United Nations rejects U.S. proposal to extend Iran arms embargo

[Metric Mouse]

I see that you stopped reading before you got to the

PLEASE NOTE that the above assumes that there would be absolutely zero effect on the US economy other than the total disappearance of foreign trade (all items of which would be instantly replaced from US domestic sources [even where the US does not have any domestic sources]).
(emphasis added)
​

bit.

Magical planet is magical. Why would that not magically happen when all the other magical stuff is happening?

 

[Metric Mouse]

See that you sort of missed the "At present" bit.

Yep. Do let us know if that ever changes in the distant, unknowable future. Until that day Iran will just have to repurpose all the carpets they want to sell in the United States.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Yep. Do let us know if that ever changes in the distant, unknowable future. Until that day Iran will just have to repurpose all the carpets they want to sell in the United States.

Fortunately Iran and the other JCPOA countries only have to wait until 03 NOV 20 (that's a whole 73 days) before making up their minds whether or not they have to tell the US government to go and pound sand so that they can get on with their lives.

 

[Metric Mouse]

Fortunately Iran and the other JCPOA countries only have to wait until 03 NOV 20 (that's a whole 73 days) before making up their minds whether or not they have to tell the US government to go and pound sand so that they can get on with their lives.

It'll be interesting to see how much things change after that date. Unfortunately I don't think Iran is going to be in a significantly different position no matter the election results. Probably why they are engaging in sponsoring terrorism and researching nuclear weapons rather than wait and see.

 

[Jonsa]

Ok... so your post didn't exactly contradict anything that I had to say. The USSR collapsed, the United States is basically energy independent, and one of the very least dependent upon global trade of any nation, of any size, on the planet. It has the world's largest consumer base and the world's second largest manufacturing base; what is the incentive for it to do anything it doesn't want to do?

You claimed I wouldn't expound on the reasons; you were wrong. You're welcome. But to return to the main question, what exactly does Iran have that the United States cares about? Pretty much nothing.

Are you familiar with the three levers of National Power? how they work in strategic harmony to achieve all kinds of necessary national goals, both internally and externally?

BTW, iran has oil, and its the sworn mortal enemy of the Saudi's who trump's entire family has cozied up to. You know trump is stealing syrian oil as we speak don't you? In trump's world you can never have too much oil. Its got an even brighter future than coal.

 

[dcsports]

Fortunately Iran and the other JCPOA countries only have to wait until 03 NOV 20 (that's a whole 73 days) before making up their minds whether or not they have to tell the US government to go and pound sand so that they can get on with their lives.

This is one of those occasions where the other countries are thumbing their nose at the US. Many likely entered the agreement under pressure from the US, and now that it's clearly failed, they blame us. That's not Trump's fault - It's Obama's. It was a bad agreement from the start. Obama didn't create a treaty - because he would never get it approved. He was hoping Clinton would carry the torch long enough to blame Iran for the failure.

From a practical standpoint, there is no agreement. Iran blew past the limits as soon as they could, and no one is willing to impose the penalties. We're at square one.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

This is one of those occasions where the other countries are thumbing their nose at the US. Many likely entered the agreement under pressure from the US, and now that it's clearly failed, they blame us. That's not Trump's fault - It's Obama's. It was a bad agreement from the start. Obama didn't create a treaty - because he would never get it approved. He was hoping Clinton would carry the torch long enough to blame Iran for the failure.

From a practical standpoint, there is no agreement. Iran blew past the limits as soon as they could, and no one is willing to impose the penalties. We're at square one.

Yes, I'm sure that that is what you have been told to think.

 

[dcsports]

Yes, I'm sure that that is what you have been told to think.

lol - resorting to a personal attack = you know what I just said was true.

 

[Grand Mal]

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

This has nothing to do with progressives. Trump abandoned America's leadership role and nature abhors a vacuum.
Get rid of Trump and America has a chance to lead the way again. Till then, other actors will fill the role.

 

[Metric Mouse]

Are you familiar with the three levers of National Power? how they work in strategic harmony to achieve all kinds of necessary national goals, both internally and externally?

BTW, iran has oil, and its the sworn mortal enemy of the Saudi's who trump's entire family has cozied up to. You know trump is stealing syrian oil as we speak don't you? In trump's world you can never have too much oil. Its got an even brighter future than coal.

The oil that the United States has embargoed and stopped them from exporting? That's your arguement; that they are after the oil that they have forced Iran to not sell... absurd.

I think that your understanding of the situation is fundamentally flawed and your opinions are not rooted in fact.

I'd be interested to hear your explanation of the three levers of National Power, however.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

lol - resorting to a personal attack = you know what I just said was true.

No, it means that I am sure that that is what you have been told to think.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

The oil that the United States has embargoed and stopped them from exporting? That's your arguement; that they are after the oil that they have forced Iran to not sell... absurd.

I think that your understanding of the situation is fundamentally flawed and your opinions are not rooted in fact.

I'd be interested to hear your explanation of the three levers of National Power, however.

That would be the oil that the US government seized from an independent and sovereign nation on the high seas, wouldn't it?

Do you know what the legal term for such actions is?

You might find "A Nation Needs More than a DIME" (from Defense.info) [04/03/2019 by Konstantin Khomko] which contains

In 1939 Edward Carr divided international political power into three categories: military power, economic power, and the power over opinion. During the Cold War, the United States and its armed forces expanded those categories and developed a four-element schema known as DIME.1

DIME helps explain national power by arranging national activity and outputs into diplomatic, information, military and economic elements.2
​

as well as

1. D.R. Worley, Orchestrating the Instruments of Power: A Critical Examination of the U.S. National Security System (Potomac Books, 2015)
   *
2. R.M. John, ‘All Elements of National Power’: Re-Organizing the Interagency Structure and Process for Victory in the Long War,’ Strategic Insights, 5:6 (2006).
   *
3. D. Jablonsky, ‘National Power’ in J.Boone Bartholomees, Jr. (ed.), U.S. Army War College Guide to National Security Policy and Strategy (Carlisle, PA: US Army War College, 2004).
   *
4. C.W. Mastapeter, ‘The instruments of national power: achieving the strategic advantage in a changing world’ (MA Thesis, US Naval Postgraduate School, 2008).
   *
   and
   *
5. UNICEF, ‘SWOT and PESTEL,’ 14 Sep 2015.

interesting.

 

[Mika-El]

The issue with Iran preceded Trump and will proceed him. I am no supporter of Trump but I would argue this is not a Trump issue. This is an issue as to Iran and what happens if and when it obtains nuclear weapons. Turning that issue into a mistake of Trump's is not accurate. He did not create Iran or its polices or its instability and he can not end it.

The UN is a corrupt, antiquated organization. Its full of human rights violating dictators and corruption from top to bottom. That has nothing to do with Trump.

Iran's threat to the stability of the Middle East has nothing to do with Trump.

If you want to discuss Iran, we should do so in a thread on Iran not Trump.

Appeasing Iran is a policy you may agree with but many people pro and con Trump would not agree with that. Many democrats are against appeasing Iran as well.

Not every issue is about Trump.

 

[MTAtech]

In just under four years, Trump has turned us into a pathetic shell of the world leader we used to be.

It wasn't easy. Putin is so delighted he's giving Trump an extension of his contract.

 

[MTAtech]

The issue with Iran preceded Trump and will proceed him. I am no supporter of Trump but I would argue this is not a Trump issue. This is an issue as to Iran and what happens if and when it obtains nuclear weapons. Turning that issue into a mistake of Trump's is not accurate. He did not create Iran or its polices or its instability and he can not end it.

The UN is a corrupt, antiquated organization. Its full of human rights violating dictators and corruption from top to bottom. That has nothing to do with Trump.

Iran's threat to the stability of the Middle East has nothing to do with Trump.

If you want to discuss Iran, we should do so in a thread on Iran not Trump.

Appeasing Iran is a policy you may agree with but many people pro and con Trump would not agree with that. Many democrats are against appeasing Iran as well.

Not every issue is about Trump.

Iran's nuclear ambitions were contained by the agreement that Obama signed. Trump tore that up because he hates Obama. Now, we live with the consequences.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

The issue with Iran preceded Trump and will proceed him. I am no supporter of Trump but I would argue this is not a Trump issue. This is an issue as to Iran and what happens if and when it obtains nuclear weapons. Turning that issue into a mistake of Trump's is not accurate. He did not create Iran or its polices or its instability and he can not end it.

The UN is a corrupt, antiquated organization. Its full of human rights violating dictators and corruption from top to bottom. That has nothing to do with Trump.

Iran's threat to the stability of the Middle East has nothing to do with Trump.

If you want to discuss Iran, we should do so in a thread on Iran not Trump.

Appeasing Iran is a policy you may agree with but many people pro and con Trump would not agree with that. Many democrats are against appeasing Iran as well.

Not every issue is about Trump.

Can you tell me why a whole lot of people think that the governments of areas that acquire nuclear weapons have no intent to use them for anything other than actions which will result in the wholesale slaughter of their own people (including themselves)?

Can you tell me why a whole lot of people think that the governments of areas that acquire nuclear weapons are completely oblivious to the fact that their use of nuclear weapons against a country that is NOT ACTIVELY ATTACKING THEM would almost certainly result in nuclear weapons being used against them?

Can you tell me why a whole lot of people think that the Iranians are NOT aware that Israel has at least 200 nuclear weapons already stockpiled and fully intends to use them against any country that attacks them?

 

[Mika-El]

Can you tell me why a whole lot of people think that the governments of areas that acquire nuclear weapons have no intent to use them for anything other than actions which will result in the wholesale slaughter of their own people (including themselves)?

Can you tell me why a whole lot of people think that the governments of areas that acquire nuclear weapons are completely oblivious to the fact that their use of nuclear weapons against a country that is NOT ACTIVELY ATTACKING THEM would almost certainly result in nuclear weapons being used against them?

Can you tell me why a whole lot of people think that the Iranians are NOT aware that Israel has at least 200 nuclear weapons already stockpiled and fully intends to use them against any country that attacks them?

Glad to answer but only for myself. I only mean to debate you. Lol, I am an sob but not as arrogant as I sound-I do respect the opinions of you and others equally, that said:


1. I do not condone or advocate any comments that hate Iranian people as a people-my comments have been about their current Muslim theocracy and its desire to have nuclear weapons;

2. I volunteered in Israel and was a witness to a terrorist attack-it provides a different perspective on Middle East foreign policy that does not see Israelis and Palestinians as enemies but blowing up the same way and being identical when I placed them in body bags;

3.I do not expect anyone who has never lived next door to Iran or within close distance of its missiles or an enemy's missiles or terrorists to grasp why what you ask about Iran is absurd-your questions are predicated on safety you assume exists for others since it exists for you-the majority of the Middle East has been subject to terrorists and Hezbollah funded by Iran-its citizens are currently being attacked by its Muslim theocracy-the threat it possesses clearly I don't think you understand until you go to Iran and speak to its students, its political opponents, or countries attacked by its funded terrorists;

4. Why would anyone listening to Iran repeatedly saying it will blow up Israel and its other enemies take solace in what you said? Has the fact that Israel has a nuclear arsenal ever stopped terrorists, missiles, wars?

Sorry but your questions make no sense to me and I say that out of politeness.

If you think this is about being worried about say Iranian physicians using nuclear medicine to diagnose or treat cancer, don't be absurd. The nuclear production is not for civilian purposes. Not even Iran says that. Iran openly admits its to develop a military arsenal.

Next let me ask you a question. Who would you prefer as your nearby neighbour, Israel or Iran? You might want to give it some thought before you answer.

Next, this is not just about Trump or Israel. Its about the entire Middle East including Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, Yemen, Iraq, UAE, Bahrain, all sharing the identical fears about Iran.

Next please read up on Iran's foreign policy, its financing of terrorists and wars and the statements it has made about all the above countries, the US, Israel.

Next, I also have a perspective that comes to listening to Iranians who moved to Toronto. We have a lot. Sorry I do not share your views as to Iran being innocent nor do I agree that to call its government out as a fascist Muslim extremist theocracy dictatorship is anti Iranian. Its anti the current government. I support its students and citizens who want basic freedoms we take for granted such as freedom of the press, freedom of political expression, freedom to vote, freedom not to have wear specific clothes and be defined inferior because of one's genitals, sexual preference, membership in a Trade union, or not being Shiite.

I don't want a war anymore than you do but I believe all Middle East countries have legitimate anxiety over Iran for some very good reasons.

Let's just say when someone points a gun at your head, you will know what I am talking about. Telling someone with a gun pointed at their head they should not over-react or be worried is absurd.

 

[dcsports]

No, it means that I am sure that that is what you have been told to think.

OK, then. You are incorrect. Parroting what 'you have been told to think', is a trait of the left.

Specifically, what I said was accurate. The Obama administration was warned about this deal, and it fell apart as predicted. It was a failure from the start.

 

[dcsports]

Iran's nuclear ambitions were contained by the agreement that Obama signed. Trump tore that up because he hates Obama. Now, we live with the consequences.

Nothing was contained. More like 'enabled'. Trump withdrew from a bad deal, according to the terms of that agreement. You are right though - we're going to have to live with the consequences of the deal that Obama made.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Glad to answer but only for myself. I only mean to debate you. Lol, I am an sob but not as arrogant as I sound-I do respect the opinions of you and others equally, that said:


1. I do not condone or advocate any comments that hate Iranian people as a people-my comments have been about their current Muslim theocracy and its desire to have nuclear weapons;

Disliking the actions of the leadership of a nation is, as we both agree, NOT the same thing as "hating" that nation. (Unless, of course, it is that actions of the government of the United States of America that are being talked about and you are supporter of the current party in power in the US.)

2. I volunteered in Israel and was a witness to a terrorist attack-it provides a different perspective on Middle East foreign policy that does not see Israelis and Palestinians as enemies but blowing up the same way and being identical when I placed them in body bags;

I quite agree, the bombing of the King David Hotel was an act of terrorism and those responsible should have been brought to justice (and not ended up forming the government of Israel).

3.I do not expect anyone who has never lived next door to Iran or within close distance of its missiles or an enemy's missiles or terrorists to grasp why what you ask about Iran is absurd-your questions are predicated on safety you assume exists for others since it exists for you-the majority of the Middle East has been subject to terrorists and Hezbollah funded by Iran-its citizens are currently being attacked by its Muslim theocracy-the threat it possesses clearly I don't think you understand until you go to Iran and speak to its students, its political opponents, or countries attacked by its funded terrorists;

The questions are NOT "predicated on safety", rather they are predicated on a very human desire not to do something that you are as close to being 100% certain will result in your own death. For Iran to use nuclear weapons on ANYONE would result in immediate, and total, retaliation. That would result in the leaders who authorized the use of the nuclear weapons becoming very dead. Those leaders know that.

4. Why would anyone listening to Iran repeatedly saying it will blow up Israel and its other enemies take solace in what you said? Has the fact that Israel has a nuclear arsenal ever stopped terrorists, missiles, wars?

If Israel were to use nuclear weapons that would be a disproportionate response to anything other than the use of nuclear weapons (or an actual invasion). That would result in Israel becoming a pariah state. Not only do the Israelis know that, but their neighbours know it as well.

Sorry but your questions make no sense to me and I say that out of politeness.

Then I suggest that you go back and attempt to deal with they WITHOUT any prior ideological fetters.

If you think this is about being worried about say Iranian physicians using nuclear medicine to diagnose or treat cancer, don't be absurd. The nuclear production is not for civilian purposes. Not even Iran says that. Iran openly admits its to develop a military arsenal.

ONE - I'm not. TWO - As they are legally entitled to do.

Next let me ask you a question. Who would you prefer as your nearby neighbour, Israel or Iran? You might want to give it some thought before you answer.

That would rather depend on two things [a] whether or not I was Jewish, and [2] whether or not I had any land that Israel wanted.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Next, this is not just about Trump or Israel. Its about the entire Middle East including Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, Yemen, Iraq, UAE, Bahrain, all sharing the identical fears about Iran.

The situation is rather analogous to the one at Guantanamo. There are people at Guantanamo who simply cannot be released because their hatred of the United States of America is too great. Many of those people were innocent of all charges when first sent to Guantanamo and harboured only the slightest of dislike for the US. HOWEVER, the actions of the governments of the United States of America have turned those people into people whose main desire is t6o "get back" at the US for what the US has done to them. Had those people been treated appropriately at the very beginning, they would hardly be any threat to the US today. They weren't. They continue not to be. They are.

So "Who created the terrorists?".

Next please read up on Iran's foreign policy, its financing of terrorists and wars and the statements it has made about all the above countries, the US, Israel.

The last war that Iran was involved in was the Iraq-Iran War when Iran was invaded by Iraq (which was acting as a surrogate for the United States of America).

Next, I also have a perspective that comes to listening to Iranians who moved to Toronto. We have a lot. Sorry I do not share your views as to Iran being innocent nor do I agree that to call its government out as a fascist Muslim extremist theocracy dictatorship is anti Iranian. Its anti the current government.

I agree.

I support its students and citizens who want basic freedoms we take for granted such as freedom of the press, freedom of political expression, freedom to vote, freedom not to have wear specific clothes and be defined inferior because of one's genitals, sexual preference, membership in a Trade union, or not being Shiite.

I agree.

I don't want a war anymore than you do but I believe all Middle East countries have legitimate anxiety over Iran for some very good reasons.

I agree. Cooperating with the United States of America to destroy Iran because the US government got into a snit over the ousting of its imposed absolute monarchy (which it imposed [after orchestrating a coup to topple the democratically elected government of Iran {which it wanted to do because the democratically elected government of Iran had the bizarre notion that the Iranian people should be getting the majority of the benefits of Iran's natural resources rather than having those benefits go to rich Americans}] in the name of spreading freedom and democracy) just might make those countries subject to the totally unjustified ire of the Iranians.

Let's just say when someone points a gun at your head, you will know what I am talking about. Telling someone with a gun pointed at their head they should not over-react or be worried is absurd.

I have, in fact, had a gun pointed at me. I have also been around a lot of people who had guns. I took (and not very gently) the gun that was pointed at me away from the person who was actually pointing it. I did not take the other guns away from the other people who had guns REGARDLESS of what they said they wanted to do with them.

 

[MTAtech]

Nothing was contained. More like 'enabled'. Trump withdrew from a bad deal, according to the terms of that agreement. You are right though - we're going to have to live with the consequences of the deal that Obama made.

These are the consequences of Trump’s rash move.
Instead of Isolating Iran, U.S. Finds Itself on the Outside Over Nuclear Deal - The New York Times

 

[dcsports]

These are the consequences of Trump’s rash move.
Instead of Isolating Iran, U.S. Finds Itself on the Outside Over Nuclear Deal - The New York Times

Paywalled article. But again, Trump didn't make the deal.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Paywalled article.

HOGWASH!

I don't give the NYT a dime and the link opened when I clicked on it.

EXTRACTS FROM ARTICLE
WASHINGTON — A diplomatic standoff over restoring international sanctions against Iran may be the most vivid example yet of how the United States has largely isolated itself from the world order — instead of isolating Tehran, as the Trump administration intended.

At nearly every step President Trump has taken in his dogged pursuit to demolish a 2015 accord limiting Iran’s nuclear program, he has run into opposition, including from America’s strongest allies in Europe.

On Thursday, the opposition turned into open defiance.

******************

Never mind that Iran’s major violations were in response to Mr. Trump’s decision to exit the nuclear agreement. And set aside the legal contortion that underpins America’s insistence that it is still a “participant” in the international accord, with the authority to restore the economic penalties, despite Mr. Trump declaring in 2018 that he was “terminating United States participation.”

The bigger issue is that even if Mr. Pompeo succeeds, he may be reimposing sanctions that no U.S. allies are willing to enforce. And that could not only weaken American authority worldwide, it may also show adversaries how to sidestep the United Nations in future global disputes.

“We call on all U.N.S.C. members to refrain from any action that would only deepen divisions in the Security Council or that would have serious adverse consequences on its work,” diplomats from Britain, France and Germany wrote in a joint statement issued moments after Mr. Pompeo spoke.

They maintained that since the United States left the nuclear agreement, it has no right to act under its provisions. “We cannot therefore support this action,” the European diplomats wrote.
​

But again, Trump didn't make the deal.

Indeed he didn't. Now "Who was it that walked away from the JCPOA?".

 

[dcsports]

HOGWASH!

I don't give the NYT a dime and the link opened when I clicked on it.

EXTRACTS FROM ARTICLE
WASHINGTON — A diplomatic standoff over restoring international sanctions against Iran may be the most vivid example yet of how the United States has largely isolated itself from the world order — instead of isolating Tehran, as the Trump administration intended.

At nearly every step President Trump has taken in his dogged pursuit to demolish a 2015 accord limiting Iran’s nuclear program, he has run into opposition, including from America’s strongest allies in Europe.

On Thursday, the opposition turned into open defiance.

******************

Never mind that Iran’s major violations were in response to Mr. Trump’s decision to exit the nuclear agreement. And set aside the legal contortion that underpins America’s insistence that it is still a “participant” in the international accord, with the authority to restore the economic penalties, despite Mr. Trump declaring in 2018 that he was “terminating United States participation.”

The bigger issue is that even if Mr. Pompeo succeeds, he may be reimposing sanctions that no U.S. allies are willing to enforce. And that could not only weaken American authority worldwide, it may also show adversaries how to sidestep the United Nations in future global disputes.

“We call on all U.N.S.C. members to refrain from any action that would only deepen divisions in the Security Council or that would have serious adverse consequences on its work,” diplomats from Britain, France and Germany wrote in a joint statement issued moments after Mr. Pompeo spoke.

They maintained that since the United States left the nuclear agreement, it has no right to act under its provisions. “We cannot therefore support this action,” the European diplomats wrote.
​

Indeed he didn't. Now "Who was it that walked away from the JCPOA?".

It is a restricted site. Sorry to break it to you. You likely subscribed.

And yes, the US walked away from the deal, as it was collapsing. Again - it's the fault of those who created the deal.