[Vision2020] Obama Responds to Trump's Iran Pull-Out
Debi Smith
debismith at moscow.com
Wed May 9 18:52:53 PDT 2018
Thank you, Sunil, for putting it in context. Vote!!! This time it is
REALLY Important!!
Debi R-S
On 5/9/2018 4:04 PM, Sunil Ramalingam wrote:
> Darrell I’m not talking about you’re not commenting much. I don’t know
> what you say elsewhere. I’m addressing your comment about president
> being broken in and unhealthy way and your focus on Obama statements
> yesterday.
>
> I completely disagree with the notion that we should be concerned
> about Obama speaking up. About time, I say, and it wasn’t Obama that
> did away with precedent. Precedents lie in wreckage all around us.
>
> I don’t see much value in that particular precedent. If you or Dan
> think Obama is lying, take him to task for that. Respect for precedent
> is a cudgel used against Democrats. There’s no reason for them to care
> about it, Republicans stop worrying about precedents and norms a
> while back.
>
> And in this case in particular: Obama is supposed to follow the
> precedent that silences him? For the guy who spread the racist lie
> that he was not a citizen? Why should he remained silent? How do the
> American people benefit from his silence? Silence doesn’t leave a
> void. Trump is willing to fill that space with lies.
>
> No, it’s time for honest and accurate speech.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* keim152 at gmail.com <keim152 at gmail.com> on behalf of Darrell
> Keim <keim153 at gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 9, 2018 11:56:21 AM
> *To:* Sunil Ramalingam
> *Cc:* Dan Carscallen; vision2020
> *Subject:* Re: [Vision2020] Obama Responds to Trump's Iran Pull-Out
> Sunil: If your note is directed at me not commenting much, please
> save it. I have commented plenty about my dislike of a variety of
> unhealthy breaks with tradition and precedent. Just not on this
> particular forum.
>
> On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 11:23 AM, Sunil Ramalingam
> <sunilramalingam at hotmail.com <mailto:sunilramalingam at hotmail.com>> wrote:
>
> This is the unhealthy break with tradition and precedent? Not the
> things that Trump has been saying for the last year and a half or
> longer? What he’s been doing?
>
> That’s like complaining about the color of the lifeboats on the
> Titanic, and remaining silent about the more important problem
> that there aren’t enough lifeboats .
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* keim152 at gmail.com <mailto:keim152 at gmail.com>
> <keim152 at gmail.com <mailto:keim152 at gmail.com>> on behalf of
> Darrell Keim <keim153 at gmail.com <mailto:keim153 at gmail.com>>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 9, 2018 11:00:19 AM
> *To:* Sunil Ramalingam
> *Cc:* Dan Carscallen; vision2020
>
> *Subject:* Re: [Vision2020] Obama Responds to Trump's Iran Pull-Out
> Yes, we are both talking style over substance. Given the current
> state of politics in our nation, style seems to trump substance in
> importance.
>
> We are also talking precedent being broken in a perhaps unhealthy way.
>
> (pun unintentional but perhaps fitting)
>
> On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 10:48 AM, Sunil Ramalingam
> <sunilramalingam at hotmail.com <mailto:sunilramalingam at hotmail.com>>
> wrote:
>
> You’re both talking style over substance. I’ll give you an
> Obama choice I find beyond unseemly. His decision not to
> prosecute torturers in the Bush Administration has allowed the
> nomination of a war criminal for the position of head of the
> CIA. That’s not unseemly, that’s repulsive and disgusting.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* vision2020-bounces at moscow.com
> <mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com>
> <vision2020-bounces at moscow.com
> <mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com>> on behalf of Dan
> Carscallen <areaman at moscow.com <mailto:areaman at moscow.com>>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 9, 2018 10:34:42 AM
> *To:* vision2020
> *Subject:* Re: [Vision2020] Obama Responds to Trump's Iran
> Pull-Out
> I’m with Darrell on this.
>
> Doesn’t matter to me who is currently in the office, the
> previous guy commenting on his activities is a little unseemly.
>
> I don’t recall anyone ever doing that. Then again Grover
> Cleveland might have, since he did serve non-concurrent
> terms. Of course that was just a little before my time.
>
> DC
>
> On May 9, 2018, at 10:22, Darrell Keim <keim153 at gmail.com
> <mailto:keim153 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>> Without commenting on the issue at hand, I have an observation.
>>
>> Can anyone recall a past president so publicly
>> rebuking/countering his successor on a major policy change?
>>
>> On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 9:12 AM, Nicholas Gier
>> <ngier006 at gmail.com <mailto:ngier006 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Former President Barack Obama released a statement after
>> Trump withdrew the US from the Iran nuclear deal that
>> amounted to a point by point debunking of Trump’s
>> falsehoods about the agreement.
>>
>> The statement provided to PoliticusUSA by Obama’s office
>> is lengthy but important:
>>
>> There are few issues more important to the security of
>> the United States than the potential spread of nuclear
>> weapons, or the potential for even more destructive war
>> in the Middle East. That’s why the United States
>> negotiated the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA)
>> in the first place.
>>
>> The reality is clear. The JCPOA is working – that is a
>> view shared by our European allies, independent experts,
>> and the current U.S. Secretary of Defense. The JCPOA is
>> in America’s interest – it has significantly rolled back
>> Iran’s nuclear program. And the JCPOA is a model for what
>> diplomacy can accomplish – its inspections and
>> verification regime is precisely what the United States
>> should be working to put in place with North Korea.
>> Indeed, at a time when we are all rooting for diplomacy
>> with North Korea to succeed, walking away from the JCPOA
>> risks losing a deal that accomplishes – with Iran – the
>> very outcome that we are pursuing with the North Koreans.
>>
>> That is why today’s announcement is so misguided. Walking
>> away from the JCPOA turns our back on America’s closest
>> allies, and an agreement that our country’s leading
>> diplomats, scientists, and intelligence professionals
>> negotiated. In a democracy, there will always be changes
>> in policies and priorities from one Administration to the
>> next. But the consistent flouting of agreements that our
>> country is a party to risks eroding America’s
>> credibility, and puts us at odds with the world’s major
>> powers.
>>
>> Debates in our country should be informed by facts,
>> especially debates that have proven to be divisive. So
>> it’s important to review several facts about the JCPOA.
>>
>> First, the JCPOA was not just an agreement between my
>> Administration and the Iranian government. After years of
>> building an international coalition that could impose
>> crippling sanctions on Iran, we reached the JCPOA
>> together with the United Kingdom, France, Germany, the
>> European Union, Russia, China, and Iran. It is a
>> multilateral arms control deal, unanimously endorsed by a
>> United Nations Security Council Resolution.
>>
>> Second, the JCPOA has worked in rolling back Iran’s
>> nuclear program. For decades, Iran had steadily advanced
>> its nuclear program, approaching the point where they
>> could rapidly produce enough fissile material to build a
>> bomb. The JCPOA put a lid on that breakout capacity.
>> Since the JCPOA was implemented, Iran has destroyed the
>> core of a reactor that could have produced weapons-grade
>> plutonium; removed two-thirds of its centrifuges (over
>> 13,000) and placed them under international monitoring;
>> and eliminated 97 percent of its stockpile of enriched
>> uranium – the raw materials necessary for a bomb. So by
>> any measure, the JCPOA has imposed strict limitations on
>> Iran’s nuclear program and achieved real results.
>>
>> Third, the JCPOA does not rely on trust – it is rooted in
>> the most far-reaching inspections and verification regime
>> ever negotiated in an arms control deal. Iran’s nuclear
>> facilities are strictly monitored. International monitors
>> also have access to Iran’s entire nuclear supply chain,
>> so that we can catch them if they cheat. Without the
>> JCPOA, this monitoring and inspections regime would go away.
>>
>> Fourth, Iran is complying with the JCPOA. That was not
>> simply the view of my Administration. The United States
>> intelligence community has continued to find that Iran is
>> meeting its responsibilities under the deal, and has
>> reported as much to Congress. So have our closest allies,
>> and the international agency responsible for verifying
>> Iranian compliance – the International Atomic Energy
>> Agency (IAEA).
>>
>> Fifth, the JCPOA does not expire. The prohibition on Iran
>> ever obtaining a nuclear weapon is permanent. Some of the
>> most important and intrusive inspections codified by the
>> JCPOA are permanent. Even as some of the provisions in
>> the JCPOA do become less strict with time, this won’t
>> happen until ten, fifteen, twenty, or twenty-five years
>> into the deal, so there is little reason to put those
>> restrictions at risk today.
>>
>> Finally, the JCPOA was never intended to solve all of our
>> problems with Iran. We were clear-eyed that Iran engages
>> in destabilizing behavior – including support for
>> terrorism, and threats toward Israel and its neighbors.
>> But that’s precisely why it was so important that we
>> prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Every
>> aspect of Iranian behavior that is troubling is far more
>> dangerous if their nuclear program is unconstrained. Our
>> ability to confront Iran’s destabilizing behavior – and
>> to sustain a unity of purpose with our allies – is
>> strengthened with the JCPOA, and weakened without it.
>>
>> Because of these facts, I believe that the decision to
>> put the JCPOA at risk without any Iranian violation of
>> the deal is a serious mistake. Without the JCPOA, the
>> United States could eventually be left with a losing
>> choice between a nuclear-armed Iran or another war in the
>> Middle East. We all know the dangers of Iran obtaining a
>> nuclear weapon. It could embolden an already dangerous
>> regime; threaten our friends with destruction; pose
>> unacceptable dangers to America’s own security; and
>> trigger an arms race in the world’s most dangerous
>> region. If the constraints on Iran’s nuclear program
>> under the JCPOA are lost, we could be hastening the day
>> when we are faced with the choice between living with
>> that threat, or going to war to prevent it.
>>
>> In a dangerous world, America must be able to rely in
>> part on strong, principled diplomacy to secure our
>> country. We have been safer in the years since we
>> achieved the JCPOA, thanks in part to the work of our
>> diplomats, many members of Congress, and our allies.
>> Going forward, I hope that Americans continue to speak
>> out in support of the kind of strong, principled,
>> fact-based, and unifying leadership that can best secure
>> our country and uphold our responsibilities around the
>> globe.
>>
>>
>> Obama made a critical point
>>
>> Much of Trump’s argument for killing the Iran deal was
>> based on the false premise that the deal was a failure if
>> it didn’t address all of the problems with Iran’s
>> behavior, but the nuclear deal was never meant to do
>> that. By design, it dealt with Iran’s nuclear program.
>> Republicans have used this rhetorical device on the issue
>> of health care, for example, as well. It is a false
>> argument that seeks to turn something successful into a
>> failure.
>>
>> It is rare for a former president to come out with such a
>> strong statement against an action taken by a current
>> president. All evidence and even members of Trump’s own
>> administration say that the deal was working.
>>
>> For more discussion about this story join our Rachel
>> Maddow and MSNBC group.
>> <https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fgroups%2F1944900445770755%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cbab469f5ae8e4b87dbf808d5b5d32bc2%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636614840926930976&sdata=y0NHcNILzQOBYDGmKb%2BIRJAtwuYreYyl4bfdH19RNrI%3D&reserved=0>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> A society grows great when old men plant trees whose
>> shade they know they shall never sit in.
>>
>> -Greek proverb
>>
>> “Enlightenment is man’s emergence from his self-imposed
>> immaturity. Immaturity is the inability to use one’s
>> understanding without guidance from another. This
>> immaturity is self- imposed when its cause lies not in
>> lack of understanding, but in lack of resolve and courage
>> to use it without guidance from another. Sapere Aude!
>> ‘Have courage to use your own understand-ing!—that is the
>> motto of enlightenment.
>>
>> --Immanuel Kant
>>
>>
>>
>> =======================================================
>> List services made available by First Step Internet,
>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>> http://www.fsr.net
>> <https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fsr.net&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cbab469f5ae8e4b87dbf808d5b5d32bc2%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636614840926930976&sdata=8Dr3v9J2U%2F70Mg7iIrDP5IZmQkVzFl0jWSkMLAtnMvs%3D&reserved=0>
>> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>> <mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com>
>> =======================================================
>>
>>
>> =======================================================
>> List services made available by First Step Internet,
>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>> http://www.fsr.net
>> <https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fsr.net&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cbab469f5ae8e4b87dbf808d5b5d32bc2%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636614840926930976&sdata=8Dr3v9J2U%2F70Mg7iIrDP5IZmQkVzFl0jWSkMLAtnMvs%3D&reserved=0>
>> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com <mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com>
>> =======================================================
>
> =======================================================
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> http://www.fsr.net
> <https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fsr.net&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cea31d2fd89f04e42920508d5b5d6bad4%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636614856211659612&sdata=PY3ZSPhkO4Je6z5VuBbHbJC0MRD4ZzxghOgXqlseCvA%3D&reserved=0>
> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> <mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com>
> =======================================================
>
>
>
>
>
> =======================================================
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> http://www.fsr.net
> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20180509/32b8969f/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Vision2020
mailing list