Iran under Sanction Pressures – Reaction?

[Goober]

EAO - As per the norm a question is asked and you up a fuk off as usual.
I also asked a question about Iran trying to aquire uranium - outside of the nomal regulations of course.

Quote: Originally Posted by earth_as_one
Still can't find the answer I already gave I see. How about you repost your question and then I'll repost my answer.

Gerry H
Fine, but if it's the non answer you already gave.... it would be a waste of time.


If Iran blocked the straight, forcing the u.s.'s hand and the u.s. and their allies invaded. Where would you stand

 

[gerryh]

EAO - As per the norm a question is asked and you up a fuk off as usual.
I also asked a question about Iran trying to aquire uranium - outside of the nomal regulations of course.

Quote: Originally Posted by earth_as_one
Still can't find the answer I already gave I see. How about you repost your question and then I'll repost my answer.

Gerry H
Fine, but if it's the non answer you already gave.... it would be a waste of time.


If Iran blocked the straight, forcing the u.s.'s hand and the u.s. and their allies invaded. Where would you stand

He's not going to answer, as I am sure he can already see that he has placed himself between a rock and a hard place and any straight on answer will show his hypocrisy.

 

[Goober]

He's not going to answer, as I am sure he can already see that he has placed himself between a rock and a hard place and any straight on answer will show his hypocrisy.

I think everyone with the exception of Dancing Loon are well aware of his character.

 

[earth_as_one]

I see you ignored the question again eao.

I see you refused to repost the question again gerryh

 

[ironsides]

Iran does not have to meet the conditions of agreements that it did not ratify. Iran can legally defy the UNSC... at its peril. Iran has a good case that it is being treated unfairly by a subjective IAEA and UNSC.

Countries can legally impose sanctions against Iran for not ratifying the additional confidence building protocols while ignoring India, Pakistan and Israel which have nuclear technology which have not signed the entire NPT and possess nuclear weapons.

A traffic cop could also hand out a speeding ticket to someone driving 5 km/h over the speed limit, while ignoring all the other cars traveling 50 km/h over the speed limit. However a case could be made that the traffic cop is not applying the same standards to everyone.

If Iran is not treated objectively by the IAEA then they would be justified in unsigning themselves from the NPT in the same way that Canada unsigned itself from the Kyoto Protocols regarding climate change.

Iran can defy the UNSC, with little fear that China would allow any UNSC resolution which would interfere with their ability to buy Iranian oil. China might choose to not protect Iran if they built a nuke, which is yet another reason why I doubt Iran is building nukes.

The guy driving 5 MPH over the limit is still breaking the law. Iran is the only country (I am aware of developing nuclear weapons) at this moment. (get the guy off the street before he hurts someone) Never mind what China might or might not do, they are not the problem.

Spread of nuclear capability is feared (San Diego Union-Tribune)
VIENNA, Austria At least 40 countries from the Persian Gulf to Latin America have recently approached U.N. officials to signal interest in starting nuclear power programs, a trend that proliferation experts say could provide the building blocks of nuclear arsenals in some of those nations.)

http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/france-says-iran-developing-nuclear-arms/story-e6frfku0-1226235972374

To br fair:
US: Iran has not yet decided to build nuclear bomb


Defense Secretary Leon Panetta says Iran is laying the groundwork for making nuclear weapons someday, but is not yet building a bomb and called for continued

diplomatic and economic pressure to persuade Tehran not to take that step

​

 

[Goober]

I see you refused to repost the question again gerryh

Here it is

If Iran blocked the straight, forcing the u.s.'s hand and the u.s. and their allies invaded. Where would you stand

 

[gerryh]

I see you refused to repost the question again gerryh

How many times do I need to repost it?

 

[earth_as_one]

gerryH:

If Iran blocked the straight, forcing the u.s.'s hand and the u.s. and their allies invaded. Where would you stand?

It would depend on context and our obligations.

Canada does not have a NATO obligation to get involved in a dispute between the US/Israel and Iran. If the US or Israel attack Iran (an act of war) and Iran closes the strait, Canada should condemn the US/Israeli attack and not get involved. As per rules of war, Iran would have a right to close the gulf.

If the US closed down the strait to Iran and its trading partners, then Iran can close the strait down to the US and its trading partners. Canada should not intervene or choose sides. We should try to remain neutral and avoid sending ships to region.

If Iran mined the gulf illegally closing the strait, then I support Canadians intervening to clear to strait at the request of our trading partners in the region and under UN authority.

If Iran illegally, unilaterally and militarily closed down the strait, with no justification, then its up to nations which have an interest in the region to decide what to do. Canada would have no NATO obligation to pick sides in this conflict. I'd support Canada putting its interests first. While a closed Persian Gulf might have a big negative impact on the rest of the world, Canada would see a net benefit. Canada owns the world's largest proven oil reserve outside of the gulf. Israel is not part of NATO. Israel's fight with the entire Muslim world and most of the middle east isn't our fight. Israel's problems with Iran aren't any more Canada's business than India's problems with Pakistan. I'd support Canada acting pragmatically to the benefit of Canadians, especially Canadians who work in Canada's oil industry. I'd support massive government intervention to build oil infrastructure to the West Coast.

If anyone attacks the American in the US or Europeans in Europe, then I support Canada acting as per its NATO obligations. Iran and their allies have an interest in not taking this conflict to Europe or the US.

If the war goes badly for Israel, I support opening Canada up to Israeli refugees.

 

[DaSleeper]

 

[gerryh]

Yup.... completely.

 

[Goober]

gerryH:

If Iran blocked the straight, forcing the u.s.'s hand and the u.s. and their allies invaded. Where would you stand?

It would depend on context and our obligations.

Let us make it clear-

Iran blocks the straits -

Threatens to sink tankers

US - French and other escort tankers thru the stait

They are attacked by Iranian forces.

US - French etc retaliate

Where do you stand?

And leave the FFn Jews out of it.
Israel will do SFA, same as Gulf War 1

 

[earth_as_one]

If Iran closes the strait and the French try to send tankers through, then I'd say that's the business of the French and the Iranians.

Canada has no obligation to defend French or US interests in the Persian Gulf.

 

[Goober]

If Iran closes the strait and the French try to send tankers through, then I'd say that's the business of the French and the Iranians.

French are part of NATO.

 

[earth_as_one]

Canada does not have any NATO obligations outside Europe and the North Atlantic. Hence the name...

Yup.... completely.

It would depend on context and our obligations.

You never gave me enough information. Give me a possible likely scenario...

 

[gerryh]

Canada does not have any NATO obligations outside Europe and the North Atlantic. Hence the name...


It would depend on context and our obligations.

You never gave me enough information. Give me a possible likely scenario...

It's a straight forward question. I have no problem answering it, why are you having so much trouble with it?

 

[Goober]

Canada does not have any NATO obligations outside Europe and the North Atlantic. Hence the name...


It would depend on context and our obligations.

You never gave me enough information. Give me a possible likely scenario...

Most of Eastern Canada's oil comes from OPEC - It would be raised to a strategic interest by NATO ASAP - SFD -Same FFFn Day. Soon as Iran stated it would/ could / threaten and in fact closed the strait. You know that as well as I. But you keep on piling on the BS.

And NATO would destroy Irans capability to attack, produce oil. Back to the stone age.



http://www.virtualjerusalem.com/news.php?Itemid=5717

US and NATO task forces in the Persian Gulf have been placed on alert after US intelligence warned that Iran's Revolutionary Guards are preparing Iranian marine commandos to sow mines in the strategic Strait of Hormuz.

The new deployment, debkafile's military sources report, consists of USS Combined Task Force 52 (CTF 52), which is trained and equipped for dismantling marine mines and NATO Maritime Mine Counter measures Group 2 (SNMCMG2). The American group is led by the USS Arden mine countermeasures ship; NATO's by the British HMS Pembroke minesweeper. Other vessels in the task forces are the Hunt-class destroyer HMS Middleton and the French mine warfare ships FS Croix du Sud and FS Var.

 

[earth_as_one]

Sure oil would get a lot more expensive. I'm almost in favor of shutting down the gulf for purely environmental reasons. Canada would see a net benefit from a closed Persian Gulf. Explain to me how a closed Persian Gulf is bad for Canada...

It's a straight forward question. I have no problem answering it, why are you having so much trouble with it?

If you asked me if I believed in shooting people, I'd also say it depends on context.

 

[gerryh]

Sure oil would get a lot more expensive. I'm almost in favor of shutting down the gulf for purely environmental reasons. Canada would see a net benefit from a closed Persian Gulf. Explain to me how a closed Persian Gulf is bad for Canada...


If you asked me if I believed in shooting people, I'd also say it depends on context.

Shooting people depends on context????????????????????????????? I thought you had said you were a pacifist.

 

[Goober]

Sure oil would get a lot more expensive. I'm almost in favor of shutting down the gulf for purely environmental reasons. Canada would see a net benefit from a closed Persian Gulf. Explain to me how a closed Persian Gulf is bad for Canada...


If you asked me if I believed in shooting people, I'd also say it depends on context.

No sense in explaining the economic impact.

Shooting people depends on context????????????????????????????? I thought you had said you were a pacifist.

From EAO's mouth.

I am a non-violent pacifist secular humanist. If everyone shared my philosophy there would be no violence, war or crime.

 

[Goober]

No sense in explaining the economic impact.


From EAO's mouth.

I am a non-violent pacifist secular humanist. If everyone shared my philosophy there would be no violence, war or crime.

EAO

How many opposing opinions do you have on the same topic??? Related to Eve by chance?????