Delayed or postponed. To all accounts of the monitoring agency, Iran is in compliance with the treaty.

Realistically, you can only ever delay or postpone countries developing the capability for nuclear weapons - based on their need. Increasing the military threat Iran is under, surely only accelerates that need (Despite the traditional sabre rattling, having nuclear capability generally paves the way to being immune to 'regime changes').

The US can't start a war with Iran, without creating massive problems throughout Iraq (very close relationship with Iran).

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

I didn't say they weren't active. I specifically stated they didn't grow rapidly until the departure of US troops.

What cities did IS hold in Iraq before the US departure? The US withdrawed in 2011. The first city captured was in 2014.

Edited by Stirlingsays (25 Oct 2017 2.08pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Obama walked into office in the midst of the mortgage meltdown, inheriting an economy that was crashing and shedding 1 million jobs a month. Job #1 was turning that around - something he did very quickly by passing a stimulus package and auto industry rescue package. He had a domestic agenda to focus on too, which included getting his signature healthcare reform passed (which Trump is trying to undo). After his first two years in office, he had a Republican-controlled congress who refused to work with him, even on the day-to-day stuff, so not much got done after that.

Internationally, he was part of the Iran nuclear deal (which Trump is trying to undo), the Paris Climate Accords (which Trump is trying to undo) and he relaxed US sanctions on Cuba (which Trump is trying to undo). Not a lot, to be fair, but he did revitalize the US' image around the world (which Trump is succeeding in undoing).

We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.

Obama talked about pulling out of Afghanistan (which he did not achieve), not Iraq. As noted above, the decision by the Iraqis to no longer allow US combat troops in their country was codified and ratified by the Iraqi parliament and signed by George W. Bush, who was President at the time.

I know it's convenient for you to hang this around Obama's neck, but Bush took us into Iraq and Bush took us out - both decisions being disastrous for the region and the world.

Edited by Ray in Houston (25 Oct 2017 2.50pm)

We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.

So three years later, at the time the US had only been in Iraq for 11 years. I don't think their growth was really dependent on the withdraw of US troops per se.

The swelling of IS was more about Jabhat al-Nusra in Syria merging with ISI to form ISIL /ISIS.

However, I would agree that had the US military not been scaled back, the 2014 incursion may not have occurred, or if it had, the US military would likely have achieved far greater success than the Iraqi forces that effectively were routed - and they would likely have only 'lost the first city' (as US forces were largely confined to bases at that point). Long before ISIS could have pushed forwards from that first victory, the US would have deployed its forces.

It was the wrong call, with hindsight, but with the Insurgents and ISI having switched their focus to Syria and Jabhat al-Nusra in Syria, I think the US effectively misread that as achieving a false level of security.

But ISIS didn't really grow as a result of the US withdrawal, it was already a fairly substantial force in Syria and Northern Iraq.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

IS was always going to take advantage of the situation that was created in Syria.

Watching the Vietham series is fascinating for seeing certain parallels.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)