Friday, June 11, 2010

Toothless Sanctions against Iran

The Toothless Tiger has done it again.

The US State Department has confirmed that despite sanctions against Iran which include not being able to acquire weapon systems ("A ban on all countries providing military vehicles, aircraft or warships and missiles or missile systems and related materiel to Iran;")  the State Department believes that these sanctions inexplicably completely leave open the option for the Russians to sell to Iran the S-300 (long range surface to air missile system) - as the State department and the US administration is choosing to understand it.

A missile system that could possibly prevent Israel from attacking and destroying Iran's nuclear weapons facilities.

QUESTION: Just one more back on sanctions, one more point on the S-300. Is there any side-letter agreement or understanding with the Russians, between the U.S. and Russia, on the S-300?
MR. CROWLEY: We have had conversations with Russia about this broad set of issues. And I would note that people have kind of overlooked the fact that there is a significant expansion of the restrictions on the sale of arms to Iran. And that has a direct bearing on Russia, which has had a fairly significant level of commerce with Iran over a number of years.
So this was very meaningful for Russia to agree to the restrictions that are in this resolution. But – been some statements out of Russia today regarding the S-300, and as we said, we note the fact that it’s not captured specifically by this resolution, but we have recognized and appreciate the restraint that Russia has shown up to this point.
QUESTION: But to the question, is there any separate understanding between the U.S. and Russia about the sale of S-300s, is there any agreement or any letter --
MR. CROWLEY: I mean, I don’t know that there’s any agreement. We have talked to Russia about this issue, and Russia obviously will make up – make its own determination as to how to proceed or not.
QUESTION: But you’re satisfied that this particular sale is not – is excluded from the sanctions?
MR. CROWLEY: That is clear, since this resolution was based on the existing arms registry at the UN, and the S-300 is not on that list.
 Gee, was that screw-up on purpose, or by accident? Or are they just choosing to understand it that way?

Sometimes the world is really just topsy-turvy.

(Hattip: IMRA)

Shabbat Shalom.

One-Click Pro-Israel Activism!
It takes just 1 Click to help Israel!

Wherever I am, my blog turns towards Eretz Yisrael טובה הארץ מאד מאד


Yonatan said...

[Q]I totally support the rights of Jews within reasonable limits[/Q]...just don't get too uppity, we likes it when you stay in your place.

How about sanctions against the only country in the world to have used nuclear weapons? How about sanctions against Turkey, that is actively killing Kurds at a much higher rate than the so called "indigenous population" you speak of. (More than two decades of conflict has claimed at least 37,000 lives) One of the worlds worst violators of human rights? This lie has been repeated so many times, you actually believe it. Forget the fact that there are actual human rights abuses happening all around the world and in much greater number than your imagined human rights abuses happening in Israel.

The stuff you're spouting off about is the kind of stuff that a 10 year old can easily see through, yet here you are. It is absolutely pathetic. The time will come soon when you will be one of those that looks back on his/her life and will be ashamed forever. Wake up and stop ingesting everything that your left wing masters are feeding you!

Flair Hickory said...

Yonatan, the extremist idea of having zero restrictions on Jews has been tried and the Israel Lobby is the result. We need to balance the rights of Jews to certain freedoms with the rights of all people to be free from Zionist intimidation. And if you think I'm "anti-Semitic," let me reiterate again: I support Jewish rights. But there are limits; you can't shout fire in a crowded theater.
And regarding your point about human rights: "Other people are doing it" isn't an excuse. Israel is a human rights violator and should be held accountable, especially because they have nuclear weapons. Israel is causing nuclear proliferation just by having nukes. Turkey doesn't have a nuclear weapon, does it?

Yonatan said...

Does the US have nuclear weapons?

Are they somehow more "trustable" than Israel?

Your argument is hollow.

Without even beginning to talk about the merits or faults of what Israel is doing, there are MUCH bigger to fish to fry. Lets concentrate on the gasoline tanker that overturned on I-95 rather than the never ending gusher in the Gulf, makes great sense to me - NOT. Unless there is another agenda at play here. Couple that with the fact that the situation in Israel is nothing like those other HUGE situations in the world, that Israel actually has a right to exist and protect itself and that the enemy on the other side doesn't want peace at all but instead wants the elimination of the Jewish state...There is nothing you can say to justify your stance.

You want to cut off all your military aid that goes back to your defense contractors, that is your prerogative, but don't be surprised when you encounter the law of unintended consequences. We are a sovereign nation. We answer to the creator of the universe. You can't lie to him.

Yonatan said...

Shabbat Shalom all, see you on the other side ;-)

Kovi said...

Your last sentence seems somewhat irrelevant. No, Turkey does not have nuclear weapons. They just have engaged in open genocide, which not only does the world ignore but which such states as the US actually specifically choose not to acknowledge for the sake of political advantage
As for your "reasonable limitations" argument about the rights of Jews, lets try this one: you can't kill people... except in self defense. That's called a reasonable limitation, and it is a universally accepted one in all countries. I.e. when someone is shooting at you, and you shoot back and kill them, it's not murder, because you had no choice but to defend yourself.
So according to your statute of "reasonable limitations", it seems that Israeli soldiers acted prudently in the killing of - what did you say, peace activists? - perhaps you meant mercenaries hired by the IHH terrorist organization - who attacked them with knives, lead pipes and live fire. One of those soldiers was shot in the stomach. Apparently they give small arms training at that "peace activist" camp.
By the same token, it seems prudent to enforce a blockade over an area controlled by terrorists that are actively attacking your civilian population, or to carry out airstrikes to counter constant rocket barrages on your home soil.
Has the logic of this -your logic - escaped you, or are you just not listening?

Flair Hickory said...

Israel's nuclear weapon is the main reason that the Arabs and Iranians want nuclear weapons--to protect themselves from the Zionists. Israel continues to dispossess Palestinians and replace them with illegal settlers. It looks like the goal is to continue this expansion through the whole "manifest destiny" of the middle east. So of course others will want defensive nuclear weapons. The best way to stop Iran from a nuclear weapon is to assert pressure on Israael to abandon its nuclear weapons. Until Israel comes clean about its nuclear weapons program, dismantles it, and allows U.N. weapons inspectors to ascertain that this has been done, the same sanctions that go on Iran and North Korea need to be applied to Israel. Unfortunately the United States is standing in the way of this, mostly because of the influence of the Israel Lobby, but ordinary Americans are waking up to this and are going to put the Israel Lobby out of business very soon hopefully.

Yonatan said...

Good luck taking them from us!

You and your country don't run the world. We don't answer to you. The barbaric countries that surround us don't fear the nuclear weapon from us per se, they fear that they cannot ever destroy us as they want to when we have nuclear weapons. Big difference, no?

You can have all the world vision you like, it doesn't mean we have to bow down and follow.

Kovi said...

ms flair, with your failure to actually respond to counter-arguments, this sad parody of a dialogue has come to an end, which is just as well, because i've gotten bored of you and your hate-spewing jowls a-quiver. honestly you know you sound just like every single other asshole who wants to step on the Jew, without a word of your own to contribute? Can't you at least be original, please? I mean Niztsche was also an anti-semite but he was at least intelligent and fun to argue with. You're just a bore.

Search the Muqata


Related Posts with Thumbnails