Trump pulls U.S. out of Iranian nuclear deal. Is a war with Iran inevitable? - Page 13 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

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

Talk about what you've seen in the news today.

Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods

#14916663
daf wrote:Russia calls for foreign troop pullout from Syria including Iran, Hezbollah

https://english.alarabiya.net/en/News/m ... llah-.html

Iran to Stay in Syria as Long as Damascus Wants - Tehran

https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/2018 ... -presence/


I see no mention in the article of Russian troops being removed. Russia seems to be calling for everyone to leave except themselves.
#14916758
Beren wrote:It's easy to get in there. :lol:


It's easy to point out you've been duped by the MSM, yes, just by the stuff you say which has little basis in reality. If I was wrong, you'd be able to prove that, but as that hasn't happened, well...

It's okay though, I understand why. A book was written about it, it's called Bad News From Israel and was compiled by a media group from Glasgee Uni; they showed after an analysis of years of MSM reporting on Palestine/Israel that the content shows so little context about the very short history of Israel, which leaves viewers completely clueless as to why things occur as they do. It's worth reading if you want to speak more confidently about the subject, rather than repeating MSM bullshit. :)
#14916928
Mike Pompeo: U.S. to hit Iran with 'strongest sanctions in history'

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/wor ... 628152002/

Pompeo noted Iran's military activities in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen and the Palestinian territories that accelerated in recent years, fueled by an influx of cash provided by the nuclear deal, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA.

"Iran advanced its march across the Middle East during the JCPOA," Pompeo said.

He said Iran would have to stop its "malign activities in the region" before the sanctions could be lifted.

"Today, we ask the Iranian people: Is this what you want your country to be known for, to be a co-conspirator with Hezbollah, Hamas and al-Qaeda? The United States thinks you deserve better," Pompeo said.

He called on Iranians to challenge their leaders to do what's necessary to avoid the damage of sanctions the Trump administration is about to impose.

The United States will "apply unprecedented financial pressure on the Iranian regime" to achieve the new goals, Pompeo said.

Not only will the past U.S. sanctions go back into full effect over the next 155 days, but "this is just the beginning," Pompeo said. "The sting of sanctions will be painful if the regime does not change its course. … These will be the strongest sanctions in history."

The new sanctions will mean “countries have to give up economic activity” with Iran, including activity allowed under the JCPOA, he said.

Pompeo said the United States would respond if Iran restarted nuclear activities, but "I’m not prepared to share with you what that response will be.”

When the full force of the sanctions are in place, Iran "will be battling to keep its economy alive," forcing it to choose between that or squandering resources abroad. "It will not be able to do both," Pompeo said.

Pompeo listed a dozen actions the United States expects from Iran to avoid or end these sanctions. In addition to ending the nuclear program, they include ending support for terrorist groups such as Hezbollah, Hamas, the Taliban and Houthi militias. Iran must withdraw all its forces from Syria, stop harboring al-Qaeda terrorists, quit threatening international shipping and end destructive cyberattacks.

Iran must also release foreign detainees.

"It's a long list, but it simply reflects the malign activities of Iran," Pompeo said. "We didn’t create the list, they did."

In exchange, Trump is willing to extend a hand of friendship to Iran by ending "all sanctions against the regime," he said. "And we’d be willing to support the reintegration of Iran’s economy in the international economic system."

Pompeo urged the Iranian people, who he said are "longing to seek the freedoms and opportunities of the 21st century," to pressure their leaders to plot a new course. "Iranian leaders can change this if they want to."

U.S. allies in Europe have been loath to abandon the agreement, which they agree is imperfect but achieves temporary limits on Iranian nuclear activities. British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson cast doubt that the broad list of objectives could be achieved in "a reasonable time frame," as Pompeo described.

“The ballistic missiles, Iran’s misbehavior, Iran’s disruptive activity in the region and the nuclear question — if you try to fold all those into ... a new jumbo Iran negotiation, a new treaty," Johnson said in Buenos Aires, "I don’t see that being very easy to achieve, in anything like a reasonable timetable."



#14917044
European Companies are Fleeing Iran

BP's (British Petroleum) told the BBC it intends to fully comply with any new US sanction regime.

https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/uk-scotlan ... ssion=true


Tuesday, 22 May, 2018 - 09:45
European Companies are Fleeing Iran

Abdulrahman Al-Rashed is the former general manager of Al-Arabiya television. He is also the former editor-in-chief of Asharq Al-Awsat, and the leading Arabic weekly magazine Al-Majalla. He is also a senior columnist in the daily newspapers Al-Madina and Al-Bilad.
US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s statement on Monday put an end to bargains.

Officially, Washington has begun its war on the Iranian regime. The weapons of economic sanctions threaten the entire regime and do not only restrain it.

The French Total left the gas fields in the Gulf and moved on. Head of the Italian company ENI told the company’s board that they shut down their offices in Tehran and stopped searching for oil and gas. Airbus signed a contract to sell Iran 100 airplanes and only three jets arrived in Tehran’s airport as part of this historic deal which the company announced its cancellation.

A Norwegian solar energy company left Iran last week and there are four years left on the contract. Other big companies also fled Iran like the German Siemens, the Italian Danieli company which supplies equipment to the metal industry and Maersk Line, a container shipping company. Dozens of European companies rejected the Iranian temptations to stay in Iran out of fear of the Trump administration which warned that whoever does not stop dealing with Iran during the next 180 days will be prohibited from dealing with the American market.

Why do European and giant companies feel afraid? It’s simply because they have greater interests with the US, and as for those who do not care about the American market, prohibiting Iran from dealing with the dollar will subject them to bankruptcy.

The attempts of European governments, which promised they will continue to deal with Iran on the economic front as part of their commitment to the JCPOA agreement, to protect their companies’ contracts failed. Almost all big companies which made deals with Iran are withdrawing quickly despite the possible losses they may suffer.

Total’s contract, which is very important for the Iranian oil and gas industry and which Tehran has greatly relied on, is proof that Europe’s politicians do not dictate their decisions on their companies and will not be able to stand in Washington’s face. Tehran, of course, will also completely fail in the confrontation against the US.

The French company was among the first of those to benefit from the Iranian nuclear signed with the West in 2015. It got the deal to develop phase 11 of the South Pars gas field for around $5 billion. A top executive at the company said at the time that they do not need US’ approval to proceed with the deal. After Trump warned in November of dealing with Iran, the French company retreated and closed its offices in Tehran and opened an office in Washington to coordinate with American authorities. It has finally announced its withdrawal from Iran.

What’s Washington’s power and authority over European companies? The US market is worth $19 trillion and trade with the Europeans is worth $700 billion. Therefore, Iran’s deals seem worth so little compared to this.

In addition to all that, the US control authorities’ sanctions are painful as they fined the French BNP bank a penalty worth $9 billion for dealing with Iran!

Therefore, the French and German governments’ attempts to defy the Trump administration and insistence to keep the nuclear deal are almost impossible for two reasons: Trump will not bend and the Iranian supreme guide will not alter his policies and stop his wars. Iran will realize that Europe’s politicians want the agreement but they willnot be able to pay it the required price as Europe’s companies’ hands are tied.

Therefore, the truth which Iran’s leaders must realize is that the deal died the minute Barack Obama left the White House and Trump took over. Instead of dealing with the new reality and reviewing its wrong calculations, Tehran is running in all direction to Brussels, Moscow, Beijing and New Delhi but it has not succeeded in compensating for its losses or attaining alternatives. It’s militarily failing in Syria and it’s politically failing in Iraq. It’s also suffering losses in Yemen and losses are even greater inside Iran itself.


https://m.aawsat.com/english/home/artic ... eeing-iran
#14917056
The key demands Pompeo laid down for Iran included:

Releasing all its nuclear materials on the military applications of its nuclear program to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
Halting all grades of uranium enrichment.
Dismantling enrichment facilities and nuclear reactors.
Giving up the development of ballistic missiles.
Withdrawing military forces from Syria
Discontinuing support for Hizballah and the Palestinian Hamas and Islamic Jihad.
Withdrawing its support from the Yemeni Houthi insurgency.
Abandoning its threats to Red Sea shipping.
Cutting off its arms supplies to the Taliban in Afghanistan.
Putting a stop to threats against Israel and Gulf nations.
...

https://www.debka.com/pompeo-iran-is...ns-in-history/

Sounds reasonable...
to me ...
#14917118
Ter wrote:https://www.debka.com/pompeo-iran-is...ns-in-history/ Sounds reasonable...to me ...

It sounds realistic, I doubt it will be received as reasonable. My guess is the Ayatollahs reject it, but they're then stuck with the growing social unrest sanctions will cause. Iran needs an issue close to home that doesn't cost much, to divert civil protest that could escalate into a serious problem.

Zam :smokin:
Last edited by Zamuel on 22 May 2018 19:28, edited 1 time in total.
#14917119
I don't know what world you live in where you think it's "reasonable" that Iran is going to kowtow to zionist/wahabi interests. :lol:

Iranian FM




Europe Must Confront America’s Extraterritorial Sanctions
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.

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.

The essence of the JCPOA and Resolution 2231 is Iran’s cessation of activities that could lead to the development of nuclear weapons. Strict compliance by Iran is linked to the normalization of international economic relations, including the lifting of UN-agreed sanctions.

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.
https://www.project-syndicate.org/comme ... hs-2018-05
#14917173
Zamuel wrote:It sounds realistic, I doubt it will be received as reasonable. My guess is the Ayatollahs reject it, but they're then stuck with the growing social unrest sanctions will cause. Iran needs an issue close to home that doesn't cost much, to divert civil protest that could escalate into a serious problem.

Zam :smokin:


It's up to the people


#14917191
A few protestors does not a revolution make. The Syrian "revolution"is a foreign funded, foreign fought war with foreign weapons. Another American proxy war to establish discord in the region for it's allies, Saudi Arabia, and Israel.

USA will push a war in Iran, just like it did in Syria. America foreign policy is inhumane and corrupt as all Hell.
#14917197
Godstud wrote:A few protestors does not a revolution make. The Syrian "revolution"is a foreign funded, foreign fought war with foreign weapons. Another American proxy war to establish discord in the region for it's allies, Saudi Arabia, and Israel.

USA will push a war in Iran, just like it did in Syria. America foreign policy is inhumane and corrupt as all Hell.


Is Russian foreign policy in Syria and Iran ‘corrupt as hell’? The question is not whether the US is corrupt. The question is does it make sense for the US to allow others to move in on these countries or to allow Iran to be imperialist? We move in first, when we can, because it is easier that way. That does not make the US necessarily any more corrupt, It makes us better at the game.
Obviously, I don’t support any imperialism. But, if it is going to continue then I want the US to be the best at it.
#14917198
One Degree wrote:Is Russian foreign policy in Syria and Iran ‘corrupt as hell’?
Did I say Russian foreign policy was good? no. I did not. You're deflecting away from USA, and assuming I am siding with Russia, which I am not.

One Degree wrote:The question is does it make sense for the US to allow others to move in on these countries or to allow Iran to be imperialist?
Iran has shown no imperialist inclinations, whereas Israel and Saudi Arabia have. In a world where the USA was principled, Iran would be an ally, not an enemy.

One Degree wrote:We move in first, when we can, because it is easier that way.
There is no reason to "move in first" when this has nothing to do with USA security, or in fact, the USA, period. American foreign policy makes America less safe, not more.

One Degree wrote:That does not make the US necessarily any more corrupt, It makes us better at the game.
You mean the game that took a secular Iran in the 70s and turned it into the regime that exists now? The game that turned Iraq from the same and into the shitshow it is now? Please... America's crap at the "game".

One Degree wrote:Obviously, I don’t support any imperialism. But, if it is going to continue then I want the US to be the best at it.
You are supporting imperialism, however. Your every statement is in support of the corrupt and evil USA moving in and destroying countries in the name of "Democracy". USA is the most imperialistic country in the world, and it's pretty bad at "the game", because it simply destroys countries.
#14917201
One Degree wrote:Is Russian foreign policy in Syria and Iran ‘corrupt as hell’? The question is not whether the US is corrupt. The question is does it make sense for the US to allow others to move in on these countries or to allow Iran to be imperialist? We move in first, when we can, because it is easier that way. That does not make the US necessarily any more corrupt, It makes us better at the game. Obviously, I don’t support any imperialism. But, if it is going to continue then I want the US to be the best at it.

Well put. I think most of us here would like to see the middle east settle down and continue the trend of improving lives and modernizing infrastructure that has made steady advances since WWII. But that isn't happening. Iran had a perfect chance to get back on that track and chose instead to pursue aggressive expansionism and anti-Israel policies. I'm not a Trump fan, but confronting Iran before the situation deteriorates further -was- the right course.

Zam
#14917203
Godstud wrote:Did I say Russian foreign policy was good? no. I did not. You're deflecting away from USA, and assuming I am siding with Russia, which I am not.

Iran has shown no imperialist inclinations, whereas Israel and Saudi Arabia have. In a world where the USA was principled, Iran would be an ally, not an enemy.

There is no reason to "move in first" when this has nothing to do with USA security, or in fact, the USA, period. American foreign policy makes America less safe, not more.

You mean the game that took a secular Iran in the 70s and turned it into the regime that exists now? The game that turned Iraq from the same and into the shitshow it is now? Please... America's crap at the "game".

You are supporting imperialism, however. Your every statement is in support of the corrupt and evil USA moving in and destroying countries in the name of "Democracy". USA is the most imperialistic country in the world, and it's pretty bad at "the game", because it simply destroys countries.


I was not accusing you. It was a rhetorical question to help make my point.
The rest of your responses show you don’t understand ‘the game’ at all. It has nothing to do with who is ‘right’. Thinking that way will just confuse you. It is about power and domination. It is continuing imperialism while pretending not to. The most devious imperialists are the ones protesting it. (Cough EU) Governments aren’t against it. They just need to justify and conceal it from their citizens.
#14917205
One Degree wrote:It has nothing to do with who is ‘right’.
I am not saying it is. I am just commenting on how much the USA has changed. It went from a nation of principles, to a callous imperialist power that goes into countries, rapes and pillages, then leaves the nation in flames(eg. Vietnam and Iraq). it went from a country that stood for rule of law, to one where Guantanamo Bay exists. USA is now Rome... in its decline.

One Degree wrote:It is about power and domination. It is continuing imperialism while pretending not to.
The USA does not even pretend.
#14917206
Godstud wrote:I am not saying it is. I am just commenting on how much the USA has changed. It went from a nation of principles, to a callous imperialist power that goes into countries, rapes and pillages, then leaves the nation in flames(eg. Vietnam and Iraq). it went from a country that stood for rule of law, to one where Guantanamo Bay exists. USA is now Rome... in its decline.

The USA does not even pretend.


I think it is more likely the average person’s tolerance has changed rather than the US having changed. Same for other countries also. The citizens see war up front and personal now (starting with Vietnam) so our leaders have to be a little more careful. Notice the reduction in deaths. Our leaders made it more acceptable. Americans will accept it more because our deaths have been very low because of military superiority. I believe it is as simple as that. Nothing else has really changed much. After WWII, it became a ‘no no’ to militarily annex. After Vietnam it became a ‘no no’ to have many deaths. The game goes on with some rule changes.
#14917207
The only difference is that the USA kills MORE, and has less American soldiers lost. That's the ONLY difference.

America can burn for all I care. Iran's correct in not dealing with USA. USA breaks deals and treaties all the time now, so the USA is dishonest, dishonourable, and unreliable. The world is learning this, as well. This bodes ill for America's "domination".
  • 1
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 19

Isn't oil and electricity bought and sold like ev[…]

@Potemkin I heard this song in the Plaza Grande […]

Russia-Ukraine War 2022

The "Russian empire" story line is inve[…]

I (still) have a dream

Even with those millions though. I will not be ab[…]