Even if we had remained in the JCPOA, that agreement would have been on the verge of obsolescence by now. It was not designed to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon forever. It was only designed to delay it for a decade or so. And the JCPOA did absolutely nothing to rein in Iran's support for terrorism.
i think unfortunately with a little poking around one can find pretty good non-biased reporting on iran's skirting of the treaty and so on ... is it a slam dunk, do we have iranian top officials on record in the public on that? no. it's not that solid, but pretty good, enough to think that the treaty alone would not have been enough to prevent them from eventually having a weapon. once again or maybe i should be more clear -- i'm not really defending the specifics of this strike, but just pt out that the long standing policy of a non-nuke-weapon iran has been this nations (also our allies i believe) goal thru several presidencies now. and we aren't there yet.
I don't think another JCPOA-type deal was possible after Trump pulled us out of the first one. We gave up leverage and went back on our word, so why would Iran do another deal with us?
It appears that Israel is still the final arbiter of US policy, given how the last week has played out.
Can we please all not lose sight of the fact that, if this was necessary, it was only necessary because Trump pulled us out of the JCPA.
Even if we had remained in the JCPOA, that agreement would have been on the verge of obsolescence by now. It was not designed to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon forever. It was only designed to delay it for a decade or so. And the JCPOA did absolutely nothing to rein in Iran's support for terrorism.
The JCPOA wasn't perfect, but we would have definitely had significantly more information on whether or not a strike on Iran was necessary.
i think unfortunately with a little poking around one can find pretty good non-biased reporting on iran's skirting of the treaty and so on ... is it a slam dunk, do we have iranian top officials on record in the public on that? no. it's not that solid, but pretty good, enough to think that the treaty alone would not have been enough to prevent them from eventually having a weapon. once again or maybe i should be more clear -- i'm not really defending the specifics of this strike, but just pt out that the long standing policy of a non-nuke-weapon iran has been this nations (also our allies i believe) goal thru several presidencies now. and we aren't there yet.
Trump might have pulled.
But Israel was doing the pushing, which, was the majority of the work.
Also: it is hard to make the argument тАЬorange man badтАЭ when Biden had four years to reimplement the JCPOA.
He didnтАЩt.
Why?
Because Israel had veto rights over his presidency. They were the final arbiter of US policy.
I don't think another JCPOA-type deal was possible after Trump pulled us out of the first one. We gave up leverage and went back on our word, so why would Iran do another deal with us?
It appears that Israel is still the final arbiter of US policy, given how the last week has played out.
Arsonist puts out fire he started v1,037.0
Exactly!