• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

France, Germany, UK to meet Iran on nuclear deal (Radio France International)

bubbabgone said:
I wouldn't be surprised if Iran is complying with the provisions of the agreement.
Why shouldn't they?
I was like they wrote it all by themselves.
Don't you remember?
Every time Kerry thought they had a deal Iran objected to something and Kerry folded.
Whet they ended up with is a deal that gave Iran everything up front and made verification and punishment for violation too obscure.
Iran played us because they saw who they were dealing with then.
That's why Congress would never have approved it and was never asked to.
Click to expand...

I hope this is a lesson for everyone, such as North Korea, that any foreign agreement with the US needs to be done as a Treaty, and ratified by the Senate. Not by a President, who may have more flexibility after an election.

President Obama made the agreement with Iran and he stood by it, as was his power to do so.
 
bubbabgone said:
I wouldn't be surprised if Iran is complying with the provisions of the agreement.
Why shouldn't they?
I was like they wrote it all by themselves.
Don't you remember?
Every time Kerry thought they had a deal Iran objected to something and Kerry folded.
Whet they ended up with is a deal that gave Iran everything up front and made verification and punishment for violation too obscure.
Iran played us because they saw who they were dealing with then.
That's why Congress would never have approved it and was never asked to.
Click to expand...

Wow, that is an unimpressive bit of revisionist history. No one thinks that Iran is not complying with the agreement except for the far right in Israel and the US. It's insane and nowhere attached to reality.

Kerry did not accede to all of Iran's demands. It is a multi-national agreement borne of compromise. It could be improved from an American perspective, but at what cost?

Congress didn't approve anything that President Obama wanted. Let's not pretend that any Iran treaty would ever have been ratified by the Senate, even if Senate Republicans wrote it themselves.

This is the bottom line for me: Policy differences are just a part of politics. The president won the election. He is entitled to set the direction for the country any way he wants. But he doesn't have any policy. He's simply undoing everything Obama did because he and his base are singularly obsessed with that presidency. DACA, the ACA, Iran, Paris, etc. He rips them up and walks away. No replacement, no alternative, no solution. He's a con artist.
 
MateoMtnClimber said:
Yet no one, including the US, thinks that Iran was not abiding by and does not continue to be in compliance with the agreement. How do you feel about the US doing business with and allying with North Korea, which is not a more benevolent country than Iran?
Click to expand...

As others have shown in various thread on the topic, there are many who know that Iran has not kept to their agreement. There are also many who think Obama's deal was a piece of crap to begin with.

NK is a different situation because, as Trump has shown us, when dealing with NK, we are actually dealing with China. Trump is the first President to understand this and to deal with NK with that understanding.
 
Aristaeus said:
1. Iran is abiding by the deal.
2. You think a deal which benefits the whole world is a mistake????

Another benefit of the deal is that offering sanctions relief, that normal Iranian people will feel the benefits of, as a result of diplomatic efforts shows the people of Iran that a softer, more diplomatic stance reaps better results than more hard-line rhetoric. It was a potential foot in the door for the more centrist politicians in Iran. That door has been slammed shut by Trump. This is a victory for extremists in Iran. Congratulations.
Click to expand...

The "Iranian people" are not the ones who run their country.

We've already seen what a "softer, more diplomatic stance" gets us: nothing but more danger.

You can have the Obama stance. I'll take the Trump stance. (I bet you don't even know what the Trump stance is, do you?)
 
Mycroft said:
shrug...

If they continue to support Iran, they might find themselves between a rock and a hard place.

Oh well...their choice.
Click to expand...

Really how's that? Trump going to get into a trade war with our own trade and military allies? Is trump that big of an idiot?
 
MateoMtnClimber said:
Wow, that is an unimpressive bit of revisionist history. No one thinks that Iran is not complying with the agreement except for the far right in Israel and the US. It's insane and nowhere attached to reality.

Kerry did not accede to all of Iran's demands. It is a multi-national agreement borne of compromise. It could be improved from an American perspective, but at what cost?

Congress didn't approve anything that President Obama wanted. Let's not pretend that any Iran treaty would ever have been ratified by the Senate, even if Senate Republicans wrote it themselves.

This is the bottom line for me: Policy differences are just a part of politics. The president won the election. He is entitled to set the direction for the country any way he wants. But he doesn't have any policy. He's simply undoing everything Obama did because he and his base are singularly obsessed with that presidency. DACA, the ACA, Iran, Paris, etc. He rips them up and walks away. No replacement, no alternative, no solution. He's a con artist.
Click to expand...

Well Said.
 
MateoMtnClimber said:
Umm. Are you a real person? "Their mistake" implies that they care what we think. They don't. That's my point. The US is a global laughing stock.
Click to expand...

Absolute nonsense.
We are rock sold with our EU allies.
However, that doesn't mean we must agree on every issue.
 
I hope someone has understood, like I do, that not upholding the Iran nuclear deal is an attempt to inhibit Iran from being huge sponsors of terrorism around the world and, specifically, the Middle East. Iran says they won't proliferate nuclear weapons? Does sending them to Syria to shoot them count? I don't imagine Iran thinks so. I'm sure Israel does think so.:roll:
 
Last edited:
MateoMtnClimber said:
You must have missed the point of this presidency. We gave up our global leadership role. The world decided to function without us. Brilliant move.
Click to expand...
Which "global leadership role" was that? You mean Obama's mobile red lines and "leading from behind"? Yeah, a real shame that's gone. :roll:
 
MateoMtnClimber said:
You must have missed the point of this presidency. We gave up our global leadership role. The world decided to function without us. Brilliant move.
Click to expand...

Exactly how we were looked at under the last president as well.

The last guy didn't make a Iran deal................. as much as he bent over for the imams.

There never was a deal because the imams continued with their deceit.

Obama and Kerry were nothing but pawns to be used by the imams.
 
Mycroft said:
I think it's a mistake to make a deal with Iran, knowing they won't abide by the deal. I think it's a mistake to make a deal that offers, at best, temporary benefits for the world and immediate benefits for Iran. I think it's a mistake to make a deal with the number one sponsor of terror in the world.

I think those countries will eventually regret their mistake.

I see these countries making this deal with...doing business with...Iran as these countries being allies with Iran. I see these countries as being allies with terrorists.

Do you disagree?
Click to expand...
This makes a lot of sense. As Trump demonstrated with North Korea a little tough talking sometimes works better than decades of flowery diplomatic posturing.
 
MateoMtnClimber said:
In that case, you greatly overestimate American power. We need the rest of the world more than it needs us. Have you ever lived abroad? Americans without a worldview, which is most of them, tend to think of the US as an "indispensable country" that can bend global will whenever we want toward whatever we want. As the current presidency makes abundantly clear, when US policy reflects the spoiled brat that is the president, the rest of the world moves on without us. All the while, we are abdicating the role for which we fought and died during WWII.
Click to expand...
Anyone tell Kim Jong Un? He's sure dancing to Trump's tune.
 
MateoMtnClimber said:
Yet no one, including the US, thinks that Iran was not abiding by and does not continue to be in compliance with the agreement. How do you feel about the US doing business with and allying with North Korea, which is not a more benevolent country than Iran?
Click to expand...
I'd be as happy as a pig in poop if Iran started moving in the direction NK appears to be. I'd like to see Iran and Saudi Arabia, for instance, mimic the steps NK and SK are taking.
 
Mycroft said:
The "Iranian people" are not the ones who run their country.

We've already seen what a "softer, more diplomatic stance" gets us: nothing but more danger.

You can have the Obama stance. I'll take the Trump stance. (I bet you don't even know what the Trump stance is, do you?)
Click to expand...

It got you Iran allowing inspections of their nuclear facilities and the chance to show the Iranian people that diplomacy gets better results than hard-line extremists.

Trump's stance appears to be to violate international deals which are working, risking Iran getting hold of nukes, and emboldening the hard-line extremists in Iran. No thanks.
 
Bullseye said:
This makes a lot of sense. As Trump demonstrated with North Korea a little tough talking sometimes works better than decades of flowery diplomatic posturing.
Click to expand...

The idea that North Korea is giving up decades of belligerence and nuclear ambitions because Trump called him childish names on twitter is absurd.
 
Aristaeus said:
The idea that North Korea is giving up decades of belligerence and nuclear ambitions because Trump called him childish names on twitter is absurd.
Click to expand...
That remains to be seen, but, at this point signs are favorable.
 
Bullseye said:
That remains to be seen, but, at this point signs are favorable.
Click to expand...

South Korea has done a lot of diplomacy work and meetings with N.Korea. Trump has just used playground insults on twitter. 95% of this progress is down to South & North Korea. Trump has done jack all.
 
Aristaeus said:
South Korea has done a lot of diplomacy work and meetings with N.Korea. Trump has just used playground insults on twitter. 95% of this progress is down to South & North Korea. Trump has done jack all.
Click to expand...
South Korea has been doing that for decades. Difference is Trump's "I got a bigger one" got Rocketman's attention.
 
MateoMtnClimber said:
Wow, that is an unimpressive bit of revisionist history. No one thinks that Iran is not complying with the agreement except for the far right in Israel and the US. It's insane and nowhere attached to reality.

Kerry did not accede to all of Iran's demands. It is a multi-national agreement borne of compromise. It could be improved from an American perspective, but at what cost?

Congress didn't approve anything that President Obama wanted. Let's not pretend that any Iran treaty would ever have been ratified by the Senate, even if Senate Republicans wrote it themselves.

This is the bottom line for me: Policy differences are just a part of politics. The president won the election. He is entitled to set the direction for the country any way he wants. But he doesn't have any policy. He's simply undoing everything Obama did because he and his base are singularly obsessed with that presidency. DACA, the ACA, Iran, Paris, etc. He rips them up and walks away. No replacement, no alternative, no solution. He's a con artist.
Click to expand...

1) I said ..."I wouldn't be surprised if Iran is complying with the provisions of the agreement."
There's really no reason not to.
They got everything they wanted ... 150 Billion $, they're not prevented from nuclear weapon development, they got help with developing their Country, and they're still fomenting all manner of violence in the M.E..

2) I remember Kerry being squeezed repeatedly ... and successfully ... by Iran. It was a multi-national agreement borne of economics.

3) I also said Congress didn't approve of the agreement and wasn't asked to.

So far you haven't found anything to disagree about.

So let me ask you ... if it was a huge compromise, what exactly did Iran give up in this compromise? A pause in some limited aspects of nuclear weapon development is not much of a compromise considering all they got for it, is it?
 
bubbabgone said:
That's why Congress would never have approved it and was never asked to.
Click to expand...

See how effortlessly conservatives (and conservative like posters) can forget reality (or pretend to). the republican congress would have never approved it because it was President Obama. Forget obstructing their own healthcare plan and focus on deficits. Remember when you thought they cared about deficits. yea, they were lying. And even you cant deny they were lying hence you pretend to forget.

so if it comes to trusting a lying republican congress or our allies, I'll side with our allies. you remember our allies, they were the ones conservatives (and conservative like posters) obediently parroted President Obama was undermining as he emboldened our enemies. times sure have changed. Is there anything you guys haven't flip flopped on?
 
Vern said:
See how effortlessly conservatives (and conservative like posters) can forget reality (or pretend to). the republican congress would have never approved it because it was President Obama. Forget obstructing their own healthcare plan and focus on deficits. Remember when you thought they cared about deficits. yea, they were lying. And even you cant deny they were lying hence you pretend to forget.

so if it comes to trusting a lying republican congress or our allies, I'll side with our allies. you remember our allies, they were the ones conservatives (and conservative like posters) obediently parroted President Obama was undermining as he emboldened our enemies. times sure have changed. Is there anything you guys haven't flip flopped on?
Click to expand...

Some Democrats didn't like the deal either and said so.
 
Mycroft said:
As others have shown in various thread on the topic, there are many who know that Iran has not kept to their agreement. There are also many who think Obama's deal was a piece of crap to begin with.

NK is a different situation because, as Trump has shown us, when dealing with NK, we are actually dealing with China. Trump is the first President to understand this and to deal with NK with that understanding.
Click to expand...

No, there is no one who is credible who thinks that Iran does not comply with the agreement. Where do you get this mess? The people who don't like "Obama's deal" (pro tip: Look up the agreement. It was never an American-centric deal, which ironically, is what you both like and hate about it simultaneously) just don't like Obama. It really is that simple.

You think that when the president of the US meets the North Korean dictator that he's meeting with China? That diaper load is a little too ripe even for you.
 
Mycroft said:
The "Iranian people" are not the ones who run their country.

We've already seen what a "softer, more diplomatic stance" gets us: nothing but more danger.

You can have the Obama stance. I'll take the Trump stance. (I bet you don't even know what the Trump stance is, do you?)
Click to expand...

Please explain "the Trump stance" to us.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom