4 ms·
Oh come on. That is just plain insulting to all the other parties of the agreement. They knew full well that they did not have a ratified treaty with the US and
by cdash 8y ago
Oh come on. That is just plain insulting to all the other parties of the agreement. They knew full well that they did not have a ratified treaty with the US and they were explicitly warned of that fact ahead of time.
Just because people on the internet did not understand that doesn't mean the parties involved did not know that.
- ddalex 8y agoThis argument reeks of "not my fault you were conned, you should have known I'm a conman"
- creaghpatr 8y agoIran got their pallet of cash, they knew Obama was making the deal without the support of congress thereby giving the middle finger to US citizens. It would be diplomatic malpractice to not forecast the deal getting revoked, especially if they violated it (and they did)
- gdfasfklshg4 8y agoHow did they violate it?
- notyourday 8y agoIt is not insulting what so ever. Every single agreement that two parties enter is a temporary agreement that will be broken. The only question is when. The history is littered with the agreements/treaties between countries that were tossed. Every single diplomat knows it, which is why diplomacy is about horse trading. Parties want to "sort of" maintain the status quo, even if it means giving up some of what is "rightfully their" by the agreement.