That Iran Deal

[Keith&Co.]

It seems strange to finally have a president with a backbone.

Perhaps, but he lacks a brain stem.

Backbone?

This IS the guy that's afraid to be in the same room as someone he's firing, right?
The four time draft dodger?

 

[Harry Bosch]

We didn't give them 400 million bucks! We gave them their money back. We sold them F-16s in the 70s. They put down about a Billion dollars. But we only sent them half the planes. They wanted their money back!

First of all, that money was paid by the legitimate government of Iran, not these theocratic usurpers. Second, that money should have been used to pay damages to US citizens killed and maimed by Iranian clients like Hezbollah.

So, if you advocate holding back money and reneging on business agreements, I guess that we should withhold payments to Saudi Arabia? By your example, we can withhold payment to them since their government wasn't elected and certainly there were many Americans killed and maimed by ISIS and Al-quada.

 

[funinspace]

We didn't give them 400 million bucks! We gave them their money back. We sold them F-16s in the 70s. They put down about a Billion dollars. But we only sent them half the planes. They wanted their money back!

First of all, that money was paid by the legitimate government of Iran, not these theocratic usurpers. Second, that money should have been used to pay damages to US citizens killed and maimed by Iranian clients like Hezbollah.

So, if you advocate holding back money and reneging on business agreements, I guess that we should withhold payments to Saudi Arabia? By your example, we can withhold payment to them since their government wasn't elected and certainly there were many Americans killed and maimed by ISIS and Al-quada.

Additionally, it is laughable to consider the royal dictator (installed largely by the CIA and the Brits) a 'legitimate' government. The last 'legitimate' government was in 1953, if one insists the current Iranian government isn't legitimate. Iran's government is certainly more 'legitimate' than the our buddies, the Saudi Arabian royal dictators, or the rump dictator trying to get back into power in Yemen.

Ironically, the US government doesn't give a shit about whether any given government is legitimate, just as long they are generally in our pocket or at least aren't in our way or in Russia's pocket.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The good news is that Russia gets the Perfecta with this, both in rising oil/gas prices and worsening US - Europe relations.

The frustrating part is how the right-wing says this isn't about Obama, yet people like Limbaugh is talking about "erasing the Obama legacy".

 

[Derec]

So, if you advocate holding back money and reneging on business agreements,

1. The business agreements were not made with the ayatollahs.
2. Iran was sued by victims of Iran-sponsored terrorism and judgments of over 2 billion dollars were rendered. These $400,000,000 should have been used to pay part of these judgments, not to give them to the ayatollahs to fund some more terrorism (like they actually did).

I guess that we should withhold payments to Saudi Arabia? By your example, we can withhold payment to them since their government wasn't elected and certainly there were many Americans killed and maimed by ISIS and Al-quada.

ISIS and Al-Qaeda are opposed to the Saudi government actually. Contrary to groups like Hezbollah which are funded and controlled by Iranian Revolutionary Guard.

 

[Derec]

Additionally, it is laughable to consider the royal dictator (installed largely by the CIA and the Brits) a 'legitimate' government.

You know that Iran had the Shah even before 1953, right?

The last 'legitimate' government was in 1953,

Not really. He suspended elections so that he would win, he ruled by decree, and he stole US and UK assets.

if one insists the current Iranian government isn't legitimate.

There is nothing legitimate about them.

Iran's government is certainly more 'legitimate' than the our buddies, the Saudi Arabian royal dictators, or the rump dictator trying to get back into power in Yemen.

By what criteria? Is "enemy of the US" chief criteria for being legitimate in your mind? Sure, Saudis are pretty nasty too, but MBS is creating some movement for the better it seems. Contrary to Iran, which is getting deeper into supporting terrorism.

Ironically, the US government doesn't give a shit about whether any given government is legitimate, just as long they are generally in our pocket or at least aren't in our way or in Russia's pocket.

Still doesn't change the fact that the plane deal was not with the theocratic usurpers and that there are legitimate judgments against Iran that the money given to them should have been used for instead.
One of the cases:
Beirut barracks bombing victims and their families are awarded $920M judgment against Iran

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

He stole back some assets, true. Which is the real reason he was deposed and the Shah was put into place.

I looked into the Wikipedia article about him.

 Mohammad Mosaddegh

There were some very interesting things going on at the time that election was suspended. Do you support or oppose foreign meddling in a national election?

The "theocratic usurpers" usurped the "royal usurpers" who usurped Mosaddegh.

Since your standard of legitimacy appears to be "subservient to the US", you don't have much ground to stand on when you criticize funinspace for having a standard of "opposes the US."

 

[Elixir]

The frustrating part is how the right-wing says this isn't about Obama

About WHO?

 

[funinspace]

You know that Iran had the Shah even before 1953, right?

Yeah, largely there by internal power.

The last 'legitimate' government was in 1953,

Not really. He suspended elections so that he would win, he ruled by decree, and he stole US and UK assets.

Still a flawed election by their own country.

if one insists the current Iranian government isn't legitimate.

There is nothing legitimate about them.

It is sure as hell more legitimate than a royal dictator installed by a foreign power.

Iran's government is certainly more 'legitimate' than the our buddies, the Saudi Arabian royal dictators, or the rump dictator trying to get back into power in Yemen.

By what criteria? Is "enemy of the US" chief criteria for being legitimate in your mind? Sure, Saudis are pretty nasty too, but MBS is creating some movement for the better it seems. Contrary to Iran, which is getting deeper into supporting terrorism.

You are funny. My idea of a legitimate government is one that at least somewhat represents and can be impacted by the will of the people. Democracies do a tolerable job most of the time. Though humans do get weird at times even with this form of government. What is not legitimate is governments imposed by foreign powers. I find it a very flawed American attitude that it can stomp about thousands of miles from our boarders and tell other people who is their rightful ruler. Vietnam, Syria, Yemen, Iran, Cuba, Panama, and a host of others come to mind. But yes, the Iranian leaders clearly support terrorism. But then again, so do the Saudis. And the US dresses up pigs and pretends they are pretty ladies. We lay waste to whole countries because we have the might. But oh...how the Iranians are so BAD...

Ironically, the US government doesn't give a shit about whether any given government is legitimate, just as long they are generally in our pocket or at least aren't in our way or in Russia's pocket.

Still doesn't change the fact that the plane deal was not with the theocratic usurpers and that there are legitimate judgments against Iran that the money given to them should have been used for instead.
One of the cases:
Beirut barracks bombing victims and their families are awarded $920M judgment against Iran

And this doesn't change the fact that the US government decided to enter into an international agreement for the sake of forestalling a potential nuclear weapons program in Iran. FWIW I wasn't even arguing over the return of the Iranian money. I just found your whining about which government is legitimate, to be comical. And you seem to gloss over the tens of thousand of Iranians butchered (with GIANT chemical red lines in the sand) by Iraq with American support. How may billions is that worth?

 

[funinspace]

The frustrating part is how the right-wing says this isn't about Obama

About WHO?

Who are you

 

[Elixir]

The frustrating part is how the right-wing says this isn't about Obama

About WHO?

Who are you

How am I supposed to know? My entire legacy was destroyed by a fat orange despot.

 

[Trausti]

 

[bleubird]

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2018/0...n-expression-gratitude-over-embassy-move.html
Like the whole thing was planned,err something.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

I’m not sure which is more pathetic, the misconception that Trump can destroy Obama’s “legacy” or the fact that so many of his followers don’t understand what a legacy is. A legacy is what you hand over to someone after you. What they then do with it is then their legacy to hand over to someone else.

History measures Presidents by their actions and accomplishments (and inactions and failure) while they’re in office. What happens after they leave office then becomes a measure of the next person to hold the office. So, for one of many many examples, history will record Obama’s brilliant end-run around a racist/obstructionist Congress to make an historic accord with Iran (and several world powers) to prevent it from achieving nuclear status, as one of many remarkable achievements.

When it comes to Trump, however, if history records anything other than “First President To Accidentally Tweet A Picture of Him Fucking His Daughter,” at best it would be something along the lines of, “For no logical or discernible reason other than either jealousy or a pathetic appeal to white bigotry, Disgraced President Trump reneged on the deal with Iran, which in turn led directly to Iran achieving nuclear status within a year.”

 

[Trausti]

I’m not sure which is more pathetic, the misconception that Trump can destroy Obama’s “legacy” or the fact that so many of his followers don’t understand what a legacy is. A legacy is what you hand over to someone after you. What they then do with it is then their legacy to hand over to someone else.

History measures Presidents by their actions and accomplishments (and inactions and failure) while they’re in office. What happens after they leave office then becomes a measure of the next person to hold the office. So, for one of many many examples, history will record Obama’s brilliant end-run around a racist/obstructionist Congress to make an historic accord with Iran (and several world powers) to prevent it from achieving nuclear status, as one of many remarkable achievements.

When it comes to Trump, however, if history records anything other than “First President To Accidentally Tweet A Picture of Him Fucking His Daughter,” at best it would be something along the lines of, “For no logical or discernible reason other than either jealousy or a pathetic appeal to white bigotry, Disgraced President Trump reneged on the deal with Iran, which in turn led directly to Iran achieving nuclear status within a year.”

Or maybe they point to the extirpation of Obama's "legacy" because the reaction by #TheResistance is fricking hillaryious.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

I’m not sure which is more pathetic, the misconception that Trump can destroy Obama’s “legacy” or the fact that so many of his followers don’t understand what a legacy is. A legacy is what you hand over to someone after you. What they then do with it is then their legacy to hand over to someone else.

History measures Presidents by their actions and accomplishments (and inactions and failure) while they’re in office. What happens after they leave office then becomes a measure of the next person to hold the office. So, for one of many many examples, history will record Obama’s brilliant end-run around a racist/obstructionist Congress to make an historic accord with Iran (and several world powers) to prevent it from achieving nuclear status, as one of many remarkable achievements.

When it comes to Trump, however, if history records anything other than “First President To Accidentally Tweet A Picture of Him Fucking His Daughter,” at best it would be something along the lines of, “For no logical or discernible reason other than either jealousy or a pathetic appeal to white bigotry, Disgraced President Trump reneged on the deal with Iran, which in turn led directly to Iran achieving nuclear status within a year.”

Or maybe they point to the extirpation of Obama's "legacy" because the reaction by #TheResistance is fricking hillaryious.

Yeah, that seems to be the lie regurgitated to the ever-shrinking DKs. How’s that working out, telling the same shitty dick joke every hour of every day into a mirror trying to convince yourself that it’s still funny?

 

[Trausti]

I’m not sure which is more pathetic, the misconception that Trump can destroy Obama’s “legacy” or the fact that so many of his followers don’t understand what a legacy is. A legacy is what you hand over to someone after you. What they then do with it is then their legacy to hand over to someone else.

History measures Presidents by their actions and accomplishments (and inactions and failure) while they’re in office. What happens after they leave office then becomes a measure of the next person to hold the office. So, for one of many many examples, history will record Obama’s brilliant end-run around a racist/obstructionist Congress to make an historic accord with Iran (and several world powers) to prevent it from achieving nuclear status, as one of many remarkable achievements.

When it comes to Trump, however, if history records anything other than “First President To Accidentally Tweet A Picture of Him Fucking His Daughter,” at best it would be something along the lines of, “For no logical or discernible reason other than either jealousy or a pathetic appeal to white bigotry, Disgraced President Trump reneged on the deal with Iran, which in turn led directly to Iran achieving nuclear status within a year.”

Or maybe they point to the extirpation of Obama's "legacy" because the reaction by #TheResistance is fricking hillaryious.

Yeah, that seems to be the lie regurgitated to the ever-shrinking DKs. How’s that working out, telling the same shitty dick joke every hour of every day into a mirror trying to convince yourself that it’s still funny?

Yeah see, hillaryious!

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Trade is the best deterrent to aggression. Isolation is the best way to spark war. Good job Mr. Trump.....

 

[arkirk]

The other nations of the world are trying to keep the Iran agreement going without our dickhead president. I wish them well.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

Yeah, that seems to be the lie regurgitated to the ever-shrinking DKs. How’s that working out, telling the same shitty dick joke every hour of every day into a mirror trying to convince yourself that it’s still funny?

Yeah see, hillaryious!

OMG YOU’RE RIGHT! It’s so fucking funny. It is! It is SO fucking funny. OMG. OH MY FUCKING GOD! SO FUCKING FUNNY!!!! SO funny. OMG.