Xtra News Community 2
August 19, 2017, 12:56:53 pm
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Welcome to Xtra News Community 2 — please also join our XNC2-BACKUP-GROUP.
 
  Home Help Arcade Gallery Links BITEBACK! XNC2-BACKUP-GROUP Staff List Login Register  

President “DUMB LOSER” versus Iran…


Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: President “DUMB LOSER” versus Iran…  (Read 13 times)
Kiwithrottlejockey
Admin Staff
XNC2 GOD
*
Posts: 27029


Having fun in the hills!


« on: July 19, 2017, 10:20:12 pm »


from The Washington Post....

The U.S. and Iran are heading toward crisis

The White House certified Iran’s compliance with the nuclear deal signed by the Obama
administration in 2015, but President Trump seems eager to pull the plug on the agreement.


By ISHAAN THAROOR | 1:00AM EDT - Wednesday, July 19, 2017



MONDAY was a tough day for President Trump's agenda. As the Senate's bid to overturn Obamacare collapsed amid Republican infighting, the White House reluctantly certified Iran's compliance with the nuclear deal signed by the Obama administration in 2015. This was the second time the Trump administration has done so — it is required every 90 days to notify Congress whether Iran is living up to its commitments.

Trump assented to the move with profound reservations and pushed for more sanctions on Iran. “Senior administration officials made clear that the certification was grudging,” my colleague Karen DeYoung wrote, “and said that President Trump intends to impose new sanctions on Iran for ongoing ‘malign activities’ in non-nuclear areas such as ballistic missile development and support for terrorism.”

Trump reportedly fumed at having to assent to another certification of Iran's compliance, which was confirmed by international monitors and the other signatories to the agreement. Key U.S. allies, including Britain, France and Germany, see the deal as an effective curb on Tehran's putative nuclear ambitions. They don't link its implementation to concerns about Iran's other troublesome behaviors, including its support for various militant groups in the Middle East and its unjust detentions of foreign nationals.

“The nuclear agreement helps significantly to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon,” Peter Wittig, the German ambassador in Washington, wrote this year. “But we remain very realistic about Iran's problematic role in the region.”


Iran's Revolutionary Guard troops march in a 2016 military parade in Tehran marking the 36th anniversary of Iraq's 1980 invasion of Iran. — Photograph: Ebrahim Noroozi/Associated Press.
Iran's Revolutionary Guard troops march in a 2016 military parade in Tehran marking the 36th anniversary of Iraq's 1980 invasion of Iran.
 — Photograph: Ebrahim Noroozi/Associated Press.


Iran remains the president's No.1 geopolitical bugbear. Trump, who seems determined to smash every pillar of former president Barack Obama's legacy, repeatedly cast the deal as a capitulation to the Islamic Republic. The only memorable event in the short-lived tenure of ousted national security adviser Michael T. Flynn was his cryptic statement “officially putting Iran on notice.” In Saudi Arabia, on his first foreign visit, Trump signed on to Riyadh's vision for the Middle East — one that is shaped first and foremost by antipathy toward Tehran.

According to Peter Baker of The New York Times, “Trump had told his security team that he would not keep [certifying Iran's compliance] indefinitely” and complained at an hour-long meeting last week about doing so this time. His top advisers, including national security adviser H.R. McMaster, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis — none of whom have much sympathy for the Iranians — had to convince him to abide by the accord.

While Candidate Trump blustered about scrapping the nuclear deal altogether, his administration has been compelled to shy away from such drastic unilateral action. Still, it seems Trump himself is eager for the deal to unravel.

The Trump administration has “deliberately created an environment of uncertainty by consistently questioning the validity” of the deal, said Trita Parsi, the president of the National Iranian American Council, which seeks better ties between Washington and Tehran, “hinting that the U.S. might quit the agreement, and by suggesting that it might pursue regime change in Iran.” Parsi said in an email that rather “than pursuing dialogue with Tehran to resolve remaining disputes, as every one of our European allies have done, the Trump administration has chosen to escalate tensions and eschew opportunities to come to a mutual understanding.”

At a NATO summit in May, Trump tried to convince European partners to stop making trade and business deals with Iran — a move that could in itself constitute a violation of the deal, which stipulates that its parties will “refrain from any policy” that would damage Iran's economic dealings while it complies with the accord.

But officials from other governments that are signatories to the deal show little willingness to renegotiate its terms. Just last month, German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel hailed the pact as “a great sign of hope” and a “historic window” for a rekindling of ties. Numerous European companies are plunging into the Iranian market. This month, French energy giant Total signed a landmark gas deal with Iran worth close to $5 billion.

“There is a clear division between where the Europeans are going and where the Americans are going on Iran,” Ellie Geranmayeh, a senior policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations, said to my colleague Erin Cunningham. “The Europeans have embarked on a path of rapprochement. The U.S. is looking at a policy of isolationism and containment.”


Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif and German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel speak to the media on June 27th in Berlin. — Photograph: Sean Gallup/Getty Images.
Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif and German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel speak to the media on June 27th in Berlin.
 — Photograph: Sean Gallup/Getty Images.


That was not lost on Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif, who was in New York this week. At the Council on Foreign Relations, Zarif said the White House was sending “contradictory signals”. In an interview with the National Interest, Zarif scolded Trump's supposed “violation” of the spirit of the deal.

“If it comes to a major violation, or what in the terms of the nuclear deal is called significant nonperformance, then Iran has other options available, including withdrawing from the deal,” he said. Although the White House would love to coax an Iranian withdrawal, that is unlikely to happen. Zarif also used his platform to chide Trump over the unraveling of his anti-Iran agenda, including the crisis among the Gulf states that flared up after Trump's visit to Saudi Arabia.

“We need to be more careful about the signaling, because we've seen that wrong signaling in the past few weeks in our region, particularly after the Riyadh summit, has caused a rather serious backlash in the region — not between U.S. allies and Iran, but among U.S. allies,” Zarif said, referring to the impasse over Qatar. “So I believe it would be important to keep that in consideration, to understand the complexities of the situation.”

“It is a devastating sign … that an American president is being outflanked so easily by an Iranian foreign minister,” Slate's Fred Kaplan wrote. “It's a sorrier sign still that the Iranian foreign minister is in the right.”


• Ishaan Tharoor writes about foreign affairs for The Washington Post. He previously was a senior editor and correspondent at TIME magazine, based first in Hong Kong and later in New York.

__________________________________________________________________________

Related to this topic:

 • U.S. adds 18 Iranian individuals and entities to sanctions list

 • Trump lets Iran deal live, but signals he may not for long


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/07/19/the-u-s-and-iran-are-heading-toward-crisis
Report Spam   Logged

If you aren't living life on the edge, you're taking up too much space! 

Social Buttons

Donald
Bloody-Good Member
*
Posts: 373



« Reply #1 on: July 20, 2017, 12:49:57 am »

Yup.. the US needs to keep Iran in its place......4 more years😉
...although some are already saying that Trump will win another 4😳
Report Spam   Logged
Kiwithrottlejockey
Admin Staff
XNC2 GOD
*
Posts: 27029


Having fun in the hills!


« Reply #2 on: August 07, 2017, 07:19:52 pm »


from the Los Angeles Times....

Trump's Alice-in-Wonderland approach to the Iran deal

Trump ordered his staff to begin work on a new study
 — one that will supply him with the excuses he needs
.”


By DOYLE McMANUS | 4:00AM PDT - Sunday, August 06, 2017

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson listens as President Donald Trump speaks at Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach, Florida, on April 7th. — Photograph: Alex Brandon/Associated Press.
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson listens as President Donald Trump speaks at Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach, Florida, on April 7th.
 — Photograph: Alex Brandon/Associated Press.


HERE'S an international crisis you can, unusually, put on your calendar ahead of time: In October, President Trump wants to declare Iran in violation of the 2015 agreement to limit its nuclear program — a decision that would allow the United States to reimpose tough economic sanctions on anyone trading with Tehran.

It's a bad idea. The nuclear deal isn't perfect — it doesn't end Iran's nuclear research, only limits it for a period of years — but it's much better than nothing. Before the agreement, Tehran was believed to be less than a year from making nuclear weapons that would have threatened Israel and Saudi Arabia. Thanks to the accord, that doomsday problem has at least been postponed.

That hasn't stopped Trump from calling the pact “the worst deal ever” and ordering aides to supply him with evidence that will allow him to declare it invalid. The most likely moment for his decision will come in October, the next time he is required to notify Congress whether Iran is in compliance.

“If it was up to me, I would have had them non-compliant 180 days ago,” Trump told The Wall Street Journal last month. Next time, he added, “I do not expect that they will be compliant.”

The president didn't offer any substantive reason to declare Iran out of compliance with the deal — because there isn't one. His own aides told him last month that, while Iran has tested the edges of the agreement, none of its actions was a “material breach,” the legal standard that would allow sanctions to snap back.

When Trump was warned that he couldn't simply walk away from the deal, “he had a bit of a meltdown,” an official told The New York Times. He chewed out the secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, who apparently brought him the bad news. And he ordered his staff to begin work on a new study — one that will supply him with the excuses he needs.

That's an Alice-in-Wonderland approach to foreign policy: Verdict first, evidence later. And it's not likely to work.

No matter what the president thinks, the facts will get in the way. U.S. officials say Iran has been carefully upholding its main obligations under the nuclear agreement: reducing its uranium stocks and limiting its enrichment program.

And none of the other six countries that negotiated the deal agree with Trump that the accord should be abrogated.

“The deal … is working, and we believe it represents the best option for the international community,” British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson wrote last month (and his government is friendlier to Trump than most).

As a result, if Trump declares in October that Iran is in breach, most of the world — including Britain, Germany and France — will blame him for the consequences, not Tehran.

That will create a major obstacle for the next step in Trump's course, which is to reimpose U.S. economic sanctions on foreign businesses that deal with Iran. (The nuclear deal didn't affect the embargo between the U.S. and Iran, which remains in effect.)

If the United States is viewed as responsible for breaking the deal, other countries may refuse to go along with Trump's unilateral sanctions, making them largely toothless.

“Nobody else wants the deal to fail,” said Elizabeth Rosenberg of the Center for New American Security, who worked on sanctions in the Obama administration. “If the U.S. is the only one that walks away, who is going to enforce new sanctions? You could easily see European leaders deciding to defend their own companies instead.”

Last month, the French energy giant Total signed a contract for a $5-billion natural gas project in Iran. If Trump tries to impose sanctions on deals like that, the result won't be merely a confrontation with Iran; it will be a clash with the EU.

There is an alternative Trump could try. It's called diplomacy.

He could press for stricter enforcement of the nuclear agreement, beginning with the restrictions Iran has placed on international inspectors' access to military bases.

He could seek stronger international sanctions on Iran for its ballistic missile tests, which aren't covered by the nuclear deal.

And he could begin negotiations toward a new agreement to maintain the curbs on Iran's nuclear program after 2026, when the current limits begin to expire.

But the president hasn't pursued those options, even though they've been offered to him by his own aides. Instead, he appears hellbent on fulfilling a bad campaign promise he should now have the wisdom to abandon. (That's a prayer more than a hope.)

Tearing up the deal won't bring down Iran's regime — most of Tehran's ruling clerics welcome the enmity of the United States — but it will set up a collision between the Trump administration and most of the world, including China, Russia and U.S. allies in Europe.

The most likely losers would be the Western alliance, already battered by Trump's disdain, and whatever remains of the United States' tattered claim to international leadership.

And the most likely winner, oddly enough, would be Vladimir Putin's Russia, the beneficiary of yet another wedge between United States and its NATO allies — this one driven by Trump alone, without Moscow's help.


• Doyle McManus is an American journalist and columnist, who writes  for the Los Angeles Times. He also appears often on Public Broadcasting Service's Washington Week.

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-mcmanus-iran-deal-20170806-story.html
Report Spam   Logged

If you aren't living life on the edge, you're taking up too much space! 
Kiwithrottlejockey
Admin Staff
XNC2 GOD
*
Posts: 27029


Having fun in the hills!


« Reply #3 on: August 07, 2017, 07:21:11 pm »


Or to put it another way....“when Trump's bullshit and alternative facts collide with the FACTUAL TRUTH!”
Report Spam   Logged

If you aren't living life on the edge, you're taking up too much space! 
Donald
Bloody-Good Member
*
Posts: 373



« Reply #4 on: August 07, 2017, 08:05:28 pm »

Ktj...."The nuclear deal isn't perfect — it doesn't end Iran's nuclear research, only limits it for a period of years.."

....yeah but nothing Oh-bummar did was perfect....he caved to Iran like scared little rabbit.....or kiwirail employee...

Iran is a bad and rotten egg....need to keep the pressure on😳
Report Spam   Logged
Kiwithrottlejockey
Admin Staff
XNC2 GOD
*
Posts: 27029


Having fun in the hills!


« Reply #5 on: August 07, 2017, 09:22:11 pm »


Name the 9/11 terrorists from Iran (there weren't any).

Name the 9/11 terrorists from Saudi Arabia and Pakistan (America's mates).

Kinda says it all, eh?
Report Spam   Logged

If you aren't living life on the edge, you're taking up too much space! 

Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Open XNC2 Smileys
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum

Buy traffic for your forum/website
traffic-masters
Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Page created in 0.094 seconds with 10 queries.