List EXACTLY what the U.S. gains in pulling out of Iran deal.

[westwall]

There is absolutely NO gains to be had for our country, if the buffoon-in-chief unilaterally pulls the U.S. out of the Iran deal........with 2 "notable" exception,of course.

First, Trump's jealousy and his cult followers hatred of Obama gains some solace....and

Second, we are (once again) acting like the "tail" wagging, to the "dog" that is Israel's current junta.

We get to PREVENT iran from obtaining a nuke. Something that your hero, the obummers "deal" GRANTED them the ability to obtain in 10 years.

How Westwall? Haven't seen a single plan advanced that is any better except go to war.

The plan as it exists allowed iran to further their ballistic missile development, didn't prevent them from engaging in State sponsored terrorism, and gave them permission to build a nuke in 10 years. What exactly do you think iran is going to do when they have that missile and nuke?

If this deal is allowed to stand we will be engaged in a nuclear war in 12 years. If iran decides to go to war over our demand that they not get to have a nuke, OK, I would far rather fight a non nuke equipped military than one that is. Wouldn't you? Anyone with the ability to think KNOWS that the second that iran has a nuke, they are going to use it. They are the david koresh of the middle east.

 

[WillowTree]

Obama gave Iran all that money and left Americans there to rot in Iranian prison. I bet you libtards think that was an excellent deal!

 

[peacefan]

bed time over at my end folks. talk with you again in about 12 hours.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Congress didn't verify any treaty with the Iranians, did they? Only Congress can do that.

Trump would have been obliged to adhere to a real treaty. Not a stupid worthless agreement between that asshole Kerry, dimwit Obama and the Mullahs.

Of course thanks to the stupidity of Obama and Kerry the Mullahs already got their barrels of cash, haven't they? How stupid an agreement was that?

Yup that makes all the difference. Congress didn't ratify a deal made by the president, so the allies will completely not mind that it's broken without Iran actually breaking the terms of the agreement made.
Why in the hell is it so hard to admit that the US just gave up a huge chunk of what little credibility it has left out of cheer spite?

You are confused. Let me guess. You have been reading Democratunderground?

The US never had any credibility making such a terrible deal with the Iranians Mullahs. We were the laughing stock of the world giving them barrels of cash up front and no verifiable agreement. Only an idiot would have made that terrible deal. We certainly had idiots in the White House and in the State Department, didn't we?

Meanwhile Trump has just served notice to Kim that he is serious about negotiating a real verifiable deal.

That is the difference between having a weak President that gives away the store and a strong President that knows The Art of the Deal.

WHAT billion in "hard earned taxpayer dollars"? Do you mean the billion that was Iran's own frozen assets?

That is not true. Now you are the one falling for spin.
It stems from assets that Iran had in the U.S. to expedite payments to U.S. military contractors throughout the 1970's.
In 1979, the United states temporarily froze the account.

1) The account had outstanding debts owed to U.S. firms. Congress enacted a law that provided authorization to pay those firms debts owed from the account.
2) After paying debts, there was just over $400 million left.
3) Congress passed another bill that granted authorization to use the funds to pay victims of families from the hostage situation of 1979.
The ENTIRE BALANCE WAS NEARLY USED.

Iran said they don't agree with what the United States did with the money.
The U.S. Government overwhelmingly agreed by Congress said too bad, we don't owe you a dime.

Obama took it upon himself to disagree with 30 years of previous arrangements and handed over not only what Iran claimed - BUT MORE THAN WHAT THEY EVER HAD HERE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Get your facts straight.

I do have my facts straight.

Back in late 1979, after Iranian revolutionaries took 52 Americans hostage at the US Embassy in Tehran, the United States severed diplomatic relations with Iran and froze Iranian assets in America. Among those frozen assets was a $400 million delivery of fighter jets from the U.S. that Iran’s previous government had already paid for.


Although the American hostages were finally released a year later, issues such as the frozen Iranian assets (including that $400 million) were not settled at that time. Instead, an international court based in the Hague, the Iran–United States Claims Tribunal was established to deal with such legal claims. The tribunal process dragged on for years and years without a ruling on the $400 million being issued, and finally, when arbitration process was apparently about to wind up (quite possibly not in American’s favor), the U.S. agreed to pay Iran back the $400 million principal along with $1.3 billion in interest. If the issue had gone to the tribunal for a decision, as was expected, the U.S. could have been on the hook for the full $10 billion in compensation Iran was seeking.


It is true the U.S. agreed to the settlement at the same time it was negotiating a nuclear deal with Iran and for the return of four U.S. citizens who had been detained by Iran. However, the negotiations over these these issues were conducted by completely separate teams in order to avoid any overlap or suggestions of connections between them.​

That is not facts.
But I do appreciate the fact you at least repost trying.
What you say here is how the media spun the facts in Obama's favor.
Like I said - Congress enacted a law that paid out debts and claims against Iran from the account to U.S. firms
Glad to see you are not trying to dispute that.
Secondly, Congress again granted access to the funds to pay out lawsuits and valid claims against Iran for the 1979 crime.
That settled it.
America does not hold itself accountable to a kangaroo court decision outside of our borders.
Neither do other countries.
Obama took it upon himself to not only pay back the money to Iran, which included over $400 million paid to families of victims of the Iran hostage taking - WHICH MEANS OBAMA DOESN'T THINK IRAN OWED THEM ANYTHING
Obama 100% gave in to Iran that hey owed no one any money....and he paid them triple the value in "interest"

Do you really want to sit there and agree that Iran's assets that were granted by Congress to settle both lawsuits against Iran that they wouldn't pay....and compensation for hostage victims were all wrong. That Iran owed no one nothing. Because that is what Obama said when he literally delivered a PALLET of money to Iran.

It wasn't our money - thus, international courts do have a say in it. There is a long established precedence to it. Just like the artworks and stuff looted by the Nazi's had to be returned and repatriated. We can make all the laws we want, but if we want to be a member of the international community - and more - if WE want OUR possessions to be treated with the same legalities in other countries - we follow international law as well.

Hilarious.
"If we want to be a part of the international community" - Good God Coyote, without us there would be NO international community!
The United Nations would be bankrupt.
America is the greatest thing to happen to the world ever.
Ever.
We are not perfect. But America's contribution to the world, in all facets, have been overwhelmingly positive. In fact, without America the world map would look entirely different. And most of the world would belong to the Soviet Union and The People's Republic of China. And that is indisputable.
"Be a part of the international community"...wow...what ignorance.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Lack of nuclear winter.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Yup that makes all the difference. Congress didn't ratify a deal made by the president, so the allies will completely not mind that it's broken without Iran actually breaking the terms of the agreement made.
Why in the hell is it so hard to admit that the US just gave up a huge chunk of what little credibility it has left out of cheer spite?

You are confused. Let me guess. You have been reading Democratunderground?

The US never had any credibility making such a terrible deal with the Iranians Mullahs. We were the laughing stock of the world giving them barrels of cash up front and no verifiable agreement. Only an idiot would have made that terrible deal. We certainly had idiots in the White House and in the State Department, didn't we?

Meanwhile Trump has just served notice to Kim that he is serious about negotiating a real verifiable deal.

That is the difference between having a weak President that gives away the store and a strong President that knows The Art of the Deal.

WHAT billion in "hard earned taxpayer dollars"? Do you mean the billion that was Iran's own frozen assets?

That is not true. Now you are the one falling for spin.
It stems from assets that Iran had in the U.S. to expedite payments to U.S. military contractors throughout the 1970's.
In 1979, the United states temporarily froze the account.

1) The account had outstanding debts owed to U.S. firms. Congress enacted a law that provided authorization to pay those firms debts owed from the account.
2) After paying debts, there was just over $400 million left.
3) Congress passed another bill that granted authorization to use the funds to pay victims of families from the hostage situation of 1979.
The ENTIRE BALANCE WAS NEARLY USED.

Iran said they don't agree with what the United States did with the money.
The U.S. Government overwhelmingly agreed by Congress said too bad, we don't owe you a dime.

Obama took it upon himself to disagree with 30 years of previous arrangements and handed over not only what Iran claimed - BUT MORE THAN WHAT THEY EVER HAD HERE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Get your facts straight.

I do have my facts straight.

Back in late 1979, after Iranian revolutionaries took 52 Americans hostage at the US Embassy in Tehran, the United States severed diplomatic relations with Iran and froze Iranian assets in America. Among those frozen assets was a $400 million delivery of fighter jets from the U.S. that Iran’s previous government had already paid for.


Although the American hostages were finally released a year later, issues such as the frozen Iranian assets (including that $400 million) were not settled at that time. Instead, an international court based in the Hague, the Iran–United States Claims Tribunal was established to deal with such legal claims. The tribunal process dragged on for years and years without a ruling on the $400 million being issued, and finally, when arbitration process was apparently about to wind up (quite possibly not in American’s favor), the U.S. agreed to pay Iran back the $400 million principal along with $1.3 billion in interest. If the issue had gone to the tribunal for a decision, as was expected, the U.S. could have been on the hook for the full $10 billion in compensation Iran was seeking.


It is true the U.S. agreed to the settlement at the same time it was negotiating a nuclear deal with Iran and for the return of four U.S. citizens who had been detained by Iran. However, the negotiations over these these issues were conducted by completely separate teams in order to avoid any overlap or suggestions of connections between them.​

That is not facts.
But I do appreciate the fact you at least repost trying.
What you say here is how the media spun the facts in Obama's favor.
Like I said - Congress enacted a law that paid out debts and claims against Iran from the account to U.S. firms
Glad to see you are not trying to dispute that.
Secondly, Congress again granted access to the funds to pay out lawsuits and valid claims against Iran for the 1979 crime.
That settled it.
America does not hold itself accountable to a kangaroo court decision outside of our borders.
Neither do other countries.
Obama took it upon himself to not only pay back the money to Iran, which included over $400 million paid to families of victims of the Iran hostage taking - WHICH MEANS OBAMA DOESN'T THINK IRAN OWED THEM ANYTHING
Obama 100% gave in to Iran that hey owed no one any money....and he paid them triple the value in "interest"

Do you really want to sit there and agree that Iran's assets that were granted by Congress to settle both lawsuits against Iran that they wouldn't pay....and compensation for hostage victims were all wrong. That Iran owed no one nothing. Because that is what Obama said when he literally delivered a PALLET of money to Iran.

It wasn't our money - thus, international courts do have a say in it. There is a long established precedence to it. Just like the artworks and stuff looted by the Nazi's had to be returned and repatriated. We can make all the laws we want, but if we want to be a member of the international community - and more - if WE want OUR possessions to be treated with the same legalities in other countries - we follow international law as well.

Hilarious.
"If we want to be a part of the international community" - Good God Coyote, without us there would be NO international community!
The United Nations would be bankrupt.
America is the greatest thing to happen to the world ever.
Ever.
We are not perfect. But America's contribution to the world, in all facets, have been overwhelmingly positive. In fact, without America the world map would look entirely different. And most of the world would belong to the Soviet Union and The People's Republic of China. And that is indisputable.
"Be a part of the international community"...wow...what ignorance.

The left have acknowledged in all the Iran threads that there is no leadership in the world except American leadership.

 

[Pilot1]

Even a lot of the Democrats were against this horrible agreement. That is why Obama didn't go through Congress. He knew he didn't have the votes. This was a one sided, BAD deal giving Iran everything in return for empty promises. Everyone knows they LIE all the time, and only understand the threat of force, and sanctions.

Kerry, and his Soros backed groups wanted to keep this deal because it is horrible for the U.S. These Globalist want to take down American sovereignty for their gain.

 

[Coyote]

There is absolutely NO gains to be had for our country, if the buffoon-in-chief unilaterally pulls the U.S. out of the Iran deal........with 2 "notable" exception,of course.

First, Trump's jealousy and his cult followers hatred of Obama gains some solace....and

Second, we are (once again) acting like the "tail" wagging, to the "dog" that is Israel's current junta.

We get to PREVENT iran from obtaining a nuke. Something that your hero, the obummers "deal" GRANTED them the ability to obtain in 10 years.

How Westwall? Haven't seen a single plan advanced that is any better except go to war.

The plan as it exists allowed iran to further their ballistic missile development, didn't prevent them from engaging in State sponsored terrorism, and gave them permission to build a nuke in 10 years. What exactly do you think iran is going to do when they have that missile and nuke?

The plan was constructed very narrowly to address only the nukes, because there was no way we would get a more comprensive plan - that can be saved for later agreements (something we COULD have been working towards). We had a sunset clause - it didn't exactly give them permission, it meant new agreements would be negotiated. It buys time, and that is quite likely the best we could have gotten.

If this deal is allowed to stand we will be engaged in a nuclear war in 12 years. If iran decides to go to war over our demand that they not get to have a nuke, OK, I would far rather fight a non nuke equipped military than one that is. Wouldn't you? Anyone with the ability to think KNOWS that the second that iran has a nuke, they are going to use it. They are the david koresh of the middle east.

No one wants to go to war, except maybe Trump. Neither Iran nor us. Hence the agreement. And no, I doubt they will use it. Nukes provide leverage and entry into an elite power club. That is what they strive for, to increase their leverage. They aren't insane.

So, no deal. Now what? Why would Iran negotiate with a partner that has renegged?

 

[peacefan]

The plan as it exists allowed iran to further their ballistic missile development, didn't prevent them from engaging in State sponsored terrorism, and gave them permission to build a nuke in 10 years. What exactly do you think iran is going to do when they have that missile and nuke?

If this deal is allowed to stand we will be engaged in a nuclear war in 12 years. If iran decides to go to war over our demand that they not get to have a nuke, OK, I would far rather fight a non nuke equipped military than one that is. Wouldn't you? Anyone with the ability to think KNOWS that the second that iran has a nuke, they are going to use it. They are the david koresh of the middle east.

you can't make a deal that is good for the rest of eternity.
like food in the supermarkets, deals like this come with an expiration date, because all nations at the frontlines of such deals, want to use the conflict again, for domestic and personal political gains, a decade or so later. that's called real-politik, and it can get very very ugly.

you also can't tell nations they can't start an orbit-launch development program of their own, because that's just not an actual WMD program.
trying to force Muslim nations to get all the tech that gives a nation international standing (such as a domestic ability to launch things into orbit, usually TV sattellites and comms satellites by the way, which you wouldn't want launched by a western company as a nation which is in a near constant state of tension with western nations),
is perceived as such arrogance among those 1-billion plus muslims around the world,
that you again give massive amounts of recruitment power to muslim fundamentalists and muslim extremists including terror groups.

DO NOT TRY TO BULLY OTHER COUNTRIES INTO TOTAL SUBMISSION. it's a golden rule. an enforced rule, too.
and now you even need to resort to threaten sanctions on all nations that won't go along with your new heavy sanctions program against Iran.
do you have any idea what that does to the strength of NATO? you're down to token support from Europe as of today.
You need your international allies a lot more than you think, Americans. And you're rapidly losing that support.
The whole world knows that, except you. That's why i'm telling you this here today.

by the way, all of this is being emailed per post to the CIA, NSA, Whitehouse, CNN, and Mossad.

and now i'm really going to get some shut-eye. talk with you all again in about 12 to 16 hours.

 

[westwall]

There is absolutely NO gains to be had for our country, if the buffoon-in-chief unilaterally pulls the U.S. out of the Iran deal........with 2 "notable" exception,of course.

First, Trump's jealousy and his cult followers hatred of Obama gains some solace....and

Second, we are (once again) acting like the "tail" wagging, to the "dog" that is Israel's current junta.

We get to PREVENT iran from obtaining a nuke. Something that your hero, the obummers "deal" GRANTED them the ability to obtain in 10 years.

How Westwall? Haven't seen a single plan advanced that is any better except go to war.

The plan as it exists allowed iran to further their ballistic missile development, didn't prevent them from engaging in State sponsored terrorism, and gave them permission to build a nuke in 10 years. What exactly do you think iran is going to do when they have that missile and nuke?

The plan was constructed very narrowly to address only the nukes, because there was no way we would get a more comprensive plan - that can be saved for later agreements (something we COULD have been working towards). We had a sunset clause - it didn't exactly give them permission, it meant new agreements would be negotiated. It buys time, and that is quite likely the best we could have gotten.

If this deal is allowed to stand we will be engaged in a nuclear war in 12 years. If iran decides to go to war over our demand that they not get to have a nuke, OK, I would far rather fight a non nuke equipped military than one that is. Wouldn't you? Anyone with the ability to think KNOWS that the second that iran has a nuke, they are going to use it. They are the david koresh of the middle east.

No one wants to go to war, except maybe Trump. Neither Iran nor us. Hence the agreement. And no, I doubt they will use it. Nukes provide leverage and entry into an elite power club. That is what they strive for, to increase their leverage. They aren't insane.

So, no deal. Now what? Why would Iran negotiate with a partner that has renegged?

The plan was constructed as it was because obama and kerry are crap negotiators, they were desperate to do a deal to further their legacy, and they gave away the farm because of that desperation. iran ABSOLUTELY will use a nuke when they get it. I grant you that the PEOPLE of iran don't want war, but the mullahs do.. They want the final war, they have Paradise waiting for them.


And yes, the sunset clause gave them permission to develop their nuke after ten years.

 

[radical right]

The plan as it exists allowed iran to further their ballistic missile development, didn't prevent them from engaging in State sponsored terrorism, and gave them permission to build a nuke in 10 years. What exactly do you think iran is going to do when they have that missile and nuke? .

Trump just did the same thing Bush did with North Korea. Breaking the deal, taking off all the shackles, allowing them to build a nuke NOW.

 

[BlindBoo]

and gave them permission to build a nuke in 10 years.

Not even remotely true.

Iran nuclear deal: Key details

 

[westwall]

The plan as it exists allowed iran to further their ballistic missile development, didn't prevent them from engaging in State sponsored terrorism, and gave them permission to build a nuke in 10 years. What exactly do you think iran is going to do when they have that missile and nuke? .

Trump just did the same thing Bush did with North Korea. Breaking the deal, taking off all the shackles, allowing them to build a nuke NOW.

Only htey can't. If obummer had left the sanctions in place, and not given them billions of dollars, the government was going to collapse, probably this year. Then, hopefully the people of iran could get rid of the crazy bastards running that once beautiful country, and take over.

 

[Crixus]

There is absolutely NO gains to be had for our country, if the buffoon-in-chief unilaterally pulls the U.S. out of the Iran deal........with 2 "notable" exception,of course.

First, Trump's jealousy and his cult followers hatred of Obama gains some solace....and

Second, we are (once again) acting like the "tail" wagging, to the "dog" that is Israel's current junta.

What do we lose?

 

[Coyote]

There is absolutely NO gains to be had for our country, if the buffoon-in-chief unilaterally pulls the U.S. out of the Iran deal........with 2 "notable" exception,of course.

First, Trump's jealousy and his cult followers hatred of Obama gains some solace....and

Second, we are (once again) acting like the "tail" wagging, to the "dog" that is Israel's current junta.

We get to PREVENT iran from obtaining a nuke. Something that your hero, the obummers "deal" GRANTED them the ability to obtain in 10 years.

How Westwall? Haven't seen a single plan advanced that is any better except go to war.

The plan as it exists allowed iran to further their ballistic missile development, didn't prevent them from engaging in State sponsored terrorism, and gave them permission to build a nuke in 10 years. What exactly do you think iran is going to do when they have that missile and nuke?

The plan was constructed very narrowly to address only the nukes, because there was no way we would get a more comprensive plan - that can be saved for later agreements (something we COULD have been working towards). We had a sunset clause - it didn't exactly give them permission, it meant new agreements would be negotiated. It buys time, and that is quite likely the best we could have gotten.

If this deal is allowed to stand we will be engaged in a nuclear war in 12 years. If iran decides to go to war over our demand that they not get to have a nuke, OK, I would far rather fight a non nuke equipped military than one that is. Wouldn't you? Anyone with the ability to think KNOWS that the second that iran has a nuke, they are going to use it. They are the david koresh of the middle east.

No one wants to go to war, except maybe Trump. Neither Iran nor us. Hence the agreement. And no, I doubt they will use it. Nukes provide leverage and entry into an elite power club. That is what they strive for, to increase their leverage. They aren't insane.

So, no deal. Now what? Why would Iran negotiate with a partner that has renegged?

The plan was constructed as it was because obama and kerry are crap negotiators, they were desperate to do a deal to further their legacy, and they gave away the farm because of that desperation. iran ABSOLUTELY will use a nuke when they get it. I grant you that the PEOPLE of iran don't want war, but the mullahs do.. They want the final war, they have Paradise waiting for them.


And yes, the sunset clause gave them permission to develop their nuke after ten years.

Crap negotiators? Who else has negotiated any sort of deal with Iran?

No, they don't want a final war - there is no indication of that or they would be behaving like ISIS and they don't. They're canny, and they want to hang on to their power and become a regional mover and shaker (and, since we took out Iraq, there is little to counter balance their ambitions).

 

[radical right]

And yes, the sunset clause gave them permission to develop their nuke after ten years.

First the sunset clause was 15 years. Giving two presidents the chance to negotiate the next deal. Remember when SALT gave way to START. The 15 year sunset could have become a 25 year sunset.

 

[westwall]

and gave them permission to build a nuke in 10 years.

Not even remotely true.

Iran nuclear deal: Key details

Here's the real deal, not the propaganda you're pushing...

"Under the JCPOA, by 2030 Iran will be permitted to build an industrial-size nuclear industry. It will be able to operate an unlimited number of advanced centrifuges and accumulate as large a stockpile of fissile material as it desires. That, in theory, includes weapons-grade uranium. At that point, it would be weeks, maybe even days, away from having the fuel for a small arsenal of nuclear weapons. All of this legitimized by the United States and the rest of what passes for the international community."

Defusing the Iran Deal's Ticking Time Bomb

 

[radical right]

What do we lose?

Cooperation from the rest of the world.

 

[Flash]

I have a sterling idea.

What not elect a Democrat President in 2020 that runs on a platform to send the Iranian Mullahs even more barrels of cash? What could possibly go wrong?

 

[Coyote]

There is absolutely NO gains to be had for our country, if the buffoon-in-chief unilaterally pulls the U.S. out of the Iran deal........with 2 "notable" exception,of course.

First, Trump's jealousy and his cult followers hatred of Obama gains some solace....and

Second, we are (once again) acting like the "tail" wagging, to the "dog" that is Israel's current junta.

What do we lose?

Inspections. Limits on what they do.