Posted on 01/01/2018 9:20:29 AM PST by MAGA2017
The protests that have rattled Iran this weekend are in many ways an echo of the near past. In the summer of 2009, millions of Iranians took to the streets to protest the reelection of President Ahmadinejad.
The opposition believed his reelection victory was fraudulent. They chanted slogans demanding a recount of the votes. Others denounced the regime and its highest authority, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei. Hardliners and security forces confronted the crowds with anti-riot gear and harsh condemnation, often labeling them agents of foreign powers. It was a huge moment and seemed, at the time, to portend an irreversible shift in geopolitics.
Iran is experiencing the first large-scale unrests since the Green Movement faded. Since then, Iranians tackled their challenges at the ballot box rather than on the streets—in two presidential elections, both won by the moderate Hassan Rouhani; and in two parliamentary elections leading to the country’s legislative body being populated by more moderates and reformists. But familiar difficulties have returned. With the controversial nuclear deal—between Tehran and world powers, including the United States—failing to deliver economic recovery for the masses, many were starting to feel restless once again.
President Trump has taken to Twitter on multiple occasions to comment. “The world is watching!” he tweeted on Friday. And also, “the good people of Iran want change, and, other than the vast military power of the United States, that Iran’s people are what their leaders fear the most.”
In one tweet, the president included a link to a video of his speech at the UN General Assembly in September, which was largely criticized by Iranians of all political persuasions as belligerent and disrespectful.
(Excerpt) Read more at theatlantic.com ...
It had been posted as “Breaking News” but the mods have now changed that.
Are they loosing their grip, losing their grip, or loosening their grip?
My guess is that she's Persian, and typically for a Communist, on the wrong side.
> removing the “carrots” from the “sticks and carrots”
Obama did that by giving away most of the carrots at the start. He also removed the biggest stick, so there’s not much left of the agreement.
> he barely understands
That’s a big part of my support for Trump. Unlike Kasich, Rubio, Hillary and most of the others who “knew” every issue better than anyone else and were “the best candidate” because of their deep knowledge, Trump knows how to surround himself with people who really know the issue and let them do their thing. The president cannot be an expert on everything, but should be a good team builder and leader. Trump’s lack of self-claimed expertise is exactly what allows him to set goals and let true experts get them done. The left/media think he’s an ego-maniacal buffoon who micromanages everything while knowing nothing. But that’s not what his past shows based on what was allowed to be published when they thought he didn’t have a chance to win.
This woman’s views on the issues are clear. As she said in the house organ of the anti-American movement (The New York Times):
With only three months before the Obama administration leaves office, the United States and Iran need to work fast to strengthen the deal’s foundations and ensure that the improvement in relations that took place over the course of President Obama’s tenure survives.
What else does anyone need to know about this woman? Even before you get to reading her article and finding its reference to the Iranian people expressing themselves in elections — that would be elections in which the candidates are chosen by the regime.
I would imagine something like that - an appeaser to radical islamic terrorists - a fool like many SJW’s who embrace evil - and happy that enablers like Manchurian Candidate Obama finance them with other people’s money.
No, the Iranian NYC taqiyya transplant is trying hard to fool the libs...
MAGA, it’s not working!!!
Trump understands, but it contradicts the lies that the dominant media are trying to force the public to accept. FU, atlantic rag!
Blah, blah, blah......typical libtard drivel. OK, asshat
“reporters”, where are the quotes from these Persian
protesters telling Trump to STFU because they don’t want
his input? These Iranian protesters are not anti-West or
they wouldn’t be protesting in Western ways. The people
are angry with their government and they have common
cause with our President. Whatever their gripes they
know that THIS American president has their backs.
The Iranian ‘experts’ in Deep State gave us Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini (pees be upon him) 40 years ago and the ABSOLUTE NIGHTMARE that Iran has been since...so them acting all intelligent can only be a good thing regarding Trump.
Speaking of Deep State 40 years ago (really 35 years), they are also the bunch that thought Reagan was OUT OF HIS MIND for actually wanting to win the Cold War.
Ariane M. Tabatabai is too much of an elitist, lesbian, ivy league egg head to understand what is happening in Iran.
https://sfs.georgetown.edu/faculty-bio/ariane-m-tabatabai/
All of that dough that Obama had flown in on pallets to Iran sure stopped them developing nuclear weapons. Uh, right. Even Israel doesn’t have that kind of understanding about Iran. How stupid of them. Liberals are never wrong don’tcha know. I like how Trump is being public about this instead of the Byzantine manner that Obama ran his foreign policy. The people of the USA deserve to at least know what his position on this is, and it’s his job to let the world know too, and publicly.
" "Now they have an opinion? LMAO
Not quite enough coffee for autoocorrect to overcome....(LOL)
How Much Longer Will the Iran Deal Last Under Trump?
His hints that he may soon abandon the agreement could spell trouble for American credibility abroad.
ARIANE TABATABAI SEP 19, 2017
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/09/the-future-of-the-iran-nuclear-deal-is-in-trumps-hands/540348/
President Trump’s contempt for his predecessor’s chief foreign policy accomplishment, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), or the nuclear deal with Iran, is no secret. On the campaign trail, he routinely called it one of the “worst” and “stupidest” agreements in history, and he pledged to dismantle it. Now, in his first speech before the UN General Assembly, Trump has suggested that if he has his way, the United States won’t continue to implement it.
During his speech, Trump described the deal as “one of the worst and most one-sided transactions the United States has ever entered into” and “an embarrassment to the United States.” And he pledged once again to take action on it, stating, “And I don’t think you’ve heard the last of it. Believe me.” The president justified his position, arguing, “We cannot abide by an agreement if it provides cover for the eventual construction of a nuclear program.” Of course, the JCPOA doesn’t provide “cover” for Iran’s nuclear program; its nuclear program is the very subject of deal. Nevertheless, the speech implied that the administration won’t be sticking to the agreement much longer.
In mid-October, Trump must announce his administration’s approach to the JCPOA. As part of the agreement’s implementation, the president must certify to Congress every 90 days that Tehran is (or isn’t) complying with its obligations under the agreement. If the president communicates to Congress that Iran isn’t complying, or simply fails to certify that it is complying, he kicks the ball over to Congress for new potential sanctions to be imposed on the country.
RELATED STORIES
What the Iran Deal Can Teach America About North Korea
How Mistranslation Could Threaten the Iran Deal
But so far, there’s no evidence to back Trump’s stance on the JCPOA and to justify his potential decertification or failure to certify the agreement. The International Atomic Energy Agency, a UN body tasked with monitoring Iran’s nuclear program, has issued several reports on the status of the nuclear deal’s implementation to date, stating that Tehran is upholding its end of the bargain. The United States’s allies and negotiating partners, the European Union and its member states, have echoed this view. On the day of Trump’s UN General Assembly speech, Vice President Mike Pence met with the EU’s High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Federica Mogherini. Mogherini chairs the joint commission that oversees the nuclear deal’s implementation. According to a press release put out by her staff, she told Pence that the agreement “is working, and that Iran is delivering on its commitments, as certified so far seven times by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). It is therefore important that a full and effective implementation of the JCPOA, in all its parts and by all parties, continues.”
Other European leaders have come forward in support of this position. French President Emmanuel Macron, for example, has become much more proactive in recent weeks, signaling to the United States that the agreement can’t be repealed and replaced. Speaking shortly after Trump at the UN General Assembly, Macron warned the United States that it’d lose confidence if it doesn’t abide by its commitments; he called repealing the deal reckless in the absence of alternatives. If America decides to unilaterally withdraw from the JCPOA while it’s working, undermining multilateral agreements and empowering Iranian hardliners, it’ll have to go it alone.
And the prospect of Trump withdrawing America from the nuclear deal isn’t just worrisome to Europeans.
Even critics of the nuclear agreement have expressed concerns about the possibility of a unilateral U.S. withdrawal without any clear evidence of Iranian noncompliance. For example, Senator Bob Corker, a vocal Iran hawk and opponent of the Obama administration’s Iran policy, has said that the White House shouldn’t tear it up. And even Trump’s own cabinet, including its many Iran hawks, such as Secretary of Defense James Mattis, are opposed to withdrawing from the process. After all, this isn’t just about the future of the nuclear deal or Iran, but about American credibility.
American withdrawal from the deal without a substantive reason will empower Iranian hardliners.
What does all this mean for the future of the JCPOA? Trump’s UN speech makes it seem increasingly likely that he won’t recertify Iranian compliance with the deal in October. Whether he will go so far as to all-out decertify it remains to be seen. But he may well kick the ball over to Congress, making it a key player in determining the agreement’s future.
For its part, Iran has signaled that it’ll continue to implement the agreement even if the United States withdraws, provided that its European partners stick to it. This has caused quite a stir in Iran. But Iran’s statements are designed to put the onus on the Europeans to preserve the future of the JCPOA regardless of the United States’ decision. As a result, it could ostensibly continue without America. But U.S. withdrawal wouldn’t come without implications.
First, continued implementation of the nuclear agreement without the United States will serve to undermine the country’s leadership in this process—and future ones, too. It’ll send a signal to the international community that such major endeavors don’t need America. And next time Washington tries to build a coalition and bring friends and foes to the table to tackle a security challenge, allies and adversaries alike will think twice before jumping on board. And sanctions, as a tool of foreign policy, will be weakened.
Second, without America on board, the international community will have a difficult time implementing the JCPOA. Indeed, investors and businesses will be more reluctant to engage Iran, making it more difficult for Iranians to collect the dividends of the deal—and, therefore, less enthusiastic about implementing it.
Lastly, American withdrawal without a substantive reason will empower Iranian hardliners. For decades, the Islamic Republic has tried to sell an anti-American ideology to the Iranian people. But its “death to America” chants have largely failed to bring the Iranian people on board. Trump, however, has been helping the regime make that case, through his anti-Iran rhetoric in Riyadh, his failure to send a sympathetic message to Iranians after the Islamic State’s attack in Tehran in June—and, now, through what seems to be an imminent withdrawal from the nuclear deal.
The Left has been enabling Terrorist Mullah regimes in Iran for about 40 years.
Then the Ayatollahs turned on them and killed them off.
The Left never learns. Their ideology will not allow them.
Is that a boy, a girl . . . or it?
[All of that dough that Obama had flown in on pallets to Iran sure stopped them developing nuclear weapons]
Yes. IMHO Obama financed the upcoming Ezekiel 38 war. That’s why Satan (the god of this world) used the foolish liberals to put him into power. He certainly did Satan’s work (John 8:44).
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.