How the Trump Administration Inflicts Misery on the Iranian People

[TU Curmudgeon]

That cash was the Iranians money not ours. Trump is handing over Syria to Putin and Iran on a silver platter and abandoning our coalition in the fight against ISIS when 20 to 30k still remain. But the worst is handing the Kurds fate over to Turkey after their valiant efforts as our ally against ISIS. What is likely now in Iran is a resurgence of the hardliners who want to make a bomb.

An exceedingly smart scenario for the Iranian leadership would be the "unexpected" emergence of an "extremely hard line" faction that pushed for the development of nuclear weapons followed by the "defeat" of that faction by the existing government that takes the position that Iran gave its word NOT to develop nuclear weapons and that it would be shameful for Iran to go back on its word - regardless of what the governments of other countries did with respect to honouring their own commitments.

A few "useful idiots" could be sacrificed and a few people could "flee the persecution of the Iranian government" just to add verisimilitude to the scenario and you could probably pull the whole thing off for well under $100,000,000 (including the life pensions for the "defeated" who had to leave Iran).

 

[iguanaman]

Hmm... when (not if) we leave Syria that still leaves Putin and Iran in the catbird seat. If Putin and Iran (possibly Turkey?) are the "real threat" to US national security then why are we not fighting them?

The question is why are we giving up our hard fought positions in Syria that our coalition against ISIS provided and abandoning the fight against ISIS and our Kurdish allies too? Trump has already bowed out of the peace talks and left Putin in charge of them. I believe the answer will be in Trumps tax returns and the Mueller report. Trump is doing Putin's bidding for a reason no doubt.

 

[ttwtt78640]

The question is why are we giving up our hard fought positions in Syria that our coalition against ISIS provided and abandoning the fight against ISIS and our Kurdish allies too? Trump has already bowed out of the peace talks and left Putin in charge of them. I believe the answer will be in Trumps tax returns and the Mueller report. Trump is doing Putin's bidding for a reason no doubt.

Why is it incumbent upon the US to (forever?) support Kurdish allies in Syria? If Turkey (or some other nation) attacks our Kurdish allies then we should be at war with that nation. The idea that no nation is responsible, yet can easily (readily?) be named as the problem and/or proper battle ground, makes little sense.

 

[iguanaman]

Why is it incumbent upon the US to (forever?) support Kurdish allies in Syria? If Turkey (or some other nation) attacks our Kurdish allies then we should be at war with that nation. The idea that no nation is responsible, yet can easily (readily?) be named as the problem and/or proper battle ground, makes little sense.

Umm Because we are an honorable nation that does not desert our allies? The Kurds deserve our support for a Kurdish homeland. Turkey is preparing to attack the Kurds as we speak. If our air support is not with them they will be annihilated.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Umm Because we are an honorable nation that does not desert our allies? The Kurds deserve our support for a Kurdish homeland. Turkey is preparing to attack the Kurds as we speak. If our air support is not with them they will be annihilated.

Hmm... is the US somehow now unilaterally empowered to create new nations? That seems to be taking being a superpower to a whole new level. What are your suggested boundaries for this new "Kurdish homeland"?

 

[markjs]

From The American Conservative

How the Trump Administration Inflicts Misery on the Iranian People
​

Secretary Pompeo offers some insincere wishes for the prosperity of the Iranian people:

As the proud people of #Iran celebrate the longest night of the year & the victory of light over darkness, I wish for them prosperity and freedom. As the Persian poet Nezami said, “even in hopelessness there is hope; at the end of a dark night there is light.” Happy #Yalda!
— Secretary Pompeo (@SecPompeo) December 21, 2018
​

Iran hawks seem to enjoy feigning interest in the welfare of the Iranian people at the same time that their preferred policies are impoverishing and strangling them. It is so obviously two-faced that no one can miss the contradiction:

Pompeo says he wishes the Iranian people "prosperity" at the exact same time as he is promoting a sanctions regime that is preventing Iran from importing food. https://t.co/qoxznbBAPd https://t.co/4qpvf1E917
— Nicholas Miller (@Nick_L_Miller) December 21, 2018
​

It is bad enough that the Trump administration is trying to strangle Iran’s economy in a cruel policy of collective punishment. For some reason, administration officials also feel compelled to add extra insults to the injuries they are inflicting by pretending that they want Iranians to prosper when their actions show that they intend exactly the opposite.

COMMENT:-

What do those left-wing, liberal, pinko, socialist, commies know about anything?
​

They know how to make witty t-shirts!:lamo

 

[iguanaman]

An exceedingly smart scenario for the Iranian leadership would be the "unexpected" emergence of an "extremely hard line" faction that pushed for the development of nuclear weapons followed by the "defeat" of that faction by the existing government that takes the position that Iran gave its word NOT to develop nuclear weapons and that it would be shameful for Iran to go back on its word - regardless of what the governments of other countries did with respect to honouring their own commitments.

A few "useful idiots" could be sacrificed and a few people could "flee the persecution of the Iranian government" just to add verisimilitude to the scenario and you could probably pull the whole thing off for well under $100,000,000 (including the life pensions for the "defeated" who had to leave Iran).

I'm pretty sure that will not happen. There will be no rebellion against the Mullahs as long as the revolutionary guard is around.

Rouhani, advocating restraint, is negotiating with the Europeans to preserve as many of the deal’s dividends as possible. The hardliners gloatingly dub his overtures “beggars’ diplomacy." They argue that Europe has neither the will nor a way to stand up to the U.S. and is certain to cave as Washington ratchets up the coercion.

The Principlists mock Rouhani’s seemingly indefatigable hope in engagement with the West: from the Iran-Contra deal with the Reagan administration in the 1980s through the agreement to suspend uranium enrichment with the Europeans in the early 2000s and on to the 2015 nuclear deal.

In each case, they say, the West has betrayed Iran. That the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has enjoined his negotiators to “preserve Iran’s dignity” in the talks with Europe has increased the stakes and diminished their maneuvering space.

Observing Iran’s aging leadership, ailing economy, depreciating currency and growing popular discontent, the Trump administration senses vulnerability.

What it neglects is that existential angst also empowers the system’s security brigades, who have developed a formidable capacity for repression of a population that has scant appetite for chaos and violence.

https://thehill.com/opinion/national-security/393664-trumps-unintended-allies-in-iran-the-hardliners
.

 

[iguanaman]

Hmm... is the US somehow now unilaterally empowered to create new nations? That seems to be taking being a superpower to a whole new level. What are your suggested boundaries for this new "Kurdish homeland"?

Our adversaries have taken Syria for their own and you don't care about that. Why is that? Israel was created. Should we dissolve that agreement too? Should all our blood and treasure always amount to nothing or worse than nothing? Who decided that? A U.N. resolution could be negotiated for the Kurds if our President was not compromised by Putin.

 

[iguanaman]

1. That cash was paid by the Shah to the US for weapons. He was overthrown before the weapons were delivered. Why should we return money to the people who overthrew a government friendly to the US when they are an adversary? If Germany had sent us money and then Hitler took over, would you return the money to Hitler? Of course not.

2. Syria has always been an ally of Russia, not of the US. We didn't hand them to anyone.

3. Russia has as much interest in annihilating ISIS as we did. They will make sure it happens.

4. We should continue to arm the Kurds and give them our support. The fact of the Kurdish situation is a weak argument for keeping US troops there indefinitely, however. The only reason to stay there is because of oil but that oil belongs to Assad, not the US.

1) Ask the World Court who awarded the Iranians even more interest on their money than Obama negotiated.

2) Syria has been involved in a civil war where we supported the overthrow of a murderous dictator who gasses his own people. Russia does not own Syria unless we give it to them.
3.) Putin uses terrorists for his own gains and did not do diddly against ISIS. His efforts were against anti-Assad factions exclusively. The U.S coalition and the Kurds did all of the heavy lifting against ISIS
4) Without our air support the Kurds will be annihilated . You know this but still pretend we are not deserting them. Assad does not control all of Syria unless we cut and run.

 

[Doug1943]

As the US declines, and China rises, expect more and more impulsive, crazy decisions to be made in the field of foreign policy. This is independent of who, or what party, is in the White House, although Trump adds an extra dimension of squalor and irrationality. It will not be possible for the people making US foreign policy to accept that we are on the way to becoming Number Two, both economically and militarily.

And they have never had a deep understanding of the world, how it changes, and how to work with these changes to advance American and general democratic interests.

Iran will be changed from within. There is already widespread discontent with the regime, but the regime has all the guns. But then, so did the Shah. Such regimes fall when there is a split among those with the guns, with one side wanting to placate mass discontent, and the other opting for the hard line approach.

Our best bet was to keep trading with Iran and opening it up to the world. This would exacerbate contradictions within that society.

If we could force the Israelis to disgorge the West Bank, that would be all the better -- but that's not going to happen. Eventually, political developments within the US will pry loose the Israeli grip on our foreign policy. The effect of this is not predictable.

So... stock up on long-life foods, get decent weapons and adequate ammunition for your family while you can, and hope for the best.

 

[ElChupacabra]

Umm Because we are an honorable nation that does not desert our allies? The Kurds deserve our support for a Kurdish homeland. Turkey is preparing to attack the Kurds as we speak. If our air support is not with them they will be annihilated.

That's an idealistic notion I'm afraid. Sticking through it with allies depends on whether it is in US interests. I don't think anyone (including the Kurds) is expecting the US to continue supporting the Kurds because their ambitions aren't ones in line with proposed US ambitions in the region. There is no way the US is going to ally itself with the Kurds to provide them with a homeland because it flies the face of past efforts (unified Iraq, partnership with Turkey etc.) and interests. Kurdistan as envisioned by the Kurds cuts into regions held by existing countries and containing oil; Turkey will not cede Kurdish sections of its country nor will Iraq part with the norther oil rich region and you can certainly forget Iran giving up territory.

 

[Gaugingcatenate]

Yes you Putin sympathizers are quite pleased with Trump I know. Nothing is too good for the murderous dictator who has vowed to destroy us,

Yeah, you, the Muel, Rosenstienks, McCabe and the fat lady joining together in a nice hundreds of millions of dollars kumbaya on the sale of our national security assets to Putin and cronies...?

Where are ya on that... blind, just don't care if the name Trump isn't associated, on Putin's team... one, two...all of them?

 

[Roadvirus]

On the bright side, our Toddler-in-Chief is giving them Syria as compensation

How is Iran in possession of a dumpster fire good for them?

 

[sangha]

Hmm... when (not if) we leave Syria that still leaves Putin and Iran in the catbird seat. If Putin and Iran (possibly Turkey?) are the "real threat" to US national security then why are we not fighting them?

Because Trump

 

[ElChupacabra]

As the US declines, and China rises, expect more and more impulsive, crazy decisions to be made in the field of foreign policy. This is independent of who, or what party, is in the White House, although Trump adds an extra dimension of squalor and irrationality. It will not be possible for the people making US foreign policy to accept that we are on the way to becoming Number Two, both economically and militarily.

And they have never had a deep understanding of the world, how it changes, and how to work with these changes to advance American and general democratic interests.

Iran will be changed from within. There is already widespread discontent with the regime, but the regime has all the guns. But then, so did the Shah. Such regimes fall when there is a split among those with the guns, with one side wanting to placate mass discontent, and the other opting for the hard line approach.

Our best bet was to keep trading with Iran and opening it up to the world. This would exacerbate contradictions within that society.

If we could force the Israelis to disgorge the West Bank, that would be all the better -- but that's not going to happen. Eventually, political developments within the US will pry loose the Israeli grip on our foreign policy. The effect of this is not predictable.

So... stock up on long-life foods, get decent weapons and adequate ammunition for your family while you can, and hope for the best.

I agree completely. As Iran would have continued to move closer to other industrialized nations, the changes that come with that start taking hold and opening up the society as well. My money would be on that approach versus potentially radicalizing them even more by brining economic misery and essentially telling them to either have a US friendly government or starve.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Because Trump

Yep, unlike Obama or Hillary would surely have done.

 

[sangha]

Yep, unlike Obama or Hillary would surely have done.

Huh?

Both Obama and Hillary supported intervening in Syria

 

[iguanaman]

Yeah, you, the Muel, Rosenstienks, McCabe and the fat lady joining together in a nice hundreds of millions of dollars kumbaya on the sale of our national security assets to Putin and cronies...?

Where are ya on that... blind, just don't care if the name Trump isn't associated, on Putin's team... one, two...all of them?

LOL Uranium One was a Canadian "asset" that produced less than 2% of our yearly needs. Most of our Uranium comes from Russia and has for decades and its for electric power not bombs.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Huh?

Both Obama and Hillary supported intervening in Syria

I must have missed all of that intervention's success.

The United States first supplied the rebels of the Free Syrian Army with non-lethal aid (including food rations and pickup trucks), but quickly began providing training, cash, and intelligence to selected Syrian rebel commanders. During the Syrian Civil War, which began in 2011, two US programs attempted to assist the Syrian rebels. One was a military program that planned to train and equip 15,000 Syrian rebels, but was canceled in 2015 after spending $500 million and producing only a few dozen fighters.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American-led_intervention_in_the_Syrian_Civil_War

 

[sangha]

I must have missed all of that intervention's success.

That is a deflection. You originally asked why they were not fighting russia. You did not ask about their success

 

[ttwtt78640]

That is a deflection. You originally asked why they were not fighting russia. You did not ask about their success

Nope, that was a direct reply to "Both Obama and Hillary supported intervening in Syria".

 

[sangha]

Nope, that was a direct reply to "Both Obama and Hillary supported intervening in Syria".

You compared Trumps willingness to engage with Russia --and other hostile nations-- in Syria to Obama and Clintons, which I found odd as the latter clearly showed that they were willing to, while Trumps actions show he is not.

Can you explain how they are comparable on this?

 

[iguanaman]

How is Iran in possession of a dumpster fire good for them?

Syria borders Israel for one. They are also desperate to expand their influence in the M.E. and this is another notch on their gun. I see you are as clueless as your dear leader,

 

[Gaugingcatenate]

LOL Uranium One was a Canadian "asset" that produced less than 2% of our yearly needs. Most of our Uranium comes from Russia and has for decades and its for electric power not bombs.

Proving you know absolutely nothing about U1. Do you even know if it, Uranium, was/is classified a national security asset?

 

[iguanaman]

Proving you know absolutely nothing about U1. Do you even know if it, Uranium, was/is classified a national security asset?

All our national security agencies signed off on the deal. U1 has no strategic importance. It's minuscule production amounts to less than 2% of our yearly use and was Canadian owned. It's a really stupid and debunked meme.that only blind sycophants use in desperation.