@anti_dan's banner p

anti_dan


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 06 20:59:06 UTC

				

User ID: 887

anti_dan


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 06 20:59:06 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 887

Another document illustrating Europe and the "international community's" inability to deal with Iran in any serious matter.

I suppose you might think JCPOA was failed by Trump and not flawed from the beginning, I vociferously disagree and think it was a failure the day it was entered into and would have done nothing to prevent Iranian arming of terrorists or progress to the bomb. I think the European response to Iranian piracy on the high seas proves me wholly correct in my assumptions as to why they entered into the deal, it was not to restrain Iran, but to profit with Iran and to restrain the US. This makes further sense because, restraining America is and was a goal of the American Democrats, and particularly the Obama administration. And even further because the Obama admin severely disliked Israel and wanted them to have less power in the region.

Is there a JCPOA-like agreement that actually could be taken seriously? Yes. Its not one the Ayatollah would ever have accepted, because steps 1-5 would be France an the UK doing the following: 1) Seizing all their Uranium; 2) Seizing all their Uranium manufacturing equipment; 3) Seizing all their ICBMs and Drones etc; 4) Setting up DMZs on Iran's borders with Iraq, Turkey, Azerbaijan, & Armenia; and 5) Engage in a joint taskforce in Gaza, Lebanon, and Syria eradicating Hamas and Hezbollah.

Then step 6 would be doing all the things the JCPOA actually did, like lifting sanctions, imposing an inspection regime, giving back seized assets could happen after something like 5 years of compliance. Etc.

But the lifting of sanctions and empowering Iran financially was the true purpose of JCPOA, and we know that because it was the first thing that actually happened, AND we further know this because France and England and Germany are not currently bombing Iran for engaging in piracy against their vessels and vessels destined for their ports.

They were apparently completely ineffective, again bolstering all critics of the deal

Yes I agree that ultimately nothing short of continued and ongoing bombing would have prevented or could prevent Iran from getting nukes. My point is JCPOA makes that much harder as Iran would have been much richer letting it have more and better military equipment and more money to invest in the nuclear program.

Then why didn't France, the UK, etc enforce those snapback provisions at any point?