(01-15-2020, 11:38 AM)MalabarJag Wrote:

(01-14-2020, 03:10 PM)Gabe Wrote: The point I originally made, HB, was that the rhetoric around how and why the agreements were made, as well as the source of any funds that ended up in Iran is slanted/distorted. We didn't "give" Iran $150b... or even billionS, despite what Trump has stated as a representation of the "worst deal(s) ever made." $1.8b - We made good on a debt owed for military equipment that we never paid. With regard to the that arrangement and the $150b asset release in exchange of nuclear program restraint - I've already stated that I would have structured them differently, releasing assets/paying debts in intervals based on good findings after appropriate oversight, BECAUSE they've had terrorist ties - giving them a chance to prove they're progressing forward instead of backward. 

I don't disagree with you: Terrorists kill, that's what they do. We deal with that on our own soil as well. 

I guess I'd ask you this: Do you trust what Kerry says any other time? There seems to be a lack of any trust of the "liberal left," (AKA any democrat) in this forum, just from my perception.

The fact is that Obama chose to release the $150B. The fact that these were Iranian assets makes no difference, he was not required to do so. 

Obama made the choice. He didn't have to.

Same with the $1.8B, although the claim by Iran was even less solid in that case since the Mullahs chose to overthrow the government that purchased the arms, and the original purchasing government was no longer able to receive them.

As far as trusting what a partisan (Kerry) or partisan website says, it's reasonable to trust the statement if it opposes the position the partisan holds. CNN is not going to claim as true a falsehood that supports Trump or anything he says.

Thanks for addressing my question head-on, MBJ. I agree, though I still don't have very much trust in DNC leadership or JK, for that matter. FWIW, he said he thought a portion could/would go to terrorist groups to settle debts Iran owed, but didn't have evidence to show it had occurred and that such behaviors would result in sanctions against Iran. Kerry was also at the table during the negotiations of the JCPOA

As for your former point, I'd posit that Obama/US was the centerpiece in the agreement, which was made in conjunction with China, France, Russia & the UK, as well as EU-3 countries. Might as well say that the UN/NATO made the agreement, considering the world powers in alignment with the decision. The US will always be the centerpiece in such alignments, but my point is that we/Obama didn't solely make it. To my knowledge, Israel was the only country that vocally opposed it. 

Again, I would have structured it differently because of Iran's history with terrorism & government instability.

---