Like this?
(thanks to FReeper @Eaker)
See also:
Also linked here on FR.
Thank you for your post and your comments on that post. That explains everything.
IMO, the "red line was drawn" when President Trump took two scoops of ice cream and only gave the reporters one at a special dinner on their behalf.
Back in May 2017, CNN was widely panned for devoting significant airtime to a Time magazine report that Trump was served two scoops of vanilla ice cream at a dinner with reporters. CNNs often-sarcastic chyron even called the extra scoop of ice cream an executive privilege.
PRESIDENT TRUMP continues to show his 'indifference' whenever he takes care of terrorists.
Trump appears dazzled by being able to bomb Syria over dessert
TRUMP: I was sitting at the table. We had finished dinner. We're now having dessert. And we had the most beautiful piece of chocolate cake that you've ever seen, and President Xi was enjoying it. And I was given the message from the generals that the ships are locked and loaded, what do you do? And we made a determination to do it, so the missiles were on the way. And I said, Mr. President, let me explain something to you this was during dessert we've just fired 59 missiles, all of which hit, by the way, unbelievable, from, you know, hundreds of miles away, all of which hit, amazing.
BARTIROMO: Unmanned?
TRUMP: It's so incredible. It's brilliant. It's genius. Our technology, our equipment, is better than anybody by a factor of five. I mean look, we have, in terms of technology, nobody can even come close to competing.
So what happens is, I said we've just launched 59 missiles heading to Iraq and I wanted you to know this. And he was eating his cake. And he was silent.
BARTIROMO: Heading to Syria?
TRUMP: Yes. Heading toward Syria. In other words, we've just launched 59 missiles heading toward Syria. And I want you to know that, because I didn't want him to go home. We were almost finished. It was a full day in Palm Beach. We're almost finished and I what does he do, finish his dessert and go home and then they say, you know, the guy you just had dinner with just attacked a country?
https://www.hudson.org/research/11436-obama-strikes-a-deal-with-qassem-suleimani
Obama Strikes a Deal—With Qassem Suleimani
Lee Smith
According to the terms of the Iran deal announced in Vienna on Tuesday, U.N. Security Council sanctions regarding nuclear-related issues will be lifted on a number of entities and individualsfrom Iranian banks to Lebanese assassins, like Anis Nacacche. The name that most sticks out is IRGC-Quds Force commander Qassem Suleimani. Administration officials counsel calm, and explain that Suleimani is still on the U.S. terror list and will remain on the terror list. But thats irrelevant. The reality is that Suleimani is the key to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.
The White Houses so-called nuclear talks with Iran over the last 18 months were never about Irans nuclear weapons program. Like everyone else in the Middle East, the Iranians understood that when Obama failed to strike Syrian president Bashar al-Assad in September 2013 for crossing his redline against the use of chemical weapons, there was no way the president would ever order military action against Iranian nuclear facilities. When Obama took that option off the table, he signaled to Iran that he wasnt going to stop them because he thought there was no way to do so. When he leaked information about the Stuxnet worm, he suggested that he could help with Israel, too.
The negotiations were about something else entirelythey were about what Obama has described as a new geopolitical equilibrium, which would stabilize the Middle East and allow the administration to further minimize its role in the region. The way Obama described it publicly, this new security architecture was going to balance Iran against traditional American allies, like Saudi Arabia. However, it soon became apparent that the White House wasnt really balancing at all, but had rather chosen one team over the others, Iran. Obama made his preference for Iran and its allies clearin Lebanon, Syria, and most obviously in Iraq where the White House ordered air strikes on ISIS positions that allowed various Iranian-backed outfits, under the leadership of Qassem Suleimani, to take Tikrit.
Obama likes Suleimani, and admires his work. As the president reportedly told a group of Arab officials in May, the Arabs need to learn from Irans example.
In fact, they need to take a page out of the playbook of the Qods Force by which [Obama] meant developing their own local proxies capable of going toe-to-toe with Irans agents and defeating them. The president seemed to marvel at the fact that from Hezbollah to the Houthis to the Iraqi militias, Iran has such a deep bench of effective proxies willing to advance its interests. Where, he asked, are their equivalent on the Sunni side? Why, he wanted to know in particular, have the Saudis and their partners not been able to cultivate enough Yemenis to carry the burden of the fight against the Houthis? The Arabs, Obama suggested, badly need to develop a toolbox that goes beyond the brute force of direct intervention. Instead, they need to, be subtler, sneakier, more effective well, just more like Iran.
And its largely because the Arabs havent assembled their own version of IRGC-QF, and instead rely primarily on the United States for their security, that Obama thinks the Iranians are a much better bet. From Obamas perspective, the Sunnis arent going to stop ISISin fact, they helped create it. However, the Iranians can do it, and plenty of other things as well. They can make sure Iraq stays stableor the administration hopes Iran will play that role because it has no other options. Same, the White House thinks, with Syria, where Iran can manage the inevitable transition, after Assad steps aside, thanks to the Iranians, or is killed. The way Obama sees it, the Quds Force can be the administrations boots on the ground.
So-called Iranian moderates like Javad Zarif may have negotiated the deal, but the real agreement is not with the regimes so-called moderates. In fact, Obama doesnt really care if the JCPOA forces a sort of Persian perestroika and brings moderates to the fore. Sure, ideally, we would see a situation in which Iran, seeing sanctions reduced, would start focusing on its economy, on training its people, on reentering the world community, to lessening its provocative activities in the region, as Obama told NPR in the spring. But if it doesnt change, we are so much better if we have this deal in place than if we dont.
The deal is with the hard men of the regime, the extremiststhe deal is with Qassem Suleimani.
Its not the moderates who control the nuclear file, but the IRGC. Accordingly, insofar as the United States and other world powers will have an interest in ensuring that the nuclear weapons program is not subject to turmoil should internal divisions in the regime turn dangerously nasty, the administration and other signatories to the deal now have a stake in ensuring the stability of the hardliners.
The White House is hardly shy about signaling the nature of its relationship with the regime, even if its lost on some regional actors. If sanctions are lifted, a Saudi diplomat said, Iran will try even harder to redesign the region. Iran may see this as acceptance from America to play a bigger role. The point of course is that Obama is counting on Iran to play bigger role in the Middle East, which is why the White House also agreed to drop the U.N. arms embargo.
The administration argues that Tehran will spend most of the money from sanctions relief on rescuing the economy, or fixing street lamps and potholes, and not so much on terrorism and other foreign adventures. But there can be no similar argument about buying and selling and smuggling arms since ending the embargo can only help the hardliners. Combining the twotens of billions of dollars in immediate sanctions relief and an end to the embargois like loading a gun and handing it over to Qassem Suleimani. And thats precisely what Obama intended: The way he sees it, hes arming an American ally.