4 ms·

"our actions toward their country have led to hundreds of thousands of dead Iranians over the years." This false and inflammatory, moreover, 'sanctions' are to

"our actions toward their country have led to hundreds of thousands of dead Iranians over the years." This false and inflammatory, moreover, 'sanctions' are totally unrelated to 'assistance'. Today, Iran can de-facto trade with most of the world either directly or through intermediaries. The purpose of any embargo is to weaken a state economically, not withhold specific medicines, obviously.

AriaMinaei 8y ago
> Today, Iran can de-facto trade with most of the world either directly or through intermediaries. The purpose of any embargo is to weaken a state economically, not withhold specific medicines, obviously This is not true. Even opening a foreign bank account (necessary for trade) is impossible for Iranians companies, making trade extremely difficult for all companies. European banks are legally permitted to trade with Iranian companies, but the threat of fines from the U.S bars all of them from doing so. > The purpose of any embargo is to weaken a state economically, not withhold specific medicines, obviously. In reality, one of the immediate effects of sanctions is scarcity of medicine. Source: I lived there through the Obama-era sanctions.
- acct1771 8y ago
  This perspective would make an excellent NYT piece.
  - lustysocietyorg 8y ago
    The NYT is part of the Western propaganda machine. Why do you think that US citzens and EU citizens do not know about deadly sanctions as economic warfare? Why do you think this post is downvoted despite linking verifiable facts? Hedges: Journalism Should Be About Truth, Not Career - Chris Hedges on Reality Asserts Itself (2/7) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XR0oGJ2yrmc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XR0oGJ2yrmc No volunteers: EU countries bow to US pressure over alternative payment channel for Iran https://www.rt.com/business/444051-eu-fears-us-sanctions-iran/ https://www.rt.com/business/444051-eu-fears-us-sanctions-ira... Who’s the boss? SWIFT defies EU, caving in to US pressure to cut off Iranian banks https://www.rt.com/business/443315-swift-iran-us-sanctions/ https://www.rt.com/business/443315-swift-iran-us-sanctions/ Madeleine Albright says 500,000 dead Iraqi Children was "worth it" wins Medal of Freedom https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omnskeu-puE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omnskeu-puE
    - dang 8y ago
      We've banned this account for using HN primarily for political and ideological battle. Regardless of which politics or ideology, this is against the site guidelines. HN is for unplanned conversation, not pre-existing agendas. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comment&storyText=false&prefix=false&page=0&query=by:dang%20primarily%20battle https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme...
      - lustysocietyorg 8y ago
        > We've banned this account for using HN primarily for political and ideological battle. Regardless of which politics or ideology, this is against the site guidelines. I have always answered where appropriate. Often in defense of truth in previous comments. I have always linked verifiable facts to prove what I wrote. Maybe I can save lives by being one more person that promotes facts at the cost of hate and censorship against me. Why does the intention matter when truth and verifiable facts are linked where appropriate? Why does my interest in certain topics matter? > HN is for unplanned conversation, not pre-existing agendas. You have just proven to be a conspiracy theorist with no facts to justify your fantasy and censorship of appropriately linked truth and facts. It is even worse than this: Rachel Maddow Reacts To Collapse Of Russiagate https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qe7A58TEms https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qe7A58TEms
- sonnyblarney 8y ago
  Iran imports and exports about $50B worth of goods ever year. You can see some figures for EU/Iran trade here [1] [1] http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/countries-and-regions/countries/iran/ http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/countries-and-regions/count...
  - AriaMinaei 8y ago
    This is not a vivid picture I'm afraid. Most of Iran's exports are oil and other petrochemical products. The U.S is exempting Iran's trade partners from sanctions on the condition that they reduce their imports quarter by quarter. Ultimate goal is to bring petro export to certain countries to zero. Iran also has trouble receiving payment for its oil. India, for example, used to have a deal in place (probably still does), that it would only pay Iran in Rupees. Your choice of cancer medicine is limited when you can only spend in Rupees, and so is your purchasing power. And after all, this is just oil. It's sold by the government, and its proceeds are used for essential government functions, such as keeping the local currency afloat (which is now about 1/3 of its value compared to last year). Oil proceeds do not help the private sector in trade. An Iranian software company for example, does not export oil.
- tobias3 8y ago
  The EU recently opened a mechanism to allow banks to interact with Iran (INSTEX; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instrument_in_Support_of_Trade_Exchanges https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instrument_in_Support_of_Trade... ). It is realtively recent and idk how much it will be used, but it is not an unsolvable problem (with some overhead).
  - A2017U1 8y ago
    There is huge pressure from the US to shut down that special trade mechanism even though none of countries involved support further sanctions. Numerous banks have backed away from it. It's a token effort on the part of Europe to salvage the nuclear treaty that everyone agrees Iran is complying with. Even US intelligence publicly acknowledge it. Amazed that NK can believe in any sort of deal after seeing what happened to Iran. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/31/world/europe/europe-trade-iran-nuclear-deal.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/31/world/europe/europe-trade...
- xhdix 8y ago
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19500900 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19500900
boomboomsubban 8y ago
>This false and inflammatory The US provided arms to both sides of the Iraq-Iran war, which killed hundreds of thousands of Iranians. This is in addition to a host of other actions the US had taken that led to more death. If you find it inflammatory, imagine how you would feel if it was your family killed by these actions.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- merpnderp 8y ago
  This is highly misleading. The US provided absolutely nothing to the Iranian Republic that superseded Imperial Iran.
- sonnyblarney 8y ago
  That the US provided some weapons to people fighting a war, does not making them responsible for it. Consider amending your sentence to state: "Saddam Hussein was responsible for the death of 100's of thousands of Iranians and Iraqis". Of course, the US was not fuelling both sides of the war with weapons as your comment implies, US equipment in Iran was there long before the Islamic revolution, after which, and ever since, Iran has declared that they want to destroy the US, Israel, and Saudi Arabia. If they want to take that posture against powerful nations, and at the same time get pretty close to building nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles to mount them - well - then they're picking a fight with entities much more powerful than them, which is why the sanctions were put in place to begin with. Nobody wants to fight Iran, nobody wants sanctions. Really, everyone wants to make money if anything. The ball is effectively in their court.
  - boomboomsubban 8y ago
    >That the US provided some weapons to people fighting a war, does not making them responsible for it. Yes, it does. Not soley responsible, but that blood is still on US hands. >Of course, the US was not fuelling both sides of the war with weapons as your comment implies, US equipment in Iran was there long before the Islamic revolution, I assumed you had heard of the Iran-Contra affair. My comment implies the reality. >Iran has declared that they want to destroy the US, Israel, and Saudi Arabia. If they want to take that posture against powerful nations, and at the same time get pretty close to building nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles to mount them - well - then they're picking a fight with entities much more powerful than them, which is why the sanctions were put in place to begin with You act like they claim they wanted to destroy those nations for no reason. Decades of the US backed regime is what led to the Iranian revolution, which was just the tail end of Western powers looting Iran. A return to those conditions is what is still required of Iran to escape sanctions.

AriaMinaei 8y ago

> Today, Iran can de-facto trade with most of the world either directly or through intermediaries. The purpose of any embargo is to weaken a state economically, not withhold specific medicines, obviously This is not true. Even opening a foreign bank account (necessary for trade) is impossible for Iranians companies, making trade extremely difficult for all companies. European banks are legally permitted to trade with Iranian companies, but the threat of fines from the U.S bars all of them from doing so. > The purpose of any embargo is to weaken a state economically, not withhold specific medicines, obviously. In reality, one of the immediate effects of sanctions is scarcity of medicine. Source: I lived there through the Obama-era sanctions.

acct1771 8y ago
This perspective would make an excellent NYT piece.
- lustysocietyorg 8y ago
  The NYT is part of the Western propaganda machine. Why do you think that US citzens and EU citizens do not know about deadly sanctions as economic warfare? Why do you think this post is downvoted despite linking verifiable facts? Hedges: Journalism Should Be About Truth, Not Career - Chris Hedges on Reality Asserts Itself (2/7) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XR0oGJ2yrmc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XR0oGJ2yrmc No volunteers: EU countries bow to US pressure over alternative payment channel for Iran https://www.rt.com/business/444051-eu-fears-us-sanctions-iran/ https://www.rt.com/business/444051-eu-fears-us-sanctions-ira... Who’s the boss? SWIFT defies EU, caving in to US pressure to cut off Iranian banks https://www.rt.com/business/443315-swift-iran-us-sanctions/ https://www.rt.com/business/443315-swift-iran-us-sanctions/ Madeleine Albright says 500,000 dead Iraqi Children was "worth it" wins Medal of Freedom https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omnskeu-puE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omnskeu-puE
  - dang 8y ago
    We've banned this account for using HN primarily for political and ideological battle. Regardless of which politics or ideology, this is against the site guidelines. HN is for unplanned conversation, not pre-existing agendas. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comment&storyText=false&prefix=false&page=0&query=by:dang%20primarily%20battle https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme...
    - lustysocietyorg 8y ago
      > We've banned this account for using HN primarily for political and ideological battle. Regardless of which politics or ideology, this is against the site guidelines. I have always answered where appropriate. Often in defense of truth in previous comments. I have always linked verifiable facts to prove what I wrote. Maybe I can save lives by being one more person that promotes facts at the cost of hate and censorship against me. Why does the intention matter when truth and verifiable facts are linked where appropriate? Why does my interest in certain topics matter? > HN is for unplanned conversation, not pre-existing agendas. You have just proven to be a conspiracy theorist with no facts to justify your fantasy and censorship of appropriately linked truth and facts. It is even worse than this: Rachel Maddow Reacts To Collapse Of Russiagate https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qe7A58TEms https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qe7A58TEms
sonnyblarney 8y ago
Iran imports and exports about $50B worth of goods ever year. You can see some figures for EU/Iran trade here [1] [1] http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/countries-and-regions/countries/iran/ http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/countries-and-regions/count...
- AriaMinaei 8y ago
  This is not a vivid picture I'm afraid. Most of Iran's exports are oil and other petrochemical products. The U.S is exempting Iran's trade partners from sanctions on the condition that they reduce their imports quarter by quarter. Ultimate goal is to bring petro export to certain countries to zero. Iran also has trouble receiving payment for its oil. India, for example, used to have a deal in place (probably still does), that it would only pay Iran in Rupees. Your choice of cancer medicine is limited when you can only spend in Rupees, and so is your purchasing power. And after all, this is just oil. It's sold by the government, and its proceeds are used for essential government functions, such as keeping the local currency afloat (which is now about 1/3 of its value compared to last year). Oil proceeds do not help the private sector in trade. An Iranian software company for example, does not export oil.
tobias3 8y ago
The EU recently opened a mechanism to allow banks to interact with Iran (INSTEX; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instrument_in_Support_of_Trade_Exchanges https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instrument_in_Support_of_Trade... ). It is realtively recent and idk how much it will be used, but it is not an unsolvable problem (with some overhead).
- A2017U1 8y ago
  There is huge pressure from the US to shut down that special trade mechanism even though none of countries involved support further sanctions. Numerous banks have backed away from it. It's a token effort on the part of Europe to salvage the nuclear treaty that everyone agrees Iran is complying with. Even US intelligence publicly acknowledge it. Amazed that NK can believe in any sort of deal after seeing what happened to Iran. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/31/world/europe/europe-trade-iran-nuclear-deal.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/31/world/europe/europe-trade...
xhdix 8y ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19500900 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19500900

boomboomsubban 8y ago

>This false and inflammatory The US provided arms to both sides of the Iraq-Iran war, which killed hundreds of thousands of Iranians. This is in addition to a host of other actions the US had taken that led to more death. If you find it inflammatory, imagine how you would feel if it was your family killed by these actions.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
merpnderp 8y ago
This is highly misleading. The US provided absolutely nothing to the Iranian Republic that superseded Imperial Iran.
sonnyblarney 8y ago
That the US provided some weapons to people fighting a war, does not making them responsible for it. Consider amending your sentence to state: "Saddam Hussein was responsible for the death of 100's of thousands of Iranians and Iraqis". Of course, the US was not fuelling both sides of the war with weapons as your comment implies, US equipment in Iran was there long before the Islamic revolution, after which, and ever since, Iran has declared that they want to destroy the US, Israel, and Saudi Arabia. If they want to take that posture against powerful nations, and at the same time get pretty close to building nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles to mount them - well - then they're picking a fight with entities much more powerful than them, which is why the sanctions were put in place to begin with. Nobody wants to fight Iran, nobody wants sanctions. Really, everyone wants to make money if anything. The ball is effectively in their court.
- boomboomsubban 8y ago
  >That the US provided some weapons to people fighting a war, does not making them responsible for it. Yes, it does. Not soley responsible, but that blood is still on US hands. >Of course, the US was not fuelling both sides of the war with weapons as your comment implies, US equipment in Iran was there long before the Islamic revolution, I assumed you had heard of the Iran-Contra affair. My comment implies the reality. >Iran has declared that they want to destroy the US, Israel, and Saudi Arabia. If they want to take that posture against powerful nations, and at the same time get pretty close to building nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles to mount them - well - then they're picking a fight with entities much more powerful than them, which is why the sanctions were put in place to begin with You act like they claim they wanted to destroy those nations for no reason. Decades of the US backed regime is what led to the Iranian revolution, which was just the tail end of Western powers looting Iran. A return to those conditions is what is still required of Iran to escape sanctions.