By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Trump pulls out of Iran nuclear agreement

Wyrdness said:
So now Iran are free from the deal and have an increased influence in the middle east.

Not denying this but how is this so? I'm not very well informed on this whole situation.. 



Around the Network
setsunatenshi said:
thismeintiel said:

Oh, because they promised, huh? I'm guessing you'd be the kind of person who would entrust your financials to a known embezzler and gambling addict because he promised he wouldn't steal from you. Iran is not to be trusted. And the agreement gives them too much power to delay inspections, as well as not covering military bases. In essence, it accomplishes nothing but giving a known sponsor of terrorism more money to do so. 

no, not because they promised, because international nuclear scientists are confirming every few months that no nuclear efforts are taking place. 

 

the deal was in place to allow the international community to check this independently and NOT taking Iran's word for it. 

 

please inform yourself before making such a stupid, uninformed rethorical question.

 

on a side note, the money that was unfrozen was already Iran's money. it's no financial support. it's like a burglar returning money he stole from you if you agree to let him check your house every now and then, then when you do accept his deal to receive your money back he still spits in your face and tells you to fuck off. 

 

that's a much more correct analogy

Sure. That's why Iran can delay inspections, as well as giving them at least a few weeks notice before we even attempt to enter the country to inspect. And not all sites are inspected. We also gave them $1.7B. Supposedly, we owed them for weapons we never delivered. Of course, there's a reason they were never delivered.

And no, your analogy is a very poor one. A more accurate one would be the government freezing the assets of a known kingpin because he is getting those funds illegally, like drugs and selling weapons to local gangs, who then use them to terrorize the surrounding community. Then, they unfreeze them because he pinkie promises not to do it anymore, plus if we inform him within 24 days (not even hours) of an inspection, we are allowed to look at some of his warehouses. Oh, and he can delay the inspection up to a few months. You know he can hide a lot of evidence if you're giving that much time, plus only allowed to go to certain areas of his business. 



Kerotan said:
Wyrdness said:
So now Iran are free from the deal and have an increased influence in the middle east.

Not denying this but how is this so? I'm not very well informed on this whole situation.. 

Shia muslim groups have gained strong footholds since the Arab Spring movement and the US wars, in Lebanon for example Shias now have a significant influence in parliament, in Iraq Saddam's removal increased Iran's influence in the region, Syria is Iranian backed and aided by Shia groups, Yemen continues to battle Saudi Arabia etc... The Sunni's influence has taken a hit in recent years increasing Iran's influence.

Iran are one of the few Muslim countries who are mainly Shia Muslims most of the middle east were Sunni but since a number of significant leaders have been toppled Shia groups have began gaining influence.



thismeintiel said:
setsunatenshi said:

no, not because they promised, because international nuclear scientists are confirming every few months that no nuclear efforts are taking place. 

 

the deal was in place to allow the international community to check this independently and NOT taking Iran's word for it. 

 

please inform yourself before making such a stupid, uninformed rethorical question.

 

on a side note, the money that was unfrozen was already Iran's money. it's no financial support. it's like a burglar returning money he stole from you if you agree to let him check your house every now and then, then when you do accept his deal to receive your money back he still spits in your face and tells you to fuck off. 

 

that's a much more correct analogy

Sure. That's why Iran can delay inspections, as well as giving them at least a few weeks notice before we even attempt to enter the country to inspect. And not all sites are inspected. We also gave them $1.7B. Supposedly, we owed them for weapons we never delivered. Of course, there's a reason they were never delivered.

And no, your analogy is a very poor one. A more accurate one would be the government freezing the assets of a known kingpin because he is getting those funds illegally, like drugs and selling weapons to local gangs, who then use them to terrorize the surrounding community. Then, they unfreeze them because he pinkie promises not to do it anymore, plus if we inform him within 24 days (not even hours) of an inspection, we are allowed to look at some of his warehouses. Oh, and he can delay the inspection up to a few months. You know he can hide a lot of evidence if you're giving that much time, plus only allowed to go to certain areas of his business. 

I don't know much about this deal (I probably shouldn't even be commenting on it), but isn't that still better than nothing though?  Isn't inspecting some of their warehouses still better than inspecting none at all?



As long as Iran are under the agreement, their "breakout time" to create a nuclear weapon is estimated to be more than a year. Without it, it's a few months.

Even if Trump (or rather his administration, as Trump likely doesn't understand much of this) think the inspections provisions are inadequate, which according to supporters are considered "the most rigorous ever brokered", leaving Iran to their own devices free to develop nuclear weapons at their leisure with no inspections, and the only hurdle being sanctions, is a terrible idea. Mainly because Iran already deals with many other countries in Europe, including Russia.

The funds were already Iran's to begin with. Their assets were just frozen. It did not come out of USA's pocket.

And the "Israeli intelligence documents" Trump referred to were already known to USA before this deal was brokered. They apply to Iran years ago. Not during the agreement. So citing them as motivation for this action without revealing that crucial piece of information is nothing more than a dishonest way of swaying public favor.

Last edited by Hiku - on 09 May 2018

Around the Network

Like Iran was upholding the deal in the first place. Honestly no problems with ending the deal



JRPGfan said:
PwerlvlAmy said:
Good deal on Trumps part. I applaud the decision.

Next year if they have Nuclear weapons, then dont bitch about it, and remember Trump is the reason why.

Because they don't have nukes already, nope, not at all



I was predicting this was going to happen, based off the fact that Trump seems to dismiss everything Obama does. I wonder if that was the sole reason why he did this. There must be more to it than that; a president can't be that passive aggressive.



thismeintiel said:
setsunatenshi said:

no, not because they promised, because international nuclear scientists are confirming every few months that no nuclear efforts are taking place. 

 

the deal was in place to allow the international community to check this independently and NOT taking Iran's word for it. 

 

please inform yourself before making such a stupid, uninformed rethorical question.

 

on a side note, the money that was unfrozen was already Iran's money. it's no financial support. it's like a burglar returning money he stole from you if you agree to let him check your house every now and then, then when you do accept his deal to receive your money back he still spits in your face and tells you to fuck off. 

 

that's a much more correct analogy

Sure. That's why Iran can delay inspections, as well as giving them at least a few weeks notice before we even attempt to enter the country to inspect. And not all sites are inspected. We also gave them $1.7B. Supposedly, we owed them for weapons we never delivered. Of course, there's a reason they were never delivered.

And no, your analogy is a very poor one. A more accurate one would be the government freezing the assets of a known kingpin because he is getting those funds illegally, like drugs and selling weapons to local gangs, who then use them to terrorize the surrounding community. Then, they unfreeze them because he pinkie promises not to do it anymore, plus if we inform him within 24 days (not even hours) of an inspection, we are allowed to look at some of his warehouses. Oh, and he can delay the inspection up to a few months. You know he can hide a lot of evidence if you're giving that much time, plus only allowed to go to certain areas of his business. 

#1 the assets were Iran's, period. 

#2 Iran has followed the agreement to the letter. An agreement that meant losing the barganing chip of a nuclear program. 

#3 the current US president unilaterally decided to terminate the agreement. this was not caused by iran or any other 3rd party. it was exclusively trump's decision with absolutely no justification

#4 there's nothing in the agreement about any pinky promisses. international independent scientists have confirmed over and over again that no nuclear program is in place

#5 a uranium enrichment program is not something you can hide easily. the IAEA scientists would report any questionnable behavior if this was to happen. and finally,

#6 iran has now no incentive to abide by the agreement and stop the nuclear program from going forward. the agreement we had was pretty much the best possible one. nothing short of an all out war could prevent them from achieving their goal. and if this happens you can 100% blame that orange retard. the world better cross their fingers it will never go that far because this could really be the start of ww3. and this time the US would be on the wrong side



Because certainly the deal was very positive for everyone and negative to Iran and for that reason Trump got out right?



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."