08-07-2019, 09:21 AM
(08-07-2019, 08:23 AM)Dill Wrote: Dill would know. The question is whether you would. Even after I have summarized it for you in posts #368 and 371. And for Bfine in #380 and 383. I keep having to do this because, as demonstrated, you keep getting it wrong, repeating my own points as if objections and misreading/misconstruing evidence.
In post #383, 08/02, I say the following in response to a question by Bfine.
According to your source: British attempts to create a European-led coalition to provide maritime security in the Gulf - and to deter Iran - have clearly not born fruit, at least yet.
Hence the UK decision to "join an international maritime security mission", which will be led by the US.
So far, the UK is the only other member.
The apparent change of heart has been made easier by the recent changes in Downing Street.
The UK government still says it hopes the taskforce can transition to a European-led mission - though so far no other European countries have said they're willing to commit warships to protect merchant shipping as part of an international maritime force.
The government also insists that its policy to Iran has not changed.
Britain says it remains committed, along with EU allies, to maintaining the Iran nuclear deal - unlike the US.
But Iran may view this latest move differently.
"Changes in Downing Street"--an allusion to the new prime minister. Jeremy Hunt, the guy who proposed the EU coalition, is gone.
For anyone who has followed my "argument," Britain, along with the rest of the EU, continues to separate itself from the US Iran policy by maintaining the Iran Deal.--as stated in your article. That is a fact. Just as it was a fact that, as of 08/02, GB had refused to join the US Naval coalition.
So if I state on 08/02 that given the new, Trump-style prime minister, Britain could "reverse" the preference for a European only security coalition in the Gulf, and then it does reverse that preference on 08/05--while maintaining the Iran Deal "UNLIKE THE US"--then how is my "argument shot to shite"?
Looks like you are still just responding to posts ad hoc, scattershot, hyperbolic ("completely fallen apart") no grasp at all of the analytic framework in which I am posing/answering questions.
Remember kids, if you simultaneously make both sides of an argument you can never be wrong.
One thing you did prove is how utterly neutered the EU is. State sponsored piracy, no problem!
