US Vows to Hit Iran with ‘Strongest Sanctions in History’

[Tokhme khar]

currently only the US refuses to purchase Iran oil........no one else has any issues. If that changes, do let us know.

First try to sell your oil under the new sanctions before trying to stop oil shipments from Iraq.

 

[TheBlackCoat]

currently only the US refuses to purchase Iran oil........no one else has any issues. If that changes, do let us know.

Wait and watch. Most countries would join.

 

[Tokhme khar]

It's been 40 years most countries trying to 'join'.......hasn't happened yet.

Wait and watch. Most countries would join.

 

[The SC]

About what? That NK will end up submitting in the end? How was I wrong, just because the two children who are running the show are slinging mud at each other and behaving like babies? That's to be expected, I mean, look at who we're talking about here.

It'll happen, there's no doubt about it. To think that something of this caliber was going to happen in 6 months without any bumps in the road is foolish.



The 4th largest oil reserves in the world after Venezuela, Canada, Saudi Arabia and its export percentage is only 30% of the total export? That's almost impossible to believe, my friend.

According to TradingEconomics, combined with gas, Iran's total oil & gas is over 80% of its total export.

View attachment 476547
Oil and natural gas are Iran's most important exports, accounting for 82 percent of the country's export revenues.

https://tradingeconomics.com/iran/exports

You are right..Trump has received a call from the NK leader today and he said that the meeting is possible as scheduled before.. !!?

 

[AmirPatriot]

NK will end up submitting in the end

Listen dude, NK never said they would get rid of their nukes. They've been working on them for 25 years ffs, do you honestly think they'll give up nukes and ICBMs to carry them after so much time and effort? Mark my words, there is no way that will ever happen. From the moment Trump started blabbing about "denuclearization", I knew it was rubbish. Trump is the one who is bigging this up for his own ego and political image.

I'll make sure to @ you when Trump's illusions are dispelled.

The 4th largest oil reserves in the world after Venezuela, Canada, Saudi Arabia and its export percentage is only 30% of the total export?

Please read what I said carefully. I said 30% of government revenue. Fiscal policy is very different from trade. First you were talking GDP, then Fiscal, then Trade. They are all seperate and different variables. Apples and oranges, if you will.

 

[Gomig-21]

Listen dude, NK never said they would get rid of their nukes. They've been working on them for 25 years ffs, do you honestly think they'll give up nukes and ICBMs to carry them after so much time and effort? Mark my words, there is no way that will ever happen. From the moment Trump started blabbing about "denuclearization", I knew it was rubbish. Trump is the one who is bigging this up for his own ego and political image.

I'll make sure to @ you when Trump's illusions are dispelled.

Listen, ma dude, make sure you do @ me when you get un-banned. Until then, yes, I do believe that NK will denuclearize in the end because of this ego maniac's reckless quest to up his political image and just because it's been able to withstand previous sanctions under different US administrations, doesn't mean it can sustain newer and much bigger ones, especially when they've shown unprecedented signs of willing to do that. If you think otherwise, that's fine. We'll have to agree to disagree on this.

As far as Iran is concerned, I actually side with them in this case because a deal was struck and it seems the US has reneged on it, which doesn't bode well for the US' integrity as far as holding up its end of such bargains. Although the details of the JCPOA might not be clear as far as the leverage the US holds with respect to that particular agreement; whether it can withdraw from the deal given it has legitimate reasons and if the reasons given are in fact legitimate, that's still to be determined as far as my own, personal knowledge of it is concerned. So I'm on Iran's side of this equation based on that. I think major agreements struck should be binding and all participants should abide by them and as far as Iran's involvement in proxy wars and spreading its influence all over the ME and it's ballistic missile program, those should be a separate issue if they are indeed not part of the JCPOA.

And as far as the oil point, I was referring to total percentage of export, period. Not GDP, or fiscal or trade (although trade is certainly a large part of export and those two are not mutually exclusive by any means) and that's what the US will be going after and whether Iran can sustain heavy sanctions against its major source of export. That's all my point was, no need to twist it and rinse it.

 

[The SC]

Listen, ma dude, make sure you do @ me when you get un-banned. Until then, yes, I do believe that NK will denuclearize in the end because of this ego maniac's reckless quest to up his political image and just because it's been able to withstand previous sanctions under different US administrations, doesn't mean it can sustain newer and much bigger ones, especially when they've shown unprecedented signs of willing to do that. If you think otherwise, that's fine. We'll have to agree to disagree on this.

As far as Iran is concerned, I actually side with them in this case because a deal was struck and it seems the US has reneged on it, which doesn't bode well for the US' integrity as far as holding up its end of such bargains. Although the details of the JCPOA might not be clear as far as the leverage the US holds with respect to that particular agreement; whether it can withdraw from the deal given it has legitimate reasons and if the reasons given are in fact legitimate, that's still to be determined as far as my own, personal knowledge of it is concerned. So I'm on Iran's side of this equation based on that. I think major agreements struck should be binding and all participants should abide by them and as far as Iran's involvement in proxy wars and spreading its influence all over the ME and it's ballistic missile program, those should be a separate issue if they are indeed not part of the JCPOA.

And as far as the oil point, I was referring to total percentage of export, period. Not GDP, or fiscal or trade (although trade is certainly a large part of export and those two are not mutually exclusive by any means) and that's what the US will be going after and whether Iran can sustain heavy sanctions against its major source of export. That's all my point was, no need to twist it and rinse it.

The US (and not only the US) was pushing for the missiles ban during those negotiations too.. the only new demands concern the regional interventions by Iran .. those Yemen missiles did not help as well as the the presence in Syria and meddling in Arab and Muslim countries internal affairs From Indonesia to Morocco.. that is nothing else than attempts at spreading the Iranian Islamic revolution that has not been successful in Iran itself.. and it is very bad ..since it politicises the religion and creates a lot of sectarianism within Islam..even the most hateful enemy of Islam can not attempt a destruction of the religion and the cohesion of Muslim nations like that !

 

[sammuel]

The US (and not only the US) was pushing for the missiles ban during those negotiations too.. the only new demands concern the regional interventions by Iran .. those Yemen missiles did not help as well as the the presence in Syria and meddling in Arab and Muslim countries internal affairs From Indonesia to Morocco.. that is nothing else than attempts at spreading the Iranian Islamic revolution that has not been successful in Iran itself.. and it is very bad ..since it politicises the religion and creates a lot of sectarianism within Islam..even the most hateful enemy of Islam can not attempt a destruction of the religion and the cohesion of Muslim nations like that !

While sanctioning the nuclear issue was clear , it is little harder the define how to sanction Iran general foreign policy. At what point exactly would US decide to draw that line ?

 

[Gomig-21]

The US (and not only the US) was pushing for the missiles ban during those negotiations too.. the only new demands concern the regional interventions by Iran .. those Yemen missiles did not help as well as the the presence in Syria and meddling in Arab and Muslim countries internal affairs From Indonesia to Morocco.. that is nothing else than attempts at spreading the Iranian Islamic revolution that has not been successful in Iran itself.. and it is very bad ..since it politicises the religion and creates a lot of sectarianism within Islam..even the most hateful enemy of Islam can not attempt a destruction of the religion and the cohesion of Muslim nations like that !

While I completely agree with all your points. The problem is whether all those things are connected to the JCPOA. If they're not (which I'm pretty certain they aren't), then the US essentially defaulted in the agreement and that's on the US, specifically Trump. This will undoubtedly impact the North Korean discussions. If I was Kim, the first thing I'd bring up is "hey, you people don't abide by the contracts you sign just like you did with Iran, so why should I trust you? Either you sign a specially highlighted clause that details exactly the conditions that all parties are to go by, including you, and we write up an attached clause that penalizes you if you pull out of the agreement under false or non-pertaining conditions."

If Iran's expansionism needs to be contained, it needs to be done in another way, not by defaulting on a signed treaty.

While sanctioning the nuclear issue was clear , it is little harder the define how to sanction Iran general foreign policy. At what point exactly would US decide to draw that line ?

Exactly my thoughts. That's why I'm not sure about that particular aspect with regards to the JCPOA. When Trump says "Iran isn't living up to the spirit of the agreement," well, that's a very murky area to get into because is it's political, military and even sectarian expansionism covered under the agreement? I'm not sure of the details but something tells me most likely not even close.