Posted on 09/11/2019 12:31:44 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Loose lips sink ships.
But I don’t recall Trump easing sanctions on ANY of our enemies. This “news” is that he “considered” easing sanctions on Iran. Well, that’s what Chief Executives do - they consider all options then make decisions.
fake news
I don't think Europe has anything to do with this. This is all about the U.S. military basically functioning as a mercenary force for a bunch of Sunni royal families in places like Saudi Arabia and Kuwait that have been buying access to the highest levels of our government for years.
Think it would be great if everyone he hires, no matter what position they sign a form that they go into exile if they talk. NO INTEGRITY ANYMORE
This is my opinion on this.
If Iran is wants nuclear weapons, they are eventually going to get them. With or without sanctions. With or without a “nuclear deal”.
Once you understand that, then you can move forward on what are the next steps.
Hell, Pakistan has nukes.
Just make sure Iran knows if a nuke/dirty bomb goes off in Tel Aviv or New York, Iran will be longer exist.
And, I think that's a good thing. But, I didn't think it was a good thing when Obama floated similar intentions, because I felt he was eager to give away the store for a short-term electoral boost. Or because it helped Islam.
I think some of the dimwits are catching on to Trump's style and that's why the lameness of their lies keeps increasing like that Jim proSciutto thing!
How so?
If Trump did ease sanctions, you think Trump would not get something in return after the Iranians promised to do a verified deal...
I forgot Trumps an idiot / S
If Trump can meet and negotiate with people like Pelosi and Schumer he can do face-to-face with anyone.
Traditional politics and diplomacy require that our adversaries “ earn” a meeting by meeting our conditions. Given our track record in settling conflicts since Korea, this hasn’t worked so well. And now that these people like NK and Iran are nuke armed or close, the danger of isolating them and escalating and depending on bureaucrats to convey messages....is ridiculous to a negotiator like Trump.
We all have to submit to authority. We have parents, school officials, employers, various levels of government, and laws of the land to abide by. None the less, some of these people act as if they have the grasp of authority of that of a 13 ear old girl who wants to join a sleep-over with five only guys in attendance.
“Oh, you’re just being mean to me. You don’t understand! It’s so unfair!”
No, sometimes we have to submit to other people’s will.
Bolton could have submitted and still have been a player.
How much influence does he have today?
Zilch!
The rial (or toman) has been stable ~6 months. Time to give it a little nudge.
“Anonymous” sources can sometimes be not “sourced” at all, at worst, or “inside” but ill informed 3rd and 4th hand at best.
Agree
notice the past tense of “considered” and “discussed”?
no doubt lots of things are considered and discussed, so what? that’s a good thing isn’t it? you know, to discuss lots of options and opinions and consequences before discarding all but one or two for implementation ...
Don’t be surprised...
I agree with you.
Thank you.
The issue seems like a judgment call, with good arguments on both sides. No reason for divisive rhetoric.
Go back to 2016 and think of all those times you heard candidate Donald Trump rail against "The Swamp" in Washington. John Bolton is a perfect example of a "Swamp" denizen. If you want to know how the system works, just follow this guy's career path. It's an endless repeating pattern of the following three types of jobs:
1. Federal government bureaucrat
2. Senior advisor at a Beltway non-profit lobbying group
3. Cable TV news expert guest propagandist
Item #2 on this list is the one that raises big red flags for me. These non-profit groups pay a typical former bureaucrat a huge sum of money to be an "expert" whose job is to appear on TV and write op-ed pieces in the New York Times and Washington Post. That's all well and good, but when it comes to foreign policy the most important question is: Where does the non-profit organization get its funding?
In the case of John Bolton, I can almost guarantee you that his "think tank" assignments have been with lobbying groups that raise a ton of money from foreign governments and corporate interests in Sunni Islamic countries. If that sounds outlandish, just ask yourself why the Saudi royal family would make a seven-figure donation to the John McCain Leadership Institute at Arizona State University.
Showing weakness to one of the world’s most evil regimes when they are on the ropes is not a good idea.
And presenting “invasion and decades-long occupation” as the proposed approach to U.S. relations with dozens of different countries around the world seriously diminishes our credibility when dealing with the ones who are REALLY a problem.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.