Iran Politicians Burn US Flag and Chant 'Death to America' After Trump Withdraws From Deal
Source: Mediaite
by Aidan McLaughlin | 7:04 am, May 9th, 2018
Iranian members of parliament burned a US flag and chanted “death to America” in response to President Donald Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Iran nuclear deal.
Trump, who made scrapping the deal a central campaign pledge, announced on Tuesday that he would be withdrawing the US from the Obama-era agreement to limit Iran’s nuclear ambitions. In the deal’s place, Trump said the US would impose the “highest level” of sanctions on the country.
The move ran against pleas from America’s allies in Europe, notably France, Germany and the UK, to remain in the deal and work to improve it.
Iranian politicians have long been fond of “death to America” chants, so a number of them naturally seized on Trump’s decision to withdraw from the deal, holding an anti-US demonstration during a parliamentary session.
Read more: https://www.mediaite.com/online/iran-politicians-burn-us-flag/
I'd just like to dedicate this to all those who remained ideologically pure on November 8, 2016. Kindly fry in hell when you die.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
still_one
(98,883 posts)occupies the WH
FarPoint
(14,873 posts)This is all tRumps doing..we, the American people do NOT support this dictator.
notdarkyet
(2,226 posts)To put your own ego and stupidity against the world and Americans interests. This faker is destroying our country..
heaven05
(18,124 posts)we do have a truce breaking potus who does NOT care. He wants to be a ' war president' so bad he pees himself...oh no I have that backwards, don't I. Putin has something on this POS called potus. I hate the GOP for what they are doing. They are evil men and women.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)How fucking stupid do you have to be to not act with some dignity at this time to prove what he did was a mistake?
karynnj
(61,022 posts)negatively to this betrayal of an agreement that the hardliners pushed Rouhan NOT to accept because the US could not be trusted. (Consider the childhood rhyme - sticks and stones will hurt my bones, but words will never hurt me) Sadly, the facts are that even our Secretaries of State and Defense admit that Iran IS complying. Trump has made the US be the country NOT in compliance once he reinstates the sanctions.
Throughout the negotiations, both Zarif and Kerry had to contend with their own "hardliners" who for different reasons did NOT want the negotiations to succeed. In fact, the announcement of the framework in spring 2015, which surprised most by being a stronger, more comprehensive deal than anyone had hoped for, was done because the US Congress was on the verge of voting in more sanctions (at the urging of AIPAC), which would have scuttled the deal. The effort against success even included Netanyahu speaking against a deal before Congress. Zarif was repeatedly attacked by Iran's hard liners including for taking a walk with John Kerry in the courtyard of where negotiations were held.
At this point, Rouhani has said they will work with the other countries to determine if the deal can hold without the US - while giving Iran sanctions relief. If that happens, Iran - unlike the US - will keep their word on the deal that the UN security council unanimously approved ... and the US won't. If it doesn't, the fear is that Rouhani will lose power to the hardliners in Iran. Though Bolton and Netanyahu seem to want regime change, tell me ONE country where outside pushed regime change led to better government. If the neocons get their war, it will be a disaster bigger than the Iraq war.
The really stupid thing is that the deal WAS keeping Iran from pursuing a nuclear bomb and it made war far less likely. It is hard to believe that we have actually given Iran, a supporter of terrorism, the high ground here.
We could have had European backing on working against Iran's ballistic weapons. We should have put pressure on Saudi Arabia and UAE to not spike the effort to get a ceasefire and peace plan in Yemen. The Trump administration also was absent in any diplomatic effort on Syria.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)Even if Americans intellectually understand what happened yesterday was a mistake, there will be ZERO sympathy for the "moderates" if this is their behavior. It only proves what right wingers have been claiming all along - that there are no moderates in iran. They COULD have just stood shoulder to shoulder with Western Europe and make us look like whiny babies and they blew it.
karynnj
(61,022 posts)actions. Trump and his buddy, Netanyahu, have made the world more dangerous -- and if it comes to war, they will deserve the greatest blame.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)(and I detest him). Donnie was merely throwing red meat to his rabid base who he promised he would do this to. He's trying all the distractions he has because of what's going on with Michael Cohen.
karynnj
(61,022 posts)For all his lies and there were many. I would have had more respect if he had been honest that he did not want a nuclear deal, no matter how strong, beause it made Iran less isolated. Then the argument could have been honest.
Remember he was the one with a poster at the UN warning everyone Iran was 2 months from a nuclear bomb. Obama acted to change that and it is undeniable they are further away now. I believe Secretary Kerry what he has said that people in the middle east lobbied him and Obama to get the US to use a military stoke on Iran.
As Obama, Kerry, and Biden said there was no crisis that precipitated Trump's action. Even Trump National Security members said Iran was complying.
StevieM
(10,578 posts)He is willing to tolerate a nuclear Iran if that is part of the package.
Remember when the deal was being negotiated? Netanyahu had all sorts of demands that had nothing to do with the nuclear program, even insisting that Iran be required to recognize Israel. As Obama said at the time, that was a request to change the fundamental nature of the regime. Netanyahu wanted to hold onto the sanctions in order to force Iran to accept being treated like a nation that had essentially lost a war.
That was not why the sanctions were implemented. It was not what we told other countries to get them to go along with the UN sanctions that brought Iran to the table. And if we had done that then it would have been a total betrayal of our allies, along with Russia and China, even more than what Trump did yesterday.
HRC worked really hard to get those sanction implemented. She had to convince Russia and China to side with us over Iran, their ally. And they worked. They got Iran to accept the kind of deal that they had previously refused to accept. It's ironic that Trump bashes her while celebrating the sanctions.
And yes, Kerry also deserves a lot of credit for uniting the P5+1 in holding out for what was eventually incorporated in JCPOA. It was a six year process that produced tremendous results. But Trump wants to stick it to Obama and validate the talking points of Fox News, and that is his top priority. Actually, it is his only priority.
I agree that Bibi shares blame. But Trump would probably have done the wrong thing regardless. He always does.
Mosby
(19,491 posts)By their proxy Hezbo, who are operating out of Lebanon and Syria.
They are by far the most destabilizing entity in the Middle East.
Whatever Bibi has said in the last few years re Iran pales in comparison to the actions and statements that the Iranian leadership engage in, they can't even say the name "Israel" because the government is so bat shit crazy.
Why would anyone trust them?
StevieM
(10,578 posts)We worked out a deal on the nuclear program. It did not rely on trust, it relied on verification. We should have kept it.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)what I meant was that I doubt very much what bibi had to say mattered at all to donnie.
StevieM
(10,578 posts)Running for president seemed to be a terrible mistake on Raisi's part. He appeared to be an emerging possibility as a successor to Khameini as Supreme Leader. Losing a presidential election doesn't look good.
This is going to make Rouhani look bad. He is going to get a lot of "I told you so." He's term-limited so he won't be running in 2021 anyway. But Raisi, or someone like him, could use this against a different opponent. The Assembly of Experts could also use it to justify disqualifying candidates who support Rouhani's mentality towards foreign policy.
I don't think there is any doubt that the agreement cannot survive Trump's actions. The problem is that he is imposing sanctions on foreign companies that do business in Iran. That essentially brings other nations on board with the sanctions, whether they want to be or not. Most of these companies won't give up a chance to do business in the United States.
If the economy in Iran goes further south it probably won't bring down the regime. But it could exacerbate the feeling of the already frustrated Iranian people that their votes don't have any ability to bring about change. (As it is, true reform is blocked by the Guardian Council, which vets all laws). That could depress the vote and allow someone like Raisi to get into office.
Mosby
(19,491 posts)Iran is not a democracy by any stretch of the imagination.
StevieM
(10,578 posts)There is a limited amount of pluralism in Iran. The regime usually feels the need to allow one or two less extremem candidates on the ballot. They are not as reform-minded as the people would like and if they win they are not allowed the right to govern in any way they like.
But it isn't totally insignificant. It means that Iran is not always represented, at home or abroad, by someone like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. It means that you can get a deal like the Iran deal that Obama negotiated. It means that you have some type of competitive campaigns, complete with debates, mudslinging and western-style advertising.
That isn't the same thing as democracy, but it is part of a process in which electoral traditions and political debate are taking root. That can have a positive effect on their ability to establish democracy--and maintain it--in the future.
robbob
(3,750 posts)Re: the “death to America” chant. I heard that the “death to...” is actually a common expression used to indicate displeasure with many mundane items and issues, as well as America.
So if you have having trouble catching a cab, you might curse “death to taxis”, or if you bite into a piece of rotten fruit, you might say “death to bad fruit”. Just thought it interesting; when we hear “death to America” we assume it’s some radical declaration of war, but culturally it’s really just a way of showing displeasure.
<on edit> This is something I heard a translator talking about on the radio; I haven’t been able to find confirmation on the web, BUT the expression “marg bar”, literally translated as “death to...” is more accurately understood as “down with...”.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)is the issue. Mute the sound and all you see is a burning American flag. They had a chance to stand with the other signatories and be adults and they blew it.
dembotoz
(16,922 posts)
Javaman
(65,866 posts)do they have a regular supplier?
while I kind of sympathize with the Iranians this time around, I can't help but feel this is really kind of a tired tirade.
JustABozoOnThisBus
(24,699 posts)Some of the flags resemble the US flag.
They burned a flag and said "death to America!"? So, an ordinary day in Iran.