Replies to post #315876 on Tornado Alley (PROG)

[fuagf]

b) is a point which must not be allowed to be sidelined by anyone commenting on this lates Trump fiasco.

d) could be written with the word coherent inserted.

Then again what of Trump policies have ever been coherent. The contradiction in the 'will
protect' and 'should protect' pronouncements by f Pompeo and Trump in your original is typical.
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=149559593

[fuagf]

Trump's latest Iran sanctions are blowhard fluff, as Khamenei and his cohorts have most of their wealth tied up safely out of
sight of any sanctions Trump could ever hit them with. They know how it's done as other corrupt leaders have done it before.

And Khamenei and his mates are not in any danger of being overthrown from within.

Trump in his overwrought fervor to undo everything positive Obama accomplished has got himself in a
corner. It has to now be an accommodation by America, a backdown with some face-saver - or escalation.

FurtherTrump's moving from a sense of diplomacy and negotiation, within days to obliterate, is just another sign of his out-of-depth overwrought state of mind.

[Tearex]

b) block Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons


Can't be "b" since Trump pulled the U.S. out of the Agreement we signed to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons.

1.'We' did not sign. Obama and Kerry did.
2. An agreement that did not include verifiable inspections. (which means we don't know crap about what they really have).
3. Allowed them to continue development of missile delivery systems for a bomb.
4. Left them with a very short thresh hold of a transfer period from non-nuclear weapon to full ability and stock pile of materials for Nuclear Weapons. (essentially they could have a nuclear bomb in a very short period of time, all while being able to say they do not have nuclear weapons). At that point, "what difference would it make"?
5. The deal had an ending date, which means at the end of the deal< Iran would have nuclear weapons.


All Obama's deal did was allow Iran to build up there nuclear program legally. This deal was made after Iran walked away from the table forcing Obama and Kerry to crawl back begging for any deal.

Instead they should have kept pressure with the sanctions that were working. That is ultimately what brought them to the table in the first place.

Not only does the deal undermine nuclear proliferation by legitimizing Iran as a nuclear threshold state, it also undermines our allies.

Here are the four most dangerous problems with the deal:

The whole neighborhood will race to go nuclear. This deal most likely will accelerate nuclear proliferation. Because if regional powers feel threatened by the possibility of Iran getting a weapon and the penalty for producing nuclear weapons decreases, then why wouldn’t they?

Tehran gets to keep its vast nuclear infrastructure and its missile program. And the promises from Iran only confirm the obvious: that the regime definitely has nuclear-weapons ambitions. After all, why have a massive ballistic-missile program and secret military nuclear facilities if the plan isn’t to build nuclear weapons?

Sanctions relief will make the region far less safe. The sanctions relief and the renewed ability to sell more oil on the open market could wind up bringing $300-400 billion into the Iranian economy, bolstering the Iranian government. Essentially, this means the deal will pay for undermining U.S. policy and interests throughout the region.
The deal is temporary, by design. Even the White House doesn’t claim it will permanently keep Iran from getting a bomb. So, what’s the point?

The deal enriches and emboldens Iran — an unstable and unprincipled nation. And it destabilizes the region even further and its puts its neighbors — our allies — at risk. It is a bad deal. While the Obama administration insists that there were only two choices — the deal or war — the choices were neither that limited, nor that simple. As Carafano concludes, “This deal is not the antidote to war. Rather, it makes increased conflict all the more likely.”

https://www.myheritage.org/news/4-reasons-why-the-iran-deal-may-be-the-worst-diplomatic-decision-in-history/