China slams new US-Iran sanctions as 'serious violation of intl rules'

page: 3
45
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 04:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


Can I vote for you?




posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 04:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Kastogere
 

Perhaps one day.


I give you the hope that there are many like me en route to politics within the next 20 years. You can vote for them, assuming you can still vote in the year 2525, if man is still alive lol.
edit on 2-8-2012 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 05:03 AM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 





You do realize that all it would take is a popular general to declare it, and the debt would simply no longer exist. There is no rule book that says you can't just declare the debt no longer existing; no reason why a dictator cannot tell China to go screw over.

Now within China, oh yes. They would still have to deal with that made up money. They would collapse with us. When you sign a deal like China and America have, you either stand together or fall together. When the US collapses, China has no more money. When China collapses, the US has no more consumer economy. The two shall burn in the same fire.


Yes you can just wipe the money and what would that do in affect.. The money in the US is based on nothing. It has value because of its worldwide demand. The fact that it is in demand is what gives it a value and made the US dollar of value.

Do you think if you wiped the debt the US currency would still be in demand.. Ofc not. If the US dollar was not the world currency. It would fast become a two bit country like most other countries in the world.

Yes China is well aware of the problems with the dollar.. That is why the BRIC nations are making the own banking system. To bypass our problems and invest with security.. A world not reliant on the US dollar or her one sides world trade rules will be a different place...



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 05:27 AM
link   
reply to post by purplemer
 


If done at the right time, it would still be used.

It's all about timing.

A little push here and shove there, next thing you know the EU is in civil war, Russia is forced away from China, India and China compete over water, and South America becomes split over which side of the EU to trade with.

Suddenly you can just causally and quietly wipe the debt clean. The world is already on fire, so let it burn. You can sit back, yell some stuff about isolationism, blah blah blah, and next thing you know you've gotten away with multi hundred trillions of dollars while the world burns. You set your values right, stabilize your own economy, go fight a few wars in the name of stability and execute a few bankers, and you've more or less pressed the reset button back to 1895.

These matters are not hard to do if you time yourself right.
edit on 2-8-2012 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)
edit on 2-8-2012 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 06:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by Kastogere
 


Don't play semantics. If I wanted a war, I'd send men with guns to kill you and your people until you did what I said. It's as simple as that.

Now you are saying it is an act of aggression. Congratulations on using correct language.

Acts of aggression are not acts of war. In fact, in many cases they are acts to prevent war.



Actually, this is incorrect.

First, the sanctions and embargoes against Iranc an be construed as tantamount to a blockade, which IS usually considered "an act of war".

Secondly, even if we were to be more conservative in our interpretation of the facts, and agreed that the multiple, unilateral sanctions restricting Iran's right to trade freely were merely an "act of agression", I would point out that, under international law, States have a right to self defense in response to acts of agression, through acts that are proportional in nature.

I for one believe what the US is doing is against many rules of international law, and is pure unilateral bullying, tantamount to an act of war.

As in the case of Iraq, it is my belief that all these sanctions are merely a prelude to US military agression against Iran.



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 06:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
In today's atmosphere these nations teaming up to shut down the SOH is not that far fetched of a theory.
edit on 1-8-2012 by Corruption Exposed because: (no reason given)



I sincerely doubt, that any of the nations mentioned are the supposed enemies they're given out to be.

If they were, China should be seriously reprimented for serious lack of planning and stragedy. The US Army is an attack force, it's not an Army aimed at defending the US, but an Army that is using the advantage of the US not being on the same continent as China and Europe, for the purpose of defeating both Europe, Middle East and Asia.

The United States, is a homicidal maniac, that needs to be put out of his miseries. It is investing all of it's money on attack weapons, stealth weaponry and advanced attack weaponry. China, has up today, focused on following up on US technology, for the purpose of being prepaired for the eventual strike on China, which it "should" know will occurr.

China isn't prepaired, and their ability to plan must be questioned ... the same thing applies to Iran. Thus, it must be questioned, as to where there leadership is originated from, and who is it's actual author.

Let me try and make this clear, the US *will* cause problems in China, and given time will create the rebel forces in China, needed to break China apart. I know that, China knows it, and you know this as well ... but what is China doing? It's trying to prepare it's defences, creating a better infrastructure and educating their pupils about western policies. They're ignoring human nature, and they are ignoring history.

You have to identify your enemy, and know your enemy. In history, enemies were identified by nations and borders. They were identified as races or ethnic groups. Ideology or religion. But today, identifying the enemy is not that easy. But all over the world, the enemy is slowly picking nations apart ... removing uniformity, removing ethnic relations, religious bonds and ideological identity. Every nation, will be a new version of chaos, with multiple ethnicities, religion and ideologies. Good or Bad, it will plunge the world thousands of years back in time ... when once again, the multiple groups within every nation, will struggle in blood, when the individual strive to find a place to belong, within the chaos of non coherence.

China isn't prepaired, nor is Russia or Iran. If they were, they'd be out there identifying the Skull bearers. And planning their complete assasination.

That is their only hope for survival, because war is not the solution. It only serves the purpose of the Skull bearers, to even further and faster, plunge the world into the chaos they have planned for it.



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 06:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by Corruption Exposed
 


An embargo is not an act of war.

It is a nonviolent act.


Maybe in your warped view. Cyber attacks are considered an act of war and they are non violent.

Wake up man!



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 07:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by Corruption Exposed
 


You don't know the future. For all you know, 5 years from now a national socialist Greece, emerging out of an EU civil war, will be invading and collapsing Russia, and influencing them to help their war against Germany. China desperately tries to protect itself from a vengeful United Korea, as millions of exiled Koreans across Manchuria rise up and declare independence. All the while America is burning in Civil War and Iran is collapsed to invading Turko-Greek Forces united against their common Russian enemy.

You don't know the future.


To assume so great as you, is truly to be a fool of the absolute highest order.

Do not assume the future, least you fall to it.
edit on 1-8-2012 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)


I don't claim to know the future, perhaps I should have reworded it for simple minded people such as yourself. On the other hand you do not know the future either so


I was merely raising a possibility. Like I said perhaps I could have worded it better so simple minded people such as yourself didin't take it out of context and get their feathers all ruffled up.

Do you find the possibility of China and Russia eventually teaming up to protect their interests that far fetched? It would take a fool to not at least consider that possibility.

Ok brb, time go to peer into my magic crystal ball



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 08:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by rock427
 


Agreeing with Ron Paul on domestic policy does not mean I agree with him on foreign policy.

An Embargo on the US would not be a declaration of war. Considering we did have an embargo placed on us for a prolonged period of time and did not invade those countries, but rather, listened to their requests and opened dialogues to what they wanted, I would consider an Embargo a very powerful tool to be used in preference over war.

The US did not attack OPEC for their embargo. Their Embargo was not viewed as a deceleration of war. We instead talked to them. Furthermore, the OPEC embargo was not a signalling for a desire of war from them against us. In fact, they wielded it instead of war, knowing they could not win favorably in open conflict. In this case, the Embargo was used as a means to avoid war, not a set up for it.

Embargoes are not decelerations of war, but rather an opportunity to make peace through nonviolent aggression.
edit on 2-8-2012 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)


Well now we're using your subjective opinion to determine what is grounds for war, and what isn't. Just look at Iraq and what we did to them before the war (in Gulf war I and II) Sanctions are always a lead up to conflict. They're usually the first "shots" fired across the bow. Yes, they are an act of war. And if a country decided to get a group of countries together to apply crippling sanctions on the US, we would consider it an act of war on our way of life.



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 08:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


I am not saying it cannot be done. I am saying it will cause some major ripples.. The dollar would no longer be the leading world currency. No one would trust it.. That in itself is enough to nose dive the economy.




A little push here and shove there, next thing you know the EU is in civil war, Russia is forced away from China, India and China compete over water, and South America becomes split over which side of the EU to trade with.


As for the EU breaking out into civil war. Really I do not think that is going to happen. Us in Europe have a long history of war and after the last two wars have learnt to stand more in solidarity.. We have more commons than differences.

Russia and China are big enough and wise enough to deal with the little shoves from the USA. We are not talking about some tin pot dictorship in the back and beyond. We are talking about China an emerging superpower whos economy is set to overtake the US as the world power hub in ten years and whos technological achievments are going to leave us sitting..

The BRIC nations have there own banking sysyem and are going to play by there own rules. Not IMF rules or the WTO rules. Those rules never made anyone rich apart from the choosen few and countries are wising up to it.

You think it matters that the US has years lead on technology development. That does not matter China is taking all that copy and go further. 1/5 of the worlds population with an average higher IQ than Caucasians.. This is a game that will not be won by the west.

You sound a bit old school. The things you mentioned would have worked in the past. The present climate is different and there are new players on the board..



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 09:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 





An embargo is not an act of war. It is a nonviolent act.


What planet are you living on. The sanctions imposed hurt the poor. Starve people. Mean hospitals dont get medicine and a lot of people die... There is nothing non violent about it....
edit on 2-8-2012 by purplemer because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 09:06 AM
link   
reply to post by purplemer
 


Well said!



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 09:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by moderateAmerican
Shut it down, who gives a crap. Canada will sell us oil, Mexico will sell us oil, we'll open our own reserves. Then destroy China's deep water rigs off the coast of Florida. It only hurts them. Wake up people if we need to use fossil fuels the US can stand on it's own for 100's of years, for proof check out our own DOE web site. By then we either have alternative energy or there is nothing, in which case the whole world is screwed. China is a third world country trying to be a super power off raping the Earth and man power only. Keep buying your crap made in China, you know the stuff that lasts about 3 months.


LOL Oh dear! Another blind patriot who cant see whats in front of him
China, is not 3rd world ( cold war saying) China will be th biggest super power in 20 years or so. They are not trying to be a super-power, theya are a super-power. While, living and travelling china, you do see poor places, but you see poor places mostly everywhere. You go into the cities, and you see a china that has come a hell of a long way. Still some way to go though.



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 10:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by DarknStormy
 


I think stopping a ship is a little bit different than sending high explosives.


I think staying out of other countries affairs is a good option also. Who are you and the USA to tell Iran what they can and cannot do especially when the USA are the only country in history to use a WMD on a city/population? Take your demonstration somewhere else.


Building a wall is not dropping a bomb. Suffering is not a deceleration of war. Their civilians have all the right to protest their government and change their policies and leaders if they want it to stop.


So you believe it is OK to bring a country to a stand still because they are not in compliance with your leaders? Put all foreign policy aside, even international law. I have drawn my conclusion from my thoughts. What the USA is doing is a provocation of war simply because not only are Iran going to suffer, but other countries interests are being put in the firing line.

Who the hell are yous to dictate to any other nation to begin with, cut off countries life sources? I tell you now, the Iranian people will back their leaders before they side with a country like the USA.. When you talk about building a wall, what to do you think closing the Strait of Hommuz is? 33% of the worlds oil moves through there... What are yous going to call that when it happens? No doubt Iran not complying with something else and amother reason to sanction or blow the crap out of them.



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 10:12 AM
link   
Are you kidding me? How does this make the U.S. the bad guys? China always sides with whatever side we are against anyways but nobody cares what they think.



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 10:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


Where have you been for the past 6-7 years, maybe longer. You do realise that there has been threats of war against Iran for a very long time and i cannot see how Sanctions are not pushing a conflict even closer. This is an act of provocation. Iran has stated before that they are against nuclear weapons and yet there is still no proof that they have acquired them or even at the least are preparing to manufactor nukes. The simple truth is that the USA does not like anyone standing up to them. It makes them cry.....



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 10:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tauvington
Are you kidding me? How does this make the U.S. the bad guys? China always sides with whatever side we are against anyways but nobody cares what they think.


When you threaten to cut off a countries bank from the rest of the world, in this case Chinas, I guess there is no need to worry hey? Why don't we just cut the USA's banks from the world in their support of terrorists in Syria and around the Middle East? Hypocrites and NAZIs is all I see.



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 12:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Corruption Exposed
 


Both China and Russia have zero issues supporting Iran/Syria if it helps them financially... Its not doing what's necessarily right, but doing what's in the best interest of their own country.....

When we look back at this 100 years from, China is going to be saying, "what the hell were we thinking?"

I really dont understand how China and Russia can legitimately defend the actions that have taken place in Iran and Syria... Either they dont want to believe what's taking place in those countries or they dont care... I believe they dont care...



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 12:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by DarknStormy

Originally posted by Tauvington
Are you kidding me? How does this make the U.S. the bad guys? China always sides with whatever side we are against anyways but nobody cares what they think.


When you threaten to cut off a countries bank from the rest of the world, in this case Chinas, I guess there is no need to worry hey? Why don't we just cut the USA's banks from the world in their support of terrorists in Syria and around the Middle East? Hypocrites and NAZIs is all I see.


So the US supports terrorism now because they are siding with the freedom fighters who are trying to bring down Bashar al-Assad's regime?

Dictators are a thing of the past... Democracy is the way...



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 12:38 PM
link   
I don't agree with these sanctions and I feel the United States's actions are merely a form of bullying.

- Sanctions to try and cripple Iran's economy

- Repeated threats of military action

- Cyber warfare attacks upon the Iranian nuclear plant.

- Suspicious assassinations of scientists working upon the Iranian nuclear program, with hints that the United States and Israel are responsible.


Iran hasn't broken any international laws and are well within their rights to develop nuclear power. There is no evidence to suggest they are developing nuclear weapons.

Israel however has a substantial number of nuclear weapons and is not a signatory to the Non-Proliferation treaty and has repeatedly echoed the threats of military action. Hypocrisy, arrogance and bullying of the highest order.





new topics

top topics



 
45
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join