EU Adopts Oil Embargo on Iran (and vid)
http://rt.com/news/iran-eu-sanctions-oil-419/
"Iran has already responded to EU sanctions by renewing its threat to block the Strait of Hormuz. A senior Iranian official said Iran would 'definintely' close the vital transit route. The EU embargo follows tough US sanctions approved earlier this month. Taken together, they remove 2.6 billion barrels of oil from international markets, driving oil prices up and adding to global economic instability.."
I'm not hearing any suggestions here how Iran is going to be prevented from obtaining nuclear weapons. We already have too many countries with nuclear weapons and we don't need to add to the list.
Perhaps the reason you're not hearing such suggestions is that it's not up to Harpo or Obomba or you to dictate to the world which nations are to be allowed to have nuclear weapons.
There is no evidence - only speculation - that Iran intends to develop a nuclear arsenal, and they have consistently denied that this is their aim. In my opinion, however, Iran risks annihilation by Israel and NATO if they do not get a nuclear weapons capability very soon. That's the only thing that has saved North Korea from getting the Serbia-Iraq-Afghanistan-Libya treatment.
Oil embargo on Iran a conundrum for Europe
By Emanuele Scimia
quote:
Maybe for the first time in its history, the EU is playing a tough geopolitical game, but it must weigh up the sustainability of its bid. Some Iranian officials have already threatened to stop exporting crude to Europe promptly in order to provoke a surge in prices and prevent European countries from finding other supplies at similar costs in the short term.....
In his State of the Union, the Pres. said something like "I will not remove any options," from the assortment offered to prevent the development of nuclear weapons by Iran, after applauding the growing economic pressures being applied, now by the European Union's decision not to buy its oil.
I believe that answers North Report's question.
Confronting Iran: Warmongering in the Middle East - by Dr Richard Falk
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/01/201212485135149579.html
"...The real threat posed by a hypothetical Iran bomb is to Israel's regional monopoly over nuclear weapons, which means that there is no deterrent available in relation to Israel's projection of force beyond its borders...To be dispassionate commentators, we need to ask ourselves whether Iran's posture towards its nuclear programme is unreasonable given this mix of circumstances.
Is not Iran a sovereign state with the same right as other states to uphold its security and political independence when facing threats from its enemies which happen themselves to be armed with nuclear weapons?
Why does Iran not have the same right as other states to take full advantage of nuclear technology? And given Israeli hostilities, terrorists assaults and military capabilities that incudes a stockpile of sophisticated nuclear warheads, delivery style and a record of pre-emptive war making, would it not be reasonable for Iran to seek and even obtain, a nuclear deterrent?
I am afraid that only when and if a yet non-existent Global Occupy Movement is fully mobilized and turns its attention to geopolitics will the peoples of the Middle East begin to have some hope for a peaceful and promising future for their region."
Stop The Madness - by Yousuf Butt
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article30344.htm
"Despite all the hype, Iran's nuclear program has yet to violate international law. It's time to calm down, think, and above all halt the rush to war..."
War With Iran (vid) - by George Galloway
Europe At War With Iran - by Pepe Escobar
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/NA25Ak02.html
"No one ever lost money betting on the foolishness of European Union (EU) politicos. And if you are an oil trader, rejoice - all the way to the bank; as expected, EU foreign ministers - meekly following the Barack Obama administration - have given a green light for a full Iranian oil embargo - a de facto European declaration of economic war.
The EU defends its strategy - or economic war - as the only way to avert 'chaos in the Middle East'. Yet the economic war may end up sparking the full-blown war it is theoretically trying to avert.
The name of the game in Iran will always be regime change because the perennial wet dream of Washington and the European poodles is to grab Iran's fabulous oil (12.7% of global reserves) and gas wealth.
And the fact is that wealth is increasingly profiting the Asian Energy Security Grid - and not the West..."
Pre-Emptive Embargo: Iran Could Turn Off Oil Tap to EU (and vid)
http://rt.com/news/iran-immediate-oil-sanctions-733/
"Iran may turn the sanctions tables by immediately stopping oil supply to Europe. The move is aimed as a response to the EU slapping an embargo on new oil contracts with Tehran. China has lashed out at the sanctions, calling them 'blind pressure'.
'A number of representaatives of the Majlis [Iran's parliament] and I are seeking to approve a plan according to which all European countries that made Iran the target of their sanctions will not be able to buy even one drop of oil from Iran, and oil taps will be turned off to them, so that they will not play with fire again,' according to Nasser Soudani, a member of Iran's energy committee.
The legislation may be voted on in the parliament as early as this Sunday. If imposed, such a ban would result in a fuel shortage in Europe, as the countries which joined the sanctions...would not have enough time to secure a substitute.."
An alternative to war
quote:
Since the United States doesn't appear prepared for a real negotiation with Iran regarding its nuclear program, there is only one real approach short of war: containment. The United States adopted this approach during the Cold War against the Soviet Union. Though it was never optimal, considering the dysfunction in the relationship between the superpowers, containment worked reasonably well until the Soviet collapse in 1991.
As former Defense Department under secretary Colin Kahl argues in his latest Foreign Affairs article, the United States already has the assets in place in the region to pursue a policy of containment: 40,000 troops are stationed in the Gulf, with 90,000 more in Afghanistan. There are two carrier task forces deployed in the Gulf, and various allies view Iran with deep suspicion. They could be a local bulwark against any possible Iranian aspirations that threaten the regional status quo....
Pretty shitty alternative.
Here's an alternative for you: get your armies out of the middle east and central asia and let people determine their own fate.
Pretty shitty alternative.
Here's an alternative for you: get your armies out of the middle east and central asia and let people determine their own fate.
..i agree.
War Abroad; Austerity At Home - by Paul Craig Roberts
http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/01/25/war-abroad-austerity-at-home/
"Iran has been trying 'to deal with us through diplomacy'. The response from Washington has been belligerent threats of military attack, unfounded and irresponsible accusations that Iran is making a nuclear weapon, sanctions and an oil embargo. Washington's accusations echo Israel's and are contradicted by Washington's own intelligence agencies and the International Atomic Energy Agency. Why doesn't Washington respond to Iran in a civilized manner with diplomacy?
The embargo is a reckless act. If the US navy tries to intercept oil tankers carrying Iranian oil, large scale war could break out.
This, many believe, is Washington's aim..."
I disagree.
And I believe it up to all of us to help prevent any more countries from developing nuclear weapons. We already have too many countries with nuclear weapons and we should be looking at ways of reducing the number of countries that have them rather than increasing the number.
We are not talking about a little camp bonfire on the beach here.
I'm not hearing any suggestions here how Iran is going to be prevented from obtaining nuclear weapons. We already have too many countries with nuclear weapons and we don't need to add to the list.
Perhaps the reason you're not hearing such suggestions is that it's not up to Harpo or Obomba or you to dictate to the world which nations are to be allowed to have nuclear weapons.
There is no evidence - only speculation - that Iran intends to develop a nuclear arsenal, and they have consistently denied that this is their aim. In my opinion, however, Iran risks annihilation by Israel and NATO if they do not get a nuclear weapons capability very soon. That's the only thing that has saved North Korea from getting the Serbia-Iraq-Afghanistan-Libya treatment.
Well then we'll put you down as being in favour of bombing Iran, shall we?
Because that's the only option your side is pursuing at the moment.
Bullshit!
However Iran, as well as many other nations, need to be stopped from acquiring nuclear weapons, and we need to be reducing the nuclear weapons country club, or do u disagree?
Well then we'll put you down as being in favour of bombing Iran, shall we?
Because that's the only option your side is pursuing at the moment.
Nuclear Iran - by Robert Fisk
http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/01/26/nuclear-iran/
"...The Israeli President warns us that Iran is on the cusp of producing a nuclear weapon. Heaven preserve us. Yet we reporters do not mention that Shimon Peres, as Israeli PM, said exactly the same thing in 1996. That was 16 years ago. And we do not recall that the current Israeli PM, Benjamin Netanyahu said in 1992 that Iran would have a nuclear bomb by 1999. That would be 13 years ago. Same old story.
In fact, we don't know that Iran really is building a nuclear weapon. And after Iraq, it's amazing that old weapons of mass destruction details are popping up with the same frequency as all the poppycock about Saddam's titanic arsenal.
Not to mention the date problem. When did all this start? The Shah. The old boy wanted nuclear power. He even said he wanted a bomb because'the US and the Soviet Union had nuclear bombs,' and no one disagreed. Europeans rushed to supply the dictator's wish. Siemens-not Russia built the Busher nuclear facility.
All this has been deleted from the historical record; it was the black-turbaned mullahs who started the nuclear project, along with the crackpot Ahmadinejad. And Israel might have to destroy this terror-weapon to secure its own survival, to ensure the West's survival, for democracy, etc, etc..."
There is no Iran A-Bomb. But there is a malevolent imperial warmachine of which we are a part seeking to manufacture consent for a war on Iran for various strategic and geopolitical reasons and OIL of course. Remember Iraq? 'Fool me once...
Iran 'Ready for Talks'
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2012/01/26-2
"They have this excuse that Iran is dodging negotiations while it is not the case -' the Iranian leader was quoted as saying by state media. 'Why should we run away from negotiations?"
Then there should be no problem letting the international inspectors in to check, right?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jan/27/iran-iaea-nuclear-talks?news...
Nuclear Iran - by Robert Fisk
http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/01/26/nuclear-iran/
"...The Israeli President warns us that Iran is on the cusp of producing a nuclear weapon. Heaven preserve us. Yet we reporters do not mention that Shimon Peres, as Israeli PM, said exactly the same thing in 1996. That was 16 years ago. And we do not recall that the current Israeli PM, Benjamin Netanyahu said in 1992 that Iran would have a nuclear bomb by 1999. That would be 13 years ago. Same old story.
In fact, we don't know that Iran really is building a nuclear weapon. And after Iraq, it's amazing that old weapons of mass destruction details are popping up with the same frequency as all the poppycock about Saddam's titanic arsenal.
Not to mention the date problem. When did all this start? The Shah. The old boy wanted nuclear power. He even said he wanted a bomb because'the US and the Soviet Union had nuclear bombs,' and no one disagreed. Europeans rushed to supply the dictator's wish. Siemens-not Russia built the Busher nuclear facility.
All this has been deleted from the historical record; it was the black-turbaned mullahs who started the nuclear project, along with the crackpot Ahmadinejad. And Israel might have to destroy this terror-weapon to secure its own survival, to ensure the West's survival, for democracy, etc, etc..."
There is no Iran A-Bomb. But there is a malevolent imperial warmachine of which we are a part seeking to manufacture consent for a war on Iran for various strategic and geopolitical reasons and OIL of course. Remember Iraq? 'Fool me once...
How about we send in international inspectors to check if Israel has a bomb?
Oh, no, wait. What was I thinking!
Nuclear disarmament is only for those who don't toe Washington's and North Report's line.
In my opinion, however, Iran risks annihilation by Israel and NATO if they do not get a nuclear weapons capability very soon. That's the only thing that has saved North Korea from getting the Serbia-Iraq-Afghanistan-Libya treatment.
I can careless if Iran or North Korea get nuclear weapons; in the end those weapons are not going to protect them from themselves.
Nuclear weapons is not the end all cure all solution to any nations problems.
Of course it isn't. If that were the case, your country would have been perfect by now.
Oh really!
Too many countries already have nuclear weapons and we certainly don't need additional ones added to the mix.
And I would be in favour of those that already have them, to reduce them, and finally getting rid of them.
With your logic you probably agree with Harper when he suggests Canada should be acquiring nuclear weapons as well (I think I heard that Harper said that).
How about we send in international inspectors to check if Israel has a bomb?
Oh, no, wait. What was I thinking!
Nuclear disarmament is only for those who don't toe Washington's and North Report's line.
USA
Russia
UK
China
France
North Korea
India
Pakistan
Israel
all possess nuclear weapons, which is 9 countries too many as far as I'm concerned.
It's nuts to keep adding members to the nuclear weapons club.
And in an interesting note: every single one of those nations listed above have been attacked in one way another since they've aquired those weapons... Some, the United States and the Soviet Union, have even lost wars.
There's a handfull of small islands in the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz Iran and its neighbors have territorial disputes over; if one of them seizes one of those disputed islands with its military what's Ian going to do? Nuke them? I don't think so...
The only nuclear power that has ever used their weapons of mass destruction on another country is the United States.
Only hypocrites would demand the right to forcibly disarm Iran while allowing the warmongers in Washington and Arlington to keep their fingers on the button.
USA
Russia
UK
China
France
North Korea
India
Pakistan
Israel
all possess nuclear weapons, which is 9 countries too many as far as I'm concerned.
It's nuts to keep adding members to the nuclear weapons club.
Umm. Until a few of them embark on disarming, I'm not sure you have a brain for your strawman.
Only hypocrites would demand the right to forcibly disarm Iran while allowing the warmongers in Washington and Arlington to keep their fingers on the button.
I'm not demanding anything from Iran... they can live by their actions or die by them if need be for all I care.
Only hypocrites would demand the right to forcibly disarm Iran while allowing the warmongers in Washington and Arlington to keep their fingers on the button.
I'm not demanding anything from Iran... they can live by their actions or die by them if need be for all I care.
How come it's not so simple to ask for nuclear-deproliferation?
And dying for them doesn't sound so nice Bec? For which foreign power do you serve?
Sure sounds like some people are going to be dying perhaps sooner rather than later.
Why does this media buildup sound an awful lot like pre Iraq war?
http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/u-s-bombs-not-strong-enoug...
http://blogs.wsj.com/davos/2012/01/28/iaea-iran-nuclear-issue-wont-be-so...
The IAEA’s previous efforts to check Iran’s claim its nuclear program has only peaceful purpose had been met before with failure. The agency wants access to a military site called Parchin, which is suspected of conducting explosives testing.
Amano, a soft-spoken Japanese diplomat, took center stage in global affairs in November by releasing a study documenting Iran’s alleged efforts to develop the technologies needed to develop nuclear-tipped mid-range missiles and bomb-triggering systems. Tehran quickly rebuked the report, calling it politically motivated and based on falsified information.
“We have overall crediable information that indicates that Iran is engaging in the development of nuclear explosives,” he said.
“It is difficult to foresee how Iran will cooperate with the inspectors…we don’t know if Iran has declared everything to us and, he said adding that it was too early to say definitively that Iran was pursuing a nuclear weapons program.
UN chief Ban Ki-moon said Friday in Davos that there was no other alternative to addressing the Iran crisis than peaceful resolution through dialogue.Tehran has previously fired volleys of insults, accusing Amano of everything from colluding with Washington to complicity in a string of assassinations of Iranian nuclear scientists.
Amano's their ringer..
Slanting the Case on Iran's Nukes - by Robert Parry
http://elementalsblog.blogspot.com/2011/11/slanting-case-on-irans-nukes....
"...Ignored is the fact that the IAEA's new Chief appears to have joined the US/Israeli camp. The evidence of the IAEA's politicization can be found in confidential US diplomatic cables obtained by WikiLeaks...
In those cables, the IAEA's new leadership indicated it was willing to give Washington what it wanted on Iran, just as the CIA hierarchy bent to Bush's needs on Iraq."
Harper and the US are Wrong on the Iran Threat - by Gerald Caplan
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/second-reading/gerald-capla...
"The proposition that Iran is more dangerous than the US, which has spent the entire last decade in aggressive wars against Muslim nations, where pressure to add Iran to this list is growing, where a Democratic president sends drones against anyone he deems unsuitable for living and is now openly provoking China with a new aggressive Asia-Pacific posture - to ignore this record demands willfull blindness.
Mr Baird is now off to Israel. Our neophyte Foreign Minister, with all the wisdom offered by spin notes and sound bites - otherwise known as the Harper foreign policy - is about to be swallowed whole by Mr Netanyahu.
Just think of the tales he'll share privately with Mr. Baird proving irrevocably that Iran must be bombed this very day if not sooner..."
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hKsOXn_7SLzmxIWbmlN92...? [URL truncated to avoid sidescroll]
What's the point of posting that crap, in the context of a western media and political campaign for war with Iran? Do you have an anti-imperialist point to make here?
We all know you're spoiling for a big confrontation with Iran over its nonexistent weapons of mass destruction. If you want to cheerlead for war, there are many other places besides babble where you will be more than welcome.
USA
Russia
UK
China
France
North Korea
India
Pakistan
Israel
all possess nuclear weapons, which is 9 countries too many as far as I'm concerned.
It's nuts to keep adding members to the nuclear weapons club.
Actually since the theory of MAD (mutually assured destruction) has arguably prevented WW3 then I think everyone should have one.
Seeming Madness - by Arthur Silber
http://powerofnarrative.blogspot.com/2012/01/seeming-madness-suffocating...
"...For this is the view of the ruling class: 'America is God. God's will be done.'
What they want is dominion over the world. They intend to have it. In pursuit of this aim, as they believe the necessity arises, they will destroy anyone and anything that stands in their way. To describe their behaviour as insane is to miss the much more critical point, and to minimize the far greater danger.
They know exactly what they're doing. They're hoping that you do not. To date far too many people oblige them..."
The Iranian Oil Embargo Blowback - by Pepe Escobar
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/NA28Ak05.html
"...If the sorry parade of European poodles - or what analyst Chris Floyd delightfully dubbed Europuppies - had any understanding of Persian culture, they would have known that blowback for their declaration of economic war in the form of an Iranian oil embargo would be nothing short of heavy metal. Better yet death metal.
The Majlis (Iranian parliament) will discuss this Sunday, in an open session, whether to cancel right away all oil exports to any European country that approved the embargo.."
All That Glitters is...OIL - by Pepe Escobar
http://www.atimes.com//atimes/middle_east/na26ak02.html
"...So let's talk about the 'unity of the international community'...Talk about the Year of the Dragon starting with a bang. And talk about the new Year of the Dragon gold standard.
As this was never about a non-existant nuclear weapon, the Tehran leadership only has to follow a supreme strategic parameter; don't fall for any provocation or false flag black ops that would provide the causus belli for a US/British/Israel axis of war attack...:
Iran Finalizes Bill to Ban EU Oil Imports
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/223554.html
"An Iranian lawmaker says the Majlis Energy Committee has finalized a draft bill to stop the country's oil exports to EU Member states in reaction to the bloc's recent decision to ban oil imports from Iran.."
And dying for them doesn't sound so nice Bec? For which foreign power do you serve?
I think you miss-read that part of my statement; I intend on not dyeing for anybody (nor should you) now days; the Iranians can die for themselves for their own actions as decided by their government... or as I said, live by them.
I do not support (nor have I ever indorsed here) the bombing or invasion of Iran for any reason... even if they get nukes.
By the way; my service to "powers" as you call it has long passed and is well past any real relevancy to today's events. Thanks for making me feel old... LOL
I'm not demanding anything from Iran... they can live by their actions or die by them if need be for all I care.
How come it's not so simple to ask for nuclear-deproliferation?
I wish it was that simple. Both the USA and Russia have reduced their nuclear arsenals... to a point, but I'm sure it's more out of cost than necessity. But still it's something.
I'm less concerned about a "nuclear combat, toe to toe with the Russkies" scenario then two newbie fringe members of the "Nuclear Club" fucking it up for everybody else. New is bad, less is good; but I'm not running this show... Just saying...
Fuck that, either every one has nukes or no one should.
The idea that more nukes is bad is wrong.
If I have a nuke you won`t attack me, problem solved.
More specifically if Israel has nukes so should Iran.
Yeah sure, whatever... and how you feel about gun control?
Just out of curiosity is this a leftist talking point on nuclear weapons now days?
"Give nukes to everybody and we'll all be safe......MAN!"
This is all we need!
Iran nuclear bid tipped to provoke Saudi bomb
http://www.smh.com.au/world/iran-nuclear-bid-tipped-to-provoke-saudi-bom...
The agency's latest delegation to Iran includes two senior weapons experts - Jacques Baute, of France, and Neville Whiting, of South Africa - suggesting Iran may be prepared to address weapons allegations. Saudi Arabia has warned that if its long-standing regional rival succeeds in building a bomb, it wants one too.
Prince Turki al-Faisal, a former head of Saudi intelligence, reportedly warned US and Britain that Iran gaining nuclear arms ''would compel Saudi Arabia … to pursue policies which could lead to untold and possibly dramatic consequences''.
''If our efforts, and the efforts of the world community, fail to convince Israel to shed its weapons of mass destruction and to prevent Iran from obtaining similar weapons, we must, as a duty to our country and people, look into all options we are given, including obtaining these weapons ourselves.''
Most analysts are convinced the Saudis will turn to Pakistan.
'West Could Target Russia, China Next' (and vid)
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/223747.html
"A senior political analyst says Moscow and Beijing should not just sit by and watch the current anti-Iran threats and moves by the West as they are bound to be the next targets, Press TV reports
Israel Uses Iran as Political Red-Herring
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/223735.html
"Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak are using Iran's nuclear program to deflect attention from the regime's heinous crimes in the Middle East, an Israeli daily writes.
Netanyahu, with Barak's help, has turned the Iranian nuclear program into an 'impressive ploy' to divert attention from settlement policy and the perpetuation of the occupation, wote Ha'aretz in its Sunday editorial.."
IRAN: DRUMS OF WAR BEATING LOUDER: U.S. Mounts Further Military Build-Up in Persian Gulf
With the drums of war beating ever louder against Iran, the U.S. military has quickly moved to reestablish a war footing in the Persian Gulf. The preparations for a looming military confrontation thus continue apace.
According to the Washington Post (1/27), “The Pentagon is rushing to send a large floating base for commando teams to the Middle East.” As the paper reports, the USS Ponce, a 40-year old amphibious transport dock previously set for decommission, will now be converted into a special ops hub, and then likely sent to the Persian Gulf.
The Pentagon, the Post reports, is seeking to retrofit the USS Ponce on an accelerated timeline. In fact, the military has gone ahead and waived “normal procurement rules because any delay presented a ‘national security risk.’”
At the same time, the Wall Street Journal reports (1/28) the Pentagon has notified Congress that it will divert an additional $82 million to refine the Massive Ordinance Penetrator (MOP). (The MOP is a 30,000-pound “bunker-buster” bomb “specifically designed to take out the hardened fortifications built by Iran and North Korea to cloak their nuclear programs.”)....
On A Mission: UN Nuclear Watchdog Arrives in Iran (and vids)
http://rt.com/news/iaea-iran-visit-993/
"UN nuclear inspectors have arrived in Iran to examine the country's atomic activities. Tehran says it hopes the visit will remove western allegations of nuclear weapon development. Iranian officials say the are certain the talks will prove the nuclear program's purpose is purely peaceful.
'We are inclined to be very optimistic about this visit. Iran does not conduct any secret or underground operations. All Iranian nuclear activities are transparent, and we as well as the opposite side are interested in finding a way out of the present situation,' said Iran's Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi.
Author Michael Winter believes the outcome of the IAEA mission largely depends on the people 'we are dealing with, adding that if the inspectors are honest nothing new will be found. 'The sad fact is that we are not dealing with honest people..."
Stop War on Iran! Actions planned in 31 cities (U.S.)
No war!
No sanctions!
No intervention!
No more Gladio assassinations in Iran!
Fingers Itch For a War on Iran - by Vijay Prashad
http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/01/30/fingers-itch-for-a-war-on-iran/
"If you ask Iranians, they will tell you that the war against Iran has already begun...there has been a long-standing animosity between the Atlantic powers and Iranian democratic ambitions. The political benefits for the US and Israel of such an attack are great. As Rami-El-Amin puts it,'
'An attack or possible war on Iran would have the added effect of derailing the Arab revolutions and revolts and justify the continued presence of a large US military force in the oil-rich region..'
When there will be a shooting war, it shall not be a mistake nor shall it be out of necessity. It shall be calculated and vicious, and the onus for it shall rest as it often does...on Washington."
Iranian Aircraft Carriers in the Gulf of Mexico - Tom Engelhardt
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tom-engelhardt/iranian-aircraft-carriers_b...
"Exclusive: New Iranian commando team operating near US.."
