Leaked ambassador's messages scandal

Please treat other members in a friendly and respectful manner: Our Community Guidelines.

  • How do you work that out? Trumps refusal to cooperate with a biased diplomat hardly merits that statement. Has Trump said (or even hinted) that he wants to choose the UK ambassador? No. It's just more spin and lies. If you disagree, then please point me to the evidence.

    You took the words right out of my mouth! Totally agree

  • But that's the Point!! It wasn't indiscreet. It was in a confidential message.

    Unless the ambassador himself leaked this stuff, then no, he hasn't fuelled the fire as you state.

    The buck stops at the ambassador's desk. Clearly not enough secrecy provisions were implemented '

  • 1 I thought the intentional atomic agency (or whatever it's called) said that Iran was compliant with the deal until Trump ripped it up?? That's why Boris went to Washington last year to try and save the deal which has now resulted in this leak.


    2 I think Boris should've supported our ambassador*

    1 It was a ridiculous amount of money being handed to a mad evil rogue state as an incentive for them to be less mad, less rogue, less evil and, as a tangible demonstration of that possibly improved relationship, for them to not build up a nuclear weapon arsenal. I understood Iran had reneged on that agreement of peaceful-only nuclear development. But if what you say is true, that the atomic agency agency decided that Iran had kept to the peacetime only level of nuclear development before Trump teared up the deal, then I'm disappointed and concerned about that. Even so, if it stuck in Trump's craw to hand over a shitload of money to such a nation in return for not build nuclear weapon resources, I can understand his feelings. Iran was playing at nuclear blackmail. Need to explore this further


    2 For Boris to support the ambassador in this fracas would in effect have been agreeing with what the ambassador was revealed to be saying about Trump. That is tantamount to putting words into Boris's mouth and, worse than that, expecting Boris, as the next PM, to join Sir Kim in souring relations with America's government. I know you're not a Boris supporter but, frankly, if you were, I'm sure would think "with supporters like that who needs enemies?" and "is it even worth trying to improve Britain's position when thinking people thinks like that?"

  • 2 For Boris to support the ambassador in this fracas would in effect have been agreeing with what the ambassador was revealed to be saying about Trump. That is tantamount to putting words into Boris's mouth and, worse than that, expecting Boris, as the next PM, to join Sir Kim in souring relations with America's government. I know you're not a Boris supporter but, frankly, if you were, I'm sure would think "with supporters like that who needs enemies?" and "is it even worth trying to improve Britain's position when thinking people thinks like that?"

    I agree. Boris needs Trump more than he this the remainer bureaucrat.


    1 It was a ridiculous amount of money being handed to a mad evil rogue state as an incentive for them to be less mad, less rogue, less evil and, as a tangible demonstration of that possibly improved relationship, for them to not build up a nuclear weapon arsenal. I understood Iran had reneged on that agreement of peaceful-only nuclear development. But if what you say is true, that the atomic agency agency decided that Iran had kept to the peacetime only level of nuclear development before Trump teared up the deal, then I'm disappointed and concerned about that. Even so, if it stuck in Trump's craw to hand over a shitload of money to such a nation in return for not build nuclear weapon resources, I can understand his feelings. Iran was playing at nuclear blackmail. Need to explore this further

    Here's a link to the Atomic Agencies news item back in June about Iran's complaince with the deal. What do you make of this quote from them?:


    Quote

    Since January 2016, the IAEA has been verifying and monitoring Iran’s implementation of its nuclear-related commitments under the JCPOA.


    “The Agency continues to verify the non-diversion of nuclear material declared by Iran under its Safeguards Agreement. Evaluations regarding the absence of undeclared nuclear material and activities in Iran continue,” Mr Amano told the 35-member Board, which is holding its regular, quarterly session this week.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • Wow. That quote tells us absolutely nothing! It just says verification is ongoing, but not what the findings were.


    I read somewhere that Iran had exceeded the agreed nuclear material, but it was 'only by a small %'!

    Mark Twain — 'Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.'

  • Mods ... is every thread to be infected with Iran's problems?

    Mark Twain — 'Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.'

  • We have a thread here for general Iran revival. Please confine that discussion there. I shall consider moving the last few posts to that thread in due course once I get the sleep out of my eyes.


    Now back to the topic of this thread. Thank you.


    [Edit] Off topic posts moved to thread shown above.


    Thread tidied.

    History is much like an Endless Waltz. The three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever.

    4312-gwban-gif

    If my post is in this colour  it is moderation. Take note.

    Edited once, last by Heero Yuy: Mod action taken ().

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member to leave a comment.