World police at it again, now aim turns toward Iran

[kpt018]

Lol. I appreciate the humor, but in all sincerity I don't care for Hillary or Trump. Neither were appealing to me, as I personally saw both of them as just pans handling towards their base.

Funny because I know when I say this next statement illiterate morons are going to misinterpret it and respond with emotional douche baggery.

Hillary was and is a proven neocon war hawk, so I don't really see any difference in how our present foreign policy would be shaping up if she was in office. What is adversely aggravating is *The Don* was supposed to be focusing on America.

Now I know he would eventually look at Iran because he's been stating for awhile he was against O-bams deal. But his dicking in Syria and N. Korea was unexpectedly un necessary. Now after putting us in a state of no mans land with no apparent ability to back off from those two nations, he wants to now ratchet up the drums on a third nation.

This is what the steel balls of an idiot look like and somewhere done the line, because it will happen, more people are going to get killed over this chest pounding bullshit.

I'm not sure how the details would be different, but Hillary is far more intelligent than Trump and light years ahead in terms of understanding each of those regions and the impacts of our options. Trump just likes to play golf and talk shit, at least Hillary would be taking the job seriously.

Again, no idea if Hillary would have taken action or not but I would sleep better if we didn't have a lazy moron leading the charge.

 

[lecter]

Yeah, I wonder why the warmongers have their eyes on Iran....

 

[Son of Jamin]

So Iran is the big threat, how about Saudiarabia with their support of Wahhabism.

 

[Anung Un Rama]

So Iran is the big threat, how about Saudiarabia with their support of Wahhabism.

 

[luckyshot]

Hillary was and is a proven neocon war hawk, so I don't really see any difference in how our present foreign policy would be shaping up if she was in office. What is adversely aggravating is *The Don* was supposed to be focusing on America.

Hilary was quite hawkish, it is true, but were you not listening when "The Don" promised to "Bomb the hell out of ISIS"?

What about this gem:
Trump Says U.S. Should Have Stolen Iraq’s Oil, and ‘Maybe We’ll Have Another Chance’
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/01/trump-u-s-may-get-another-chance-to-take-iraqi-oil.html

Then there is the fact that he was a REPUBLICAN. When is the last Republican to be anti-interventionist or anti-military industrial complex? At least with Hilary, there was potential for checks and balances.

If you bought into the Breit-tard version of Trump, that's on you.

 

[Curmudgeon]

For neocons, war with Iran is the pièce de résistance of

Edit wrong post. Fuck deleting fix your shit sherdog

 

[Anung Un Rama]

 

[Fawlty]

So far Iran policy has been a continuance of Obama policy. If we actually start beating drums again, then that will be a concern. Today's rhetoric is nowhere near as threatening as it was just 10 years ago.

 

[Amerikuracana]

Truth is I was looking forward to "America First." The wanted increase in military spending and willingness to let generals trained to want war to run the military were really the only things that seriously "worried" me about a Trump presidency.

 

[superpunch]

,..

 

[IGIT]

Yeah, I wonder why the warmongers have their eyes on Iran....

hi Lecter, how are you?

The Trump administration has notified Congress that Iran is complying with the terms of the 2015 nuclear deal negotiated by former President Barack Obama, and says the U.S. has extended the sanctions relief given to the Islamic republic in exchange for curbs on its atomic program.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-trump-iran-nuclear-deal-20170418-story.html

no idea.

- IGIT

 

[SiKnSiN]

They have to sound tough on Iran bc they are keeping the deal Trump blasted throughout the campaign. And I hope I'm not wrong, but I don't see Trump starting anything major. I see his shift of tone being a political tool. He needs the GOP united behind him before pushing major legislation. And nothing unites the GOP more than their President having a hawkish tone on fp.

We will start to see an uptick of Trump approval from Republicans in general and those on the Hill. And Trump will use that wave to push major legislation very soon. Hopefully this is just political. The tone of our fp may have drastically changed, but so far the actual policy doesn't seen much different.

 

[IGIT]

Everyone, including you, knew for decades that all this stuff was going to happen. You just looked the other way because it was more convenient at the time. Now that your bad choices are leading to consequences that you don't want to accept, you're just looking for a scapegoat. And you're perfectly content with finding a scapegoat (Trump) and kicking the can down the road again and selling America out again just for convenience.

hello superpunch, good to see you once more,

the President Obama did not look the other way.

according to the Trump administration, Iran is complying with the terms of the deal struck.

- IGIT

 

[superpunch]

hello superpunch, good to see you once more,

the President Obama did not look the other way.

according to the Trump administration, Iran is complying with the terms of the deal struck.

- IGIT

In your opinion, do you really think that Iran, an oil-rich nation, wanted a nuclear reactor just for energy purposes that badly? It screams against basic intelligence to believe that.

 

[lecter]

hi Lecter, how are you?

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-trump-iran-nuclear-deal-20170418-story.html

no idea.

- IGIT

Hi IGIT, I'm alright, thanks.

I think this isn't about the USA-Iran relations, "sometimes" we have to think of our allies.
The greater the ally, the more think.

 

[IGIT]

Hi IGIT, I'm alright, thanks.

I think this isn't about the USA-Iran relations, "sometimes" we have to think of our allies.
The greater the ally, the more think.

heya there Lecter,

France, the UK and Germany (in addition to China and Russia) helped negotiate the Iran nuclear deal, so i'd imagine they'd want the US to adhere to its end of the bargain as long as Iran continues to operate within its framework.

- IGIT

 

[IGIT]

In your opinion, do you really think that Iran, an oil-rich nation, wanted a nuclear reactor just for energy purposes that badly? It screams against basic intelligence to believe that.

hi superpunch,

yes, i agree it does scream against basic intelligence to believe that.

that's probably why the P5+1 negotiated the deal with Iran.

- IGIT

 

[oldshadow]

He can talk all he wants as long as we don't start shooting.

 

[IGIT]

He can talk all he wants as long as we don't start shooting.

hello oleshadow,

as long as Iran is in compliance, i don't even think bellicose talk serves any purpose.

if Iranians see the US as an unremittingly hostile entity that will welch on the deal struck, Rouhani is probably not going to get re-elected and a hardliner may spring up in his place.

i don't see how that furthers US foreign policy interests in the Middle East.

- IGIT

 

[TrippleOG]

anyone know much about the Iran vs Iraq war? USA supplied saddam trying to take Iran out. Gassed people poison you name it .