New Obama hypocrisy.

[Lemon law]

Obama has now determined, that Iranian sanctions are somehow permissible because taking Iranian oil off world markets will not adversely effect world oil prices.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/...h-sanctions-targeting-iran-oil-190045204.html

But if we examine the logic and its converse, its totally bogus stinking thinking. Because if we assumed on no logical basis that Iran intends to develop nuclear weapons, why would an adverse effect on world prices make the Iranian nuclear permissible?

The fact is and remains, there is absolutely no evidence that Iran is developing nuclear weapons.

And at the same time, the USA invaded Iraq on the premise that Saddam had WMD, when it fact, Saddam did not have WMD. And now, 10 years later, US citizens have pissed some 4000 US lives down an Iraqi rat hole, and another 2 trillion dollars to boot on a invasion that was based on nothing but false suspicions, and now we have nothing to show for it. At the very time when the occupation of Afghanistan is on the verge of total failure.

And now on that same false suspicions basis, the USA and the EU have learned nothing and want to try more of the same in Iran.

Which may not be easy this time, as other mid-east nations may side with Iran as Turkey is already saying. As Israel chomps at the bit to bomb Iran when Israel is the most hated nation in the mid-east.

The US simply can't accept the fact that their US puppet in the Shah of Iran got the ole heave ho from the Iranian people and simply will never come back. Meanwhile for 30 years the US has tried various things to torpedo Iran, and its backfired on the US every time.

Israel and the US have already pushed up US gas prices by 50 cents a gallon, and now Obama risks pushing up US gas prices to $15.00 or more. By alienating Arab nations and the world with only suspicions.

 

[Craig234]

You have to wonder, is the nuclear weapons issue simply a cover for 'we don't want Iran to have power in the region so we're going to try to weaken them for our preference'...

Clearly, we have preferences for who has more power (e.g., close alliance with the Saudis, who are at odds with Iran). Clearly, Iran has benefited from our war on Iraq. Clearly, if we said 'we're going to take various hostile measures to attack Iran's economy and military strength for our own interests', it doesn't sound good.

But 'sanctions to prevent nuclear proliferation'? Sure!!

It's a bit like how WMD were 'selected as the issue for justifying policy against Iraq as a bureacratic convenience'.

It's a little tin foil hat, but not that much - because it closely fits how it would make sense for us to do that if we wanted to.

For what it's worth, I suspect our concern is more actual about the weapons issue than used as a cover, but it's useful to note how these things can work.

We are absolutely not above manufacturing an issue to use this way IMO, nor is any major nation I can think of, and smaller nations would be the same if they were major.

It's just unfortunate that such excesses for partisan benefit can lead to real harm (think Iraqi children killed by disease under sanctions) and war, rather than any better system.

These needs to 'compete for regional power' lead to things like bad alliances - think Iranian backing of the regime in Syria, because losing them would lose regional power.

Or how we tend to notice the moral need to oppose humanitarian abuses more strongly when they happens to be by someone we'd benefit from weakening.

This is where a much more effective UN could be useful - if the members weren't more concerned with keeping it weak to not interfere with their wrongful actions.

How many sanctions have we pressed for against Israel for nuclear weapons? If we were in Iran's situation, would we be ok with the double standard?

 

[Moonbeam]

When party X is A. enriching uranium that can be weaponized into nuclear weapons and B. claims that a nuclear war doesn't matter because their side will go to heaven you C. demand full access to their nuclear sites immediately or you nuke them as fast as you can.

The dangerously insane have to be put down, just as you would a rabid dog. The sane have a duty to protect innocent people from dangerous mad men. Pantie waist liberals don't seem to get this.

Remember that Moonbeam's law will only ever have to be fully applied but once. From that point on there will always be open access.

 

[soccerballtux]

The fact is and remains, there is absolutely no evidence that Iran is developing nuclear weapons.

cool so NRC inspectors get full unfettered unannounced access then. Iran has nothing to hide.

 

[soccerballtux]

When party X is A. enriching uranium that can be weaponized into nuclear weapons and B. claims that a nuclear war doesn't matter because their side will go to heaven you C. demand full access to their nuclear sites immediately or you nuke them as fast as you can.

The dangerously insane have to be put down, just as you would a rabid dog. The sane have a duty to protect innocent people from dangerous mad men. Pantie waist liberals don't seem to get this.

Remember that Moonbeam's law will only ever have to be fully applied but once. From that point on there will always be open access.

This sounds unlike you. Are you being facetious? Because I'm in support of that.

 

[bfdd]

Read this earlier. Don't feel to strongly about the Iranian Sanctions. Why are we trying to embolden their stance against us again?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Read this earlier. Don't feel to strongly about the Iranian Sanctions. Why are we trying to embolden their stance against us again?

Iran is a country where officials out of favor are removed on the charge of sorcery. Members of their government say that the Holocaust never happened, that Israel needs to be eliminated and have announced they'll hire terrorists. When people protest they eliminate them and I mean forever. It's a place with a crazy ass government. Thats why people are a bit uneasy allowing weapons of mass mayhem to come under their control. They never need use them to destabilize things in their favor of course. The problem is with practical options. Giving a blessing to such people isn't a great idea but war is a bad idea. No one seriously desires military action yet so what does that leave? Sanctions.

 

[cubby1223]

The fact is and remains, there is absolutely no evidence that Iran is developing nuclear weapons.

I'm glad you cleared that up for us

 

[bfdd]

Iran is a country where officials out of favor are removed on the charge of sorcery. Members of their government say that the Holocaust never happened, that Israel needs to be eliminated and have announced they'll hire terrorists. When people protest they eliminate them and I mean forever. It's a place with a crazy ass government. Thats why people are a bit uneasy allowing weapons of mass mayhem to come under their control. They never need use them to destabilize things in their favor of course. The problem is with practical options. Giving a blessing to such people isn't a great idea but war is a bad idea. No one seriously desires military action yet so what does that leave? Sanctions.

Look I don't like the Iranian regime/government/whatever either, but it doesn't seem to be the right thing to do. Sanctions embolden their position, which will then require us to take the next step, and back and forth etc etc. We should try to destroy them through being a shiny beacon of liberty and success. Destroy them with our productivity, innovation and economy. It's not like they pose any sort of military threat.

 

[SparkyJJO]

And if Iran is trying to develop nukes, and does a test launch, then glass them.

/notbeingserious

 

[Moonbeam]

Iran is a country where officials out of favor are removed on the charge of sorcery. Members of their government say that the Holocaust never happened, that Israel needs to be eliminated and have announced they'll hire terrorists. When people protest they eliminate them and I mean forever. It's a place with a crazy ass government. Thats why people are a bit uneasy allowing weapons of mass mayhem to come under their control. They never need use them to destabilize things in their favor of course. The problem is with practical options. Giving a blessing to such people isn't a great idea but war is a bad idea. No one seriously desires military action yet so what does that leave? Sanctions.

I think it leaves them the only door that can save them, an open door for inspections or annihilation. You can't allow folk who wish to take their case to a higher court access to nuclear weapons. You present them with that test of faith and hope their faith is as phony as the faith of fundamentalist Christians. If real then they get to present their case first to the Maker.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Look I don't like the Iranian regime/government/whatever either, but it doesn't seem to be the right thing to do. Sanctions embolden their position, which will then require us to take the next step, and back and forth etc etc. We should try to destroy them through being a shiny beacon of liberty and success. Destroy them with our productivity, innovation and economy. It's not like they pose any sort of military threat.

There are good reasons why sanctions are bad. They tend to ultimately punish people you'd like to court while not discomforting the leadership in the least. I'd personally be wary and judicious in their application. The root problem is that in reality all choices are bad. I like to think I'm reasonably adept at coming up with possible courses of action but I'm stumped with Iran.

 

[theeedude]

cool so NRC inspectors get full unfettered unannounced access then. Iran has nothing to hide.

Saddam allowed inspectors, had nothing to hide, and still got invaded. Why would Iran let inspectors in?

 

[cubby1223]

Sanctions embolden their position

A lack of sanctions also embolden their position.

 

[Lemon law]

Saddam allowed inspectors, had nothing to hide, and still got invaded. Why would Iran let inspectors in?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree with the senseamp point but its understated.

As its quite evident to Iran, that the IAEA officials turn their findings over to Israel, and the Israel uses it to murder Iranian nuclear scientists. A fact that the US State department has confirmed. As Israel, IMHO, should not even have a right to get the time of day from the IAEA.

Then we can take the other fact from the horse mouth in Leon Pinetta, who also states there is zero evidence Iran intends to go the nuclear weapons route as that Iranian option is still two years away for Iran.

Or we can also ask, when GWB&co made a totally false case of Saddam having WMD and sold a war on the basis of a totally fraudulent sales job, why should not the international community have indicted GWB&co for international war crimes? Or failing that, pay no attention to new US lies for being the little boy who cried wolf riding again.

As we all should ask, if the USA in its arrogance gets it wrong and skyrockets world oil prices, USA foreign policy is going to suffer a very large dopeslap. I would vote GOP on that basis if it were not for the fact the GOP is even more delusional. Or vote for Ron Paul who at least gets that point but will still lead to a even worse end.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I think it leaves them the only door that can save them, an open door for inspections or annihilation. You can't allow folk who wish to take their case to a higher court access to nuclear weapons. You present them with that test of faith and hope their faith is as phony as the faith of fundamentalist Christians. If real then they get to present their case first to the Maker.

The question I cannot answer is what to do to save all and have the greatest good. Alas I haven't the wit.

 

[Double Trouble]

Sanctions generally do very little to the leadership, and hurt the population, but Iran might be somewhat unique. It's highly unstable with a relatively young population led by old bearded ultra conservative nutcases. Messing with their economy just might lead to an overthrow of the theocratic government.

I agree with some of the earlier posts that the options are somewhat limited, with no obvious good answers available. Sanctions seem like the only option that has a chance to succeed. Make no mistake about it, if sanctions don't work and it looks like Iran is getting close, Israel will take action, and it won't be pretty. The US is trying to avoid that scenario.

 

[cybrsage]

Saddam allowed inspectors, had nothing to hide, and still got invaded. Why would Iran let inspectors in?

He "sorta" allowed inspectors. He routinely kicked them out, denied them access to places, etc. It was not all hugs and man-kisses.

 

[cybrsage]

The problem with sanctions is that they do not work. The THREAT of sanctions work, but when you reach the point of actually having to apply sanctions, they never work. However, if you never apply them, then even the threat stops working.

 

[shabby]

The fact is and remains, there is absolutely no evidence that Iran is developing nuclear weapons.

Slight chance seeing as how the US actually gave iran nuclear plans http://blog.skepticallibertarian.com/2012/03/14/obamas-war-on-whistleblowers-jeffrey-sterling/
Ya what were they thinking... oops.

 

[Moonbeam]

The question I cannot answer is what to do to save all and have the greatest good. Alas I haven't the wit.

I don't think it's because you don't have the wit, but that there is no answer.

MAD can only work where all who posses unclear weapons are sane. As soon as one party starts to think their earthly lives don't matter, and that they not you will find themselves in heaven if everyone dies, there is no rational alternative, if you care about billions of innocent people, but to remove the smaller number of the insane. You would want to give Iran every chance to open up for inspection and you would want to notify the people what is coming but you would need to act on non compliance. As I said, I believe you would only have to do this one time in history. You could even work up slow by dropping the smallest possible weapons but you would have to go all the way to complete capitulation.

The fact that the US is not a moral nation fit to apply such a fix isn't of much importance. It doesn't really matter if the lives of millions are saved by a piece of shit.

 

[Lemon law]

When party X is A. enriching uranium that can be weaponized into nuclear weapons and B. claims that a nuclear war doesn't matter because their side will go to heaven you C. demand full access to their nuclear sites immediately or you nuke them as fast as you can.

The dangerously insane have to be put down, just as you would a rabid dog. The sane have a duty to protect innocent people from dangerous mad men. Pantie waist liberals don't seem to get this.

Remember that Moonbeam's law will only ever have to be fully applied but once. From that point on there will always be open access.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If Moonbeam's law has any validity, why is not Moonbean applying his law equally to Israel? As Israel never bothered to enrich Uranium and instead has been enriching plutonium at an ever faster rate. And now is a nuclear threat of the first order as Israeli irrationality makes Israel the most destabilizing nation in the mid-east.

Why not inspect Israel also Moonbeam?

 

[JEDIYoda]

Saddam allowed inspectors, had nothing to hide, and still got invaded. Why would Iran let inspectors in?

Not entirely true....

 

[Matt1970]

Saddam allowed inspectors, had nothing to hide, and still got invaded. Why would Iran let inspectors in?

Saddam kicked the inspectors out numerous times. He would let them back in only to deny them access to places. Clinton had to order air strikes for 3 days to get Saddam to comply with weapons inspectors. The inspectors also quit once in protest over Saddam not allowing them access to sites.

 

[Moonbeam]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If Moonbeam's law has any validity, why is not Moonbean applying his law equally to Israel? As Israel never bothered to enrich Uranium and instead has been enriching plutonium at an ever faster rate. And now is a nuclear threat of the first order as Israeli irrationality makes Israel the most destabilizing nation in the mid-east.

Why not inspect Israel also Moonbeam?

In the first place they already have the bomb so MAD is in effect.

In the second place they have had the bomb for a very long time and have not used it.

In the third place they seem to appreciate life on earth and don't seem to want to commit suicide to get to heaven. Everybody is irrational but not everybody is willing to die themselves to kill you.