Despite howls of protest by the Left, the foreign-policy establishment, and European leaders, and contrary to misleading assessments by U.S. intelligence agencies, it is now clear that President Trump’s decision last May to withdraw the United States from the controversial 2015 nuclear deal with Iran (the JCPOA) was the right call and is a huge policy success.
Trump’s JCPOA withdrawal did not lead to war with Iran, as many critics predicted. Instead, Iran is far more isolated than it was when President Trump assumed office. The United States has worked to unite its Middle East allies, especially Israel and Saudi Arabia, against Iran and, in Warsaw this month, will co-chair an international conference with Poland on the threat from Iran. Iran’s economy is under unprecedented pressure thanks to reimposed U.S. sanctions, especially oil sanctions, with negative 1.5 percent growth in 2018 and an expected negative 3.6 percent growth in 2019. Iran’s current year-on-year inflation rate through last month was 40 percent.
Some Trump critics predicted that any effort by the president to reimpose U.S. sanctions lifted by the JCPOA would have little effect, since other parties to the agreement — in particular the EU, Germany, France, and the U.K. — would not follow suit. But numerous European companies have resisted pressure from their governments to defy reimposed U.S. sanctions. On January 31, European leaders announced a special finance facility to help European firms skirt U.S. sanctions on Iran, but that initiative is months behind schedule and few experts believe it will work.
Instead, as a result of reimposed U.S. sanctions, European airlines Air France, British Airways, and KLM ended service to Iran last year. European companies Total, Siemens, and Volkswagen also withdrew from Iran, along with U.S. companies GE, Boeing, and Honeywell and the Russian oil firm Lukoil. In November, Germany’s Bundesbank changed its rules so it could reject an Iranian request to withdraw 300 million euros from Hamburg-based trade bank Europäische-Iranische Handelsbank, to protect the central bank’s relationships with institutions in “third countries.” That is, the United States.
Before the U.S. withdrawal, JCPOA critics made strong arguments about the accord’s weaknesses, especially Iran’s refusal to allow International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors access to military sites. The lone exception is the Parchin military base, self-inspected by Iranians. There the IAEA obtained evidence of covert nuclear-weapons work. There were other credible reports of Iranian cheating before the U.S. withdrawal, including several from German intelligence agencies. Senators Ted Cruz, Tom Cotton, Marco Rubio, and David Perdue raised Iranian noncompliance and cheating on the JCPOA in a July 2017 letter to Secretary of State Rex Tillerson.
JCPOA supporters rejected those criticisms, noting that the IAEA repeatedly declared Iran to be in compliance with the nuclear agreement. However, they refused to admit that the IAEA reached its compliance findings by claiming that Iranian violations were not “material breaches” and by not asking to inspect Iranian military facilities (which Tehran has declared off limits) even though they are the likely locations of covert nuclear-weapons work.
A disturbing report concerning the Arak reactor arose late last month when Ali Akbar Salehi, the head of Iran’s nuclear agency, claimed that Iran did violate the JCPOA by disabling the reactor and filling it with cement, and that Iran secretly acquired banned equipment to keep the reactor functional. If true, this would mean Iran fooled the JCPOA parties and IAEA inspectors on a major compliance issue. The IAEA has not commented publicly on the matter.
At last week’s worldwide-threat briefing to the Senate Intelligence Committee, the U.S. intelligence community reported that Iran is technically complying with the JCPOA, a finding that reflects both the IC’s history of liberal bias on assessments of weapons of mass destruction (as seen after the Iraq War as well) and the failure of the Trump administration to take steps to clean out key intelligence offices that were stacked with analysts who favored Obama-administration policies during the last administration. At National Review Online in 2015, I wrote about a CIA official who tried to pressure me to support the agency’s pro-Obama line on Iran’s nuclear program even though I had left the CIA and was working for the House Intelligence Committee staff.
JCPOA backers also prefer not to discuss the fact that Tehran can advance its nuclear-weapons program without violating the agreement, since the accord allows Iran to improve its capability to make nuclear-weapons fuel — that its, to enrich uranium with over 5,000 centrifuges and develop advanced centrifuges. Moreover, although the agreement required Iran to disable its Arak heavy-water reactor (a source of plutonium), which was under construction, under the JCPOA a new heavy-water reactor will be built that will be capable of producing one-fourth of a weapon’s worth of plutonium per year. That arrangement will enable Iran not only to gain knowledge on how to build and operate heavy-water reactors but also to have access to plutonium, the ideal fuel for nuclear weapons.
Oh, the genius of Obama. Hey, has Kerry been indicted for violating the Logan Act yet?
Here’s your “clear success”:
Officials: U.S. carrier group, bombers going to Mideast due to multiple Iran threats
An effing tweet? Maybe we should unfriend them on Facebook.
Hey, they can respond to our Twitter posts.
Read the article. It’s lengthy, and I’ve omitted much. Probably the parts covering all of the Trump administration’s moves reducing tensions and decreasing the likelihood of disaster. You know how we are about that.
Probably Iran considers that provocative behavior. If we had a diplomatic channel, we might know.
Meanwhile, North Korea, and Venezuela…
@Greg: All Iran has done is acknowledge what we’ve all known all along: they were cheating. No Iranian signed the JCPOA and no American signed it. So, there NEVER WAS a deal.
Yeah, meanwhile, Trump continues to confront N. Korea as well. They didn’t get any relief from the Russians, their situation gets more and more desperate. They can be assured no C-130’s full of cash will be arriving to try and buy their friendship. Obama is gone.
More of your “clear success.”
May 8, 2019 — Iranian leader announces partial withdrawal from nuclear deal
This is very worrisome. Trump is in serious need of a distraction. War with Iran might be his move. He could probably sell it to his base with ease. They’d never even notice that he was pursuing a long-standing item on the Neocon To Do list.
Of course, anyone who thinks this is a good idea has more than a few loose screws, what with Russia having Iran’s back, North Korea being entirely uncontained, China ready to take advantage of our sudden inattention, and an annual deficit that’s back up over a trillion dollars in spite of a fully recovered economy.
Whatever. Trump is moving aircraft carriers.
@Greg: There was never an agreement. Iranians never signed any agreement and neither did any Americans. Obama simply invented an excuse to provide aid and comfort to terrorists, via his infusion of cash to the Iranians and support of their nuclear ambitions.
@Greg:
And B52s. There will be no war, there was no nuclear strike from NK, The action in Syria…. ISIS caliphate no more.
Europe is coming to acknowledge and act on the nuclear threat posed by Tehran.
Barry if not intentionally aiding a terrorist nation was taken like the ignoramus he always has been.
Where did all the 600 missiles shot into Israel come from?
@Deplorable Me, #5:
The agreement was finalized in July 2015. Iran signed it, along with China, France, Germany, the EU, Russia, the UK, and the United States. The signed agreement was subsequently ratified in the Iranian Parliament in October.
Trump unilaterally pulled out of the agreement on May 8, 2018.
It was predicted at the time that this could trigger a new Gulf crisis. The man is an idiot.
@Greg: All treaties must be ratified by congress we had no agreement we had an Obama give away.
@Greg: Obama didn’t bother to get Iran to sign their wonderful nuclear deal
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3334249/State-Department-says-Iran-NEVER-SIGNED-nuclear-deal-s-not-legally-binding-tells-Congress-butt-Obama-s-political-commitments.html
@kitt:
There was never going to be a nuclear strike from North Korea.
@Michael: I guess that was never a concern, you are such a fail Mikey
https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/831653/north-korea-usa-nuclear-missile-hawaii.
@Deplorable Me, #9:
The nuclear arms deal with Iran was a negotiated executive agreement between participating nations, not a treaty. There is no formally signed treaty document because it was not a treaty. There were signatories to an international agreement.
From the State Department website:
I suppose this deprived Trump of the satisfaction of ripping up a signed piece of parchment during a televised announcement. Very unfortunate. His audience would have loved it.
@Greg: It was nothing but an agreement between liars. As such, it was worthless and would always be worthless.
It accomplished plenty. It delayed Iran’s acquisition of nuclear weapons for years and could well have continued to do so. Now we’ll once again be dealing with Iran’s nuclear ambitions, along with the delusional thinking Donald Trump has fostered about North Korea’s intentions in an effort to make himself look good.
The man’s international “policies” have been an effing disaster. He may fake his way through any number of business and investment deals, but that’s not the way geopolitics works. I’m not even sure it’s the way business works, since no one is ever allowed to look at his balance sheets. No one but Deutsche Bank was willing to loan the man money, and it’s really not clear why they did.
Let’s see; so far, in this thread alone, Greggie Goebbels has relied on NPR, CNN and the far left British rag, The Guardian.
Nah, no chance any of those sources are biased against, or would taint their reporting to reflect badly on, President Trump.
@Greg:
What was needed was Iran prevented from ever having nuclear weapons; they have threatened to use them to wipe out another sovereign nation. But Obama decided it would serve the world better to pay Iran for the honor of accepting their terms… and trust Putin to be a custodian of Iran’s nuclear material… like they took care or Syria’s chemical weapons.
Obama was a fool; a fool because he thought everyone else was so stupid.
This was more than a bad deal. President Obama has betrayed the American people by agreeing to the kind of agreement with an enemy of the United States that he said he would not agree to, as a Senator. It was the exact opposite of what he said it was.
Then for re-election during the 2012 debate “But the deal we’ll accept is — they end their nuclear program. It’s very straightforward.”
What we got, Obama’s Jihadist Stimulus Package.
@retire05:
Do you have a specific complaint about a specific piece of reporting? Have you ever actually listened to NPR? They always have opinions from both sides of the aisle on their morning and afternoon news shows, and they don’t do commentary in those venues.
Perhaps you could share an example of what you would consider “tainted” reporting.
@kitt: Media nuttiness about something doesn’t mean it’s a real threat. The overwhelming weight of history was on the side of “don’t sweat it.” You’re easily manipulated .
@Michael: Take your ignorance elsewhere, comment to Greg. He loves the funding of terrorists.
@kitt:
If you stop and realize that the odds against a nuclear attack, even by Kim Jong Un, are astronomical, you’ll notice that Trump’s Korea strategy has done, essentially, nothing at all.
@Michael: If Trump’s efforts fail, then he tried and that is something. I still think Un is closer to cooperation than not; I don’t think he is in full control. Beyond any doubt, though, N. Korea is struggling under the sanctions and Trump has given up nothing to try and convince Un to be rational and reasonable.
@Deplorable Me: I know the previous strategy was to not get any meetings and send them tons in aid, allowing them to further develop their military program. It doesnt seem to have worked very well, why doesnt Trump listen to these people who have previously dealt with the UNs, you know the Government “experts”?
May 13, 2019 — Two Saudi oil tankers damaged in ‘sabotage attack,’ says press agency
The timing here seems far more than a little too convenient. Ask yourself who this war would serve. The answer sure as hell isn’t the people who would most likely die in it, nor the people who would wind up paying for it. Don’t call me cynical for saying so. I’m way beyond cynical, at this point.
@Greg: You are applying rational thought to terrorists. Terrorists terrorize and Iran is led by a terrorist government. They want to control the Straits of Hormuz and they will employ tactics to slow down or stop traffic through the Straits.
Gulf of Ton-kin tricks is a Democrat tactic.
Yeah, delusional is way beyond cynical.
@Deplorable Me:
The decisions of beefing up the military presence in the area Just Trump playing army men, I bet his are not plastic, may have nothing do with information this guy
Brigadier General Ali Nasiri and things he might have told our military.
http://isicrc.org/irgc-basij-and-hezbollah/exclusive-irgc-commander-believed-to-have-defected-to-the-west.
@Deplorable Me:
Do you literally mean tricks involving the Gulf of Tonkin? If so, then I guess I have to agree with you. If, on the other hand, you’re referring to the practice of lying to involve the United States in a war, then I need only draw your attention to yellowcake uranium, WMDs, and the fateful sixteen words.
@Michael:
Then maybe you should explain what the “lies” were? You DO know that Iraq was getting yellow cake and tens of thousands of WMD’s were found in Iraq… right? There were lies involved, but they were produced by Democrats and all came about AFTER many prominent Democrats had enthusiastically supported the war and the intelligence that led up to it.
@Deplorable Me: Seal what deal?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/dougschoen/2015/10/06/argentinian-president-makes-big..
@Deplorable Me:
Oh, my god.
@Michael: Oh my god, indeed.
@Deplorable Me: Why the Bush lied people died, much of what was discovered came from Wikileaks.
@Deplorable Me, #25:
Why should America’s military power be at the beck and call of a regime that slaughters and dismembers journalists who dare criticize them? And what did we fail to learn about the consequences of creating power vacuums in the Middle East?
@Deplorable Me, #28:
What I understand is that you believe such b.s. to be true. The only yellowcake uranium “found” and removed from Iraq was an already known quantity that was left over from their nuclear program, which had been discontinued years earlier after we bombed and destroyed their program facilities during Desert Storm. It was fully cataloged. We already knew what it was and where it was, and didn’t much care because without sophisticated program facilities and equipment it was a useless, essentially harmless resource. Yellowcake is nothing but uranium oxide after extraction from crushed ore.
The “tens of thousands of WMDs” consisted of junk left over from the Iran-Iraq war of the 1980s, so old, unstable, and degraded as to be unusable. They were potentially dangerous in the sense that dumps of highly toxic waste are dangerous. They were not weapons that could be deployed.
Both the yellowcake and the dumps of old chemical weapons have been turned into something else in the right’s alternate Iraq War history. That’s the history where Saddam had something to do with 9/11 and was busily working on nuclear weapons that would soon turn into spreading mushroom clouds. We preemptively invaded to Protect America, found proof of the foregoing, and everything would have been great but for Obama, who spoiled everything.
@Greg: Explain how the US military is at anyone’s beckon call.
I think you need to review the facts. That way, you would look less ignorant.
@Deplorable Me: *beck and call
May 15, 2019 — The US and its allies in Iraq are bracing for attacks as a hidden threat from Iran looms
It’s well hidden, alright.
Possibly a Weapon of Mass Distraction is involved.
@Greg: At least our men can now shoot back so you are right not such a threat.
@Greg: It’s called preparation based on intelligence. Kind of the opposite of Obama and Hillary in Benghazi. Remember how that turned out? It’s called leadership. You should get some.
While this is a well-worn tactic of Democrats, keep in mind that Republicans don’t benefit from a hand-in-glove alliance with the media like Democrats do. So, your allegation is based on ignorance.
There are high-level people in the Trump administration that are heir to the perennial Neocon agenda regarding Iran. The danger is that they might slip the leash, because Trump doesn’t have an especially firm grip on it. Foreign policy and military affairs are not his strong suits. This could also could be made to appear to him as a politically advantageous change of subject.
No one should assume that this can’t happen. All of the necessary conditions exist.
@Greg: Trump graduated HS from a military school his grasp would be greater than any commie you would vote for. He understands Soldiers shouldnt have to call the pentagon for permission to shoot back.
@kitt:
Sweet mother of God, you’re serious, aren’t you?!
@Greg: Maybe more pallets of cash would help? You seem to think that is brilliant diplomacy. Remember Iranians taking US sailors prisoners in international waters immediately afterwards? And Obama and Kerry actually THANKING them for it? Trump plays by different rules.
@Michael: , #41:
It’s got to be humor.
@Greg:
God, I hope so.
@Greg: You see why I prefer to poke at you than the other moron?
@Deplorable Me, #42:
We gave them $1.7 billion of their own money back as a cash payment, and freed up access to around $50 billion of their own money that was frozen in United States financial institutions. In return, we got their compliance with the nuclear agreement which Trump has now unilaterally scrapped in return for the threat of a resumed nuclear program and another disastrous Middle East war.
What a deal!
Over $1.9 billon of their own assets still remain frozen inside the United States. Over $100 billion of their own assets remain frozen in international banks.
@Greg: But they are naughty https://www.reuters.com/article/us-iran-satellite-idUSKBN1AC1YY
Why would they need to be testing ICBMs?
Was that Kerrys doing?
@Greg: Iran still owed damages for taking our embassy staff hostage. So, paying them for the honor of accepting their terms (and paying their ransom for the other hostages they were holding) was a complete miscarriage of justice and a slap in the face to every American.
Obama was the absolute worst President this nation ever had. Anyone that supported him criticizing Trump’s leadership (something Obama totally lacked) is laughable.
@Deplorable Me: https://nypost.com/2016/09/08/no-we-didnt-owe-iran-that-1-7-billion-ransom-payment/
We didnt owe those sand niggers a dime they were making IEDs that killed Our guys.
@kitt:
More humor?