What's new

Russia-Ukraine War - News and Developments PART 2

You have to separate two things.
  1. Is there a law in the EU that blocks banking transactions
  2. Are there policies in place within banks that blocks banking transactions with Iran.
All private companies have the sovereign right to choose whether they want to do business with Iran or not, so the second thing does not violate the JPCOA.
The EU only violates agreements to lift sanctions if they actually punishes people for trading with Iran.

Seems like Your accusations so far are unfounded.
let see
ok from 2018
PARIS: The Belgium-based SWIFT financial messaging service will be disconnecting some Iranian banks this weekend, said SWIFT chief executive Gottfried Leibbrandt at an event in Paris on Friday.
Earlier this week, SWIFT had already stated that it would be suspending some unspecified Iranian banks’ access to its messaging system in the interest of the stability and integrity of the global financial system.
In a brief statement issued earlier this week, SWIFT had made no mention of US sanctions coming back into effect on some Iranian financial institutions on Monday, as part of US President Donald Trump’s effort to force Iran to curtail its nuclear, missile and regional activities.
SWIFT’s statement on Nov. 5 said that suspending the Iranian banks access to the messaging system was a “regrettable” step but was “taken in the interest of the stability and integrity of the wider global financial system.”

you see we don't deal with your fancy word that only convince you
after usa left you promised us you use it to bypass usa sanctions

this mechanism only used once and you were failed to deliver what you promised

why because you guys were not willing to use you blocking mechanism that you promised you use if your protect the trade with Iran


these are the promises that are made and were not delivered ,and as our official already said we don't care about some text on papers and some laws , we care about their effect and till today the effect of your laws , promises and talks or nill
so you can complain iran did not acted according to JCPOA after you delivered . we followed every word in word in JCPOA till 1 year after usa left it , but if the benefit it promissed are not delivered we don't see any reason to do so. here west is the one who break the deal not us
 

IMG_20221005_005306.jpg
 
But the Shahed-136 drones…..
ask from Ukrainian , the problem is Russia is conservative on using them and also they for strange reason opt to not to buy our anti radiation drones .

also consider another thing , 2-3 month ago when russia arm storage one after each other get destroyed people said russia had a lot of them and its not important , now we see the effect of those incidence . right now russia start to give ukrain the same treatment with the help of Shahed-136 . winder what the war situation would be in 2 months after enough of those arm storage get blown away
 
let see
ok from 2018


you see we don't deal with your fancy word that only convince you
after usa left you promised us you use it to bypass usa sanctions

this mechanism only used once and you were failed to deliver what you promised

why because you guys were not willing to use you blocking mechanism that you promised you use if your protect the trade with Iran


these are the promises that are made and were not delivered ,and as our official already said we don't care about some text on papers and some laws , we care about their effect and till today the effect of your laws , promises and talks or nill
so you can complain iran did not acted according to JCPOA after you delivered . we followed every word in word in JCPOA till 1 year after usa left it , but if the benefit it promissed are not delivered we don't see any reason to do so. here west is the one who break the deal not us
Show where in JPCOA the EU makes such promises…
Seems like you are confusing things.
 
ask from Ukrainian , the problem is Russia is conservative on using them and also they for strange reason opt to not to buy our anti radiation drones .

also consider another thing , 2-3 month ago when russia arm storage one after each other get destroyed people said russia had a lot of them and its not important , now we see the effect of those incidence . right now russia start to give ukrain the same treatment with the help of Shahed-136 . winder what the war situation would be in 2 months after enough of those arm storage get blown away

The Shaheds are only used for terror bombing at this point.
 
don't you put all the possible economical and political pressure on the country then at the table , discuss on removing some of those pressure if they agree to your demands and after they do and you get what you wanted later again put those same pressure again and ask for something else

whats the difference in end result here with what Russia do , two tactic same shit
What Estonia PM Kaja Kallas said is that for the Soviet/Russia method, if you want something that you do not have, just take it by force and negotiate from there. In a manner of speaking, you will be negotiating from a position of strength -- that you are in possession of that thing and it will require force to take it from you. Then as you drag out the negotiation, delays or teases of concessions, eventually someone from the other side will get tire and advises their leaders to give A, B, and/or C. You may get %100 of that thing, or you may get partial, but at least you get something from nothing.

The problem of Ukraine is that Russia failed to secure what Russia wanted, even partial of Ukraine so Russia have nothing to even tease of concessions to induce that tiredness of negotiation. If only the Ukrainians put a difficult fight, then Russia would have that position of strength, but the Ukrainians, with NATO assist, put up more than just difficult and for now, actually winning. So why should anyone from the West be tired of negotiations? Why should we put up any inducements? Elon Musk is being called out a 'simp' for his social media comments. Same for some Fox News talking heads when they tacitly advised giving Russia something because they are scared of Poutine.

You can bet whatever salary you make that right now, Poutine is aware that some of his people are plotting his removal from office. No one want a nuclear war. Ukraine is not worth it. Not even Crimea is worth it. Maybe, IF the Ukrainians feels truly indifferent about Crimea, then maybe we can negotiate with Russia over Crimea. However, with what Poutine put Russia thru and all he gained was little Crimea, his days are numbered. Either he dies a horrible death in Russia or he flee.

But...In case if we need to take out Russia thru a nuclear exchange, we need only two strikes.

f0NNUJ3.png


GiK45ll.jpg


Back in WW II, we did not destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki like popular impressions have it. But both cities suffered enough damages to induce surrender. So out of all Russia territory, we are looking at two critical targets to essentially cripple Russia. All of Russian government knows this.
 
have no faith in the USA, not while that dementia ridden corpse, Biden is POTUS
 
Show where in JPCOA the EU makes such promises…
Seems like you are confusing things.
those are the promise EU made after USA left and reinstated the sanctions to Iran so Iran stay in the deal and don't leave it .
lifting those sanction was the only reason for iran to agree to jcpoa, I wonder if you are under the impersion we agreed to the deal because we loved your eye and brew ?

The Shaheds are only used for terror bombing at this point.
if hitting ammunition storage and central command of Ukrainian force and attacking ukrainian artillery with them is considered terror bombing then yes

But...In case if we need to take out Russia thru a nuclear exchange, we need only two strikes.

f0NNUJ3.png


GiK45ll.jpg


Back in WW II, we did not destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki like popular impressions have it. But both cities suffered enough damages to induce surrender. So out of all Russia territory, we are looking at two critical targets to essentially cripple Russia. All of Russian government knows this.
my guess is if it come to nuking each other two or three tzar bomba would be enough . but that aside as i doubt it will come to that , japan surrendered mainly because it was ready to surrender , it was talking with you about surrender
 
Last edited:

That "zaro defences" allegedly has very bad roads, and marshy grounds.

When RU force first entered the area, they built their defence line along the very few roads.

They know they can't back off to the river, and they retreated from the area which they knew will be impossible to supply without that road.

With that, gone was their arty bases too.

They chose not to contest UA forces near the river.

It's now all about denying RU building new firebases near the dam.

Without defensive firebases, they will be doomed in those open fields.
 
my guess is if it come to nuking each other two or three tzar bomba would be enough . but that aside as i doubt it will come to that , japan surrendered mainly because it was ready to surrender , it was talking with you about surrender
What I posted is well known even further back than when I was active duty and on the F-111. Our Victor Alert F-111s, from RAF Upper Heyford and RAF Lakenheath, each with two freefall B61s and two external fuel tanks, can reach Moscow. We can make the usual rhetoric that 'no one win a nuclear war' but realistically, after a nuclear exchange, the American people is actually more survivable than Russians because most of CONUS is livable while most of Russia is barely livable. When I say 'livable' I do not mean just eking out a scrabble existence but actually building something. And if survive mean win, then the US can win a nuclear war. This harsh calculus is not mine but from cold analyses done during the Cold War.

Poutine made the worst mistake of his life with Ukraine.
 
What I posted is well known even further back than when I was active duty and on the F-111. Our Victor Alert F-111s, from RAF Upper Heyford and RAF Lakenheath, each with two freefall B61s and two external fuel tanks, can reach Moscow. We can make the usual rhetoric that 'no one win a nuclear war' but realistically, after a nuclear exchange, the American people is actually more survivable than Russians because most of CONUS is livable while most of Russia is barely livable. When I say 'livable' I do not mean just eking out a scrabble existence but actually building something. And if survive mean win, then the US can win a nuclear war. This harsh calculus is not mine but from cold analyses done during the Cold War.

Poutine made the worst mistake of his life with Ukraine.
a question for you ,Chernobyl explosion released more radioactive material or a 1mega ton hydrogen bomb ?
do you knew how many people died and how many caught cancer because of it.
 
Back
Top Bottom