What is the US up to with regard to Iran?

[Berzerker]

And its not working. NK has restarted missile tests.

Now Trump is left with either using the big stick or looking like a blowhard.

Thats part of the negotiating process, both sides do it.

So what are the successful deals he has negotiated with these guys? Any new treaties in place? Any new trade deals? Are there fewer weapons in the world? Oh ad Did Trump negotiate with the Taliban? I don't remember him meeting with them.

You mean Trump has to show up in person to make deals? We are negotiating with the Taliban, the last I heard we're debating how long we hang around after a peace deal is signed, 6 to 18 months. I'm not privy too all the deals we have going with Russia, but the big one is we stopped trying to overthrow Assad. As for NK, Trump actually is meeting them in person and working to a resolution of hostilities. Course the Democrats howled about that too, how could Trump meet with Kim!?!

 

[AmazonQueen]

Thats part of the negotiating process, both sides do it.

No, its the failure of Trumps supposed process. NK has renewed tests. Trump looks ridiculous so he tries to turn attention to another part of the world to cover up that he hasn't achieved anything with NK.

 

[Patine]

It'll be fun to see all the players eager to fight with dad step into the cop roles they pick up. Lots of state surveillance going in around the world, ah the harmony.

Well, of course, once the damage is done and the mess is made, the idealism looks a lot harder to get up and running. At this point, packing up and turtling back home would only make the U.S. look cowardly and irresponsible. I was more pining for a "what-if" scenario where people who had power and influence at the time had used their heads and not their guns.

 

[Farm Boy]

Idealism up and running.

We're stuck with the conclusion because, ultimately, apart from widespread collapse we realize that somebody will seek to step into all voids. Often more than one, and frequently in tension. While the US stepping out of a lot of stuff or having not stepped into in the first place will be good and would have been better, a lot of the guys and gals that are going to come hoofing in as soon as they can are going to suck major ass. <shrug> I mean, it's like so super predictable as to be more accurately called nigh unavoidable, isn't it?

 

[Socrates99]

I might not have gone far enough back in the thread to see if someone said this already but the US just needs a boogeyman. Trump proclaimed his love for Kim and is a strong advocate for normalizing relations with Russia. Venezuela isn't a threat and neither is Syria. No American truly believes war with China is on the horizon. ISIL is almost a nonentity and the Taliban, while resilient, poses no threat. Iran is it.

Trump broke the Iran deal mostly as an "I hate Obama" move and has furthered the "they're a danger" narrative while doing it. Hes too stupid to have planned for them to be the boogeyman but has fallen backwards into it. The left is busy fearmongering about Russia because they think it undermines Trump (it doesn't) so right wingers need their own boogeyman to justify more absurd Pentagon budget increases to appease the Military Industrial Complex. Trump's and other neocon strategists have latched on to Iran purely for survival.

Heaven forbid the day the American populace decides en masse that we truly have nothing to fear.

 

[Farm Boy]

No American? Oh it's definitely on the horizon if we(universal) aren't careful.

 

[Socrates99]

Lol, I'll correct that to the near horizon. Them going to war with us would be virtually burning a mountain of accumulated assets and one of their largest revenue streams.

 

[Farm Boy]

Give it, eh, about a decade?

 

[Socrates99]

We'll see it coming when they start liquidating their portion of the US debt and selling off US real estate holdings. Right now they just have entirely too much invested here to make it worth it.

Of course if our crazy pants president decides seizing Chinese assets is a good move in his trade war we're screwed.

 

[Farm Boy]

Watch the weapons build outs/deployments and the resource development/stockpiles. Cash and legal property agreements are cheap when people start considering paying in children.

 

[Birdjaguar]

You mean Trump has to show up in person to make deals? We are negotiating with the Taliban, the last I heard we're debating how long we hang around after a peace deal is signed, 6 to 18 months. I'm not privy too all the deals we have going with Russia, but the big one is we stopped trying to overthrow Assad. As for NK, Trump actually is meeting them in person and working to a resolution of hostilities.

Well, he is the great negotiator.

Trump creates problems so he can solve them. He likes to create lots of controversy and step in to "negotiate" a solution. So do you approve of keeping Assad in power? Ceding power in the ME to Putin is not something negotiated. Trump just gave it away. If we aren't privy to other deals with Russia, how do you know they exist or if they are to our benefit? There is no deal with NK; there is no replacement for Nafta yet; he has to negotiate that with congress. The Taliban deal is all show. They are just waiting for the US to leave at which time they will resume their effort to take over the country. That is their primary goal and always has been. They'll wait another year and then disregard any deal. When they do, are we going to go to war again and send troops back to Afghanistan?

Trump has broken many deals and has failed on every deal he has tried to put together so far except giving Russia a free hand where they want.

 

[Hamid.H]

Well, he is the great negotiator.

*hes a great con artist.

Trump creates problems so he can solve them. He likes to create lots of controversy and step in to "negotiate" a solution.

have you ever considered that he doesnt want a solution? that he is simply escalating the situation and extrapolating tensions until the inevitable end result is reached?

So do you approve of keeping Assad in power? Ceding power in the ME to Putin is not something negotiated.

perhaps its something you simply allow to happen... he simply doesnt care about syria.

Trump just gave it away. If we aren't privy to other deals with Russia, how do you know they exist or if they are to our benefit?

exactly.

There is no deal with NK; there is no replacement for Nafta yet; he has to negotiate that with congress.

he doesnt want a deal with nafta. dump wants to blow it up.

Trump has broken many deals and has failed on every deal he has tried to put together so far except giving Russia a free hand where they want.

he hasnt failed. hes gotten exactly what hes wanted every step of the way, including giving russia a free hand. honestly, i think it is a disservice to progressives to continue to pretend that trump is an incompetent fool who doesnt know what hes doing. if given a second term theres no telling what actual deals he may strike whilst unimpeded by a nearing and potential 2nd term.

until dump is safely behind bars for selling out our country and collaborating with the russians everyone will be forced to live on pins and needles waiting for the next great betrayal of our ideals and values.

hh

 

[Patine]

So do you approve of keeping Assad in power?

This is a classic example of one of the big problems of the Cold War mentality that's still lingering today. That the Western Powers and Russia should decide (or conflict) between them to decide who will lead Third World Nations. Because God forbid the actual people of those nations themselves are allowed any say in the issue without the stamp of approval, meddling, or sabotage of these big powers.

 

[Birdjaguar]

This is a classic example of one of the big problems of the Cold War mentality that's still lingering today. That the Western Powers and Russia should decide (or conflict) between them to decide who will lead Third World Nations. Because God forbid the actual people of those nations themselves are allowed any say in the issue without the stamp of approval, meddling, or sabotage of these big powers.

It is a thorny problem. When a leader acts very badly towards his/her people and then acts in ways to prevent any change in their power, what should other nations do? Mostly, the big powers act secretly to create change or not at all. In Assad's case there was an active rebellion that drew support from outside and encouraged others to support Assad. Do you support a unilateral "do nothing" for all other nations? Do you approve of Kim's rule in NK and think he should be ignored and we should let the people of NK handle their future without outside help? Certainly sanctions are an aggressive action by the world's big powers. Should they be stopped?

Should Vietnam have not invaded Cambodia and toppled Pol Pot? Or is it Ok for a neighbor effect regime change? Would your opinion change if China had paid for Vietnam to intervene?

The world would be a better place without these guys. Where is Jason Bourne when we need him?

• Putin
• Assad
• Erdogan
• Maduro

 

[Patine]

It is a thorny problem. When a leader acts very badly towards his/her people and then acts in ways to prevent any change in their power, what should other nations do? Mostly, the big powers act secretly to create change or not at all. In Assad's case there was an active rebellion that drew support from outside and encouraged others to support Assad. Do you support a unilateral "do nothing" for all other nations? Do you approve of Kim's rule in NK and think he should be ignored and we should let the people of NK handle their future without outside help? Certainly sanctions are an aggressive action by the world's big powers. Should they be stopped?

Should Vietnam have not invaded Cambodia and toppled Pol Pot? Or is it Ok for a neighbor effect regime change? Would your opinion change if China had paid for Vietnam to intervene?

The world would be a better place without these guys. Where is Jason Bourne when we need him?

• Putin
• Assad
• Erdogan
• Maduro

But yet the al-Saud Family, Syngman Rhee, Chiang Kai-Shek, Mbutu Sese-Seko, Hosni Mubarak, the Pahlavi Shahs, Lon Nol, Ngo Dinh Diem, Nguyen Van Thieu, Ferdinand Marcos, Effrain Rios Montt, Oscar Humberto Mejia Victores, Adolfo Arnaldo Majano Ramos, Jaime Abdul Gutierrez Avendano, the Samoza Family, Manuel Antonio Noriega (at least initially), Augustin Pinoche, Raul Trujillio, Fulgencio Batatista, and Francois "Papadoc" Duvalier - and even a post-WW2 Francisco Franco, all of which were about as horrid, bloody-handed, brutal, human-rights-abusing, criminal tyrants, were not only acceptable to keep in power by the West, but supported, funded, armed, and entrenched and protected from removal from power against their own people. Here is where ANY virtue or ethics breaks into utter self-serving hypocrisy and moral bankruptcy in this issue, and why I do not believe in the Western "mandate" to hold Third World tyrants accountable with any sincerity.

 

[Birdjaguar]

But yet the al-Saud Family, Syngman Rhee, Chiang Kai-Shek, Mbutu Sese-Seko, Hosni Mubarak, the Pahlavi Shahs, Lon Nol, Ngo Dinh Diem, Nguyen Van Thieu, Ferdinand Marcos, Effrain Rios Montt, Oscar Humberto Mejia Victores, Adolfo Arnaldo Majano Ramos, Jaime Abdul Gutierrez Avendano, the Samoza Family, Manuel Antonio Noriega (at least initially), Augustin Pinoche, Raul Trujillio, Fulgencio Batatista, and Francois "Papadoc" Duvalier - and even a post-WW2 Francisco Franco, all of which were about as horrid, bloody-handed, brutal, human-rights-abusing, criminal tyrants, were not only acceptable to keep in power by the West, but supported, funded, armed, and entrenched and protected from removal from power against their own people. Here is where ANY virtue or ethics breaks into utter self-serving hypocrisy and moral bankruptcy in this issue, and why I do not believe in the Western "mandate" to hold Third World tyrants accountable with any sincerity.

They are all dead. what was done or not done is behind us. The world is not the same place. Can we learn from the past? We should.

What do you see as the best path for NK? Do nothing (let NK people deal with him)? Sanctions? More sanctions? Shoot him? Let SK deal with it? Let China deal with him? Go to war?
It is easy to make a list of terrible guys leading counties. For each we have choices. What would you choose? Kim has enslaved his country and so far has not been a major threat to anyone except SK and through cyber attacks the US. Putin not only has robbed his country of its wealth, but he actively exports his particular brand of terror and hate to Europe and the US. Should those two be treated the same?

It is easy to be critical of the past, but what do you offer as a solution?

 

[Patine]

They are all dead. what was done or not done is behind us. The world is not the same place. Can we learn from the past? We should.

What do you see as the best path for NK? Do nothing (let NK people deal with him)? Sanctions? More sanctions? Shoot him? Let SK deal with it? Let China deal with him? Go to war?
It is easy to make a list of terrible guys leading counties. For each we have choices. What would you choose? Kim has enslaved his country and so far has not been a major threat to anyone except SK and through cyber attacks the US. Putin not only has robbed his country of its wealth, but he actively exports his particular brand of terror and hate to Europe and the US. Should those two be treated the same?

It is easy to be critical of the past, but what do you offer as a solution?

But similar situations exist today. Why fuss about Kim Jong-un and Bashir Assad and paternalistic responsibility to do something when Mohammed bin Salmon al-Saud (you said ALL the sponsored tyrants I listed were dead - I listed the al-Sauds as a family) still get money, arms, and support to be the most politically and socially backward and barbaric regime on Earth and stay in power as such, and Donald Trump doesn't believe the Crown Prince and Prince Regent should be investigated for ordering the killing of a Saudi journalist critical of his government in the Saudi embassy of a NATO nation. With allies like Saudi Arabia, you don't need enemies (but you get them anyways)! So, what REALLY has been learned?

 

[red_elk]

It is easy to be critical of the past, but what do you offer as a solution?

If you are desperate to make world a better place, start with fixing yourselves.

 

[Ironsided]

It is a thorny problem. When a leader acts very badly towards his/her people and then acts in ways to prevent any change in their power, what should other nations do? Mostly, the big powers act secretly to create change or not at all. In Assad's case there was an active rebellion that drew support from outside and encouraged others to support Assad. Do you support a unilateral "do nothing" for all other nations? Do you approve of Kim's rule in NK and think he should be ignored and we should let the people of NK handle their future without outside help? Certainly sanctions are an aggressive action by the world's big powers. Should they be stopped?

Should Vietnam have not invaded Cambodia and toppled Pol Pot? Or is it Ok for a neighbor effect regime change? Would your opinion change if China had paid for Vietnam to intervene?

The world would be a better place without these guys. Where is Jason Bourne when we need him?

• Putin
• Assad
• Erdogan
• Maduro

If a leader acts badly enough for outside military intervention is seldom decided by the people but more often a consent-manufacturing political machine. We should use an international democratic assembly for these issues. The closest thing we have is the UN. But oh wait it’s non-functional in this regard… I wonder why that is so? What major nations could it be to halt democracy while using the democracy argument to blatantly and shamelessly further their non-democratically founded interests? I’m so confused! Who could it be?

You do understand that America supported among others the Al Qaida rebels in Syria. The same ones who flew the planes into the WTC some years back. The very ones you still drone innocent civilians to death to catch in theatres not far away.

Are you sure you are not missing any names there in your list btw? Got enough names there, have you?

 

[Birdjaguar]

But similar situations exist today. Why fuss about Kim Jong-un and Bashir Assad and paternalistic responsibility to do something when Mohammed bin Salmon al-Saud (you said ALL the sponsored tyrants I listed were dead - I listed the al-Sauds as a family) still get money, arms, and support to be the most politically and socially backward and barbaric regime on Earth and stay in power as such, and Donald Trump doesn't believe the Crown Prince and Prince Regent should be investigated for ordering the killing of a Saudi journalist critical of his government in the Saudi embassy of a NATO nation. With allies like Saudi Arabia, you don't need enemies (but you get them anyways)! So, what REALLY has been learned?

I still don't know what your point is. what are you advocating? You don't like US policy; fine. Are the Saudi's bad? Sure. So I'll ask again:

What do you see as the best path for NK? Do nothing (let NK people deal with him)? Sanctions? More sanctions? Shoot him? Let SK deal with it? Let China deal with him? Go to war?
It is easy to make a list of terrible guys leading counties. For each we have choices. What would you choose? Kim has enslaved his country and so far has not been a major threat to anyone except SK and through cyber attacks the US. Putin not only has robbed his country of its wealth, but he actively exports his particular brand of terror and hate to Europe and the US. Should those two be treated the same?

If you are desperate to make world a better place, start with fixing yourselves.

We are trying, but the Trumpers are getting in the way. Don't forget that counties like, Turkey, Russia, NK, etc. are the allowing the these terrible leaders to rule.

Do you want the world to be a better place? If so, how would you do that?