4 ms·

Question is: why are these sanctions here in the first place? The US uses its control of the Dollar-based system to wield its power as it sees fit. It’s apparen

Question is: why are these sanctions here in the first place? The US uses its control of the Dollar-based system to wield its power as it sees fit. It’s apparently ok for the US to have as many nukes as it sees fit, but not ok for others to have the same.

xtian 4y ago
I 100% agree. The US recently added additional sanctions on China for chip making technology simply because China has improved their domestic chip manufacturing capabilities. There is no possible justification for the US getting to decide what products other countries are allowed to research and manufacture.
- bsedlm 4y ago
  yes there is, it's the oldest justification in the book. for some reason it's not well seen but it's there and has been for a long time. it's justification of might and power. summed up in "might makes right". there's also something of this in the reasoning behind the phrase "history is written by the winners". this is only an instance of power being wielded by the powerful.
  - xtian 4y ago
    Ok, but the "powerful" in this situation are not looking out for the interests of average working Americans, who would be best served by fair and peaceful relations with other countries. And they're not even looking out for the interest of maintaining their "power" since they continue to give the entire rest of the world more and more incentive to abandon the dollar as the global reserve currency. What will happen to the standard of living in de-industrialized America once that happens?
    - bsedlm 4y ago
      you need to consider that many rich and powerful people are not in any way bound to "America" the country. At most they have some (among many other) assets in america.
- boredumb 4y ago
  The chinese have stolen enough IP to make this and other ventures of theirs possible, they absolutely get to feel at the very least some repercussion for it and should be treated as a thief in your home.
  - xtian 4y ago
    "IP" is a fiction invented to justify collecting rent from unproductive assets and ultimately serves to prevent underdeveloped countries from developing industrial capacity. Every industrialized country in the world (including the US) "stole IP" when they were developing.
    - nradov 4y ago
      Any country with ICBMs pointed at us cannot plausibly claim special privileges for being "underdeveloped".
      - xtian 4y ago
        I didn't claim China was underdeveloped. They're very obviously the premier industrial power in the world. The people demanding ahistorical special privileges are so-called "intellectual property holders". I have zero sympathies for the plight of these parasitical rent collectors. They certainly don't hold any special sympathies for the American people.
        nradov 4y ago
        I'm not sure what you mean by "ahistorical special privileges". Intellectual property rights have been around for centuries. Patents and copyright are specifically mentioned in the Constitution.
        xtian 4y ago
        https://www.history.com/news/industrial-revolution-spies-europe https://www.history.com/news/industrial-revolution-spies-eur...
cjpearson 4y ago
> why are these sanctions here in the first place? Initially they were a response to the Iran Hostage Crisis. Since the Clinton administration, the reasons have been Iran's nuclear program and support for groups such as Hezbollah and Hamas. > It’s apparently ok for the US to have as many nukes as it sees fit, but not ok for others to have the same. This isn't just a US goal. 190 countries have agreed to the Non-Proliferation Treaty.
- PoignardAzur 4y ago
  The Trump administration left the JCPOA unilaterally. So the sanctions are very much a US imposition on the rest of the world by now.
- hestefisk 4y ago
  Prime example of US rhetoric though. The US is allowed nukes because they see themselves as the “benevolent dictator” of the world and only real superpower. Therefore “we” can hold nukes and tell everyone else what to do. On Hamas, it’s a great example of why the US system of designating who is a “terrorist” or not simply doesn’t work. In Palestine, Hamas are central to the liberation of Palestine from Israeli acts of aggression and terror against the Palestinians. Some would call them rebels or legitimate, organised political groups (as with PLO). Hamas have done a lot of wrong things and I’m not defending them. My point is merely to prove that just because it’s on a US list, doesn’t mean it is right.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
winReInstall 4y ago
Cause alot of regional ex-empires want to be empire again instead of the empire. Some of those empires, align with the us interests, others muddle through (turkey), others align with opposing ex-empires (syria) and some try to win it stand-alone (Iran). The ferrocity of american hatred also seems to increase, the more cultural similarity there is. Russia with its redneck culture and iranians with there crazy almost protestant messianic streak, are to much of a mirror to not bark and bite at. Crypto is to find out about the ten dolar wench as the ultimate key..
nradov 4y ago
Iran is being sanctioned for multiple reasons. The primary one is because they ratified the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), but then (allegedly) violated the terms. That treaty comes with a mix of benefits and responsibilities, and it specifically calls out the permanent Security Council members (including the US) as being allowed to have nukes. If Iran wanted to have nukes then they should have never ratified the treaty in the first place. https://www.un.org/disarmament/wmd/nuclear/npt/ https://www.un.org/disarmament/wmd/nuclear/npt/ Iran is also being sanctioned as a state sponsor of terrorism. https://www.state.gov/state-sponsors-of-terrorism/ https://www.state.gov/state-sponsors-of-terrorism/
- hestefisk 4y ago
  Case in point, though: US is allowed nukes because they are “special”, the rest cannot. On “state sponsor of terrorism”, perhaps it’s time for the US to realise it’s a case of the pot calling the kettle back: 70+ years of clandestine operations supporting iron-fisted right-wing regimes in Indonesia (Suharto), Chile (Pinochet), Cuba (Bay of Pigs invasion / project Mongoose), Nicaragua (Contras), Iraq (Hussein prior to the US flipping on him in the invasion of Iraq), DRC (assassination of Lumumba) etc. My point here is not to be a dick, but simply to show that the US itself has sponsored hordes of so-called “state terrorists” and they get to pick and choose who is a terrorist or not based on some list in the State Department. That is not right.
  - nradov 4y ago
    What's your point? No one forced Iran to ratify the NPT. They did so voluntarily, and thus agreed to give up development of nuclear weapons. Whether it's fair or right in your opinion is utterly irrelevant. There is no question that Iran is a state sponsor of terrorism. They have literally given weapons and funding to terrorist groups which killed Americans and our allies. If Iran (or other countries) want to also designate the USA as a state sponsor of terrorism under their national laws and impose economic sanctions on us then they're free to do so.

xtian 4y ago

I 100% agree. The US recently added additional sanctions on China for chip making technology simply because China has improved their domestic chip manufacturing capabilities. There is no possible justification for the US getting to decide what products other countries are allowed to research and manufacture.

bsedlm 4y ago
yes there is, it's the oldest justification in the book. for some reason it's not well seen but it's there and has been for a long time. it's justification of might and power. summed up in "might makes right". there's also something of this in the reasoning behind the phrase "history is written by the winners". this is only an instance of power being wielded by the powerful.
- xtian 4y ago
  Ok, but the "powerful" in this situation are not looking out for the interests of average working Americans, who would be best served by fair and peaceful relations with other countries. And they're not even looking out for the interest of maintaining their "power" since they continue to give the entire rest of the world more and more incentive to abandon the dollar as the global reserve currency. What will happen to the standard of living in de-industrialized America once that happens?
  - bsedlm 4y ago
    you need to consider that many rich and powerful people are not in any way bound to "America" the country. At most they have some (among many other) assets in america.
boredumb 4y ago
The chinese have stolen enough IP to make this and other ventures of theirs possible, they absolutely get to feel at the very least some repercussion for it and should be treated as a thief in your home.
- xtian 4y ago
  "IP" is a fiction invented to justify collecting rent from unproductive assets and ultimately serves to prevent underdeveloped countries from developing industrial capacity. Every industrialized country in the world (including the US) "stole IP" when they were developing.
  - nradov 4y ago
    Any country with ICBMs pointed at us cannot plausibly claim special privileges for being "underdeveloped".
    - xtian 4y ago
      I didn't claim China was underdeveloped. They're very obviously the premier industrial power in the world. The people demanding ahistorical special privileges are so-called "intellectual property holders". I have zero sympathies for the plight of these parasitical rent collectors. They certainly don't hold any special sympathies for the American people.
      - nradov 4y ago
        I'm not sure what you mean by "ahistorical special privileges". Intellectual property rights have been around for centuries. Patents and copyright are specifically mentioned in the Constitution.
        xtian 4y ago
        https://www.history.com/news/industrial-revolution-spies-europe https://www.history.com/news/industrial-revolution-spies-eur...

cjpearson 4y ago

> why are these sanctions here in the first place? Initially they were a response to the Iran Hostage Crisis. Since the Clinton administration, the reasons have been Iran's nuclear program and support for groups such as Hezbollah and Hamas. > It’s apparently ok for the US to have as many nukes as it sees fit, but not ok for others to have the same. This isn't just a US goal. 190 countries have agreed to the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

PoignardAzur 4y ago
The Trump administration left the JCPOA unilaterally. So the sanctions are very much a US imposition on the rest of the world by now.
hestefisk 4y ago
Prime example of US rhetoric though. The US is allowed nukes because they see themselves as the “benevolent dictator” of the world and only real superpower. Therefore “we” can hold nukes and tell everyone else what to do. On Hamas, it’s a great example of why the US system of designating who is a “terrorist” or not simply doesn’t work. In Palestine, Hamas are central to the liberation of Palestine from Israeli acts of aggression and terror against the Palestinians. Some would call them rebels or legitimate, organised political groups (as with PLO). Hamas have done a lot of wrong things and I’m not defending them. My point is merely to prove that just because it’s on a US list, doesn’t mean it is right.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

winReInstall 4y ago

Cause alot of regional ex-empires want to be empire again instead of the empire. Some of those empires, align with the us interests, others muddle through (turkey), others align with opposing ex-empires (syria) and some try to win it stand-alone (Iran). The ferrocity of american hatred also seems to increase, the more cultural similarity there is. Russia with its redneck culture and iranians with there crazy almost protestant messianic streak, are to much of a mirror to not bark and bite at. Crypto is to find out about the ten dolar wench as the ultimate key..

nradov 4y ago

Iran is being sanctioned for multiple reasons. The primary one is because they ratified the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), but then (allegedly) violated the terms. That treaty comes with a mix of benefits and responsibilities, and it specifically calls out the permanent Security Council members (including the US) as being allowed to have nukes. If Iran wanted to have nukes then they should have never ratified the treaty in the first place. https://www.un.org/disarmament/wmd/nuclear/npt/ https://www.un.org/disarmament/wmd/nuclear/npt/ Iran is also being sanctioned as a state sponsor of terrorism. https://www.state.gov/state-sponsors-of-terrorism/ https://www.state.gov/state-sponsors-of-terrorism/

hestefisk 4y ago
Case in point, though: US is allowed nukes because they are “special”, the rest cannot. On “state sponsor of terrorism”, perhaps it’s time for the US to realise it’s a case of the pot calling the kettle back: 70+ years of clandestine operations supporting iron-fisted right-wing regimes in Indonesia (Suharto), Chile (Pinochet), Cuba (Bay of Pigs invasion / project Mongoose), Nicaragua (Contras), Iraq (Hussein prior to the US flipping on him in the invasion of Iraq), DRC (assassination of Lumumba) etc. My point here is not to be a dick, but simply to show that the US itself has sponsored hordes of so-called “state terrorists” and they get to pick and choose who is a terrorist or not based on some list in the State Department. That is not right.
- nradov 4y ago
  What's your point? No one forced Iran to ratify the NPT. They did so voluntarily, and thus agreed to give up development of nuclear weapons. Whether it's fair or right in your opinion is utterly irrelevant. There is no question that Iran is a state sponsor of terrorism. They have literally given weapons and funding to terrorist groups which killed Americans and our allies. If Iran (or other countries) want to also designate the USA as a state sponsor of terrorism under their national laws and impose economic sanctions on us then they're free to do so.