Sally Yates
- Thread starter Skulnik
- Start date
Acting United States Attorney General
In January 2017, according to a Justice Department spokesman, Yates accepted a request from the incoming Trump Administration to serve as Acting Attorney General, beginning on January 20, 2017, and until the successor for Attorney General Loretta Lynch can be confirmed by the United States Senate.[9]
On January 30, 2017, Yates ordered the Justice Department not to defend Trump's Executive Order "Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States", saying "At present, I am not convinced that the defense of the executive order is consistent with these responsibilities of the Department of Justice, nor am I convinced that the executive order is lawful".[10][11][12] In response to her decision not to defend the Order, former Attorney General Eric Holder tweeted he trusted her judgment.[13]
Later that day, the Trump administration fired Yates, replacing her with Dana Boente, the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia.[14]
In January 2017, according to a Justice Department spokesman, Yates accepted a request from the incoming Trump Administration to serve as Acting Attorney General, beginning on January 20, 2017, and until the successor for Attorney General Loretta Lynch can be confirmed by the United States Senate.[9]
On January 30, 2017, Yates ordered the Justice Department not to defend Trump's Executive Order "Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States", saying "At present, I am not convinced that the defense of the executive order is consistent with these responsibilities of the Department of Justice, nor am I convinced that the executive order is lawful".[10][11][12] In response to her decision not to defend the Order, former Attorney General Eric Holder tweeted he trusted her judgment.[13]
Later that day, the Trump administration fired Yates, replacing her with Dana Boente, the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia.[14]
At her confirmation hearing in 2015, Jeff Sessions asked her if she was willing to defy the President if she felt he was wrong. Well, she wasn't lying.
President Donald Trump?s national security adviser says the administration is putting Iran ?on notice? after it tested a ballistic missile.
.................................
:mj07::mj07:
He put Iran on notice :mj07:
woooooo they are shaking in their boots now.
just follow isreal and go and nuke them. you know you want to start the wwiii
.................................
:mj07::mj07:
He put Iran on notice :mj07:
woooooo they are shaking in their boots now.
just follow isreal and go and nuke them. you know you want to start the wwiii
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Kqewojda3M0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
...
This is Flynn NAS to Iran
You are on notice !
...
This is Flynn NAS to Iran
You are on notice !
We do not want to be premature or rash or take any action that would foreclose options or unnecessarily contribute to a negative response,? the first official said.
During his presidential campaign, Trump called the 2015 nuclear agreement ?one of the dumbest deals ever made.? Last spring, speaking to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, he said that his ?number one priority is to dismantle the disastrous deal with Iran.?
.......................................................
Their keeping the Iran Deal that Obama signed . Trump said on day 1 he would rip it up.
wow
looks like Obamacare aint so bad either.
YOUR ON NOTICE IRAN < YOUR ON NOTICE !
:mj07::mj07::mj07:
During his presidential campaign, Trump called the 2015 nuclear agreement ?one of the dumbest deals ever made.? Last spring, speaking to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, he said that his ?number one priority is to dismantle the disastrous deal with Iran.?
.......................................................
Their keeping the Iran Deal that Obama signed . Trump said on day 1 he would rip it up.
wow
looks like Obamacare aint so bad either.
YOUR ON NOTICE IRAN < YOUR ON NOTICE !
:mj07::mj07::mj07:
The newspaper said the Sumar cruise missile was built in Iran and traveled around 600 km in its first known successful test. The missile is believed to be capable of carrying nuclear weapons and may have a range of 2,000 to 3,000 km, the paper said, citing intelligence sources.
Cruise missiles are harder to counter than ballistic missiles since they fly at lower altitudes and can evade enemy radar, confounding missile defense missiles and hitting targets deep inside an opponent's territory.
But the biggest advantage from Iran's point of view, a security expert told Die Welt, was that cruise missiles are not mentioned in any United Nations resolutions that ban work on ballistic missiles capable of carrying nuclear weapons.
International sanctions on Tehran were lifted in January last year under a nuclear deal brokered in 2015 by Britain, France, Germany, China, Russia and the United States.
News of Iran's reported cruise missile test came hours after Washington said it was putting Iran "on notice" for its ballistic missile test and signaled that it could impose new sanctions.
:mj07::mj07:
Khamenei ally says useless for U.S. to threaten Iran over missile test: Fars
..............................
Iran says Trump is not experienced enough to deal with them.
Trump put them on notice after they fired another missle.
Trump - I may put sanctions back on Iran.
Holy shit. what happened to Iran will not fuck with me. no sir .... they will bend to me
sanctions sanctions.
Its no better than Obama who he critisized bigley over sanctions.
For that to even cross his lips is hilarious.
Go ahead. Donnie , nuke them with your friend Israel. you know it will be over in maybe 10 years and trillions again.
:facepalm:
Cruise missiles are harder to counter than ballistic missiles since they fly at lower altitudes and can evade enemy radar, confounding missile defense missiles and hitting targets deep inside an opponent's territory.
But the biggest advantage from Iran's point of view, a security expert told Die Welt, was that cruise missiles are not mentioned in any United Nations resolutions that ban work on ballistic missiles capable of carrying nuclear weapons.
International sanctions on Tehran were lifted in January last year under a nuclear deal brokered in 2015 by Britain, France, Germany, China, Russia and the United States.
News of Iran's reported cruise missile test came hours after Washington said it was putting Iran "on notice" for its ballistic missile test and signaled that it could impose new sanctions.
:mj07::mj07:
Khamenei ally says useless for U.S. to threaten Iran over missile test: Fars
..............................
Iran says Trump is not experienced enough to deal with them.
Trump put them on notice after they fired another missle.
Trump - I may put sanctions back on Iran.
Holy shit. what happened to Iran will not fuck with me. no sir .... they will bend to me
sanctions sanctions.
Its no better than Obama who he critisized bigley over sanctions.
For that to even cross his lips is hilarious.
Go ahead. Donnie , nuke them with your friend Israel. you know it will be over in maybe 10 years and trillions again.
:facepalm:
you been listening to Hannity way too much
that money was money that was not ours . It was Irans money that we froze with sanctions.
So we gave them back their money .
or do you want to called America the thiefs of the world.
Washington (CNN)The Obama administration secretly arranged a plane delivery of $400 million in cash on the same day Iran released four American prisoners and formally implemented the nuclear deal, US officials confirmed Wednesday.
President Barack Obama approved the $400 million transfer, which he had announced in January as part of the Iran nuclear deal. The money was flown into Iran on wooden pallets stacked with Swiss francs, euros and other currencies as the first installment of a $1.7 billion settlement resolving claims at an international tribunal at The Hague over a failed arms deal under the time of the Shah.
A fifth American man was released by Iran separately.
Details of the cash delivery drew fresh condemnation of the Iran deal from Republicans. They charged that the administration had empowered a major sponsor of terrorism because the nuclear agreement enables Tehran to re-enter the international economy and gives it access long-frozen funds.
In addition, they said the cash delivery amounted to a ransom payment that violates long-standing US practice not to pay for hostages. As such, they argued, it encourages Iran to hold onto its remaining Americans prisoners until they can get more money for them.
"Paying ransom to kidnappers puts Americans even more at risk," said Illinois Republican Sen. Mark Kirk. "While Americans were relieved by Iran's overdue release of illegally imprisoned American hostages, the White House's policy of appeasement has led Iran to illegally seize more American hostages, including Siamak Namazi, his father Baquer Namazi and Reza Shahini."
Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump jumped on the issue, seeking to change the subject after a punishing week of gaffes and reproaches from members of the GOP.
"Iran was in big trouble, they had sanctions, they were dying, we took off the sanctions and made this horrible deal and now they're a power," Trump said Wednesday in Daytona, Florida.
"We paid $400 million for the hostages," Trump said. "Such a bad precedent was set by Obama. We have two more hostages there right? What's are we going to pay for them? What we're doing is insane."
Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, when asked about the payment by a local Denver, Colorado, television station, said it was "old news."
"It was first reported about seven or eight months ago, as I recall," she told Denver's 9News. "And, so far as I know, it had nothing to do with any kind of hostage swap or any other tit-for-tat. It was something that was intended to, as I am told, pay back Iran for contracts that were canceled when the Shah fell."
US officials said cash had to be flown in because existing US sanctions ban American dollars from being used in a transaction with Iran and because Iran could not access the global financial system due to international sanctions it was under at the time. The details of the how the transaction occurred were first reported by The Wall Street Journal. CNN reported in January that the transfer of funds had been arrangement.
The money was procured from central banks in Switzerland and the Netherlands, official said, and an unmarked cargo plane loaded with Swiss francs, euros and other currencies were flown to Iran.
"They were totally cut off from global banks and there was no other way to get them the money," one senior official with knowledge of the transaction said.
While the cash transaction took place the same day as the release of Washington Post reporter Jason Rezaian and the other Americans, administration officials insist the payment did not constitute ransom and that there were was no quid pro quo for the payment. They said the agreement on the release of the prisoners dovetailed with the resolution of parallel negotiations over the dispute of the failed arms deal.
"It's against the policy of the United States to pay ransom for hostages," White House spokesman Josh Earnest said Wednesday.
He described the payment as a "conscious strategic decision that was made on the part of the Obama administration as we were implementing the deal to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon to resolve other longstanding concerns we had with Iran."
"That included securing the release of five American citizens who had been unjustly detained in Iran, and closing out a longstanding financial dispute in a way that saved the American people potentially billions of dollars," he said.
CNN Politics app
In return for the US citizens' release, the US dropped extradition requests for 14 Iranian citizens and freed seven. Former FBI agent Robert Levinson, who disappeared in Iran in 2007, remains missing.
Earnest cast those using the new details about the palettes of cash as people "flailing to justify their continued opposition to the deal to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon."
The $400 million was Iran's to start with, placed into a US-based trust fund to support American military equipment purchases in the 1970s. When the Shah was ousted by a 1979 popular uprising that led to the creation of the Islamic Republic, the US froze the trust fund. Iran has been fighting for a return of the funds through international courts since 1981.
In announcing the agreement, Obama said that paying the $400 million -- plus $1.3 billion in interest -- was saving American taxpayers billions of dollars. The Iranians had been seeking more than $10 billion at arbitration.
"For the United States, this settlement saved us billions of dollars that could have been pursued by Iran," Obama said in January. "There was no benefit to the United States in dragging this out."
As it was making the January cash delivery, the US also imposed new sanctions on Iran over its ballistic missile testing. At the same time, the White House unfroze a larger pool of Iranian assets, estimated at $100 to $150 billion, as part of the nuclear deal, though administration officials cautioned that Iran would only pocket about $50 billion after legal claims.
.............................
and after all that.
Trump just put Iran on notice :scared:scared
President Barack Obama approved the $400 million transfer, which he had announced in January as part of the Iran nuclear deal. The money was flown into Iran on wooden pallets stacked with Swiss francs, euros and other currencies as the first installment of a $1.7 billion settlement resolving claims at an international tribunal at The Hague over a failed arms deal under the time of the Shah.
A fifth American man was released by Iran separately.
Details of the cash delivery drew fresh condemnation of the Iran deal from Republicans. They charged that the administration had empowered a major sponsor of terrorism because the nuclear agreement enables Tehran to re-enter the international economy and gives it access long-frozen funds.
In addition, they said the cash delivery amounted to a ransom payment that violates long-standing US practice not to pay for hostages. As such, they argued, it encourages Iran to hold onto its remaining Americans prisoners until they can get more money for them.
"Paying ransom to kidnappers puts Americans even more at risk," said Illinois Republican Sen. Mark Kirk. "While Americans were relieved by Iran's overdue release of illegally imprisoned American hostages, the White House's policy of appeasement has led Iran to illegally seize more American hostages, including Siamak Namazi, his father Baquer Namazi and Reza Shahini."
Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump jumped on the issue, seeking to change the subject after a punishing week of gaffes and reproaches from members of the GOP.
"Iran was in big trouble, they had sanctions, they were dying, we took off the sanctions and made this horrible deal and now they're a power," Trump said Wednesday in Daytona, Florida.
"We paid $400 million for the hostages," Trump said. "Such a bad precedent was set by Obama. We have two more hostages there right? What's are we going to pay for them? What we're doing is insane."
Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, when asked about the payment by a local Denver, Colorado, television station, said it was "old news."
"It was first reported about seven or eight months ago, as I recall," she told Denver's 9News. "And, so far as I know, it had nothing to do with any kind of hostage swap or any other tit-for-tat. It was something that was intended to, as I am told, pay back Iran for contracts that were canceled when the Shah fell."
US officials said cash had to be flown in because existing US sanctions ban American dollars from being used in a transaction with Iran and because Iran could not access the global financial system due to international sanctions it was under at the time. The details of the how the transaction occurred were first reported by The Wall Street Journal. CNN reported in January that the transfer of funds had been arrangement.
The money was procured from central banks in Switzerland and the Netherlands, official said, and an unmarked cargo plane loaded with Swiss francs, euros and other currencies were flown to Iran.
"They were totally cut off from global banks and there was no other way to get them the money," one senior official with knowledge of the transaction said.
While the cash transaction took place the same day as the release of Washington Post reporter Jason Rezaian and the other Americans, administration officials insist the payment did not constitute ransom and that there were was no quid pro quo for the payment. They said the agreement on the release of the prisoners dovetailed with the resolution of parallel negotiations over the dispute of the failed arms deal.
"It's against the policy of the United States to pay ransom for hostages," White House spokesman Josh Earnest said Wednesday.
He described the payment as a "conscious strategic decision that was made on the part of the Obama administration as we were implementing the deal to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon to resolve other longstanding concerns we had with Iran."
"That included securing the release of five American citizens who had been unjustly detained in Iran, and closing out a longstanding financial dispute in a way that saved the American people potentially billions of dollars," he said.
CNN Politics app
In return for the US citizens' release, the US dropped extradition requests for 14 Iranian citizens and freed seven. Former FBI agent Robert Levinson, who disappeared in Iran in 2007, remains missing.
Earnest cast those using the new details about the palettes of cash as people "flailing to justify their continued opposition to the deal to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon."
The $400 million was Iran's to start with, placed into a US-based trust fund to support American military equipment purchases in the 1970s. When the Shah was ousted by a 1979 popular uprising that led to the creation of the Islamic Republic, the US froze the trust fund. Iran has been fighting for a return of the funds through international courts since 1981.
In announcing the agreement, Obama said that paying the $400 million -- plus $1.3 billion in interest -- was saving American taxpayers billions of dollars. The Iranians had been seeking more than $10 billion at arbitration.
"For the United States, this settlement saved us billions of dollars that could have been pursued by Iran," Obama said in January. "There was no benefit to the United States in dragging this out."
As it was making the January cash delivery, the US also imposed new sanctions on Iran over its ballistic missile testing. At the same time, the White House unfroze a larger pool of Iranian assets, estimated at $100 to $150 billion, as part of the nuclear deal, though administration officials cautioned that Iran would only pocket about $50 billion after legal claims.
.............................
and after all that.
Trump just put Iran on notice :scared:scared
Forty percent of registered voters support impeaching President Trump, according to a poll released Thursday from the left-leaning Public Policy Polling (PPP).
Nearly half of voters, 48 percent, are opposed to impeaching Trump, and 12 percent remain unsure, according to the poll.
Pollsters also found that a majority of voters, 52 percent, would prefer former President Obama in his old role rather than Trump; 43 percent prefer Trump, and 5 percent are uncertain.
"Usually a newly elected president is at the peak of their popularity and enjoying their honeymoon after taking office," PPP President Dean Debnam said in a statement.
"But Donald Trump's making history once again with a sizeable share of voters already wanting to impeach him, and a majority of voters wishing they could have Barack Obama back."
PPP polling found that 49 percent of voters disapprove of Trump's performance since his inauguration on Jan. 20 and 47 percent approve.
Overall impressions of Trump remain negative, according to the poll, with 52 percent viewing him unfavorably and 45 percent viewing him favorably.
A number of major protests have punctuated the first two weeks of Trump's presidency, including over women's issues and Trump's order last week denying U.S. entry to travelers and refugees from several Muslim-majority countries.
...............................
impeach trumps after two weeks :142smilie
Nearly half of voters, 48 percent, are opposed to impeaching Trump, and 12 percent remain unsure, according to the poll.
Pollsters also found that a majority of voters, 52 percent, would prefer former President Obama in his old role rather than Trump; 43 percent prefer Trump, and 5 percent are uncertain.
"Usually a newly elected president is at the peak of their popularity and enjoying their honeymoon after taking office," PPP President Dean Debnam said in a statement.
"But Donald Trump's making history once again with a sizeable share of voters already wanting to impeach him, and a majority of voters wishing they could have Barack Obama back."
PPP polling found that 49 percent of voters disapprove of Trump's performance since his inauguration on Jan. 20 and 47 percent approve.
Overall impressions of Trump remain negative, according to the poll, with 52 percent viewing him unfavorably and 45 percent viewing him favorably.
A number of major protests have punctuated the first two weeks of Trump's presidency, including over women's issues and Trump's order last week denying U.S. entry to travelers and refugees from several Muslim-majority countries.
...............................
impeach trumps after two weeks :142smilie
WH issues additional sanctions against Iran
.......................................
The Iran-related sanctions the United States imposed on Friday were "in the pipeline" before President Donald Trump took office, but were activated in light of recent events, the White House said on Friday.
"These kinds of sanctions don't happen quickly but I think the timing of them was clearly in reaction to what we've seen over the last couple days," White House spokesman Sean Spicer told reporters. "We knew we had these options available to us because they had been worked through the process ... They were in the pipeline."
...............................................
Obama pulls trump out of the hole again
.......................................
The Iran-related sanctions the United States imposed on Friday were "in the pipeline" before President Donald Trump took office, but were activated in light of recent events, the White House said on Friday.
"These kinds of sanctions don't happen quickly but I think the timing of them was clearly in reaction to what we've seen over the last couple days," White House spokesman Sean Spicer told reporters. "We knew we had these options available to us because they had been worked through the process ... They were in the pipeline."
...............................................
Obama pulls trump out of the hole again
New U.S. defense chief warns North Korea on nuclear weapons
...............................
and then we have this gem.
US tells N Korea if they set off a nuke they will get full slam dunk.
Only thing is ,...... thats the way it goes with everyone capable. You use mass destruction and its a given payback of anniliation .
so what kind of warning is that
grab a pussy.... holy chit
...............................
and then we have this gem.
US tells N Korea if they set off a nuke they will get full slam dunk.
Only thing is ,...... thats the way it goes with everyone capable. You use mass destruction and its a given payback of anniliation .
so what kind of warning is that
grab a pussy.... holy chit
House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) said the Iran nuclear deal will stay in place.
In an interview with NBC?s ?Meet the Press? that will air Sunday, Ryan said the ?toothpaste is already out of the tube? when it comes to the deal.
?I never supported the deal in the first place. I thought it was a huge mistake. But the multilateral sanctions are done,? he said.
?I don?t think you?re going to go back and reconstitute the multilateral sanctions that were in place,? he added.
The deal, reached in July 2015, lifted sanctions in exchange for limits on nuclear activity in Iran.
The U.S. brought new sanctions against Iran on Friday, targeting 13 individuals and 12 entities in the aftermath of a missile test conducted by Iran on Sunday.
?I think the key is to rigorously enforce this deal. But also, remember, they?re testing ballistic missiles,? Ryan told NBC.
.............................................
:mj07::mj07:
Trump - I will tear up that deal on the first day.
Maybe Obama worked some magic afterall with this deal.
and Iran is on notice....:mj07:
In an interview with NBC?s ?Meet the Press? that will air Sunday, Ryan said the ?toothpaste is already out of the tube? when it comes to the deal.
?I never supported the deal in the first place. I thought it was a huge mistake. But the multilateral sanctions are done,? he said.
?I don?t think you?re going to go back and reconstitute the multilateral sanctions that were in place,? he added.
The deal, reached in July 2015, lifted sanctions in exchange for limits on nuclear activity in Iran.
The U.S. brought new sanctions against Iran on Friday, targeting 13 individuals and 12 entities in the aftermath of a missile test conducted by Iran on Sunday.
?I think the key is to rigorously enforce this deal. But also, remember, they?re testing ballistic missiles,? Ryan told NBC.
.............................................
:mj07::mj07:
Trump - I will tear up that deal on the first day.
Maybe Obama worked some magic afterall with this deal.
and Iran is on notice....:mj07:
When Gen. Michael Flynn marched into the White House Briefing Room to declare that ?we are officially putting Iran on notice,? he drew a red line for President Trump. In tweeting the threat, Trump agreed.
His credibility is now on the line.
And what triggered this virtual ultimatum?
Iran-backed Houthi rebels, said Flynn, attacked a Saudi warship, and Tehran tested a missile, undermining ?security, prosperity and stability throughout the Middle East,? placing ?American lives at risk.?
But how so?
The Saudis have been bombing the Houthi rebels and ravaging their country, Yemen, for two years. Are the Saudis entitled to immunity from retaliation in wars they start?:0corn
Where is the evidence Iran had a role in the Red Sea attack on the Saudi ship? And why would President Trump make this war his war?
As for the Iranian missile test, a 2015 U.N. resolution ?called upon? Iran not to test nuclear-capable missiles. It did not forbid Iran from testing conventional missiles, which Tehran insists this was.
Is the United States making new demands on Iran not written into the nuclear treaty or international law ? to provoke a confrontation?
Did Flynn coordinate with our allies about this warning of possible military action against Iran? Is NATO obligated to join any action we might take?
Or are we going to carry out any retaliation alone, as our NATO allies observe, while the Israelis, Gulf Arabs, Saudis and the Beltway War Party, which wishes to be rid of Trump, cheer him on?
Bibi Netanyahu hailed Flynn?s statement, calling Iran?s missile test a flagrant violation of the U.N. resolution and declaring, ?Iranian aggression must not go unanswered.? By whom, besides us?xstop
The Saudi king spoke with Trump Sunday. Did he persuade the president to get America more engaged against Iran?
Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Corker is among those delighted with the White House warning:
?No longer will Iran be given a pass for its repeated ballistic missile violations, continued support of terrorism, human rights abuses and other hostile activities that threaten international peace and security.?
The problem with making a threat public ? Iran is ?on notice? ? is that it makes it almost impossible for Iran, or Trump, to back away.:0074
Tehran seems almost obliged to defy it, especially the demand that it cease testing conventional missiles for its own defense.:0008
This U.S. threat will surely strengthen those Iranians opposed to the nuclear deal and who wish to see its architects, President Hassan Rouhani and Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, thrown out in this year?s elections.
If Rex Tillerson is not to become a wartime secretary of state like Colin Powell or Dean Rusk, he is going to have to speak to the Iranians, not with defiant declarations, but in a diplomatic dialogue.
Tillerson, of course, is on record as saying the Chinese should be blocked from visiting the half-dozen fortified islets they have built on rocks and reefs in the South China Sea.
A prediction: The Chinese will not be departing from their islands, and the Iranians will defy the U.S. threat against testing their missiles.:lol:
Wednesday?s White House statement makes a collision with Iran almost unavoidable, and a war with Iran quite possible.:0002
Why did Trump and Flynn feel the need to do this now?
There is an awful lot already on the foreign-policy plate of the new president after only two weeks, as pro-Russian rebels in Ukraine are firing artillery again, and North Korea?s nuclear missile threat, which, unlike Iran?s, is real, has yet to be addressed.
High among the reasons that many supported Trump was his understanding that George W. Bush blundered horribly in launching an unprovoked and unnecessary war on Iraq.
Along with the 15-year war in Afghanistan and our wars in Libya, Syria and Yemen, our 21st-century U.S. Mideast wars have cost us trillions of dollars and thousands of dead. And they have produced a harvest of hatred of America that was exploited by al-Qaida and ISIS to recruit jihadists to murder and massacre Westerners.
Osama?s bin Laden?s greatest achievement was not to bring down the twin towers and kill 3,000 Americans, but to goad America into plunging headlong into the Middle East, a reckless and ruinous adventure that ended her post-Cold War global primacy.
Unlike the other candidates, Trump seemed to recognize this.
It was thought he would disengage us from these wars, not rattle a saber at an Iran that is three times the size of Iraq and has as its primary weapons supplier and partner Vladimir Putin?s Russia.
Neither the Ayatollah Khamenei nor Trump appears to be in a mood to back away, especially now that the president has made the threat public
...........................................
soon war will come calling
His credibility is now on the line.
And what triggered this virtual ultimatum?
Iran-backed Houthi rebels, said Flynn, attacked a Saudi warship, and Tehran tested a missile, undermining ?security, prosperity and stability throughout the Middle East,? placing ?American lives at risk.?
But how so?
The Saudis have been bombing the Houthi rebels and ravaging their country, Yemen, for two years. Are the Saudis entitled to immunity from retaliation in wars they start?:0corn
Where is the evidence Iran had a role in the Red Sea attack on the Saudi ship? And why would President Trump make this war his war?
As for the Iranian missile test, a 2015 U.N. resolution ?called upon? Iran not to test nuclear-capable missiles. It did not forbid Iran from testing conventional missiles, which Tehran insists this was.
Is the United States making new demands on Iran not written into the nuclear treaty or international law ? to provoke a confrontation?
Did Flynn coordinate with our allies about this warning of possible military action against Iran? Is NATO obligated to join any action we might take?
Or are we going to carry out any retaliation alone, as our NATO allies observe, while the Israelis, Gulf Arabs, Saudis and the Beltway War Party, which wishes to be rid of Trump, cheer him on?
Bibi Netanyahu hailed Flynn?s statement, calling Iran?s missile test a flagrant violation of the U.N. resolution and declaring, ?Iranian aggression must not go unanswered.? By whom, besides us?xstop
The Saudi king spoke with Trump Sunday. Did he persuade the president to get America more engaged against Iran?
Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Corker is among those delighted with the White House warning:
?No longer will Iran be given a pass for its repeated ballistic missile violations, continued support of terrorism, human rights abuses and other hostile activities that threaten international peace and security.?
The problem with making a threat public ? Iran is ?on notice? ? is that it makes it almost impossible for Iran, or Trump, to back away.:0074
Tehran seems almost obliged to defy it, especially the demand that it cease testing conventional missiles for its own defense.:0008
This U.S. threat will surely strengthen those Iranians opposed to the nuclear deal and who wish to see its architects, President Hassan Rouhani and Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, thrown out in this year?s elections.
If Rex Tillerson is not to become a wartime secretary of state like Colin Powell or Dean Rusk, he is going to have to speak to the Iranians, not with defiant declarations, but in a diplomatic dialogue.
Tillerson, of course, is on record as saying the Chinese should be blocked from visiting the half-dozen fortified islets they have built on rocks and reefs in the South China Sea.
A prediction: The Chinese will not be departing from their islands, and the Iranians will defy the U.S. threat against testing their missiles.:lol:
Wednesday?s White House statement makes a collision with Iran almost unavoidable, and a war with Iran quite possible.:0002
Why did Trump and Flynn feel the need to do this now?
There is an awful lot already on the foreign-policy plate of the new president after only two weeks, as pro-Russian rebels in Ukraine are firing artillery again, and North Korea?s nuclear missile threat, which, unlike Iran?s, is real, has yet to be addressed.
High among the reasons that many supported Trump was his understanding that George W. Bush blundered horribly in launching an unprovoked and unnecessary war on Iraq.
Along with the 15-year war in Afghanistan and our wars in Libya, Syria and Yemen, our 21st-century U.S. Mideast wars have cost us trillions of dollars and thousands of dead. And they have produced a harvest of hatred of America that was exploited by al-Qaida and ISIS to recruit jihadists to murder and massacre Westerners.
Osama?s bin Laden?s greatest achievement was not to bring down the twin towers and kill 3,000 Americans, but to goad America into plunging headlong into the Middle East, a reckless and ruinous adventure that ended her post-Cold War global primacy.
Unlike the other candidates, Trump seemed to recognize this.
It was thought he would disengage us from these wars, not rattle a saber at an Iran that is three times the size of Iraq and has as its primary weapons supplier and partner Vladimir Putin?s Russia.
Neither the Ayatollah Khamenei nor Trump appears to be in a mood to back away, especially now that the president has made the threat public
...........................................
soon war will come calling
