REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Trump withdraws from Iran nuclear deal

POSTED BY: SIGNYM
UPDATED: Wednesday, May 30, 2018 07:42
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 571
PAGE 1 of 1

Thursday, May 10, 2018 3:56 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


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.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, May 10, 2018 4:25 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


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.

JCPOA never was an Agreement. Iran was never a signatory.
I expect France, Germany, UK will continue to reap massive profits from Iran.

My posts on this subject for the past few days are in the Draining The Swamp thread.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, May 10, 2018 5:07 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


If I have anything to add I'll post it over there.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

America is an oligarchy
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, May 10, 2018 5:40 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

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

Here is fine with me. I had not found a thread with the specific topic at the time. This topic might get buried in that one more easily.
I was just saying where some other posts on the topic were located.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, May 10, 2018 6:04 PM

WHOZIT


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

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, May 10, 2018 6:07 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

are they going to do with the 150 billion we sent them?
It was their money to begin with, so as long as they're not building nuclear weapons ... who cares? Seems like that's their business, not ours.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

America is an oligarchy
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, May 10, 2018 6:10 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing 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."



Did anyone say "Ukraine? This is a pretty clear statement that the USA does destabilize other nations.

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.


Wait. What?
Why is the "US" facing threats in Yemen? Is Yemen part of our territory? Is Syria? What happened to focusing on America, and not being policeman to the world?

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."







-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

America is an oligarchy
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, May 10, 2018 6:23 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

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

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

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, May 10, 2018 7:51 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


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


-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

America is an oligarchy
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, May 10, 2018 10:19 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


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


Do you really believe everything Obama and his stenographers in the MSM spoon-feed you?

The US froze the assets of the U.S. and Israel Ally Kingdom of Iran, so they would not be misappropriated by the coup, in the illegitimate Mullah Fundamentalist Iran. The King (translation: Shah) of Iran has not returned to power, and the funds of the Kingdom have not been claimed by a legitimate successor. The only claimants to the funds have been the illegitimate dictators ushered in by Carter, the anti-American Islamothugs which naturally Obama supported - anybody who hates America.
Obama gave American Taxpayer money to the thieves who stole Iran from its rightful descendants (and have murdered most if them) under the pretense that the thieves have legitimate right to what they stole.

When a civilized nation uncovers Jew gold, do you think it should be rightfully returned to the Nazi Germans who melted down the fillings from the Jew corpses?

Your understanding seems limited, or solely within the context of Hilliary/Obama narrative.

Do you really think the Menendez brothers should inherent the wealth of their parents after murdering them?
Or any criminal should benefit from their crimes?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, May 11, 2018 2:43 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


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

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

America is an oligarchy
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, May 11, 2018 4:29 AM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

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

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

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?
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 suspect that thread(s) about the plane full of gold on the tarmac likely have more info than me.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, May 11, 2018 4:44 AM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


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?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, May 11, 2018 4:51 AM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


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?

Does it help your thinking if we spell out for you that America was a bit ticked off about the IRAN HOSTAGES in Tehran in 1979-1980?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, May 11, 2018 4:58 AM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


That was then. A lot has happened in the meantime, where former dictator enemies became friends, elected friends became easily deposable enemies, and sometimes the cycle even went a whole 360. The legitimacy of any particular government has really nothing to do with our stance on Iran, or any country, despite your claims.




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

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, May 11, 2018 9:35 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


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:

President Carter acted for America the oil companies.
But REAGAN "negotiated" with terrorists. REAGAN (Ollie North) opened secret deals with the Grand Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and his henchmen to KEEP Americans hostage until AFTER the election, and sold them arms afterwards, transfering the arms-money to the Contras.

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?

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

America is an oligarchy
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, May 11, 2018 12:51 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


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??

Some of this history goes back farther than I recall well.
Did not the Pahlavi Monarchy rule from July 1926 until overthrow by the exiled Ayatollah in 1979? I think there was a change in Monarchy Lines during a few years of the 1920s.
I don't think there is dispute that Mosaddegh served in numerous different offices under the Pahlavi Monarchy, including the 35th Prime Minister, an elected office (like the British Monarchy allows Elections to occur in some colonies within their Realm). He was 1 of 22 elected Prime Ministers holding office under the last Shah, Shahnashah (King of Kings, reigning 1941-1979), correct?
Are you suggesting the Pahlavi House has been illegitimate since 1926? I don't recall the Pahlavi House aligning with The Axis Powers during that dust-up in the 1930s, so they might have been considered Allied, at least during their Anglo-Soviet occupation.
During the reign of Shahnashah the Anniversary was marked of 2,500 years of continuous Persian Monarchy rule. Apparently his greatest outrage was granting women sufferage, under his umbrella White Revolution, which unduly riled the Fundamentalist Mullahs. Under this House, in 1935 the name was changed from Persia to Iran. The exiled Crown Prince of Iran is reportedly related to the British Royal heirs (maternally thru Egypt, Duchy of Athens and Crown of Aragon, Prince Charles' father is Prince Philip of Greece)
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?

I keep forgetting to mention that part of the frozen assets included Real Estate, which did not fit on the same pallets of gold and cash bricks.


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? 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?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, May 11, 2018 10:45 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


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?
I don't know what you mean by "reigning authority". The Prime Minister of England, along with Parliament, govern the nation. THEY, not the king or queen, set policy, write laws, direct the military, and collect taxes and disburse funds. The British monarchy is a titular office only, with no real authority over the nation. They live in palaces, birth heirs, and wave at the populace.

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?
Scotland has its own Parliament, as does Wales and Northern Ireland.
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.
Australia attained independence in 1900. America, of course, won independence from Britain by revolution.

The FRENCH monarchs lost their heads about 1789.

So you see, monarchs lose authority either by granting it to others, or by revolution.

If you're trying to say that the "real" authority in Iran belonged to the Pahlavi line (which BTW established itself only a short time ago, in 1925, after the PREVIOUS monarchy was deposed by the Parliament of Iran) then I'm afraid you're sticking yourself in the wrong era.



-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

America is an oligarchy
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 12, 2018 12:06 AM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


"Scotland has its own Parliament, as does Wales and Northern Ireland." And as does Canada.




SECOND has managed to not actually discuss my post at all.
But it does certainly snark and troll at every post.
SECOND is a troll.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, May 14, 2018 10:59 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


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


-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

America is an oligarchy
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, May 14, 2018 2:00 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


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


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

Has Swiftboat Ketchup registered as a Foreign Agent?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, May 14, 2018 7:17 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

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

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

America is an oligarchy
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 15, 2018 3:59 AM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


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).

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 15, 2018 7:29 AM

CAPTAINCRUNCH

... stay crunchy...


Quote:

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



Depends on what their goal was, dun'it?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 15, 2018 9:19 AM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


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).

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

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 15, 2018 9:31 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


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!

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

America is an oligarchy
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 15, 2018 9:50 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


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'.



-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

America is an oligarchy
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 15, 2018 10:55 AM

CAPTAINCRUNCH

... stay crunchy...


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'.




Most Trump supporters have no idea what is meant by "The Deep State" or if it's even real. And they probably don't even care. They just repeat what Fox tells them. Just like Trump!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 15, 2018 11:08 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


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?

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

America is an oligarchy
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 15, 2018 3:34 PM

CAPTAINCRUNCH

... stay crunchy...


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?



Chaos and distractions and infighting - just what Russia is trying and succeeding with the US currently. You need to read more.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 15, 2018 4:08 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


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!

Wasn't Obama in Iraq just undercutting the Government? I don't recall him supporting anything he was gifted.
That was the whole point, remember? CHANGE. Once Iraq started to stabilize, Obama was annointed to Change the Middle East situation back to it's multi-millenial history, war and strife.
A lot of blood and treasure was expended in Iraq, so that Obama could squander away all progress.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 15, 2018 4:18 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


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'.

butbutbutbut Trump! Russia! Are you saying Trump ended the fictional pretense of a deal so that his buddy Putin could have Iran? Will this not pit USA against Russia? Or will this give USA access to Iran thru the backdoor of Putin, thereby cutting EU out of the loop?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 16, 2018 7:54 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


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?

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

America is an oligarchy
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 16, 2018 10:07 AM

CAPTAINCRUNCH

... stay crunchy...


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?




My answer hasn't changed - why are you asking again? Did you miss it the first time? Scroll up!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 16, 2018 10:35 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


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.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

America is an oligarchy
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 16, 2018 3:48 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


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?

You forgot the alias pizmobeach with CC/G.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 16, 2018 4:18 PM

CAPTAINCRUNCH

... stay crunchy...


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.




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?

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.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, May 17, 2018 10:27 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


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

(a) No, I don't remember. You spend so much of your time attacking other posters, it's hard to find an actual ... yanno... opinion in all of that trolling and

(b) perhaps you didn't notice when I posted that we were we're (mostly) all rah-rah-rah about R2P or WMD or whatever. I know that there are exceptions, but if YOU feel tarred as being a cheerleader for war that's on you.

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

Have you ever criticized Obama for his warmaking? Just curious.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

America is an oligarchy
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, May 17, 2018 11:39 AM

CAPTAINCRUNCH

... stay crunchy...


Quote:

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


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.

Fwiw:

1. As you might expect, I don't believe everything I've heard attributed to him or Hillary by you and others. There's so much reflexive hate focused on them that there's no way to trust a lot of it to be more than that. I need a lot more convincing.
2. I was biggly against his administration's drone policy.
3. I often doubted if he was able to stand up to those who pushed for military solutions in whatever form or whatever kind. Not an excuse, just an observation.

Overall, it's pretty hard to judge simply up or down, Obama's warmaking:

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/03/obama-doctri
ne-wars-numbers/474531
/

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, and partly because so much of the U.S.’s military activity is done from the shadows. That’s why, in consultation with Anthony Cordesman at Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) and Chris Harmer at the Institute for the Study of War, I’ve limited the definition of military involvement to countries that the United States is consistently bombing (overtly or covertly); where regular U.S. troops are engaged in combat; or where regular U.S. troops are providing intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance in support of another military force that is engaged in combat. By that definition, the U.S. is currently fighting in roughly eight countries. (For sanity’s sake, my definition excludes special-operations forces; Ken McGraw, a spokesman for U.S. Special Operations Command, or SOCOM, told me in early February that special-operations personnel were deployed in 82 countries that week alone.)

In many ways, Obama has kept his word. He ended Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom—the combat missions in Iraq and Afghanistan, respectively, that Bush bequeathed to him—and drastically reduced U.S. troop levels from their peaks in both countries. In the midst of the Arab Spring, the president led a limited military campaign against Libyan dictator Muammar al-Qaddafi with the support of the United Nations and a multinational coalition. He has been reluctant to intervene in Syria’s civil war in any significant way despite intense pressure to do so from both inside and outside his administration. In 2013, Obama announced his intention to shift the United States away from “a perpetual wartime footing.” He said, “Our systematic effort to dismantle terrorist organizations must continue. But this war, like all wars, must end.” And Obama has repeatedly shown his commitment to diplomacy by reestablishing relations with Burma and Cuba, and by striking a nuclear deal with Iran.

And yet while America’s military footprint abroad is fainter today than when Obama took office, it’s also more dispersed. Not counting the probable expansion of the anti-ISIS campaign to Libya and other parts of Africa in the near future, the U.S. military is, by my reckoning, involved in more countries now than when Obama took office in 2009, albeit to varying degrees.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, May 17, 2018 12:54 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


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.
Yes, I know. You spend so much time trolling you rarely discuss THE ISSUES.

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.




-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

America is an oligarchy
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, May 17, 2018 1:01 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


But aside from discussing your trolling habits, let's look ahead.

Will the EU EFFECTIVELY blow past US sanctions against Iran? Or will they huff and puff and make a lot of noise, but quietly calculate that it would be less painful to lose Iranian business than American? (And secretly pay off the blackmailers in Iran who have, apparently, threatened to "tell all" if their don't get their hush money?) Or are they hoping to ameliorate the American position which will allow them SOME business dealing with Iran?

It's a close call. Merkel and Macron and Mogherini don't have a stellar history of standing up against the USA, why start now? OTOH, this really could represent an existential threat to some politicians.


-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

America is an oligarchy
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, May 17, 2018 4:29 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


This

Trump Gives Merkel An Ultimatum: Drop Russian Gas Pipeline Or Trade War Begins
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-05-17/trump-gives-merkel-ultimatum
-drop-russian-gas-pipeline-or-trade-war-begins
(Originally posted at Trump Presses Germany to Drop Russian Pipeline for Trade Deal https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-presses-germany-to-drop-russian-pip
eline-for-trade-deal-1526566415
but you need a WSJ subscription to read it)

and this

EU Launches Rebellion Against Trump's Iran Sanctions, Bans European Companies From Complying
https://tradingcheatsheet.com/2018/05/17/eu-launches-rebellion-against
-trumps-iran-sanctions-bans-european-companies-from-complying
/

are related.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

America is an oligarchy
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, May 17, 2018 4:37 PM

CAPTAINCRUNCH

... stay crunchy...


Quote:

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



I just did in the post before this, ya ignoramus.

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.



More Siggy bullsh*t. I called it an invasion, not a "full-out invasion." It must really suck to have to lie most of the time to be "right" in your mind.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, May 28, 2018 5:14 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


"full-out invasion"

Actually, the phrase was "full-scale invasion" and was used - not to respond to your post - but to illustrate the range of possible 'involvement'.

If you're going to be a troll, you need to not be so laughable at it.




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).

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, May 28, 2018 5:18 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Trump and Europe are entering a 'game of chicken' over Iran nuclear ...
CNBC-May 24, 2018

European leaders are assembling a playbook to preserve the Iran nuclear ... the deal and restore a punishing slate of sanctions against Iran.
Doubts Emerge Over EU's Attempts to Counter US-Iran Sanctions Threat
Bloomberg-May 23, 2018

EU countries want to save the Iran nuclear deal. Don't expect ...
In-Depth-Washington Post-May 25, 2018




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).

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 30, 2018 7:42 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Don't read the words, just watch the pictures of Iran. Not what I expected and probably not what you expected either.



I thought this was interesting
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.
http://www.atimes.com/article/iran-diary-bracing-for-all-out-economic-
war
/

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

As long as you insist that everything is the Republicans'/ Democrats' fault, then you fail to grasp the REAL problem with American politics.

America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
A thread for Democrats Only
Sun, July 22, 2018 06:54 - 1548 posts
Our Future in Space
Sun, July 22, 2018 01:31 - 18 posts
Chemical weapons: Are we detecting a pattern yet?
Sat, July 21, 2018 17:30 - 108 posts
Equality Now
Sat, July 21, 2018 16:43 - 4 posts
This is Why Trump is a SCUMBAG!
Sat, July 21, 2018 15:36 - 506 posts
Countdown Clock to Trumps impeachment " STARTS"
Sat, July 21, 2018 15:33 - 1187 posts
You can't take the sky from me, a tribute to Firefly
Sat, July 21, 2018 08:48 - 186 posts
Cohen had tapes
Fri, July 20, 2018 20:52 - 4 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!!!
Fri, July 20, 2018 07:53 - 698 posts
The Evidens
Fri, July 20, 2018 07:17 - 994 posts
Civility
Fri, July 20, 2018 07:14 - 165 posts
Dow @ 20K. Time to jump off!
Fri, July 20, 2018 07:09 - 546 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL