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

page: 7
45
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 08:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by superman2012
 


The Vatican is the only one you mentioned that is actually a theocracy.

Furthermore you're trying to murk up something that's pretty obvious. Shooting a man for slaughtering a dozen people in a theatre is not the same as shooting someone because he likes to pop in through the back door.


No it isn't. Check it out.

I am not murking anything up. I wasn't talking about a batman moron that can't deal with mommy issues and wants to kill innocents. I was talking about the US gov't killing many innocents and bombing countries because of what I stated above: they don't fit into their definition of good.




posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 08:33 AM
link   
reply to post by superman2012
 


Whose definition of good is the correct paradigm for our planet?? Each culture seems to have a completly different Interpretation of "Good". (Devils advocate again
)

In attempts to stay on topic, China's definition of Good may be in conflict with the current practices and restrictions placed on Iran....are they wrong? or right?...is their definition of "Good" wrong or right? I dont know....

Who is not say a more naturalistic form of rule is "Good" or not. Strong Survive, weak perish.....so many options to choose from.
edit on 3-8-2012 by MDDoxs because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 08:35 AM
link   
reply to post by GarrusVasNormandy
 


Putin is a gangster. His government is an oligarchy. And I don't think there's a great deal wrong with that because he's proven himself capable of being a decent leader, somewhat sane, and reasonable.

If there is a line to draw, however blurry it may be, it's visible when people go on self righteous dogma rallying people to their need to "purify" something. We can take a case study with Rick Santorum, Ahmadinejad, and Hitler. Just watch how they talk and rally. There is an essence to them. I cannot explain it. It's just a niche people fall into that, because of its very nature, is readily identifiable with some subjectivity.




So much as I know Iraq is still nationalist and still owns its oil. I know companies like Halliburton suffered a great deal in the long run because of failed policies in Iraq and investigations.

Fact is their own shortsightedness always gets them more losses than gains, no matter how much corruption and special interest gets involved. Take BP for example. Stocks are down multi billion dollars, and falling. Just can't justify taking risks that these guys do. They will kill themselves in the end.





It's pretty sad, but you're going to see the complete opposite before your utopia. These things do have a pattern to them. Before your utopia, you will see the rise of a World Union which will look and act shockingly similar to the Roman Empire, and like the Roman Empire will fall into civil war half a dozen times before it starts recognizing its own identity and finally becomes your utopia. But before then, you'll see unionization of the army, politicization of the corporation, and ultimately feudal corporatism mixed with military governance. Eventually, in say a century, the redrawn borders and generals will start civilizing, taking sides, and building for themselves a more perfect union of the world. But not in your life time. The Christianization of China, secularization of America, and Anglicization of many 3rd world countries certainly won't help in the short term for peace, but in the long term will help all see greater commonality.

Of course that's assuming the future. But if a utopia is the end goal, what I said is a logical plausible path to it. In all likelihood the Year 2112 will be a lot like the year 1912 and 2012. Same as usually.
edit on 3-8-2012 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)
edit on 3-8-2012 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 08:40 AM
link   
reply to post by superman2012
 


TO me what you said is just different scales of the same thing. Good to the western and eastern civilized world is far more varied of an idea than the middle eastern definition. Because good in both the east and west is tied to civilized, whereas good in the middle east is tied to your willingness to submit.

And no, the Vatican is the only theocracy you mentioned. Utah is not a theocracy, though it may act like it. Israel does not stone gays and put murderers in sanction cities. It follows western laws. Sure it has some religious identity, but no more than most nations with cultural heritage.



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 09:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by superman2012
 


TO me what you said is just different scales of the same thing. Good to the western and eastern civilized world is far more varied of an idea than the middle eastern definition. Because good in both the east and west is tied to civilized, whereas good in the middle east is tied to your willingness to submit.

And no, the Vatican is the only theocracy you mentioned. Utah is not a theocracy, though it may act like it. Israel does not stone gays and put murderers in sanction cities. It follows western laws. Sure it has some religious identity, but no more than most nations with cultural heritage.



Theocracy is a form of government in which official policy is governed by immediate divine guidance or by officials who are regarded as (or claim to be) divinely guided, or is pursuant to the doctrine of a particular religion or religious group.


There is nothing there about stoning gays or anything else of the like. The ones I listed are most certainly theocracies.
Back on topic (sorry I get off a lot) I hope China puts their foot down and Russia follows suit with the illegal sanctions. It seems that the US et al. are not getting their way, so they keep punishing the child in order to get a reaction. I say good on Iran for not reacting yet.



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 12:00 PM
link   
reply to post by superman2012
 


Oh yes, but of course. After all, as Ahmadinejad put it, "There are no gays in Iran".



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 12:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


Sure Iran is no mr perfect. But the USA isn't either and maybe worse so only with their power they push their will on others bigly with big guns, just because they can and think they are better. Rude and so wrong in many ways.



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 03:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 





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.


So what your saying if a larger countries decides to dictate a smaller one and the smaller one disobeys then people deserve to die... Sorry mate that is very messed up thinking on your part.

Sanctions on a county are a form of violence. You can slip your words as much as you like but sanctions are a form of economic warefare..

Using your thinking the country with the largest economy in the world has the right to dictate to the rest of the world what they do.............

v!



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 06:16 PM
link   
reply to post by purplemer
 


You added the word deserve. I would like it if you please do not add words to what I say to change what I said.


I said it is not my concern if I were a leader of my own country.

The producer has a right to demand things for the product. If that's economic warfare, which fyi is not warfare, then every trade is a form of warfare. After all, how dare they demand cash for food?!



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 06:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Plugin
 


The word rude is a joke. It has no real definition. What, to offend someone? pff.

If you feel someone is being rude, chances are it's because you feel offended they don't follow what you define as proper. Which is a load of bull.


You're talking about dictating terms with guns. I'm talking about dictating terms with money and resources. Two very different things. One is basically theft, the other is simply business.

And sure America is not perfect, nor is its history. But America doesn't execute gays, nor a many other host of social wrongs Iran does.

It takes a special kind of dumb*ss to go in front of a crowed and claim your country doesn't have gays while photographs of their executions spread across the internet.
edit on 3-8-2012 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 02:45 AM
link   
Originally posted by superman2012
reply to post by Alien Abduct
 





1. Iran has made trade agreements with the international community.

Yup, so have many other countries. Want to know which ones aren't a part of the NPT?
India. Israel. Pakistan. North Korea. North Korea was a signatory to the NPT, but dropped out. I say Iran drops out too.
If Iran drops out then they would be breaking the treaty. Other countries will want to follow with what Iran has done and it will severely weaken the treaty if not destroy it all together.



-within these agreements Iran has agreed that they will not manufacture nuclear weapons nor attempt to obtain nuclear weapons by any means.

Right, and there is no proof still.

Proof of them making nuclear weapons is not needed for them to break the treaty. They are breaking the treaty by not complying to certain perameters set fort by the international community. i.g. not letting inspectors into it's facilities.




-Iran has agreed that it will let inspectors in to make sure it is not attempting to produce nuclear weapons

Right, but, not allowing them in because you might be enriching for other secret means.
The reasons why they are not letting the inspectors in is errelivent. The fact is, the act of not letting them in for any reason at all is a breach of the NPT.




-Iran has agreed that if it does not comply with the rules of the agreement that sanctions will be place on her as per her international trade agreements.

Can you please source this? I am in too much of a hurry to look right now. Thanks.
It is written in international law of which they agreed to abide by being that Iran is a signatory of the U.N.

The United Nations (abbreviated UN in English, and ONU in French and Spanish), is an international organization whose stated aims are facilitating cooperation in international law, international security, economic development, social progress, human rights, and achievement of world peace.

Wiki

See also...www.un.org

-Alien
edit on 8/4/2012 by Alien Abduct because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 04:21 AM
link   
I don't have proof Iran ISN'T developing nuclear weapons, but I can certainly provide you with what two important people said and I'd imagine they should be privy to more information than we are.

Seen as you make the claim that Iran is making nuclear weapons you should try and back that up instead of turning it around and throwing it back at people.







Israel Military Chief: Iran not pursuing nuclear weapons



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 04:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Alien Abduct
 





Proof of them making nuclear weapons is not needed for them to break the treaty. They are breaking the treaty by not complying to certain perameters set fort by the international community. i.g. not letting inspectors into it's facilities.


Surely that argument could also be applied to Israel.

International community? You mean the United States and the other countries which it has cajoled and manipulated into supporting it?



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 04:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Alien Abduct
 





It is written in international law of which they agreed to abide by being that Iran is a signatory of the U.N.


Aren't the United States and Israel signatories to the U.N?

And they've flouted U.N resolutions left right and centre for the past how many years?



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 05:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Alien Abduct
 


International law is a farce. What is happening in Iran has nothing to do with nuclear weapons..

edit on 4-8-2012 by purplemer because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 08:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Alien Abduct
 


The US/Israel cannot tell Iran what to do in regards to nuclear enrichment. Until the US follows the NPT to the letter, and Israel becomes a signatory to it, then I will put a little more weight behind their stance. As of right now, it seems to me, that they are just scared.



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kram09
reply to post by Alien Abduct
 





It is written in international law of which they agreed to abide by being that Iran is a signatory of the U.N.


Aren't the United States and Israel signatories to the U.N?

And they've flouted U.N resolutions left right and centre for the past how many years?


Could you provide examples of this?

It is my opinion that All countries abide by their obligations. And even if true it still doesn't change the fact that Iran is not complying with it's obligations so don't deflect.

-Alien



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 01:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kram09
reply to post by Alien Abduct
 





Proof of them making nuclear weapons is not needed for them to break the treaty. They are breaking the treaty by not complying to certain perameters set fort by the international community. i.g. not letting inspectors into it's facilities.


Surely that argument could also be applied to Israel.

International community? You mean the United States and the other countries which it has cajoled and manipulated into supporting it?


It's not just the United States and a few of it's close friends that have voted on this.

The resolution, which adopted a fourth round of sanctions against the country,[2] was adopted by twelve votes for the resolution, two against....
Wiki

Don't act like The country of Iran is just some impressionable little boy that can be easily manipulated, it is a nation big enough to stand on it's own two feet and make the decision to be a signatory of the UN or not to.

-Alien



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 01:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by superman2012
reply to post by Alien Abduct
 


The US/Israel cannot tell Iran what to do in regards to nuclear enrichment. Until the US follows the NPT to the letter, and Israel becomes a signatory to it, then I will put a little more weight behind their stance. As of right now, it seems to me, that they are just scared.


Even if the United States and Israel abstained their vote the resolutions and sanctions would have still passed, so what say you to that?

-Alien



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 02:13 PM
link   
reply to post by purplemer
 


Oh cool a picture. Howe about a source. Because, fyi, with photoshop I can do the same.

edit on 4-8-2012 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)


WOW Sourceless claims on images are super fun to make. I should do this more often.


edit on 4-8-2012 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
45
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join