Welcome home, fellow Gator.

The Gator Nation's oldest and most active insider community
Join today!

diplomatic vandalism

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by PITBOSS, Jul 13, 2019.

  1. homer

    homer GC Legend

    783
    284
    348
    Nov 2, 2015
    I don’t support many of his tweets. Especially the ones you’ve listed.

    And I wish he’d stop altogether.

    However, it’s the way Trump does business and stays in the news. Right or wrong (mostly wrong) it it keeps him front and center in the news, and got him elected.

    I don’t like the guy personally. Most certainly wouldn’t want him as my neighbor either.

    Not to worry. Biden will be our next president.
     
  2. steveGator52

    steveGator52 All American

    353
    80
    243
    May 3, 2016
    DC Metro area
    Because the deal was such a screw-up, that Iran would have to be brain dead not to pretend to comply with the favorable conditions of said deal. The deal was the IAEA will check those easily accessible civilian sites, and ignore all the secret military sites. So just keep everything on the down low away from those civilian sites, and you will be in compliance.

    So if you have a sloppy roommate, as long as the common area remains clean, you would assume that the roommate’s room is being kept clean also, when in the past the room has been a pigsty? Or do you have an agreement that you can spot-check the roommate’s room to be sure it is clean?

    Why can’t you accept that the agreement reached was a worthless pile of crap, similar to the North Korean agreements of the past, and that having a pile of crap in place isn’t necessarily an improvement over having nothing in place. Obama had them backed into a corner, and allowed them to get out of it into a position of strength. This is similar to the Choke at the Doke in 1994, where FSU scored 28 points in the 4th quarter to tie the game. Does the fact that the game ended in a tie make it any better for UF, since it could have ended in a loss? No it doesn’t, since arguing that all is good since the game ended in a tie is putting lipstick on a pig, as the result of that game was an utter disaster.
     
  3. mdgator05

    mdgator05 Premium Member

    8,004
    691
    508
    Dec 9, 2010
    Do you have any evidence to back that they violated the agreement or made substantial progress towards enrichment in that time period?
     
  4. steveGator52

    steveGator52 All American

    353
    80
    243
    May 3, 2016
    DC Metro area
    What incentive does Iran have to go back to the negotiating table? What could Trump do to force them to the table? With Obama’s deal in place, sanctions are off the table, correct? Especially since it would be hard to prove any violation of said deal, as the IAEA only has access to the sites Iran wants them to have access to. So how do you force Iran back to the table while keeping Obama’s deal?

    Iran has got their favorable deal that Obama served them on a gold platter. Obama had them backed into a corner via sanctions. The only result should have been for Iran to completely give up their nuclear ambitions, as they agreed to when they signed the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, in exchange for removal of the sanctions. However, Obama needed a signature foreign policy deal which gave Iran leverage to demand a deal favorable to them, and Obama caved to them and squandered all the leverage that had been achieved through the use of sanctions.
     
  5. steveGator52

    steveGator52 All American

    353
    80
    243
    May 3, 2016
    DC Metro area
    If all the military sites are off limits and inaccessible to the IAEA, how can you prove Iran hasn’t? Satellites are of limited use in detecting what is going on in underground military facilities. Unless they detonate a device, there is no way to know if they are carrying out enrichment or assembly within those military sites. Scientists are also off-limits to the IAEA, without approval from the Iranian government.

    So the IAEA sees what the Iranian governments wants them to see, while there is a whole lot going on they are not allowed to see.
     
  6. homer

    homer GC Legend

    783
    284
    348
    Nov 2, 2015
    I don’t know why we shouldn’t trust Iran?

    They are an outstanding country run by outstanding people.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  7. mdgator05

    mdgator05 Premium Member

    8,004
    691
    508
    Dec 9, 2010
    The US government certified it as well. Is that because we don't have the capability of telling whether they are violating the agreement in other locales? Do we not have the resources to monitor nuclear development except where we are allowed to visit?
     
  8. mdgator05

    mdgator05 Premium Member

    8,004
    691
    508
    Dec 9, 2010
    Weren't you in favor of negotiations with North Korea?
     
  9. homer

    homer GC Legend

    783
    284
    348
    Nov 2, 2015
    I’m in favor of negotiations with all countries.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  10. mdgator05

    mdgator05 Premium Member

    8,004
    691
    508
    Dec 9, 2010
    Is there a point if you are just not going to trust anything anyway?
     
  11. homer

    homer GC Legend

    783
    284
    348
    Nov 2, 2015
    Depends on the circumstances.
     
  12. OaktownGator

    OaktownGator Guardian of the GC Galaxy Moderator VIP Member

    24,602
    1,625
    2,023
    Apr 3, 2007
    I view this like I view NK.

    NK would have their nuke and missile programs regardless of who is POTUS now. Trump hasn't accomplished anything there, but it would have happened anyway. Trump just looks a helluva lot sillier in the process than most any other POTUS would look. (Love letters?!?!)

    We shouldn't trust Iran not to develop their nuke and missile programs because Iran would be nuts not to develop their nuke and missile programs. They need a deterrent from aggressive nations like us and the Russians, just as other countries do.
     
  13. steveGator52

    steveGator52 All American

    353
    80
    243
    May 3, 2016
    DC Metro area
    They certified based on the prior agreement and what they were allowed access to. Well, Iran told us they weren’t enriching additional uranium and we didn’t see anything contrary to that in the locations they let us see, so it must be true, right? You don’t see an issue with that?

    You are seriously overestimating the ability of satellites and UAV overflights to determine progress on building a nuclear bomb. They can pinpoint launch sites and military installations, but they can’t view what is going on in underground bunkers. If that were the case, the US would have known North Korea had a bomb before they detonated it. Instead, it was the detonation that let the world know North Korea now had nuclear weapons.
     
  14. mdgator05

    mdgator05 Premium Member

    8,004
    691
    508
    Dec 9, 2010
    Enriching uranium emits detectable things. We already knew that North Korea has enriched uranium (we had for known that for about 4 years prior to their first test). You are conflating different stages of development.