- Joined
- Mar 7, 2018
- Messages
- 62,625
- Reaction score
- 19,350
- Location
- Lower Mainland of BC
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
From United Press International
United Nations rejects U.S. proposal to extend Iran arms embargo
Aug. 15 (UPI) -- The United Nations Security Council has rejected the U.S. proposal to extend an arms embargo on Iran.
The Dominican Republic was the only country to support the proposal in the security council vote late Friday. Russia and China voted against the U.S. resolution and the rest of the council members abstained.
U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo criticized member states for their lack of support.
"The Security Council's failure to act decisively in defense of international peace and security is inexcusable," Pompeo said in a statement.
COMMENT:-
In related news, the rumour that Mr. Trump is considering placing a 100% trade embargo on the United Nations and all of its members has not yet been confirmed.
However, Mr. Trump's statement "I am the leader of the free world and what I say to do is what you have to do because that is what being "The Leader" means. Besides why should the US be bound by some so-called 'decision' that has been made by something that the US doesn't even belong to?" is indicative that the possibility cannot be totally dismissed.
Its bizarre to argue that we can impose penalties on another country for not complying with an agreement that we pulled out of, so in that vein I would concur with the other nations. However its also bizarre for those nations to not impose sanctions against Iran for advancing its weapons programs when that is against the best interests of all those nations.
What is the point in standing by silently here? You don't have to like Trump to understand that Iran aquiring more powerful weapons is not a good idea.
I feel like there is something being left out of the artical or I am missing something in it.
Theres no doubt that the Trump administration is msking a weak argument and would be on a better foothold to just declare Irans pursuits dangerous and base the sanctions on that rather than invoke the terms of a broken agreement that they broke, but whst do these other nations, who have a good argument for reinstating sanctions based on the agreement that they didnt break, have to gain by standing mute?
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Its bizarre to argue that we can impose penalties on another country for not complying with an agreement that we pulled out of, so in that vein I would concur with the other nations. However its also bizarre for those nations to not impose sanctions against Iran for advancing its weapons programs when that is against the best interests of all those nations.
What is the point in standing by silently here? You don't have to like Trump to understand that Iran aquiring more powerful weapons is not a good idea.
I feel like there is something being left out of the artical or I am missing something in it.
Theres no doubt that the Trump administration is msking a weak argument and would be on a better foothold to just declare Irans pursuits dangerous and base the sanctions on that rather than invoke the terms of a broken agreement that they broke, but whst do these other nations, who have a good argument for reinstating sanctions based on the agreement that they didnt break, have to gain by standing mute?
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
China and Russia are leading the way to where? Is that a place you think the rest of the world should follow them to?They abstained because they are diplomats and know full well that trump's reelection is facing long odds. The world hopes America loses its incompetent ignorant mob boss soon.
China and Russia are shown leading the way and the US looks like fools. They couldn't wish for better global diplomatic gains if they fought a friggin' war.
The point is those other nations wish to suck up to Russia, Iran and China. In this case they could do that as well by remaining silent as they could have by actually voting.
the thing is America/Trump is breaking international law with unilateral sanctions and demand everyone else to observe them and there is high jacking 4 Iranian tankers is essentially piracy also breaking international laws and trade laws .... America has become a pariah state it now bypasses the UN and demands nations follow international law but refuses to do the same then there is the trade sanctions on china Huawei, Tik Tok, We chat now talk of banning Ali Babba/AliExpress and then there is sanctions on EU/Germany/Russia over Nordstream 2 EU energy policy has nothing to do with the USA and Congress .... it's not for America to decide .... keep pushing and you will regret it ... Europe is about to push back and push back hard
Psh. Europe can't even keep Russia out of Belarus or stop Iran from researching and building nuclear missiles. I doubt they'll be able to do anything of consequence to the United States.
Russia is not in Belarus and even if it was it's not our business it's not a EU state .... and if Iran does build nuclear weapons and missiles Trump and Israel are both to blame ... and for your information Russia is a reliable trading partner and not a threat, unlike america who uploaded malware to every EU nations pwoer grids, spied our governments, and our people and stole data from EU companies to help Us companies win contracts over EU companies and also stole other intellectual property from EU companies ... so who is the real threat to the EU then ??
Congrats to China and Russia, I guess. They won this one.
China and Russia are leading the way to where? Is that a place you think the rest of the world should follow them to?
This is one of the areas progressives lose me. They seem to embrace Totalitarian philosophies.
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Which is the long way of saying congrats to Trump.
International politics is very weird, and often counter-intuitive. You have to figure out the reasons behind the reasons, and put together a puzzle with missing pieces. I would never have the patience for it.
I agree - the US can't force sanctions under an agreement they pulled out of - but the governments still in the agreement should. One could argue that if no one is honoring the agreement, Iran or the other member countries, that the agreement is dead.
Worth noting - the criticism that many had about this agreement has been validated - that Iran would only honor the agreement as long as it was convenient to do so.
Iran was in full compliance with the agreement, according to the IAEA, until Trump stupidly decided to pull out, guaranteeing tensions in the region would increase.
Iran is complying with nuclear deal restrictions: IAEA report - Reuters
IAEA Says Iran Abiding by Nuclear Deal | Arms Control Association
Iran stays within nuclear deal's main limits while testing another - Reuters
Iran was in full compliance with the agreement, according to the IAEA, until Trump stupidly decided to pull out, guaranteeing tensions in the region would increase.
Iran is complying with nuclear deal restrictions: IAEA report - Reuters
IAEA Says Iran Abiding by Nuclear Deal | Arms Control Association
Iran stays within nuclear deal's main limits while testing another - Reuters
Inspectors found that Iran’s stock of enriched uranium was well below the limit set by the deal, as of May 20. That last date covered by the report is also the day Iran said it had increased the rate at which it enriches uranium, meaning any acceleration will appear only in the next report.
The IAEA said Iran had installed 33 advanced IR-6 centrifuges, machines that can enrich uranium, although only 10 had been tested with uranium feedstock so far. The deal allows Iran to test up to 30, but only after 8 1/2 years have passed. The limit before then is a “grey area”, diplomats say.
“Technical discussions in relation to the IR-6 centrifuges are ongoing,” the report said. A senior diplomat, asked about the nature of those discussions, declined to elaborate.
While Iran has stayed within the deal’s main limits over the past three years, it has breached a cap on its heavy water stock within the first year, although this is acknowledged by diplomats as a comparatively minor issue. Diplomats also say it has dragged its feet on allowing access to some sites, without explicitly violating the requirements of the deal.
Again, Iran only planned to stay in it until it suited them not to. Once they built up their infrastructure to the point where they could exceed it, they did. Even after agreeing to maintain the agreement with the other countries. They did exactly what many warned they would.
From that last article....
So they were installing 'extra' centrifuges that they didn't plan to test or use for 8 1/2 years? And they happened to increase production on the day the report came out? And they happened to need excessive amounts of heavy water in the first year of the agreement?
I have a bridge for sale.
We don't know that. Why should Iran honour a joint agreement when the other party has reneged? It took years of delicate diplomacy to reach the agreement in the first place, but of course it was Obama's achievement and, just like every other achievement of the Obama administration, Trump had to crap on it for no other reason than it wan't his idea-and he despises Obama anyway for mocking him publicly at the White House correspondent's dinner. Mocking an already pathologically insecure individual was guaranteed to further anger the vengeful little creep.
"...a comparatively minor issue...without explicitly violating the requirements of the deal". Like I said, Iran was in full compliance until the idiot Trump crapped over Obama's brilliantly conceived diplomatic coup.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?