Iranian Power plants in Syria taking shape..Turbines have arrived.

[BATMAN]

pakistan should do the same and iran also should get rid of most of the damaging dams and create more clean and sustainable power domestically aswell because the liberal agenda doesnt work their power production destroys the land itself dams dont work most of the time they are damaging thermal underground energy gives limited energy and it gives huge damage and generally most of these concepts are proven to be more damaging than useful
the whole concept of energy consumption and production has to be taken out of these idiotic ruinous agendas and thought about in future more serious because we are stuck in a mess if things continue like this
i dont with iran to follow these selfish and ruinous agendas as turkey did and i dont want more floods and fires and droughts to hit iran so things have to change and taken away from the liberal agenda and factionalism to the islamic revolutionary agenda which is iranian agenda aswell because it is the only sustainable thing out there for us to chose since nobody else has solutions and only repeats failures its a global problem this issue really the entire world is moving into the wrong direction for way to long and it has to change

Pakistan's Imran Khan has already sent aid to fighters much earlier Iran did.

Pakistan sends medical aid to Syria to fight Covid-19

Islamabad, Nov 1, IRNA -- The government of Pakistan has sent first shipment of humanitarian and medical aid to Syria on Sunday to help the country in fight against Covid-19.

en.irna.ir

 

[Hack-Hook]

Supposedly this only applies to the last few millennia. But, a few millennia are nothing much at the scale of Earth's entire existence. When viewed from that prism, much quicker temperature changes have occurred in the past.

how you knew that ?

And no reversal is possible at any point time, since every goal voluntarily set by a participating nation must go farther than the previous one.

Also, if the treaty does not bind its signatories in any manner, then there's no point in ratifying it. Any measure deemed necessary could then be taken without being party to the treaty. The point of the Paris Agreement is to force developing nations to forego their industrial development goals and submit to international control mechanisms ie to so-called global governance, which is a way to neutralize domestic resistance against this diktat and to gradually put an end to national sovereignty.

Let me quote Edmond de Rothschild: "The lock which must be blown now, is the nation."

those nation for industrial goal want to import 19 centuries thrown away technology of western countries , now they have to import more recent technologies

They're going to take strides in terms of industrial development while those who set limits on their emissions will lag behind.

no they stride in wrong direction while those who did not did that take steps in right direction . interestingly we already took those necessary step in the right direction . wonder you think we stayed behind because we won't for example use CFC-12 or HCFC-22 or Hexafluoroethane or Tetrafluoromethane also those nation really don't need to spend that much on these according t UN if a developed nation give technologies that reduce greenhouse gas uses to developing nations it can write it as its own effort

So it's either the globalist way or the highway? To me colonization is a crime which cannot be justified by the contention that the victim conducted wrong policies. Two wrongs do not make a right, as the saying goes. But rest assured, with the strengthening of the industrial base comes expansion of military might and therefore deterrence against colonialists.

to me colonization is natural result of staying behind I don't care if it's crime or not if you stay behind you'll face one sort of colonization. there is no way around it.
and a military might have nothing to it , that's 17 century colonization todays colonization is totally different. let ask you something you have resource x, you don't knew what to do with it , but country c knew how to use it , he buy that resource at peanut price from you then process it and made product y now they sell that product to you at 10000 time they paid for resource x , what you call that practice ?
or let just say they buy resource x from you but wont give money that was agreed to you and say you can get our products instead and not al of them but you can choose from the selection we say you are allowed .again what you are calling this ?
to me that is the new type of colonialism we face today and tomorrow until the more advanced countries invent a new form more profitable and more hidden form of it which need less work

I feel obliged to reiterate: two wrongs don't make a right. And, in my view it's a mistake to restrict nuclear technology. However, it's not exactly as if the stakes were the same: the west is not (yet) threatening Iran with sanctions and "other options on the table" if it does not comply with their wishes in the ecological realm; when it comes to the nuclear file however, it does issue such threats and puts them into practice as far as sanctions are concerned. Hence, it's not quite the same.

well I believe you believe jcpoa didn't gave Iran any sanction relief so I can't see the difference here

Globalists believe nobody can stand in their way. As former French president Sarkozy infamously declared: "We will go together towards this New World Order, and nobody will be able to prevent it."

But hard luck for these globalists elites: Iran is not going to ratify their environmental instrument, hence they can monitor all they want, it will not have any impact on what Iran does.

again I reiterate its how the monitoring is done

and he is right on one point you stay in the race or go the way of Dodo you can made industrial progress base on older technologies but nobody will want your products

Exactly. Which is why Islamic Iran must keep resisting these globalist schemes. Else they will step in and deprive Iran not just of her sovereignty, but of her very existence.

the only way is by delivering competitive products not by resisting any necessary progress and at the end not being able to deliver.

Rules defined by a cabal of loan sharks, freemasons and zionists? I'd rather not, to be honest... I'd rather go under fighting them to my last breath than letting them suppress and uproot me. Because that's what they're aiming for.



This oppressive cabal will be brought down. It will not be allowed to end mankind as it plans to (look up anti-specism, transhumanism, man-animal chimeras currently being experimented on with support from the oligarchy). If you want to be on the winning side, you better not play by their rules, even if they seem invincible. The battle for haqq has often if not always been against powers which seemed invincible.

I'm a man of few word honestly can't answer when you talk about such complex high philosophy and theology .

 

[SalarHaqq]

how you knew that ?

Go look it up. Also look up how abruptly the last ice age for instance came to an end.

those nation for industrial goal want to import 19 centuries thrown away technology of western countries , now they have to import more recent technologies

If they follow the Iranian model, they will bank on self-sufficiency not imports. Those who import have no industry of their own to start with.

no they stride in wrong direction while those who did not did that take steps in right direction . interestingly we already took those necessary step in the right direction . wonder you think we stayed behind because we won't for example use CFC-12 or HCFC-22 or Hexafluoroethane or Tetrafluoromethane also those nation really don't need to spend that much on these according t UN if a developed nation give technologies that reduce greenhouse gas uses to developing nations it can write it as its own effort

No but in case it ratified this treaty, Iran would have to roll back various industrial development projects.

to me colonization is natural result of staying behind I don't care if it's crime or not if you stay behind you'll face one sort of colonization. there is no way around it.

I was addressing the idea that they "deserve" it. Because they don't, no country does.

Besides, almost every developing nation which ratified this agreement is in effect subject to neocolonial submission. Only a handful of countries in the world are enjoying actual independence from the zio-American empire, and Iran is one of them. So obviously, it's not the Paris Agreement that is going to free nations of the South from imperial yoke!

and a military might have nothing to it , that's 17 century colonization todays colonization is totally different.

I'm not talking about the colonial power but about the free nation keen on preserving its independence from neo-colonialism. To achieve that, there's no way around military might, be it asymmetrical. And Iran is here to prove it. You disarm, you lose negotiating power, you are submitted. No mercy will be shown by these oppressors.

let ask you something you have resource x, you don't knew what to do with it , but country c knew how to use it , he buy that resource at peanut price from you then process it and made product y now they sell that product to you at 10000 time they paid for resource x , what you call that practice ?

Hence why self-sufficiency is needed. The polar opposite of free trade.

or let just say they buy resource x from you but wont give money that was agreed to you and say you can get our products instead and not al of them but you can choose from the selection we say you are allowed .again what you are calling this ?
to me that is the new type of colonialism we face today and tomorrow until the more advanced countries invent a new form more profitable and more hidden form of it which need less work

This pertains to the economic aspect. There's also interference in domestic politics by colonial powers, cultural imperialism and more.

well I believe you believe jcpoa didn't gave Iran any sanction relief so I can't see the difference here

Correct, neither JCPOA nor Paris Agreement, independence and enjoying one's full rights is the best.

and he is right on one point you stay in the race or go the way of Dodo you can made industrial progress base on older technologies but nobody will want your products

We're simply discussing the Paris Agreement here. There's only a handful of manufactured goods that emit carbon gases. The rest don't and there's no such treaty when it comes to them.

the only way is by delivering competitive products not by resisting any necessary progress and at the end not being able to deliver.

There's no such thing as necessary progress. This progressist ideology is a hoax. It has led to human ruin in the west and will end up eliminating the human species. Competitiveness loses its priority outside of an open borders free trade economy. Also, fact of the matter is that whichever way one twists it, developing nations will keep lagging behind their neo-colonial masters in a free trade environment. Iran in particular would be largely confined to exporting crude oil if competitiveness was the central criterion and overarching condition. Massive deindustrialization would ensue.

 

[Hack-Hook]

Go look it up. Also look up abruptly the last ice age for instance came to an end.

not in one or two decade

No but in case it ratified this treaty, Iran would have to roll back various industrial development projects.

not exactly ,for example using natural gas in power planet instead of mazut or make some corrupt car maker at least use technique in their cars engine to reduce emissions and exhaust of half burned hydrocarbons in their car engine or implementing laws that reduce the waste of energy in the newly build houses can amount to 10 times the obligation Iran may have with implementing that treaty and i don't consider them limiting Iran progress and development . on other hand they are considered better and more advance technologies.

I was addressing the idea that they "deserve" it. Because they don't, no country does.

Besides, almost every developing nation which ratified this agreement is in effect subject to neocolonial submission. Only a handful of countries in the world are enjoying actual independence from the zio-American empire, and Iran is one of them. So obviously, it's not the Paris Agreement that is going to free nations of the South from imperial yoke!

that's not the purpose of the agreement , if they want to free themselves they must learn that they can do it and they can stand on their feet . unless they learn the world we can no matter they agree to Paris agreement or not they are being subject to submission no matter it be east or west or center .
the Paris agreement is being able to give a living world to the future generation its to protect water source and arable lands for the next generation

 

[Hack-Hook]

Hence why self-sufficiency is needed. The polar opposite of free trade.

not exactly , free trade is good for self sufficiency if we empower and monitor private sector by the way the Paris agreement have nothing to do with free trade or self sufficiency . wonder why you must always think in both extreme of the line what's the problem with gray area in middle

This pertains to the economic aspect. There's also interference in domestic politics by colonial powers, cultural imperialism and more.

they only can interfere when you kept yourself weak by staying behind instead of embracing new knowledge , technologies and....... the true power come from knowledge and knowing how to use it that lead to a sustainable self sufficiency , you can make resemblance of self sufficiency by clinging to old Idea and ways of doing things but in the end you become weaker and weaker and weaker it just the example of still water and moving water , which can support life in sustainable manner ?

 

[Hack-Hook]

Correct, neither JCPOA nor Paris Agreement, independence and enjoying one's full rights is the best.

my point if we already implemented the suggestion in the agreement and even more , when we knew we can and have plan to implement a lot more without harming our industry or advancement , why fight it why not ratifying it ? why buy ourselves the bad propaganda ?

 

[Hack-Hook]

We're simply discussing the Paris Agreement here. There's only a handful of manufactured goods that emit carbon gases. The rest don't and there's no such treaty when it comes to them.

limiting those gases alone is a lot more than the treaty ask and many of those gases are 10000 time more potent than co2 when it come to green house effect .also we produce catalyzers' that reduce co2 emission , y just adding them the the machines we produce , modify the exhaust of the old car add those catalyzers to old power plant , modifying old power planet to like newer generation be Combined cycle power plant not only won't harm our industry rather help it more while reducing those emissions (this measure only can increase the efficiency of our old power planet by factor of two)
do you knew in countries like Finland they use the steam from combined cycle power planet to heat cities and that also reduce a lot of fuel burned for energy we just let that steam go to atmosphere , we can use that steam to heat factories and work shop and cities around those power planets and that measure can reduce the emission from those power planet by 95%.and save a lot of valuable fuel that is being burned. in short there are lots and lots of measure you can take to reduce emission that not only won't affect your development but also help you increase your efficiency and save lots of cost in your project and meanwhile help us give a cleaner environment to the next generation . we are talking about increasing the population if we don't take such measure how con provide a healthy environment for them ?

There's no such thing as necessary progress. This progressist ideology is a hoax. It has led to human ruin in the west and will end up eliminating the human species. Competitiveness loses its priority outside of an open borders free trade economy. Also, fact of the matter is that whichever way one twists it, developing nations will keep lagging behind their neo-colonial masters in a free trade environment. Iran in particular would be largely confined to exporting crude oil if competitiveness was the central criterion and overarching condition. Massive deindustrialization would ensue.

the competitiveness is cornerstone of international trade , Iran won't sell anything at all if it can't compete with other countries product in international market.

 

[SalarHaqq]

not in one or two decade

And the difference in temperatures was superior as well.

not exactly ,for example using natural gas in power planet instead of mazut or make some corrupt car maker at least use technique in their cars engine to reduce emissions and exhaust of half burned hydrocarbons in their car engine or implementing laws that reduce the waste of energy in the newly build houses can amount to 10 times the obligation Iran may have with implementing that treaty and i don't consider them limiting Iran progress and development . on other hand they are considered better and more advance technologies.

It's not limited to automobile industries and power plants. Other sectors would be hampered in their development.

that's not the purpose of the agreement , if they want to free themselves they must learn that they can do it and they can stand on their feet . unless they learn the world we can no matter they agree to Paris agreement or not they are being subject to submission no matter it be east or west or center .
the Paris agreement is being able to give a living world to the future generation its to protect water source and arable lands for the next generation

You were the one who established an equivalence by suggesting colonization is a result of staying behind, and that not ratifying the Paris Agreement amounts to staying behind...

As for the other above quoted points, the globalist oligarchy which seeks to impose this and similar treaties on nations is not motivated by the common good but by its own egoistic interests. Therefore their goals certainly don't reside in trying to serving the next generations in the actual inclusive sense.

not exactly , free trade is good for self sufficiency if we empower and monitor private sector by the way the Paris agreement have nothing to do with free trade or self sufficiency . wonder why you must always think in both extreme of the line what's the problem with gray area in middle

Free trade doctrine postulates that if a country cannot transform product X from your example into an added value good on an internationally competitive basis, then it shouldn't bother and should instead export it. It's Adam's Smith's theory of comparative advantage.

Even developing nations such as 1970's-1980's south Korea which succeeded on an export-oriented model relied heavily on state intervention and planning, as well as on giant corporations (named "chaebol" in Korea).

Iran has a far bigger domestic market and a much wider range of natural resources. It is also exposed to the deindustrializing effects of the Dutch disease syndrome given its vast crude oil and gas reserves. I'm not even getting into economic culture, work ethics and so on. For these and other reasons, Iran should not follow an export-oriented or free trade based model, as these would have adverse effects on the industrial basis.

But either way, the free trade path isn't even an option due to US imposed illegal sanctions.

What's the problem with gray areas? In political terms I will gladly say I'm a radical, not a moderate. Maybe I reflect Iranian culture well, given ancient Iranian beliefs of good vs evil.

they only can interfere when you kept yourself weak by staying behind instead of embracing new knowledge , technologies and....... the true power come from knowledge and knowing how to use it that lead to a sustainable self sufficiency , you can make resemblance of self sufficiency by clinging to old Idea and ways of doing things but in the end you become weaker and weaker and weaker it just the example of still water and moving water , which can support life in sustainable manner ?

Concretely speaking, knowledge without ethics will lead to catastrophy. So will science without religion. And there's no neutral type of knowledge in practice. Science is subject to politics. I never opposed knowledge per se, not sure why this is being mentioned at all.

At any rate, fact remains that Iran has deterred the world's superpower for several decades in a row. So Iran conducted adequate policies, which shouldn't be turned upside down.

my point if we already implemented the suggestion in the agreement and even more , when we knew we can and have plan to implement a lot more without harming our industry or advancement , why fight it why not ratifying it ? why buy ourselves the bad propaganda ?

Because ratifying it means getting bound and subject to supranational regulation. A loss of maneuvering space.

limiting those gases alone is a lot more than the treaty ask and many of those gases are 10000 time more potent than co2 when it come to green house effect .also we produce catalyzers' that reduce co2 emission , y just adding them the the machines we produce , modify the exhaust of the old car add those catalyzers to old power plant , modifying old power planet to like newer generation be Combined cycle power plant not only won't harm our industry rather help it more while reducing those emissions (this measure only can increase the efficiency of our old power planet by factor of two)
do you knew in countries like Finland they use the steam from combined cycle power planet to heat cities and that also reduce a lot of fuel burned for energy we just let that steam go to atmosphere , we can use that steam to heat factories and work shop and cities around those power planets and that measure can reduce the emission from those power planet by 95%.and save a lot of valuable fuel that is being burned. in short there are lots and lots of measure you can take to reduce emission that not only won't affect your development but also help you increase your efficiency and save lots of cost in your project and meanwhile help us give a cleaner environment to the next generation . we are talking about increasing the population if we don't take such measure how con provide a healthy environment for them ?

Again examples from the power plant sector. This isn't so my first concern, as said.

the competitiveness is cornerstone of international trade , Iran won't sell anything at all if it can't compete with other countries product in international market.

Yeah, but Iran will have to avoid basing its development primarily on international trade and focus on the domestic market first. Due to sanctions alone, this is a must.

 

[Hack-Hook]

It's not limited to automobile industries and power plants. Other sectors would be hampered in their development.

some example please as the goal will be set by individual government, and is based on the obligation of Tokyo protocol not what they already have as they may have already did more than what Tokyo protocol asked

And the difference in temperatures was superior as well.

but not this much in two decade unless some external factor were involved

You were the one who established an equivalence by suggesting colonization is a result of staying behind, and that not ratifying the Paris Agreement amounts to staying behind...

yes its the result of staying behind and not trying to improve is staying behind not not ratifying it . the question is when you setting higher goal won't hamper your development and you have the technology to do so why not doing it . if you don't put a higher goal for yourself , you'll stay behind ? a question why we could not sell car in south Asia but japan could ? wasn't it because of not having competitive modern standard car ? or you believe japan bribed Asian country not to buy our cars ?

Free trade doctrine postulates that if a country cannot transform product X from your example into an added value good on an internationally competitive basis, then it shouldn't bother and should instead export it. It's Adam's Smith's theory of comparative advantage.

if there is no free trade do the same country have other choice ?

Even developing nations such as south Korea which succeeded on an export-oriented model relied heavily on state intervention and planning, as well as on giant corporations (named "chaebol" in Korea).

they rely on planning do we do that , where our planning in car industry bring us , where south Korea brought us . the international treaties are not the problem . no matter what we ratify them or don't do that we reach nowhere unless we fix ourselves.

What's the problem with gray areas? In political terms I will gladly say I'm a radical, not a moderate. Maybe I reflect Iranian culture well, given ancient Iranian beliefs of good vs evil.

even then not everything was black and white and there always was a place for flexibility , a dry wood will break a wet branch won't break

Because ratifying it means getting bound and subject to supranational regulation. A loss of maneuvering space.

a maneuvering space in places we don't plan to go

Again examples from the power plant sector. This isn't so my first concern, as said.

what's your concern , you reach some goal in that sector , car industry and such and you achieved all your obligation , exactly what sector you are concerned about

Yeah, but Iran will have to avoid basing its development primarily on international trade and focus on the domestic market first. Due to sanctions alone, this is a must.

you suggest we gave our citizen subpar good , don't you think it result in smuggling higher quality foreign goods ?

 

[SalarHaqq]

some example please as the goal will be set by individual government, and is based on the obligation of Tokyo protocol not what they already have as they may have already did more than what Tokyo protocol asked

Detailed case against this globalist instrument:

The Paris Agreement affects industries across the board, not just the automobile sector and power plants.

Steel and cement, two areas in which Iran excels and ranks among the world's top ten. If production costs are driven up, it will negatively impact Iran's output.

Heavy industry: what effects of the Paris Climate Agreement?

The Paris Climate Agreement’s objective for net-zero CO2 emissions shortly after mid-century has completely transformed the climate policy debate for heavy industry. Prior to Paris, the steel, cement, chemicals and other materials sectors were expected to be the last sectors emitting in a -80%...

www.iddri.org

The terms used here are telling:

The policies and investments resulting from the Paris Agreement will reshape national economies, development paths, and value chains for companies across the globe.

https://www.bsr.org/reports/BSR_WeMeanBusiness_Business_Climate_Paris_Agreement_Implications.pdf

Practically the entire economy would be affected. And so would even the development model itself, economic planning etc. In short, it would represent a huge all encompassing loss in self-determination and in autonomous shaping of economic policy.

but not this much in two decade unless some external factor were involved

Researchers show that global warming happened just as fast in the past as today

Climate change is progressing rapidly. It is not the first time in our planet's history that temperatures have been rising, but it is happening much faster now than it ever has before. Or is it? Researchers at Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg have shown in the latest edition of...

phys.org

November 11, 2015

Researchers show that global warming happened just as fast in the past as today

by University of Erlangen-Nuremberg

Credit: Kilian Eichenseer

Climate change is progressing rapidly. It is not the first time in our planet's history that temperatures have been rising, but it is happening much faster now than it ever has before. Or is it? Researchers at Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg have shown in the latest edition of the journal Nature Communications that the temperature changes millions of years ago probably happened no more slowly than they are happening today.

the question is when you setting higher goal won't hamper your development and you have the technology to do so why not doing it . if you don't put a higher goal for yourself , you'll stay behind ? a question why we could not sell car in south Asia but japan could ? wasn't it because of not having competitive modern standard car ? or you believe japan bribed Asian country not to buy our cars ?

Why must Iran sell cars in east Asia? It can start with markets close by. There are enough takers.

Also, the domestic market is largely sufficient to keep Iran's automobile industry afloat. Iran must not necessarily pursue a Japanese-style export oriented strategy here.

But as I said, the issue goes way beyond the automobile industry. And steel or cement products for example do not emit carbon gas.

if there is no free trade do the same country have other choice ?

In a free trade scenario it will tend to just export the non-transformed, low added value good. In a protected economy, it might try to acquire the means to transform it into more technology intensive products.

they rely on planning do we do that , where our planning in car industry bring us , where south Korea brought us . the international treaties are not the problem . no matter what we ratify them or don't do that we reach nowhere unless we fix ourselves.

My point is that without some measure of state intervention and regulation, it will fail. I'm not saying Iran's policies in this sector can't be improved, they surely can, but this will involve better planning and execution, not a retreat of the state.

a maneuvering space in places we don't plan to go

I wouldn't be sure about that considering how the Paris Agreement affects the entire economic structure of its signatories from ground up, and that the future of the economy and the challenges it will face is not entirely predictable.

you suggest we gave our citizen subpar good , don't you think it result in smuggling higher quality foreign goods ?

It'd be wrong to assume that competition and free market will magically boost production quality, when even high tech manufacturing countries could not have achieved this feat without state intervention in some form or shape.

even then not everything was black and white and there always was a place for flexibility , a dry wood will break a wet branch won't break

Certain anthropological and moral constants are non-negotiable. They constitute the core Tradition which have held Iranian society together for millennia, as well as imperatives relative to God, His religion and the latter's dogma, which is not up for discussion or relativization. One step below that level, flexibility is in order.

Our problem today is that powerful forces which strive to jeopardize the above equation and uproot the very core Tradition as well as the human species or God's creation in its very nature, are progressing at dangerous speed. These are Ahrimanian forces, have no doubt about it. Dark forces will never cease to exist and plague us until the end of History, and it is incumbent upon us to correctly identify (a whole challenge unto itself) and resist them.

 

[Hack-Hook]

Detailed case against this globalist instrument:

The Paris Agreement affects industries across the board, not just the automobile sector and power plants.

Steel and cement, two areas in which Iran excels and ranks among the world's top ten. If production costs are driven up, it will negatively impact Iran's output.

the agreement says in areas that is not necessary . if its not necessary to emit that amount of co2 why do so if its necessary ,then the Paris agreement have nothing to do with it

Why must Iran sell cars in east Asia? It can start with markets close by. There are enough takers.

we failed to do in russia , pakistan , gcc, turkey and well even afghanistan the only place we managed to sell cars was selling pride in Iraq , well after not taking any taxes on those cars which drived the price of the car half what we sold to Iranian

Researchers show that global warming happened just as fast in the past as today

Climate change is progressing rapidly. It is not the first time in our planet's history that temperatures have been rising, but it is happening much faster now than it ever has before. Or is it? Researchers at Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg have shown in the latest edition of...

phys.org

the crux of that bogus article is this part

In their study the researchers looked at around two hundred analyses of changes in climate from various periods in geological history. It became clear that the apparent speed of climate change appears slower the longer the time periods over which increases or decreases in temperature are observed. The reason for this is that over long periods rapid changes in climate do not happen constantly in one direction. There are always phases during which the temperatures remain constant or even sink—a phenomenon that has also been observed in the current period of global warming. 'However, we are unable to prove such fast fluctuations during past periods of climate change with the available methods of analysis.

all they argument is based on that because we cant measure changes in short period of time there must be such changes . really ridiculous , do you expect me to accept such logic

In a free trade scenario it will tend to just export the non-transformed, low added value good. In a protected economy, it might try to acquire the means to transform it into more technology intensive products.

but it more probably will not ,just look around yourself. the protected economy result in Iran Khodro and Saipa . it will result in Our mining industry ,.....

My point is that without some measure of state intervention and regulation, it will fail. I'm not saying Iran's policies in this sector can't be improved, they surely can, but this will involve better planning and execution, not a retreat of the state.

who talk about retreat of the state , the state must made plan for the change , we can't continue old methods for centuries because they were good once . do you knew were it will bring us . at the time of the pahlavi they bought a second hand paper making factory if I'm not wrong from Sweden , it was bombed and its many part were damaged during war and because of the passing of time , some time after war they asked the Sweden company to fix and repair it , when their technicians come they said we can't do that as its year we don't produce such factories and and our new factories have evolved several generation and they offered to replace that factory with a new one.
do you knew what they did. they offered a hefty price for the parts to be built for it and you can guess what price they must have paid for those custom made devices , nearly as much as half a price of a modern factory , thats what addiction to old ways bring you.

It'd be wrong to assume that competition and free market will magically boost production quality, when even high tech manufacturing countries could not have achieved this feat without state intervention in some form or shape.

then let state mediate but in the role of regulatory and preventing corruption not in the role of competing with private sector .

Certain anthropological and moral constants are non-negotiable. They constitute the core Tradition which have held Iranian society together for millennia, as well as imperatives relative to God, His religion and the latter's dogma, which is not up for discussion or relativization. One step below that level, flexibility is in order.

Our problem today is that powerful forces which strive to jeopardize the above equation and uproot the very core Tradition as well as the human species or God's creation in its very nature, are progressing at dangerous speed. These are Ahrimanian forces, have no doubt about it. Dark forces will never cease to exist and plague us until the end of History, and it is incumbent upon us to correctly identify (a whole challenge unto itself) and resist them.

the problem is some policies after the revolution attack those core tradition , poverty and disappearance of middle class attack those core traditions , appearance of new money class which get their money from stealing national resource attack those core tradition , corruption attack those core tradition ,
you like to talk about corruption in western society , there if a corruption case become public even letting a friend pay your hotel bill or accepting a free weekend in a friend stablishment they resign , here well let not go what will happen . that's what attack the core of our society

 

[SalarHaqq]

the agreement says in areas that is not necessary . if its not necessary to emit that amount of co2 why do so if its necessary ,then the Paris agreement have nothing to do with it

It would lead to Iran having to reduce emissions by steel and cement producing facilities, because these can continue to function while emitting less if certain investments are made and production methods changed. However, this in turn would drive up production costs and therefore hamper these industries.

we failed to do in russia , pakistan , gcc, turkey and well even afghanistan the only place we managed to sell cars was selling pride in Iraq , well after not taking any taxes on those cars which drived the price of the car half what we sold to Iranian

Beyond the Kia Pride and analogous cars from Saipa, you're forgetting exports of IKCO brand models.

Including to Syria and to Venezuela, where local assembly plants were set up for mass production. In Syria, they managed to conquer quite a fair share of the market.

Plus exports to certain African countries, Senegal if I'm not mistaken, as well as Azarbaijan Republic, where another local assembly line was set up just recently (picture of which were posted in this forum). And possibly Armenia and Uzbekistan too.

In Russia, sales offices for IKCO cars were set up, even if they don't sell a lot down there.

But, and I did not mention this in my previous reply, the main impediment to Iranian exports - be it in the automobile sector or any other, is not economic ie it's neither the quality, the price nor the level of carbon emissions of Iranian cars, but it's eminently political in nature, having to do with US sanctions, US hostility towards Iran and the lacking backbone of the extreme majority of countries to stand up to Washington. This prominently includes east Asian nations.

As long as Iran keeps Resisting US imperialism and zionism, these discussions are rather pointless, since export oriented development won't really be an option for Iran anyway, given that access to export markets will be hindered by the subservience of most governments to Washington.

the crux of that bogus article is this part

all they argument is based on that because we cant measure changes in short period of time there must be such changes . really ridiculous , do you expect me to accept such logic

They have other arguments too. And besides, that statement is not so irrelevant because if such rapid past fluctuations cannot be entirely proven with currently available methods, then these same methods will hardly allow to prove absence of such fluctuations either. In other terms, both hypotheses are speculative anyway and it comes down to the arguments put forth by each side as to why they believe their standpoint is more probable.

but it more probably will not ,just look around yourself. the protected economy result in Iran Khodro and Saipa . it will result in Our mining industry ,.....

IKCO and Saipa is better than no car industry at all or mere assembly lines of 100% imported components, which is what the lifting of protective measures would lead to.

IKCO's problems started the moment it was privatized (or semi-privatized, call it what you will). If managed by institutions headed by selfless individuals who do not have individual enrichment but much rather the manufacture of cost-effective, functional products as well as the common good as their goal, such as the current IRGC top brass, then these issues will be solved as well.

who talk about retreat of the state , the state must made plan for the change , we can't continue old methods for centuries because they were good once . do you knew were it will bring us . at the time of the pahlavi they bought a second hand paper making factory if I'm not wrong from Sweden , it was bombed and its many part were damaged during war and because of the passing of time , some time after war they asked the Sweden company to fix and repair it , when their technicians come they said we can't do that as its year we don't produce such factories and and our new factories have evolved several generation and they offered to replace that factory with a new one. do you knew what they did. they offered a hefty price for the parts to be built for it and you can guess what price they must have paid for those custom made devices , nearly as much as half a price of a modern factory , thats what addiction to old ways bring you.

The Islamic Republic's development strategies, which focus on self-sufficiency, have little to do with Pahlavi era policies of dependence on foreign ie essentially western suppliers.

Iran has experienced quite exemplary industrialization and development since 1979. State intervention and absence of a total free market environment are what made this possible.

then let state mediate but in the role of regulatory and preventing corruption not in the role of competing with private sector .

It depends on the sector of activity. Some sectors must entirely remain under state control in order to be viable. In others, a public company may compete with privately owned ones. And in others yet, state-owned firms aren't needed.

the problem is some policies after the revolution attack those core tradition , poverty and disappearance of middle class attack those core traditions , appearance of new money class which get their money from stealing national resource attack those core tradition , corruption attack those core tradition ,

Poverty per se does not. The resilience of Tradition is not a function of wealth but of other factors.

As for corruption, certainly. I don't remember advocating corruption though, quite to the contrary.

you like to talk about corruption in western society , there if a corruption case become public even letting a friend pay your hotel bill or accepting a free weekend in a friend stablishment they resign , here well let not go what will happen . that's what attack the core of our society

The media in the west belong to the same oligarchy which controls the rest of the economy. Nothing much gets public without their consent therefore, and whistleblowers are a rare species.

And in any case, this is quite the cold comfort for western citizens whose rights are getting trampled as we speak by mega-corporations that keep committing tax evasion to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars each year, among many other corrupt and unjust practices.

https://equitablegrowth.org/the-sources-and-size-of-tax-evasion-in-the-united-states/

New EU tax study: fight against tax evasion has not yet been won - Sven Giegold - Mitglied der Grünen Fraktion im Europaparlament

A new study by the European Commission concludes that the Member States of the European Union lost around 46 billion euros in tax revenue in 2016 as a result of tax evasion by private individuals. The German tax authorities alone lost around 7.22 billion euros in 2016 as a result of tax evasion...

sven-giegold.de

The corruption in Iran must be fixed no matter what, but imagining that the introduction of western models of society and culture, of western economic management or of western political organization will somehow solve the issue is misleading.