Tehran to test-fire missiles in defiance of fresh US sanctions

The Revolutionary Guards' Sepahnews website said it would show their "complete preparedness to deal with the threats" and "humiliating sanctions" from Washington.

...

President Trump imposed new sanctions on Friday after Iran tested medium-range missiles last Sunday and because of its support for Yemeni rebels.

...

"In response to the new move by the United States of America and as a reciprocal action, (Iran) will impose legal limitations for some American individuals and companies that have had a role in the creation and support of extreme terrorist groups in the region," the foreign ministry said.

Tehran to test-fire missiles in defiance of fresh US sanctions

I don't recall a country responding to U.S. sanctions like this. It may a bit of propaganda and face-saving on Iran's part. After all, the U.S. sanctions came after the testing of medium-range missiles. This new test will be of "very short-range" missiles.

I still believe this situation is worth watching closely because Trump is so unpredictable. I think he may have said and written more shocking things in his first two weeks as POTUS than Obama did in eight years.

At least one Trump tweet has caused confusion internationally already.

Confusion erupts within Toyota over Trump tweet on new Mexico plant

Japan, like other allies, fear next Trump tweet could scuttle post-WWII order

Another significant aspect of this situation is the emboldened part above. If sanctions are an act of war, a little bit of a war is occurring. I hope it doesn't escalate beyond that.

a reply to: Profusion

The US already knows how to handle Iran. Sanctions against them actually work. If they sanction oil production and sales again Iran is the only one that will suffer.

a reply to: Profusion

Sanctions arent an act of war.

An embargo/blockade can be considered an act of war.

Besides I think the Iranian government is saber rattling considering they have both, Presidential and local elections coming up in May.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Profusion

Sanctions arent an act of war.

That's a controversial issue.

North Korea: U.S. sanctions act of war

Economic Sanctions Are An Act of War

Ron Paul: Sanctions Against Iran Are an 'Act of War'

Ron Paul slams US on Crimea crisis and says Russia sanctions are 'an act of war'

a reply to: Profusion

Controversial or not, it's in iran's best interest to play by the rules. Russia won't be there to stop US sanctions.

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: Profusion

Controversial or not, it's in iran's best interest to play by the rules. Russia won't be there to stop US sanctions.

I agree with that, but I believe we have to include the recently formed "Russian-Iranian Cooperation" in any analysis.

Consider the following:

Trump tells Ukrainian politician he won't lift Russia sanctions

What if Russia decided that since there's no hope of the United States' sanctions ending, it's time to take on the United Sates now. They may have decided that a war with the U.S. is inevitable. Since the sanctions are making them weaker and weaker financially, they may have decided that they can no longer wait for what they feel like is an inevitable war with the U.S. If they wait any longer, they'll lose any hope of ever being able to win because they'll be too weak financially. What if that's the case?

My belief is that Iran has Russia's backing in what they're doing pertaining to this situation.

a reply to: Vector99

Russia won't be there to stop US sanctions.

Pretty sure they will be .

a reply to: Profusion

That won't happen. Russia backs Iran, but until the US actually goes to war with Iran, they won't do anything to intervene.

originally posted by: hutch622
a reply to: Vector99

Russia won't be there to stop US sanctions.

Pretty sure they will be .

They obviously would veto any UN sanctions, but I said US sanctions. Russia cannot veto those.

This is stupid of Iran.

They where in a good place with the deal last year. They where given a GOOD chance to prove themselfs to the international community and show themselfs as better than there Saudi counterparts...... Looks like they are blowing it.

I dont wont the UK to get invloved in anymore wars in the ME, it is not our concern. But if Iran carry on as they are I will have no sympathy if the USA decides to bomb them.

a reply to: Profusion

Might be an idea to put a small wager on as to this new missile blowing up on launch or soon after?

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Profusion

Might be an idea to put a small wager on as to this new missile blowing up on launch or soon after?

That's North Korea. Iran's missiles usually work.

originally posted by: Profusion

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: Profusion

Controversial or not, it's in iran's best interest to play by the rules. Russia won't be there to stop US sanctions.

I agree with that, but I believe we have to include the recently formed "Russian-Iranian Cooperation" in any analysis.

Consider the following:

Trump tells Ukrainian politician he won't lift Russia sanctions

What if Russia decided that since there's no hope of the United States' sanctions ending, it's time to take on the United Sates now. They may have decided that a war with the U.S. is inevitable. Since the sanctions are making them weaker and weaker financially, they may have decided that they can no longer wait for what they feel like is an inevitable war with the U.S. If they wait any longer, they'll lose any hope of ever being able to win because they'll be too weak financially. What if that's the case?

My belief is that Iran has Russia's backing in what they're doing pertaining to this situation.

seriously? how many copy-pastes and threads on the same topic will you post?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: Profusion

Controversial or not, it's in iran's best interest to play by the rules. Russia won't be there to stop US sanctions.

The thing is these sanctions arent new. They are an expansion of ones already in place when the UN sanctioned Iran over its ballistic missile program.

UNSC 1929 was enacted over Irans ballistic missile program in June of 2010. Russia voted in the affirmative on the resolution(The resolution was adopted after receiving 12 votes for the resolution, two against (Brazil and Turkey) and one abstention (Lebanon).

Everyone should keep in mind the ballistic missile resolution is completely separate from the nuke deal.

a reply to: Xcathdra

I'll be honest. I haven't even looked into the new sanctions by the US, just heard of it on a talk radio news brief this evening while I was out.

Speaking of the nuclear deal we have with them, isn't a provision somewhere in it about missile testing? I very well could be wrong, but I remember reading something along those lines some time back.

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: Xcathdra

I'll be honest. I haven't even looked into the new sanctions by the US, just heard of it on a talk radio news brief this evening while I was out.

Speaking of the nuclear deal we have with them, isn't a provision somewhere in it about missile testing? I very well could be wrong, but I remember reading something along those lines some time back.

The US administration (both Obama and Trump) maintains its a violation of the nuke agreement. Iran and Russia argue its not. If we play the word game the nuke deal position on it is apparently open to interpretation. Neither Iran nor Russia addressed unsc resolution where it is a violation.

The wild card in the nuke deal was how Obama got the deal in the first place. In order to bypass congress he made the deal as an executive agreement. That means Trump could tear it up and walk away from it without needing congressional approval (although I would wager if congressional approval were needed he would get it.

As a side note I hope you dont think I was attacking you / your post. If it came across that my my apologies.

a reply to: Vector99

I was alluring to the idea of us western powers somehow managing to effect the missile via an external source.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Don't worry, it didn't come across that way, I'm just curious as to the verbatim regarding missile tests in the nuke deal.

Actually in general I'm slacking on this one, I haven't even looked into what kind of test Iran did. I heard something about a failed re-entry, meaning it definitely was an ICBM test, just not sure what kind of sugar coating iran put on it this time around.

Why cant we just give Iran what they want? War? They want to die so badly I think we should oblige them.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Profusion
Besides I think the Iranian government is saber rattling considering they have both, Presidential and local elections coming up in May.

That was my first thought when I heard this on the news. Saber rattling... testing the mettle of a new president. Lets wait and see if Trump sends the right message. Sanctions are a good start but at some point, he needs to show strength that the previous president didn't have.