Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Now, I have never been able to understand Trump's grotch against Iran. Possibly he has information that he can't share, for security reasons. Possibly it's just an emotion-based identification with Israel. Or he just has a short hair up his ass. Maybe it's an attempt to shore up Saudi and the petrodollar, or to interdict Iranian economic activity with ...anyone. "Economic warfare" would certainly be consistent with the current attack on Iran's currency, the rial, and with the recent attempt at
"regime change" as well as external military pressure. Trump supporters are busy squaring the circle, insisting that Trump is only interested in getting the deep state collaborators out of the Iranian government. Conflicting explanations abound!

For whatever reason, Trump has decided not to renew the JCPOA. What are the practical results?

The EU insists it will maintain the agreement. If that's true, then they will be loathe to conduct any business with Iran in the American dollar, or to have assets pass thru American banks. Trade will have to be negotiated in Euros or an alternate like a gold-backed trade note, and thru non-American banks, which will only weaken the role of the American petrodollar further.

Alternately, the EU will abide by American sanctions, which will piss off most European politicians and businesses, and throw Iran even further into the Chinese/ Russian orbit.

It's an interesting topic.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
If I have anything to add I'll post it over there.

---

Quote:

---

are they going to do with the 150 billion we sent them?

---

Quote:

---

Leaked Doc Reveals White House Planning "Regime Change" In Iran

It appears Rudy Giuliani wasn't joking.

Just a few days after the former NYC mayor and latest member of President Trump's unexpectedly let it slip that "we got a president who is tough, who does not listen to the people who are naysayers, and a president who is committed to regime change [in Iran]", the Washington Free Beacon has obtained a three-page white paper being circulated among National Security Council officials with drafted plans to spark regime change in Iran, following the US exit from the Obama-era nuclear deal and the re-imposition of tough sanctions aimed at toppling the Iranian regime.

The plan, authored by the Security Studies Group, or SSG, a national security think-tank that has close ties to senior White House national security officials, including - who else - National Security Adviser John Bolton, seeks to reshape longstanding American foreign policy toward Iran by emphasizing an explicit policy of regime change, something the Obama administration opposed when popular protests gripped Iran in 2009, writes the Free Beacon, which obtained a leaked copy of the circulating plans.

The regime change plan seeks to fundamentally shift U.S. policy towards Iran and has found a receptive audience in the Trump administration, which has been moving in this direction since Bolton—a longtime and vocal supporter of regime change—entered the White House.

It deemphasizes U.S military intervention, instead focusing on a series of moves to embolden an Iranian population that has increasingly grown angry at the ruling regime for its heavy investments in military adventurism across the region. -Free Beacon

"The ordinary people of Iran are suffering under economic stagnation, while the regime ships its wealth abroad to fight its expansionist wars and to pad the bank accounts of the Mullahs and the IRGC command," SSG writes in the paper. "This has provoked noteworthy protests across the country in recent months" it further claims as an argument to push a "regime change" policy.

For now - at least - overthrowing the Iran government, with its extensive and close ties to the Kremlin, is not official US policy; SSG president Jim Hanson told the Free Beacon that the Trump administration does not want to engage in direct military intervention in Iran - and is instead focusing on other methods of ridding Iran of its "hardline ruling regime."

"The Trump administration has no desire to roll tanks in an effort to directly topple the Iranian regime," Hanson said. "But they would be much happier dealing with a post-Mullah government. That is the most likely path to a nuclear weapons-free and less dangerous Iran."

That will likely change, however.

One source close to the White House who has previewed the plan told the Free Beacon that the nuclear deal, also known as the JCPOA, solidified the Iranian regime's grip on power and intentionally prevented the United States from fomenting regime change

"The JCPOA purposefully destroyed the carefully created global consensus against the Islamic Republic," said the source, who would only speak to the Free Beacon on background about the sensitive issue. "Prior to that, everyone understood the dangers of playing footsie with the world's largest state sponsor of terrorism. It's now Trump, Bolton, and [Mike] Pompeo's job to put this consensus back in place."

The source tells the Beacon that Bolton is "acutely aware of the danger the Iranian regime poses to the region."

"John is someone who understands the danger of Iran viscerally, and knows that you're never going to fundamentally change its behavior—and the threats against Israel and the Saudis especially—until that revolutionary regime is gone," the source said, adding that "nothing's off the table right now if Israel is attacked."

That said, Bolton is confident that an Iranian regime change will occur in the next six months [LINK THAT I CAN'T GRAB]

A second source tells The Beacon that the Trump administration recognizes that the "chief impediment to the region is Iran's tyrannical regime."

"The problem is not the Iran nuclear deal it's the Iranian regime," said the source. "Team Bolton has spent years creating Plans B, C, and D for dealing with that problem. President Trump hired him knowing all of that. The administration will now start aggressively moving to deal with the root cause of chaos and violence in the region in a clear-eyed way."

Regional sources who have spoken to SSG "tell us that Iranian social media is more outraged about internal oppression, such as the recent restrictions on Telegram, than about supporting or opposing the nuclear program. Iranian regime oppression of its ethnic and religious minorities has created the conditions for an effective campaign designed to splinter the Iranian state into component parts," the group states. -Free Beacon

"More than one third of Iran's population is minority groups, many of whom already seek independence," the paper explains. "U.S. support for these independence movements, both overt and covert, could force the regime to focus attention on them and limit its ability to conduct other malign activities."

---

Quote:

---

Without a regime change, the United States will continue face threats from Iranian forces stationed throughout the region, including in Iraq, Yemen, Syria, and Lebanon.

---

Quote:

---

"The probability the current Iranian theocracy will stop its nuclear program willingly or even under significant pressure is low," the plan states. "Absent a change in government within Iran, America will face a choice between accepting a nuclear-armed Iran or acting to destroy as much of this capability as possible."

That said, President Trump made clear earlier in the week that US officials must make efforts to differentiate between the people of Iran and its ruling regime.

"Any public discussion of these options, and any messaging about the Iranian regime in general, should make a bright line distinction between the theocratic regime along with its organs of oppression and the general populace," according to the plan. "We must constantly reinforce our support for removing the iron sandal from the necks of the people to allow them the freedom they deserve."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by whozit:
what are they going to do with the 150 billion we sent them?

---

Quote:

---

Accelerate their Nuclear Weapons building. Wasn't that the whole purpose of giving them American Taxpayer money?

---

Quote:

---

Here's what's in Iran's $100 billion in assets that will become unfrozen by the nuclear deal

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

Accelerate their Nuclear Weapons building. Wasn't that the whole purpose of giving them American Taxpayer money?

---

As far as I know, this was IRANIAN money that was being returned to them.

We froze Iranian assets in 1979, remember?

What, did you think we weren't supposed to return it?

Quote:

---

Here's what's in Iran's $100 billion in assets that will become unfrozen by the nuclear deal

---

http://www.businessinsider.com/whats-in-irans-100-billion-in-frozen-as
sets-2015-7

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Well. Now, THAT is a different view of things! I need to spend more time asking you about this.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
I kinda' think the US isn't picky about giving money to thugs who overthrow, or try to overthrow, elected, recognized governments.

So anyway ... anyone up for a rational, fact-based, and civil discussion about the topic?

---

Quote:

---

Well. Now, THAT is a different view of things! I need to spend more time asking you about this. - SIGNY

Countries around the world besides America, plus United Nations, have frozen Iran assets since 1979 following the overthrow of the legitimate and worldwide recognized King of Iran.- JSF

---

Quote:

---

Many Iranians regard Mosaddegh as the leading champion of secular democracy and resistance to foreign domination in Iran's modern history. Mosaddegh was removed from power in a coup on 19 August 1953, organised and carried out by the CIA at the request of MI6, which chose Iranian General Fazlollah Zahedi to succeed Mosaddegh

---

Quote:

---

President Carter acted for America the oil companies.

---

Quote:

---

The estimated total worldwide is 200 Billion. The portion frozen by America is estimated at a little under $2 Billion.

---

Quote:

---

So is Obama proclaiming himself as King of the World again, unilaterally giving the worldwide Assets of the Kingdom to the thugs who executed the Coup?

---

Quote:

---

Or did he give $2 Billion of the Assets of the Kingdom, and threw in an extra $148 Billion of American Taxpayer money to help the Islamothugs reestablish their Nuclear Weapons procurement Program?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

Well. Now, THAT is a different view of things! I need to spend more time asking you about this. - SIGNY

Countries around the world besides America, plus United Nations, have frozen Iran assets since 1979 following the overthrow of the legitimate and worldwide recognized King of Iran.- JSF

---

Oh, you mean the "king" of Iran, Shah Reza Pahlavi, who was INSTALLED BY THE CIA when they overthrew the ELECTED leader of Iran, Moassadgh, in 1953?

Quote:

---

Many Iranians regard Mosaddegh as the leading champion of secular democracy and resistance to foreign domination in Iran's modern history. Mosaddegh was removed from power in a coup on 19 August 1953, organised and carried out by the CIA at the request of MI6, which chose Iranian General Fazlollah Zahedi to succeed Mosaddegh

---

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Mosaddegh
You mean the Shah who used the (CIA-trained) secret police, Savak, who tortured and killed in such medieval ways as to make the CIA blush? You mean THAT "legitimate" leader of Iran??

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

The estimated total worldwide is 200 Billion. The portion frozen by America is estimated at a little under $2 Billion.

---

Quote:

---

So is Obama proclaiming himself as King of the World again, unilaterally giving the worldwide Assets of the Kingdom to the thugs who executed the Coup?

---

Well, it is an interesting point to whom those assets belong. Since DEBT racked up under dictatorships is still payable by a revolutionary nation (unless they can declare it to be "odious debt") I assume ASSETS racked up under a dictatorship belong to a successor nation as well? It's a point of international law that I'm not familiar with and you prolly aren't either.

Quote:

---

Or did he give $2 Billion of the Assets of the Kingdom, and threw in an extra $148 Billion of American Taxpayer money to help the Islamothugs reestablish their Nuclear Weapons procurement Program?

---

I dunno. Did he? I can't seem to find a reliable statement ANYwhere as to exactly how much $$$ was xfered to the Iranian govt under the JPCOA, and where it came from. Maybe you can find a linky?

---

Quote:

---

I wish to ask your viewpoint here. Do you consider the elected Prime Minister who hangs around London (I don't recall the exact title) to be the reigning authority over the British Monarchy?

---

Quote:

---

To be the leader of Scotland and Ireland? Was that PM the supreme authority over Hong Kong before the turn of the century? The supreme authority over Canada? Or Australia?

---

Quote:

---

In the United Kingdom, devolution refers to the statutory granting of powers from the Parliament of the United Kingdom to the Scottish Parliament, the National Assembly for Wales, the Northern Ireland Assembly and the London Assembly and to their associated executive bodies the Scottish Government, the Welsh Government, the Northern Ireland Executive and in England, the Greater London Authority and combined authorities.

---

Quote:

---

Raman Ghavami @Raman_Ghavami
H.J.Ansari Zarif’s senior advisor: “If Europeans stop trading with Iran and don’t put pressure on US then we will reveal which western politicians and how much money they had received during nuclear negotiations to make #IranDeal happen.”
That would be interesting.#JCPOA

---

Quote:

---

No wonder Kerry is in a panic trying to salvage deal. Obama and rest of BenRhodesian crew must be on list too. I want to know how many network CEOs got captured. #ABC #CBS #CNN #AMJoy #inners #AMR
— omen (@omen_syria) May 12, 2018

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Well, this is getting downright weird.

"Dave" of the X22 Report is right, again. He has been spouting for at least the last month that the Iranian nuclear deal was a joint venture between deep staters in the USA/EU and collaborators in Iran, that the purpose of the deal was (among other things) to transfer money to/ create a slush fund for the collaborators in Iran, and that if the rest of the money is not forthcoming, Iranians will feel free to reveal who those western politicians were on the other end of the deal.

And now, in a tweet from Iraq (which has close ties to Iran) ...

Quote:

---

Raman Ghavami @Raman_Ghavami
H.J.Ansari Zarif’s senior advisor: “If Europeans stop trading with Iran and don’t put pressure on US then we will reveal which western politicians and how much money they had received during nuclear negotiations to make #IranDeal happen.”
That would be interesting.#JCPOA

---

and

Quote:

---

No wonder Kerry is in a panic trying to salvage deal. Obama and rest of BenRhodesian crew must be on list too. I want to know how many network CEOs got captured. #ABC #CBS #CNN #AMJoy #inners #AMR
— omen (@omen_syria) May 12, 2018

---

Really?

https://ilovemyfreedom.org/grab-the-popcorn-iran-threatened-to-name-po
liticians-who-took-bribes-to-pass-nuclear-deal/?utm_source=realjack&utm_medium=twitter

---

Quote:

---

Why is any of this weird? Did you not know? Have you not been paying attention?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
The results have been unmitigated disaster after disaster.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-05-14/ron-paul-explains-trumps-pla
n-iran-put-terrorists-charge

It’s easy to dismiss the bombastic Giuliani as he speaks to his financial benefactors in the MeK. Unfortunately, however, Giuliani’s claims were confirmed late last week, when the Washington Free Beacon published a three-page policy paper being circulated among National Security Council officials containing plans to spark regime change in Iran.

The paper suggests that the US focus on Iran’s many ethnic minority groups to spark unrest and an eventual overthrow of the government. This is virtually the same road map that the US has followed in Iraq, Libya, Syria, and so on. The results have been unmitigated disaster after disaster.

SECOND is a troll because it constantly misrepresents what people post, fails to address their actual positions, and resorts to personal attacks when its brain isn't working (which is most of the time).

---

Quote:

---

The paper suggests that the US focus on Iran’s many ethnic minority groups to spark unrest and an eventual overthrow of the government. This is virtually the same road map that the US has followed in Iraq, Libya, Syria, and so on. The results have been unmitigated disaster after disaster. - KIKI

Wasn't Obama supporting the dictators/disasters of those 3? Protecting the evil from the locals, squashing unrest?- JSF

---

Quote:

---

The results have been unmitigated disaster after disaster.- KIKI

Depends on what their goal was, dun'it?- CC

---

Quote:

---

China's CNPC ready to take over Iran project if Total leaves: sources

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Trump supporters would say that this was his plan to get the deep state out of the Iranian government. Just sayin'.

---

Quote:

---

The results have been unmitigated disaster after disaster.- KIKI

Depends on what their goal was, dun'it?- CC

Well, if the goal was to replace functioning national governments with smoking ruins of failed-states crawling with jihadists, and to represent the Saudi and Israeli national interests by destroying other nations, then I say they scored bigtime! -SIGNY

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

The results have been unmitigated disaster after disaster.- KIKI

Depends on what their goal was, dun'it?- CC

Well, if the goal was to replace functioning national governments with smoking ruins of failed-states crawling with jihadists, and to represent the Saudi and Israeli national interests by destroying other nations, then I say they scored bigtime! -SIGNY

---

So just ooc, what WERE those goals, do you suppose?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

The paper suggests that the US focus on Iran’s many ethnic minority groups to spark unrest and an eventual overthrow of the government. This is virtually the same road map that the US has followed in Iraq, Libya, Syria, and so on. The results have been unmitigated disaster after disaster. - KIKI

Wasn't Obama supporting the dictators/disasters of those 3? Protecting the evil from the locals, squashing unrest?- JSF

---

I dunno, that description is too broad-brush to be accurate. Obama's relationship with Afghanistan and Iraq was post USA-invasion, and could best be described as "propping up the CIA-supported national government".

On the other hand, Obama himself initiated and completed the destruction of Libya, and nearly destroyed Ukraine and Syria, so his relationship with THOSE nations was to destabilize/depose/destroy the then-current leadership.

Quote:

---

The results have been unmitigated disaster after disaster.- KIKI

Depends on what their goal was, dun'it?- CC

---

Well, if the goal was to replace functioning national governments with smoking ruins of failed-states crawling with jihadists, and to represent the Saudi and Israeli national interests by destroying other nations, then I say they scored bigtime!

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
So, why is Kerry creeping around Iran, trying to salvage the Iran deal? Isn't he behaving as a private citizen negotiating with a foreign nation against current national policy? Isn't he providing aid and comfort to an enemy of the USA? When DOES treason and/or the Logan Act come into play?

*****

In any case .... thinking ahead ... a lot of what happens next depends on what the EU (France, Germany, the UK) decide. They would probably buck the Iranian sanctions if the USA would let them by working with non-dollar payments and keeping their transactions out of USA-located branches, but Bolton has already suggested that the USA might sanction any nation which breaks the Iranian sanctions. So if Trump and Bolton are serious about that, any large French, UK, or German transnational which does a large amount of business with the USA (which is probably all of them) won't risk sanctions.

Along this path, that means that China and Russia will complete their stranglehold/ warm embrace of Iran. We can see the outlines already: China is ready to step in if Total (French oil) bows out.

Quote:

---

China's CNPC ready to take over Iran project if Total leaves: sources

---

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-iran-nuclear-cnpc-total/chinas-cnpc
-ready-to-take-over-iran-project-if-total-leaves-sources-idUSKBN1IC0TE

Also, if there is a complete rupture between the EU and Iran, and further payments and deal-making are out of the question, then the ayatollahs and other government functionaries who were in on the deal are free to tell all.

*****

Trump supporters would say that this was his plan to get the deep state out of the Iranian government. Just sayin'.

---

Quote:

---

The results have been unmitigated disaster after disaster.- KIKI

Depends on what their goal was, dun'it?- CC

Well, if the goal was to replace functioning national governments with smoking ruins of failed-states crawling with jihadists, and to represent the Saudi and Israeli national interests by destroying other nations, then I say they scored bigtime!
So just ooc, what WERE those goals, do you suppose? - SIGNY

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

The results have been unmitigated disaster after disaster.- KIKI

Depends on what their goal was, dun'it?- CC

Well, if the goal was to replace functioning national governments with smoking ruins of failed-states crawling with jihadists, and to represent the Saudi and Israeli national interests by destroying other nations, then I say they scored bigtime!
So just ooc, what WERE those goals, do you suppose? - SIGNY

---

So just ooc, what WERE those goals, do you suppose? CC (GSTRING) ... any thoughts?

---

Quote:

---

Chaos and distractions and infighting

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

The results have been unmitigated disaster after disaster.- KIKI

Depends on what their goal was, dun'it?- CC

Well, if the goal was to replace functioning national governments with smoking ruins of failed-states crawling with jihadists, and to represent the Saudi and Israeli national interests by destroying other nations, then I say they scored bigtime!
So just ooc, what WERE those goals, do you suppose? - SIGNY

---

So just ooc, what WERE those goals, do you suppose? CC (GSTRING) ... any thoughts?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Yes, I missed it the first time, sorry.

Quote:

---

Chaos and distractions and infighting

---

Do you mean here, or there? Because in the initial stages, we're (mostly) all rah-rah-rah about R2P or WMD or whatever. The infighting (here) only comes afterwards.

Also, don't forget this seems to have been the goal of both Presidents Bush AND Obama.

---

Quote:

---

Yes, I missed it the first time, sorry.= SIGNY

Chaos and distractions and infighting ... CC

Do you mean here, or there? Because in the initial stages, we're (mostly) all rah-rah-rah about R2P or WMD or whatever. The infighting (here) only comes afterwards. - SIGNY

I wasn't rah rah anything Middle East. I have been rah rah it's a black hole, get the hell out. You don't remember?- CC

---

Quote:

---

Also, don't forget this seems to have been the goal of both Presidents Bush AND Obama. - SIGNY

I have never absolved any US president of anything. Cites? Do you remember me posting all those negative things I said about nominee Hillary after you said I never did? That's why we never have a decent discussion - you ignore shit or make shit up or lately, just forget.- GSTRING

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:Have you ever criticized Obama for his warmaking? Just curious.

---

Quote:

---

I'm not sure if I have ever "criticized Obama for his (alleged) warmaking" here. I have never supported or defended it here or anywhere, either.

---

Quote:

---

To be fair, defining U.S. “military involvement” is tricky, partly because there are many levels of engagement between no military involvement and full-scale invasion,

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Yes, I know. You spend so much time trolling you rarely discuss THE ISSUES.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

To be fair, defining U.S. “military involvement” is tricky, partly because there are many levels of engagement between no military involvement and full-scale invasion,

---

Except in Ukraine, when what can best be described as a "proxy war" becomes a full-out "invasion", in your book.

---

Quote:

---

What daily life in 17 million-strong, congested to death Tehran reveals is the standard of living essentially of a mid-level emerging nation. Everyone has a car, and smartphones and wi-fi are ubiquitous. In parallel, everywhere we feel intimations of a Persian civilization boasting at least a millennium of fabulous history even before Islam was born. And when we talk to the secularized intellectual elite, it’s clear that for them, in comparison, Arabs are nothing but trouble.

---