Iran bad, North Korea good?

[Roadkingtrax]

So, someone smart here explain to me how the Iran deal was bad on principal, and giving North Korea a similar deal is somehow different?

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-44101068

We all know the return of imposed Iranian sanctions benefits the world's big oil (gas going up where I live). Also, oil accounts for 60% of all Russia exports. Who's benefiting here? HINT: Starts with P, ends with N.

Next they'll say North Korea won't allow nuclear experts to be privy to the destruction of their facilities. No doubt the NORKS want to deal, but my guess is their not really holding the cards their proposing to fold for the generosity of the United States and South Korea.

[rkohut]

I'm guessing a bunch of Euro companies want to do present and future business in Iran, not so much in NoKo.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/may/09/eu-moves-to-protect-european-firms-from-us-sanctions-on-iran

[Roadkingtrax]

I'm guessing a bunch of Euro companies want to do present and future business in Iran, not so much in NoKo.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...ctions-on-iran

Same goes for American companies that had sales on the books. Billions of dollars in backlogs, benefiting American workers and our need for supply side tax revenue. In Iran's case, they had nothing more to gain.

North Korea isnt exactly a fertile field for us, save for bad missile technology.

[barretcreek]

Let's see. Norks concern is to keep us from invading (say paranoid?) versus the Iranians want to export their version of Paradise to all their neighbors except for Israel, turning that into a parking lot. My view of the difference.

[Vern Humphrey]

Equally important, we are neither allowing them to continue their nuclear program, nor are we shipping them pallets of money.

[RED]

Iran

1. Their was no "deal," with Iran.
2. A "deal," means two people agree on something. Each giving and each receiving.
3. Iran didn't agree to give anything. They promised to not enrich weapon grade nuclear material, a "the unsigned check's in the mail," type thing.
4. Iran kept on building and testing ICBM missiles... Why, If they don't have nukes to put on the missiles?
5 There was zero verification that they stopped their Nuclear weapons program... Remember the Trust but Verify policy?
6. There was no Congressional input, it was all executive orders signed by Obama, and not a treaty ratified by the Democratic controlled Senate.
7. There is no agreement signed by Iran. Since such a document does not exist, how do we know they agreed to do anything?

No Korea

1. There will be a signed and sealed document, likely a ratified treaty ending the Korean War.
2. There will be strong verification required.
3, North Korea won't get anything until their actions are verified.

Just a teeny bit of difference.

Mr. Kim meets Mr. Al Khameni

Mr. Al Khomeni says “Death to America, we will never negotiate with them. Kill them all!!!”

Mr. Kim says “Nah, we tried that since 1950. It don’t work. Do what Mr. Trump says. It be better for everyone..”

[S.A. Boggs]

How about this "deal", we follow the Constitution as written. Any "deal" that bind our country must go before the Senate for ratification otherwise why? We are a Republic, not a Democracy as some suppose. I am against any agreement, no matter how good unless it is Constitutional not done as in a dictatorship.
Sam

[togor]

Iran

1. Their was no "deal," with Iran.
2. A "deal," means two people agree on something. Each giving and each receiving.
3. Iran didn't agree to give anything. They promised to not enrich weapon grade nuclear material, a "the unsigned check's in the mail," type thing.
4. Iran kept on building and testing ICBM missiles... Why, If they don't have nukes to put on the missiles?
5 There was zero verification that they stopped their Nuclear weapons program... Remember the Trust but Verify policy?
6. There was no Congressional input, it was all executive orders signed by Obama, and not a treaty ratified by the Democratic controlled Senate.
7. There is no agreement signed by Iran. Since such a document does not exist, how do we know they agreed to do anything?

No Korea

1. There will be a signed and sealed document, likely a ratified treaty ending the Korean War.
2. There will be strong verification required.
3, North Korea won't get anything until their actions are verified.

Just a teeny bit of difference.

Mr. Kim meets Mr. Al Khameni

Mr. Al Khomeni says “Death to America, we will never negotiate with them. Kill them all!!!”

Mr. Kim says “Nah, we tried that since 1950. It don’t work. Do what Mr. Trump says. It be better for everyone..”

ROTFL!!

Clarification added: A guy who publicly executes his relatives with an anti-aircraft gun is not going to say "Do What Mr. Trump says. It will be better for everyone." In my opinion.

[m1ashooter]

I'm really enjoying North Korea saying they are taking apart their testing facility. Its my understanding the mountain collapsed in areas and is leaking radiation.

[Allen]

I'm really enjoying North Korea saying they are taking apart their testing facility. Its my understanding the mountain collapsed in areas and is leaking radiation.

From all that I have read it is against international laws to test nuclear bombs in the atmosphere so these dumba$$es were testing them underground where their facility was hidden and everything collapsed. They were making daily threats against the whole world till then. Now they want piece and all the sanctions lifted because they have nothing else to bargain with.

[RED]

So, you don't think Kim actually said that?

[Vern Humphrey]

From all that I have read it is against international laws to test nuclear bombs in the atmosphere so these dumba$$es were testing them underground where their facility was hidden and everything collapsed. They were making daily threats against the whole world till then. Now they want piece and all the sanctions lifted because they have nothing else to bargain with.

So much the better for us.

[togor]

So, you don't think Kim actually said that?

Not to his people. Whether he let something be quoted to the foreign press as part of his propaganda campaign, who knows. Totalitarian regimes need an enemy to justify the continuous state of emergency. If you an make a tractable case that North Korea is prepared to pivot to some new enemy, away from the US, then I'll certainly listen to your argument. Right now I don't see it, and no, I see no sign of an imminent NK collapse. The most likely scenario in my opinion is this is one of those episodic pivots to "peace", in the hope of enticing Trump into pulling US troops out of South Korea. And make no mistake even if Trump thinks it is his idea, Kim's propaganda machine will have a very different message.

Once it becomes clear that the US can't or won't defend the ROK anymore, the covert campaigns will commence out of Pyonyang and Beijing to weaken the fabric of South Korean civil society. I hope I'm wrong.

[RED]

Not to his people. Whether he let something be quoted to the foreign press as part of his propaganda campaign, who knows.

Here is a clue for you... Kim has never met Al Khomeni... There is no public record of Kim ever calling DJT "Mr. Trump."

Hook, line, and sinker just like a catfish jumping all over a bait of rotten chicken livers.

[togor]

Here is a clue for you... Kim has never met Al Khomeni... There is no public record of Kim ever calling DJT "Mr. Trump."

Hook, line, and sinker just like a catfish jumping all over a bait of rotten chicken livers.

Boy you come up with some weird stuff sometimes. You think I'm some kind of nut job for hoping the ROK doesn't get screwed. Well, whatever. BTW I'm watching The Bridges at Toko-Ri right now. Good movie. Excellent footage of mid 50's carrier ops. Sure, Hollywood, but that's ok.

Hah! The flight of Able Dogs just came in to suppress the Commies during the SAR attempt. Mickey Rooney with a pair of carbines!