• 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!

With US out, others reaffirm commitment to Iran nuclear deal

TU Curmudgeon

TU Curmudgeon

B.A. (Sarc), LLb. (Lex Sarcasus), PhD (Sarc.)
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 7, 2018
Messages
62,481
Reaction score
19,295
Location
Lower Mainland of BC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
From ABC News

With US out, others reaffirm commitment to Iran nuclear deal
​

Five world powers agreed with Iran on Friday to forge ahead with negotiations with the country and maintain its ability to export gas and oil as they seek to preserve a nuclear deal with Tehran despite the withdrawal of the United States.

European Union foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini told reporters that top diplomats from Germany, Britain, France, Russia and China reaffirmed their commitment to the 2015 deal, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, "which is in the security interest of all."


"The participants recognized that, in return for the implementation by Iran of its nuclear-related commitments, the lifting of sanctions, including the economic dividends arising from it, constitutes an essential part of the JCPOA," Mogherini told reporters after the meeting without taking questions.


Iranian President Hassan Rouhani had previously called the latest package of incentives offered "disappointing," but Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif said he would convey "deeper explanation" observed at the Vienna meeting to Tehran.

COMMENT:-

What a revolting development. I mean, what are the leaders of Germany, Britain, France, Russia, and China doing even thinking about honouring their commitments when the President of the United States of America tells them not to?

Of course, the alternate view is that what they are doing is educating Mr. Trump in how it feels to have a sharp stick firmly inserted in his left eye.

PS - The "Diplomatic Brownie Points" that Iran is going to score when it announces (something like)

"We understand that Germany, Britain, France, Russia, and China have been prevented, by the government of the United States of America, from fully complying with all of the terms of the JCPOA. HOWEVER we also recognize that those governments have made good faith attempts to comply as fully as possible and have remained in substantial compliance (even though they have suffered from antagonistic actions by the government of the United States of America). ACCORDINGLY, the government of Iran is going to remain bound by the terms of the JCPOA while those good faith efforts to substantially comply on the parts of Germany, Britain, France, Russia, and China continue."
​

would be substantial.
​
 
The world can handle itself without us? Who knew.

I don't get the complaint. If one supports the deal, it continuing without the US is probably the best case scenario.
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
From ABC News

With US out, others reaffirm commitment to Iran nuclear deal
​

Five world powers agreed with Iran on Friday to forge ahead with negotiations with the country and maintain its ability to export gas and oil as they seek to preserve a nuclear deal with Tehran despite the withdrawal of the United States.

European Union foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini told reporters that top diplomats from Germany, Britain, France, Russia and China reaffirmed their commitment to the 2015 deal, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, "which is in the security interest of all."


"The participants recognized that, in return for the implementation by Iran of its nuclear-related commitments, the lifting of sanctions, including the economic dividends arising from it, constitutes an essential part of the JCPOA," Mogherini told reporters after the meeting without taking questions.


Iranian President Hassan Rouhani had previously called the latest package of incentives offered "disappointing," but Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif said he would convey "deeper explanation" observed at the Vienna meeting to Tehran.

COMMENT:-

What a revolting development. I mean, what are the leaders of Germany, Britain, France, Russia, and China doing even thinking about honouring their commitments when the President of the United States of America tells them not to?

Of course, the alternate view is that what they are doing is educating Mr. Trump in how it feels to have a sharp stick firmly inserted in his left eye.

PS - The "Diplomatic Brownie Points" that Iran is going to score when it announces (something like)

"We understand that Germany, Britain, France, Russia, and China have been prevented, by the government of the United States of America, from fully complying with all of the terms of the JCPOA. HOWEVER we also recognize that those governments have made good faith attempts to comply as fully as possible and have remained in substantial compliance (even though they have suffered from antagonistic actions by the government of the United States of America). ACCORDINGLY, the government of Iran is going to remain bound by the terms of the JCPOA while those good faith efforts to substantially comply on the parts of Germany, Britain, France, Russia, and China continue."
​

would be substantial.
​
Click to expand...



Perfect. Iran is contained and the US doesn't have to give up anything.

This could not have worked out better!
 
ecofarm said:
The world can handle itself without us? Who knew.

I don't get the complaint. If one supports the deal, it continuing without the US is probably the best case scenario.
Click to expand...

The "complaint" is that other countries are not complying with the orders of the President of the United States of America.

I mean, how can you claim to be "The Leader of the Free World" if "the Free World" won't do what you tell it to do?
 
HowardBThiname said:
Perfect. Iran is contained and the US doesn't have to give up anything.

This could not have worked out better!
Click to expand...

The US, indeed, doesn't have to "give up anything" - provided that you don't count all of the US sanctions which don't actually have any effect because everyone else ignores them.
 
HowardBThiname said:
Perfect. Iran is contained and the US doesn't have to give up anything.

This could not have worked out better!
Click to expand...

This was the American Century, we led the free world.

Now? Not so much.
 
You mean the deal they never honored for a split second?
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
The "complaint" is that other countries are not complying with the orders of the President of the United States of America.

I mean, how can you claim to be "The Leader of the Free World" if "the Free World" won't do what you tell it to do?
Click to expand...

The deal was made between President Obama and the Iranians, not president Trump. Who cares what the rest of the world does.
 
late said:
This was the American Century, we led the free world.

Now? Not so much.
Click to expand...

Who's leading it now if not us? And if you remember, Obama didnt lead the free world either. Unless you fall for the 'leading from behind' is leadership charade.
 
Fletch said:
Who's leading it now if not us?

And if you remember, Obama didnt lead the free world either. Unless you fall for the 'leading from behind' is leadership charade.
Click to expand...

That's up for grabs. China is moving fast to replace us in Asia.

Obama played it smart, that's why he got Iran to stop, and Trump could not.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
It could have led to better relations with Iran.
Click to expand...

That's very difficult when they treat their own citizens so badly, burn American flags and chant "Death to the Americans."

On the positive side, though, is the rising number of protests from their own citizens who would like to overthrow the religious leaders. That would be a beneficial change that might lead the way to trading and peace.
 
HowardBThiname said:
That's very difficult when they treat their own citizens so badly, burn American flags and chant "Death to the Americans."

On the positive side, though, is the rising number of protests from their own citizens who would like to overthrow the religious leaders. That would be a beneficial change that might lead the way to trading and peace.
Click to expand...

I would rather not have any further attempts at regime change. The political moderates in Iran have to worry about the hardliners over there.

If the political moderates secure more power, the influence of the hardliners will probably start to decline.

As for the religious leadership of Iran, the ayatollahs, I think it is a fantasy to expect that the Iranian people will overthrow them. We just have to engage in detente.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
I would rather not have any further attempts at regime change. The political moderates in Iran have to worry about the hardliners over there.

If the political moderates secure more power, the influence of the hardliners will probably start to decline.

As for the religious leadership of Iran, the ayatollahs, I think it is a fantasy to expect that the Iranian people will overthrow them. We just have to engage in detente.
Click to expand...

Regime change is inevitable as the world evolves. The mullahs have been in control for over three decades and the people are tired of it -- they will rebel, and eventually -- they will win.

I can't imagine wanting people to suffer under theocratic rule.
 
Look at how Donald Trump is trying to play up his N. Korean Deal- that fell on it's ass before anything was actually accomplished or agreed upon.

Did he get a guarantee that includes a shutdown of N. Korean Nuclear development? NO! And Hell NO! And all the while claiming that N. Korea is no longer a threat- just because of his buttercupping and elbow rubbing photo op with lil' Kim over an expensive wing ding shrimp fest for nothing!

And all the while ending our commitment to the world order established with Iran that was working just fine before Donald wanted to play Mr. Bigshot and rear his ugly ass in the big middle of it.

Donald Trump is an idiot and a very dangerous idiot to our national defense, while trying to be some kind of a smart-ass and big shot for his base of idiots!

Fail! Donald Trump is a huge FAIL!
 
HowardBThiname said:
Regime change is inevitable as the world evolves. The mullahs have been in control for over three decades and the people are tired of it -- they will rebel, and eventually -- they will win.

I can't imagine wanting people to suffer under theocratic rule.
Click to expand...

We didn’t seem to mind when Iran was ruled by the Shah.

In fact din’t We put the Shah in Power after overthrowing a Democraticly elected prime minister back in the 1950s? Oh yeah we did.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
We didn’t seem to mind when Iran was ruled by the Shah.

In fact din’t We put the Shah in Power after overthrowing a Democraticly elected prime minister back in the 1950s? Oh yeah we did.
Click to expand...

Do you have any idea what happened to women in Iran under the Shah and then after? No one in their right mind supports that.

a654065f2fab3842e391cdab0b5ab026--afghanistan-revolution.jpg
 
HowardBThiname said:
Do you have any idea what happened to women in Iran under the Shah and then after? No one in their right mind supports that.

View attachment 67235743
Click to expand...

Trying to impose modern secular practices in countries with deeply rooted traditions and cultural norms, especially among the rural populations of these countries, is a recipe for disaster if done blindly and too quickly. The reason why the ayatollahs and the Taliban came to Power is because the rural populations of both Iran and Afghanistan saw that Western modernization was a source of instability and corruption, which brought no benefits to them and seemed to be undermining the traditions that they valued. The ayatollahs and Taliban used this to acquire power, they portrayed themselves as the defenders of the age-old traditions of the rural populations of Iran and Afghanistan, they argued that in order to restore Iran and Afghanistan to their former glory, the source of corruption ( the westernized values and modernization of Afghanistan and Iran) had to be removed

So that is the problem
 
HowardBThiname said:
The Iran deal hardly fell into the category of "leading the world."

At least not in a positive direction.
Click to expand...

Nuclear nonproliferation efforts, short of war, is one of the smartest things we used to do.

That was the first significant deal we had with Iran in half a century, which was an improvement in our relations.

That was a win/win.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
Trying to impose modern secular practices in countries with deeply rooted traditions and cultural norms, especially among the rural populations of these countries, is a recipe for disaster if done blindly and too quickly. The reason why the ayatollahs and the Taliban came to Power is because the rural populations of both Iran and Afghanistan saw that Western modernization was a source of instability and corruption, which brought no benefits to them and seemed to be undermining the traditions that they valued. The ayatollahs and Taliban used this to acquire power, they portrayed themselves as the defenders of the age-old traditions of the rural populations of Iran and Afghanistan, they argued that in order to restore Iran and Afghanistan to their former glory, the source of corruption ( the westernized values and modernization of Afghanistan and Iran) had to be removed

So that is the problem
Click to expand...

Horse****. The reason why Iran fell into "disarray" is because Carter stopped paying off the fundamentalist leaders who then stirred up insurrection. A violent minority rose to power because the violent minority was willing to kill to reestablish the Ayatollah and a fundamentalist regime. The fundamentalists in Iran are a minority...but they have no problem killing. And so a country that was a developing first world nation was plunged back into the dark ages. Its no different then than now.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
Trying to impose modern secular practices in countries with deeply rooted traditions and cultural norms, especially among the rural populations of these countries, is a recipe for disaster if done blindly and too quickly. The reason why the ayatollahs and the Taliban came to Power is because the rural populations of both Iran and Afghanistan saw that Western modernization was a source of instability and corruption, which brought no benefits to them and seemed to be undermining the traditions that they valued. The ayatollahs and Taliban used this to acquire power, they portrayed themselves as the defenders of the age-old traditions of the rural populations of Iran and Afghanistan, they argued that in order to restore Iran and Afghanistan to their former glory, the source of corruption ( the westernized values and modernization of Afghanistan and Iran) had to be removed

So that is the problem
Click to expand...

Wow. We're talking about people here -- women who once felt free but are now forced to hide under layers of fabric.

Your post shows your inherent misogyny and preference for patriarchal religions over freedom.

There's absolutely nothing left to say, knowing your feelings on the matter.
 
HowardBThiname said:
Wow. We're talking about people here -- women who once felt free but are now forced to hide under layers of fabric.

Your post shows your inherent misogyny and preference for patriarchal religions over freedom.

There's absolutely nothing left to say, knowing your feelings on the matter.
Click to expand...

Bull crap. I was just pointing out the historical facts. The Shah of iron and Afghanistan’s government tried to bring western values and modernization into thier countries but the modernization was divisive: it was popular in the cities where the governments could directly implement the policies and afford it, but in the rural areas far from major urban centers, the benifits of westernization and modernization were not felt by the rural populations and they grew resentful of western modernization because they saw it as a source of corruption undermining traditional values.

The Shah of Iran and the government of Afghanistan tried to bring western reforms to their people, but they tried to implement the reforms too quickly and so ham-handedly that it generated a backlash from the conservative rural populations in both Afghanistan and Iran, and the reason why the ayatollahs and Taliban were able to gain power was because they promised a return to the traditional ways of their respective countries and that carried a lot of influence in the rural regions of their respective countries.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
Bull crap. I was just pointing out the historical facts. The Shah of iron and Afghanistan’s government tried to bring western values and modernization into thier countries but the modernization was divisive: it was popular in the cities where the governments could directly implement the policies and afford it, but in the rural areas far from major urban centers, the benifits of westernization and modernization were not felt by the rural populations and they grew resentful of western modernization because they saw it as a source of corruption undermining traditional values.

The Shah of Iran and the government of Afghanistan tried to bring western reforms to their people, but they tried to implement the reforms too quickly and so ham-handedly that it generated a backlash from the conservative rural populations in both Afghanistan and Iran, and the reason why the ayatollahs and Taliban were able to gain power was because they promised a return to the traditional ways of their respective countries and that carried a lot of influence in the rural regions of their respective countries.
Click to expand...

You're making excuses for the cultists. Your making excuses for making women live as second-class excuses.

Your argument is basically Trump's argument -- that people from these nations can't change so we can't let them come here.

But, your argument is anti-woman and anti-homosexuality because those are the tenets that are entrenched in extremist religion, whether that religion is Islam or Christianity. To pretend that we should just make things easy for Iran's ruling class (via the "deal") rather than hold out for better human rights is repugnant to free people all over this world. You sell out the soul of Western idealism when you make the claim that "they can't change" so let's just make it easy for them to continue to harm their citizens.

Your backwards ideology is what is harming the world today.

Don't blindly accept cultism.

Make it clear that you're above it.

I don't think you are.
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
The "complaint" is that other countries are not complying with the orders of the President of the United States of America.

I mean, how can you claim to be "The Leader of the Free World" if "the Free World" won't do what you tell it to do?
Click to expand...

I understand the sentiment of what you are trying to state. But we have a history of dragging our allies, and even being rejected by our allies, that go back to the late 1940s. One of the reasons we got involved in Vietnam was because the French used it as bargaining chip in order to comply with what we wanted in Europe. And when it came to the Korean War, aside from the UK, the very few allies that participated did so with far less than the bare minimum. The tradition for each to promote their own sovereignty in a world where America leads was seen as late as the Iraq invasion in 2003.

The problem today is that we are actively encouraging our allies to form their own camps outside of our own. Our obtuse defiance to the world and the international organizations and systems that we created are undoing decades of effort that started with Roosevelt. And it comes down to a stubborn will to remain bitter over our own expired ideologies and irrational fear of others. It's a paradox that along with becoming the most powerful nation in history after Wold War II, we also developed into the nation that is the most afraid of others. Today, we present the world with far more fear than courage. Nobody wants to be led by that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom