But they were also dissuaded from pursuing a nuclear weapons program, as best as we can tell. And it could have been all that foreign meddling in their program that resulted in Iran shelving those plans for obtaining a nuclear weapon (seems like nobody has a clear answer to that, though).
Possibly North Korea will agree to a lot of things to get some short-term benefits and the instant the U.S. does anything concrete (or anything that looks sufficiently concrete for propaganda purposes) to alter the Iran deal, North Korea will instantly renege on everything and say the treatment of Iran proves the U.S. cannot be trusted.
That’s an argument that Israel’s ambassador to the US made. That the concerted efforts of Israeli, US and various other intelligence agencies have played a large part in keeping Iran in successfully developing a nuclear weapon over the past 20 years or so. Of course, he also credited Bibi’s PM-ship for 12 of those years as playing a significant contributing factor in keeping Iran from achieving their nuclear ambitions.
Israel has nuclear weapons in some isolated desert underground facility.
Perhaps the Iranians do, too.
versus giving them a nuclear power plant or plane loads of cash in the dark of night? Great diplomacy.
Rocket man needs to know he’s a dead man if he doesn’t make nice with South Korea. China needs to know the shit will hit the fan if NK gets stupid. It’s time they stepped up and pulled the strings on their puppet regime.
I wonder how China would view NK trading it’s nuclear weapons and the end of the Korean War for a couple of nuclear power plants and a lot of food?
IOW, in the abstract, they don’t want unwanted births out of wedlock, but they want all this other stuff even more that inevitably leads to unwanted births out of wedlock.
Maybe not the same as wanting unwanted births out of wedlock, but close.
Which is to say, sure, in the abstract, they don’t want Iran to have nukes, but they want all this other stuff even more which will result in Iran having nukes. Only in this case, they wouldn’t even get any ‘other stuff’ (unless one counts the opportunity to strut around as if they’ll keep Iran from having nukes simply by being so tough and macho), just the deal ends and Iran gets nukes.
IOW, they want Iran to get nukes.
Didn’t Bibi swear up and down that the Iraqis had WMDs? I get the impression that Bibi really wants a war to destroy the Iranian regime, but if he gets it, what then? See how well that worked in Iraq. See how well backing rebels worked in Syria. One doesn’t solve a theoretical problem by creating a real one.
Not that I remember. At the time he was Minister of Finance in the Sharon administration, which generally refused to either publicly confirm or refute Bush’s claims.
(Little-known historical note: not long after the U.S. invasion Ariel Shron quietly fired the entire Iraq desk at the Mossad, allegedly for failing to provide an accurate assessment on the state of Iraqi WMDs)
I get the impression that Bibi really wants a war to destroy the Iranian regime, but if he gets it, what then? See how well that worked in Iraq. See how well backing rebels worked in Syria. One doesn’t solve a theoretical problem by creating a real one.
[/QUOTE]
As I noted above, I don’t think Bibi wants an actual full-scale war. He likes to rattle his saber, not draw it.
Besides, if the Iranian thread were removed, what reason would would people have to vote for him?
Not to mention…
Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf!
The story says everybody should have stopped taking these bozos seriously well before now. Something’s not working here. :mad:
At least he has lengthened the timeframe for Iran to obtain a nuclear weapon from 3-5 years in the 1990s to 7 years under the JCPOA. That’s progress.
How many Friedman Units is that?
Bibi’s not the only one who wants that - John Bolton has been banging that drum too. This is the same delusion that got us into Iraq, only worse.
Developing then again? Iran never stopped developing nuclear weapons or increasing the range of its missiles to deliver them.
Obama’s deal was a bad one. It just gave Iran a nation who makes no bones about funding terrorism even worse.
Iraq had WMD’s, they used chemical weapons and poison gas on the Kurds, then buried the rest of them in non metallic containers in a nation the size of Texas that is full of sand.
Its not only Bibi. Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt fear what Iran might do as well.
Wow! You should totally provide the UN inspectors with this information and the name of the reliable source that gave it to you, because they would definitely want to know about it. And also about those giant metal containers of chemical weapons in Iraq. I mean, I’m assuming you must have a pretty solid lead to be contradicting the views of most of the world’s experts on the region.
I’d explain to you the dozen ways in which both these sentences are wrong, but given that you haven’t even come back to your tariffs thread I’m not sure it’s worth it. If you actually care, I’ll leave it to John Oliver to explain it to you.
Cite ? Or is that just a silly conspiracy theory-ish rationalization for why none whatsoever were found over the 10 years of US occupation of the country ; because absence of evidence is evidence of evidence where you live ?
Not according to the intelligence community under George W. Bush.
I thought Alex Jones and Fox News had proof that they were all shipped to Syria using a huge convoy of semi-trailers.
Yes, but then they sent them back. See, if they remain in a constant loop of transport, nobody actually “has” them. And, as you might expect, the “…huge convoy of semi-trailers…” is a battered Ford pickup truck. Specifically, the glove compartment.