This Is Difficult For Neo-cons

[TLK Valentine]

That seems to be the administration's line, all right. It's not taken seriously by anyone else.

It's not being taken seriously by you or anyone else who hates the administration... but what of it?

Ask a few people without a political ax to grind...

Furthermore, you still haven't given an alternative besides war...

 

[JustOneWay]

That seems to be the administration's line, all right. It's not taken seriously by anyone else.

Just dismiss it as if it never happened. More evidence that nothing Obama does is good in the eyes of some on the right.

Thanks for demonstrating my point.

 

[mark46]

That seems to be the administration's line, all right. It's not taken seriously by anyone else.

This isn't the administration line. It is the line of every country in Europe and the other signatories to the treaty. In any case, it is clear that Iran doesn't have nuclear weapons now. They would have had nuclear weapons by now (absent war) with no negotiations. Each month we proceed is an additional month without Iranian nuclear weapons.

Event the Israelis agree that the Iranian nuclear threat has been greatly delayed. It is only US Republicans who believe differently. There are OTHER reasons to oppose the Iranian deal. The Israelis and the Saudis certainly didn't want us to return Iran's own money. They both prefer a weak, angrier, and more aggressive Iran.

 

[Albion]

This isn't the administration line. .

Actually, it is. And it's known now that lies fueled the acceptance of that treaty.

That's not to say that some other countries that were dragged along by us, couldn't stop the USA from going ahead anyway, or wanted the treaty because of business and trade considerations -- even at the expense of letting the Mullahs have the bomb -- didn't fall in line.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Actually, it is. And it's known now that lies fueled the acceptance of that treaty.

Known by whom?

And would you kindly provide an alternative -- assuming there is one?

 

[mark46]

Actually, it is. And it's known now that lies fueled the acceptance of that treaty.

That's not to say that some other countries that were dragged along by us, couldn't stop the USA from going ahead anyway, or wanted the treaty because of business and trade considerations -- even at the expense of letting the Mullahs have the bomb -- didn't fall in line.

None of the signatories were dragged along by us. They would have stopped their participation in the sanctions before the treaty was signed. It was only the negotiations that keeps the sanctions in place.

What countries are you referring to? Certainly not Israel, the Saudis and the emirates. They disagree with the treaty, although some of the emirates were bought off with arms to remain relatively quiet.

 

[mark46]

And would you kindly provide an alternative -- assuming there is one?

POLITICAL RULE #73

Opposition is not required to come up with alternatives.

 

[mark46]

Trump was forced to go along with the Republican rhetoric. I suspect that he strongly supports the treaty. I doubt very much if he and his Russian buddies would have allowed the sanctions to continue as long as they did. And Iran (or anyone else) have nuclear weapons is NOT a high priorities on Trump's list of foreign policy priorities.

I do NOT say this to demean Trump. His position of foreign policy (when clarified a lot) may be the view of the majority of Americans. Of course, very, very few presidential elections are decided on foreign policy issues.

Trump will need to get enough votes from those who think that economy is in bad shape, and that Trump could do better.

Alternatively, Trump can simply win on the obvious logan: I AM THE CANDIDATE OF CHANGE!
==========
To be clear, having rejected the party's recommendations, he must now accept them, and find a way to appeal to women and minorities.

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

Nothing short of an invasion is going to stop Iran from getting a bomb... are you proposing that?

It's only a question of when...

Funny thing though when Trump made a similar comment about Saudi Arabia, he was castigated for it...

I suspect that he strongly supports the treaty.

One thing to note is whereas Cruz objects to the treaty being done, Trump's objection is merely that it was done badly.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Funny thing though when Trump made a similar comment about Saudi Arabia, he was castigated for it...

Probably because nobody's all that concerned about Saudi Arabia getting the bomb... and if they were, antagonizing them would lead to an oil embargo.

One thing to note is whereas Cruz objects to the treaty being done, Trump's objection is merely that it was done badly.

I'm sure Trump has a plan for doing it better which he's not willing to share.