Global Events & Politics Überthread

I don't subscribe to the belief that Iran cheated (or was going to cheat).

I'm just talking about how quickly they could obtain uranium.
Ok, cool, then 100% agree that they can obtain uranium quickly.

Still prolly disagree on the overall picture, but hey, I disagree with thethe on like the whole situation other than “Iran is bad and not worthy of trust”, so we got more than that in agreement.
 
Last edited:
Ok, cool, then 100% agree that they can obtain uranium quickly.

Still prolly disagree on the overall picture, but hey, I disagree with thethe on like the whole situation other than “Iran is bad and not worthy of trust”, so we got more than that in agreement.

To me the nukes are almost inconsequential. Israel would drop an atom bomb on Tehran before that day comes.

My issue is more the support of a regional antagonist who is not an ally, will not be an ally (absent reform), and doesn't play nice with any of our allies.

I don't like giving money to Iran that they are, in turn, using to shank us in Syria, either.
 
regional antagonist who is not an ally, will not be an ally (absent reform), and doesn't play nice with any of our allies

something something Russia
 
So what happens if the Euros don't get on board?

Iran has to choose whether they will or will not pull out of the agreement with the Euros too. We didn't follow the procedure outlined in the deal with our withdrawal since Iran didn't cheat/develop nukes, so the deal isn't automatically destroyed.

If Iran pulls out of the agreement with the Euros (seems likely based on public statements), then things will probably go back to ~5 years ago except Iran has more money and less uranium/equipment now. If Iran keeps the agreement with the Euros, it will more or less keep the status quo and just lose trade from the US (and we get higher oil prices).

That's all just as I understand it though.

Going a bit off of this: https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/09/europe/iran-deal-macron-rouhani-intl/index.html
 
To me the nukes are almost inconsequential. Israel would drop an atom bomb on Tehran before that day comes.

My issue is more the support of a regional antagonist who is not an ally, will not be an ally (absent reform), and doesn't play nice with any of our allies.

I don't like giving money to Iran that they are, in turn, using to shank us in Syria, either.
Your position makes a lot of sense to me. I just value the nukes part more than you do
 
Iran showing they are a perfectly reasonable world player but attacking Israel in response to the US backing out of the nuke deal. I can't understand why anyone would not want to deal with such great people.
 
Iran showing they are a perfectly reasonable world player but attacking Israel in response to the US backing out of the nuke deal. I can't understand why anyone would not want to deal with such great people.

I'm not in favor of anyone (else) shooting at anyone (else) over there, but that's an interesting take, considering that yesterday Israel bombed an Iranian base in Syria. Let's maybe entertain the idea that everybody should keep it in their pants, huh?
 
This is why I think the names should be a huge consideration in conversations involving Iran.


FoxNewsInsider
‏Verified account @FoxNewsInsider

Oliver North: @realDonaldTrump Should Sanction Iran and Anybody Who Does Business With Them


@foxandfriends
 
“There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again.”

― George W. Bush


32080638_2418513618159602_7957704453862195200_n.png
 
Back
Top