Imposing heavy sanctions will be utterly ineffective unless they're international. These won't be. Our European allies have made it perfectly clear they have no intention of abandoning the deal. I'm not worried about Iran hating us for reneging on the deal. I'm worried about all of the other deals we'll want to make in the future, not just during Donny's Administration (no one in his right mind will deal with Donny -- he's already proven he can't be trusted), but in future Administrations. The world now knows that the United States government will not abide by its word.flockofseagulls104 wrote:Trump has been saying from day one of his campaign that he would do this, and that the deal was the worst he'd ever seen. This is no surprise. There are so many things reported about this deal that it is hard to know what is true and what is not about it. (Unless you're bob-tel or AH, in which case you cherry pick the news you like and have it support your pre-decided opinion.) But the fact is that Iran is still sponsoring terrorism, still threatens Israel, the US, and its immediate neighbors. From what I understand from most news sources, this agreement has an expiration date, at which time Iran can go ahead and do what it wants. For those reasons alone, it might make sense to reimpose heavy sanctions on them. As far as I can tell, we (the US) got the shaft in this deal. What? Iran will hate us for reneging on the deal? I think they (at least the government) already does. Not much to worry about there.
Another reason is that it will send a message to Kim Jung Un that he better not be counting on hoodwinking us, like NK did to other previous administrations. I think it shows we won't be fooled again.
And I haven't seen any evidence that we were fooled. Do you think that if we hadn't entered the deal, Iran would have stopped acting as a state sponsor of terrorism? Of course not. The difference is that with the deal, at least they can't arm terrorists with nukes. That seems like a pretty good benefit. --Bob