Trump pulls the US out of Iran deal.

#1
There has been major concern about the withdrawal of the US from the deal with Iran.

the U.S. led negotiations under Obama was between Iran and six world powers that concluded with an agreement that only temporarily cut off Iran's pathway to making a nuclear bomb, in exchange for the relief of economic sanctions levied by the U.S. and United Nations.

Iran agreed to significantly reduce its stockpile of enriched nuclear material and cease further enrichment, extending the time it would take Iran to build a bomb from a few months to one year, over to 10 years.

Upon verification that Iran was keeping its commitments to dismantle much of its nuclear program, major economic sanctions would be lifted, effectively releasing more than $100 billion in frozen Iranian assets.

Negotiators agreed that a long-standing arms embargo on Iran would be lifted over time, one of the major sticking points in the talks, and a decision that was a major concession by the United States.

The nuclear accord stated that five years from the start of the deal Iran would be able to buy and sell conventional arms on the international market, and in eight years be allowed to do the same with ballistic missiles.

Trump always felt that this deal was for too short a time and gave too much for too little. Iran in the meantime has been involved in much of the unrest in the surrounding countries, and has been increasingly active in Syria and in assistance to Hizbollah against Israel a country it still declares it wants to obliterate.

Israel has in recent weeks not only actively been targeting Iran’s missile build up in Syria, but made another pre-emptive attack on another Iranian Revolutionary Guard facility in Syria immediately after the declaration that the US was withdrawing from the deal, but has also called up reservists and put its military on high alert.

Israel had a few days earlier claimed that Iran had been cheating on it’s agreement.
Israel Says Secret Files Detail Iran’s Nuclear Subterfuge

Criticism of the deal, claim it does not contain sufficient safeguards to prevent Iran from reaching nuclear-weapons capability, nor does it address Iran’s other activities across the region. Another omission is Iran’s long-range missile program. Iran’s aggression in the region has certainly not ceased , if anything it has increased, and despite the deal, Iran has continued to develop its ballistic missiles capability.

Trump has signed a presidential memorandum withdrawing from the 2015 agreement and declared he is planning to reinstall sanctions on the Iranian regime. He has also stated that he will not allow the US to be held hostage to nuclear blackmail or allow “a regime that chants ‘Death to America’” access to nuclear weapons.

America’s relationship with Iran after the Shah has not been a good one and Iran has done nothing to make it any better. They have maintained an aggressive and hostile stance towards the US and Trump has recently indicated that the US is tired of giving concessions to regimes which take but give little in return. It was a multi-latteral deal with a number of countries involved, but one he felt where the major concessions had been given by the US under Obama.

One more campaign promise Trump had vowed to make, and it seems, has now carried out.
 
Last edited:

Guns

ADC
Moderator
Book Reviewer
#3
Hay Kim, trust us when we offer you this deal to remove the one thing that gives you a seat at the table. No honest Iran was something else.

Welching on international treaties never ends well. In essence the USA is now not to be trusted when it tries to broker a treaty.

The problem will be Trump is too dump dumb to understand this and Bolton is too bat shit craze to care.

Well done the USofA, you are now not to be trusted and your word means nothing.
 
Last edited:
#4
Hay Kim, trust us when we offer you this deal to remove the one thing that gives you a seat at the table. No honest Iran was something else.

Welching on international treaties never ends well. In essence the USA is now not to be trusted when it tries to broker a treaty.

The problem will be Trump is too dump to understand this and Bolton is too bat shit craze to care.

Well done the USofA, you are now not to be trusted and your word means nothing.

Dumb? Maybe dump dunno.
 
#5
Hay Kim, trust us when we offer you this deal to remove the one thing that gives you a seat at the table. No honest Iran was something else.

Welching on international treaties never ends well. In essence the USA is now not to be trusted when it tries to broker a treaty.

The problem will be Trump is too dump dumb to understand this and Bolton is too bat shit craze to care.

Well done the USofA, you are now not to be trusted and your word means nothing.
Are you saying the reasons Trump cited for pulling out are fabricated / not important?
 
#7
Hay Kim, trust us when we offer you this deal to remove the one thing that gives you a seat at the table. No honest Iran was something else.

Welching on international treaties never ends well. In essence the USA is now not to be trusted when it tries to broker a treaty.

The problem will be Trump is too dump dumb to understand this and Bolton is too bat shit craze to care.

Well done the USofA, you are now not to be trusted and your word means nothing.
Governments change, and political imperatives change. I have no doubt that the (Conservative) government that signed the Maastricht Treaty had no intention of a future (Conservative) government exiting the EU. Does this similarly discredit the United Kingdom's trustworthiness? No, of course not.

It seems Canada's not honouring its obligations to its own citizens either:

'It's a breach of treaty': Manitoba First Nations want promised land | CBC News

Aussies a bit fickle too:

Australia tears up UN treaty with treatment of asylum seekers

Russians (quelle surprise):

Russia’s missile treaty violations directly threaten Europe—so Europe should speak up

Chicken Licken can stand down, the sky is not falling in, despite the political narratives aimed against the current President.
 
#9
Are you saying the reasons Trump cited for pulling out are fabricated / not important?
Like the one where he said Iran are responsible for their own inspections?. It was a campaign pledge which he made without the benefit of any intel then surprise surprise he has suddenly has some intel to support his assertions, now that's never happened before has it.
 
#10
IIRC congress never ratified the treaty so under US law not legally binding anyway
 
#11
Like the one where he said Iran are responsible for their own inspections?. It was a campaign pledge which he made without the benefit of any intel then surprise surprise he has suddenly has some intel to support his assertions, now that's never happened before has it.
Are you denying the reasons he cited for withdrawing exist? Do you think those reasons are invalid?
 

Sixty

ADC
Moderator
Book Reviewer
#12
Are you denying the reasons he cited for withdrawing exist? Do you think those reasons are invalid?
The single most important driver for this decision is ONLY that it is that the agreement was made under the Obama administration. Anyone who believes otherwise will likely be interested in these magic beans I'm selling...

Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia - which bears more responsibility for 9/11 than most - sees it's major regional rival take a significant financial hit. Alcohol free (ahem) champagne all round.
 
#13
The single most important driver for this decision is ONLY that it is that the agreement was made under the Obama administration. Anyone who believes otherwise will likely be interested in these magic beans I'm selling...

Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia - which bears more responsibility for 9/11 than most, sees it's major regional rival take a significant financial hit. Alcohol free (ahem) champagne all round.
The Obama thing may well have provided initial motive, but Iran would now appear to have provided reasons.
 

FORMER_FYRDMAN

LE
Book Reviewer
#14
Hay Kim, trust us when we offer you this deal to remove the one thing that gives you a seat at the table. No honest Iran was something else.

Welching on international treaties never ends well. In essence the USA is now not to be trusted when it tries to broker a treaty.

The problem will be Trump is too dump dumb to understand this and Bolton is too bat shit craze to care.

Well done the USofA, you are now not to be trusted and your word means nothing.
Alternatively, perhaps having direct experience of dealing with a nuclear-armed North Korea, which achieved that capability on Obama's watch, he's not so keen on having to manage a nuclear-armed Iran; a proven regional trouble-maker dominated by religious fatalists.

In foreign policy terms at least, Obama was hopeless (as was George W. Bush). If he'd been white he'd have gone the same way as Jimmy Carter after one term. By any objective measure, Trump has made far more progress on foreign policy issues - which is astonishing and not the outcome I'd have backed two years ago.

It's nothing to do with 'giving your word', the only agreements that stick are when the interests of both parties are broadly aligned and one side hasn't given up too much (as western oil and gas companies who screwed Russia into the ground in the Nineties discovered when Russia got her breath back). If those conditions aren't met, or circumstances change, a re-alignment is inevitable at some point.

What would really damage the US would be any perception that it was dumb enough to stick with a useless agreement made by a US President who gave away the farm because his personal priority was to secure a rare foreign policy 'success' and who was more concerned with his legacy than with delivering a sustainable regional solution.
 
#15
At least Trump has acted on his concerns, as opposed to the rest of Western leaders who seek perceived moral high ground as opposed to best policy.

Take that Aug san su kyi (sp)for example...she was heralded as a Mandela with tits and our leaders were crawling over themselves to be seen with her....

Now we have formation navel gazing at mention of her.
 
#16
There would appear to be those who seem to believe Iran is completely without any blame in this. Has stuck faithfully to the deal and shut down all development, indulged in no mischief making in the region and has completely peaceful intentions.

Now where are those magic beans?

As for Kim turning over a new leaf. Better prepare a giant load, I’m going to need a sack full.

A question that might be worth considering is why were sactions imposed on Iran in the first place?

Iran’s and N Korea’s words are of course completely trustworthy.
 
Last edited:
#17
I'm loving the idea that although Trump has a lifetime track record of self-aggrandisement, vanity and arrogance and has sidelined everyone who knows anything about foreign policy in favour of his own 'knows best', it was Obama's Iran policy that was driven by a craving for recognition.

To paraphrase Tytler, a democracy can only exist until voters realise they can vote their own inadequate appreciations into policy without being patted on the head and given a lolly while the adults run things.
 
#18
And yet, the US and Israelis turn a blind eye to Saudi Arabia’s shiny new Chinese IRBMs and it’s para nuclear status - it’s purely coincidence that the nuclear warheads it paid Pakistan to develop fit on their missiles.
 
#19
I note that Boris Johnson was forced to appeal to PotUS through Fox news to try to get him to reconsider.

Boris Johnson appears on Fox & Friends in effort to speak to Trump on US visit

I'm sure that official channels were used, but it's a little bit embarrassing for the UK foreign secretary, supposedly our point man in the much vaunted special relationship having to use this sort of stunt to appeal to Trump.

Not a critique of BoJo, just this illusion that we have any real influence with the USA
 
#20
Alternatively, perhaps having direct experience of dealing with a nuclear-armed North Korea, which achieved that capability on Obama's watch, he's not so keen on having to manage a nuclear-armed Iran; a proven regional trouble-maker dominated by religious fatalists.

.

Except the idea that the mullahs are mad religious fatalist simply doesn’t hold water.
They are known as the ‘Millionaire Mullahs’ for a reason. Many are fabulously wealthy, ayatollah Rafsanjani was cynically nicknamed ‘Akbahr Shah’ for his staggering wealth.
Religious fatalists don’t build multi million, billion dollar empires to lose it all for allah.
 

Top