Who knew that the denuclearization of North Korea could be so simple?

the janitor

Tom Curren status
Mar 28, 2003
12,340
1,737
113
north of the bridge
FecalFace said:
the janitor said:
FecalFace said:
GWS said:
It was worth a try. I mean, if you were willing to buy into a a de-nuclearized Iran why not sell you the same load of sh!t in a different country?
Because the Iran deal was beneficial to both sides.

Diplomacy. :shrug:

NK "deal" was not beneficial in any way to NK.
How was the Iran deal beneficial to us? They explicitly stated that they would continue developing the missiles necessary to deliver nuclear weapons and also denied inspectors access to the military facilities where they were developing the weapons.
Link?
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-iran-nuclear-usa/iran-rejects-u-s-demand-for-u-n-visit-to-military-sites-idUSKCN1B918E


http://www.latimes.com/world/asia/la-fg-iran-nuclear-20170830-story.html

https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2017/09/13/549217764/should-nuclear-inspectors-be-demanding-access-to-irans-military-sites
 

FecalFace

Duke status
Nov 21, 2008
42,338
2,105
113
The Californias
the janitor said:
FecalFace said:
the janitor said:
FecalFace said:
GWS said:
It was worth a try. I mean, if you were willing to buy into a a de-nuclearized Iran why not sell you the same load of sh!t in a different country?
Because the Iran deal was beneficial to both sides.

Diplomacy. :shrug:

NK "deal" was not beneficial in any way to NK.
How was the Iran deal beneficial to us? They explicitly stated that they would continue developing the missiles necessary to deliver nuclear weapons and also denied inspectors access to the military facilities where they were developing the weapons.
Link?
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-iran-nuclear-usa/iran-rejects-u-s-demand-for-u-n-visit-to-military-sites-idUSKCN1B918E


http://www.latimes.com/world/asia/la-fg-iran-nuclear-20170830-story.html

https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2017/09/13/549217764/should-nuclear-inspectors-be-demanding-access-to-irans-military-sites
:roflmao:

All your links are from 2017 after Trump already blew the deal. :socrazy:

You can do better than that.
 

the janitor

Tom Curren status
Mar 28, 2003
12,340
1,737
113
north of the bridge
FecalFace said:
the janitor said:
FecalFace said:
the janitor said:
How was the Iran deal beneficial to us? They explicitly stated that they would continue developing the missiles necessary to deliver nuclear weapons and also denied inspectors access to the military facilities where they were developing the weapons.
Link?
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-iran-nuclear-usa/iran-rejects-u-s-demand-for-u-n-visit-to-military-sites-idUSKCN1B918E


http://www.latimes.com/world/asia/la-fg-iran-nuclear-20170830-story.html

https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2017/09/13/549217764/should-nuclear-inspectors-be-demanding-access-to-irans-military-sites
:roflmao:

All your links are from 2017 after Trump already blew the deal. :socrazy:

You can do better than that.
That doesn't change the fact that inspectors didn't have access to military sites and Iran continued to build missiles. Also none of the participants in this thing got anything passed in their respective parliaments (same for us with Congress).

So what did we get out of the deal?
 

the janitor

Tom Curren status
Mar 28, 2003
12,340
1,737
113
north of the bridge
FecalFace said:
We've got inspectors on the ground and peace with Iran.

Trump came and went back to threats.

What are we getting out of that?
It sounds like we have inspectors on the ground - where the Iranians want them to be - which sounds close to meaningless to me

what is this peace with Iran stuff, when did that break out? Have they stopped supplying the folks that attack our troops in Iraq?
 

Autoprax

Duke status
Jan 24, 2011
68,724
23,354
113
62
Vagina Point
I don't know how you guys know some much about this issue.

Do you every start talking about something and realize you are talking about of your ass?

I do it a lot.

I try to stop talking when I realize it.
 

FecalFace

Duke status
Nov 21, 2008
42,338
2,105
113
The Californias
the janitor said:
FecalFace said:
We've got inspectors on the ground and peace with Iran.

Trump came and went back to threats.

What are we getting out of that?
It sounds like we have inspectors on the ground - where the Iranians want them to be - which sounds close to meaningless to me
YES BECAUSE TRUMP BLEW THE DEAL OFF :foreheadslap:

You are just fvcking with me now.

 

afoaf

Duke status
Jun 25, 2008
49,647
23,258
113
Sharkbiscuit said:
Who cares about Iran? What are they going to do, nuke Jerusalem? Raise my taxes to get that done, sheesh.
two birds one cup
 

the janitor

Tom Curren status
Mar 28, 2003
12,340
1,737
113
north of the bridge
FecalFace said:
the janitor said:
FecalFace said:
We've got inspectors on the ground and peace with Iran.

Trump came and went back to threats.

What are we getting out of that?
It sounds like we have inspectors on the ground - where the Iranians want them to be - which sounds close to meaningless to me
YES BECAUSE TRUMP BLEW THE DEAL OFF :foreheadslap:

You are just fvcking with me now.
No, that was the original structure of this agreement
 

FecalFace

Duke status
Nov 21, 2008
42,338
2,105
113
The Californias
the janitor said:
FecalFace said:
the janitor said:
FecalFace said:
We've got inspectors on the ground and peace with Iran.

Trump came and went back to threats.

What are we getting out of that?
It sounds like we have inspectors on the ground - where the Iranians want them to be - which sounds close to meaningless to me
YES BECAUSE TRUMP BLEW THE DEAL OFF :foreheadslap:

You are just fvcking with me now.
No, that was the original structure of this agreement
They were complying before Trump.

I have LENKE
 

the janitor

Tom Curren status
Mar 28, 2003
12,340
1,737
113
north of the bridge
FecalFace said:
the janitor said:
FecalFace said:
the janitor said:
It sounds like we have inspectors on the ground - where the Iranians want them to be - which sounds close to meaningless to me
YES BECAUSE TRUMP BLEW THE DEAL OFF :foreheadslap:

You are just fvcking with me now.
No, that was the original structure of this agreement
They were complying before Trump.

I have LENKE
Yes, they were complying with an agreement that allowed them to keep developing missiles and also allowed them to deny inspectors access to military sites.
 

$kully

Duke status
Feb 27, 2009
60,288
17,094
113
GDaddy said:
I think China might have reversed tack on the issue due to tariffs.

Nothing ventured, nothing gained. We haven't lost any ground. That is, unless people are mad that we're moving away from surrender mode.

Let us know when these negotiations involve us sending pallets of cash to them, like Obama's Iran deal.
This is what you get when you vote for a dotard that has no comprehension of the complexity and nuance of foreign policy. It was abundantly clear in his criticism of Obama during his Presidency and it's coming to fruition now. You don't start a trade war with a nation you need on your side to deal with North Korea. Trump is Trump's greatest saboteur.
 

afoaf

Duke status
Jun 25, 2008
49,647
23,258
113
https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2017/09/13/549217764/should-nuclear-inspectors-be-demanding-access-to-irans-military-sites
 

Autoprax

Duke status
Jan 24, 2011
68,724
23,354
113
62
Vagina Point
I don't know. It seems like these NKs are kind of untrustworthy.

I thought they were the cool Koreans.

Tough people.

Pretty ones are real pretty but they have hearts of stone.

And they can get this dead look in their eye that is scary.

I think they have high bone density in their skulls.

They could take a blunt trauma to the head better than whitey.

That is just a hunch but I bet I'm right.