The U.S. Just Removed Iran, Hezbollah From Its List of Terrorists. Is This Too Far To Go For A Nuke Deal?

Why don't we just hand them the blue prints next? Or do we give them to North Korea first?

A few thoughts:
- I thought the purpose of producing a terrorist threat list was more so to document who in the world is using violence to achieve their political purposes and less about who/what is a direct threat to the US. If direct threat to the US is the standard then I guess Boko Haram in Africa are not terrorists.
- Iran has been supporting terrorism since at least 1979. How else to explain Syria and Hezbollah since then?
- Placement on the US terrorism list is not just a list thing. It kicks in specific actions and limitations on the part of the US Government and its citizens. Likewise, taking a country or organization off the list opens up possibilities for the USG and its citizens.
-If the article is correct then the US is essentially turning a blind eye to Iran's terrorist activities in order to enable a nuclear deal that might not be worth the paper it is printed on. Does not sound like great negotiating skills or an understanding of the long game/bigger picture on the part of the USG.

As I write this, 80% of respondents (16/20) believe "the Administration has gone way too far; what can they be thinking?" There are two responses from MSG David Chappell and SFC (Join to see) which contain a link to a Newsweek article which purportedly proves that Iran and Hezbollah were, in fact, removed from the "list." MAJ Tristan M. recanted that the DOS list is meaningless, and I agree that de facto encouraging a black market is not ideal, but the United States do not have a trade relationship with Iran (something that DOS and Dept. of Commerce deal in), and Iran is still under the UN microscope. As far as I can tell, only one respondent here, other than me, SFC Miguel Lopez, disregards this discussion's headline.

"Hizballah" is still designated as a Foreign Terror Organization, and Iran is still designated as a State Sponsor of Terrorism. http://www.state.gov/j/ct/rls/other/des/123085.htm; http://www.state.gov/j/ct/list/c14151.htm.

Retired Air Force LT GEN and incumbent Director of National Intelligence Jim Clapper signed his name to a report that omitted Iran and Hezbollah from a list of terrorist threats to the United States. The National Intelligence Estimate is an independently authored document required by Congress, and is used to advise the President and Congress. That independence can sometimes pull the rug from under presidents, just ask President Bush about the 2007 NIE that stated that Iran was "very unlikely" to have the means of producing nuclear weapons before 2009 and "judge[d] with high confidence that Iran will not be technically capable of producing and reprocessing enough plutonium for a weapon before about 2015." http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/international/20071203_release.pdf.

As I have said before in this discussion, Iran or Hezbollah could be removed from the State Sponsors of Terrorism list or the Foreign Terror Organizations list, respectively, but they have not been removed yet.

Regardless of the source listed a quick search shows the facts are true http://www.newsweek.com/iran-and-hezbollah-omitted-us-terror-threat-list-amid-nuclear-talks-314073

Iran...sort of. While they still sponsor terrorist groups, at least trying to see some sort of legitimacy in the government and country is a start. I wouldn't give them an inch of leeway though. Treat the government there like how you would treat any alcoholic. Lock up the beers, don't wave and tease them with drinks. But for the purposes of having something other than military options, its better than nothing.

Hezbollah though is widely known to be a proxy of the Ayatollahs and they have never been up to any good in that region. Removing them from the Terrorist watch list is an epic disaster. Hindsight is always 20/20 and its always easier to be an armchair General. But, to take an example, we gave the German people a legitimacy as a country, but to give the Nazi Party and the other thugs running around Germany any sort of leniency is a bad idea.

If this is giving Iran some breather that we see them as worthwhile people to court and get along with, I'm all for it. But to give Hezbollah any sort of room is just totally missing the target. And furthermore, while I'm all for building trust and ties with Iran (as a country), their government is so corrupt and dysfunctional, that you might as well be trying to bargain with clowns. This is a monumental disaster waiting to happen, and it will be the American Soldier to pay the price.

I have come to the conclusion that this President will do "whatever it takes" to secure a deal with Iran ... whether it is in our country's best interest or not.

If this is true, then this is another attack waiting to happen, they are putting our guard down. History will repeat itself if we don't learn from it.

In view of the recent State Department report that said Iran is still a state sponsor of terrorism, how the hell can the Administration 'remove' it from the list? Total frickin' nonsense ...

You do not remove a terrorist from the list who has been known to threaten the US. Our government is out of their mind.

The U.S. did not remove them from the DoS's list, which represents U.S. policy. The intelligence community merely reported on them in a more favorable manner than in previous annual reports. This article is a little more thorough: http://www.newsweek.com/iran-and-hezbollah-omitted-us-terror-threat-list-amid-nuclear-talks-314073 Furthermore, the reports I read on the deal specifically stated that certain sanctions were remaining in place because they were emplaced as a result of Iran's terror sponsorship.