Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4
and then

Iran threatens war over renewed sanctions

120 posts in this topic

8 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

It was Iran that invaded their embassy and held their staff hostage. It was Iran that organised mass demonstrations screaming "Death to America".

Those were frustrated students mostly but anways why did Iran do that?

Do not answer to me, answer to your self my friend ;) They didn't start to hate America overnight because they felt filled with joy with first spark of hate towards America. 

8 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Designating the Islamic Republic Guards Corp as a terrorist organisation does NOT mean that they can be attacked. It merely means that the USA can impose sanctions relating to trade between US companies and IRGC companies and interests.

It 'merely' means blocking of Iran's economy which is directly violating Nuclear deal. Also, terrorist designation has way more implications both economically and politically. America try to find a way to go around nuclear deal and impose sanctions. Such one sided action violates deal made by many countries, it ain't only about America.

Personally, i believe that pressure from Israel for America to do something has starting to became fruitful.

14 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

As for Saudi.. well... obviously they would align against Iran; they are a Sunni state, and Iran is a Shia state. Nuff said.

Iraq is/was mostly Shia :D

Whole premise of Sunni and Shia war is ridiculous, its about politics and regional influence not religious war. Majority of Gulf population is Shia, relatively large part of Saudi Arabia has Shia population.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
On 10/25/2017 at 0:20 PM, Sir Smoke aLot said:

Those were frustrated students mostly but anways why did Iran do that?

Do not answer to me, answer to your self my friend ;) They didn't start to hate America overnight because they felt filled with joy with first spark of hate towards America. 

It 'merely' means blocking of Iran's economy which is directly violating Nuclear deal. Also, terrorist designation has way more implications both economically and politically. America try to find a way to go around nuclear deal and impose sanctions. Such one sided action violates deal made by many countries, it ain't only about America.

Personally, i believe that pressure from Israel for America to do something has starting to became fruitful.

Iraq is/was mostly Shia :D

Whole premise of Sunni and Shia war is ridiculous, its about politics and regional influence not religious war. Majority of Gulf population is Shia, relatively large part of Saudi Arabia has Shia population.

No... I don't believe it does, Sir Smoke aLot. The US is not threatening to block "Iran's" economy, merely those functions carried out by the Islamic Republican Guard Corps. Or are you suggesting that the entirety of Iran's economy is controlled by the IRGC ? If so, why on EARTH are we encouraging them to make nuclear weapons ? 

There are - as you say - a lot of Shia muslims in Saudi Arabia, and across the gulf region. And almost without exception they are treated as second-class citizens, bordering on apartheid, and are the subject of pogroms and atrocities. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shia_Islam_in_Saudi_Arabia#Restrictions_and_persecutions

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Shi'ism

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

No... I don't believe it does, Sir Smoke aLot. The US is not threatening to block "Iran's" economy, merely those functions carried out by the Islamic Republican Guard Corps. Or are you suggesting that the entirety of Iran's economy is controlled by the IRGC ? If so, why on EARTH are we encouraging them to make nuclear weapons ? 

There are - as you say - a lot of Shia muslims in Saudi Arabia, and across the gulf region. And almost without exception they are treated as second-class citizens, bordering on apartheid, and are the subject of pogroms and atrocities. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shia_Islam_in_Saudi_Arabia#Restrictions_and_persecutions

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Shi'ism

Im not sure why you keep saying that. Sanctions affect a broad array of Iranian business, thats the point of them , to hurt a nation :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanctions_against_Iran

Quote

The European Union has imposed restrictions on cooperation with Iran in foreign trade, financial services, energy sectors and technologies, and banned the provision of insurance and reinsurance by insurers in member states to Iran and Iranian-owned companies.[14] On 23 January 2012, the EU agreed to an oil embargo on Iran, effective from July, and to freeze the assets of Iran's central bank.[15] The next month, Iran symbolically pre-empted the embargo by ceasing sales to Britain and France (both countries had already almost eliminated their reliance on Iranian oil, and Europe as a whole had nearly halved its Iranian imports), though some Iranian politicians called for an immediate sales halt to all EU states, so as to hurt countries like Greece, Spain and Italy who were yet to find alternative sources.[16][17]

 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Farmer77 said:

Im not sure why you keep saying that. Sanctions affect a broad array of Iranian business, thats the point of them , to hurt a nation :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanctions_against_Iran

 

Indeed Farmer77. However, my comments where about the possibility of future sanctions specifically targeting the Islamic Republican Guards Corps, rather than the more general sanctions by the United Nations against the Iranian government (recently lifted).

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

Indeed Farmer77. However, my comments where about the possibility of future sanctions specifically targeting the Islamic Republican Guards Corps, rather than the more general sanctions by the United Nations against the Iranian government (recently lifted).

Come now, RG!  You really MUST get into the spirit of the thing.  Repeat after me, Amrika BAD!  Everyone else, JUSTIFIED!  It's the subtext of every conversation with a few here.  They deny it so as to maintain some dignity and plausible deniability in the conversation but it is what it is.  Apparently, it will always be this way with them.  I'd be very surprised if any of the blame America first crowd were actually bothered in the slightest if another 9-11 type of attack occurred tomorrow.  Hell, it might even be welcomed.  Mark my words, unless we get sucker-punched with an EMP or an actual ground-burst bomb in a port or a major city that effectively takes us out as a world power, we WILL go to war against Iran or NK or both.  We will be left with no choice.  One cannot coexist with regimes that regularly scream their intention to destroy you.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Iran wont go to war with the US directly but via proxy states ie Yemen or attacks an ally via yemen. Which has already happened this week.

Iran is winning in the proxy war even though they offically deny any involvement

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

No... I don't believe it does, Sir Smoke aLot. The US is not threatening to block "Iran's" economy, merely those functions carried out by the Islamic Republican Guard Corps. Or are you suggesting that the entirety of Iran's economy is controlled by the IRGC ? If so, why on EARTH are we encouraging them to make nuclear weapons ? 

There are - as you say - a lot of Shia muslims in Saudi Arabia, and across the gulf region. And almost without exception they are treated as second-class citizens, bordering on apartheid, and are the subject of pogroms and atrocities. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shia_Islam_in_Saudi_Arabia#Restrictions_and_persecutions

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Shi'ism

I'm not suggesting that Iranian economy is controlled by IRGC because they are directly under Supreme Leader but Iranian economy is reliant on IRGC. It's really long subject to cover here but in short, IRGC is present all over Iranian economy, from oil industry to healthcare.

Rouhani has explained Iranian position and their nuclear ambitions in his UN speech ( reply to Trump's speech ). No need to go over that again.

With all that has happened in ME region, especially recently, smart sovereign country there would do everything in it's power to develop deterrence capability. I can not blame Iran for that, it's vital for their survival as sovereign country. But what is alternative? Is Iran being given one?

When first nuclear deal was made for many it was happy day and that day was viewed as first step towards better deals in the future. But, so far, we do not see that there are better deals. Only more hostilities. What we see is how politicians ( in this case mainly Trump and Netanyahu ) are trying to break that deal based on false claims ( we know mainstream agencies reports ). What is Trumps alternative? I'd like to know that.

Now aggression towards Iran is increasing rapidly.

Among other things, resignation of Lebanese prime minister ( most likely all Saudi plan ) which has snowballed into Saudi Arabia ordering its citizens to leave Lebanon today, is aggression against Iranian interests.

There were so many events in last few days with so much more to happen soon. It's best to wait a bit more time to get better general picture.

Thanks for links, i was never into that subject but damn it seems brutal. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mr.United_Nations said:

Iran is winning in the proxy war even though they offically deny any involvementIran wont go to war with the US directly but via proxy states ie Yemen or attacks an ally via yemen. Which has already happened this week.

Iran is winning in the proxy war even though they offically deny any involvement

Of course, direct confrontation between leading regional powers is very unlikely. Yemen is not simply ''proxy operation'' but much more complex issue, even tho it's simply in it's essence. Essentially, constructing of Suez Canal in 19th century made Yemen into one of most important geopolitical places in the world.

As for Iran denying involvement... That isn't really true, Iran doesn't deny their support for Syrian government in it's fight, they answered invitation from Syrian government. Iranian officials have stated, numerous times, their support for legitimate resistance forces such as Hezbollah ( which is now part of Lebanese government ) and also for Palestinians and Houtis. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, and then said:

Come now, RG!  You really MUST get into the spirit of the thing.  Repeat after me, Amrika BAD!  Everyone else, JUSTIFIED!

Its just called being human amigo. Putting yourself in others shoes for half a second. RoofGardner's question was is it acceptable to threaten war over sanctions and put the shoe on the other foot for a second. Not only would I support the US going to war if they were in Irans position I would be demanding it. Thats not saying America is bad, just an honest evaluation of the situation. 

11 hours ago, and then said:

I'd be very surprised if any of the blame America first crowd were actually bothered in the slightest if another 9-11 type of attack occurred tomorrow.  Hell, it might even be welcomed.

Considering it was me that Roof was speaking to, I find that pretty offensive. Noone was celebrating Vegas , noone was celebrating NYC and noone was celebrating the shooting in TX. 

 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Farmer77 said:

Its just called being human amigo. Putting yourself in others shoes for half a second. RoofGardner's question was is it acceptable to threaten war over sanctions and put the shoe on the other foot for a second. Not only would I support the US going to war if they were in Irans position I would be demanding it. Thats not saying America is bad, just an honest evaluation of the situation. 

Considering it was me that Roof was speaking to, I find that pretty offensive. Noone was celebrating Vegas , noone was celebrating NYC and noone was celebrating the shooting in TX. 

 

Hey, I call it like I see it and I see it from several here REGULARLY.  No matter the situation, the U.S. seems to be at fault.  In case you mightn't have noticed it, Iran and the Norks - as well as several other entities around the globe - are salivating over the idea of ending this nation.  We seem to be overpopulated with people who think that'd be okay, at least, they think it would.  I'm not sure they're smart enough to understand what such an occurrence would mean to them, personally.  So, if Iran had the power to use sanctions against us that would cripple our economy, you'd think going to war would be justified?  How about if they pop up someday and announce they've tested a nuke?  It's foolish to think they won't.  Remember all the assurances we received from smilin' Bill about the Norks?  So, one fine day when the mullahs announce they have the big fire and the means to deliver it where they want to do, then what?  Talk to them?  They don't seem chatty just now.  This is all an academic discussion, anyway.  I, personally believe that this nation is going to be neutralized in one way or another in the coming years.  I think that between the corrupt politicians and the drones that just want to suck the cream, we don't have a chance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

2 minutes ago, and then said:

Hey, I call it like I see it and I see it from several here REGULARLY.  No matter the situation, the U.S. seems to be at fault.  

Identifying when the nation holds culpability isnt being anti American, its simply being honest. 

 

10 minutes ago, and then said:

So, if Iran had the power to use sanctions against us that would cripple our economy, you'd think going to war would be justified?   

Absolutely I would so I understand why Iran is p***ed about the sanctions. 

 

6 minutes ago, and then said:

How about if they pop up someday and announce they've tested a nuke?  It's foolish to think they won't. 

The more I think about it the more I think , so what? Are you naive enough to think if their goal was to attack the US with a nuclear device that they couldnt secure enough uranium to make a dirty bomb WITHOUT their own nuclear program?  Before you even start no, I dont care about America's biggest welfare queen Bibi. Thats their circus, those are their monkeys , let them deal with the mess. 

Further though I have a fundamental problem with the US dictating the course another nation takes. Thats imperialism type crap right there. If you dont have a problem with it because it benefits you, i get that but at least take a couple of seconds to put yourself in the shoes of those we are dominating. 

 

 

........... holy hell ..totally off topic but I was looking for the George Washington quotes on imperialism because I think they're somewhat relevant to the conversation and I came across this quote from Abe Lincoln and I had to share due to its prescience 

 

Quote

"I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. As a result of the war, corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavour to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed." Abraham Lincoln

I get that its 100+ years ago but damn dude really nailed it. 

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And as a means of breaking the power of out of control corporate interests in the U.S., you're okay with allowing our sworn enemies to prosper and become strong enough to destroy this country?  Or is it a lack of belief that they will ever be capable of that?  I'm curious.  I just happen to believe that, warts and all, a world without America is a much worse world than the one we have today.  As strongly anti-authority as you seem to be, I'd think you'd chafe at an invading power putting its boot on your neck, but hey, maybe I misjudge.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, and then said:

And as a means of breaking the power of out of control corporate interests in the U.S., you're okay with allowing our sworn enemies to prosper and become strong enough to destroy this country?  Or is it a lack of belief that they will ever be capable of that?  I'm curious.

Its more a faith that just like in the buildup to the great wars America can mobilize its might militarily when needed without having an entire industry dictating policy. 

3 hours ago, and then said:

I just happen to believe that, warts and all, a world without America is a much worse world than the one we have today.   

I agree wholeheartedly that the world would be much worse off if it didn't have America. 

3 hours ago, and then said:

As strongly anti-authority as you seem to be, I'd think you'd chafe at an invading power putting its boot on your neck, but hey, maybe I misjudge.  

I simply don't buy that the military industrial complex in its current form is what is keeping that from happening. If you do buy that you're in effect held hostage by the industry. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8-10-2017 at 10:03 PM, and then said:

A nation whose military infrastructure could be mauled in less than a month, probably shouldn't casually threaten war over sanctions.  And before I get a lecture about the insanity of invading Iran, save your typing.  If the IRGC bases and their Navy were shattered, the mullahs would have to begin to fear those millions of young people who hate them.  No large U.S. ground forces required.  

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-iran-usa-guards/iran-warns-u-s-against-imposing-further-sanctions-idUSKBN1CD081

sorry, wrong link.

 

From your own link; the US threatens to regard one of the main elements of the Iranian army as 'a foreign terrorist organisation' (right after convening with Israel on how to deal with Iran the best way possible), obviously with the treatment that goes with that.. Iran subsequently responds to do thesame to the US army if and when that happens..

..And we have our lovely neighbourhood AT here who posts the most biased, twisted content humanly conceivable. Dude, something is very, very wrong with you. You need professional help, seriously.

Remember, this individual regards himself as 'a Christian'. Oy vey, what a character. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/3/2018 at 7:23 AM, Phaeton80 said:

And we have our lovely neighbourhood AT here who posts the most biased, twisted content humanly conceivable. Dude, something is very, very wrong with you. You need professional help, seriously.

Content that does not support your worldview isn't necessarily biased, P80.  Also, while I agree to be quite broken and imperfect (and thus a man in NEED of a Savior), I at least don't accuse you of mental problems.  I try to give you at least a modicum of respect as an individual.  I plan to continue doing so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, and then said:

Content that does not support your worldview isn't necessarily biased, P80.  Also, while I agree to be quite broken and imperfect (and thus a man in NEED of a Savior), I at least don't accuse you of mental problems.  I try to give you at least a modicum of respect as an individual.  I plan to continue doing so.


Apologies AT, but you more or less structurally paint agressors as the victim, continually salivate for war (mainly against Muslim nations) to confirm your eschatological expectations (while regarding yourself as 'a Christian' - a 'follower of Christ' no less). The OP of this thread is another striking example of that for all Im concerned. The US moves against Iran (just after convening with the political entity you have come to see as holy on how to 'deal with Iran', which the last has been demanding since the early 90'ies), Iran reacts, and what do you do.. You still somehow manage to blame Iran.

To simply be able to depict Iran as some warmongering, terrror supporting entity, while being American yourself, is the most hypocritical, twisted position imaginable from where Im standing. Your nation has been at the heart of all wars since the 1960'ies, a significant part of which unconstitutional and illegal, all of them perpetuating grave crimes against humanity.. and the US is one of the main nations employing terrorist elements as a proxy to further her geo political goals - especially in the 21st century. And you have the chutzpah to paint Iran as such, paiting them as the agressor and excusing your own. It quite simply boggles the mind..

 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'..A Christian'.. defending individuals like this, and this (etc etc), acts like this, this, and this (etc etc), because he has convinced (conditioned) himself a Rothschild Zionist political entity is 'the Holy Israel' from the Bible.. granting 'unwaverable support' while screaming bloody murder regarding that 'evil Islam..' that 'evil Islamic terrorism' as the scourge of the world, and hoping for war against 'non Judeo Christian nations' just to see your dark 'prophecies' fomented.. every chance you get.

Chris·tian

 (krĭs′chən)

adj.
1. Professing belief in Jesus as Christ or following the religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus.
2. Relating to or derived from Jesus or Jesus's teachings.
3. Manifesting the qualities or spirit of Jesus, especially in showing concern for others.
4. Relating to or characteristic of Christianity or its adherents.
Edited by Phaeton80

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/13/2018 at 4:05 AM, Phaeton80 said:

Apologies AT, but

Everything after those three words was a diatribe to justify insulting me.  Why bother?  It doesn't really bother me too much, I was just pointing out the hypocrisy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, and then said:

Everything after those three words was a diatribe to justify insulting me.  Why bother?  It doesn't really bother me too much, I was just pointing out the hypocrisy.


Well, it does take a big man to recognize his own mistakes, bias. My hopes really werent that high, I was just pointing out the hypocrisy (thanks for that).

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought I read something recently about Donald Trump blaming previous Administrations on the wastage of billions of dollars on US "affairs" in the Middle East?  It seems to me he can't stop sticking his nose in it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.