{{featured_button_text}}

President Donald Trump recently did a wrong thing, then a right thing, then another right thing, then another right thing and a wrong thing in trying to keep the evil, terroristic, conniving leaders of Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

Of course, President Barack Obama had helped give these plotters a surefire means of achieving their Hiroshima-end: the hopeless Iran deal.

Concerning their murderous Middle East ambitions and preparations for war, they received a Joe Biden-like hug.

Jay Ambrose mug

Jay Ambrose

However, to the disappointment of much of Europe, profitably trading with the Islamists, Trump opted out of the deal. The purpose was to try to save millions of lives, more important than money.

This forever belittled man in the White House immediately called for new negotiations and began imposing sanctions of the kind that got Iran to the table in 2015 for talks with its pals, Russia and China, and also the European Union, France, Germany, Britain and the United States.

The resulting agreement was the answer to everything, leftists and European officials have insisted, failing to mention that Iran violated it 32 times in trying to buy prohibited nuclear technology from Germany.

Iran got caught and the Obama administration said the violations were therefore not violations. That’s a strange incentive to keep trying, but stranger still is that the deal did not require Iran to get rid of facilities capable of enriching uranium that could help turn cities to dust.

Right now, it is enriching again, but wait, say defenders. It sent most of its highly enriched uranium to Russia. This buddy has already sent some back.

Obama said we would be able to inspect when and where we wanted but Iran said no on military bases, and here I turn to a Harvard Kennedy School scholar who cautioned that these bases provide “an enormous sanctuary for clandestine nuclear weapons work” and that this was “the largest loophole in arms control history.”

Additionally, the United States took billions in frozen Iranian assets and told Iran the money is yours again and we’ll watch as you build your economy.

What we watched was Iran shipping the money to homicidal Hezbollah and other terrorist proxies. Despite U.N. resolutions, Iran has been testing ballistic missiles, and The New York Times carried a story about its building what looked like a long-range missile that could hit the United States.

Trump, always asking for new negotiations, has tightened sanctions to the extent that the Iranian economy is hobbling and the regime looks shaky.

It recently made some military maneuvers that caused a U.S. general to order more ships and troops and then Iran unconvincingly claimed it did not fire on oil tankers near the Strait of Hormuz.

When it shot down a U.S. drone, Trump ordered retaliation that could have killed 150 people (bad), backed down (good), ordered a cyberattack (good), ordered sanctions on leaders (questionable) and warned that an obliteration party would take place after any hit on anything else American (bad).

Drawing red lines can put you in an impossible situation, such as risking war for next to nothing or looking like a measly coward if you don’t.

But Trump is absolutely right in saying NATO should be guarding the Strait of Hormuz and that a unified Europe on the side of ending the Iranian threat could well end it.

If Obama had heeded the Constitution and made this a treaty requiring two-thirds approval by the Senate, we would either have ended up with no deal or a much better deal with Trump unable to scotch it.

Now we get other Democrats, presidential candidates, telling us with qualifications that they would reenter the old deal if elected, thereby signaling Iranians to give up on nothing until Nov. 3, 2020.

Thanks so much.

Be the first to know - Sign up for Breaking News

* I understand and agree that registration on or use of this site constitutes agreement to its user agreement and privacy policy.

Jay Ambrose is an op-ed columnist for Tribune News Service. Readers may email him at speaktojay@aol.com.

0
1
0
0
0

(22) comments

oldhomey

Good Grief! This column is so rife with untruth that it is not even worth pulling it apart. I would recommend that we somehow get a copy of Richard Kyte's excellent column today to this fact and truth-challenged pundit.

martian2

" Trump opted out of the deal. The purpose was to try to save millions of lives, more important than money." What a bunch of b.s.. Ambrose got the wrong guy when he wrote that. Trump was and always will be all about money, that is his God. That is what he spent his whole life constantly pursuing. Well that and seeing how many women he can get into bed with him. The only reason he pulled out of the treaty with Iran, with nothing to replace it with, is the same reason he tried to repeal Obama care with nothing to replace it with. Its all a campaign to smear and obliterate all that Obama did as much as possible. That's it, nothing more complicated than that. He wants a treaty with his name on it, its all about him. Meeting Kim at the DMZ was all about getting himself in the headlines, nothing of substance occurred. Its all about the Donald, the whole world is all about the Donald in his twisted bent mind.

DMoney

It's almost as if you are trying to be wrong. Like some kind of weird self sabotage. Donald Trump became president because he's all about the money? He hasn't accepted a red cent since taking the job. He would be making far more in the private sector. Nothing of substance happened at the NK border? An impromptu show of good will turned into a full on meeting in which both parties agreed to continue denuclearization negotiations. It was a brilliant piece of diplomacy and shows great flexibility and creativity. You are making this far too easy for me.

martian2

He hasn't accepted a penny you say. He still has control and ownership over his business operations, which is still against the emolument clause. weekend trips to his tower in Florida and his business empire receives millions in payments from the government.(That is the taxpayers). He is using public office for private gain. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/trump-s-mar-lago-travel-triggers-cost-ethics-concerns-n743541 If you don't think Trump is all about money you are as wrong as could be. He made a career chasing money, and he is not about to give it up now. That photo op at the NK border was nothing more than a chance to control the press and get his picture on the front pages. An agreement to start talking again could of easily happened without the photo op. Besides, Trump once declare NK is no longer a nuclear threat! What has changed? Was he lying?? You are making this far to easy for me. Works without receiving a penny, what a joke!! LOL!

oldhomey

martian, quit picking on D. He has hopes set SO high that Trump, that brilliant geopolitical tactician, tough guy negotiator and stable genius (I guess he is an expert on horses' assets) will emerge with an agreement in which Kim and North Korea will junkpile their nuclear weapons and shut down their nuclear armaments industry. Why are you trying to destroy the hopes of this young man? And PLEASE don't tell him that ever since the first Trump-Kim talks a year ago, North Korea has continued to churn out more nuclear warheads and continued missile testing. That will REALLY send the poor boy around the bend!

Jobaba

'This forever belittled man in the White House'. Ah, it is just too hard to hear Trump sobbing in the background. It is difficult enough to listen to an orange man weep and cry about the persecution he is put to. Now a third rate hack attempts to convince us that the president is unfairly attacked. Trump's troubles are his own. He went out with a shopping cart and personally selected all of his own problems. It becomes an issue when he attempts to make his problems, our problems. We needn't worry about future republican wars however. We may rest assured that his children will all be safe in a gold plated bunker somewhere while your children go off to fight. Oh, the poor orange man!

DMoney

[offtopic]

oldhomey

Perhaps it would be more effective, D, rather than employing an emoticon, you could explain how Jobaba was off topic. The sentiments he expresses in his comment seem perfectly appropriate to a column talking about Trump and warfare in the Middle East.

DMoney

It does? There wasn't one message related to Iran, the middle East in general, or Trump's foreign policy. There was a reference to Republicans starting wars, however, considering Trump hasn't started any wars, it's not only off topic it's anti-topic. Sometimes I just don't want to waste my time.

oldhomey

Hmm. Could I share this quote cut out of his post above, D? "The only reason he pulled out of the treaty with Iran, with nothing to replace it with, is the same reason he tried to repeal Obama care with nothing to replace it with. Its all a campaign to smear and obliterate all that Obama did as much as possible. That's it, nothing more complicated than that. He wants a treaty with his name on it, its all about him. " Did I miss something? Is this not a commentary about Trump's Mid East "policy" by martian? Correct me if I am misreading it and thinking it was off-topic from the Ambrose column.

DMoney

My off topic emoji was in reference to jobabas response.

martian2

well how about the latest from the bromance with Kim and Trump. The white house wants to let NK keeps its nuclear stock pile now, with a promise not add to it. The WH wants to admit NK in to the list of nations that are nuclear powers. In return they will lift sanctions on NK. Wow, what a deal for the world. Let a two bit dictator keep weapons of mass destruction because Trump has a flourishing bromance with Kim. Here is a brutal dictator that defies the world community, and if justice was to be served, would be on trial for crimes against humanity. What a deal there hey D! Bet you will be dancing and celebrating this one for many days! Meanwhile in Iran, where Trump doesn't have a bromance with its leader, is facing more sanctions and tough talk from the Donald. Hmmm, why not just let them have nuclear weapons too? Iran would be a great place to build a Trump tower.

DMoney

The alternative is conflict, death and destruction. Is that what you prefer? If past adminiatrations--any of them--would have prevented NK from developing nukes we wouldn't be in this position. But here we are. What more could Trump possibly do to help the situation? There's literally nothing more.

oldhomey

So it was, D. My apologies. Jobaba's comments, however, were pretty danged stirring and accurate, weren't they? I found nothing I could disagree with. Did you see that Trump is now being talked into perhaps doing an agreement with North Korea that will try to get it to withdraw from its nuclear program in stages? Doesn't that sound an awful lot like the one that the U.S. and other world powers struck with Iran in 2015, the one Trump unilaterally pulled out of two years later, declaring it the worst deal ever? I suspect it is highly doubtful that he will get Kim to go that far, but if he did, can we declare it Worst Deal Ever, Part Two?

martian2

OMG D's defense of Trump is another round of "how great thou art donald!" there are other alternatives besides death and destruction on one hand, and coddling and endorsing a rogue murderous regime. Obama was criticized by the right wingers for trying to appease Iran in a verifiable multi lateral treaty. He just couldn't do anything right. Trump goes it alone in appeasement, normalizing a tyrant who should be tried for crimes against humanity, and you think oh he is so smart. I guess we should of normalized those concentration camps in WWII to avoid conflict. For over fifty years this country held NK in check with the help of its allies. And that is what it will continue to take to hold Nk accountable, and to make the world safer. You said in a previous post there D that we get what we want, we have the power, we can't be stopped. Why the big turn around with NK. Or is your view purposely bent in order to defend the Donald.

DMoney

The ad hoc and insensitive WW2/Nazi/Holocaust references need to stop. You are disrespecting so many people, most dead but some still living. Did you learn nothing from Cortez? Have you ever been to the national Holocaust museum? You need to get educated.

martian2

me disrespecting?? How is that D, you failed to explain anything just make accusations. You are the one defending coddling a murderous brutal dictator not me. You are the one defending a president who is warehousing little children without basic needs met (that sounds so familiar like something from the past). Now who is doing the disrespecting? You logic is to forgive and forget the atrocities of dictators Trump likes. Gee it was a good thing we didn't do that in WWII. OOPS there I go again making a true correlation between the present to the past. How awful of me.

oldhomey

D, it was you who dropped that cowpie of a U.S. version of a Thousand Year Reich comment on the ground, and it was you who then promptly stepped in it and messed up your boots. Of course you want it to stop. You embarrassed yourself thoroughly. But it was totally insensitive on your part, and you deserve the ridicule.

DMoney

I used a number. You associated it with an evil connotation.

oldhomey

Did you, D, in literally or figuratively reading 5,000 WWII history books, as you claim to have done, ever come across that most famous boast by Adolph Hitler that he was establishing a Third Reich, and that the German people, if they followed him, would enjoy a thousand year reign of power as he unleashed what was then the most powerful military machine in the world? If you did not come across that part of the story, I will abjectly apologize to you and say that you were simply pulling an innocent number out of the air.

DMoney

I obviously know about the third Reich, lebensraum, Berlin being the capital of the world. I know about Italy's New Roman empire. I know about Japan's greater East Asia co-prosperity sphere. I know about everything there is to know about WW2. I also know that the number 1,000 existed long before Nazism and will long into the future. I know that it is not forever linked and marred by an idea Hitler had. I know that it is HIGHLY uncommon for people to reference the third Reich in non-historic conversation. I know that this is an embarrassing and shameful attempt to slander a person with opposing views. One that disregards the deaths of millions of people who actually suffered under oppression. I know that (ironically) I am the one being "progressive", looking ahead at the future and our role in it. You are the ones looking backwards.

oldhomey

Yes, D, you old progressive, you. You have mapped out the future for us and the U.S. for the next thousand years. We should take on the world on our own, knowing we have no friends, and we should use our military superiority in cowing all other nations to our will. What could they do to us, when, as you say, we hold all the cards? And if somebody does get a little snotty and resistant to our will, well, it wouldn't hurt to unleash a little fire and brimstone on them to make them object lessons for the rest of the trash that inhabit the world. We Americans are, in fact, exceptional people -- a special race, as it were -- and we should demand exceptional treatment from the rest of the world for the next thousand years. How could I have been so foolish to have thought ill of your plan?

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.