re: Approval of Trump's Iran war actions ahead by double digit margin

quote:

---

IAEA reports were minimalist and provided less technical detail than pre-JCPOA reports

---

Misleading. IAEA did change reporting style. Reports became shorter, more standardized, less granular public detail.

Sensitive details were moved into confidential channels to member states & public reports became more compliance summaries than technical dumps.

That was on purpose, not a compliance issue.

quote:

---

“IAEA omitted or downplayed compliance controversies (e.g., centrifuge R&D issues)”

---

Institute for Science and International Security argued IAEA was too cautious in public reportin, but the IAEA did report deviations when relevant & most issues cited were minor or resolved within JCPOA mechanisms.

So “Downplayed” is not an objective fact & you’re shifting from a claim of breach to criticism of IAEA.

quote:

---

Inspectors had not visited military sites and said there was ‘no reason to ask

---

Access to military sites required specific justification under the agreement. They had no specific evidence requiring access at that time. That’s very different from “We don’t want to inspect” & more accurately “We don’t request inspections without evidence”

quote:

---

“Without access to military sites, verification was inherently limited”

---

Any inspection regime has limits, this is true in general. There were mechanisms for monitoring undeclared activity… Supply chain monitoring & environmental sampling.

The IAEA explicitly distinguishes between declared material verification and absence of undeclared material. Undeclared verification was ongoing, which is standard for nuclear verification worldwide.

So your response is far from baseless nonsense, but it’s framed in the most skeptical interpretation possible… mixing facts with opinion & omitting key context that changes the meaning
Far from proof of anything. More importantly, we never secured a better deal & I’m not sure what sort of terms people imagine the US and Iran would agree on now that would be an improvement.

Which begs the question… what are we trying to accomplish here?

Those are absolutely trash numbers. Title is crazy misleading.

quote:

---

I'm going with no nukes/enrichment, no ballistic missiles and no IRGC regime. That's the best deal I would give them.

---

Well we agree that regime change is the only acceptable outcome now. If the regime remains, the first two conditions are long-shots at best.

The polls are being manipulated. I don’t believe for a second that this country supports this bullshite war that Israel started.

quote:

---

Yes I absolutely believe that the Iranian regime is the moral equivalent of nazi Germany. 

---

Why hasn't Iran killed the Jews and Christians in Iran since 1979? They've had plenty of time to do Nazi things inside their own borders if that was their goal.

Because they are wonderful people who you can fully trust

Carry on.

I couldn’t be more happy for you

Carry on (some more)

Enlistment age just rose bro. Nothing is stopping ya from joining up.

And yes, Murph belongs in Cooperstown.

I think this great nation would be better off having red blooded Americans like yourself in the military instead of these kids who won't jubilantly go forward and dodge Iranian missiles and UAVs.

Here you go, high speed

quote:

---

I’ll go down to the recruit office tomorrow morning.

---

Glad to hear it.

I'll buy you your first beer after you get back from the CENTCOM AOR.