Trump Reneges on Iran Nuclear Deal, Citing Non-Existent Violations

[lfd0311]

https://www.armscontrol.org/Issue-B...-Asked-Questions-About-the-Iran-Deal-Part-One

https://www.armscontrol.org/Issue-B...-Asked-Questions-About-The-Iran-Deal-Part-Two

Simple reading of this Iran deal for those that might be in denial about what's in it and what Iran has to comply with. 15 minutes of reading tops.

And what is supposed to be so great about this?

 

[Diamond Jim]

Trump is always the kid giving a book report that didn’t read the book.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

And what is supposed to be so great about this?

It's a simple to read FAQ that can be read to better improve knowledge about the JCPOA. In place of reading the whole agreement.

 

[lfd0311]

It's a simple to read FAQ that can be read to better improve knowledge about the JCPOA. In place of reading the whole agreement.

I mean the agreement. What is the benefit in it for us, from your perspective.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

I mean the agreement. What is the benefit in it for us, from your perspective.

The over all benefit for us is that I ran gives up or reduces centrifuges and makes the path toward a nuclear weapon in the coming decade more difficult if not impossible. in exchange for sanctions relief. While the sanctions relief does fuel the terrorism in the ME and NA, that's the price that we pay for not letting Iran get a nuclear weapon.
What we and our allies get:

Substantial reductions of Iran's existing centrifuges and significant restrictions on it developing new ones for 8-10 years.
A ban on uranium enrichment and the Fardow facility for 15 years.
A ban on uranium enrichment above 3.6 % for 15 years.
Destruction of core and design of heavy water reactor at Arak.
Iran's commitment to not conduct refuel reprocessing or reprocessing research and design.
15 year ban on building and new facilities for uranium or heavy water production.
Shipment of all Iran's low enriched uranium out of the country.
Provisions to prevent covert bomb development.
Regular inspections by IAEA access to all Iranian nuclear fuel sites. To include continuous surveillance and access to suspicious facilities to investigate possible covert activities.
carefully monitor and approve all nuclear technology and materials t and from Iran for 25 years.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

I mean the agreement. What is the benefit in it for us, from your perspective.

Do you think that a nuclear weapon is the most important part of dealing with Iran? Or is another foreign policy issue more important

 

[AnGrYcRoW]

How people can believe absurdities like this is beyond me.

So you feel the hardliners wanted this deal?

What makes you think this?

 

[Bunk Moreland]

That awkward moment when your traditional allies jumped on the China-Russia bandwagon:



https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...toward-russia-and-china-germany-idUSKBN1CH2OK

Who is that in your AV?

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Congratulations on the single worst post on this topic of all time. North Korea is going to be distrustful? North Korea has nuclear weapons specifically because they've violiated every single agreement they've ever made with us and 30 years of American Presidents have failed to do anything about it. Please, please try to act like Trump is somehow responsible for all that, though. Awful post. Truely awful.

The US didn't own up to their part of the deal stuck with the Clinton administration pertaining to oil shipments and construction of light water reactors to North Korea. Both the US and N.Korea were at fault, imo.

 

[lfd0311]

The US didn't own up to their part of the deal stuck with the Clinton administration pertaining to oil shipments and construction of light water reactors to North Korea. Both the US and N.Korea were at fault, imo.

Do you remember why that was?

 

[lfd0311]

So you feel the hardliners wanted this deal?

What makes you think this?

It's fantasy to think that this in any way really prevents Iran from doing anything they don't want to do, and all they had to do was agree to a bunch of things that couldn't be enforced through anything other than war to get 150 billion dollars from the US, with a timetable of 15 years before the US can even really call them on doing anything sketchy. And at the end of all of it, it really would just push their nuclear weapons making abilities back about a year from the agreement, which means they could have, with the stuff we knew they already had and gave 15 years to destroy or sell, have made a nuke last year.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Do you remember why that was?

New Congress.

edit: didnt mean to quote you twice

 

[lfd0311]

New Congress.

Because we knew that they had never stopped attempting to make nuclear weapons, which was the point of the Agreed Framework. They had stopped attempting to make nukes by the stipulations stated within the agreed framework, but had attempted to develop enriched uranium secretly, something that wasn't covered in the AF, but is a major component in building a nuke, something they weren't allowed to have according to the agreement. Bush sent an envoy to NK to confront them about this, the essentially admitted it and kicked all UN inspectors out of the country after we threatened to end the oil shipments if they didn't stop. They didn't stop producing the unranium, so we stopped the shipments, and here we are.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Because we knew that they had never stopped attempting to make nuclear weapons, which was the point of the Agreed Framework. They had stopped attempting to make nukes by the stipulations stated within the agreed framework, but had attempted to develop enriched uranium secretly, something that wasn't covered in the AF, but is a major component in building a nuke, something they weren't allowed to have according to the agreement. Bush sent an envoy to NK to confront them about this, the essentially admitted it and kicked all UN inspectors out of the country after we threatened to end the oil shipments if they didn't stop. They didn't stop producing the unranium, so we stopped the shipments, and here we are.

You're making the point that an agreement is just that until there is something else that is worth obtaining to break that agreement. I get it. The JCPOA is worth adhering to until it isn't for Iran. But from the US perspective why try and torpedo this agreement or slap other provision onto the agreement that you know allies and Iran wont agree too?

By North Korea admitting that thy were enriching Uranium but not pursuing nuclear weapons, this was not a breach in the Agreed Framework. The lesson learned in this case was applied to the JCPOA, where the main point of the agreement was to reduce Iran's centrifuges and ability to enrich uranium above a certain percentage.

 

[Undying Poster]

Oh' yeah, before this move, the US government was viewed as the fairest in all the land. Nations sang songs about how fair and just they were. But then, in October 2017, that all changed with the denouncement of a shitty deal. No more songs could be heard around the land. For the evil Nazi Wizard Donald Trump had killed the mood.

It's not about image you dope, it's the trust and confidence for whenever we make a deal. Unsurprisingly everyone who Liked that post are completely worthless.

 

[lfd0311]

You're making the point that an agreement is just that until there is something else that is worth obtaining to break that agreement. I get it. The JCPOA is worth adhering to until it isn't for Iran. But from the US perspective why try and torpedo this agreement or slap other provision onto the agreement that you know allies and Iran wont agree too? .

I'm saying that they never once kept up their end of the agreement. I'm not saying that you should only honor agreements as long as you stand to profit from them.

Secondly, by the time it isn't worth it for Iran to adhere to the agreement they will have already made a nuclear weapon, a violation of the agreement, and the only way to make them adhere to this agreement and give that up would be to go to war with them, a country that is allied with Russia and extremely cozy with China that now also has nukes to boot. So we're creating the exact same scenario in Iran that we've created in North Korea, all under the guise of trying to prevent that self same scenario.

By North Korea admitting that thy were enriching Uranium but not pursuing nuclear weapons, this was not a breach in the Agreed Framework. The lesson learned in this case was applied to the JCPOA, where the main point of the agreement was to reduce Iran's centrifuges and ability to enrich uranium above a certain percentage.

Enriching the Uranium was a violation of the Agreed Framework. There was no clause within the Framework having to do with enriching uranium, but the Framework stated that both parties would adhere to the terms of the Joint Declaration on the Denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula Agreement, in which is was clearly stated that both sides would refrain from uranium enrichment programs indefininently.

 

[Fugazy]

Probably, but just replace NK with any other country Trump will have to deal with. The lack of trust even applies to our allies.

I disagree because all of those countries know how dependant they are on us for a variety of things, plus Trump is at most an 8yr problem for them.

 

[kpt018]

I disagree because all of those countries know how dependant they are on us for a variety of things, plus Trump is at most an 8yr problem for them.

The dependence goes both ways and their confidence in our institutions to prevent a Trump presidency is shaken. Who’s to say we don’t elect another Trump like president.

 

[Fugazy]

The dependence goes both ways and their confidence in our institutions to prevent a Trump presidency is shaken. Who’s to say we don’t elect another Trump like president.

Anything's possible for sure, but we're talking about a 1 in 45 anomaly.

Right now there are no future candidates that appear to be anything like him nor any indication that someone like him could jump into the political fray and be successful aside from a celebrity on the Democrats side.

The politicians that we deal with on an international stage much like many politicians before Trump play for the long ball in many circumstances. We've had to deal with wildcard politicians from many other countries, I think our history, but more so than that, our place as the economic and Military leader buys us a lot of leeway here. The moment we have a president other than Trump all this tough talk from other nations will be dead.

I'd go as far to say that Trump could be doing everything he's doing now yet if he just covered it in the typical bullshit political facade, there'd be a fraction of the pushback.

 

[kpt018]

Anything's possible for sure, but we're talking about a 1 in 45 anomaly.

Right now there are no future candidates that appear to be anything like him nor any indication that someone like him could jump into the political fray and be successful aside from a celebrity on the Democrats side.

The politicians that we deal with on an international stage much like many politicians before Trump play for the long ball in many circumstances. We've had to deal with wildcard politicians from many other countries, I think our history, but more so than that, our place as the economic and Military leader buys us a lot of leeway here. The moment we have a president other than Trump all this tough talk from other nations will be dead.

I'd go as far to say that Trump could be doing everything he's doing now yet if he just covered it in the typical bullshit political facade, there'd be a fraction of the pushback.

I don’t know if it’s that big of a long shot to get another Trump like president. God I hope you’re right though.

But anyway, given how high the stakes are, 8 years is a long time and at a minimum countries will not trust us while he’s in office.