Slashdot Mirror
Trump Withdraws US From Iran Nuclear Deal (nytimes.com)
President Trump on Tuesday announced he is withdrawing the United States from the Iran nuclear deal, a historic accord signed in 2015 that aims to limit Tehran's nuclear ability for more than a decade in return for lifting international oil and financial sanctions against the country. "This was a horrible one-sided deal that should never, ever been made," Mr. Trump said at the White House in announcing his decision. "It didn't bring calm, it didn't bring peace, and it never will." The New York Times reports: Mr. Trump's announcement, while long anticipated and widely telegraphed, plunges America's relations with European allies into deep uncertainty. They have committed to staying in the deal, raising the prospect of a diplomatic and economic clash as the United States reimposes stringent sanctions on Iran. It also raises the prospect of increasing tensions with Russia and China, which also are parties to the agreement.
One person familiar with negotiations to keep the accord in place said the talks collapsed over Mr. Trump's insistence that sharp limits be kept on Iran's nuclear fuel production after 2030. The deal currently lifts those limits. As a result, the United States is now preparing to reinstate all sanctions it had waived as part of the nuclear accord -- and impose additional economic penalties as well, according to another person briefed on Mr. Trump's decision. Despite Trump's decision, President Hassan Rouhani said that Iran would remain committed to a multinational nuclear deal. "If we achieve the deal's goals in cooperation with other members of the deal, it will remain in place. [...] By exiting the deal, America has officially undermined its commitment to an international treaty," Rouhani said in a televised speech. "I have ordered the foreign ministry to negotiate with the European countries, China and Russia in coming weeks. If at the end of this short period we conclude that we can fully benefit from the JCPOA with the cooperation of all countries, the deal would remain," he added.
One person familiar with negotiations to keep the accord in place said the talks collapsed over Mr. Trump's insistence that sharp limits be kept on Iran's nuclear fuel production after 2030. The deal currently lifts those limits. As a result, the United States is now preparing to reinstate all sanctions it had waived as part of the nuclear accord -- and impose additional economic penalties as well, according to another person briefed on Mr. Trump's decision. Despite Trump's decision, President Hassan Rouhani said that Iran would remain committed to a multinational nuclear deal. "If we achieve the deal's goals in cooperation with other members of the deal, it will remain in place. [...] By exiting the deal, America has officially undermined its commitment to an international treaty," Rouhani said in a televised speech. "I have ordered the foreign ministry to negotiate with the European countries, China and Russia in coming weeks. If at the end of this short period we conclude that we can fully benefit from the JCPOA with the cooperation of all countries, the deal would remain," he added.
I have a feeling that a lot of Trump's nonsense will be corrected once Trump is gone.
I think there is a potential for Trump to be like the Mule in the Foundation Trilogy; in the same way that he's extremely disruptive in the moment, but may ultimately have little effect on the course of history.
The Paris Accord, the Iran deal, the Wall, ... if the rest of the planet just holds shit together until Trump is gone, the next president is reasonably likely to just put a lot of the pieces pretty much back where they were.
Not that I really expect trump to resign or anything, and we may have several more years of his chaotic nonsense, but he will ultimately have to go and unless America decides to double down and elect Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Camacho for president... or maybe Ted Nugent, things will probably return to normal pretty quickly.
They were already preparing to build nukes, the were never honest the deal was broken before it started. Did you see the intel from Israel?
How the US deals with them should be correct, we would be stupid (were being stupid) to let enemies get Nukes if we can stop them. Only someone sick in the head would let that happen (by the way this is what happened prior to WWII with Germany.) They burn our flags chant death to America etc. They announce themselves as our enemy.
For some sort of insanity people want to let our enemies get Nukes. How long have we heard crying that Trump was going to cause a nuclear war with North Korea?
Now we are going to get the same crying about Iran for a while from the same people. I say go ahead and cry, but fortunately as good or bad as trump is he is not all FUD (like Obama wrt Iran and this whole sh*t deal we just canned. It was a sham to make people feel good.)
You can't handle the truth! - Because I don't post left all my comments get modded down, bye bye Karma.
Did you see the intel from Israel about WMDs in 2003?
The "intel from Israel" consisted of a PowerPoint presentation with a slide that said, "Iran is Cheating". You could change the word "Iran" to "Iraq" in everything that's been presented by Israel and you'd get an exact copy of the run-up to the Iraq War. Coincidentally, the people who are most keen to believe the "intel from Israel" are the exact same people who insisted that Saddam was hours away from being able to send a nuke to New York. It's been 15 years since Bush invaded Iraq and the Likudniks assume we've forgotten by now.
You've been played. No, you played yourself.
You are welcome on my lawn.
That's not what the article says, at all.
You are welcome on my lawn.
The idea that Iran, who has lied,
Who hasn't?
The point of the deal is you didn't have to trust Iran because they're subjected to rigorous inspections.
who has claimed to want to destroy entire countries
You mean their blowhard former President once made a comment that sounds like that when translated and taken out of context.
But you can't relate to anything like that.
and it the worlds leading sponsor of terror,
Whether or not that's true is irrelevant. The deal was about Nukes, not missiles, Hezbollah support, or anything else.
would not use the principle of Taqiyya (Shia being much more flexible in its use) to lie about their goals is ridiculous.
WTF? You think the only people on the planet capable of lying are Muslims following your distorted understanding of religious practice? Was it really that necessary to discredit your already dumb argument by demonstrating to everyone that you're an ignorant Islamophobe?
The perfidy of the Iranian government is well documented as is the avoidance measures they took to truly by limited in their goals to become a nuclear power.
Good for Trump.
Yeah, good for Trump. He's destroyed a perfectly good non-proliferation deal and risked a Nuclear arms race in the Middle East because he's too big a wuss to admit that he got suckered by the Fox News/GOP push to smear Obama in the lead up to the 2016 election.
Risking Nuclear war is one thing, but admitting you were wrong??? That's unthinkable!!!
I stole this Sig
Where is the evidence for what you are saying? Every partner in this treaty agrees that Iran has maintained their obligations. So do members of the Trump administration (James Matis). You are just a troll spewing bullshit.
It wasn't a legally enacted treaty - never went to Congress for approval as all treaties must.
It's not a treaty. It's an agreement. Iran agreed to do a thing, the UNSC permanent members and the EU agreed to do a thing, all within the bounds of their respective executive powers. Congress's approval was not necessary, because nothing in the deal required legislative authority.
We were prevented from inspecting numerous locations considered 'military' by Iran's leaders - which is the most likely place to develop a nuclear program.
False - that is categorically and unquestionably incorrect.
The agreement provided for guaranteed inspection of *any* location the International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors deem potentially in violation. Iran has a limited ability to push back - they have a 24-day window to negotiate an alternative, but if we decide we *need* to see it, we will see it or the sanctions will kick back in. 24 days is not enough to hide a nuclear weapons facility from close inspection - particularly not when we have satellite surveillance and can easily see any large movement of equipment and materiel away from the site.
Additionally, a term of the agreement required Iran to accede to the "Additional Protocol", which has even more stringent requirements allowing short-notice inspections of any site by the IAEA - and that protocol will *not* expire with the rest of the agreement.
As I type this the news on tv is showing me Schumer, Menendez, and other democrats speaking AGAINST the Iran deal in 2015 - who now oddly embrace the deal they were against because Trump ended it.
Schumer and Menendez were the *only* two Democrat senators to oppose the deal. A symbolic resolution decrying the bill was passed through the House on party-line vote, and was never formally voted on in the Senate due to lack of sufficient votes. And I have not seen either of them publicly support the deal to this day. I strongly suspect your sources are being misleading on this, as they clearly are on other issues.
And in one fell stroke Trump handed Iran the win.
The US has never had any material pressure economically against the Iranian regime. We've had sanctions on them for 30 years. The only thing that drew Iran to the table was European sanctions that through the hard work of the Obama administration was able to draw Europe to the table and get them to implement sanctions to drive Iran to a deal. By withdrawing the US from the deal all US pressure is now gone and the deal is directly between Europe and Iran (what Iran wanted from the beginning). The US will implement sanctions, Europe won't and Iran gets what they wanted, the US out of the deal and monitoring regime and Europe on board to maintain the deal and keep sanctions off.
And with the stroke of a pen Trump snatched defeat from the Jaws of victory.
It would be humorous if it wasn't so bloody SAD.
Something about that line stinks. I did a quick Google Search to check its veracity. (https://goo.gl/p6ni4E)
... in next weeks’
It looks like "someone" made the claim and every single newsbot out there reproduiced it on their respective sites... and JUST that line.
TEHRAN, Iran — Iran’s president says if negotiations fail, Islamic Republic will enrich uranium ‘more than before
That's it. There are hundreds of articles out there made up of that one line.
According to everyone including Netanyahu, they were not building nuclear weapons. I guess you must be smarter than all of Mossad and the CIA put together. Or you are complete doofus.
We tried doing that with Syria, letting them just sort their own shit out. The resulting civil war led to a refugee crisis and the rapid growth of ISIS, and then let Russia expand its military reach into the Mediterranean.
A Saudi-Iran war would result in a refugee crisis bigger than any since WW2, an oil crisis bigger than any since ever, and if it went nuclear (Israel is a known-but-undeclared nuclear power, Iran and Saudi Arabia are just a serious political push and a year away from building their own nukes), a radioactive crisis when the winds carry it either eastward towards China, or southwestward into Africa.
Peace, if possible, is a vastly preferable alternative.
The UN observers, US Secretary of Defense and the joint chiefs of staff are satisfied that Iran is following the terms of the agreement. You're so desperate to believe that Iran is doing stuff in secret, *somehow*, that it becomes an easy chip to play for political gain for Trump. It's almost too easy.
"Old man yells at systemd"
of what America's word is worth when they make a "deal".
Trump will one day be gone, but the USA's untrustworthiness will take much long to repair.
I hope Iran, Russia, China, and the EU pick up the slack and prosper from trade deals with each other.
Iran? Nope. Too much fundamentalism. Russia? Nope. They've been empire-building since before the USA was even a thing. China? Nope. They'd like to rule the world, too. They're not going to play nice with Russia.
Truth is, America is still the world's most benevolent superpower. If China or Russia were where we are, things would be even worse. That doesn't mean don't fix the problems with America, but it does mean have some perspective.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
The US absolutely can not produce all the oil it needs domestically, even with fracking.
Not only can it (see sibling comments) but it doesn't need to, either. We have more than enough unused land (crappy land, too, not the good stuff) to produce 100% of our transportation fuel from algae feedstocks with current technology. That accounts for 71 percent of our oil consumption...
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Israel claims they have a bunch of evidence and the US intelligence services have confirmed the information. Is that not enough for you?
No. It's not enough for Michael Hayden, former director of the NSA and CIA, either. In fact, none of the information Israel has is new. We already knew Iran lied about their nuclear program; that's actually part of what led to the Iran Nuclear Deal. What Israel has uncovered is the specific details of Iran's former nuclear program, which explains how they lied. But we already knew they lied, so Netanyahu has dropped exactly zero bombshells with his powerpoint presentation.
While we're on the subject though, I don't believe anything Israel says. Like, literally anything. They deliberately murder journalists to prevent the truth from being heard. That's not a good look.
You want to see a mushroom cloud before you believe the Iranians are building the bomb? Isn't that a bit too late?
We have been inspecting the shit out of them for years and we know the state of their nuclear program in some detail from a combination of direct and indirect intelligence gathering. The nuclear deal has been working, and you fell for Netanyahu's dog and pony show. What a maroon.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I don't think this was a treaty, just an agreement. Congress didn't approve it. Which made congress at the time very very angry, but then the president as executive can abide by the agreements anyway and doesn't need permission from congress to remove the sanctions or insist on inspections. However without congress this agreement doesn't have force of law, and the next president can overturn the agreement on a whim. The executive branch decides on foreign policy, not congress.
War is bad no matter who it's with. People forget this. They see WWII and think "we stopped Hitler, yea!" and become warhawks. Never mind that Hitler came to power because of WWI, and WWI happened because of prior wars, and you can follow the chain all the way back to the Romans. And after WWI we majorly screwed up in Vietnam and Iraq, and yet we still have people who think we could have "won" Vietnam even though technically we were only supposed to be advisors there, and people who think Iraq was a good idea and that we just need more troops on the ground. At some point the world needs to just agree to stop fighting over petty issues, like economics, religion, oil, ideology, tribalism, etc.
According to everyone including Netanyahu, they were not building nuclear weapons. I guess you must be smarter than all of Mossad and the CIA put together.
I have no opinion on this issue specifically, but it is indeed possible that the person you are talking to could indeed be smarter than all of Mossad and the CIA put together. And you probably are, too. Any organisation which actively rejects public scrutiny can very easily be far stupider than any single person who works for them.
In the lead up to the Iraq war, our intelligence services were convinced that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. The "evidence" that they presented in public was laughably stupid, but many (including me) figured that they had better information but couldn't tell us because that would give away stuff like exactly how they got it.
What nobody (including me) seemed to question was the premise that our spies knew what they were doing and had some understanding of how the world worked. It turns out that they knew shit. They did not have any information that the rest of us didn't have. That laughably stupid "evidence" was literally all they had, and they convinced themselves anyway.
I've seen a lot of films and TV shows presenting a fictionalised account of MI5, the British agency responsible (amongst other things) for finding foreign spies. Do you know how many foreign spies they have actually discovered since it was created a century ago?
You probably know the answer already by my tone of voice: The number is exactly zero. Even the ones who worked for MI5. Everyone MI5 "caught" by their own devices was not a spy, and every one who was an actual spy was caught by someone else or they turned themselves in.
The assumption that our intelligence services know more than you do, or understand the world better than you do, is a fatal one. This is, if you like, the anti-conspiracy theory. "They" are not suppressing information, "they" are not arranging atrocities, "they" do not possess secret knowledge that you do not, "they" are not secretly running the show. In reality, "they", more than likely not, are incompetent weirdos who live in a fantasy world.
sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
I have no opinion on this issue specifically, but it is indeed possible that the person you are talking to could indeed be smarter than all of Mossad and the CIA put together. And you probably are, too. Any organisation which actively rejects public scrutiny can very easily be far stupider than any single person who works for them.
In the lead up to the Iraq war, our intelligence services were convinced that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.
Cool story Bro. The people who were convinced were the Neocons running the country at that time. Turns out that was not an intel failure, but a lie.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Exactly right. Had Obama wished to make the deal permanent, he needed to go to the Senate to have them ratify it. Since the Senate at the time was controlled by Republicans he was in no mood to negotiate with
Your take-away from the Obama administration is that Obama was the one reluctant to negotiate with Republicans?
Were you even paying attention?
I stole this Sig
Here was the subject line of his comment:
"Ben Rhodes admitted lying to sell it"
You are welcome on my lawn.
You think that allowing Iran to build a nuclear weapon, become more isolated and have the hardliners get back in power is going to lead to disengagement?
It's the same story as 2003, 2006, 2010 and 2014. We're going to bring peace to a Middle Eastern country by doing everything we can to fuck it up.
You don't get it. It doesn't matter who's in office here. It only matters who's in office in Israel. The intelligence and military apparatus of Israel wanted to keep the Iran deal in place. Netanyahu wants it destroyed to help him because like Trump he's facing all sorts of legal problems for himself, and his family. It's the tail wagging the hintele.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Hear, hear, especially as regards Dubya. Actually I'm almost shocked by the amount of insight I've seen in the so-modded comments I've seen so far.
You didn't mention one important aspect, however. The reason for this mess and the real driver of Iran's increasing power is Dubya's mess in Iraq, brought to you by the very same fools who have produced today's fiasco. The power vacuum they created in Iraq had to be filled in some way. The only problem is whether to describe it as "irresistible" or "inevitable", but the bottom line is that the winners of Dubya's wars were Iran in Iraq and the Taliban in Afghanistan. On America's tab--which is still open and bleeding.
Don't forget ISIS, that's pretty damn easy to attribute to the Iraq war. And Putin is probably a lot more manageable if the mid-2000's NATO expansion didn't convince him that the US was out to create a military alliance encircling Russia. Not to mention the other contributing factor in the invasion of Ukraine, the Iraq war lowering the international standards for invading other countries.
Oh and Bush's bone-headed "temporary tax cut" that caused skyrocketing deficits in a time of economic prosperity, making the financial meltdown much worse than it needed to be.
People spend so much time treating politics like a team sport they forget the actual consequences of political action. Hundreds of thousands of people died because the Bush administration make easily avoidable errors.
That's not a minor thing, that's a very, very, big consequence of incompetent/irresponsible politicians.
All these people just falling in line with Trump as he stumbles along making bone-headed decisions based on a Fox and Friends segment. Are they actually thinking about the consequences that kind of decision making will bring?
I stole this Sig
Several. Yeah. You know very few, and very little.
I was raised by them - so I know a lot more than you know about them, my friend.
But I certainly will provide some evidence not of my upbringing. Let us start with the little list of the apocalypse: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Howard Camping, who's Family Radio group publicized his prediction that the World would end on May 21, 2011 was enraptured with the Rapture. They even made happy songs about it. They are mentioned in this article about the hopeful. https://www.theguardian.com/wo....
Michelle Bachmann, one of the Republican Presidential candidates called specifically by gawd to run - had this to say:
[the U.S.'s funding of al Qaeda in Syria] happened and as of today the United States is willingly, knowingly, intentionally sending arms to terrorists, now what this says to me, I’m a believer in Jesus Christ, as I look at the End Times scripture, this says to me that the leaf is on the fig tree and we are to understand the signs of the times, which is your ministry, we are to understand where we are in God’s end times history. Rather than seeing this as a negative, we need to rejoice, Maranatha Come Lord Jesus, His day is at hand. (emphasis mine) When we see up is down and right is called wrong, when this is happening, we were told this; these days would be as the days of Noah.”
Praying for the Rapture: https://gracethrufaith.com/ask...
Not just pray for it - desire it! http://christinprophecy.org/ar...
Any questions? Like I said, I was raised by these folks, and I can find plenty more of them if need be.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
The "intel from Israel" consisted of a PowerPoint presentation with a slide that said, "Iran is Cheating"
If you read it carefully, it doesn't even say that. It says they were cheating in 2007. Nothing in the Israeli intel is relevant to anything that has happened since the deal was reached in 2015.
This cash? It was already theirs. The bigger problem with that payment is that it looked a lot like a ransom.
The $400 million was Iran's to start with, placed into a US-based trust fund to support American military equipment purchases in the 1970s. When the Shah was ousted by a 1979 popular uprising that led to the creation of the Islamic Republic, the US froze the trust fund. Iran has been fighting for a return of the funds through international courts since 1981.
In announcing the agreement, Obama said that paying the $400 million -- plus $1.3 billion in interest -- was saving American taxpayers billions of dollars. The Iranians had been seeking more than $10 billion at arbitration.
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
Wow, what a nice little fairy tale. Let me tell you a real story. I was alive and old enough to remember the runup to IRAQ, and I was politically aware enough to watch the news. TONS of people knew Iraq had jack and squat. THere were NIGHTLY news stories about how the UN weapons inspectors, over and over again, weren't finding even hints of a nuclear program. In fact, when bush finally got his authorization of force, they had to hurry inspectors out who had been begging for time to finish yet another inspection trying to debunk the made up evidence.
Evidence by the way that Cheney had to essentially create an office in the pentagon to come up with. After our intelligence continually told him over and over that it wasn't the case, he had to create a department to "find evidence at all cost". The most telling thing I remember was watching the state of the union and hearing bush say "...and a european intelligence report states that Sadam Hussien is actively seeking nuclear materials." I remember thinking "What do OUR intelligence agencies think about it? Why couldn't he cite them in the speech?"
A few days later we learned why, the news started airing reports that our intelligence agency had long considered that particular report fiction. Even the days of the week didn't match up to the numeric dates!
I don't know if you were a child or an early victim of fox news, but it was widely known by anyone paying attention that the Iraq war was being manufactured. There were protests, constant news reports, general skepticism.