Skirting U.S. sanctions, Europeans launch trade mechanism for Iran • Hacker News Board

Re: Skirting U.S. sanctions, Europeans launch trade mechanism for Iran

#201

Post by nickik » Thu, Jan 31, 2019, 4:29 PM UTC

ashelmire wrote: post #194

femiagbabiaka wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you know the history of Iran? It was once a very progressive country before we interfered in their government. With expose to global markets for Iranian citizens, it may be again.

I think you have that backwards. It was another Islamic regime until the west interfered with it. Then it became more progressive due in large part to our interference. Then the Islamists revolted, wanting to regress back to a less progressive state, fearing secularism - which gave us the Islamic state we have today.

You are missing part of the history.

Iran was Democracy until 1953 when a CIA coup took down the government. Its a myth that Iran was only progressive because of the West. They were progressing without direct Western influence.

The Shah was installed and he was super progressive (in some ways) pushing values on the population and that cause a huge backlash.

The US essentially destroyed the only real democracy in the middle east.

Re: Skirting U.S. sanctions, Europeans launch trade mechanism for Iran

#202

Post by strictnein » Thu, Jan 31, 2019, 4:29 PM UTC

nickik wrote: post #195

strictnein wrote: post #173

Yeah, Iran is just a simple country that doesn't deserve any of this... they treat everyone well, don't subjugate half their population along gender lines, aren't responsible for thousands of US and Iraqi causalities, and don't export terrorism across the region. I know the "America is dumb" line works well on HN, but the naivety of some people here around foreign policy is just kind of staggering. Iran's "own destin…

The US position with Iran has LITERALLY NOTHING to do with gener lines, or causalities or export of terrorism. The allies that the US works with to contain Iran are worse in every single category you mention. Claiming the moral high ground over Iran is embracing and only works for people who don't have a clue about the middle east. Iran has complied with an international process according to international law after b…

"treated since 1979" - the US should have treated them well while holding American hostages? Is that what you're claiming here?

It has to do with all the things I've stated. And stating that "Iran never had a program to build nuclear weapons" is just nonsensical. They may no longer be pursuing it, but you're conflating many things.

> "Iran and six world powers known as the P5+1 (China, France, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States) reached a historic nuclear deal on July 14, 2015 ... Prior to that, Iran had been engaged in efforts to acquire the capability to build nuclear weapons for more than two decades."

https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheet/Timeline-of-Nuclear-Di...

Re: Skirting U.S. sanctions, Europeans launch trade mechanism for Iran

#203

Post by AsyncAwait » Thu, Jan 31, 2019, 4:29 PM UTC

zozbot123 wrote: post #162

AsyncAwait wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> half the world isn't actively trying to destroy most people/nations True, including Israel. You do realize that the occupation and abuse of Palestinians by Israel is what drives those Arabs that hate Israel, right? It's a rallying call, if you will. As for genocidal rhetoric, it's been done both by Israeli neighbors and Israel itself. As for military might, Israel is clearly on top. > I do recognize it must suck as…

> You do realize that the occupation and abuse of Palestinians by Israel is what drives those Arabs that hate Israel, right? It's a rallying call, if you will. You do realize that it's the other way around, in that "Palestinians" have always hated Israel (aided and abetted by Israel's Arab neighboring states) since it's lawful establishment by the UN? Palestinians are still failing to acknowledge Israel's right to ex…

> You do realize that it's the other way around, in that "Palestinians" have always hated Israel (aided and abetted by Israel's Arab neighboring states) since it's lawful establishment by the UN?

If you're giving the historical context, it's worth noting that Israel was indeed established by the UN, but only after years of massive migration to the territory and committing significant terrorism when the British were there(in fact the IDF is a result of the merger of several terrorist factions), the kind of terrorism that is often used by Israelis to pain the Palestinians as uncivilized savages.

The UN also established what should be the Palestinian territory, which is today occupied by Israel. The Arab states did in fact invade, the Palestinians saw it as eroding on their land, (and the British agreed to a large extent at the time), however I do agree that they should have accepted the UN ruling. It was wrong not to do so, regardless of how Israel came to be.

This does however not justify the present occupation of even the few remaining Palestinian territories, especially because the very UN that you cite considers them illegal and Israel is regularly condemned at the UN for it. Yet it continues to ignore international law with impunity because of U.S. support.

> Palestinians are still failing to acknowledge Israel's right to exist.

They largely do acknowledge it, the PA certainly does and even Hamas has amended their charter in 2017 to that direction as far as I know.

The fact is, Israel has a state in any case. Do you acknowledge the right for Palestine to exist? Because Israeli continued expansion of illegal settlements on the ground does not suggest so and it certainly does not help the peace process in any way.

Re: Skirting U.S. sanctions, Europeans launch trade mechanism for Iran

#204

Post by Kiriyat » Thu, Jan 31, 2019, 4:30 PM UTC

AsyncAwait wrote: post #122

misja wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I dont'agree with the Israeli occupation of foreign territories but I don't see what that has to do with the US's sanctions against Iran. Are you trying to say that the sanctions against Iran are bad, because there are no US sanctions against Israel? >> As an European, I just don't get the Israeli fixation with Iran, Well I'm a European too but I can completely understand that a country which repeatedly has announced…

> I dont'agree with the Israeli occupation of foreign territories but I don't see what that has to do with the US's sanctions against Iran. If, as an Israeli, one makes claims that the sanctions are justified because Iran is sponsoring terrorism, perhaps it's justified to look at whether Israel is not only sponsoring, but committing terrorist acts on its neighbors, unless Israel is somehow justified to do so, while I…

> If, as an Israeli, one makes claims that the sanctions are justified because Iran is sponsoring terrorism, perhaps it's justified to look at whether Israel is not only sponsoring, but committing terrorist acts on its neighbors, unless Israel is somehow justified to do so, while Iran isn't.

You must have a very broad definition of "terrorism" if you consider Israeli military operations to be "terrorist acts". Iran sponsors an out-and-proud terrorist organization called Hezbollah. They've committed textbook terrorist attacks around the world.

> Right, but my point is that isn't nor really a one-sided thing. Israel does it too towards not only Iran, but its closest neighbors, they regularly threaten to "bomb Lebanon back to the stone age", as an example.

...as a response to legitimate threats made by Hezbollah in Lebanon. Don't forget that Hezbollah started and escalated the war in Lebanon in 2006. Israel does not threaten Egypt, or Jordan, or even Syria itself except for Hezbollah's presence therein.

Re: Skirting U.S. sanctions, Europeans launch trade mechanism for Iran

#205

Post by strictnein » Thu, Jan 31, 2019, 4:32 PM UTC

BeetleB wrote: post #183

strictnein wrote: post #173

Yeah, Iran is just a simple country that doesn't deserve any of this... they treat everyone well, don't subjugate half their population along gender lines, aren't responsible for thousands of US and Iraqi causalities, and don't export terrorism across the region. I know the "America is dumb" line works well on HN, but the naivety of some people here around foreign policy is just kind of staggering. Iran's "own destin…

>Iran's "own destiny" isn't a positive one, so let's not romanticize it. It's probably more positive than a number of the US's allies, and it is a valid question as to why Iran is the one being picked on. Everything you say is as true and more of Saudi Arabia. And much of it is also more true for Pakistan. In the latter country, a huge portion of the population literally cheer the assassination of a governor who prom…

Please list the terrorist organizations that Pakistan funds and supplies that have a very significant destabilizing impact on its neighbors.

Re: Skirting U.S. sanctions, Europeans launch trade mechanism for Iran

#206

Post by dragonwriter » Thu, Jan 31, 2019, 4:32 PM UTC

sonnyblarney wrote: post #146

AsyncAwait wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Well, Iraq and Syria would be two countries. No, they wouldn't, Iran is in both countries with the explicit permission of the local governments, (like them or not). That's not what occupation means. > And if they could, they would be occupying many more. Given you first statement isn't true, I doubt this one is, beyond the cynical, "who wouldn't"? > Iran is not some entity trying to protect themselves from invaders…

"Their strategy of having some proxy forces in strategic places is part of their defence strategy, this has been studied." Iran's sponsorship of Hezbollah towards attacking Israel is part of their defence strategy? Iran's passing of Hadouthi missiles to targeted at cilivian areas in Saudia Arabia is part of their defence strategy . Yes 'this has been studied' and I'm afraid you're wrong. Iran is a antagonistic entity…

> Iran's sponsorship of Hezbollah towards attacking Israel is part of their defence strategy?

Yes.

Particularly, it's central to their defense strategy against Sunni-dominated neighbors.

Re: Skirting U.S. sanctions, Europeans launch trade mechanism for Iran

#207

Post by boomboomsubban » Thu, Jan 31, 2019, 4:32 PM UTC

ashelmire wrote: post #194

femiagbabiaka wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you know the history of Iran? It was once a very progressive country before we interfered in their government. With expose to global markets for Iranian citizens, it may be again.

I think you have that backwards. It was another Islamic regime until the west interfered with it. Then it became more progressive due in large part to our interference. Then the Islamists revolted, wanting to regress back to a less progressive state, fearing secularism - which gave us the Islamic state we have today.

This is getting the details incorrect and ignoring a century of interference.

Following allied occupation during WWII, Iran was developing a progressive secular government until the US decided to overthrow it as Iran was trying to regain control over it's oil. This led to 25 years of a pro-west regime that can not remotely be considered progressive, followed by the revolution leading to the anti-west regime that also can not be considered progressive.

Re: Skirting U.S. sanctions, Europeans launch trade mechanism for Iran

#208

Post by sadris » Thu, Jan 31, 2019, 4:33 PM UTC

okal wrote: post #89

jdowongns wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, except that the US has reduced emissions more than any other country and is highly competitive on a per-capita percentage basis.

Not true. The US is responsible for 14% of emissions, which is unconscionable for a country that only holds ~4.5% of the world's population. You're actually doing quite horribly on a per-capita basis. China is doing far better than the US on a per-capita count.

Should be GDP per unit of carbon. Not people.

Re: Skirting U.S. sanctions, Europeans launch trade mechanism for Iran

#209

Post by blibble » Thu, Jan 31, 2019, 4:35 PM UTC

blibble wrote: post #192

louisswiss wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty much all of the important stuff is still covered ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_in_the_Council_of_the_E... ) To argue otherwise would be akin to arguing that the UK parliament isn't sovereign because local councils can make some local decisions independently. EDIT (To reply to the comment below): If you read the information in the link posted, it's obvious that the important decisions still require una…

that very much depends on your definition of "important" personally I would call employment, business, immigration, social security, criminal law, and half a dozen things listed there as important, but there you go

what's wrong with the reply button?

> If you read the information in the link posted, it's obvious that the important decisions still require unanimity, even if minor decisions (yes, some of them in important fields) now only require QMV.

not true (again)... might be true most of the time, but not always (which is the entire problem)

see the fuss over the past two years where eastern european countries were forced over their explicit objections to accept migrant quotas using QMV

Re: Skirting U.S. sanctions, Europeans launch trade mechanism for Iran

#210

Post by NeedMoreTea » Thu, Jan 31, 2019, 4:35 PM UTC

ashelmire wrote: post #194

femiagbabiaka wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you know the history of Iran? It was once a very progressive country before we interfered in their government. With expose to global markets for Iranian citizens, it may be again.

I think you have that backwards. It was another Islamic regime until the west interfered with it. Then it became more progressive due in large part to our interference. Then the Islamists revolted, wanting to regress back to a less progressive state, fearing secularism - which gave us the Islamic state we have today.

It was the West what broke it.

The 1979 revolution probably would not had happened had the US and UK not overthrown the Prime Minister in the 50s, because he had the audacity to nationalise his country's oil. How very dare he. Once the Shah returned he turned initial popularity (thanks to an economy spared from the oil nationalisation sanctions) into a repressive dictatorship.