North Korea South Korea Sitting in a Tree

Rum, beer, women, movies, nice websites, gaming, etc., without interrupting the flow of martial threads.

Re: North Korea South Korea Sitting in a Tree

Postby Steve James on Wed May 09, 2018 4:29 am

A deal with Israel? Why is the US involved? Shouldn't Israel be part of a young Iraq agreement too?

Anyway, Iran will probably expel any inspectors who are there now? Trump will reimpose sanctions, but the rest of the EU, Russia, and China may make up the difference if Iran plays it right by not giving Trump the excuse to attack anything. Iran will also continue to fund terrorists who are helpful.

Still trying to reconcile the simultaneous isolationism and interventionism. It seems that the confusion is not increasing US prestige in the world. We're watching us become less important fast. I.e., countries are negotiating and dealing around us and with each other. That's not necessarily a bad thing.
I
Last edited by Steve James on Wed May 09, 2018 4:30 am, edited 1 time in total.
"A man is rich when he has time and freewill. How he chooses to invest both will determine the return on his investment."
User avatar
Steve James
Great Old One
 
Posts: 17261
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 8:20 am

Re: North Korea South Korea Sitting in a Tree

Postby windwalker on Wed May 09, 2018 5:51 am

President Obama made a bad deal with Iran without support from Congress, and today President Trump is pulling out of President Obama’s personal commitment, and he doesn’t need Congress’s support to do so.” Rep. Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.) tweeted that “President Trump had every right to withdraw the U.S. from what was effectively an Obama executive agreement.”


Historically presidents have made agreements though "executive order" that didn't last beyond their administration as the next one comes in. The resaon for the change depends on the agreement itself and changes in conditions that first prompted it.

“The overriding reason to prefer a nonbinding international arrangement to a treaty is the need to preserve the greatest possible flexibility to re-impose sanctions if we believe Iran is not meeting its commitments under a Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action,” the official wrote in a statement.

https://www.rollcall.com/news/iran-deal-treaty-or-not

Or as in this case the present administration feels it was a bad deal to begin with as many did when it was first enacted and many still do.

The Iran deal is one example. The White House contends Congress has no business in that deal. It's an executive agreement, not a treaty. Lawmakers in both parties demanded a voice. Many dislike the deal — a lot.

https://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpoli ... -iran-deal

Some have referred to this as a "treaty" so it can not be changed after it was enacted, when it was an " executive agreement" allowing it to be enacted.

Bypassing the process by which it would bind the the US to remain in it with no ability to change it.
While one could say the US had agreed to it, the fact was that many on both sides of aisle did not,
but were out locked out of the process loop to stop it..

It remains to be seen what happens within the next 90 days the interval before the sanctions will kick in, along with how countries doing business with Iran will be dealt with after they do.
Last edited by windwalker on Wed May 09, 2018 6:40 am, edited 4 times in total.
rule 19
windwalker
Wuji
 
Posts: 7026
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 4:08 am

Re: North Korea South Korea Sitting in a Tree

Postby windwalker on Wed May 09, 2018 6:32 am

I am pleased to inform you that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is in the air and on his way back from North Korea with the 3 wonderful gentlemen that everyone is looking so forward to meeting. They seem to be in good health. Also, good meeting with Kim Jong Un. Date & Place set.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 9, 2018


“Releasing the three Americans is a good sign that North Korea wants a good meeting between President Donald Trump and Kim Jong Un and, eventually, a peaceful resolution of the nuclear and other issues with North Korea,” says Joseph DeTrani, a former intelligence official who previously negotiated peace talks with North Korea.
https://www.vox.com/2018/5/9/17333964/n ... ease-trump

A good move towards the upcoming meeting.


Other hostages released.

The Trump administration worked with Egypt to release Aya Hijazi, an Egyptian-American aid worker, from captivity in April 2017.
And last October, Trump announced the release of Caitlan Coleman, her husband, and the three children that they bore in a captivity that lasted five years.
Last edited by windwalker on Wed May 09, 2018 6:35 am, edited 1 time in total.
rule 19
windwalker
Wuji
 
Posts: 7026
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 4:08 am

Re: North Korea South Korea Sitting in a Tree

Postby Steve James on Wed May 09, 2018 6:46 am

Well, it's true that no one knows what other countries will do now. It's obviously true that Trump has the right to drop out of the "agreement," but the agreement was to ensure that Iran would stop trying to develop a nuclear weapon. Trump's argument is that the Iranians are not living up to that part of the agreement. (We weren't at war, so we couldn't have a treaty anyway).

I.e., the goal was to prevent Iranian nuclearization, primarily because if Iran succeeded, the Saudis and Egyptians would soon follow. The way to prevent it was to enforce severe sanctions on Iran, meaning on Iranian products (like oil) and on anyone doing business with Iran (i.e., those who use Iran's oil, meaning Europeans). That's one reason the Europeans favored the agreement.

Trump's said that it was a bad "deal," but I didn't hear him explain exactly why yesterday. I saw the Netanyahu show; but, I have no idea what was those tapes, books, and cds. I do know that the CIA said the info was from 2005, and was used as part of the reason for the agreement in the first place. But, still, the issue is whether Iran has a nuclear weapons program or not. The answer is either yes or no.;

If yes, then what does the US do? More sanctions? Iran was developing nuclear weapons capability when there were sanctions. It (supposedly) stopped in order to get the sanctions lifted. A re-imposition of sanctions could mean that they return to their original objective.

If, however, Iran does (stupidly) resume its program, then is the US/Israel going to attack? On the basis of them possessing weapons of mass destruction, I mean. How do we stop them? If they were doing it a week ago, do ya think they've stopped today?

Of course, I argued in my earlier post that Iran may be smart enough to use this as an opportunity to get a deal that has nothing to do with an alleged nuclear arms program. I just don't think that Iran or NK really wants a war with the US. The cynic in me considers it more likely that an Iranian invasion would be about oil, or simply keeping the Iranian economy weak. There is an entire war making and "peace keeping" post-war economy to figure in. So, maybe a few airstrikes somewhere.
"A man is rich when he has time and freewill. How he chooses to invest both will determine the return on his investment."
User avatar
Steve James
Great Old One
 
Posts: 17261
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 8:20 am

Re: North Korea South Korea Sitting in a Tree

Postby Steve James on Wed May 09, 2018 6:54 am

“Releasing the three Americans is a good sign that North Korea wants a good meeting between President Donald Trump and Kim Jong Un and, eventually, a peaceful resolution of the nuclear and other issues with North Korea,” says Joseph DeTrani, a former intelligence official who previously negotiated peace talks with North Korea.


Absolutely good news. (Even if not a precondition). Pompeo meeting with Kim is invaluable. Pompeo's smart and will learn a lot about how Kim thinks. He'll know whether Kim is really a loonytoon or whether that was a caricature --and Dennis Rodman was right.
"A man is rich when he has time and freewill. How he chooses to invest both will determine the return on his investment."
User avatar
Steve James
Great Old One
 
Posts: 17261
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 8:20 am

Re: North Korea South Korea Sitting in a Tree

Postby Steve James on Wed May 09, 2018 2:52 pm

Trump just tweeted that there would be "severe consequences" if ... IF ... Iran restarts its nuclear enrichment program. Um, isn't that why the sanctions were lifted? Now, ya want them to stop, but you want the sanctions too? Or else ... But, if the sanctions are imposed and Iran doesn't restart its program, when would the sanctions end?

Anyway, I think he could build a much stronger case by continuing the argument that Iran is already doing nuclear enrichment, etc. Well, maybe the prez's "if" was just a slip of the thumb.
"A man is rich when he has time and freewill. How he chooses to invest both will determine the return on his investment."
User avatar
Steve James
Great Old One
 
Posts: 17261
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 8:20 am

Re: North Korea South Korea Sitting in a Tree

Postby windwalker on Wed May 09, 2018 4:36 pm

Steve James wrote:Trump just tweeted that there would be "severe consequences" if ... IF ... Iran restarts its nuclear enrichment program. Um, isn't that why the sanctions were lifted? Now, ya want them to stop, but you want the sanctions too? Or else ... But, if the sanctions are imposed and Iran doesn't restart its program, when would the sanctions end?

Anyway, I think he could build a much stronger case by continuing the argument that Iran is already doing nuclear enrichment, etc. Well, maybe the prez's "if" was just a slip of the thumb.


My understanding is a little different.


It never really stopped their development only delayed them
Last edited by windwalker on Wed May 09, 2018 5:21 pm, edited 2 times in total.
rule 19
windwalker
Wuji
 
Posts: 7026
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 4:08 am

Re: North Korea South Korea Sitting in a Tree

Postby Steve James on Wed May 09, 2018 5:26 pm

You seem to have a misunderstanding of what the sanctions were designed to do and were doing and why the deal entered into was a bad deal to begin with.

It never really stopped their development only delayed them


Hmm, "what the sanctions were designed to do." Well, yeah, the sanctions weren't delaying them at all, were they?

Otoh, by "it" you mean the deal was what "only delayed them." And, now with the reimposition of sanctions, they will stop. Right? But, if they don't, do we have the right to bomb them?

You say it was a bad deal, like Trump. But, the other signers of the agreement didn't think so. Probably because it affects them much more than the US. Let's see what they do, since the sanctions will affect their business with Iran.

Ya never know. If Trump is like Reagan, we might end up selling Iran some arms. In all these deals, there's always a quid pro quo. Though, I doubt we'll ever know what the other sides get out of these "good" deals. Well, I'd bet money that very few people have any idea of the details of the past "bad" deal or be able to tell it from any "new" deal. They'll say it's be better, if it comes; if it doesn't, they'll say the Iranians forced Trump or that Trump forced the Iranians.

Well, the Iranians are saying that they will continue to honor the agreement.
"A man is rich when he has time and freewill. How he chooses to invest both will determine the return on his investment."
User avatar
Steve James
Great Old One
 
Posts: 17261
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 8:20 am

Re: North Korea South Korea Sitting in a Tree

Postby windwalker on Wed May 09, 2018 7:28 pm

Steve James wrote:
You seem to have a misunderstanding of what the sanctions were designed to do and were doing and why the deal entered into was a bad deal to begin with.

It never really stopped their development only delayed them


Hmm, "what the sanctions were designed to do." Well, yeah, the sanctions weren't delaying them at all, were they?

A matter of opinion of what the sanctions were doing and supposed to do....they were canceled, never achieved their objective.

Otoh, by "it" you mean the deal was what "only delayed them." And, now with the reimposition of sanctions, they will stop. Right? But, if they don't, do we have the right to bomb them? They've declared their intentions towards the US, they lack the means to implement them at this time. The point is to prevent them from ever having the means, by what ever action is necessary

You say it was a bad deal, like Trump. But, the other signers of the agreement didn't think so. Probably because it affects them much more than the US. Let's see what they do, since the sanctions will affect their business with Iran. All have an interest just depends on what that interest is based on, losing business and a energy source is a little different then dealing with an active agent trying to destroy you. Once the sanctions kick in, it will be interesting to see how those doing business with Iran try get around them if they can

Ya never know. If Trump is like Reagan, we might end up selling Iran some arms. In all these deals, there's always a quid pro quo. kinda why its called a deal. no? The conditions for getting out of the deal have not changed for the major player who controls many of the options the others need to play. ..

Though, I doubt we'll ever know what the other sides get out of these "good" deals. Well, I'd bet money that very few people have any idea of the details of the past "bad" deal or be able to tell it from any "new" deal. They'll say it's be better, if it comes; if it doesn't, they'll say the Iranians forced Trump or that Trump forced the Iranians.

Well, the Iranians are saying that they will continue to honor the agreement.


Doesn't matter, they haven't renounced their intentions towards the US or Israel and continue to actively
work towards them.
Last edited by windwalker on Wed May 09, 2018 8:05 pm, edited 3 times in total.
rule 19
windwalker
Wuji
 
Posts: 7026
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 4:08 am

Re: North Korea South Korea Sitting in a Tree

Postby Ian C. Kuzushi on Thu May 10, 2018 12:59 am

Terrible decision and even worse timing.

I agree with Steve about other nations now moving around and without us. It's already happening, and it's not a bad thing for the world.
文武両道。

Lord Li requires one hundred gold coins per day!
User avatar
Ian C. Kuzushi
Great Old One
 
Posts: 1857
Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 10:02 pm

Re: North Korea South Korea Sitting in a Tree

Postby windwalker on Thu May 10, 2018 4:41 am

The timing was set by the bill itself not something that could be changed.
As to the decision.

“In explaining his no-vote, Schumer said, “It is because I believe Iran will not change, and under this agreement it will be able to achieve its dual goals of eliminating sanctions while ultimately retaining its nuclear and non-nuclear power.”

Better to keep U.S. sanctions in place, strengthen them, enforce secondary sanctions on other nations, and pursue the hard-trodden path of diplomacy once more, difficult as it may be. For all of these reasons,

I believe the vote to disapprove is the right one.”


I agree with his line of reasoning

some highlights of why some felt the deal was flawed

Iran has continued to test ballistic missiles and has warned it won’t allow inspections of military sites — highlighting ambiguities in the agreement.

https://nypost.com/2017/09/15/iran-deal ... ing-flaws/

“when key nuclear restrictions of the JCPOA expire, Iran will be free to build up its nuclear capabilities, especially its enrichment capacity, and drastically reduce the time it would need to produce enough fissile material for a nuclear weapon.”
Sounds very similar to what happend with N-Korea.
They achieved their goal and became a threat to the US.


Between 2025 and 2030, the agreement to limit Iran’s stocks of low-enriched uranium and the number of centrifuge cascades it can operate will expire, allowing Iran to erect an industrial-scale nuclear program if it chooses.


Apparently there was no way to restructure the agreement in its present form.

Iran has 90 days before the the full effect of the sanctions are re instated.
Hopefully before that time, some resolution will be found addressing the concerns of all parties.

The crux of the matter

“There is no need to force a crisis over it at this very moment — as Trump and some deal opponents seem inclined to do — given that elements of the JCPOA don’t begin to sunset until 2026-2031,” he wrote. He added that any negotiations to further restrict Iran ought to include “possible positive inducements” for Iran. The same type of thinking that allowed N-Korea to attain its goal now being dealt with

Perhaps. But Iran negotiated the current deal only after the US imposed and enforced sanctions that cut its banking system off from the international economy and cut off its ability to export oil. Those so-called secondary sanctions crippled Iran’s economy, because they applied not only to Iran but also to any foreign entities that did business with it. Why the other players will not be able to play, "any foreign entities" all those in favor of keeping the agreement was only possible with the consent of the US,. Something when the sanctions are re applied they will not be able to do....maybe :-\ never know ...

What’s to say the threat of bringing back those sanctions won’t persuade America’s European allies to try to fix the nuclear deal’s flaws?
It worked before.



No longer a threat a reality
Remains to be seen whether it will work again.
Within 90 days we should know....
Last edited by windwalker on Thu May 10, 2018 5:08 am, edited 4 times in total.
rule 19
windwalker
Wuji
 
Posts: 7026
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 4:08 am

Re: North Korea South Korea Sitting in a Tree

Postby windwalker on Thu May 10, 2018 5:19 am

More: House Democrat: I opposed Iran nuclear deal but now I think we should keep it

More: Trump and Iran nuclear deal: Smart chess play could motivate the mullahs

Trump kept the Iran deal on life support for his first year in office, extending sanctions relief “for the last time” on Jan. 12. The president said that final 120-day grace period was to provide time for Congress or our European allies to fix the plan.

While there have been some proposals for a better deal, actual changes were not forthcoming.

Rather than fix it, he nixed it. Now with a clean slate, the United States and the international community can forge a more sensible agreement.


Agree or not, it wasn't something that was decided on lightly, maybe Iran will be the one that provides the spark for forging a better agreement.

It gets worse for Iran. Under the JCPOA, if one or more parties are found not to be in compliance with the agreement, “the provisions of the old U.N. Security Council resolutions would be reimposed, unless the U.N. Security Council decides otherwise.”

Because the United States has veto power, it is unlikely the council will vote to block this, which means seven suspended United Nations sanctions resolutions will come roaring back into force. This is the famous “snap-back” mechanism Obama touted while promoting the agreement in 2015: “We won't need the support of other members of the U.N. Security Council. America can trigger snap back on our own.”

Of course, Obama never expected his successor to push this self-destruct button, probably because he envisioned a much different 2016 presidential election outcome.


"This is the famous “snap-back” mechanism Obama touted while promoting the agreement in 2015:
“We won't need the support of other members of the U.N. Security Council. America can trigger snap back on our own.”

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/ ... 589828002/

looks like it was triggered
rule 19
windwalker
Wuji
 
Posts: 7026
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 4:08 am

Re: North Korea South Korea Sitting in a Tree

Postby windwalker on Thu May 10, 2018 5:40 am

Steve James wrote:
Absolutely good news. (Even if not a precondition). Pompeo meeting with Kim is invaluable. Pompeo's smart and will learn a lot about how Kim thinks. He'll know whether Kim is really a loonytoon or whether that was a caricature --and Dennis Rodman was right.


Seems like it was, I can't v see the president having a meeting while they still retained the captives.
Their release was made a precondition by Pompeo, according to the clip.

I know you won't watch it, outlines how it was precondition prior to the meeting.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sl8qUH7_mq8
rule 19
windwalker
Wuji
 
Posts: 7026
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 4:08 am

Re: North Korea South Korea Sitting in a Tree

Postby Ian C. Kuzushi on Thu May 10, 2018 6:11 am

I guess it depends on what one means by "lightly." Certainly, the decision was made a long time ago, regardless of what you seem to imply. I haven't seen anyone else (and that's saying a lot) try to paint Trump and his ever-revolving group of cronies as such masters of intrigue and calculation. He is trashing the Iran deal because it's pretty much the last part of Obama's legacy that he hasn't smashed.

The global environment.

Our environment.

Healthcare.

Trade (really strategic alliance in Asia).

The bilateral and internationally supported Iran Deal...

And, yes, he could have changed the timing. He can make the decision every three months.
文武両道。

Lord Li requires one hundred gold coins per day!
User avatar
Ian C. Kuzushi
Great Old One
 
Posts: 1857
Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 10:02 pm

Re: North Korea South Korea Sitting in a Tree

Postby windwalker on Thu May 10, 2018 11:18 am

Ian C. Kuzushi wrote:I guess it depends on what one means by "lightly." Certainly, the decision was made a long time ago, regardless of what you seem to imply. I haven't seen anyone else (and that's saying a lot) try to paint Trump and his ever-revolving group of cronies as such masters of intrigue and calculation. He is trashing the Iran deal because it's pretty much the last part of Obama's legacy that he hasn't smashed.

Different view point.

The arguments used for pulling out of the agreement are some of the same ones voiced entering into the agreement under Obama, way before DT was elected.
While true he didn't feel it was a good agreement, he also extended it to allow others to make a case for remaining in it. They couldn't.




The global environment.

Our environment.

Healthcare.

Trade (really strategic alliance in Asia).

The bilateral and internationally supported Iran Deal...

All changes voted on by the election of DT, now being enacted. Something the last president
recommended https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Q3GJhUkLr0


And, yes, he could have changed the timing. He can make the decision every three months.


Correct, every 90 days he had to recertify the agreement.
Last edited by windwalker on Fri May 11, 2018 7:57 am, edited 8 times in total.
rule 19
windwalker
Wuji
 
Posts: 7026
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 4:08 am

PreviousNext

Return to Off the Topic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bill and 1 guest