EU energy official assures commitment to Iran nuclear deal

[TU Curmudgeon]

By backing the deal with Iran, Europe is making sure it has access to China's OBOR Initiative. Not backing the deal now, would mean effectively missing out on the trillions of dollars that will circulate through Europe if they are on good terms with Iran.

Europe is looking at the future, we're looking at the yellow scare.

Not specifically directed at you, but one of the REALLY big problems with the "EU companies do about $20 billion with Iran and $600 billion with America." mantra is the underlying assumption that there isn't any place else in the world for the EU companies to do business with. The second is that if the EU companies take that business elsewhere then they are going to be replacing American sales to those places.

Since about 3.3% of the GDP of the United States of America is "defence spending", the economic consequences of dropping that down to China's (approximately) 1.9% of GDP would likely be disastrous.

 

[apdst]

Not any more there isn't.

And, of course, that so-called "American signature" on the JCPA never existed.

On the other hand, you could (technically) be correct because - since more nations than the US and Iran "signed on to" the JCPA there was no agreement that was SOLELY between the US and Iran.

There never was.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

There never was.

Quite right.

I mean, after all, Mr. Trump never signed the JCPA so it never existed and the US was never a signatory to the JCPA so there was never any "deal".

[We now return you to our regularly scheduled reality.]

 

[apdst]

Quite right.

I mean, after all, Mr. Trump never signed the JCPA so it never existed and the US was never a signatory to the JCPA so there was never any "deal".

[We now return you to our regularly scheduled reality.]

The Senate didn't vote to make the deal a treaty. Therefore, there was no agreement between The United States and Iran. Don't like it? Blame Obama.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

The Senate didn't vote to make the deal a treaty. Therefore, there was no agreement between The United States and Iran. Don't like it? Blame Obama.

Strangely enough nations often make "deals" which are not "treaties".

For example, did you know that NORAD is not governed by a "treaty"? Would you say that there is no agreement between the United States of America and Canada on North American Air Defence?

Of course you would - because there is no "treaty".

NAFTA is also not governed by a "treaty". Would you say that there is no agreement between the United States, Canada, and Mexico with respect to trade?

Of course you would - because there is no "treaty".

International air travel is also not government by a "treaty". Would you say that there is no agreement between the United States of America and other countries on international air travel?

Of course you would - because there is no "treaty".

[We now return you to the regularly scheduled reality.]

 

[apdst]

Strangely enough nations often make "deals" which are not "treaties".

For example, did you know that NORAD is not governed by a "treaty"? Would you say that there is no agreement between the United States of America and Canada on North American Air Defence?

Of course you would - because there is no "treaty".

NAFTA is also not governed by a "treaty". Would you say that there is no agreement between the United States, Canada, and Mexico with respect to trade?

Of course you would - because there is no "treaty".

International air travel is also not government by a "treaty". Would you say that there is no agreement between the United States of America and other countries on international air travel?

Of course you would - because there is no "treaty".

[We now return you to the regularly scheduled reality.]

The only time The United States makes a deal with another country is when the Senate votes to make it a treaty.

The Iran deal? That was between Iran and Obama, not The United States.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

The only time The United States makes a deal with another country is when the Senate votes to make it a treaty.

The Iran deal? That was between Iran and Obama, not The United States.

I'm very glad that you admit that neither NORAD, NAFTA, nor International Air Travel Agreements exist.

I rather suspect that the "Minders" at "The Home" are too.

 

[apdst]

I'm very glad that you admit that neither NORAD, NAFTA, nor International Air Travel Agreements exist.

I rather suspect that the "Minders" at "The Home" are too.

NAFTA and NORAD are treaties.

 

[iguanaman]

The Senate didn't vote to make the deal a treaty. Therefore, there was no agreement between The United States and Iran. Don't like it? Blame Obama.

It was Trump who has backed out of the deal without cause and made another war in the M.E. more likely. All Obama did was to peacefully stop Iran's nuclear weapons program cold. Trump is to blame for daring them to restart it as well as throwing our most valued allies under the bus. Trump is the worst negotiator in Presidential history, his legacy will be one of pulling out of important and valuable deals and failing to make any new ones. He regularly poisons the chances of equitable agreements by making concessions without getting anything in return. He did it with Israel, China and N. Korea. Wait until we see what a mess he makes of the meeting with Kim.

North Korean leader Kim Jong Un's recent threat to pull out of the upcoming summit with President Donald Trump appears to be a ploy to take advantage of Trump's main weakness as a negotiator: He often makes major concessions without securing anything of significance in exchange.
Trump has already conceded more than he should. North Korean leaders have tried for two decades to get a meeting with an America president because they believed it would give them prestige and legitimacy. Trump agreed without securing a single commitment first -- a missed opportunity.
Then, when Kim bluffed and threatened to walk away from the summit that he so desperately wants, Trump made an additional concession and, according to CNN, shifted a planned flight of B-52 bombers so as not to fly over the Korean Peninsula. (The Pentagon has declined to comment on the matter. )
Both concessions are significant and give Kim the upper hand heading into the summit.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/21/opinions/north-korea-trump-summit-upper-hand-fischer/index.html

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

NAFTA and NORAD are treaties.

Actually they aren't.

Oh, wait ... now I understand what you are saying. If you like the deal then it is a treaty but if you don't like the deal then it isn't.