Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Trump full-asses killing the Iran deal

Trump full-asses killing the Iran deal
Thread Tools
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 14, 2018, 08:13 PM
 
We'll need a thread, I think.

So we're leaving, without cause, and without having convinced a single one of our allies to join us.

In the process, Trump has given Iran leverage to renegotiate a better deal with the remaining partners because they're not keen on killing the agreement and seeing Iran resume it's nuclear program.

Meanwhile: https://twitter.com/AFP/status/994274695565504514
"#BREAKING Saudis will seek nuclear weapon if Iran does, minister says"

****ing stellar. Plus Iran and Israel having been trading pot-shots in Syria.

I feel safer already.

Edit: Oh yea, we're threatening sanctioning our allies, too.
     
reader50
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 14, 2018, 10:33 PM
 
The whole Iran thing is an exercise in insanity. Along with moving the US embassy to Jerusalem, it appears a deliberate effort to destabilize the middle east. Perhaps to brew a war to direct attention away from domestic issues?

Near as I can figure, Trump wants a NK deal because it would be his deal. And hates the far-more-stable Iran deal because it was done by Obama. Gotta undo everything Obama did, as though he had never been elected.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 14, 2018, 11:08 PM
 
Originally Posted by reader50 View Post
The whole Iran thing is an exercise in insanity. Along with moving the US embassy to Jerusalem, it appears a deliberate effort to destabilize the middle east. Perhaps to brew a war to direct attention away from domestic issues?
Nah (Though I'm sure Bolton is rock hard)

Originally Posted by reader50 View Post
Near as I can figure, Trump wants a NK deal because it would be his deal. And hates the far-more-stable Iran deal because it was done by Obama. Gotta undo everything Obama did, as though he had never been elected.
Much more likely.

I'm trying to ignore the leaks about some of the NK stuff because I don't want to pre-judge it, and honestly, I'm not sure anything people 'know' matters if the ultimate call comes from Trump.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 14, 2018, 11:19 PM
 
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/12/u...is-pompeo.html
Even if Mr. Mattis had wanted to fight for the deal, it is not clear how much he would have been heard. Mr. Bolton, officials said, never convened a high-level meeting of the National Security Council to air the debate. He advised Mr. Trump in smaller sessions, otherwise keeping the door to his West Wing office closed. Mr. Bolton has forged a comfortable relationship with the president, several people said, channeling his “America First” vocabulary.
I'm not sure how this works. Mattis doesn't report to the NSC, but to the Pres. If the NSA can block the SoD, then we need to re-examine the position not needing senate confirmation.

Hmm...
The influence and role of the National Security Advisor varies from administration to administration and depends not only on the qualities of the person appointed to the position but also on the style and management philosophy of the incumbent President.[5] Ideally, the National Security Advisor serves as an honest broker of policy options for the President in the field of national security, rather than as an advocate for his or her own policy agenda.[6]

However, the National Security Advisor is a staff position in the Executive Office of the President and does not have line or budget authority over either the Department of State or the Department of Defense, unlike the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense, who are Senate-confirmed officials with statutory authority over their departments;[7] but the National Security Advisor is able to offer daily advice (due to the proximity) to the President independently of the vested interests of the large bureaucracies and clientele of those departments.[5]
So basically its a crapshoot of whether you're getting Seward or Wormtongue.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 15, 2018, 08:23 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
I'm not sure how this works. Mattis doesn't report to the NSC, but to the Pres. If the NSA can block the SoD, then we need to re-examine the position not needing senate confirmation.
My assumption is Bolton can do an end run around Mattis by convincing the president to block.
     
   
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:03 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,