The Iran deal

[hollodero]

(05-09-2018, 08:55 PM)Dill Wrote: In ascending order--it's not clear to me that Iran REALLY wants a bomb. They could have had one by 2005 and then again by 2013, but did not go that direction.  They maintain they have a RIGHT to make one, apparently (and understandably) out of national pride. Breaking the deal, though, has given impetus to the hard liners who wanted the bomb but were held back.

Yeah, if they didn't want one back then, I guess this has changed now. I don't think it's just about pride, but also about self-preservation. At least I'd be in a loss of words if that point were made. Atomic bombs threaten the world, but make the country in possession safer, at least in the shorter term.

(05-09-2018, 08:55 PM)Dill Wrote: Right now, it is still in Iran's best interest to continue the deal with Russia, China, and the EU reps.  That is made more difficult by Trump's insistence that we will slap sanctions on disobedient European countries if they don't do what we say and re-impose the the sanctions we decide (right now, just "secondary" ones).

Well, the companies dealing with Iran might face US sanctions. Whch will make it very hard to uphold the deal. But I lack insight to really evaluate the possibilities. Right now, losing some business in the US doesn't look like the scariest thing to me, at least not from a more political standpoint.

(05-09-2018, 08:55 PM)Dill Wrote: This is a very unstable situation since slapping sanctions or France or Germany or other EU countries is not quite as easy as bullying 3rd world states.  Trump et al. seem to imagine individual countries unable to stand up to the US for fear of losing our markets. But Europeans may be thinking that collectively they very well can do that. Or at least that it is worth the risk.

I sure hope so. I don't mind accepting the US as more powerful and more influential country. But I'm pissed in how within your current admin's position the deal was just called rotten and dumb - which is such a major offense to all the partners in the deal that want to uphold it. I'm not willing to partner up with people who deem our opinions and agreements with us as worthless. Which is exactly what's happening, after it happened with the Paris accord.
I guess we gave Macron his chance, now it's time to choose a more Merkelish approach. Cool it off. No touching. And hope that other countries from China to Iran will show a stronger preference for Europe over the US too. That's the plan :)

(05-09-2018, 08:55 PM)Dill Wrote: Great insight into our division.[/b] How CAN you trust us when an election four years from now might trash the agreement you signed today. One party cannot get treaties ratified so all hangs on executive agreements. Back in the 90s, during the Gingrich revolution, I assumed there would be a correction. Party divisions would balance the center. Instead the right just got more extreme. The old radicals--Gingrich, Cocaine Mitch, and Boehner, became "the establishment" challenged by the Tea Party and Freedom Caucus, many of whom are now challenged by the more extreme Trumpsters, who do not learn from political error and little in the way of political memory. "Once-Radicals" Cantor and Ryan gone!  Who is next? The center cannot hold.

Sorry I skipped a lot, doesn't mean it's not interesting. About this, yeah I see it the same way. Extremes have gotten mainstream, which is used as the counter-argument against said extremism claim. One lie a season makes them huge deals, one lie a day makes them the new normal and those who complain about them blind haters. Goes for lies or whatever.

Also, cocaine Mitch? Am I missing something?