Sixteen billion is a lot. Especially given the tax cuts resulting in huge deficits during a good economy. I guess we don’t care about deficits if a Republican is in charge. Of course, it is a fallacy to say that Obama gave Iran money since it was, of course, Iran’s money in the first place. But I agree, if Obama knew that Trump was going to butcher diplomacy, there was no sense in allowing Iran to have that money back.
Yeah, it was Iran’s money. A funky accounting notwithstanding.
Well, it’s the attitude that $16 billion isn’t a lot that explains why we have such a massive deficit during a good economy. So much for that fiscal conservativism, my voters need a payout.
No, the courts had already ruled against Iran. That money was being legally withheld to cover their liabilities.
Then why was it not distributed to satisfy those liabilities?
I don’t know, such cases with appeals can run forever. But the money was legally with held.
Of course, it was used for leverage. And we will never know if Obama got anything because Trump’s actions have butchered any agreement.
Nothing “funky” about it. U.S. Courts had declared that the money could be held to pay the damage claims of Iran’s victims.
All you’re telling us is that you dislike Trump’s actions even when you don’t know what they are.
And it wasn’t distributed to Iran’s victims.
You said that the price of crops is fine, so there is no need for a bailout.
Undoubtedly … Both ‘sides’ have had plans covering a multitude of possibilities…
I don’t think we know that none of it was. What we do know is that Obama paid Iran what Iran claimed it was “owed”, and made the taxpayers pay the victims’ claims.
I never said there was a need for a “bailout” or even a price floor. And you don’t know whether anything has been/will be paid out or for what, any better than I do. You just want to attack Trump even when you don’t know why you’re doing it.
Umm, okay, it seems like if you are going to say this, you might provide a source instead of speculation
Well, let’s see what you said…
Hard to figure why a bailout is needed if the prices for most commodities are 'a little higher than historically". There is a disconnect in your logic.
We knew the agreement was dodo when it was signed, it was an effort to normalize the status quo, not cause change in Iran.
Not really. We buy insurance not because we KNOW our house is going to burn down but just in case it does. If this bill is a price floor, it might never be used. But neither of us know that.
Well. That didn’t age well.
Well, let’s go back to Plan A and treat the Iranians as a cancer, because that has worked so well for the last 40 years.
Funny how farmers can’t really hold their own in a true marketplace and need socialism to protect them.
I’m not sure what didn’t age well. The Trump administration is still struggling to give a coherent answer as to why they assassinated Suleimani. According to the Washington Post, Republican Sen. Mike Lee of Utah labeled the administration’s briefing on Iran “probably the worst briefing I have seen, at least on a military issue, in the nine years I’ve served in the United States Senate.” The Trump administration doesn’t seem to have any grand strategy in dealing with Iran.Thorolfr:
Well. That didn’t age well.