[ZakCarter]

“President Trump announced Tuesday that the U.S. will pull out of the Iran nuclear deal. It is a campaign promise that he made repeatedly during the election.

Trump has said the Iran deal is the worst of all time, and instead of staying in it he’s going to impose new sanctions against Iran.

So why did Trump abandon the Iran deal? Was it truly a bad deal, or was there influence coming from Israel? And what could that influence mean for our future?

This is a Reality Check you won’t get anywhere else.”

Think Ben Swann is on the right track?

“The real question we should be asking: Are we, the American people, ready to join Israel’s escalating war against Iran, a war that looks more likely every day?”

[Godstud]

He did it because Obama made the deal.

He did it because he doesn't have a fucking clue what diplomacy is.

He did it because he's an egotistical narcissist.

He did it because he's a mediocre businessman trying to apply business bullying to world affairs that he knows little about.

[Bulaba Khan Jones]

If money was the only bottom line here, America would have continued to engage with Iran. A peaceful resolution would have been in both their interest. Further, the US could have used the future potential of peaceful relations with Iran to attempt a reduction in Russian and Chinese influence. The hindrance to this are the expansionist warmongers in Israel and the Jihadist-exporting Saudis who categorically refuse to engage with Iran as it stands for many different reasons.

[Tainari88]

If money was the only bottom line here, America would have continued to engage with Iran. A peaceful resolution would have been in both their interest. Further, the US could have used the future potential of peaceful relations with Iran to attempt a reduction in Russian and Chinese influence. The hindrance to this are the expansionist warmongers in Israel and the Jihadist-exporting Saudis who categorically refuse to engage with Iran as it stands for many different reasons.

Bulaba, be realistic now. Many politicians in the DC scene have close ties to the defense industry and it is a way of making money. War is a profitable business. It is a way of distracting the public from FBI investigations and uniting the deplorables and the not so deplorables. It might work for the Trump dude in his poll ratings.

[Bulaba Khan Jones]

We continue to manufacture weapons of war regardless of whether we're fighting a war or not. Losing out on money with Iran means the bottom line is clearly geopolitical, as it would run contrary to Israeli and Saudi interests, both of whom we have closer ties and more economic dealings with. War with Iran is not looming, nor are we starting a war with Iran any time soon.

[Atlantis]

We continue to manufacture weapons of war regardless of whether we're fighting a war or not. Losing out on money with Iran means the bottom line is clearly geopolitical, as it would run contrary to Israeli and Saudi interests, both of whom we have closer ties and more economic dealings with. War with Iran is not looming, nor are we starting a war with Iran any time soon.

True, it is first of all about geopolitical influence, but ultimately that translates into economic profit (ie. money). The point is that the empire will not stand recalcitrant nations. We must bow to the empire and obey its dictates while singing its praise. The Assads and the Ayatollahs haven't been singing the US hymn sheet loud enough.

Israel and SA are small apartheid regimes that prevent the Arab nation from uniting. The Empire can only rule by dividing people and by keeping them in a state of constant war. War is a purpose in itself to the Empire. The Empire needs war like humans need oxygen. Without war no empire and no profits to the arms industries. Just keeping the arms isn't good enough, they need to be used from time to time, for testing and for ordering new arms. Wars are also necessary for sales promotion. Who is going to buy all that expensive hardware if we don't know that it'll be effective against the arms of the other side.