4 ms·

>Yet nobody did that. Maybe the criteria aren't so 'similar'. For the same reason no one designated GRU or Mossad operatives. The weight of the state behind th

by fuoqi 6y ago

>Yet nobody did that. Maybe the criteria aren't so 'similar'. For the same reason no one designated GRU or Mossad operatives. The weight of the state behind them and absurdity of the act. But the US government has decided to stretch definition of terrorism (and frankly deflating its value even further in the process) to somehow limit actions of IRGC, which were clearly outplaying the US in the ME region, not in the last because of the Soleimeini's masterful leadership. >These restrictions were not to be lifted immediately. That particular limit was due to expire only this October. Sigh... Read the sources, ok? https://www.europarl.europa.eu/cmsdata/122460/full-text-of-the-iran-nuclear-deal.pdf https://www.europarl.europa.eu/cmsdata/122460/full-text-of-t... >The UN Security Council resolution endorsing this JCPOA will terminate all provisions of previous UN Security Council resolutions on the Iranian nuclear issue -1696 (2006), 1737 (2006), 1747 (2007), 1803 (2008), 1835 (2008), 1929 (2010) and 2224 (2015) –simultaneously with the IAEA-verified implementation of agreed nuclear-related measures by Iran and will establish specific restrictions, as specified in Annex V. In October expired the UN arms embargo, which is irrelevant to the 1747 resolution affecting Soleimeini. If you read news just a little at the time, you may recall that economic sanctions against Iran have been lifted long before this October. >Maybe al-Qaeda + Assad and Iran's support for insurgents during the Iraq war played a huge part. They encouraged fanaticism which shockingly turned against everyone. Wow. Are you even aware that Iran is a Shia state and mostly supports Shia militia groups in other countries, while ISIS was predominantly Sunni? And that Assad is from the Alawite minority, who is also Shia? If anyone has supported al-Qaeda in the Syrian civil war it's the US and Turkey. The former has acknowledged indirect "accidental" support of the al-Qaeda branch via "moderate" rebels. To conclude: you demonstrate utter lack of knowledge in this area.

yyyk 6y ago
>For the same reason no one designated GRU or Mossad operatives. Most countries don't support terrorist (sorry, 'resistance') organizations and don't officially announce it on every corner. It turns out Iran not even bothering with cover makes designation very easy. >Read the sources, ok? You're mixing JCPOA (not a UN text) and several different types of sanctions. >Are you even aware that Iran is a Shia state and mostly supports Shia militia groups in other countries, while ISIS was predominantly Sunni? ISIS started from Al-Qaeda in Iraq, a Sunni group that Iran and Syria were happy to support so long as they bothered Americans more.
- fuoqi 6y ago
  >Most countries don't support terrorist (sorry, 'resistance') organizations and don't officially announce it on every corner. Yeap, and the US is not included into this list of the "most countries" as well. Simply instead of "resistance" they call them "pro-democratic rebels" and they have a long tradition in this area (e.g. search for a humble "freedom-fighter" Osama). So we got back to the starting point. >You're mixing JCPOA and several different types of sanctions. Again, I've linked the document, which clearly lists the 1747 resolution as to be terminated. AFAIK it is the only UN resolution affecting Soleimeini. So do please clarify what exactly I am "mixing"? >ISIS started from Al-Qaeda in Iraq, a Sunni group that Iran and Syria were happy to support so long as they bothered Americans more. LOL what? When ISIS has started making territorial claims Syria was already for two years in the midst of the hot civil war, Asad was losing territories to the Sunni rebels supported by the US, Iran at the time tried to help Assad by supporting Shia militia, but its supply lines got disrupted by ISIS, which motivated them to persuade Russians to help Assad. If anything, it's American support of Sunni rebels in the hope that they will overthrow the Assad government resulted in the creation of ISIS as a quasi-state. One of the big American goals in Iraq is to prevent creation of so-called Shia Crescent and the Suni rebellion was a great way to achieve it. This is why you haven't seen much US action against it until they started to threaten Bagdad, and even after ISIS lost all its territories the US supported "moderates" which are close to the Syrian Al-Qaeda branch. Though in the end it spiraled out of control. As usual... Controlled chaos rarely stays controlled for long. If your next message will be as ignorant as the last two, I no longer see the need to continue this discussion.
  - yyyk 6y ago
    >Simply instead of "resistance" they call them "pro-democratic rebels" Which is mostly accurate (the rebels part, we have no idea what regime they would have set up). Iran officially supported Hamas and Hizbollah, the former even after it's been declared a terrorist org. When one does those things so openly, it's no wonder the designations follow. >(e.g. search for a humble "freedom-fighter" Osama). Al-Qaeda (or the Taliban) didn't even exist at the time. >So do please clarify what exactly I am "mixing"? Your original comment mixed JCPOA (a text at most binding members who signed it but does not override UN resolutions), nuclear sanctions (removed under UN 2231, not the JCPOA), economic sanctions (not all removed, since quite a bit is not nuclear), terror sanctions (e.g. Solemani), etc. >LOL what? When ISIS has started making territorial claims... ISIS existed before they made 'claims'. The organization is what Al-Qaeda in Iraq evolved into once they got radical beyond even what Bin Laden wanted (Bin Laden opposed targeting Shiites). Al-Qaeda in Iraq was supported by Assad and Iran. Just recently someone assassinated an Al-Qaeda head in Tehran. >If anything, it's American support of Sunni rebels in the hope that they will overthrow the Assad government resulted in the creation of ISIS as a quasi-state. Ah, yes, the US created ISIS conspiracy theory. Lets remember the US left Iraq and was happy to be out until ISIS called it back. ISIS then took over Mosul first, and only then became a quasi-state. The holding in Syria came later, and it was the US (with SDF) which threw them out.

by fuoqi 6y ago

yyyk 6y ago

>For the same reason no one designated GRU or Mossad operatives. Most countries don't support terrorist (sorry, 'resistance') organizations and don't officially announce it on every corner. It turns out Iran not even bothering with cover makes designation very easy. >Read the sources, ok? You're mixing JCPOA (not a UN text) and several different types of sanctions. >Are you even aware that Iran is a Shia state and mostly supports Shia militia groups in other countries, while ISIS was predominantly Sunni? ISIS started from Al-Qaeda in Iraq, a Sunni group that Iran and Syria were happy to support so long as they bothered Americans more.

fuoqi 6y ago
>Most countries don't support terrorist (sorry, 'resistance') organizations and don't officially announce it on every corner. Yeap, and the US is not included into this list of the "most countries" as well. Simply instead of "resistance" they call them "pro-democratic rebels" and they have a long tradition in this area (e.g. search for a humble "freedom-fighter" Osama). So we got back to the starting point. >You're mixing JCPOA and several different types of sanctions. Again, I've linked the document, which clearly lists the 1747 resolution as to be terminated. AFAIK it is the only UN resolution affecting Soleimeini. So do please clarify what exactly I am "mixing"? >ISIS started from Al-Qaeda in Iraq, a Sunni group that Iran and Syria were happy to support so long as they bothered Americans more. LOL what? When ISIS has started making territorial claims Syria was already for two years in the midst of the hot civil war, Asad was losing territories to the Sunni rebels supported by the US, Iran at the time tried to help Assad by supporting Shia militia, but its supply lines got disrupted by ISIS, which motivated them to persuade Russians to help Assad. If anything, it's American support of Sunni rebels in the hope that they will overthrow the Assad government resulted in the creation of ISIS as a quasi-state. One of the big American goals in Iraq is to prevent creation of so-called Shia Crescent and the Suni rebellion was a great way to achieve it. This is why you haven't seen much US action against it until they started to threaten Bagdad, and even after ISIS lost all its territories the US supported "moderates" which are close to the Syrian Al-Qaeda branch. Though in the end it spiraled out of control. As usual... Controlled chaos rarely stays controlled for long. If your next message will be as ignorant as the last two, I no longer see the need to continue this discussion.
- yyyk 6y ago
  >Simply instead of "resistance" they call them "pro-democratic rebels" Which is mostly accurate (the rebels part, we have no idea what regime they would have set up). Iran officially supported Hamas and Hizbollah, the former even after it's been declared a terrorist org. When one does those things so openly, it's no wonder the designations follow. >(e.g. search for a humble "freedom-fighter" Osama). Al-Qaeda (or the Taliban) didn't even exist at the time. >So do please clarify what exactly I am "mixing"? Your original comment mixed JCPOA (a text at most binding members who signed it but does not override UN resolutions), nuclear sanctions (removed under UN 2231, not the JCPOA), economic sanctions (not all removed, since quite a bit is not nuclear), terror sanctions (e.g. Solemani), etc. >LOL what? When ISIS has started making territorial claims... ISIS existed before they made 'claims'. The organization is what Al-Qaeda in Iraq evolved into once they got radical beyond even what Bin Laden wanted (Bin Laden opposed targeting Shiites). Al-Qaeda in Iraq was supported by Assad and Iran. Just recently someone assassinated an Al-Qaeda head in Tehran. >If anything, it's American support of Sunni rebels in the hope that they will overthrow the Assad government resulted in the creation of ISIS as a quasi-state. Ah, yes, the US created ISIS conspiracy theory. Lets remember the US left Iraq and was happy to be out until ISIS called it back. ISIS then took over Mosul first, and only then became a quasi-state. The holding in Syria came later, and it was the US (with SDF) which threw them out.