[Oxymandias]

@Zamuel

Wow … Abracadabra …

I intentionally phrased it that way in order to draw interest due to the phrase's strange and ridiculous statement as to encourage you to continue reading the post instead of taking it out of context. Apparently good writing techniques aren't enough.

Sure, by people rioting (and dieing) in the streets.

Iranian news outlets continue to report on the matter and the Iranian population continues to protest their treatment. Furthermore, calling them riots deprecates these protester's accomplishments and defines them as mere revolts and not as instigators of major political change.

Also you spelled dying wrong.

@Trooper

If you mean legally or openly without repercussions of course not. It's not called the Theocratic Republic of Iran for nothing.

If you mean whether or not Iranian society is fine with atheism or agnosticism then it depends on where. Rural societies will be less accepting than urban ones but overall, agnosticism is more accepted than atheism.

If you mean whether an Iranian can physically be an atheist or agnostic then yes, they can. I myself am an agnostic atheist.

[Zamuel]

Apparently good writing techniques aren't enough.

Why don't you try that and we'll see … ?

Iran's recent rhetoric is driving away EU sympathies.

Zam

[Oxymandias]

@Zamuel

You wouldn't know good writing even if it hit you in the face with a brick, knocked you unconscious, and then proceeded to run you over several times with a van. Heck, you yourself aren't capable at writing anything that doesn't accompany a meme of some kind.

I don't see how the opinions of a dying organization has any bearing on the fate of Iran. However, to be honest, the government's actions towards the current protests are very troubling. I hope that Iran pulls a Oman and implements reforms in order to appease the population but I don't see that happening under the current Ayatollahs who aren't particularly fond of the Iranian revolution's democratic ideals.*

*Note: They were democratic, all it takes for something to be democratic is to incorporate it's principles. The Iranian Revolution's original goal was a strong theocratic state with strong republican values which was achieved (but could not be sustained in the long run given the high literacy rates and IQs among the population along with the desire for greater autonomy and political participation).

[daf]

@Oxymandias

The Iranian Revolution's original goal was a strong theocratic state with strong republican values which was achieved (but could not be sustained in the long run

When was the good days of Iranian democracy?

[Zamuel]

you yourself aren't capable at writing anything that doesn't accompany a meme of some kind.

I write the truth, it's easy … sure seems to irritate the heck out of you ...

I don't see how the opinions of a dying organization has any bearing on the fate of Iran.

No, I agree you don't. The present regime's opinions drive their actions, in their opinion the people are becoming a threat, so their actions are repressive. Infidels (agnostic atheists) are targets for both sides. Step carefully.

Zam

[Oxymandias]

@Zamuel

What you consider truth is merely a disjointed set of narratives which you’ve created to make yourself feel better. Your “truth” not backed by anything substantial. What entertains me is how irritated you are when I ask for evidence to back up those narratives.

The people are not a threat to the regime as it is the people which provide it with wealth and it’s prosperity. The government was founded on that principle, that of a semi-democratic country with strong republican values (along with a concentration of secular and religious authority in the hands of the government).* While this may seem oppressive on the surface, there is a great deal of power handed over to the people in this situation which results in a delicate balance of power between the populous and the government proper.

But this status quo is unsustainable and the regime is slowly becoming more aware of this and the population is as well through the Reformist Party and other liberal organizations. This is the reason for the protests and the government’s reaction towards them. This is about the consolidation of power, not the fear of dissenting opinions.

Also I live in Iran’s most liberal city within its most liberal district. I don’t think I’ll be threatened anytime soon.


*Note: This is less than satisfactory however it is better than a absolute monarchy with secular and religious authority vested in the hands of a single individual.

[Oxymandias]

@daf

Could you clarify? Iran has never been democratic. The closest thing we got to a democracy was Mossadegh’s presidency and he was quickly disposed of by the US for trying to nationalize oil.

[Zamuel]

Also I live in Iran’s most liberal city within its most liberal district. I don’t think I’ll be threatened anytime soon.

Which makes the area a primary target, keep laughing.

Zam - Boom

[Oxymandias]

@Zamuel

No, it doesn’t. It appears that you haven’t bothered reading my post. Whatever, you wouldn’t read anything that may challenge your own tangled mess of a narrative. I won’t repeat myself so I hope you have the patience to, like, have me reference my previous posts whenever you repeat your sorry excuses for arguments. I doubt you would want to critically evaluate them given that they might change your perspective on things and as such is against your conservative, anti-progressive nature.

[daf]

@daf

Could you clarify? Iran has never been democratic. The closest thing we got to a democracy was Mossadegh’s presidency and he was quickly disposed of by the US for trying to nationalize oil.

When were the good years of the Islamic Republic? You said, in the past, they try to go along with "republican values".

[daf]

A German dilemma; whether to continue to support an agreement with Iran in order to promote economic business with it, or maintain a loyal relationship with the United States and the Sunni Arab countries? Europe will soon face not only American sanctions as a result of its continued support of the nuclear agreement and the strengthening of economic ties with Iran. Now Saudi Arabia is beginning to "punish" Europe because of its position with Tehran.

Reception Grows Frosty for German Firms in Saudi Arabia
Following diplomatic discord between Berlin and Riyadh, contracts for German businesses in Saudi Arabia have been drying up. Is the crown prince punishing them?

By Susanne Koelbl

May 25, 2018 06:02 PM Print FeedbackComment
Detlef Daues is a pioneer of the German small- and medium-sized companies that have made Germany what it is today: a prosperous nation with good international relations that stretch to even the farthest-flung corners of the world.

His Hannover-based virtual department store for original replacement parts, V-Line GmbH, services customers in countries like Mexico, the United States, Qatar and Oman in addition to others in East Asia. But 65 percent of Daues' revenues come from Saudi Arabia.

But currently, the once-positive relationship between Saudi Arabia and Germany has worsened. Six months ago, Riyadh withdrew its ambassador from Germany and he still hasn't returned. There has been little open discussion of the reasons behind the conflict, but for people like Daues in the business community, the rift is as plain as day. "For Germans, the doors in Riyadh have suddenly been closed," says one experienced businessman in the Saudi capital. Meetings with delegations from Germany that were set up before the crisis are being canceled. "That hurts," says Oliver Oehms of the German-Saudi Arabian Liaison Office for Economic Affairs in Riyadh.

Young crown prince Mohammed bin Salman, known as MBS for short, appears to be "deeply offended" by the German government, says Daues, who adds that his information comes from confidants in Riyadh. Relations between the two countries began souring last November when then-German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel spoke of spreading "political adventurism" in the Middle East, a remark many thought was aimed at Saudi Arabia. The impression was widespread at the time that Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri was being held against his will in Riyadh and that he was being strong-armed by the rulers there to step down.

Blunt public criticism of that nature is considered a no-no in the world of diplomacy. "Why didn't Gabriel pick up the phone and call Riyadh if he was concerned," asks one influential member of the royal family during a meeting a in Riyadh. Within the palace, the impression was that the remarks made on Nov. 16 were a cheap shot by the German foreign minister to drum up support among voters, the royal family member says, adding that the prince was not happy.

Profound Transformation

Saudi Arabia is currently undergoing a profound transformation. Crown prince MBS wants to shed his country of its religious fundamentalism and he is preparing it for the post-oil economy. It's a change that German companies would also like to benefit from.

Daues himself invested $5 million to place his company at the forefront as that change comes. But now the "German government has succeeded" in "upsetting the country so badly that German firms are being excluded from being awarded contracts," the entrepreneur wrote in a letter to Bernd Althusmann, the economics minister for the state of Lower-Saxony, where his company is located. He wrote that he had been deliberately excluded from contracts for the first time.

No one is able to say precisely whether the prince has issued a written order, as sources in Riyadh claim, or whether there was just a verbal decree that civil servants have been all too eager to obey.

MBS himself is actually an admirer of Germany. Recently, though, there has been one hitch in relations after the other. The affront from Gabriel over Lebanon was followed by a line in the Berlin coalition agreement explicitly stating that Germany will not deliver weapons to countries involved in the war in Yemen -- Saudi Arabia above all.

The situation is further complicated by Germany's role in the current wrangling over Iran. Berlin is determined to stick with the nuclear deal despite U.S. President Donald Trump's announcement he will withdraw from it, whereas there is deep-seated distrust of the government in Tehran in Riyadh. It may be that the Saudi crown prince views Germany's conduct as criticism of his governance. Sources close to him say that a relaxed attitude toward differences of opinion is not one of the prince's strong points.

An Important Trading Partner

Germany remains Saudi Arabia's most important European trading partner. Some 800 German companies are active in the country, and 200 have offices in Saudi Arabia with a total of 40,000 employees. In 2017, the volume of German exports to Saudi Arabia was 6.6 billion euros. But the mood is shifting.

Well-informed observers in Saudi Arabia are reporting that even larger German companies like Daimler have been affected. The Saudis, for example, threatened to temporarily postpone the delivery of several hundred Mercedes buses. Officially, the company has vehemently denied the reports, with Daimler saying it cannot confirm any delay. The bus project, the company insists, is proceeding on schedule.

The Saudi Health Ministry, which has worked closely together with medical equipment supplier Siemens and pharmaceutical companies Bayer and Boehringer for years, has also distanced itself from its German partners recently. "The business is tougher," a spokesman for Siemens says in a cautious formulation. "We don't want to comment on the matter," spokespeople for Bayer and Boehringer stated. No one wants to further rile the government in Saudi Arabia. Recently, Riyadh's city development authority ADA issued a contract for the construction of a major bike path that will run through the capital city's green belt to the American architecture firm Coen+Partners. But only a year ago, it had planned to award the contract to the German firm AS+P Albert Speer and Bödeker Landscape Architects.

This prompted German landscape architect Alexandra von Bieler at Bödecker to write a letter to Foreign Minister Heiko Maas in which she pleads for a patching up of relations with Saudi Arabia. "No more contracts will be awarded to German companies and our invoices are no longer being paid," the letter states, before going on to say that her office has been "pushed to its limits."

The Bödeckers have worked together with the Saudi urban planning agency for more than 40 years, developing recreational areas, parks and entire city districts. Company founder Richard Bödecker, 84, has known many members of the royal family personally for decades. But he, too, is now being faced with a wall of silence.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel has since had a telephone conversation with the crown prince in which she assured her personal regard for the prince and said she was looking forward to future cooperation with the kingdom. Gabriel also stated repeatedly before leaving office in March that his remark about Middle East adventurism had not been specifically aimed at Riyadh. Diplomatic notes have since been exchanged and meetings between ambassadors held.

But none of that has sufficed. Sources inside the palace in Riyadh say they are expecting an "apology." "The Saudis are a proud people and they are also very sensitive to criticism," says landscape architect Bieler, who has long been familiar with the country's culture.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/bus ... 09576.html

[Ter]

Germany remains Saudi Arabia's most important European trading partner. Some 800 German companies are active in the country, and 200 have offices in Saudi Arabia with a total of 40,000 employees. In 2017, the volume of German exports to Saudi Arabia was 6.6 billion euros. But the mood is shifting.

That is how expensive it is to keep licking sweaty Ayatollah's asses.
Germany and the rest of Europe should repudiate Iran as soon as possible.

[Atlantis]

A German dilemma; whether to continue to support an agreement with Iran in order to promote economic business with it, or maintain a loyal relationship with the United States and the Sunni Arab countries? Europe will soon face not only American sanctions as a result of its continued support of the nuclear agreement and the strengthening of economic ties with Iran. Now Saudi Arabia is beginning to "punish" Europe because of its position with Tehran.

That's only half the story. The Saudis already reduced business with Germany and even recalled their ambassador from Berlin when the German government last year announced a halt to arms deals with the Saudis because of the Yemeni war.

It's interesting to note that the Saudis are now the objective allies of Israel.

German trade with Iran is minimal (less than 1%). The problem is that Europe cannot keep on bending to Washington's dictate for more war in the MENA. This is not only bad for trade but it severely puts at risk Europe's security. Why the hell should we pay for Washington setting the region on fire, for which we'll have to bear the consequences. We need to end US extra-territoriality, and if it means puncturing the dollar economy by shifting oil and gas trade to the Euro, which the Russians would be more than happy with.

Europe Must Confront America’s Extraterritorial Sanctions

May 17, 2018 JEFFREY D. SACHS

Europe’s biggest challenge in resisting US sanctions on Iran is not legal or even geopolitical. It is psychological: European leaders act as if the US still cares about a trans-Atlantic alliance of shared interests, values, and approaches.

NEW YORK – Donald Trump’s renunciation of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) with Iran and the reimposition of US sanctions on that country threaten global peace. Europe’s security depends on defending the agreement with Iran despite the US withdrawal. That, in turn, requires Europe, along with Russia, China, and other United Nations member states, to ensure that economic relations with Iran can develop. And that can happen only if Europe confronts, and ultimately overturns, America’s extraterritorial sanctions, which aim to deter trade and financial activities with Iran by non-US actors.

The purpose of Trump’s move is clear and indeed explicit: to topple the Iranian regime. Given this folly, European citizens accurately sense that Europe’s security interests are no longer closely aligned with those of the United States.

America’s bullying approach to Iran has been seconded – indeed championed – by two Middle Eastern allies of the United States, Israel and Saudi Arabia. Israel invokes US power to avoid having to make any compromises with the Palestinians. Saudi Arabia invokes US military power to contain its regional rival, Iran. Both are hoping for a direct US war with Iran.

America’s previous efforts at regime change in the Middle East yielded horrendous results for the US and Europe (to say nothing of the disasters that befell the countries caught up in the US-provoked mayhem). Such “wars of choice” have been the major factor in the surge of migration to Europe from the Middle East and North Africa. Even when regime change has “succeeded,” as in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya, the aftermath has been violence and instability. And when regime change has failed, as in Syria, the result has been ongoing war.

The humiliating failure of French President Emmanuel Macron, UK Prime Minister Theresa May, and German Chancellor Angela Merkel to convince Trump to remain in the JCPOA was predictable. The US decision reflects two converging forces: a deep-seated foreign-policy tendency – manifested by all recent US administrations – to seek hegemony in the Middle East, and Trump’s peculiar brand of psychopathy. Trump delights in embarrassing European leaders; their squirming is his triumph.1

Yet they are not powerless. The agreement with Iran can still be salvaged, precisely because it is a multilateral agreement, endorsed by the UN Security Council (Resolution 2231), not an agreement solely between the US and Iran. Indeed, under Article 25 of the UN Charter, all UN member states, including the US, are obligated to fulfill the JCPOA. Trump’s withdrawal of the US from the JCPOA is itself a violation of international law.

Even if the US now absents itself from the JCPOA, it has only two means to block the implementation of the agreement between Iran and the rest of the world. The first would be to foment war. This clearly is on the US agenda, especially with the neoconservative doyen John Bolton back in the White House as National Security Adviser. The world must steadfastly resist another ruinous US military adventure.

Extraterritorial sanctions are the second way the US could kill the JCPOA. It is one thing for the US to decide that it will not trade with Iran. It is quite another for the US government to attempt to block trade with Iran by non-US parties. This is America’s intention; it is up to Europe and China to defeat it, in the interest of global peace, as well as in their own direct economic interest.

In practical terms, the US will be able to enforce anti-Iran sanctions on companies operating in its domestic market, and most likely on subsidiaries of US firms operating abroad. Yet the US will try to go much further, by trying to block non-US companies from dealing with Iran. The US will probably succeed in clamping down on dollar-based transactions, as these are generally cleared through the US banking system. The real issue will come with non-US companies operating outside of the US and interacting with Iran via non-dollar currencies such as the euro and renminbi.

The US will certainly try to punish such companies, whether by targeting their local subsidiaries, by trying to haul them into US courts, or by denying them access to the US market. Here is where the European Union must take a strong stand and move beyond begging Trump for “waivers” for specific European business deals, a process that would make European countries even more subservient to Trump’s whims. Europe should defend a firm and unequivocal “No” to US extraterritorial sanctions, notably on companies operating in non-dollar currencies.

The EU should insist that extraterritorial sanctions violate international law (including the Resolution 2231 and therefore the UN Charter) and the rules of the World Trade Organization. They should recognize that acquiescence would be tantamount to handing the US a blank check to set the rules of war and peace beyond the UN Security Council, and the rules of global trade beyond the World Trade Organization. The EU should be prepared to use the WTO dispute resolution process against the US, and to bring its case to the UN Security Council and General Assembly. Where Europe is afraid to tread, China will surely swoop in to capitalize on business opportunities in Iran. And China would be right to do so.

Europe’s biggest challenge is not legal or even geopolitical. It is psychological. European leaders act as if the US still cares about a trans-Atlantic alliance of shared interests, values, and approaches. Sadly, this is no longer the case.

The US and Europe do still have many shared interests; but they have many divergent ones as well, especially when the US violates international law. Europe needs its own security policy, just as it needs its own trade and environmental policies. The showdown over the JCPOA is therefore a moment of truth. World peace depends on Europe’s defense of the UN Charter and the rules of international trade.

Jeffrey D. Sachs, Professor of Sustainable Development and Professor of Health Policy and Management at Columbia University, is Director of Columbia’s Center for Sustainable Development and of the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network. His books include The End of Poverty, Common Wealth, The Age of Sustainable Development, and, most recently, Building the New American Economy.

Nearly 20 years of illegal Yankee wars, millions killed, tens of millions displaced, terrorists on the rampage, the whole ME destabilized, Europe put a risk and the world at the abyss of WW3 due to the psychopath at the White House. Enough is enough!

[daf]

@Atlantis

That's only half the story. The Saudis already reduced business with Germany and even recalled their ambassador from Berlin when the German government last year announced a halt to arms deals with the Saudis because of the Yemeni war.

Germany punished the Saudis for the war the Iranian (through the Houthi proxy) provoked? Who sell the weapons to Iran? It looks deep alliance.

[Atlantis]

Germany punished the Saudis for the war the Iranian (through the Houthi proxy) provoked? Who sell the weapons to Iran? It looks deep alliance.

No, Germany announced a halt of arms deals with all combatants in the Yemeni war. I think it should have been enough to punish the Saudis for their genocidal war.

[Zamuel]

No, Germany announced a halt of arms deals with all combatants in the Yemeni war. I think it should have been enough to punish the Saudis for their genocidal war.

Punish Saudi Arabia? That's a joke.

"Saudi Arabia: We do not need German arms " https://www.aa.com.tr/en/europe/saudi-arabia-we-do-not-need-german-arms-/1071890

By Ayhan Simsek - BERLIN

Saudi Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir has slammed Germany's decision to stop arms exports to Saudi Arabia due to its active military presence in Yemen.

"If Germany has a problem with supplying weapons to Saudi Arabia, we would not put Germany under pressure. We don't need your weapons. We would get them from somewhere else," he said in an interview with the German news agency DPA, published on Friday. (See URL for more details)

I'd guess was is a German ploy to prevent social disturbance again weakening Merkel's authority. It surely isn't going to affect Saudi Arabia,

Zam

[Ter]

I am sure the US and Israel can supply all the weapons Saudi Arabia needs, and then some.
The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

Iran is playing a pernicious and dangerous game, infiltrating Yemen, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon either directly or though proxies. This can and will not end well for Iran.

[Oxymandias]

@daf

Oh, then probably during the Islamic Revolution proper when the ideology was still being formulated, when the first actual elections were taking place, and present day Iran as of now are actually good days for republican values in Iran.

[Oxymandias]

@Ter

Iran hasn’t directly infiltrated most of those countries and many of those proxies are funded not just by Iran, but several other countries including Saudi Arabia. The proxies are there for defense, not to expand Iran’s borders or whatever. Given that Iran’s military doctrine entirely revolves around defense I don’t see how you can make any argument for Iranian expansionism.

[Zionist Nationalist]

@Ter

Iran hasn’t directly infiltrated most of those countries and many of those proxies are funded not just by Iran, but several other countries including Saudi Arabia. The proxies are there for defense, not to expand Iran’s borders or whatever. Given that Iran’s military doctrine entirely revolves around defense I don’t see how you can make any argument for Iranian expansionism.

Defence from what?

Houthis want to take over all of Yemen why should Saudia allow that?
Hezbollah are terrorists who just poke Israel whenever they feel like its the right time or whenever they receive such orders from Iran
Iraqi militias are there to eventually take over the country like it happened in Lebanon

its part of Iranian constitution to spread the Islamic revolution abroad

Iran is an aggressive country and will remain so as long as its being ruled by an expansionist Islamic theocracy