Biden emboldened Iran to make billions and now.

[Luvnit2]

US sending troops and assets to the middle east in anticipation of Iran striking US or Israel.

Biden's foreign policy nightmare has already cost soldiers their lives or major injuries.

Why in the world would Biden lift sanctions off of Iran and then give them money to rebuild their military and fund terrorism?

Please someone help me understand Biden's thought process. The middle east was more stable under Trump than any time in decades. In 3+ years, it is now an absolute mess created by Biden.

[GMDino]

(04-12-2024, 04:37 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: US sending troops and assets to the middle east in anticipation of Iran striking US or Israel.

Biden's foreign policy nightmare has already cost soldiers their lives or major injuries.

Why in the world would Biden lift sanctions off of Iran and then give them money to rebuild their military and fund terrorism?

Please someone help me understand Biden's thought process. The middle east was more stable under Trump than any time in decades. In 3+ years, it is now an absolute mess created by Biden.

Because Biden is the anti-Christ sent here to make us appreciate the Chosen One: Donald John Trump.

Only he can make our world safe.  Only he can protect us!

When the Rapture* occurs we will see his true light! 

Or something like that....












The REAL Rapture.  None of the others that were predicted...even though it's not in the bible.

[*Nately120*]

Everyone is just jealous that Iran made a billion bucks and they didn't.

[StoneTheCrow]

(04-12-2024, 05:16 PM)GMDino Wrote: Because Biden is the anti-Christ sent here to make us appreciate the Chosen One: Donald John Trump.

Only he can make our world safe.  Only he can protect us!

When the Rapture* occurs we will see his true light! 

Or something like that....

The REAL Rapture.  None of the others that were predicted...even though it's not in the bible.

TDS

Any thoughts on the topic though? Just curious

[NATI BENGALS]

(04-12-2024, 10:04 PM)StoneTheCrow Wrote: TDS

Any thoughts on the topic though? Just curious

Obviously it’s a new problem. There has been nothing but peace in the Middle East. And Biden is to blame for all of the problems in the region.


Did I get it right?

[StoneTheCrow]

(04-12-2024, 11:02 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: Obviously it’s a new problem. There has been nothing but peace in the Middle East. And Biden is to blame for all of the problems in the region.


Did I get it right?

In order:

No, obviously not.

No, but compare the amounts of such said peace between the last two admins.

“The buck stops with me.” -Joe Biden

No.

[NATI BENGALS]

(04-13-2024, 12:22 AM)StoneTheCrow Wrote: In order:

No, obviously not.

No, but compare the amounts of such said peace between the last two admins.

“The buck stops with me.” -Joe Biden

No.

The way some people talk I thought Biden was the cause of all Middle East conflict.

Alternative facts. That’s like believing the previous administration defeated Isis too. We were at war in Afghanistan. Israelis and Palestinians were doing their thing with plenty of violence sprinkled in, sometimes as a direct result of Trump. Tensions with Iran were high, we pulled out of a nuclear treaty and killed their high profile general and they shot missiles at bases housing US troops in Iraq. Yemen and Syria were doing their civil war thing. Pretty disgusting thing to look at, but how many American Troops lost their lives under the last administration compared to this one?

It did. He said he didn’t want to pass the war in Afghanistan off to a 5th administration. Problem is we negotiated the timeline with the taliban and the afghan national army folded like a lawn chair. Yes we had some casualties. But who knows how many more we would have had if we were still there.

[NATI BENGALS]

And to the OP.

It’s called diplomacy. Imo it’s worth a shot. Sometimes it leads to peace.

Shitty thing is we had a nuclear agreement with Iran that the last administration ruined. And now they say Iran could be days away from having nukes.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(04-13-2024, 03:08 AM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: And to the OP.

It’s called diplomacy. Imo it’s worth a shot. Sometimes it leads to peace.

Shitty thing is we had a nuclear agreement with Iran that the last administration ruined. And now they say Iran could be days away from having nukes.

in what century has Iran kept their promises?

[GMDino]

(04-12-2024, 10:04 PM)StoneTheCrow Wrote: TDS

Any thoughts on the topic though? Just curious

Yeah, but the OP doesn't want facts like the nuclear deal with Iran was working before Trump killed it, or what those "billions" were.


So I'm just giving him the positive feedback he craves.

[GMDino]

(04-13-2024, 03:28 AM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: in what century has Iran kept their promises?

The 21st.

They were compiling, they were being watched...then Trump killed it because Obama.  Now they are maybe days away from a weapon.

Those are facts.

Just like there were no WMDs in Iraq but we invaded anyway it was a dumb decision based on bravado instead of reality.

[JustWinBaby]

(04-13-2024, 09:10 AM)GMDino Wrote: Yeah, but the OP doesn't want facts like the nuclear deal with Iran was working before Trump killed it, or what those "billions" were.


So I'm just giving him the positive feedback he craves.

The US withdrew, but didn't the deal remain in place with the other countries and the EU?  How else would you expect inspections to have taken place to confirm the latest developments?

[Dill]

(04-13-2024, 11:46 AM)JustWinBaby Wrote: The US withdrew, but didn't the deal remain in place with the other countries and the EU?  How else would you expect inspections to have taken place to confirm the latest developments?

The rest of the world tried to keep the deal in place. 

But Trump threatened sanctions on any country that kept the bargain by trading with Iran.

By 2020 Iran said "eff this"; in about four years they went from operating less than forty
high grade centrifuges to over 9,000, as well as developing more efficient models.

As of two days ago, there were still monitors in nuclear facilities in Iran and the IAEA was
still making inspections.

Many Americans still don't get what a disaster that pullout was, its ripple effects
throughout Europe and Asia. Many are still unable to connect the reduction of breakout time to Trump breaking the Deal.


Sure exploded this liberal head, though.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(04-13-2024, 09:14 AM)GMDino Wrote: The 21st.

They were compiling, they were being watched...then Trump killed it because Obama.  Now they are maybe days away from a weapon.

Those are facts.

Just like there were no WMDs in Iraq but we invaded anyway it was a dumb decision based on bravado instead of reality.

Hate to ruin your Facts, but yes even in the 21st century. 


https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/Timeline-of-Nuclear-Diplomacy-With-Iran

June 18, 2004: The IAEA rebukes Iran for failing to cooperate with IAEA inspectors. Iran responds by refusing to suspend enrichment-related activities as it had previously pledged.


March 24, 2007: The UN Security Council unanimously adopts Resolution 1747 in response to Iran’s continued failure to comply with the council’s demand to suspend Uranium enrichment.


September 25, 2009: United States President Barack Obama, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, and French President Nicolas Sarkozy announced that Iran has been constructinga secret, second uranium-enrichment facility, Fordow, in the mountains near the holy city of Qom. IAEA spokesman Marc Vidricaire said that Iran informed the agency September 21 about the existence of the facility, but U.S. intelligence officials said Iran offered the confirmation only after learning that it had been discovered by the United States.


Obama deal done in April 2016. 

November 2, 2016: IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano expresses concern to Iranian leaders regarding the size of Iran’s heavy water stock. On November 8th, the Agency confirms that Iran’s heavy water stock, at 130.1 tons, exceeds the 130 metric ton limit outlined in the deal, marking the second time Iran has exceeded the limit. On November 9th, Iran informs the IAEA of plans to remain in compliance by transferring heavy water out of the country.


December 13, 2016: President Rouhani announces Iran will respond to Washington’s extension of the Iran Sanctions Act by researching and developing nuclear propulsion for marine vessels.



January 28, 2017: Iran test fires a medium-range ballistic missile, in defiance of UN Security Council Resolution 2231. The test prompts former NSA Michael Flynn, on February 1, to declare the United States has placed Iran “on notice.”



September 22, 2017: Iran parades its new medium-range ballistic missile tested in January, the Khoramshahr, with a range of about 2,000 km, in a military parade.







Just a few, If you need more facts, knock yourself out. 
To the part i Bolded, that should tell you that if we don't know about it, they aren't going to offer any of the other possible sites up. 


But to start, you should never start or assert that these are the "facts" there's almost always an exception. Didn't you learn anything from Fred?  

[JustWinBaby]

(04-17-2024, 07:03 PM)Dill Wrote: The rest of the world tried to keep the deal in place. 

They didn't try - the deal remained in place.

Iran did, and continues to do, what they always have - which is use the threat of nuclear development to extract concessions.  That Iran would one day have nuclear capability has long been recognized - the deal Trump pulled out of was designed only to delay that beyond 2025.

Biden had an opportunity to re-enter the deal, but decided the concessions Iran was demanding were too high.

https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2019/5/8/understanding-the-iran-deal-what-why-and-the-next-steps
"Rouhani said the remaining signatories – the United Kingdom, France, Germany, China and Russia – had 60 days to implement their promises to protect Iran’s oil and banking sectors from US sanctions."

"Prior to the agreement, Iran was believed to be only two or three months away from being capable of making a nuclear bomb. But after the accord, it would have taken a year to make the weapon."


So the US pulled out of the deal, Iran violated its deal with the other signatories, and they are basically the same place they were in 2015 before the deal was signed.  Big nothingburger.

[Dill]

(04-19-2024, 03:19 PM)JustWinBaby Wrote: They didn't try - the deal remained in place.

Iran did, and continues to do, what they always have - which is use the threat of nuclear development to extract concessions.  That Iran would one day have nuclear capability has long been recognized - the deal Trump pulled out of was designed only to delay that beyond 2025.

Biden had an opportunity to re-enter the deal, but decided the concessions Iran was demanding were too high.

https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2019/5/8/understanding-the-iran-deal-what-why-and-the-next-steps
"Rouhani said the remaining signatories – the United Kingdom, France, Germany, China and Russia – had 60 days to implement their promises to protect Iran’s oil and banking sectors from US sanctions."

"Prior to the agreement, Iran was believed to be only two or three months away from being capable of making a nuclear bomb. But after the accord, it would have taken a year to make the weapon."

So the US pulled out of the deal, Iran violated its deal with the other signatories, and they are basically the same place they were in 2015 before the deal was signed.  Big nothingburger.

No. Enrichment was capped at 3.67% for 15 years. That would go past 2030. (See Nuclear.A.5 https://medium.com/p/5cdd9b320fd)
Also, no plutonium enrichment. You frame Iran's partial pullout--because of Trump--from a deal it had been keeping as some kind of shakedown. 
In fact, US threatened our own allies with withdrawal of US business if they did not restore sanctions.  

And no, not basically the same place.  Breakout time was 6-8 weeks in 2015. Over a year under the deal. Now down to zero.

Russia and Iran were working with the US and EU to contain Iran. Now they are not and have tremendous incentive to help Iran. While US Trumpers
are squealing about 6 billion Biden gave Iran and it still can't use, China is investing 400 billion in Iran in return for oil 
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/27/world/middleeast/china-iran-deal.html.  Russia sees advantage as well.
https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/iransource/iran-wont-break-with-russia-over-ukraine-heres-why/

Another goal was to empower the "moderates" and the Iranian middle class who wanted the deal and said "Trust Obama." 
Now they are embarrassed and without credibility before the hardliners, who warned their people about trusting the Great Satan. 

US credibility was at a historic high having pulled together so many antagonistic partners into a common purpose.
Now it is difficult to trust the US in long term security matters. Exploding liberal heads explodes US credibility, though that may
not matter to people who don't see why that credibility is useful, or seem to think Trump's "strength" is an adequate substitute.

And the point of rehearsing this at a moment when we are again in danger of falling into war with Iran is to remind people
that Trump's ME policy was a disaster, including his Abraham Accords. This in the face of the Fox machine which retroactively constructs a "peaceful"
ME under Trump, which is only now falling apart under Biden. 

[Dill]

(04-19-2024, 06:17 AM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Just a few, If you need more facts, knock yourself out. 
To the part i Bolded, that should tell you that if we don't know about it, they aren't going to offer any of the other possible sites up. 

But to start, you should never start or assert that these are the "facts" there's almost always an exception. Didn't you learn anything from Fred?  

That was a pretty scattered deployment of "facts."  Not clear to me what you thought you were proving.

From the first part I gathered that you consider Iran, a sovereign nation, untrustworthy if it does not do what the US says.
We don't do what others say, and we don't revel nuclear secrets upon demand. I.e., refusing to comply with demands is not
the same as a refusal to keep one's word. I've never disputed that Iran might break its word on some things--but obviously
so does the US, with more damage to its credibility. 

You mention two moments post deal where Iran slightly exceeded its 130 ton heavy water limit by a fraction of a ton. Such small potatoes,
implying no risk to the deal or intent to deceive. 

The first important "fact" here is that invasive inspections showed Iran in compliance for three years, and that the deal restricted Iran's
potential to develop a bomb. 

The second important fact is that is that the US broke a deal that was working, creating new options for Iran, Russia and China and hurting
US credibility.  

If Iran was finally on track for reintegration into the community of nations in 2017, and now it's an outlaw with zero breakout time cutting deals with Russia and China, that is Trump's doing, and you can't paper that over claiming Iran was not trustworthy in 2004 or refused to cooperate with US-led UN demands in 2007, so no biggy if the US trashes the deal and its own credibility six years before the ME is again on brink of international war.