EU impotence against US sanctions on Iran - Page 2 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in Europe's nation states, the E.U. & Russia.

Moderator: PoFo Europe Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please. This is an international political discussion forum, so please post in English only.
#14938085
Beren wrote:However, regardless of what the EU does European companies will leave Iran if they consider remaining too risky. If Iran wants them to stay, they have to make a deal with Trump until November, I guess. Which is a good thing, isn't it, @Ter?

Yes, definitely.
Although I think that Trump is asking too much to be able to reach a deal right now.
Let's see.

anasawad wrote:It was not Iran that started the conflict with the US, it was the US when it with the UK helped a coup by pahlavis.

Indeed, but that was like almost a hundred years ago. How long will you remain angry about that ?

anasawad wrote:It was not Iran that started the conflict with the Saudis, it was the Saudis and their bunch when they poured funds and weapons to Saddams army in its invasion of Iran in attempt to annex the oil rich provinces in south west of Iran.

I was not aware of the details but Sadam is dead and buried and don't forget the siege of the American Embassy and the whole American Embassy staff kept hostage for about a year.
The aggression didn't come from one side only.
But again, that's almost a half Century ago.

anasawad wrote:You want peace to come, then you should tell your own people and allies to stop constantly pursuing expansion and control all around the world.

Fine, but I still believe that countries like Israel could have very positive interactions with Iran in many technological and agricultural fields. They do not even have a common border so there is no risk of invasion or whatever other evil designs you think. I may be naive but there is no rational reason to be enemies.
#14938089
@Ter

Indeed, but that was like almost a hundred years ago. How long will you remain angry about that ?

It ended 40s years ago.
don't forget the siege of the American Embassy and the whole American Embassy staff kept hostage for about a year.

And thats how it ended.

I was not aware of the details but Sadam is dead and buried

The remnants of his regime are still alive.
His supporters are still alive.
The regimes that sponsored hem are still alive and following the same policy.
The families of his victims are still alive.
That wasn't very long ago for it to old history by now.

The aggression didn't come from one side only.

One side sure started it, and the rest was a cycle of responses.

Fine, but I still believe that countries like Israel could have very positive interactions with Iran in many technological and agricultural fields.

Not if Israel is on the side of those who spent the past 70 years attacking Iran and actively trying to destroy it and its people.

They do not even have a common border so there is no risk of invasion or whatever other evil designs you think. I may be naive but there is no rational reason to be enemies.


Not having common borders is irrelevant in regards to regional affairs.
Take Syria for example.
Syria serves 2 purposes;
1- A route to trade with Lebanon in which Iran mainly sells goods to and recieves investments from various entities in Lebanon. As well as having a port on the Mediterranean which serves to facilitate its trade with countries across the Mediterranean and Europe to that matter as well.
2- Act as a weight against Turkish ambitions in the region, against Saudi Ambitions in the region (both being to dominate it) and against Kurdish separatism which would gain huge strength if it managed to get sea access through syria not to mention expand oil and water supplies which would empower them to start an open insurgency in western Iran to try to claim land, not to mention the countless terrorist attacks they did the past periods would start over again on a bigger scale.

So Syria is an important link in this regard. Both for Iran to save guard its interests by preventing the region to be dominated by Sunni powers and thus Islamists mainly and protect mainly minority groups in Lebanon and the Syrian coast since being a Shia state means those are the only possible allies in the region.
And Syria is important for Turkey and Saudi Arabia for completely dominating the region.
Wahabis and Islamists dominating the region would mean people like me and my family along with every other minority group in the region get to be killed off as openly declared and attempted not that very long ago (70s,80s, and just recently) and for Iran to become completely surrounded by armies of people who preach daily how Iranian shias should be exterminated and are actively pursuing that goal.
When Israel joins in with Saudi Arabia and Turkey to attack and take over Syria. What you see as not a big deal, we and everyone like us see as Israel joining the side of the people who are to a large and reasonable extent can be recognized as existential threats and who will kills all of us the minute they get the chance, as they did with all the other groups in the middle east like us.

Now, does that make Israel safe ? No, because they'll be next right after us.
But we don't really plan or even like being first in that regard, so.. yea.

EU is not prepared on nuclear war, but Russia,[…]

It is implausible that the IDF could not or would[…]

Moving on to the next misuse of language that sho[…]

There is no reason to have a state at all unless w[…]