Trumped

[Crampknees]

11 hours ago, Jason said:

I get it, Trump was sent in a glowing orb from God and even though I am the biggest jackass, that one ain't so funny. 

[tennischmp]

18 hours ago, Lou said:

Getting out of something stupid is silly? 

You can say all you want about the deal, whether it was stupid or not, but a this deal is still better then no deal at all as it relates to the nuclear capabilities of Iran. If Trump didn't like the components of the deal he should have renegotiated it, he had over a year now to do it now and is self proclaimed king of making deals but scrapping the deal is not what is in the best interest and safety of the US.

[Jason]

2 minutes ago, tennischmp said:

You can say all you want about the deal, whether it was stupid or not, but a this deal is still better then no deal at all as it relates to the nuclear capabilities of Iran. If Trump didn't like the components of the deal he should have renegotiated it, he had over a year now to do it now and is self proclaimed king of making deals but scrapping the deal is not what is in the best interest and safety of the US.

Maybe a deal like this shouldn't be done unilaterally and go through the legislative process and congress. I also remember the left having grave concerns about Trump getting us into a nuclear war with North Korea.

[Blarg]

The day ain't over yet, Jason.

[Jason]

1 minute ago, Blarg said:

The day ain't over yet, Jason.

Very true. You never know what you'll get. Calhoun may even start hitting the crap out of the ball tonight as well.

[tennischmp]

1 hour ago, Jason said:

Maybe a deal like this shouldn't be done unilaterally and go through the legislative process and congress. I also remember the left having grave concerns about Trump getting us into a nuclear war with North Korea.

Maybe so but are you trying to say that is the reason Trump nixed the deal, because the wants to do it the right way? The same Trump who bombed Syria twice without pre authorization from Congress and didn't impose the Russia sanctions that Congress approved for months? He doesn't give a shit about the right way and nixed the deal because it was made by Obama

[the dude abides]

1 hour ago, Jason said:

 I also remember the left having grave concerns about Trump getting us into a nuclear war with North Korea.

Give him time.

[Jason]

1 minute ago, tennischmp said:

Maybe so but are you trying to say that is the reason Trump nixed the deal, because the wants to do it the right way? The same Trump who bombed Syria twice without pre authorization from Congress and didn't impose the Russia sanctions that Congress approved for months? He doesn't give a shit about the right way and nixed the deal because it was made by Obama

Not at all. I know he campaigned that he would do it and he did. I'm confident that another Iran deal isn't completely dead and that they will renegotiate something else. What that is, I have no clue. I guess we will have to wait and see.

[Jason]

3 minutes ago, the dude abides said:

Give him time.

Everything that is happening in that region right now is a good and positive thing. We should all be happy. If anything, we're further away from any conflict with them than we have been in a long time.

[tennischmp]

13 minutes ago, Jason said:

Not at all. I know he campaigned that he would do it and he did. I'm confident that another Iran deal isn't completely dead and that they will renegotiate something else. What that is, I have no clue. I guess we will have to wait and see.

Except most of the time candidates campaign on 1 thing and after getting into office and getting the details and more knowledge on the issue they do what's in the best interest of the county which may not be to fulfill that promise. I guess he just likes to fulfill promises. As I stated before he had over a year to renegotiate the deal and he didn't have to nix the deal to do that, giving Iran full nuclear power back and setting a bad precedent for future deals to come. 

[Jason]

14 minutes ago, tennischmp said:

Except most of the time candidates campaign on 1 thing and after getting into office and getting the details and more knowledge on the issue they do what's in the best interest of the county which may not be to fulfill that promise. I guess he just likes to fulfill promises. As I stated before he had over a year to renegotiate the deal and he didn't have to nix the deal to do that, giving Iran full nuclear power back and setting a bad precedent for future deals to come. 

Most candidates care less about what they said during a campaign once they get in office. I get your skepticism on future deals but it's to early to say if this is a international policy mistake on Trump's part.

[Blarg]

2 hours ago, Jason said:

Very true. You never know what you'll get. Calhoun may even start hitting the crap out of the ball tonight as well.

Let's not go too far.

[Crampknees]

1 hour ago, Jason said:

Everything that is happening in that region right now is a good and positive thing. We should all be happy. If anything, we're further away from any conflict with them than we have been in a long time.

I agree we are further away from a conflict with N. Korea but at the same time was it all just flexing muscles.  I think war in Iran is much closer at the same time.  That shit is profitable and Trump wants some Haliburton style action. Guy is broke and needs money. We need war and all defense contracts should be run through Essential Consultants LLC. 

[Jason]

26 minutes ago, Kurt Swanson said:

I agree we are further away from a conflict with N. Korea but at the same time was it all just flexing muscles.  I think war in Iran is much closer at the same time.  That shit is profitable and Trump wants some Haliburton style action. Guy is broke and needs money. We need war and all defense contracts should be run through Essential Consultants LLC. 

I truly do not think he shares the same motivations that his predecessors did. I think he is strictly motivated to do whatever he needs to feed his ego.  

[Crampknees]

1 hour ago, Jason said:

I truly do not think he shares the same motivations that his predecessors did. I think he is strictly motivated to do whatever he needs to feed his ego.  

I agree, that is him and if feeding his own ego is good than I just have to tune it out. I have studied the guy for 40 years and he should just be getting out on parole so I am a bad example. 

Just turned on the news and Little Marco in the CIA lady confirmation, which I give no shit about her past, says what kind of signal does this send to young people that you were drug through the mud.  10 minutes later you will get a Trump tweet saying FBI, DOJ, members need to be imprisoned.  I'm just confused at this point.  

 

[tennischmp]

3 hours ago, Jason said:

Most candidates care less about what they said during a campaign once they get in office. I get your skepticism on future deals but it's to early to say if this is a international policy mistake on Trump's part.

But it’s already a mistake simply because we pulled out. If the intention was to make another deal then he should have just renegotiated the current one. If there is not intention of making another one then it’s also a mistake. 

[Jason]

1 hour ago, tennischmp said:

But it’s already a mistake simply because we pulled out. If the intention was to make another deal then he should have just renegotiated the current one. If there is not intention of making another one then it’s also a mistake. 

Sounds like something a person without kids would say

[Jason]

In all seriousness, the other side of your position is that we never should have made the deal in the first place. Only time will tell which side made the best decision.

[Taylor]

On 5/9/2018 at 8:21 AM, Jason said:

Very true. You never know what you'll get. Calhoun may even start hitting the crap out of the ball tonight as well.

If Trump can make Calhoun great again, I'll become a fan.

[Thomas]

On 5/9/2018 at 2:39 PM, tennischmp said:

But it’s already a mistake simply because we pulled out. If the intention was to make another deal then he should have just renegotiated the current one. If there is not intention of making another one then it’s also a mistake. 

Playing devil's advocate, sometimes you can't win in negotiating until one party feels the teeth of the consequences of their choice. Girlfriend wants boyfriend to stop doing something. He agrees but keeps doing it anyway. She dumps him and he comes back on his knees and far more amiable. Now in this case I think Trump is just doing it because he said he would during the campaign and he only said it on the campaign because Obama did it and he knew it would appeal to the base. But in general you can't just argue that pulling out of a deal means that renegotiating is off the table. Sometimes it's an effective negotiating tactic. 

[Blarg]

Renegotiation of a bad deal doesn't make it a good one. Your baseline is too low to get what you really want. So all you end up doing is clawing for a less bad deal. 

This was a bad deal. Negotiations would not have changed it to a good one for all parties. 

Edited May 10, 2018 by Blarg

[Thomas]

5 minutes ago, Blarg said:

Renegotiation of a bad deal doesn't make it a good one. Your baseline is too low to get what you really want. So all you end up doing is clawing for a less bad deal. 

This was a bad deal. Negotiations would not have changed it to a good one for all parties. 

 

[arch stanton]

If I remember correctly the deal wasn’t just between the US and Iran. It involved all 5 permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany. So he’s not just tearing up a bad deal made by Obama, he’s tearing up a deal that took a good bit of negotiating and involved 5 other countries. Makes me wonder the timing with respect to the meeting with North Korea has anything to do with it 

[UndertheHalo]

The only issue with the “Iran deal” was that it wasn’t a treaty that passed through Congress.  

As if the republican congresss would have ever approved an Obama treaty. The orange asshole can scream to the heavens about how it was a terrible agreement as much as he wants.  The treaty served the purpose of preventing an Iranian nuclear weapon.  It had extremely thorough compliance verification.  It was perfectly solid diplomatic agreement for all parties.  

Edited May 11, 2018 by UndertheHalo

[Blarg]

49 minutes ago, arch stanton said:

If I remember correctly the deal wasn’t just between the US and Iran. It involved all 5 permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany. So he’s not just tearing up a bad deal made by Obama, he’s tearing up a deal that took a good bit of negotiating and involved 5 other countries. Makes me wonder the timing with respect to the meeting with North Korea has anything to do with it 

Taking away a precedent for nuclear negotiations? That is more like a 3 dimensional chess game instead of checkers. If it is a thought out plan then many are underestimating the administration's ability to play this game.