Obama Killed His Own Iran Deal

Trump announced America’s withdrawal from the Iranian nuclear deal, triggering a paroxysm of fury among liberals, Never Trumpers, and the keepers of conventional foreign-policy wisdom. Yet it wasn’t the 45th president who set the stage for the deal’s collapse. Blame for that belongs to his predecessor.

Beginning in his first term, President Obama set his sights on a nuclear accord with the mullahs, one which he hoped would allow Washington to extricate itself from the Middle East. It was an ill-conceived idea that failed to take sufficient account of the nature of the regime in Tehran, its long record of terror and nuclear deception, and the anti-Americanism and anti-Semitism that form its ideological DNA.

Set all that aside for now. Even if such a deal were desirable, Obama went about pursuing it in the worst possible way. He dealt with crucial foreign and domestic stakeholders—America’s traditional Mideast allies and congressional Republicans—as nonentities and fools, who just couldn’t see that rapprochement with Iran was in their best interests.

He tried to circumvent the Israelis by keeping them in the dark about secret negotiations with the Islamic Republic. For Obama, Arab fears of Iranian expansionism were a tertiary concern, and he was surprised when the most important Sunni powers didn’t show up for a 2015 summit that was supposed to sell them on the deal. He likewise pooh-poohed Iran’s eliminationist anti-Israel rhetoric (“at the margins, where the costs are low, they may pursue policies based on [Jew] hatred as opposed to self-interest,” he told The Atlantic‘s Jeffrey Goldberg). His aides described a sitting Israeli prime minister as a “chickens—t” (on background, naturally).

He lectured and condescended, and then lectured some more.

On the home front, meanwhile, Obama relied on his signature “pen and phone” methods to ram the deal through. Rather than welcome GOP hawks as good-faith actors seeking to strengthen his hand against an adversary, he treated Republicans as the adversary. He thought his diplomacy pitted him and reasonable Iranians like Javad Zarif against “hard-liners” in Washington and Tehran.

Meanwhile, Obama’s Ben Rhodes-operated media echo chamber swarmed and shouted down journalists and experts who raised concerns about the terms of the accord, not least the fact that it permitted the Iranians to inspect their own military sites and left unaddressed the question of ballistic missiles. The Obama administration never satisfactorily answered critics’ questions about Iran’s refusal to come clean about its prior weaponization activity—the glaring flaw in the deal’s architecture that contributed the most to its undoing this week.

And here we are. The deal’s demise, then, was written into it by its primary author.

https://www.commentarymagazine.com/foreign-policy/middle-east/iran/obama-killed-his-own-iran-deal/

Didge wrote:Beginning in his first term, President Obama set his sights on a nuclear accord with the mullahs, one which he hoped would allow Washington to extricate itself from the Middle East.

How? The nuclear accord had nothing to do with our presence in the middle east.

The nuclear accord was about nuclear weapon containment. The west's presence in the middle east was in Iraq. Different subjects, different countries.

Didge wrote:Rather than welcome GOP hawks as good-faith actors...

Cops don't welcome robbers.

Didge wrote:...it permitted the Iranians to inspect their own military sites and left unaddressed the question of ballistic missiles.[/i]

Indeed, it also left the US free to inspect its own military sites and left unaddressed the question of US ballistic missiles.  What could be more fair than a completely bilateral agreement?

Watch closely what will happen to talks with North Korea.  I predict that Kim Jong Un will be equally unwilling to give up his nation's complete sovereignty.  Do you think he's going to be satisfied with beads and trinkets?

To be a good negotiator you have to grasp every exchange at issue.  Trump doesn't even read.  He will give-up the hegemony we already have in the far east--watch him give up troop levels in South Korea, while North Korea already has nuclear weapons--and get less that Obama achieved with the Iranians.

Original Quill wrote:

Didge wrote:Beginning in his first term, President Obama set his sights on a nuclear accord with the mullahs, one which he hoped would allow Washington to extricate itself from the Middle East.

How?  The nuclear accord had nothing to do with our presence in the middle east.

The nuclear accord was about nuclear weapon containment.  The west's presence in the middle east was in Iraq.  Different subjects, different countries.

Like the Clinto deal to contain nukes in North Korea and look how that panned out eh?

Like the article says,  many Middle Eastern countries did not even attend the summit, as they see Iran as a major threat and rightly so. Obama tried to appeaser a hateful antisemitic regeme that has vowed to wipe out Israel and as se, this has come back to bite him in the butt

Didge wrote:Like the Clinto deal to contain nukes in North Korea and look how that panned out eh?

Yeah!  That's pretty much the way I expect this deal to go.

Trump has no idea what he is doing.  Worse, he has no State Department with which to counsel him on diplomacy, he has no CIA Director to whisper secrets into his ear, and he can't read!

North Korea has punked, not just Clinton, but several presidents over the years.  Frankly, I see this one heading down he same path...courtship, meeting, an accord, and ultimately, disregard of the essentials of the agreement.  As Bloomberg noted:

Bloomberg wrote:The North Koreans, like expert magicians, have shown themselves adept at making the world think their nuclear program is disappearing, when it’s actually just hiding backstage. Kim’s test-site [closure] performance feels all too familiar to a stunt his father, Kim Jong Il, pulled a decade ago.

Back then, Pyongyang blew up the cooling tower at the country’s main nuclear reactor, with CNN cameras dutifully broadcasting it to Washington. That, too, was supposed to be a symbolic act to show Pyongyang’s commitment to giving up its nuclear program. A year later, Pyongyang conducted its second nuclear test.

The key is verification.  Typically, North Korea will balk at allowing verification, and poof...it all results in a big hallucination.  Trump has blinded the US intelligence apparatus with his 'deep state' bullshit, and the result is we are less able to negotiate, monitor and successfully conclude a program.

Be prepared to be disappointed.

And look what happened?

Iran attacked Israel with 20 rocktets and Israel responded by knocking out 50 Iranian targets on Syria, knocking out any ability it has to target Israel. Guess what the UK, France and Germany backed her in doing so.

Trump maybe an unhined loon, but is not an appeaser like Obama was. He can see a nation under the fringes of extreme with the Mullahs of Iran. You though want to be blind to this, when most of the Middle East see Iran as a threat

The reality is, we have been here before with Clinton and no deal will stop Iran looking to obtain nuke weapons. The only thing will be Israel again, as it did when Syria and Iraq tried. The irony is that Iran sighed a huge relief, after they tried and failed to take out Saddams nuke facility and then Israel pulled off an amasing coup, taking it out against all odds.

I mean can you imagine what Assad would do with a nuke, when he has used chemical weapons against his own people. Just also as Saddam did with with the Kurds. Israel has stopped a mass genocide with nukes by both war criminals from ever happenning.

One day the penny will drop with you. As Israel is the first line of defense for the west and in many cases, it is their intelligence that helps thwarts terrorism in the west.

Didge wrote:Trump maybe an unhined loon, but is not an appeaser like Obama was.

Trump is an appeaser in a different way.  He is a narcissist.  He is susceptible to flattery and ceremony.  He will succumb to the urge to 'pull it off', throwing caution to the wind in order to achieve the distinction.

Of course, he has staffed neither a diplomatic team, nor an intelligence team...so he goes in completely unprepared and totally disarmed.  He is essentially blind.  His eye is on the red ball of the glory, and so he will give away the store for his ego.

Watch.  The key is, will he pull out US troops on the peninsula?  If he does that, South Korea will be completely vulnerable, and Trump will have bought another war in order to regain his ground.

Alternatively, if he doesn't pull troops, North Korea gains nothing and won't do the deal.  North Korea won't settle for more consumer goods--trinkets and baubles--because that spigot can always be turned off.  North Korea will only settle for something strategic.

Prepare to be disappointed.

Original Quill wrote:

Didge wrote:Trump maybe an unhined loon, but is not an appeaser like Obama was.

Trump is an appeaser in a different way.  He is a narcissist.  He is susceptible to flattery and ceremony.  He will succumb to the urge to 'pull it off', throwing caution to the wind in order to achieve the distinction.

Of course, he has not staffed either a diplomatic team, or an intelligence team...so he goes in completely unprepared and disarmed.  He is essentially blind.  His eye is on the red ball of the glory, and so he will give away the store for his ego.

Watch.  The key is, will he pull out US troops on the peninsula?  If he does that, South Korea will be completely vulnerable, and Trump will have bought another war in order to regain his ground.

Alternatively, if he doesn't pull troops, North Korea gains nothing and won't do the deal.  North Korea won't settle for more consumer goods--trinkets and baubles--because that spigot can always be turned off.  North Korea will only settle for something strategic.

Prepare to be disappointed.

I agree that Trump is a narcassist and even more an egotist. Which is the one thing keeping his narcassism in check. So he will never go the final mile and do really something that stupid, that even he will recognise would be his undoing and have his own supporters then come to see him in a very poor light.

He was going to pull troops out and it was what the Russians wanted to happen, so they could end up being the defacto powerhouse in the Middle East. It seems Trump is actually standing up to Putin, but only when it comes to Syria and more to look good in the public eye. Not any real meaning to do any good. 

The reality is this, Obama was clueless on foreign policy and tried to appease as other Political appeasers have done so in history and paid the price for their incompetance. All he managed to achieve is a further political divide within the Middle East, which is stepping closer and closer to an all out Sunni and Shia war

This is so apparant, that Now Saudi, sees a former enemy in israel as a friend. To have many Muslim majority states, see Israel as a friend, is unprecedented and Obama created that by default, by making a deal with Iran. I am happy its help in that factor to bring peace that much closer with Israel and Palestine, but only by mistake. As now Arab nations are applying pressure on Palestine to make peace with Israel. As they Israel as the best ally in thwarting the military and expanisionist ambitions of Iran,.

Obama had no choice.  The Republican Congress wouldn't back any geopolitical program, so all he could do was tread water and do no harm.

Trump has a Republican Senate, a Republican House of Representatives, a Republican Supreme Court, and watch...he will still fook it up.

Trump has nothing to give North Korea.  North Korea wants guarantees, not beads and trinkets.  Right now it has something strategic--a nuclear capability--and the demand is that it give that up.

Guarantees come from reality, not promises.  The reality is that the US has 30,000 troops stationed just across the frontier, and as long as they are stationed there there can be no security for North Korea.

But if the troops are pulled out, the US will give up its edge.  So how can there be any accord that denuclearizes the peninsula?  It's an impasse...unless Trump does something stupid, for the glory and accolades.

Which won't come about, as it will be a great, big Opps moment.  

Original Quill wrote:Obama had no choice.  The Republican Congress wouldn't back any geopolitical program, so all he could do was tread water and do no harm.

Trump has a Republican Senate, a Republican House of Representatives, a Republican Supreme Court, and watch...he will still fook it up.

Trump has nothing to give North Korea.  North Korea wants guarantees, not beads and trinkets.  Right now it has something strategic--a nuclear capability--and the demand is that it give that up.

Guarantees come from reality, not promises.  The reality is that the US has 30,000 troops stationed just across the frontier, and as long as they are stationed there there can be no security for North Korea.

But if they are pulled out, the US will give up its edge.  So how can there be any accord that denuclearizes the peninsula?  It's an impasse...unless Trump does something stupid, for the glory and accolades.

Which won't come about, as it will be a great, big Opps moment.  

No choice?

Come on, it was his pet project and he screwed up..

I mean, has it not escaped your notice, that Saudi Arabia under its no leadership, has made a bout face on human rights and trying to look good to the west by now finally bringing about some human rights to its populace? They see an incoming war, which has been brewing long before Bush invaded Iraq.

This is the main problem, this conflict has gone on unabated since the inception of Islam, splintered over two main factions.

I mean you really think I care about Trump?

No, I dont, he is like i say an unhinged loon, but its taken an unhinged loon to undo the mad foreign policies of Obama. Who through his appeasement, has ensured that conflict has now expanded and grown closer, to enveloping the world, in a further 3rd world war. That is what you do not see here and again, when israel acts. taking out the facilities of Iran. The world will condemn them and in reality, sigh a huge relief. That a nation that understands what its like to continually live under the sphere of fighting for its very right to exist, will act to preserve Jews, having a home and sanctuary, free from people trying to wipe them out. Which it has faced constantly in humanity.

Obama should have done something that no President has done, until now Trump. Stop pandering to terrorism and extremism. He should have told Abbas, that he will not continue to allow an antisemitic leader to bring Palestine into ruin. That to have peace means to stop hating and actually place the Palestian people first over his hate of the Jews.

You still fail to grasp this. Abbas recent antisemitic rant, is what has always been the reason why the palestinian leadership continues to favour hating Jews, over wanting a state of their own, because they refuse to live alongside the Jews as a people in peace.

Didge wrote:No choice?

Come on, it was his pet project and he screwed up.

You don't really understand the American system.  A parliamentary system like the UK is more or less unitary.  The executive is the prime minister, and the cabinet heads are other ministers.  It's one body, with one voice.

In America, divide and conquer was the principle used by the founders.  They called it 'balance of powers', or 'separation of powers.'   It meant that without consensus, nothing can get done.  Programs must start with Congress (war powers, spending, e.g.s).  See, Article I, US Constitution. The executive can only implement programs.  See, Article II, US Constitution. The Supreme Court can only review programs.  See, Article III, US Constitution.  Without consensus, nothing gets done.  It's deliberately designed so that no direct action can go through the system.

Within Obama's last two years, the system had the perfect freeze...a Republican Congress (House and Senate), a Democratic president, and a divided Court.  Perfect stalemate...nothing could get through.  The Iran accord was mostly a Congressional animal--one of the few things the Republicans passed; Obama only signed off, after Congress passed it.

The Iran accord was negotiated by six nations and Iran.  The actual accord was a consensus of all seven nations, with the architect being the International Atomic Energy Agency.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_nuclear_deal_framework.  It had to pass the American Congress, which was Republican dominant.  Again, Obama was merely the wagging tail.

Incidentally, the other nations and Iran are sticking with the accord.  So, it's not done yet.  Trump has insisted that sanctions be reimposed, but so far the major European nations have thumbed their nose at the US demand.  Trump's nationalism--rejection of trade agreements, and imposition of tariffs--has had the effect of isolating the US, leaving it high and dry on trade sanctions.

That is now two posts Quill, where you have basically ignored all my points and gone onto something else with Obama and the Republicans

Seriously, you want a debate or shall we just continue to debate, on two different parrellel planes here?

Again, the Iran deal was Obama's brainchild and screw up.

You decide whether you want to continue this debate, but if you want me to, then get back to debating my points, not your poor misidrection

Didge wrote:That is now two posts Quill, where you have basically ignored all my points and gone onto something else with Obama and the Republicans

Seriously, you want a debate or shall we just continue to debate, on two different parrellel planes here?

Again, the Iran deal was Obama's brainchild and screw up.

You decide whether you want to continue this debate, but if you want me to, then get back to debating my points, not your poor misidrection

Out of ideas, are you? S'all right. There's a lot of new stuff coming down the pike. Warrant served on the President's attorney's office. Graft and corruption being uncovered in this administration, daily. President's son-in-law about to be pulled before the Grand Jury.

Do some digging and posting, and we can discuss some other stuff.

Original Quill wrote:

Didge wrote:That is now two posts Quill, where you have basically ignored all my points and gone onto something else with Obama and the Republicans

Seriously, you want a debate or shall we just continue to debate, on two different parrellel planes here?

Again, the Iran deal was Obama's brainchild and screw up.

You decide whether you want to continue this debate, but if you want me to, then get back to debating my points, not your poor misidrection

Out of ideas, are you?  S'all right.  There's a lot of new stuff coming down the pike.  Warrant served on the President's attorney's office.  Graft and corruption being uncovered in this administration, daily.  President's son-in-law about to be pulled before the Grand Jury.

Do some digging and posting, and we can discuss some other stuff.

Oh for fuck sake

You are as dishonest as Sly

I want you to answer my points

Last chance or you can join thast old biddy Sly in siberia

WTF...do you have against Syl?? I think she's nice.

Didge...you're having a bad day.

Original Quill wrote:WTF...do you have against Syl??  I think she's nice.

Didge...you're having a bad day.

I take issue with people when they are two faced

I took issue with a view around people thinking the term "child free" is a good thing. Then Vintage tried to stir things up. After Rags had also jumped in deliberately to also stir up. It seem I cannot have an opinion, without both of them trying to shut down my views. Then Sly jumps in and claims Vintage made good points, when I questioned how on earth a poster claiming another debate is down the pan, simple because they do not like my views.

That is shit stirring and again we see posters being two faced as Sly was

I am not going to tolerate such bullshit any longer

I made valid points and all Rags did was try to goad me and stir up things and Vintage never speaks out against her. I even showed this to be true, when Vintage pulled me up  on things I had said to Rags about being unemployed. Which i only did, because rags had accused me of this. Vintage seemed to be blind to her doing this, proving again, people only see what they want to see and its they, that look to shut down threads, with such pointless comments. As she claimed she would tell Rags it was wrong also and I am still waiting for her to do so. She never did and gave poor excuses.

So more niceties with such imbicilles

I guess I'm not a participant on that thread. You seem to be dividing your attention.

Didge wrote:That is now two posts Quill, where you have basically ignored all my points and gone onto something else with Obama and the Republicans

Pt. 1:  I've answered all your points, and more so.  I've rebutted them

Pt. 2:  I've gone on to discuss Obama, and his problems with the prevaricating Republicans, because they are the ones ultimately responsible for the Iran accord.  It was a Republican Congress that consented to it.  We have a system of checks and balances, which means that nothing can get through without Congressional consent.

Had the Republicans really wanted to prevent the accord, they had only to say 'No'.  In September 2015 a Republican resolution to reject the six-nation nuclear accord with Iran was presented in the Senate, and it was defeated!! At this point (September 2015), Republicans controlled both houses of the Legislature and were in charge.
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/11/us/politics/iran-nuclear-deal-senate.html

You have fudged in telling the whole story, didge.  That's why I had to fill in about Obama not having control of Congress, and how the Republicans were the ones who effectively ratified the Iran deal.  It happened on the Republican watch...a point that detractors take great pains to avoid.

No you have not

Last chance

Go back and respond to my points or ensujre you have the debate terminated

Didge wrote:

Original Quill wrote:Obama had no choice.  The Republican Congress wouldn't back any geopolitical program, so all he could do was tread water and do no harm.

Trump has a Republican Senate, a Republican House of Representatives, a Republican Supreme Court, and watch...he will still fook it up.

Trump has nothing to give North Korea.  North Korea wants guarantees, not beads and trinkets.  Right now it has something strategic--a nuclear capability--and the demand is that it give that up.

Guarantees come from reality, not promises.  The reality is that the US has 30,000 troops stationed just across the frontier, and as long as they are stationed there there can be no security for North Korea.

But if they are pulled out, the US will give up its edge.  So how can there be any accord that denuclearizes the peninsula?  It's an impasse...unless Trump does something stupid, for the glory and accolades.

Which won't come about, as it will be a great, big Opps moment.  

No choice?

Come on, it was his pet project and he screwed up..

I mean, has it not escaped your notice, that Saudi Arabia under its no leadership, has made a bout face on human rights and trying to look good to the west by now finally bringing about some human rights to its populace? They see an incoming war, which has been brewing long before Bush invaded Iraq.

This is the main problem, this conflict has gone on unabated since the inception of Islam, splintered over two main factions.

I mean you really think I care about Trump?

No, I dont, he is like i say an unhinged loon, but its taken an unhinged loon to undo the mad foreign policies of Obama. Who through his appeasement, has ensured that conflict has now expanded and grown closer, to enveloping the world, in a further 3rd world war. That is what you do not see here and again, when israel acts. taking out the facilities of Iran. The world will condemn them and in reality, sigh a huge relief. That a nation that understands what its like to continually live under the sphere of fighting for its very right to exist, will act to preserve Jews, having a home and sanctuary, free from people trying to wipe them out. Which it has faced constantly in humanity.

Obama should have done something that no President has done, until now Trump. Stop pandering to terrorism and extremism. He should have told Abbas, that he will not continue to allow an antisemitic leader to bring Palestine into ruin. That to have peace means to stop hating and actually place the Palestian people first over his hate of the Jews.

You still fail to grasp this. Abbas recent antisemitic rant, is what has always been the reason why the palestinian leadership continues to favour hating Jews, over wanting a state of their own, because they refuse to live alongside the Jews as a people in peace.

Here are my points again

Didge wrote:No you have not

Last chance

Go back and respond to my points or ensujre you have the debate terminated

You claim to be raising "the mad foreign policies of Obama" when the whole issue is, at best, a collaborative effort.  I've just responded a second time: the Republicans ratified the Iran accord.  You've gone about twisting the facts, and I have only to correct you, or add crucial facts to the picture you paint.  You just haven't been reading my responses with care.

Now, I stand on the threshold of repeating my correction of your allegations a third time.    Don't you think others are getting a little tired of this game?

Original Quill wrote:

Didge wrote:No you have not

Last chance

Go back and respond to my points or ensujre you have the debate terminated

You claim to be raising "the mad foreign policies of Obama" when the whole issue is, at best, a collaborative effort.  I've just responded a second time: the Republicans ratified the Iran accord.  You've gone about twisting the facts, and I have only to correct you, or add crucial facts to the picture you paint.  You just haven't been reading my responses with care.

Now, I stand on the threshold of repeating my correction of your allegations a third time.    Don't you think others are getting a little tired of this game?

Avoided my points yet again

Didge wrote:Avoided my points yet again

Just responded, repeating the response a third time. For efficiency sake, we could just go with a 'did not', 'did too', 'did not', etc., etc., ad infinitum. Like...see who blinks.

Original Quill wrote:

Didge wrote:Avoided my points yet again

Just responded, repeating the response a third time.  For efficiency sake, we could just go with a 'did not', 'did too', 'did not', etc., etc., ad infinitum.  Like...see who blinks.  

Avoided my points yet again

"Did not."

Original Quill wrote:"Did not."  

Avoided again

Didge wrote:

Original Quill wrote:"Did not."  

Avoided again

"Did not."

Original Quill wrote:

Didge wrote:
Avoided again

"Did not."  

Avoided again

Didge wrote:

Original Quill wrote:
"Did not."  

Avoided again

"Did not."

Didge wrote:

Original Quill wrote:Obama had no choice.  The Republican Congress wouldn't back any geopolitical program, so all he could do was tread water and do no harm.

Trump has a Republican Senate, a Republican House of Representatives, a Republican Supreme Court, and watch...he will still fook it up.

Trump has nothing to give North Korea.  North Korea wants guarantees, not beads and trinkets.  Right now it has something strategic--a nuclear capability--and the demand is that it give that up.

Guarantees come from reality, not promises.  The reality is that the US has 30,000 troops stationed just across the frontier, and as long as they are stationed there there can be no security for North Korea.

But if they are pulled out, the US will give up its edge.  So how can there be any accord that denuclearizes the peninsula?  It's an impasse...unless Trump does something stupid, for the glory and accolades.

Which won't come about, as it will be a great, big Opps moment.  

No choice?

Come on, it was his pet project and he screwed up..

I mean, has it not escaped your notice, that Saudi Arabia under its no leadership, has made a bout face on human rights and trying to look good to the west by now finally bringing about some human rights to its populace? They see an incoming war, which has been brewing long before Bush invaded Iraq.

This is the main problem, this conflict has gone on unabated since the inception of Islam, splintered over two main factions.

I mean you really think I care about Trump?

No, I dont, he is like i say an unhinged loon, but its taken an unhinged loon to undo the mad foreign policies of Obama. Who through his appeasement, has ensured that conflict has now expanded and grown closer, to enveloping the world, in a further 3rd world war. That is what you do not see here and again, when israel acts. taking out the facilities of Iran. The world will condemn them and in reality, sigh a huge relief. That a nation that understands what its like to continually live under the sphere of fighting for its very right to exist, will act to preserve Jews, having a home and sanctuary, free from people trying to wipe them out. Which it has faced constantly in humanity.

Obama should have done something that no President has done, until now Trump. Stop pandering to terrorism and extremism. He should have told Abbas, that he will not continue to allow an antisemitic leader to bring Palestine into ruin. That to have peace means to stop hating and actually place the Palestian people first over his hate of the Jews.

You still fail to grasp this. Abbas recent antisemitic rant, is what has always been the reason why the palestinian leadership continues to favour hating Jews, over wanting a state of their own, because they refuse to live alongside the Jews as a people in peace.

Still waiting for this to be countered

Didge wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Trump is an appeaser in a different way.  He is a narcissist.  He is susceptible to flattery and ceremony.  He will succumb to the urge to 'pull it off', throwing caution to the wind in order to achieve the distinction.

Of course, he has not staffed either a diplomatic team, or an intelligence team...so he goes in completely unprepared and disarmed.  He is essentially blind.  His eye is on the red ball of the glory, and so he will give away the store for his ego.

Watch.  The key is, will he pull out US troops on the peninsula?  If he does that, South Korea will be completely vulnerable, and Trump will have bought another war in order to regain his ground.

Alternatively, if he doesn't pull troops, North Korea gains nothing and won't do the deal.  North Korea won't settle for more consumer goods--trinkets and baubles--because that spigot can always be turned off.  North Korea will only settle for something strategic.

Prepare to be disappointed.

I agree that Trump is a narcassist and even more an egotist. Which is the one thing keeping his narcassism in check. So he will never go the final mile and do really something that stupid, that even he will recognise would be his undoing and have his own supporters then come to see him in a very poor light.

He was going to pull troops out and it was what the Russians wanted to happen, so they could end up being the defacto powerhouse in the Middle East. It seems Trump is actually standing up to Putin, but only when it comes to Syria and more to look good in the public eye. Not any real meaning to do any good. 

The reality is this, Obama was clueless on foreign policy and tried to appease as other Political appeasers have done so in history and paid the price for their incompetance. All he managed to achieve is a further political divide within the Middle East, which is stepping closer and closer to an all out Sunni and Shia war

This is so apparant, that Now Saudi, sees a former enemy in israel as a friend. To have many Muslim majority states, see Israel as a friend, is unprecedented and Obama created that by default, by making a deal with Iran. I am happy its help in that factor to bring peace that much closer with Israel and Palestine, but only by mistake. As now Arab nations are applying pressure on Palestine to make peace with Israel. As they Israel as the best ally in thwarting the military and expanisionist ambitions of Iran,.

Still waiting for this to be countered

Didge wrote:And look what happened?

Iran attacked Israel with 20 rocktets and Israel responded by knocking out 50 Iranian targets on Syria, knocking out any ability it has to target Israel. Guess what the UK, France and Germany backed her in doing so.

Trump maybe an unhined loon, but is not an appeaser like Obama was. He can see a nation under the fringes of extreme with the Mullahs of Iran. You though want to be blind to this, when most of the Middle East see Iran as a threat

The reality is, we have been here before with Clinton and no deal will stop Iran looking to obtain nuke weapons. The only thing will be Israel again, as it did when Syria and Iraq tried. The irony is that Iran sighed a huge relief, after they tried and failed to take out Saddams nuke facility and then Israel pulled off an amasing coup, taking it out against all odds.

I mean can you imagine what Assad would do with a nuke, when he has used chemical weapons against his own people. Just also as Saddam did with with the Kurds. Israel has stopped a mass genocide with nukes by both war criminals from ever happenning.

One day the penny will drop with you. As Israel is the first line of defense for the west and in many cases, it is their intelligence that helps thwarts terrorism in the west.

Still waiting for this to be countered

Already has been...3 x's. Anything else?

3 posts avoided and counting

Three times answered. Getting boring.

Didge wrote:3 posts avoided and counting

And still counting