4 ms·
Why would any country trust the current US regime to follow through on its commitments? They weren't even able to maintain a ceasefire during the agreed-upon ce
by rchaud 4mo ago
Why would any country trust the current US regime to follow through on its commitments? They weren't even able to maintain a ceasefire during the agreed-upon ceasefire period?
Beyond that, what would prevent the next administration from unilaterally decreeing this current agreement null and void as was done with the JCPOA? They certainly aren't going to want to bear the brunt of political unpopularity of paying out billions in war reparations.
- spwa4 4mo agoBecause you're always looking about a comparison, a choice. Holding the world economy hostage placates some egos at incredible cost to Iran ... or agreeing to the US commitments, problems and all. The superior option is obviously to trust the US.
- rchaud 4mo agoIran is already under decades-long sanctions and have shown that their ability to wait out the US+Israel was massively underestimated. After Vietnam and Afghanistan, has the US not learned that countries at war are willing to incur costs well beyond what the State Department thinks they should?
- spwa4 3mo agoOk ... let's follow your logic. They don't want peace. And your argument is that they are implacable. They will never agree to peace. And they have shown time and again, their demands don't make sense. They violently demand essentially everything. They will of course increase in capabilities until they become impossible to ignore, given their geographic location ignoring them ... not gonna happen. At which point we have a bigger problem and have to switch to more powerful weapons and wider destruction. So really, you're advocating for nuclear war? Or how should I understand this?