Jump to content
Thailand Visa Forum by Thai Visa | The Nation
webfact

Exclusive: Trump to weigh more aggressive U.S. strategy on Iran - sources

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, Naam said:

a brilliant idea as the Mullahs are all dumb and eager to commit suicide :coffee1:

Partially agree with your comment.  I don't think they are all that smart.  If they were, their country would be in better shape.  Right?  Focused too much on Religion.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, otherstuff1957 said:

Trump wants a war.  After all, wars always boost a president's popularity!  So, what are his options:

Venezuela?  - Too close to home.

N. Korea? - Too close to China, S. Korea and Japan.  The effect on the global economy would probably be too great to take a chance with.

Iran? - perfect!  They don't have nukes, they are enemies of our "friends" the Saudis, and they wear funny hats.  :sick:

 

Doubt Trump got a clear foreign policy or even a consistent one, campaign trail aside.

 

Kinda funny citing "effect on global economy" as a reason not getting into a war with NK, but somehow implying that war with Iran wouldn't carry such consequences. And, btw, I find the NK military hats much funnier..

 

The OP isn't about going to war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The plan also recommends the United States react more aggressively in Bahrain, whose Sunni Muslim monarchy has been suppressing majority Shi'ites, who are demanding reforms, the sources said."

What does "react more aggresively" mean, exactly? That the US should give even more assistance to Bahrain in suppressing the Shi'itte majority or that it should help the Shi'ites? Given the freedom loving bias of the previous administration and this one, I'd guess it means helping the monarchy.  But it's unclear.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

Mr Trump, I'm certainly not one of your biggest critics.

Obama did a few bad things, and a few good things. One of the good things that Obama did was to improve relations between the USA and Iran. Obama did know that Iran is basically harmless. You, Mr Trump, you seem to reckon that Iran is dangerous. For the sake of planet earth, can you please not reverse the good work that Obama did in reaching out to Iran.

 

Nonsense.

 

"Obama did know that Iran is basically harmless." - if Iran was harmless, what was the point of the sanctions and the agreement?  Nowhere did Obama express any such sentiment such as you allege. Both administrations saw Iran as a threat, the differences are, perhaps, more to do with how to address them. The reason I put "perhaps" there, is that like other foreign policy and security issues, Trump's administration does not actually have any realistic bright ideas as to how to handle Iran. Other than Trump, there aren't many voices on his administration calling for the deal to be scrapped or pushing for war.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Jingthing said:

That's total BS. Obama most certainly did not think Iran was totally harmless. I agree the nuclear treaty has merit.

 

26 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Nonsense.

 

"Obama did know that Iran is basically harmless." - if Iran was harmless, what was the point of the sanctions and the agreement?  Nowhere did Obama express any such sentiment such as you allege. Both administrations saw Iran as a threat, the differences are, perhaps, more to do with how to address them. The reason I put "perhaps" there, is that like other foreign policy and security issues, Trump's administration does not actually have any realistic bright ideas as to how to handle Iran. Other than Trump, there aren't many voices on his administration calling for the deal to be scrapped or pushing for war.

Okay, Obama reached out to Iran, and had sanctions partly lifted, and I reckon this was cerainly a sensible idea. I'm going to say, that I criticise and condemn all those who made comments like "oh, Obama is selling out to Iran, he is being too friendly and generous to Iran".

Do you guys feel the same as me ? I noticed on ThaiVisa, when those comments were being made (mainly by Trump supporters) well, it's not as if lots of people came out to support Obama, on here. I did. I'm conscious of the point that many pro-Obama people simply did not support Obama's Iran policy, some of them secretly reckoned that Obama was being too friendly and generous to Iran.

I do have a smirk when I see the strange position being held by some of the pro-Obama/Clinton people. It's Trump who is carrying out the more aggresive policy towards Iran, that's what them pro-Clinton people actually want. And the pro-Clinton brigade, they would be cheering on this more aggresive policy towards Iran IF it was Hillary who was in charge.
But it's Trump who is charge, it's Trump who is doing it, but these people don't want to support it.

Edited by tonbridgebrit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, tonbridgebrit said:

 

Okay, Obama reached out to Iran, and had sanctions partly lifted, and I reckon this was cerainly a sensible idea. I'm going to say, that I criticise and condemn all those who made comments like "oh, Obama is selling out to Iran, he is being too friendly and generous to Iran".

Do you guys feel the same as me ? I noticed on ThaiVisa, when those comments were being made (mainly by Trump supporters) well, it's not as if lots of people came out to support Obama, on here. I did. I'm conscious of the point that many pro-Obama people simply did not support Obama's Iran policy, some of them secretly reckoned that Obama was being too friendly and generous to Iran.

I do have a smirk when I see the strange position being held by some of the pro-Obama/Clinton people. It's Trump who is carrying out the more aggresive policy towards Iran, that's what them pro-Clinton people actually want. And the pro-Clinton brigade, they would be cheering on this more aggresive policy towards Iran IF it was Hillary who was in charge.
But it's Trump who is charge, it's Trump who is doing it, but these people don't want to support it.

 

More nonsense.

 

Obama didn't reach out to Iran. Iran was under a sanctions regime (upheld for years by Obama's administration) and finally gave in, signing an agreement. At no point did Obama say anything about Iran being "harmless", basically or otherwise.

 

 

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

More nonsense.

 

Obama didn't reach out to Iran. Iran was under a sanctions regime (upheld for years by Obama's administration) and finally gave in, signing an agreement. At no point did Obama say anything about Iran being "harmless", basically or otherwise.

 

 

 

 


Morch, do you want to join me in criticising and condemning those people who said "Obama is selling out to Iran, Obama is being too friendly and generous to Iran" ??

Morch, sanctions were (partly) lifted, do you reckon this was good thing ?  I certainly do.

What has Iran done since Obama left, to justify a more aggresive strategy by Washington ? Surely, Iran has done nothing to justify a more aggresive strategy by Washington ? People are refusing to criticise Trump for thinking about this more aggresive strategy, because, because they actually want to see this. They never wanted Obama's friendly and generous approach to Iran.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Morch, do you want to join me in criticising and condemning those people who said "Obama is selling out to Iran, Obama is being too friendly and generous to Iran" ??

Morch, sanctions were (partly) lifted, do you reckon this was good thing ?  I certainly do.

What has Iran done since Obama left, to justify a more aggresive strategy by Washington ? Surely, Iran has done nothing to justify a more aggresive strategy by Washington ? People are refusing to criticise Trump for thinking about this more aggresive strategy, because, because they actually want to see this. They never wanted Obama's friendly and generous approach to Iran.

Yeah Iran has done nothing aggressive.


Back to the real world.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, tonbridgebrit said:


Morch, do you want to join me in criticising and condemning those people who said "Obama is selling out to Iran, Obama is being too friendly and generous to Iran" ??

Morch, sanctions were (partly) lifted, do you reckon this was good thing ?  I certainly do.

What has Iran done since Obama left, to justify a more aggresive strategy by Washington ? Surely, Iran has done nothing to justify a more aggresive strategy by Washington ? People are refusing to criticise Trump for thinking about this more aggresive strategy, because, because they actually want to see this. They never wanted Obama's friendly and generous approach to Iran.

 

None of this got much to do with what you posted above - "Obama did know that Iran is basically harmless.". Just the usual deflections. The sanctions were there for a reason, and it wasn't Iran being harmless. The agreement was signed not because Iran was (or is), harmless.

 

Whether or not a better deal could have been struck is a matter of opinion. What isn't debatable is that the unlike Obama, the current administration is in no position to enlist international support - not for dismantling the agreement's framework, not for decreeing new sanctions and not even for statements regarding Iran's compliance.

 

Iran not breaking the terms relating to its nuclear program, fine. That doesn't have a whole lot to do with how Iran acts on other fronts and issues, though. That you would fake ignorance of this is unsurprising.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Why does Iran have to be supressed?

 

Where do you see anything in the OP that mentions "suppressing" Iran?

Edited by Morch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Where do you see anything in the OP that mentions "suppressing" Iran?

By reading.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, stevenl said:

By reading.

 

Cool. Now let's advance to comprehension - where does the OP relate "suppression" of Iran?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

What has Iran done since Obama left, to justify a more aggresive strategy by Washington ? Surely, Iran has done nothing to justify a more aggresive strategy by Washington ? People are refusing to criticise Trump for thinking about this more aggresive strategy, because, because they actually want to see this. They never wanted Obama's friendly and generous approach to Iran.

Iran continues to fund the terror going on in Yemen.  Along with a variety of other terrorist organizations involved in conflicts in the region.  Syria being a big one.

 

Perhaps without Iran's support, the war in Yemen would be over?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

BANGKOK 14 December 2017 03:43
Sponsors
×