Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Results 221 to 227 of 227

Thread: Trump pulls U.S. out of Iran nuclear deal

  1. #221

    Default Re: Trump pulls U.S. out of Iran nuclear deal

    And I'm not trying to downplay Iran's actions either. Both of us obviously know that Iran isn't "good" or "evil" regardless of how anyone tries to spin their actions. Their internal power struggles aside, Iran is ultimately a belligerent actor in the Middle East who seeks to increase their regional power because they view it as integral to their national security.

    However, I believe that the nuclear deal should proceed regardless of Iran's foreign policy. This is a good summary of a "conservative" argument towards exiting the nuclear deal. This is the part where I have issues,

    "Well, that was President Obama’s and [former Secretary of State] John Kerry’s intention in signing the nuclear deal. That is not an intention I share, and it’s not what the deal would’ve covered if I was negotiating it. First of all, even if you say you’re only focused on nukes, not including ballistic missiles, which are the delivery system for nukes, doesn’t make any sense.

    Beyond that, pressure is pressure, and malign activity is malign activity. Whether it’s terrorism, missiles, or human rights abuses, all of these things are violations of international law and have been condemned by the international community. When you build up that level of pressure, where the regime is facing real economic collapse, that is the moment where you try to extract the most concessions possible to address all of your concerns."


    I think it is a mistake to link anything other than nuclear enrichment to the deal. I'm not interested in controlling Iran's foreign policy or having them sign a treaty where they agree to certain constraints on their foreign policy. I am only interested in preventing nuclear proliferation. Being a signatory of the Iran deal does not prevent us from imposing sanctions related to other abuses, from invading Iran should they break the deal or invade Israel, or from pursuing a number of other options that can punish Iran for their non-nuclear transgressions. The Iran deal is powerful because it prevents Iran from openly developing their nuclear weapons and gives us more legitimacy in invading should Iran break it.

    We should oppose Iran in the Middle East geopolitically regardless of whether there is a deal or not.

  2. #222

    Default Re: Trump pulls U.S. out of Iran nuclear deal

    Quote Originally Posted by sumskilz View Post
    Excellent, everything is falling into place. What we really need is Iran to elect an openly "Death to America" president, one who goes on long antisemitic rants, and claims the US has a secret program to find and kill the "Hidden Imam". What would also further their credibility, would be to immediately start enriching uranium to a percentage beyond what's needed for civilian use, but not just quietly, better they make a big deal out of it, openly presenting it as a threat while simultaneously maintaining their program has always been for civilian purposes.
    So what ?

    The West wants that to say Iran is evil and not into negotiation ?!

    Guess what , Iran did try to approach the West twice but it backfired . Even those poor europeans couldn't resist America's agression and had to give up on a deal they spent years to make .

    For me as an Iranian who has a negative view about the Islamic Republic and millions like me it was made clear the West basically is talking nonesense about literally anything they say untill Iran is Libya 2 .
    Iran gave up it's nuclear right to make a deal and that made the West ask for missiles , if Iran gave up missile program the US would mention foreign policy and Iran's role in the ME . If that was done the Americans would make new claims as long as there was nothing left of iran but a US client state .

    Trump did what the Islamic Republic needed and shattered the dreams of those pro moderate people in Iran .

  3. #223

    Default Re: Trump pulls U.S. out of Iran nuclear deal

    sumskilz is being sarcastic, at least I think.

  4. #224

    Default Re: Trump pulls U.S. out of Iran nuclear deal

    Quote Originally Posted by Vanoi View Post
    I tend to agree with you Suki but many of the belligerent actions Iran has taken happened during the nuclear deal or continued in spite of it. Iranian involvement in helping the Houthis overthrow the government of Yemen and Iranian intervention has happened or continued to happen regardless of the nuclear deal reached.

    There may be a power struggle between theocrats and reformists but the foreign policy of Iran is firmly in control of the IRGC. Until that changes Iran's actions won't change either regardless of the nuclear deal or not.

    The thing is Iran has only supported the Houthis politically and in the media . No solid evidence has been shown by the Saudis to support their propaganda claims . Thousands of Iranians were killed in Iraq and Syria and dozens were captured and beheaded by Daesh but not a singke video of iranian presence in Yemen .

    By the way , unlike the US and the West Iran tends to respect countries' sovereignty and never go there uninvited . For instance Syria and Iraq .

    The US could simply boost the reformits' power through supporting them succeed while governing and this could lead to decline of the conservatives . But instead literally killed them to gurantee another Ahmadinejad minded presidency .

    I believe there are long term plans for such policies and that's beyond sb like Trump's control . It's orchestrated by powerful lobbies in the uS to keep the ME that way so that the US can milk Arabs trillions of dollars .

  5. #225
    Abdülmecid I's Avatar ¡Ay Carmela!
    Civitate Moderation Mentor

    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    3,831

    Default Re: Trump pulls U.S. out of Iran nuclear deal

    Indeed, the alleged Iranian support to Houthis has been grossly exaggerated, probably by the usual suspects, lobbyists with an interest in favour of an aggressive US foreign policy in the Middle East. Given the geographical position of Yemen and the naval blockade in the Arab and Red Seas, Iran could only transport materials by teleporting. Fun fact: One of the self-proclaimed pundits about Yemen, I think it was that al-Qaeda apologist, Nadwa Dawsari, suggested that Iran smuggled weapons through Oman, the Empty Quarter and al-Qaeda dominated Yemen. In fact, Tehran strongly advised the Houthis against capturing Sanaa, presumably because they feared that if they could be easily destroyed, if they turned from a guerrilla into a regular army with a fixed base of operations. So much for being Iranian puppets...
    Quote Originally Posted by Admiral Piett View Post
    I say again. Who cares? If the regime's only wildcard is to bring up events from 60 years ago then it has long since lost its narrative out to the facts and reality of today.
    Technically I agree that past grievances should gradually be forgotten. However, the Iranian cautious approach can easily be justified. British and Americans strengthened violent tribes and bandits at the expense of the imperial authorities, they endorsed military coups, they contributed to the overthrow of a democratic leader, they undermined the revolution, killing a couple of civilians in the process, they equipped a brutal dictator in his expansionist war against the nascent republic, they financially suffocated Iranian society, they massacred hundreds of civilians under the flimsiest pretext and even blamed Iran, in an intentionally misleading manner, for a war crime committed by Saddam. It's just a lot of bad blood and cannot be quickly forgotten.

    That being said, it would be ridiculous to suggest that American hostility against Iran stopped the time when their regional proxy suddenly decided to invade Kuwait. Sanctions were never terminated, because Washington cannot tolerate the fact that the oil industry, exploited for almost a century by foreign companies, has been nationalized. Meanwhile, America and its allies, like Israel, continue to offer their services to various murderous groups, internationally recognized as terrorist organisations, such as Jundallah, PJAK and MEK. Every one of them has an extensive criminal record to show, where unprovoked attacks against random civilians are the most prominent. Indirectly speaking, the situation is even worse, considering the support given by the US, the Gulf Monarchies and Israel to terrorist groups threatening Syria, the only reliable ally of Iran in the Middle East. Even al-Qaeda is included in that list, so the entire affair, together with numerous assassinations of non-military Iranians, makes controversial incidents like the Karbala raid look like a drop in the ocean. From a moral and cynical perspective, it would be absurd to expect from the Iranian government to unconditionally surrender and submit to the United States, under the (false, as recent events proved) hope of the interruption of the trade war. In reality, Iran, being by far the weakest side in the confrontation, is in a desperate need to continuously protect its interests, or otherwise the current semi-democratic system is in danger of being replaced by an absolutist regime of royalist émigrés.

  6. #226

    Default Re: Trump pulls U.S. out of Iran nuclear deal

    Quote Originally Posted by Sukiyama View Post
    Which begs the question, are Americans really interested in seeing a more aggressive and radical Iran? Are we really interested in that? I am not. I have very little understanding of Iranian politics, which is a complicated affair, but the posters who are chanting against the Iran deal seem to know even less. Khamenei is not in control of every single aspect of the Iranian political structure. Currently Iran, as I understand it, is in a power struggle between reformists and theocrats. The nuclear deal, despite it's flaws, offers credibility to Iranian voters who are currently give only marginally more support to the Reformists than to the theocrats. Tearing this deal up swings Iran towards theocrats, who are against the West, who oppose secular rule, and who ultimately believe that the clash with the West is inevitable.
    I'm fairly sure that was part of the plan, that was my point. Now the ball is in the Iranians' court. They can play into it or they can back down and expose themselves as being as weak as they actually are (in relative terms). Rouhani complicates the issue. It's hard to really stand on the Iranians' chest when they've got such a well-spoken presentable face apparently at the helm. Having him there allows the Iranians to do the good cop/bad cop thing with him and Khamenei. Khamenei gets to go off for the benefit of domestic consumption and the regional allies in a way that comes across as completely unhinged to Western audiences, and then Rouhani gets to walk back and soften things in a way that allows the Eurostanis to still feel good about their economic interests in Iran, but I suspect economics is the real reason why the Europeans are so supportive of the deal, and it's actually Khamenei not Rouhani that matters when it comes to Iran's foreign policy, and military ambitions. Though he is much more cautious than he sounds.

    Is this a good strategy for the US? Hard to say, not all the information is available to us. If a conflict is inevitable, it's better now than later. I don't know if it's inevitable, and of course I prefer Iran backing down. Is that realistic? I don't know, depends on how afraid they are of the consequences, economic or worse, and how they estimate the consequences of backing down in comparison. They are not in an enviable position.

    Talking about whether or not backing out of the deal was a good thing is a mute point with regard to foreign policy. Though it'll remain a domestic political issue I'm sure.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mithridates II the Great View Post
    So what ?

    The West wants that to say Iran is evil and not into negotiation ?!

    Guess what , Iran did try to approach the West twice but it backfired . Even those poor europeans couldn't resist America's agression and had to give up on a deal they spent years to make .
    There was no major compromise. The deal was in Iran's interests, otherwise it wouldn't have been signed and there wouldn't have been so much effort to try to protect it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mithridates II the Great View Post
    For me as an Iranian who has a negative view about the Islamic Republic and millions like me it was made clear the West basically is talking nonesense about literally anything they say untill Iran is Libya 2 . Iran gave up it's nuclear right to make a deal and that made the West ask for missiles , if Iran gave up missile program the US would mention foreign policy and Iran's role in the ME . If that was done the Americans would make new claims as long as there was nothing left of iran but a US client state .
    It was never meant to be fair, but I have confidence that Iran won't turn out like Libya even in a worst case scenario, because I don't expect you all to start cutting each other's throats the moment the autocrats are removed. As I've said, I was opposed to us getting involved in Libya, for the exact reason that it ruined our credibility, but Libya itself is very different from Iran, and they were already in the middle of a civil war.

    Depends on who you consider to be a US client state, but in my estimation, some are doing quite well.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mithridates II the Great View Post
    The thing is Iran has only supported the Houthis politically and in the media . No solid evidence has been shown by the Saudis to support their propaganda claims .
    Not Iranians themselves as far as I know, but Iranian weapons, for example (PDF).
    Quote Originally Posted by Enros View Post
    You don't seem to be familiar with how the burden of proof works in when discussing social justice. It's not like science where it lies on the one making the claim. If someone claims to be oppressed, they don't have to prove it.


  7. #227
    Vanoi's Avatar Comes Limitis
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    14,346

    Default Re: Trump pulls U.S. out of Iran nuclear deal

    Quote Originally Posted by Mithridates II the Great View Post
    The thing is Iran has only supported the Houthis politically and in the media . No solid evidence has been shown by the Saudis to support their propaganda claims . Thousands of Iranians were killed in Iraq and Syria and dozens were captured and beheaded by Daesh but not a singke video of iranian presence in Yemen .
    Your own country admitted it.

    https://aawsat.com/english/home/arti...E2%80%99s-arms

    Then there is more evidence: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/18/w...t-admiral.html

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-y...-idUSKBN16S22R

    http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/p...enses-in-yemen

    Quote Originally Posted by Mithridates II the Great View Post
    By the way , unlike the US and the West Iran tends to respect countries' sovereignty and never go there uninvited . For instance Syria and Iraq .
    Except you know with their funding and support of Hezbollah and Hamas.


    Quote Originally Posted by Abdülmecid I View Post
    Indeed, the alleged Iranian support to Houthis has been grossly exaggerated, probably by the usual suspects, lobbyists with an interest in favour of an aggressive US foreign policy in the Middle East. Given the geographical position of Yemen and the naval blockade in the Arab and Red Seas, Iran could only transport materials by teleporting. Fun fact: One of the self-proclaimed pundits about Yemen, I think it was that al-Qaeda apologist, Nadwa Dawsari, suggested that Iran smuggled weapons through Oman, the Empty Quarter and al-Qaeda dominated Yemen. In fact, Tehran strongly advised the Houthis against capturing Sanaa, presumably because they feared that if they could be easily destroyed, if they turned from a guerrilla into a regular army with a fixed base of operations. So much for being Iranian puppets...
    I would suggest not using a source thats more than a year old.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/18/w...t-admiral.html

    http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/p...enses-in-yemen

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-y...-idUSKBN16S22R

    https://aawsat.com/english/home/arti...E2%80%99s-arms

    The last link is Iran admitting that it supports the houthis.
    Quote Originally Posted by RubiconDecision View Post
    Those who protect the right of terrorists to have Free Speech enable the bombings of innocents.

Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •