Trump to Refuse to Certify Iran Nuclear Deal

[DarkTZeratul]

Predictably, he's now actually refused to certify it:
http://nypost.com/2017/10/13/trump-d...wont-withdraw/

There is no way this will not end badly.

[Mittens]

That deal is really really bad. Something more ought to be done about it, I'm not sure, however, that Trump is the right man for it.

[Adam Jensen]

That deal is really really bad. Something more ought to be done about it, I'm not sure, however, that Trump is the right man for it.

And what was bad about it?

It allowed Iran to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes (a wholly different process, that cannot be converted to war material at all.)
It allowed the UN to inspect Iranian nuclear sites to make sure Iran was complying.
It allows the younger, more progressive Iranians view the West in a better light
It makes the old timey ultra conservative religious blowhards who run the country . . . look like blowhards.

Iran wins, the West wins, the Middle East wins.

What was so bad about it?

[Mittens]

And what was bad about it?

It allowed Iran to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes (a wholly different process, that cannot be converted to war material at all.)
It allowed the UN to inspect Iranian nuclear sites to make sure Iran was complying.
It allows the younger, more progressive Iranians view the West in a better light
It makes the old timey ultra conservative religious blowhards who run the country . . . look like blowhards.

Iran wins, the West wins, the Middle East wins.

What was so bad about it?

Yeah, even the more progressive wing of Iran still hates the US with passion. And the deal is essentially a free pass for Iran to do as it pleases with its newfound wealth, which means more funding to extremists and terrorists!! yeay!!!

[Deleted]

Yeah, even the more progressive wing of Iran still hates the US with passion. And the deal is essentially a free pass for Iran to do as it pleases with its newfound wealth, which means more funding to extremists and terrorists!! yeay!!!

*looks at Saudi Arabia*

[Felya]

Yeah, even the more progressive wing of Iran still hates the US with passion. And the deal is essentially a free pass for Iran to do as it pleases with its newfound wealth, which means more funding to extremists and terrorists!! yeay!!!

This isn't true at all...

http://www.cc.com/video-clips/ll00sk...rets-of-menace

[Breccia]

And the deal is essentially a free pass for Iran to do as it pleases with its newfound wealth

Um, no.

If they fund terrorism, they get further sanctioned. Which Trump personally did. It has nothing to do with the deal in any way, unless you're Trump, and need a reason to say Iran broke the rules. Which they did not.

What you're saying is flat-out fantasy.

- - - Updated - - -

Tillerson says international allies will back Trump's Iran play.

Which is a stupid thing to say, because the UN, the UK, France, Germany, and Russia have all said this was a dumb idea. Basically it's only Israel saying this was the right move.

[GennGreymane]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-4161...ource=facebook

Global powers, including key US allies, have said they will stand by the Iran nuclear deal which US President Donald Trump has threatened to tear apart.
Mr Trump said on Friday that he would stop signing off on the agreement.

The UK, France and Germany responded that the pact was "in our shared national security interest". The EU said it was "not up to any single country to terminate" a "working" deal.

Iran's President Hassan Rouhani said the US was "more isolated than ever".
"Can a president annul a multilateral international treaty on his own?" he asked.
"Apparently he doesn't know that this agreement is not a bilateral agreement solely between Iran and the United States."

The deal, signed in 2015, is between Iran and six international powers - the UK, the US, Russia, France, Germany, and China. It imposed curbs on Iran's nuclear programme in return for an easing of international sanctions.

In a combative speech on Friday, Mr Trump called Iran a "fanatical regime" and said it had violated the terms of the deal. He accused Iran of sponsoring terrorism, and proposed new sanctions.

"We will not continue down a path whose predictable conclusion is more violence, more terror, and the very real threat of Iran's nuclear breakout," he said.

International observers say Iran has been in full compliance with the agreement.
China has not spoken since Mr Trump's speech but previously called on the US to preserve the deal.
Russia's foreign ministry said it regretted Mr Trump's decision but did not expect it to stop the deal being implemented.
What does Trump's refusal to sign mean?

Congress requires the president to certify every 90 days that Iran is upholding its part of the agreement. Mr Trump had already recertified twice, but refused to sign a third time ahead of a Sunday deadline. Congress now has 60 days to decide whether to pull out of the nuclear deal by re-imposing sanctions.
Trump hands Iran chalice to Congress

Although some advocates of the deal had feared that Mr Trump would withdraw the US entirely, he has instead essentially referred the matter to Congress.

What changes does he want?
Mr Trump is seeking the end to the nuclear deal's so-called "sunset clauses", one of which allows for the lifting of restrictions on Iran's nuclear enrichment programme after 2025.

He announced treasury department sanctions on Iran's elite Revolutionary Guards, which he called the "corrupt personal terror force of Iran's leader", and called for restrictions on Iran's ballistic missile programme, which is not covered by the deal.

Last month, Iran said it had successfully tested a new medium-range missile with a 2,000km (1,200-mile) range.
The president said that congressional leaders were drafting amendments that would curb Iran's ballistic missile development and eliminate expiry dates on restrictions to the country's nuclear development.

How did other key players respond?
Yukiya Amano, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), said Iran was implementing the deal and was subject to "the world's most robust nuclear verification regime".

European diplomats warned that any such unilateral changes to the agreement were likely to trigger the deal's collapse and a return to a nuclear standoff in the Middle East.
In other reaction:

EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini said Europe and the world "could not afford" to terminate a nuclear deal that was working
French President Emmanuel Macron assured Mr Rouhani of France's commitment to the deal in a phone call
"This deal lives to fight another day and that's a good thing," said UK Foreign Minister Boris Johnson
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu congratulated Mr Trump, who he said had "boldly confronted Iran's terrorist regime". Saudi Arabia also backed the US president's "firm strategy"

What has changed?
By Lyse Doucet, chief international correspondent
President Trump has recast the list of Middle East threats, with Iran replacing so-called Islamic State (IS) as Enemy Number One.
That world view is shared by his strongest supporters in the region, including Israel and Gulf Arab leaders who have long seen Iran as their primary threat, and a rival with vast sway across the Middle East.

They resented Washington's focus on the Iran deal during President's Obama administration. Like President Trump, they want to undo his legacy. The new approach imposes new sanctions but stops short of designating Iran's elite Revolutionary Guards as a terrorist group - a step Iran says would be tantamount to a declaration of war.
The urgent question now is whether the new strategy will embolden Iran's hardliners including the Revolutionary Guards. Like US forces, they're involved in battles to defeat IS in Iraq and Syria, and may also see a new enemy.

What is the nuclear deal?
Formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, it is designed to prevent Iran developing a nuclear weapon.
It lifted some sanctions that stopped Iran from trading on international markets and selling oil.

The loosening of sanctions is dependent on Iran restricting its nuclear programme. It must curb its uranium stockpile, build no more heavy-water reactors for 15 years and allow inspectors into the country.

[Theodarzna]

Yeah, even the more progressive wing of Iran still hates the US with passion. And the deal is essentially a free pass for Iran to do as it pleases with its newfound wealth, which means more funding to extremists and terrorists!! yeay!!!

Considering the West outright toppled its democratic government and installed a hated monarch, I can see why Iranians and America aren't on friendly terms.

[Blade Wolf]

Yeah, even the more progressive wing of Iran still hates the US with passion. And the deal is essentially a free pass for Iran to do as it pleases with its newfound wealth, which means more funding to extremists and terrorists!! yeay!!!

While the US props up Saudi Arabia

[Deleted]

Yeah, even the more progressive wing of Iran still hates the US with passion. And the deal is essentially a free pass for Iran to do as it pleases with its newfound wealth, which means more funding to extremists and terrorists!! yeay!!!

Lets see.

-You toppled their Democracy and installed a Dictator, because of Oil.
-You shot down a Iranian Airliner, filled with Civilians. Then gave those responsible medals, instead of Prison Sentences.
-Supported Saddam during the Iran-Iraq war. Even supplied him with the WMD he used against Civilians.
-After 9/11 the Iranians offered to support the US in Afghanistan and even tried to restore relations with the US. They got smacked in the face with the Olive Branch they extended and got called a Axis of Evil.

Yet you Americans still cannot figure out why they hate you?

which means more funding to extremists and terrorists!! yeay!!!

Americans lost the right to complain about Nations funding terrorists long ago.

[Slant]

Only have German sources for the moment, but this is one of the more reputable papers here:
http://www.zeit.de/politik/ausland/2...u-donald-trump

@Skroe This could be an interesting turning point. The Iranian Foreign Minister apparently said Iran would honor the deal regardless of US participation and it would depend on the European Union whether or not the whole deal falls apart.

Remember a while ago when we talked about US influencing global politics and Trump not having done any serious damage to the US, yet? I think this is it. This is the first time, he's actually caused lasting damage. This is the thing where people in the coming years will say where the US has lost influence in the Middle East.

Btw, the European Union is in open opposition to the US on this. The wedge has been driven.

What do you think about this?

[Wyrt]

Lets see.

-You toppled their Democracy and installed a Dictator, because of Oil.
-You shot down a Iranian Airliner, filled with Civilians. Then gave those responsible medals, instead of Prison Sentences.
-Supported Saddam during the Iran-Iraq war. Even supplied him with the WMD he used against Civilians.
-After 9/11 the Iranians offered to support the US in Afghanistan and even tried to restore relations with the US. They got smacked in the face with the Olive Branch they extended and got called a Axis of Evil.

Yet you Americans still cannot figure out why they hate you?


Americans lost the right to complain about Nations funding terrorists long ago.

Yeah, but 'Murica is the good guy, we're the only country with freedom and stuff, how could we be bad?

[ati87]

Yeah, even the more progressive wing of Iran still hates the US with passion. And the deal is essentially a free pass for Iran to do as it pleases with its newfound wealth, which means more funding to extremists and terrorists!! yeay!!!

Can you blame them? Even ignoring the history of the Sha and the help the US gave to Iraq so they could invade Iran.

Just look at how the US is treating Iran when they aren't doing anything wrong, what argument can you even use when literally everybody says that Iran is holding up to their side of the agreement except the nut-job genocidal maniacs in the US.

- - - Updated - - -

Only have German sources for the moment, but this is one of the more reputable papers here:
http://www.zeit.de/politik/ausland/2...u-donald-trump

@Skroe This could be an interesting turning point. The Iranian Foreign Minister apparently said Iran would honor the deal regardless of US participation and it would depend on the European Union whether or not the whole deal falls apart.

Remember a while ago when we talked about US influencing global politics and Trump not having done any serious damage to the US, yet? I think this is it. This is the first time, he's actually caused lasting damage. This is the thing where people in the coming years will say where the US has lost influence in the Middle East.

Btw, the European Union is in open opposition to the US on this. The wedge has been driven.

What do you think about this?

The US lost most of his influence when they invaded Iraq and started calling french fries freedom fries. Obama resorted some of it but never back to pre BUsh jr.

Trump just made it clear that the US can't be trusted anymore for the long term

[Acidbaron]

Only have German sources for the moment, but this is one of the more reputable papers here:
http://www.zeit.de/politik/ausland/2...u-donald-trump

@Skroe This could be an interesting turning point. The Iranian Foreign Minister apparently said Iran would honor the deal regardless of US participation and it would depend on the European Union whether or not the whole deal falls apart.

Remember a while ago when we talked about US influencing global politics and Trump not having done any serious damage to the US, yet? I think this is it. This is the first time, he's actually caused lasting damage. This is the thing where people in the coming years will say where the US has lost influence in the Middle East.

Btw, the European Union is in open opposition to the US on this. The wedge has been driven.

What do you think about this?

Very simply put, we are going to the ways back of how we dealt with the Brush presidency. A position rather bad for the US since it ruins a lot of relationships and takes away of the relative power the US has in foreign politics.

[Rhamses]

The really bad part of all this is that this is going to reduce the influence of the US, and increase the power of China and Russia. No one is going to trust us as long as this buffoon is in the White House. We're in a ridiculous cycle of getting an intelligent president and then a moron.

[Felya]

Considering the West outright toppled its democratic government and installed a hated monarch, I can see why Iranians and America aren't on friendly terms.

Now you blame US for what Britain did, under the banner of 'the west'?

[LaserSharkDFB]

The really bad part of all this is that this is going to reduce the influence of the US, and increase the power of China and Russia. No one is going to trust us as long as this buffoon is in the White House. We're in a ridiculous cycle of getting an intelligent president and then a moron.

Worse than that; we've proven we're a country that might elect a Trump. Nobody is going to trust us - and shouldn't - when our system and our people are so irredeemably stupid as to allow into office a complete monster that is willing to fuck over the entire world for the sake of his own ego.

[Felya]

Lets see.

-You toppled their Democracy and installed a Dictator, because of Oil.

The name of the oil company is now British Petroleum. The oil field were secured for Russia:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angl...vasion_of_Iran

The Anglo-Soviet invasion of Iran, also known as Anglo-Soviet invasion of Persia, was the invasion of the Empire of Iran during the Second World War by Soviet, British and other Commonwealth armed forces. The invasion lasted from 25 August to 17 September 1941 and was codenamed Operation Countenance. Its purpose was to secure Iranian oil fields and ensure Allied supply lines (see Persian Corridor) for the USSR, fighting against Axis forces on the Eastern Front. Though Iran was neutral, the Allies considered Reza Shah to be friendly to the Axis powers, deposed him during the subsequent occupation and replaced him with his young son Mohammad Reza Pahlavi.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angl...an_Oil_Company

By 1951 Iranian support for nationalisation of the AIOC was intense. Grievances included the small fraction of revenues Iran received. In 1947, for example, AIOC reported after-tax profits of £40 million ($112 million), but the contractual agreement entitled Iran to just £7 million or 17.5% of profits from Iranian oil.[11] Britain was receiving more from AIOC than Iran.[16] In addition, conditions for Iranian oil workers and their families were very bad.

Yet you Americans still cannot figure out why they hate you?

Because "they" don't...

Americans lost the right to complain about Nations funding terrorists long ago.

Really? You are blaming US for what Britain and Russia did nearly 100 years ago, but Americans lost the right to complain? Even though the complaint largely stems from less than 20?

[Mormolyce]

It's astonishing really, the only effect this is likely to have is to weaken the US's bargaining position with North Korea and hand a propaganda victory to hardliners in Iran. But I guess it makes neo Nazi dicks hard and annoys Obama so he's all over it?

Trump is like a machine designed for the sole purpose of shooting feet.

Imagine if Trump's successor tries to spite him as much as Trump has done to Obama. We could start a nice chain of undoing everything until we are all dirt.

Undoing all of Trump's accomplishments would no doubt take the better part of an afternoon.