No other President found it necessary to turn this money over to this terrorist regime. We should have continued to sue Iran for every terrorist act we could dig up on them until the money was gone.
Instead they now have an agreement to continue working on nuclear [del]weapons[/del] research along with the funding to go with it.
Obama has done everything possible to hand Iran a nuke.
Reagan gave them weapons. Did you prefer that to giving them back money they paid us years ago?
Not according to nearly every nuclear weapons proliferation expert. But what do nuclear weapons proliferation experts know about nuclear weapons proliferation?
This is absurd. Pretty much every expert has said Iran is now further from a nuke, and the conditions of the agreement–to which they are adhering, makes it so they do not have the capability to “rush to the finish line.” If they decide to break the agreement and start work towards a nuke again, we would likely have over a year to respond.
We actually had agreed years ago to international arbitration over this money, and all evidence was we were going to lose, and lose big. Because we basically stole this money from Iran. We ended up settling for like $1.5bn (the $400m is just a partial payment), and some have speculated we might have owed as much as $10bn if we hadn’t agreed to this. Sure, we could’ve ignored the result of the international arbitration, but for a country like the United States that ostensibly lives by the rule of law that would be a questionable diplomatic decision.
Plus, Iran has itself entered into an agreement in which it accepts lawsuits for some of its actions–and has paid out tons of money, including to the Iran embassy hostages and others.
Steps to giving Iran a nuke:
Iran directly supports international terrorism and has designs on the region. Saudi Arabia has rogue regime elements who support international terrorism, but it is not government policy, and the Sauds are pretty content to just run Saudi Arabia rather than nations beyond their borders. Iran is definitely the bigger problem.
Tell that to Yemen.
They were already doing nuclear research – with tons and tons of nuclear material and zero inspections. Now they can conduct peaceful research, with nearly zero nuclear material and tons of inspections.
Without this agreement Iran would be guaranteed to get nukes. With the agreement, there’s no chance for at least 15 years or so.
The agreement doesn’t provide for on-demand inspections. It’s specific to agreed-upon locations.
A year to respond? What does that mean exactly?
Obama makes the BEST deals. This is what winning looks like. Trump is just jealous.
Can anyone fill me in- short version is fine, on why we owed Iran money in the first place?
Right before the Iranian revolution (in the late 70s), the Iranian government purchased weapons from us, sending over $400m. Before we delivered weapons, the revolution happened, and relations were cut off. We never delivered the weapons, but we kept the money.
[ol]
[li]We agreed to sell them a bunch of military hardware, planes mostly IIRC.[/li][li]They paid us in advance of receiving the goods.[/li][li]They had a regime turnover, we didn’t like the new leaders.[/li][li]We said “Hey no planes for you, but we will hang on to your money”[/li][/ol]
So, basically, it’s like I make a big order on Amazon.com, and then the next day have a mental breakdown and become a professional denouncer of Amazon.com, holding rallies shouting “Death to Amazon!”. Amazon decides that they don’t like me any more, and keep my money but don’t send my stuff.
So it’s reasonable that they didn’t send the order, but they should have returned the money.
Is this anything like the line drawn in Syria and the removal of chemical weapons? How’d that work out?
You presume a number of things:
-the Iranians got rid of most of their material
-they got rid of most of their centrifuges
-they no longer wish to build nuclear weapons
The agreement made with Iran is worth exactly the paper it’s printed on unlike the 400 million dollars we gave them in cash.
Actually it’s more like Charles Manson’s brother making a big order and then refunding the money to Charles Manson for kidnapping people and then exporting terrorism. Giving him the money is going to fuel his efforts.
Syria’s chemical weapons were destroyed. It worked out pretty well, considering the circumstances.
There are actual human inspectors, and they actually can look for stuff like this. There is science and engineering involved. As to Iran’s desire, that’s why we keep inspecting. Don’t trust – verify. That’s what the deal does, according to nuclear proliferation experts.
You mean the money we returned to them?
But we’ll see. If Iran gets nukes in the next few years, I’ll concede that you might have been right. If they don’t, will you concede that you were wrong?
Who is the US in this metaphor? Manson, or the brother?
Iran’s government sucks. But get our people home. Seems favorable to me