@AIPChristina@Pro__Trading The enrichment restrictions expired, those are what I was mainly referring to as they're the most important aspect of a nuclear deal.
@AIPChristina@Pro__Trading I don't see anything other than it ending at a certain point, with some sanctions able to be reapplied if voted on. Even that sanction plan had an expiration date as well though..
https://t.co/M60TzpBaYT
https://t.co/g2f5XpWHfY
I'm agreeing with him, I don't understand what you're saying here.
I was just mentioning that the people who were actively trying to force the US to withdraw without a deal in place are now complaining that this deal isn't good enough.
Basically, even if this deal were terrible it'd be better than a US defeat and no deal at all.
@AIPChristina@Pro__Trading "By the end of debate, the key question was less about the operation of the agreement itself and more about what would happen when the extraordinary restrictions were removed after 10β15 years."
https://t.co/sPWfBEydHL
It's a purely modern sentiment though. Everyone acts like Jackson didn't throw a wild destructive inauguration party for the public IN the white house or invite 20k people to come eat the 1,400lb block of cheese he had on the ground;
or
TR's boxing ring as well as adding the west wing, while also destroying almost all prior president's additions, including a large conservatory added by Buchanan;
or
Nixon's bowling alley, or the fact that Taft is the one who built the actual oval office;
or
FDR's indoor swimming pool; or Ford's additional swimming pool;
or
the press room that covered up aforementioned swimming pool.
Thing is, many presidents "leave their mark" on the white house. It's a tradition at this point, interrupted or paused at times, and some people only hate it now because of who the president is, not what he's doing. I even think the few people outraged at Obama's basketball court fall into this camp.
@ricktrolle63431@Pro__Trading Then we'd be where we were in February, except by then they'd have a far more competent defense posture and much stronger regional proxy-group allies.
@716mafia70825@Pro__Trading The JCPOA was already signed and ratified, I don't think he could realistically and unilaterally make changes. I think if the the JCPOA had provisions limiting their proxy funding and deterrence apparatus, it would have been harder for Trump to argue for it's cancellation.
Sure, but then they're at the negotiating table with more money, more deterrence assets (missiles and drones were unrestricted, afaik), and overall from a greater position than they would be otherwise. They'd have far less incentive to be "generous" and would be far more difficult to deal with militarily. But once the deal totally expired, they'd have no obligation outside some additional provisions of the NPT to abandon nuclear development.
The MOU isn't binding yet, so hard to debate too thoroughly on what will happen, but it seems more accurate that the $300B will be subject to compliance with the goals of the upcoming deal, and not likely a lump-sum payment.
Of course much of it will go to rebuilding the military, considering that's where the bulk of their >$300B losses from the war are.
I haven't seen any reference to the $100-120bn that you mentioned, but I think the only "immediate" money they get is frozen assets; money that's already theirs.
I don't disagree fully with your last statement, but my point is that the JCPOA was hinging on the hope that Iran will decide to stay a part of the wider global economy and choose not to pursue nuclear enrichment after the deal sunset. At that point, they could have already built up a strong missile/ drone deterrence that would prevent any intervention to stop them.
Even contemporary reporting shows that the status of Iran post-JCPOA was unknown.
https://t.co/A53EB5zev2
After Gaddafi fell and seeing the DPRK sucessfully position themselves as the 10th nuclear power, there's no way Iran wouldn't at least consider the utility of being "untouchable".
@ricktrolle63431@Pro__Trading Imagine how much progress they would make as the agreement would've expired by now. At this point they'd be far richer and legally allowed to enrich however much they wanted.
@Pro__Trading Of course, dont forget almost every democrat voted to end the war without any deal in place at all, with Iran actively vying doe control of the strait at the time. Know they act like this MOU is somehow worse than that!
Woodrow Wilson campaigned on staying out of world war 1, won the election and immediately got us involved, then made it a federal crime to criticize the government, pushed for the creation of the income tax, re-segregated the federal workforce, played aa legit kkk movie in the white house, then had a debilitating stroke and secretly left his wife in charge of the oval office.
Imagine if Trump did literally one of those things and then see if your bias is blinding you to actual history.