USA imposes new sanctions against Iran

[Ἀπολλόδοτος Α΄ ὁ Σωτήρ]

Anyone who thinks a Saudi-funded religious institution is going to produce people with an outlook favourable towards the west is gravely mistaken. They teach that music is haram. They teach that genders must be segregated. They teach that human beings cannot use their minds, nor exercise any independent reasoning. They teach that you must obey, or you are deserving of death or worse. Books and education are not allowed; associating with anyone outside the group is not allowed. Human happiness is not allowed. Everything is about fear, intimidation and merciless punishment of anyone who deviates even in the slightest. There is no nuance, no dialogue, no understanding. No peace, no mercy, no compassion. It's barbaric and inhuman.

Personally, I think Wahhabism in all its forms should be banned. In its place, Sufi or Shia institutions should be sponsored to teach the real religion. Many people would be discovering their religion for the first time. It would be quite a liberation and an Enlightenment at the same time.

I'm pretty sure that even the most ardent supporters of close US-Saudi cooperation wouldn't openly argue that Saudi Wahhabi Islam is the most tolerant one.

You are correct, but any Westerner saying this openly would be called an Islamophobe. What can one do.

I say it all the time, they are spreading their interpretation of Islam unabatedly and the worst thing is that the West enables them.

[Dracula]

Question is why doesn't Iran go to do smth to people who are against it. Cause only this is the manly behaviour. But led by clergy whose problem is pederasty the response is pederastic of course.

[bigdaddy1204]

You are correct, but any Westerner saying this openly would be called an Islamophobe. What can one do.

I say it all the time, they are spreading their interpretation of Islam unabatedly and the worst thing is that the West enables them.

One possibility: the west could switch alliances. Drop the alliance with Saudi Arabia. Ally with Iran instead. Iran would be a natural ally for the west, since we are both fighting against ISIS, and we both need a stable Iraq, and we are both threatened by Saudi Arabia. Working together, Iran and the west could be quite a powerful team. It would certainly be a good way of countering Saudi Arabia, and it would reduce the west's dependence on their oil; just buy it from Iran instead. It's a win-win scenario.

[fkizz]

Question is why doesn't Iran go to do smth to people who are against it. Cause only this is the manly behaviour. But led by clergy whose problem is pederasty the response is pederastic of course.

Iran is under econimic siege. I doubt it has the luxury to spend resources for that.

One possibility: the west could switch alliances. Drop the alliance with Saudi Arabia. Ally with Iran instead. Iran would be a natural ally for the west, since we are both fighting against ISIS, and we both need a stable Iraq, and we are both threatened by Saudi Arabia. Working together, Iran and the west could be quite a powerful team. It would certainly be a good way of countering Saudi Arabia, and it would reduce the west's dependence on their oil; just buy it from Iran instead. It's a win-win scenario.

That's for armed forces strategy makers to comteplate and decide. Way out of my league.

[Incontinenta Buttox]

Was probably overheard due to all your cheering for Trump.


They aren't more dangerous, because they are counting on their Western partners. Their military is focused on small units and air superiority, which, linked to SA western ties, has a mainly defensive function. Iran's manpower vastly outnumbers SA's and with armored cavalry and Zulfiquar main battle tanks, they are equipped for invasion and occupation. Iran's political personality has been outrageously hostile towards the West, hostile towards her rivals in the Gulf region and especially hate filled towards Israel since 1979. If anyone still believes the Iranian dream about annihilating Israel is something like a clandestine expression of a grudge and not rally to be taken seriously, then they are simply delusional. Iran threatens to become a Middle Eastern superpower with an utterly hostile agenda, meanwhile Saudi arabia is tightly intertwined with Western interests.

Therefore i'd say the exact opposite: It is retarded to focus on Saudi Arabia instead of Iran. Trump is simply objectively right with this regard. The Iran deal is naive and nothing but an opportunity for decieving the US.

Have a closer look what Trump's sanctions actually entail and where he is coming from with this regard:



Unfortunately:



http://www.politico.com/magazine/sto...on-iran-214737

Which is exactly one of the things you so gleefully appreciated, isn't it. You practically endorsed the guy for exactly the wrong reasons and once he does something actually sensible, namely basically proceeding with the policy of his predecessors, you say it's retarded and "JOOOS DIDDIT".

Sorry. It's not Iran that is funding and promoting jihadi terrorism, and the islamisation of Europe. It's the Saudi's, they are far more dangerous.

[swabian]

Sorry. It's not Iran that is funding and promoting jihadi terrorism, and the islamisation of Europe. It's the Saudi's, they are far more dangerous.

Directly to us westerners and right now, probably, but not when it comes to the potential to unleash havoc in the Near East. Mosques and a bunch of Salafists can't do what an army of over 400k and 1500 tanks can do.

@Basil: What you're applying there is short-term thinking, the very same very human trait caused this chaos in the first place.
- Neutrality when it comes to Israel's security? You've got to be kidding me. They are a Western outpost sourrounded by mortal enemies, they contribute a lot to our security. They aren't hanging at the Western tit they are partners and an integral part of the Western world, how is this difficult to conceive?
- Near Eastern warfare caused by Iran unthinkable? Seriously? Hahaha. Like financial problems and an overpowering West has ever stopped them for long. I can't fathom what this is with economy guys always assuming that financial troubles are a gurantee for peace. Rather the opposite is the case. Do you think Germany was rich when they started WW2? Of course not, you take risks, conquer, raid and finance your . No need to consider economical subtleties.

[bigdaddy1204]

- Neutrality when it comes to Israel's security? You've got to be kidding me. They are a Western outpost sourrounded by mortal enemies, they contribute a lot to our security. They aren't hanging at the Western tit they are partners and an integral part of the Western world, how is this difficult to conceive?

Completely wrong. You couldn't be more wrong if you tried. Israel does not benefit the security of the west. Right-wing Israel is the number one cause of radicalisation in the Middle East. Even Osama Bin Laden talked about Palestine as a justification for 9/11. Israel's "security" can go to hell, as long as the right-wing Israeli government is oppressing, torturing and murdering the people of Palestine there will be righteous resistance. There can be no peace with an oppressor until they stop their acts of aggression and desist. How difficult is that for YOU to conceive?

It should come as no surprise to you that when people are routinely attacked, murdered and oppressed in a thousand smaller ways, they will fight back. If you can't grasp that, you shouldn't be debating politics.

[Basil II the B.S]

@Basil: What you're applying there is short-term thinking, the very same very human trait caused this chaos in the first place.
- Neutrality when it comes to Israel's security? You've got to be kidding me. They are a Western outpost sourrounded by mortal enemies, they contribute a lot to our security. They aren't hanging at the Western tit they are partners and an integral part of the Western world, how is this difficult to conceive?

Actually they only thing they contribute to is angering Muslims against them and whoever supports their expansion (us), providing a reason to join jihadist groups against the invader and their decadent supporters.

- Near Eastern warfare caused by Iran unthinkable? Seriously? Hahaha. Like financial problems and an overpowering West has ever stopped them for long. I can't fathom what this is with economy guys always assuming that financial troubles are a gurantee for peace. Rather the opposite is the case. Do you think Germany was rich when they started WW2? Of course not, you take risks, conquer, raid and finance your . No need to consider economical subtleties.

Define long term, then you'll notice that in your definition of long term Iran hasn't started a single war.

[Love Mountain]

Completely wrong. You couldn't be more wrong if you tried. Israel does not benefit the security of the west. Right-wing Israel is the number one cause of radicalisation in the Middle East. Even Osama Bin Laden talked about Palestine as a justification for 9/11. Israel's "security" can go to hell, as long as the right-wing Israeli government is oppressing, torturing and murdering the people of Palestine there will be righteous resistance. There can be no peace with an oppressor until they stop their acts of aggression and desist. How difficult is that for YOU to conceive?

It should come as no surprise to you that when people are routinely attacked, murdered and oppressed in a thousand smaller ways, they will fight back. If you can't grasp that, you shouldn't be debating politics.

The existence of Israel is a point of conflict for the entire region. That is unacceptable to me. While the Palestine situation is unfortunate I am not going to support any action that'll encourage Arabs to over-run a prosperous country into yet another wasteland. Not only that, but they are by far, the most reliable partner and essentially a giant NATO base in the Middle East. Not to mention that they are angels when compared to their peers in Saudi Arabia, Iran, or Turkey. The former two openly sponsor terrorism and the latter is still participating in an on-going conflict with Kurds. You put any other Muslim gov. in Israel's shoes and their answer would be to engage in ethnic cleansing that would be called "ethnic cleansing" instead of "settlements".

I'll take the most xenophobic, right-wing, militant Israel over anyone else in the Middle East.

[EU Empire is fubar]

Iran is going to be attacked. Israel Saudi Arabia and USA will do it. Hezbollah and Syria are too busy with USA and Saudi supported Terrorists. Pray to Kek and meme power or this will happen.

[fkizz]

Iran is going to be attacked. Israel Saudi Arabia and USA will do it. Hezbollah and Syria are too busy with USA and Saudi supported Terrorists. Pray to Kek and meme power or this will happen.

There's no memes of Trump leading US into Iran.

[Basil II the B.S]

Iran is going to be attacked. Israel Saudi Arabia and USA will do it. Hezbollah and Syria are too busy with USA and Saudi supported Terrorists. Pray to Kek and meme power or this will happen.

Iran getting attack means going to war against Russia and probably China. Third world war that is. It'd be the dumbest mistake ever.

[Principe Alessandro]

Trump's foreign policy is becoming even more incoherent than Obama's foreign policy.

It makes no sense at all to put economic sanctions against Iran while at the same time effectively helping his military expansion in Iraq and Syria.

[Cyclops]

One possibility: the west could switch alliances. Drop the alliance with Saudi Arabia. Ally with Iran instead. Iran would be a natural ally for the west, since we are both fighting against ISIS, and we both need a stable Iraq, and we are both threatened by Saudi Arabia. Working together, Iran and the west could be quite a powerful team. It would certainly be a good way of countering Saudi Arabia, and it would reduce the west's dependence on their oil; just buy it from Iran instead. It's a win-win scenario.

That would be a massive reversal of alliances.

Unfortunately the entrenched position in the US is "Iran is a big bad theocracy (nvm Saudis guise lel)" and the Iranians are even more wedded to their Cuban style demonization of the US ("milk spoiled? Curse you Great Satan!")". Maybe they could pull of a 1984 style diplomatic retcon "USA has always been our friend" but I doubt it.

Then again if the US did ally with Iran it would put another enemy in the soft underbelly of the Russian federation and threaten Russian influence across the Turanian plain into central Asia. Such a move might well spark war with Russia (it would put them in a "backs to the wall" situation) and would activate a wave of Salafist terror greater than the current episode. It would definitely require a war in Arabia, probably taking out the corrupt Gulf States as well as the evil Saudi regime, so Iraq II and III probably.

The upside would that after decades of meat grinding you could put a moderate Sharif as guardian of the Holy Places, every would accept a US appointed dynasty right?

Geez its a mess, the sooner we go solar/fusion/genetically modified giant hamster power the better.

[Love Mountain]

We wouldn't be in this position if we didnt invade Iraq, but I digress.

For all the evil Saudis do, I wouldn't mind it so much if it wasn't directed against America, who is one of the people guaranteeing their security. Talk about biting the hand that feeds you. We should've began the process of re-orienting the world economy against the Saudis 16 years ago after 9/11. I'd prefer a Persian hegemony over the region to a Saudi or Erdogan one. At least Iran has some semblance of "democracy".

[EU Empire is fubar]

Trump may need a war to get the country to gel together.? Stop the protesters? He will get his travel ban then. No Judge can stop him during war time. This is how I see Trump going into battle .

[Roboute Guilliman]

Trump may need a war to get the country to gel together.? Stop the protesters? He will get his travel ban then. No Judge can stop him during war time. This is how I see Trump going into battle .

The US can hardly defeat the taliban, and now you expect them to go up against a war veterened military fighting in the same terrain like in Afghanistan. Its just going to be another Vietnam or worse.

[sumskilz]

The US can hardly defeat the taliban, and now you expect them to go up against a war veterened military fighting in the same terrain like in Afghanistan. Its just going to be another Vietnam or worse.

I'm not suggesting that there is any reason to do so at this point, but defeating Iran would be much easier than defeating the Taliban. To defeat the Taliban, you pretty much have to kill them all, which the US could easily do, but only if willing to commit horrible war crimes. To defeat Iran, all that really needs to be done is to beat up on them until they no longer want to participate, see Operation Praying Mantis. I can't imagine a case that would actually call for a ground invasion of Iran.

[Prodromos]

I'm not suggesting that there is any reason to do so at this point, but defeating Iran would be much easier than defeating the Taliban. To defeat the Taliban, you pretty much have to kill them all, which the US could easily do, but only if willing to commit horrible war crimes. To defeat Iran, all that really needs to be done is to beat up on them until they no longer want to participate, see Operation Praying Mantis. I can't imagine a case that would actually call for a ground invasion of Iran.

Yeah, it is obviously easier to get a peace deal from a state, than from a terrorist organization, but, a simple ceasefire wouldn't be ideal, in my opinion. I think any outcome other than a liberal, democratic and hopefully Christian Iran, would be a failed mission. But you can't impose that without a total military victory. A peace deal without regime change is just kicking the can down the road. They will keep militarizing and expanding, but perhaps more subtly. And as for oppressed Iranians, they are still SOL if Khamenei and co are still running the government. I'd rather just kill the leaders once and for all, and help the new government fight whatever insurgency the deposed Islamists start.

[Roma_Victrix]

I do hope Russia sends Iran some nukes.

That's delusional. Russia, along with China, the US, and the EU (particularly France and the UK) partook in sanctions against Iran while Barack Obama was president, and only lifted these sanctions once it became clear that Iran was willing to negotiate and curb its uranium enrichment project. Russia has no problem hoarding its own nukes that it has retained since the days of the Cold War, but it has no interest in proliferating the most lethal weapon on Earth among foreign powers. Probably bad enough as it is that the US, UK, France, Pakistan, India, China, Russia, and now North Korea (and most likely Israel) all have nuclear weapons. There's a reason why Vasili Arkhipov thwarted a Soviet attempt at using a nuclear strike against the United States Navy during the Cuban Missile Crisis. It's a lesson Moscow has not forgotten, let alone the rest of the world.