You are again manifesting your lying tendency, and your deep pathological hatred of Trump. And cherry picking and misrepresenting what was said, to conform to your pre-conceived pro-Democrat narrative, no matter what the true facts.
You vile and demented piece of excrement.
- “We run out of reserves at about four weeks,” Trump said in France while at the Group of Seven summit, discussing the recent memorandum of understanding with Iran. “You know, there are reserves all over the world, and we would really run out, and there’ll be a time when you wouldn’t be able to get it.”
and
- It’s not entirely clear whether Trump was referring to U.S. or global oil inventories. The White House declined to elaborate , referring The Hill back to Trump’s original remarks.
So Trump really said nothing, he made a deliberately provocative public comment to hasten negotiations along. He DIDN'T say U.S. oil reserves were running out, he used rhetoric to motivate negotiation.
Since the U.S. only (as I said) gets about 2% of its oil from the Persian Gulf, and (as I said) the U.S. is oil independent again for the first time in 71 years because of his policy as president, (not to mention further new oil on tap from Venezuela, Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates) it is OBVIOUS he is talking ambiguously about OTHER nations' limited reserves, without naming them.
And motivating Europe, Japan, South Korea and even China, out of their own vulnerability and self interest, to do everything they can to help move along a resolution to the Strait of Hormuz negotiations.
Your own article on Trump's Iranian missile comments ALSO partly explains things, without my even having to, if you had reading comprehension skills.
A large percentage of missiles have already been destroyed. So what remains could be considered just a defensive capability, now deprived of the nuclear component. They also have lost the manufacturing facilities to build more. My own choice would be to eliminate far more Iran missiles, by either negotiation or strikes, and demand that the current remaining IRGC leadership either leave Iran into exile, or at least step down from power to be replaced by a more moderate provisional coalition government, as conditions of surrender.
Bu even with Trump's existing plan, the IRGC regime is not expected to survive in power through the first election, so if the new regime doesn't continue the same aggression toward its neighbors, there is no urgency to remove their missiles.
Unmentioned in the article, whether the missiles are 85% destroyed (as Trump asserts) , or 70% survived bombing and remain (as others assert), there are other factors. General Keith Kellogg said that while Iran may have missiles, they have lost the launchers and trained crews to fire them. I think Trump is is about offering something to the remaining IRGC regime, as a bargaining chip, to bring about their larger surrender. And all these are still tentative offers, to bring the Iran IRGC leadership into a final agreement, and not yet set in stone as you imply. Not for at least 60 days.
