pumping stations in Saudi Arabia.

Not much in detail yet and how successful this was? Saudi Arabia is claiming the houtis did it?
 

roc_

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 5, 2009
Messages
6,528
Trump’s advisors knew these demands could not be met by the Iranians; it would to tantamount to surrender to a mortal enemy. They were designed to be rejected so that the trade war could be ratcheted up.
Perhaps. But Trump is squeezing them, squeezing them hard. Acknowledge that Obama basically got nothing out of them in the deal he did with them. Obama's deal ended up as basically consisting of 'optics'. Whereas on of the things Trump promised during his election was a much better deal with Iran. For example he wants verifiable, tangible agreement on their nuclear program. He wants agreement on their use of proxies to further their expansionist and revolutionary ambitions. He wants them to adopt policies based on genuine self-interest as opposed to policies based on anti Semitic and conspiracist minded fatwa. So we see him now seriously ratcheting up the costs and the military pressure for them, realising that they are also are interested in maintaining power, having some semblance of legitimacy inside their own country. It's a risky strategy no doubt, but the alternative of not doing so is in all probability an even much more risky strategy in the long term.
 

Nebuchadnezzar

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 15, 2011
Messages
10,786
The damage on at least one of these ships looks more like the result of some sort of impact rather than from an explosion. Those vertical scratch marks to the left of the hole seem to indicate that.

B1748102-0774-436C-A901-2ECC59C49EB1.jpeg

Another interesting point is that the damaged ships is that some of them seem to have been empty....they are sitting high in the water.

18067
 
Last edited:

owedtojoy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2010
Messages
46,031

It's no wonder why he can't close the deal with Kim with morons and scum like Bolton and Pompeo in his cabinet.
It seems that a lot of foreign policy chickens are coming home to roost ...
  • North Korea. Kim looks to be heading off the reservation again ....
  • Venezuela. A failed coup backed by Trump has left the opposition worse off.
  • China. A Trade War of Attrition.
  • Iran. Matters dangerously coming to the boil ....
Trouble is, the American voter is not interested in foreign policy, unless
  • Gas prices rise significantly.
  • Body bags start coming back, followed by marches and riots.
 

owedtojoy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2010
Messages
46,031
Clearly, both sides trying to defuse tension yesterday and today.

Trump denied that the US were looking at plans to send 120,000 troops to the Middle East (but did not rule it out, either).

Iran's Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic Al Khamenei also spoke yesterday about not wanting a war.

In Moscow, Secretary of State Pompeo spoke about Iran "becoming a normal state". Well, Mike, if you want a state to become "normal", you do not cancel Agreements with it, an Agreement it was adhering to in good faith.
 
Joined
May 2, 2019
Messages
60
Perhaps. But Trump is squeezing them, squeezing them hard. Acknowledge that Obama basically got nothing out of them in the deal he did with them. Obama's deal ended up as basically consisting of 'optics'. Whereas on of the things Trump promised during his election was a much better deal with Iran. For example he wants verifiable, tangible agreement on their nuclear program. He wants agreement on their use of proxies to further their expansionist and revolutionary ambitions. He wants them to adopt policies based on genuine self-interest as opposed to policies based on anti Semitic and conspiracist minded fatwa. So we see him now seriously ratcheting up the costs and the military pressure for them, realising that they are also are interested in maintaining power, having some semblance of legitimacy inside their own country. It's a risky strategy no doubt, but the alternative of not doing so is in all probability an even much more risky strategy in the long term.
The problem with America they side with Jihadists in the Middle East when they are fighting for the same cause.

America does not care about human rights or the people who live in the Middle East. It is a delusion many people suffer from in the west. It was the jihadists who they armed to fight the Soviet Union in Afghanistan ( foreign fighters). They are constantly arming the worse scum of the earth for decades. For me, no coincidence, ISIS and Al Qaeda just emerged after the fall of the Soviet Union. A new boogeyman appeared in the 90s, enabling the US military-industrial complex to keep on spending billions of dollars with new weapons for the US military and its allies. I feel it just manufactured war and terrorism.

If you truly believe 9/11 was planned out in a cave in Afghanistan, then why is it Iran the number one state sponsor of Terrorism? I fairly clued in that Iran has not attacked us in Europe or the United States with WMD or terrorism. The real Terrorist ideology was spread from the religious movements in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and UAE. 15 of the alleged hijackers on 9/11 were Sunnis who were born in Saudi Arabia. So why do we support these countries fight against Iran?.

Iran is no real threat to Europe or America. Iran religious ideology is not based around hating others.

Israel manufactured threat is Iran, but then again it mostly Israel who fighting and killing their supporters in Syria. When you killing in Syria and bombing facilities, deaths chants to Israel are going to be commonplace. Israel has a right to live in peace, but they have not done themselves any favours in the actions they have carried out since the state emerged in 1948.

The Iran nuclear deal was working. Europeans who signed the agreement even said so and they normally side with America. Trump pulling out of a deal made no sense. Asking a foreign power to give up missile defences is nonsensical. Trump only made the world less safe.
 
Joined
May 2, 2019
Messages
60
If the US does start a war with Iran, I wonder how the Trump supporters will explain it away?

I'm sure that "Trump the supposed peacemaker" will be forgotten, and instead they will praise Trump for his manly willingness to take on the world's baddies.
I saw reports on Twitter saying emergency staff in US embassies are now leaving Iraq and new reports ExxonMobil evacuating staff from Basra oil fields in southern Iraq.

From what I gather Pompeo rushed to Iraq days ago because intelligence from the Israelis included Satellite images showing supposedly new missile platforms in Basra belonging to the Iranians. They are now there to hit US bases in Iraq and around the region.

I not surprised the Iranians would increase preparedness since the Americas are acting hostile, and it just another excuse for the American and Israelis to overreact. Then again since its Basra and is in Iraq it made the threat an emergency in a way.
 

Ardillaun

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
11,402
A rift seems to be developing between the Brits and Yanks on Iran:


Trump has not exactly improved relations with allies he may want to call on.
 

belcoo666

Active member
Joined
Mar 12, 2019
Messages
264
A rift seems to be developing between the Brits and Yanks on Iran:


Trump has not exactly improved relations with allies he may want to call on.
Good
Europe needs to realize who the real enemies of peace in the world are and kick the Americans out . Permanently
 

owedtojoy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2010
Messages
46,031
A rift seems to be developing between the Brits and Yanks on Iran:


Trump has not exactly improved relations with allies he may want to call on.
No Tony Blair this time.
 

HenryHorace

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 22, 2017
Messages
2,934
Lot of mad s h ite being talked on this thread. The Iranians won't do diddly squat and we all know it. Go back to your lunches fools and stop getting all hard thinking about a war.
 

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top