When new sanctions are imposed there will be less free cash flow so while it doesn't remove it we are still squeezing the leaderships ability to fund it.
Global Events & Politics Überthread
- Thread starter Hawk
- Start date
When new sanctions are imposed there will be less free cash flow so while it doesn't remove it we are still squeezing the leaderships ability to fund it.
57Brave
Well-known member
John Harwood
Verified account @JohnJHarwood
11m11 minutes ago
GOP chair of House Armed Services subcomittee: “without proof that Iran
is in violation of the agreement, it is a mistake to fully withdraw from this deal”
Haaretz: https://www.haaretz.com/middle-east...nctions-on-iran-a-crisis-for-the-eu-1.6071851
This scenario could well be the biggest diplomatic dilemma in the European Union’s history. The EU is also a signatory, but EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini – a valiant cheerleader for the Iran deal – will be powerless if the leaders of Britain, France and Germany won’t agree on a joint policy. Theresa May, Emmanuel Macron and Angela Merkel will each have to make independent decisions on whether to defy the United States and join a new Iran deal without the Americans, or fall in line with the Trump administration.
This is a momentous decision for the main Western European nations. Do they act against their own stated policies, or open up an unprecedented rift between Europe and the United States? The stakes are particularly high for “Brexit Britain,” which is on course to leave the EU next year. If France and Germany stick with the JCPOA, despite Trump, Prime Minister May’s government will have to decide which relationship they are more loath to jeopardize.
The stakes are particularly high for Britain, as London is still a major global financial hub both for banks and insurance companies. The City of London played a central role in imposing the sanctions on Iran at the start of the decade – and will be crucial in either renewing the sanctions or trying to counteract them, should Britain join the international coalition trying to save the Iran deal.
For Iran, and for Russia and China as well, a major crisis in the U.S.-European relationship, potentially endangering NATO’s cohesion, would be a huge achievement. On its own, it could be a worthwhile incentive for Iran to remain within the JCPOA framework, despite the United States pulling out.
This scenario could well be the biggest diplomatic dilemma in the European Union’s history. The EU is also a signatory, but EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini – a valiant cheerleader for the Iran deal – will be powerless if the leaders of Britain, France and Germany won’t agree on a joint policy. Theresa May, Emmanuel Macron and Angela Merkel will each have to make independent decisions on whether to defy the United States and join a new Iran deal without the Americans, or fall in line with the Trump administration.
This is a momentous decision for the main Western European nations. Do they act against their own stated policies, or open up an unprecedented rift between Europe and the United States? The stakes are particularly high for “Brexit Britain,” which is on course to leave the EU next year. If France and Germany stick with the JCPOA, despite Trump, Prime Minister May’s government will have to decide which relationship they are more loath to jeopardize.
The stakes are particularly high for Britain, as London is still a major global financial hub both for banks and insurance companies. The City of London played a central role in imposing the sanctions on Iran at the start of the decade – and will be crucial in either renewing the sanctions or trying to counteract them, should Britain join the international coalition trying to save the Iran deal.
For Iran, and for Russia and China as well, a major crisis in the U.S.-European relationship, potentially endangering NATO’s cohesion, would be a huge achievement. On its own, it could be a worthwhile incentive for Iran to remain within the JCPOA framework, despite the United States pulling out.
My point, which I'll emphasize again, is that we should focus more on the policy and less on the names.
Or what Congresspeople 'think' - because let's be honest about what that actually means.
Julio3000
<B>A Chip Off the Old Rock</B>
That's a fair point. My point, names aside, is that the policy increases the chances of more war in the region, whether by proxy or directly.
That wasn't considered prior to this?
https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news...es-travel-warning-for-golan-heights-1.6071960
Explosions Heard Near Damascus; Israeli Military Believes Iran Planning Imminent Attack
Explosions Heard Near Damascus; Israeli Military Believes Iran Planning Imminent Attack
Julio3000
<B>A Chip Off the Old Rock</B>
Interesting that the explosions are in Damascus, then.
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
the semicolon serves as a sort of dmz between the two thoughts
57Brave
Well-known member
I think the names should be a focus.
With the track record of the parties of course we have to measure the source
Who's word do you take/trust that there were/are violations that warrant this action ?
Last edited:
You really think this is about violations?
I bet you have a picture of Hans Blix hanging in your living room.
Managuarantano's Volunteers
<B><I>The Artist Formally Known as <P>Ventura's St
Hope thethe is happy when the Iranians have a nuclear missile tomorrow pointed at Israel (jk, but I think this decision was a mistake).
To nsacpi’s point, I think people knew that after the Paris Accord stuff. Before that was kinda “eh, prolly not going to change anything majorly”.
To nsacpi’s point, I think people knew that after the Paris Accord stuff. Before that was kinda “eh, prolly not going to change anything majorly”.
Last edited:
That would just prove we needed to kill the deal.
I hope they try and attack israel. Iranian leadership would get blown out o existence and the Iranian people would be free
Managuarantano's Volunteers
<B><I>The Artist Formally Known as <P>Ventura's St
You’re right, it would. It should be at least two months of “safety” from them becoming a nuclear power
Considering they were allowed to enrich uranium under the absurd nuclear deal it's very possible which goes to show what an embarrassment it was in the first place.