Off Topic Politics Thread

I’m with you on that one, Archers. I’d love to go to the US, but I refuse to whilst he’s in control. Mind you, if they look at my social media accounts (which, apparently, they do) I haven’t got a cat’s chance of getting in anyway!

 

Blair also had, iirc, the support of Rupert Murdoch, who influenced the many readers of the Sun and NOW, into supporting him, just as he is now using his media outlets to convince the turkeys to vote for Christmas, by persuading the poor that the Tories are good for them.

We don’t get the government we need, we get the one the media persuades us to vote for, which is a major factor, IMO, why Labour struggle to get their views across to the country as a whole. Around 75/80% of the written press support and make contributions to the Tories, so they will always present news in the manner that best serves them.

 

He pulled out of me and lived to regret it, Stormy Daniels reassures Iran

 

They let me in two years ago, which was a bit of a surprise tbh.

 

And the more threatened they feel by the thought of a genuinely radical and progressive Labour govt., the more desperately they twist the story to tarnish everything about Jeremy Corbyn.

 

No I have not, I don't live in the UK. Build trust, fine, but the Iran is a religious regime that will do anything try and get away with things whilst thinking no one is watching. Agreeing to allow Iran to basically self regulate themselves is just dumb. Obama is the new Chamberlain and the deal gives as much as Hitler's promise to Chamberlain. The EU will carry on with the deal in it's present form so the Iranians still get their cake

 

There'd be even less outside regulation if we dropped the deal.

 

That's a poor analogy imo. For all the faults of the current regime, Iran is not Nazi Germany - they have elections for a start. And Obama was not in any way comparable to Chamberlain, who was so desperate to avoid another pan-European conflict that he refused to see Hitler for what he was. Obama knew who and what he was dealing with, and decided, along with the rest of the democratic world, that there was more to be gained from inviting Iran into the wider family of nations, than there was from pushing them further to the political margins.

Trump, in attempting to marginalise Iran, is turning the US into an international pariah; much as Netanyahu has done to Israel. There's no statesmanship there, at all.

 

Here's a link to an excellent analysis on the deal. It's clear about the weaknesses but points out that that's what deals are: compromises. Otherwise, people don't sign up for them.

You want October 17th 2017.

https://www.thecipherbrief.com/podcasts/intelligence-matters/page/2

If you really are interested in the answer to your question, I suggest that you download it and listen to it on your commute.

Vin

 

No, the Iranians don't self-regulate under the deal. That's an utter, total falsehood.

That said, you said that Mueller should be sacked because of his part in the so-called Uranium One "scandal". No scandal, and no Mueller involvement. It's an utter, total falsehood (again). Even Fox news eventually admitted it.

Might be time to watch something other than Fox news.

Vin

 

Iran may not be Nazi Germany but it does sponsor terrorist organisations and the elections are fairly pointless. The president they elect has much less power than the "Supreme Leader". Iran is effectively a theocracy and it's leadership is fundamentally opposed to western ideas. Let's not forget they still execute children and the penalty for blasphemy is also death.

The criticism of the JCPOA has always been that it's temporary, allows Iran to continue sponsoring terror groups and also helps Iran develop its economy and gain regional influence. It's entirely plausible that the agreement will end and we'll be left with a richer, more influential, nuclear-armed Iran that remains culturally and philosophically opposed to Western ideas.

It's all very well saying we should build trust and cooperation and then relax sanctions but the differences in thinking between Iran and the West are so great I'm not sure trust or cooperation are even possible right now. The US and Iran certainly aren't going to be friendly towards each other any time soon. Even if trust etc was possible the JCPOA removed the vast majority of sanctions against Iran so there's now very little to be relaxed.

None of which is to say that Trump has some genius masterplan, but it's entirely possible there's a better way of dealing with Iran than the JCPOA.

 

I prefer that argument but the problem is with these sanctions is once you've applied them you can't apply them again for something else. You can't threaten somebody with a bullet you've already fired as it were.

If we're in talks with them, trading with them, and they become reliant on that trade, that gives us far more influence over them and these other issues than if we've already cut them off.

 

You forget that Obama is allowed to be a dictator and push through things by Presidential decree as is Macron. "The good guys" are allowed to dictate.

 

The Iranians have stated that their red line would be the inspection of military sites. No inspections allowed on any military site / where would bombs be made. inspectors from the USA are not even allowed into the country. Iran can fob off inspections for 24 days if they want, IAEA say its not a problem as residue will obviously last many years, my line of thought is they could be using a site for processing uranium, get a 24 day notice of inspection, clean out all equipment, the IAEA find traces of uranium but the Iranians say its from many years ago when the location was used in the production of uranium, how would the IAEA prove that Iran was breaking the deal?
Taken from Real Clear Politics
If Iran can deny inspectors access to military sites, it will create an enormous sanctuary for clandestine nuclear weapons work. The Parchin site alone encompasses hundreds of buildings spread over a dozen square miles. If military sites in Iran are off limits to IAEA inspection, the “strongest non proliferation agreement ever negotiated” will include the largest loophole in arms control history.

 

Eh?

This makes no sense at all. What is 'Presidential decree' in either France or the USA, and why does it only apply to certain Presidents (ie the ones you don't like)?

 

Iran have started firing missiles at Israeli forces in Golan Heights.

Well done you ****ing orange twat. So depressingly predictable.

 

Interesting that the usual suspects think Trump's done just fine.

Interesting that the governments of the UK, France, Germany, Russia and China (guided by expertise possibly better than "some blokes on the internet") all counselled Trump heavily against breaking the agreement.

Hmmm, who to trust?

Vin

 

And Isreal are now bombing Iranian forces.

He's certainly a master diplomat.

Reduced US oil supply, caused more instability and attacks on an ally, and abandoned what oversight they had on a relatively hostile nation's nuclear program.

How does this benefit the American people again?

 

Wrong thread.

 

Good to see a sensible post on this thread.