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

reply to post by Gorman91


I could be wrong, but I remember several reports of Iraq crumbling to sanctions. Iraq had several multi-million industries in place that were affected by sanctions. From the obvious oil industry, to construction.

There was even a period, prior to the second invasion, where there were a lot of talks about Iraq asking for medical supplies because it was being denied access due to the sanctions. The argument at the time was that Iraq could use those medical supplies to produce WMD's, if I recall correctly.

Before Desert Storm, yes, Iraq was a stable and functional economy, at least for Middle East standards, of course. Something like the current UAE or Saudi Arabia.

But after, with all the sanctions, the country was not only crippled, but also cut out from any foreign assistance. That caused what some people argue as being the "desperation effect", that made Saddam become so aggressive towards the West. Which, personally, is what we saw with Ghaddafi.

It's not a good sign when you see a country ASKING for medical supplies. The same country that before Desert Storm and before the sanctions, made pride in having a sound economy with a functional healthcare-system.

I might add that I'm also pro-Ron Paul, which makes me agree with your stand on the necessity of these wars. But I disagree with the state of things. Iraq was just fine prior to the intervention, like so many other ME countries. We should just stop trying to control/educate them.

Also, I partially agree with what you say about the health of a state prior to a military conflict. Some people argue that the feeling pre-WW2 that we saw in Germany is growing as we speak in Russia. Something along the lines of feeling hurt for the embarassment of losing territory to the Western powers, and then having someone like Putin coming to power, with a war rhetoric and national pride.

I just don't agree with the part of not attacking crippled countries, mostly because we have seen it happen over and over again in the past century. (Germany actions, France invasion, Spain's civil war, Africa (like you stated), and all these situations in the Middle East, adding up to examples like Vietnam).

Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
reply to post by moderateAmerican

 

I'm Canadian and we sell lots of oil to China, and we plan on selling them more due to Obama cancelling the Keystone Pipeline. There are rumors of building a pipeline to China. Canada doesn't care, we will just sell to the highest bidder. Once we get Harper out of office we hopefully will get a leader who doesn't bow down to American foreign policy.

The USA has tons of oil, they invaded Iraq, are buddies with the Saudis, and as a last resort they can always invade Venezuela (just joking that will never happen, at least I hope not).

Don't think so, your own people dont want the pipeline either.
Canadians dont want keystone pipeline either

reply to post by tide88


Our government doesn't care what we want.

We have no choice in the matter.

They do what they want regardless of what we say and they justify it with lies.

You must not be Canadian.

reply to post by Corruption Exposed


Just keep in mind this is ALL staged.

reply to post by mcamp2011


The US isn't the best example either.
Guantanamo anyone?

reply to post by GarrusVasNormandy


The truth is in the data. Though I don't know what time period you are talking about for sure. The post Gulf War Iraq was not anything spectacular and Iraq's GDP is in its greatest strength today.

As far as I know Iraq was being complacent with the demands and working its way back. The Bush administration told lies to make a war they wanted. Iraq was headed into national ruin so it was forced to finally obey the sanctions. It planned to return to nuclear and chemical projects after it stabilized.


The truth is, there is no sane reason for the Iraq war. Nothing has been gained for it, nothing would have been lost if we avoided it. All we did was turn Iraq into a Productive nation. We built a colony, basically, and told it to go sell oil to China. So the very little evidence there is suggests Iraq was invaded for no other reason than to feed China and strengthen regional presence.

What I was saying is that you want to try and invade in such a way to gain GDP, and also prevent national unity in dissent.

Originally posted by Kram09
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.

I have nothing to add to this post, I merely wanted it to be seen again!

reply to post by superman2012


Would only be relevant if they weren't a homophobic, xenophobic, halfway between national socialist and theocratic borderline failed state.

And if you want to talk about history, there isn't really any. It's a new government. Literally one of the youngest on Earth. It has no track record. I see no reason why to assume peace when dealing with theocratic states that like to execute people who don't fit it's definition of good.

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by DarknStormy

 

If they simply stop doing what they want and listen to the international community, it would be finished quite quickly.

And who is this international community? The UN (apart from Russia and China).. Not every country in the international community agrees with sanctions. Far from it actually. Did you know that over 150 countries back irans stance of nuclear developement? Are those countries counted as the international community? Or are they just void because they back Iran....

Iran's government has been trying to do things their way. I've no problem with international actions to stop that short of war.

Don't you think if we wanted a war we would have invaded in, oh, the last decade or something? This is literally been a longer "acts of provocation" than any other nation in our history to my knowledge.

Oh yes I believed we "wanted war"...in 2004. Then 2005 came, and still no war...and 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011....I think it's pretty clear we don't want to invade Iran by this point. And if you think we do, then why the f*ck have we waited 10 years for them to decay into a collapsing nonfunctional state?

You have invaded surrounding countries of Iran and have built up military in those countries over the past 10 years. So to me, the USA has been building for a conflict with the Iranians for a very long time along with the Israelis.

What makes you think the country of Iran is a failing state? Do you actually believe that sanctioning them is going to send them into the dark ages or something? They don't deal with yous to start with. They booted your asses out in 1979 and I think your country has never got over it.

In case you don't know, you can't invade a failed state, because there is nothing to invade. Invading a failed state is like going to a party and saying its yours. Everybody is too busy doing their own thing. You think they'll listen to you? Try opening an oil rig in a failed state. See how long it lasts.

edit on 2-8-2012 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)

Again, Iran is only a failed state in the wests eyes. Iran is a very rich country with or without western influence. I call a failed state a country who owes trillions of dollars to the rest of the world and has no possible way of repaying it. The only thing that country does is lie through their teeth and blaming other countries for other issues.


Heres a reminder of how pathetic the US goverment really are concerning Iran



Amazing how they will do anything to label them.. Shame.

reply to post by DarknStormy


The international community is indeed the UN and indeed they support Iran's civilian nuclear technology.


But support for one thing does not mean doubting that you aren't trying to do another.

For example, the US supports Russian Space exploration. Russia supports US space exploration. This does not mean either support militarization of space of the other.

past 10 years. So to me, the USA has been building for a conflict with the Iranians for a very long time along with the Israelis.

Except, we did not spend 10 years planning to invade any of those other countries. Which logically thinking would mean we probably don't want to invade Iran.

You spend 10 years planning to invade, say, Russia, or China. Hell even Germany.

You do not spend 10 years planning to invade a country whose primary weapons of defense include 60 year old tanks and 50 year old rifles.

What makes you think the country of Iran is a failing state? Do you actually believe that sanctioning them is going to send them into the dark ages or something? They don't deal with yous to start with. They booted your asses out in 1979 and I think your country has never got over it.

Headed? They've been in the dark ages for a while now. Not their people. Their government. Which, fyi, is sucking its people into the dark ages.

Now aside from the fact that the Iranian revolution was hijacked by theocracy, and otherwise was going to make Iran a pretty cool place, they did not boot the US out. There wasn't exactly a US presence in Iran in 1979. The US wasn't exactly that concerned. They did not attempt to invade them because they also booted the Russians out. If they weren't with the communists, they weren't our concern. US interest in Iran was only to prevent Russian interest in Iran. If the Iranians weren't going communist, we didn't care enough.


Iran booted the Americans, and the Russians out, because Iran has a long history of being colonized, and would like to enjoy its new found freedom as long as it can. Once it was understood they were not going to allow Russia in just as much as they were not going to allow the US in, the US stopped giving a damn, because the US was only interested in preventing Russian expansion.




That's RT.....Russian News.... Furthermore, I actually decided to, you know, research the claim.


Judge George Daniels ordered it.

And he also added this tidbit, which our lovely western and eastern media forgot to mention.

But the report also stated that "we have found no evidence that Iran or Hezbollah was aware of the planning for what later became the 9/11 attack." In October, 2011, Maas determined that al Qaeda should face $9.3 billion in penalties for the businesses and properties destroyed and damaged in the 2001 attacks.

Oh yea, and this is after they dismissed the claim Iraq had helped.


This is actually from 2003.....

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by purplemer

 

Cool, let them rot. That's not a deceleration of war however.


Let me tell you a little secret. In war, civilians don't matter. So there's no reason why their suffering is a deceleration of war.

Once again, the case of Chinese pollution. I don't see other nations declaring war because of the aerial embargo of the sun...

edit on 2-8-2012 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)

It amazes me how insular people have become. Do you really think its cool to let children die through the use of economic warfare. The reasons we went to war with Iraq where lies and as a result of the sanctions a lot of people died. If people really think thats cool then there is something very wrong with our society..

reply to post by purplemer


I don't think it's cool. I just don't view dead or dying people inside a barred county as a deceleration of war. If you refuse to obey someone with huge economic power and your people starve, that is on you, not the nation with the economic power. He who controls the produce controls who gets it.

It would be no different than if a Jew owned the only tank factory in a anti Semite country and refused to build tanks for his country until they accepted his people. The people who die because that country cannot defend itself die by the will of their leader, not the factory owner. If there are children among the dead, that is still on the leader, not the factory owner. He has every right to demand things for that produce. If you don't like it, buy somewhere else or go build your own tank factory.

Simply put, I don't like dying children, but you will not find a single tear in me for dead civilians under a defiant government. Thou reap what thou sow. Rot for it.

reply to post by jhn7537


are you crazy? Since when did al qaeda become freedom fighters? Do you know that Assad has the support of the population.Maybe you should check the polls on Doha Debates which confirmed that Assad has support of 55% population.

reply to post by purplemer


Hell,feels good I am not an american citizen now.atleast I won't have to face martial law or the jackboot TSA thugs or that Horrid DHS...

When DHS will confiscate food and do economic warfare against dissidents ,I would like to see what Obamatrons have to say here then.

reply to post by Gorman91


All that has been done is the process of creating Kurdistan and securing the oil for corporations has been done. Iraq had considerable wealth and good healthcare system before the Gulf wars.

reply to post by NoJoker13


China can easily confiscate the corporate assets of USA in China overnight. There is more than 40 trillion $ worth of corporate assets.

Escalation is not a good idea. Diplomacy is. The current war administration is putting us in a multi front war ,ultimately which we will lose.

reply to post by Gorman91


and yet our nation has election fraud since 2000. Does it occur to you that we are waging war against the world.The Nazis did the same and look what happened to them.

reply to post by ludwigvonmises003


Many dictators usually do. You have to offset the bad with more good.

Actually voter fraud has existed since Ancient Greece. It's nothing new, and nothing spectacular. You can't get away with it, and the ability to do so decreases as your population increases.


And the Nazis did not go to war with everyone. They actually went to war with those they felt had wronged them. If you took Hitler's deceleration of war and translated it into Persian, you'd more or less have the same speeches Iran's president has said.

As to what happened to them....well, let me first say I hate what the Nazis did to minorities....but it took hundreds of millions of people, tens of millions of soldiers, the combined efforts of literally ALL the super powers on Earth, and untold billions of military spending....all to kill 5 million soldiers and a meth head for a leader.

...I'd say under different management and ethics, it's a pretty solid system.

No wonder some leaders of the Iranian revolution looked at them and the soviets. They were trying to copy them, only without the whole killing jews part....at least until they got hijacked by theocracy.

reply to post by Gorman91


Well, I disagree with that conclusion.

Iraq had a functional economy (and productive, as you say) before the invasion of Kuwait. That was all on them, but some people (news commentators) have argued that if it were not for the sanctions imposed in Iraq, Saddam wouldn't feel the need to sting Kuwait.

They made the mistake of stepping into Kuwait, got a measured U.S. response, and backed down. After that it was the real hit from the sanctions. I remember hearing stories about Iraq requesting international assistance in their healthcare system, because they needed things like x-ray machines, and those were banned under the sanctions and restrictions enforced by the U.N. .

I agree with you on the necessity and causes for the second Iraq war. Personally, it was a very bad call and decision on the U.S. . Even if the reasons they thought as being valid were true, the benefits would never compensate for the loss, mostly the loss of human lives, but also due to the crippling of the Iraq economy.

I'm sure you give the GDP data with the best intentions, but to me it's a hard concept to wrap my head into (that Iraq is better now than what it was before). It's a very touchy debate if you think of it.

Saddam was brutal and sadistic, but he did have a tight-fist control on the country, which reduced the violence. Now, the whole country is divided and several groups are fighting for control within Iraq borders. Some people view that as good since they are "fighting for their country", but I just see death everyday.

The infrastructures that were in place prior to the 1990's was well within what you might consider a productive and stable country. They might even have a lower GDP, but I think we should also consider the importance of the GDP they had being their own, and not a higher GDP that was also shared with foreign companies that installed them-selfs inside Iraq after the wars.

They were good, then went down the drain, and they are getting back up with the "assistance" of western countries, which is good I think. But I would rather to have peace than to go through all this, just to see the country living in the same conditions, if not worst.

reply to post by Gorman91

And the Nazis did not go to war with everyone. They actually went to war with those they felt had wronged them. If you took Hitler's deceleration of war and translated it into Persian, you'd more or less have the same speeches Iran's president has said.

Nazis/axis was fighting wars on three continents overtly. Europe,Africa , Asia and Australia. USA is overtly and covertly engaged on every continent.

As to what happened to them....well, let me first say I hate what the Nazis did to minorities....but it took hundreds of millions of people, tens of millions of soldiers, the combined efforts of literally ALL the super powers on Earth, and untold billions of military spending....all to kill 5 million soldiers and a meth head for a leader.

isn't that already happening ? US empire is facing opposition at several fronts whether Libya,Sudan,Syria,Venezuala,Brazil,Central Asia,Afghanistan,Pakistan,Saudi Arabia,Yemen,Bahrain,Iran,Russia,China,Greece etc . In many zones its military and in others economic.

German people still had their hides spared from total genocide.I fear it will not be the same for US empire as a lot of people have been on the recieving end of US empire.And there is great probability of a nuclear one in 2012-2015.

you'd more or less have the same speeches Iran's president has said.

Same can be said for Israel.