• unmagical@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    131
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    So Trump, in his racist fury, canceled an existing plan that prevented Iran from producing nuclear weapons and permitted rigorous investigations. While this plan did grant access to several billion dollars those funds were either Iranian funds formerly frozen as part of prior sanctioned nuclear activities or repayments for a trade deal the US had failed to uphold their side of.

    To replace this deal, “No new wars” Trump started a new war which ended up closing one of the world’s most influential shipping lanes, revealed to Iran how easy it is to close that shipping lane, revealed to the world how affable the US military is, lost the war he started and will have to actually pay reparations in an amount double the number of funds the Obama plan gave access to. The end result of this will be that Iran has fewer restrictions (though still no nuclear weapon), more money, and greater respect in the region.

    Trump will still claim he got a better deal.

    • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 day ago

      Trump will still claim he got a better deal.

      And 40% of the country will believe him, and nothing anyone says will ever change their mind.

    • Deacon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      2 days ago

      I have never seen affable used in this way, presumably as a pejorative. Do you mean this in the sense of them being benign?

      I’m genuinely not criticizing; I love learning new things and my question is genuine.

      • unmagical@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Yeah, was going for the “mild/benign” meaning.

        Basically, “the greatest military in the world, which has NeVeR lOsT a WaR, couldn’t keep the strait that was already open open, lost several planes, and had multiple bases struck.”

        That military seems mild or benign.

        • Deacon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          2 days ago

          Thank you. I didn’t even know this was one of the definitions until seeing your use of it and looking it up. Appreciate you expanding my understanding.

          • unmagical@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            2 days ago

            Even the “mild/benign” meaning generally carries a tone of positivity (like a store clerk is trained to be affable–even at their worst they’ll still be polite) so it’s not an exact literal fit here.

            I was using it more as a tongue and cheek jab attempting to highlight more than just the inadequacies, but to paint them as non-threatening. Obviously that’s not case, the US did carry out strikes in Iran and has certainly been threatening both in language and act.

            In a more professional setting devoid of my joke attempt I would have probably used “inept.”

    • floofloof@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      revealed to the world how affable the US military is

      Is “affable” really the word you meant here?

      • unmagical@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Yeah, was going for the “mild/benign” meaning.

        Basically, “the greatest military in the world, which has NeVeR lOsT a WaR, couldn’t keep the strait that was already open open, lost several planes, and had multiple bases struck.”

        That military seems mild or benign.

    • Arancello@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      and united states citizens will fall for it again. The united states population and political system created this.

  • REDACTED@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Step 1) Declare war upon your “enemy” (friend, like Putin)

    Step 2) Say the war is unsustainable

    Step 3) Officially pay Russia billions of billions of dollars

    And y’all said he’s stupid

  • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    This is geat news. The last time Iran got economic reprieve their economy grew by 6-7% per year and purchasing power grew.

    That said this won’t happen again if Israel has any say in the matter.

    • nova_ad_vitum@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 day ago

      Isreal has de-facto veto power over any deal since they can just fly over and blow up something if a deal gets signed that they don’t like and most of the US political establishment will not only not criticize them but they’ll defend them.

  • kibblebits@quokk.au
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 days ago

    Oh man this article is good. Imagine being a soldier in this stupid war, dying even, so some cunts can pull some real estate deals in Iran.

    If you’re in the military, you’re trash.

    • Ilixtze@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      2 days ago

      Being in the military in the US is pretty much a humiliation ritual at this point. Being in the military in Israel is just going straight to hell, hell on earth as well hopefully.

      • Deacon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Being in the military in the US is pretty much a humiliation ritual at this point.

        FTFY

  • Nobody@anarchist.nexus
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    2 days ago

    $300 billion dollars is a ridiculous figure. This deal is going to be structured in a way that benefits Trump and his cronies. They’ll only pay Iran such an enormous amount if a significant part of it is captured as bribes.

  • humanspiral@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 day ago

    It all depends on how this is funded, and this is mostly a colonization trap for Iran. US has recently controlled the budgets of Afghanistan, Iraq, and now Venezuela. There is full threat of confiscation for any non-compliance, and this was done to Afghanistan.

    Funding could be extorted from GCC colonies, and like Venezuela, pressure for US major oil companies. There is zero history of any US investment in these colonial trap arrangements. Just bribery of political class to keep US control as long as feasible. Like Venezuela (and Iraq), US oil companies would be reluctant to spend cash because future nationalization is a likely retaliation to US extortion.

  • Mulligrubs@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    2 days ago

    If true, this is the USAs version of “oops, sorry”

    It appears that everyone but Trump was right, trying to claim the strait would be very difficult and expensive, practically impossible without boots on the ground.

    I think this deal is probably the best the USA can do at this point, but I don’t think Trump will agree. What a moron. There’s no clearer sign of the USAs rapid decline than having this clown as our President, once again I am humiliated.

  • Brem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    2 days ago

    Donald Trump is rather bland

    Donald Trump is a stupid “man”

    So all the “king’s” fools & all the tool’s “men”

    Had to rename Iran’s list of demands