The Iran deal

[Bengalzona]

(05-10-2018, 02:04 PM)hollodero Wrote: I came across that point, it sure isn't a moot one. It doesn't really change things much from an outsider's perspective. There are still two Americas, and we can reach deals with one America, but the other America is likely to not respect that, yes is even more likely to tear up agreements that came from the wrong America just because of that very fact.
As a result - and also what you're saying is: The USA can be somewhat reliable only in times where House, Senate and presidency is in the hand of the same party. If not, just don't even bother to negotiate anything long term with the US. That's it, right? How could a conclusion be any different. It seems impossible to find an agreement both of your parties would accept. Especially when democrats are in power.

The republican congress would have never approved any Iran deal, and at least to me it seems like this has little to do with Iran or the deal itself. It's about Obama and democrats and republicans being fundamentally opposed to pretty much anything coming from there. I feel safe to put it that way because that was the agenda Mitch openly gave out from the beginning: Whether sun or rain, if it comes from Obama we're fundamentally opposed.

As world, what we I guess in the end inevitably need to learn from that is, unreliable partner, don't trust them. One wouldn't trust any company that's run that way either. Change of management, so all past contracts are null and void? I get you want it that way, I get that's how your system runs or can be run if that's desired, you don't seem to get that this is not the way to work together and rely upon each other. This is not just about Obama, there's more at stake than just American partisanship and I figure Europe and others are getting tired of the attitude. Guess that's the reaction republicans label as "butthurt".

True.

Republicans used to be different, and a LOT more respectable.