Hacker News Reader

Comment by Laurel1234 | Hacker News Reader

So Trump just took it unlubed up the ass so far it came out of his mouth, huh.

Wondering what the Yankees reading feel about forking out $300 billies to Iran.

Yankee here. Happy for the people of Iran, assuming that money mostly benefits them and not the underground missile cities that should have been cleared out and turned into geothermal market cities and resource storage for their people.

I'm sure it will, the Ayatollah and the IRGC are famous for caring about their citizens.

The same way they felt about getting dragged into a war by Israel.

I think any successful negotiation will looks exactly like this. What do you guys want? A full-on world war 3?

This is not successful negotiation. This is unsuccessful negotiation after a war you lost ... that was completely pointless and started by you.

And I think that what people want is to send there someone actually experienced in diplomacy and negotiations. Witkoff and Kushner must be the two least capable most incompetent negotiators in the world.

Just curious what would a successful negotiation look like for you?

Obama's 2015 JPCOA is looking better and better

Sure, the regime excels at sweeping performative actions that merely look like a real answer. It's enough to fool rubes, who hang on the superficial details with no seemingly ability to judge for themselves nor willingness to listen to analysis from their fellow citizens.

What do I want? Depose the "leaders" who started this war, and make them face justice for their crimes. From that place of honesty, negotiations can start. A pipe dream, of course.

But that was not the goal. The goal was to stop nuclear capability. Even now it has not been achieved. But as I understand the current deal is dependent on its achievement.

So it does not look like a total failure at this point.

It's nonsensical to talk about a "current deal" when these things are merely being used for marketing, and it's not compelling to have picked one currently-plausible "goal" from the hodgepodge of justifications that have been trotted out. It seems like you're still trying to shoehorn the situation into 4-d chess.

There is no "hodgepodge of justification". There is one thing that Trump has been insisting, and it is the nuclear power thing. He also says a lot of other stuff, but that is to irritate his detractors. But it is pretty easy to pick how the stuff he really cares about if you not very biased...

> one thing that Trump has been insisting ... He also says a lot of other stuff

So then, a hodgepodge? Why does it seem like the "one thing" changes by the conditions of whatever is needed to thread the needle of rationalization? If you want to talk about bias, continuing to pick out what you perceive as signal from the noise of a long-known double-talking con man would seem to be a very strong bias.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com