User Controls
Can someone explain why we pulled out of the Iran Nuclear Deal?
-
2019-06-19 at 3:17 PM UTCLike, besides the fact that the US is addicted to Israeli/Saudi dick?
Apparently the majority of Americans supported withdrawal from the deal, at least in Gallup polling. How were our interests supposed to be hurt by lifting sanctions and preventing an Iranian nuclear program? Was the argument that there was still a secret nuclear program or what? -
2019-06-19 at 3:19 PM UTCthey want WWIII
-
2019-06-19 at 3:48 PM UTC
Originally posted by Lanny Like, besides the fact that the US is addicted to Israeli/Saudi dick?
Apparently the majority of Americans supported withdrawal from the deal, at least in Gallup polling. How were our interests supposed to be hurt by lifting sanctions and preventing an Iranian nuclear program? Was the argument that there was still a secret nuclear program or what?
Essentially the goal of the JCPOA was for it to be the first step in normalising relations; Iran would scale down its nuclear research and prove that it wasn't building weapons to the satisfaction of the IAEA and in return the sanctions and embargoes that have been in place over decades would be reduced.
It was never meant to be a complete disarmament treaty or anything like that; it was meant to grant temporary concessions from both sides as a starting point for long-term negotiations. Trump and much of the US government seem to either not understand or not want to understand that and have rejected it as ineffective essentially because it does not force Iran to irreparably dismantle its (civilian) nuclear program. It's the same story with North Korea; talks have fallen apart (again) because the US is not interested in concessions made by both sides, they expect the other side to completely disarm and simply trust the US will keep to the terms afterwards.
The primary issue Trump seems to have with the JCPOA is the 'sunset clauses' which essentially allow Iran to return to pre-agreement enrichment levels after the JCPOA concludes, ie. it does not force Iran to permanently cripple its nuclear infrastructure.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2019-06-19 at 3:50 PM UTCtl;dr: the j'ews don't want relations with Iran normalisedThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2019-06-19 at 3:56 PM UTC
Originally posted by aldra Essentially the goal of the JCPOA was for it to be the first step in normalising relations; Iran would scale down its nuclear research and prove that it wasn't building weapons to the satisfaction of the IAEA and in return the sanctions and embargoes that have been in place over decades would be reduced.
It was never meant to be a complete disarmament treaty or anything like that; it was meant to grant temporary concessions from both sides as a starting point for long-term negotiations. Trump and much of the US government seem to either not understand or not want to understand that and have rejected it as ineffective essentially because it does not force Iran to irreparably dismantle its (civilian) nuclear program. It's the same story with North Korea; talks have fallen apart (again) because the US is not interested in concessions made by both sides, they expect the other side to completely disarm and simply trust the US will keep to the terms afterwards.
The primary issue Trump seems to have with the JCPOA is the 'sunset clauses' which essentially allow Iran to return to pre-agreement enrichment levels after the JCPOA concludes, ie. it does not force Iran to permanently cripple its nuclear infrastructure.
It's cute how you see all of this playing out.
You sound really bluepilled aldra. -
2019-06-19 at 3:59 PM UTCI was describing the purpose of the agreement
-
2019-06-19 at 4:21 PM UTCIran: Death to America!
The idiots in the USA: Here.. have $150 billion dollars. -
2019-06-19 at 4:21 PM UTCTo avoid pregnancy
-
2019-06-19 at 4:24 PM UTC
-
2019-06-19 at 4:26 PM UTCIt was some weak bullshit
The UN is weak bullshit
Everything Europe does is weak bullshit -
2019-06-19 at 4:29 PM UTC
Originally posted by aldra tl;dr: the j'ews don't want relations with Iran normalised
not really.
the real tl;dr is :
OIL.
the US is capable of supplying 1/4 of the world's oily needs and if iran was let loose to pour as much oil into the market, it will nudge US into supplying only 1/5 or the worlds demand.
thats ... lots and lots of billions. -
2019-06-19 at 4:36 PM UTC
Originally posted by vindicktive vinny not really.
the real tl;dr is :
OIL.
the US is capable of supplying 1/4 of the world's oily needs and if iran was let loose to pour as much oil into the market, it will nudge US into supplying only 1/5 or the worlds demand.
thats … lots and lots of billions.
While I agree with the sentiment, those projections are absurd. Fracking is a ponzi scheme and wells are drying up around twice as fast as investor prospectus had projected. US oil output is not stable or sustainable. Gas (LPG) yes, oil no way -
2019-06-19 at 4:43 PM UTC
Originally posted by Archer513 It was some weak bullshit
The UN is weak bullshit
Everything Europe does is weak bullshit
Ah, yes, of course. Diplomacy is for weak soft-dicked fags. The real beta play here is to passive-aggressively cook up a pretext for another unsuccessful mid east war that conveniently targets (((someone's))) regional enemy while justifying Iran seeking nuclear armament.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2019-06-19 at 4:45 PM UTC
Originally posted by aldra While I agree with the sentiment, those projections are absurd. Fracking is a ponzi scheme and wells are drying up around twice as fast as investor prospectus had projected. US oil output is not stable or sustainable. Gas (LPG) yes, oil no way
for projections you really have to look at actions of the big 4 oil companies,
ie; are they currently diversifying the shit out of themselves like theres no tommorrow ?
or are they lobbying for more brazen use of oils ?
because only they know the truth as to where we are on the bell curve, and what they do reflects this.
i dont see them diversifying rapidly, theres got to be more oil than this entire generation needs. -
2019-06-19 at 4:46 PM UTCIt's very unlikely Iran even wants nuclear weapons; Khamenei has explicitly decreed (through fatwa) that nuclear weapons are haraam and contravene the laws laid out in the Qu'ran
-
2019-06-19 at 4:53 PM UTC
Originally posted by Lanny Ah, yes, of course. Diplomacy is for weak soft-dicked fags. The real beta play here is to passive-aggressively cook up a pretext for another unsuccessful mid east war that conveniently targets (((someone's))) regional enemy while justifying Iran seeking nuclear armament.
Now you’re getting it 👍🏻
Diplomacy doesn’t work with Middle Eastern countries
Never has
Never will -
2019-06-19 at 4:53 PM UTC
Originally posted by aldra It's very unlikely Iran even wants nuclear weapons; Khamenei has explicitly decreed (through fatwa) that nuclear weapons are haraam and contravene the laws laid out in the Qu'ran
everyone who knew and understood islam and quran will know he didnt really meant it.
almost any modern invention that didnt existed durimg the time quran was written can be declared haramm, even ak47 if he wills it. it doesnt matter.
it can simply be flipped over night as permmissible if it is used in the defense of islam. fatwas are more fluid than americans constitutions. -
2019-06-19 at 5:13 PM UTC
Originally posted by aldra *here, have $150 billion of the assets we stole from you
Doesn't matter. Let's say you have a crazy guy outside your house shouting up to your window that he's going to kill you and burn your house down, then you realize you owe this crazy guy $500. You go out there, hand him the $500 in cash, he thanks you, pockets the cash, then he tells you he'll be back next week to kill you and burn your house down. Good thing you paid the crazy guy who's going to kill you next week and burn your house down the money he needs to buy the gas can and pistol, eh! After all! You did the honorable thing and paid the debt, it was his money, so that's all that matters! The "logic" these people have is akin to the logic a two-year old might have, or someone with an IQ of, say, 60. -
2019-06-19 at 5:14 PM UTC
Originally posted by -SpectraL Doesn't matter. Let's say you have a crazy guy outside your house shouting up to your window that he's going to kill you and burn your house down, then you realize you owe this crazy guy $500. You go out there, hand him the $500 in cash, he thanks you, pockets the cash, then he tells you he'll be back next week to kill you and burn your house down. Good thing you paid the crazy guy who's going to kill you next week and burn your house down the money he needs to buy the gas can and pistol, eh! After all! You did the honorable thing and paid the debt, it was his money, so that's all that matters! The "logic" these people have is akin to the logic a two-year old might have, or someone with an IQ of, say, 60.
Then why hasn't the crazy guy killed us yet? -
2019-06-19 at 5:15 PM UTC
Originally posted by -SpectraL Doesn't matter. Let's say you have a crazy guy outside your house shouting up to your window that he's going to kill you and burn your house down, then you realize you owe this crazy guy $500. You go out there, hand him the $500 in cash, he thanks you, pockets the cash, then he tells you he'll be back next week to kill you and burn your house down. Good thing you paid the crazy guy who's going to kill you next week and burn your house down the money he needs to buy the gas can and pistol, eh! After all! You did the honorable thing and paid the debt, it was his money, so that's all that matters! The "logic" these people have is akin to the logic a two-year old might have, or someone with an IQ of, say, 60.
in this scenario, the 'crazy' guy is actually just very angry because you've parked him in and he hasn't been able to go to work for the last 40 years.
