I have heard that Trump has threatened Sanctions against Iraq if they force U.S. troops to leave the country. Is this legal, how would the U.N. view this, and if Trump doesn’t get re-elected would sanctions still continue until troops are allowed in again?

GG @League Of Spectroradiers, you just advanced to level 2!

the US is a member of the security council, so we can make anything we do 'legal' , in a functional sense

Although I tend to agree, the council is made up of others too including Russia, China, France, and Britain. All of which Trump has had negative interactions with. Russia (with Syria) China (Tariff war) Britain (Public dislike of Trump) France (Sanctions being placed on them by the Trump administration) It seems the U.S. could become outnumbered. A recent example of the UN pushing back U.S. activities was ordering them to relieve sanctions on Cuba a country south of Florida.

we can veto positive action

brazil was with us on that vote as well

UN has done that vote against US for cuba for 30 years

```For the 28th consecutive year, the UN General Assembly has adopted a resolution calling for an end to the economic, commercial and financial embargo imposed by the United States against Cuba.

```

28 years

Even then could Iraq simply enter another countries area of influence (not exactly with Iran but Russia or China too who’s been more and more interested with the region lately) if the U.S. continues to not play nice. This seems to only hinder the U.S. long term especially seeing the investments made in Iraq.

@Sh0t You’re right about the Iran deal. I read the Act myself. It would’ve been much easier if AP news cited where in the Act it said that.

so what does that mean for Trump's statements on Iran and Obama?

Was he lying to his audience?

They are somewhat misleading. Another political half truth

Although in some ways, Trump was correct about that, he just said it in an over-dramatic way

it was sowing the seeds for pulling out of a deal that was helping to normalize us relations with iran

exactly what the neocons wanted and what we are getting now as we shoot at each other

Trump is petty in the sense, whatever Obama did, good or bad, Trump has been determined to bring it crashing down. The Iran deal included.

A lot of it is he wants to tear down "the Obama legacy" and be the guy who passes all the great deals and "saves the county". Trump believes his own campaign propaganda.

@Sh0t

they knew what they were doing in the campaign, it wasn't just 'pettiness', look at who was backing them and participating. obama stood up to the israelis and saudis a bit

undoing obama was about more than just ego, it was a strategy of rolling back the clock on purging neoconservatism

Of course, but Trump is uber petty about it.

It comes through in all his tweets.

It is a lot of ego motivating his decisions.

thats' the cover man

"He's too dumb to be hurting America on purpose"

the pettiness is for show for his base, it gets them pumped

that's putting the sail into the wind to power the strategy

he's a performance artist

Lol. Pence and others do the heavy lifting. He is amateur compared to them.

Pence was a PR move to get the evangelicals, as were sessions and some others

Those wanting to impeach Trump don't get that Pence is a political insider that knows how to get what he wants. So it was 4D chess to make his VP worse than himself.

it's how they got ann coulter and the like on board

then they were discarded

as were the less crazy natsec types like mattis

dont be surprised if pence is replaced with Nimrata

Pence was a PR move to cover for a guy with 2 divorces and a history of being a playboy

da fuck somebody like DONALD TRUMP is getting voted for by evangelicals?

but they are that dumb, as bannon predicted

then he was discarded too