The prospect of the US moving forward with unilateral sanctions against Iran seems all but assured today, after the House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed a bill that set up talks with the Senate on a finalized bill...
The measure would attempt to block companies across the world from doing business with Iran in importing gasoline and other vital goods Iran does not produce domestically, a move with has been designed to “cripple” Iran’s economy in retaliation for refusing to abandon its civilian nuclear program...
http://news.antiwar.com/2010/04/22/house-overwhelmingly-passes-iran-sanctions-bill/
But don't you know that sanctions have worked so effectively to rid of Cuba and North Korea of communism?
Political Atheists Blog
this should fix things
Awesome. The radicals already hate us for killing 500,000 people with our medical embargo on iraq after gulf war 1.
I know no one else is going to agree with me on this, but I'm glad to see them finally trying to do something about Iran.
"I know no one else is going to agree with me on this, but I'm glad to see them finally trying to do something about Iran."
I do disagree with you on other grounds but, even from a utilitarian point of view this is worthless. Actually worse than worthless it is counterproductive. As someone else above pointed out these measures never work. They almost exclusively affect the poorer population and do nothing to the state apparatus except give them an effective talking point against the US to rally support and deflect attention for their failures away from themselves. This has never worked and it never will and that should be "common sense" by now.
@Curtis, you're probably right. But this seems to be the strongest measure they could get international support for.
if anything it's free and open trade that rids the world of places like this; the free movement of goods (and ideas can and do accompany goods IMHO) eventually forces the state to relax certain controls.
Resident Christian Anarcho-Capitalist.
btw, they're not trying to overthrow Iran's system of government with this, they're doing this to try and get Iran to back off their development of nuclear materials.
"The measure would attempt to block companies across the world from doing business with Iran in importing gasoline and other vital goods Iran does not produce domestically, a move with has been designed to “cripple” Iran’s economy in retaliation for refusing to abandon its civilian nuclear program. "
The US has boycotted Iran for over thirty years now. They have applied pressures to their "allies" to do the same. Despite this, European, Japanese and Korean companies have all regularly traded with Iran. Uncle Sam used to turn a blind eye if no weapon deals were involved. Now the music is changing.
Last year French oil company Total (formerly Elf-Aquitaine) left Iran, traditionally one of their best partners. Their concessions were picked up by CNPC (China National Petroleum Company): the Chinese got a killer deal from the Iranian government. Since no reasons were given for this move it's much likely President Sarzozy's vehemently pro US and Israeli politics had an hand in it. With fuel prices skyrocketing in Europe it wasn't a very smart decision but when politics have ever been "smart"? European companies are slowly but steadily abandoning Iran: since Iran is traditionally a good trading partner one is left to think that they have pressured (and possibly blackmailed/bribed) by their home governments. Chinese are quickly moving in to replace the Europeans: despite what the media are saying China and Iran aren't all chummy. Iranians have a deep distrust of East Asian peoples and China's ambiguous stance on Iran isn't helping.
As Bastiat rightly remarked when goods aren't crossing borders, armies will.
What's wrong with Iran, compared to let's say Israel or the United States?
Well, in bloom's defense, would any of us argue that Iran more closely embodies our ideals as compared to the US? I would think not. There is plenty wrong with Iran. My difference with bloom is that I don't believe statist intervention on the US part will in any way shape or form make the situation better, and actually has a high probability of making the situation worse.
Bert: What's wrong with Iran, compared to let's say Israel or the United States?
Do you mean morally wrong? If so, I don't think morality has anything to do with this.
Israel and the US are allies. Iran is a potential enemy of Israel and also the US and it looks like they might be building nukes. This could be a serious problem. The US is trying to deal with it.
Do you mean morally wrong? If so, I don't think morality has anything to do with this. Israel and the US are allies. Iran is a potential enemy of Israel and also the US and it looks like they might be building nukes. This could be a serious problem. The US is trying to deal with it.
Has nothing to do with morality. I'm not sure why our Congress think's that (in whoever's interest) blocking the transfer of goods is productive. Israel may be our government's ally, but I have no interest in Israel and would be very pleased if we ceased from doing their dirty work. Also, I don't see why country's X and Y, who have nuclear weaponry, want to block Z from having it.
If the United States want's to "deal" with this "problem", they can first start by not getting entangled in Israel's b/s and start disarming our own nuclear weapons.
@Bert, the reason is that there's good reason to believe that Iran might use a nuclear weapon on Israel or hand it off to some terrorist organization that could potentially use it here or elsewhere. In short, a nuclear Iran is a security risk.
I have a great deal of interest in Israel and I'm glad that the US is trying to do something to prevent a Nuclear Iran from happening.
The security risk is exaggerated. Iran is doing nothing wrong (nothing that we haven't done, at least).
From previous post of yours I know your interest in Israel is more of a "nationalist" interest. I understand your interest, but as a whole for everyone else, governments restricting the flow of goods through people's own voluntary association is counter productive.
Bert: I understand your interest, but as a whole for everyone else, governments restricting the flow of goods through people's own voluntary association is counter productive.
I understand your interest, but as a whole for everyone else, governments restricting the flow of goods through people's own voluntary association is counter productive.
Agreed, but if it gets Iran to reconsider their nuclear program it will be worth it to me. Probably not to you though.
If all it does is make them angrier and push them faster towards developing nukes then it will have been a total waste and mistake and the US will have to consider more drastic measures.
We'll see what happens.
Generally the most drastic are the most unproductive, in this sense.
"The prospect of the US moving forward with unilateral sanctions against Iran seems all but assured today, after the House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed a bill that set up talks with the Senate on a finalized bill... The measure would attempt to block companies across the world from doing business with Iran in importing gasoline and other vital goods Iran does not produce domestically, a move with has been designed to “cripple” Iran’s economy in retaliation for refusing to abandon its civilian nuclear program... http://news.antiwar.com/2010/04/22/house-overwhelmingly-passes-iran-sanctions-bill/"
"The prospect of the US moving forward with unilateral sanctions against Iran seems all but assured today, after the House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed a bill that set up talks with the Senate on a finalized bill...
http://news.antiwar.com/2010/04/22/house-overwhelmingly-passes-iran-sanctions-bill/"
Not cool...
"No person is so grand or wise or perfect as to be the master of another person." ~ Karl Hess
"look, property is theft, right? Therefore theft is property. Therefore this ship is mine, OK?" ~Zaphod Beeblebrox
How radical of them.
Well, in bloom's defense, would any of us argue that Iran more closely embodies our ideals as compared to the US? I would think not. There is plenty wrong with Iran.
Ridicilous. It is not even a contest. The US is a criminal world empire. Iran on the other hand is just a normal state, but on a plus side even has an anti-imperial regime.
Well, I like my women not being forced to wear head to toe covering (in fact the less covering the better). I like my drinking and dancing. Shit I could go on forever but lets just say in general I like the pathetic few freedoms I have left and wouldn't want to be in the even sorrier shape the poor Iranian people are in. I despise my government and the very concept of the State but I don't see how it can possibly be argued that the Iranian State allows for more individual freedom than the US one does. That is delusional. The US is a criminal world empire, no argument from me. Yes, the US has committed far more crimes against the rest of the world than most states but that is positional, rather than by virtue. The Iranian statists would be perfectly happy to replace us in that regard. Anti-imperial regime? You must be kidding. They (rightly) oppose US imperialism but, like any other statists, would very much like to replace it with their own brand of imperialism. That is the nature of the state my friend. Don't get it twisted their statists are no better or worse than ours. Why would you play cheerleader for any statists? Personally I'm an ancap so I oppose them all but maybe we differ there.
Which laws has the US broken that make it a criminal empire and what court has the authority to declare the US criminal?
"Which laws has the US broken that make it a criminal empire and what court has the authority to declare the US criminal?"
lol, are you kidding? Ever heard of "anarchy among nations"?
The empire has commited murder, theft and forced people into slavery (to name a few of the empire's many crimes).
The US Government has (repeatedly) broken the natural laws of humanity and thus should be liquidated.
My next guess is war. Perhaps just before the elections? Obama is getting desperate.
I also forgot - we invaded iraq claiming that saddam might have WMD's. But a lot of people think that if he really did have them, we wouldn't have invaded in the first place. Press the red button, hundrds of thousands dead. Publicity nightmare. Infrastructure destroyed. etc. It sends a giant message to all other would-be enemies of the united states to acquire nukes as soon as possible. We won't invade if they have WMD's. We're accusing Iran of all the same stuff we accuse Iraq and Afghanistan of. I think we'd have gone in by now if they didn't have nuclear capabilities. (They at least have nuclear power plants... activate self destruct sequence - you have five minutes to evacuate the building mr bond)
Well, I like my women not being forced to wear head to toe covering (in fact the less covering the better). I like my drinking and dancing. Shit I could go on forever but lets just say in general I like the pathetic few freedoms I have left and wouldn't want to be in the even sorrier shape the poor Iranian people are in.
Blah, blah, blah. How many people did the USA kill today? How many did Iran? Iranians have the freedom not to see their taxes go towards killing people in other countries. That is the number one freedom to have. If you don't have that you don't have nothing. "Poor Iranian people"? Stop with the condescension and sweep before your own doorstep.
Anti-imperial regime? You must be kidding. They (rightly) oppose US imperialism but, like any other statists, would very much like to replace it with their own brand of imperialism.
Woulda, coulda, shoulda... Facts are facts. US is the Empire and Iran is one of very few countries in the world free of the Empire. 0 and 1. No woulda, coulda, shoulda. Also what is "their brand of imperialism" specifically, do tell?
That is the nature of the state my friend. Don't get it twisted their statists are no better or worse than ours. Why would you play cheerleader for any statists? Personally I'm an ancap so I oppose them all but maybe we differ there.
Funny, you weren't such a fundamentalist a moment ago when you were expressing a preference for the US "in Bloom's defense". So this only works when convenient, eh?
Just about every international law you can name. ICJ in Hague.
Anything else?
Bloomj31, has there ever been a US war or a build up towards one that you opposed? You seem to talk quite a bit for "doing something" but nothing ever about not doing anything.
bloomj, compare China and Vietnam to Cuba and North Korea. All four are "communist" countries. The latter two have suffered from extensive embargoes imposed by the US. The former two have traded with the US. The latter two are backwards, unfree countries. The former two are becoming freer and more prosperous.
krazy kaju: "The former two are becoming freer and more prosperous."
Really? In what way?
Hello World War 3. We're fucked
bloomj31: Bert: What's wrong with Iran, compared to let's say Israel or the United States? Do you mean morally wrong? If so, I don't think morality has anything to do with this. Israel and the US are allies. Iran is a potential enemy of Israel and also the US and it looks like they might be building nukes. This could be a serious problem. The US is trying to deal with it.
Wow. Cable news is apparently more effective than Vallium at sedating critical thought.
Clayton -
I don't watch TV actually.
Marko: Just about every international law you can name. ICJ in Hague.
ICJ has no teeth.
Marko: has there ever been a US war or a build up towards one that you opposed?
has there ever been a US war or a build up towards one that you opposed?
No, but I've only been around for Afghanistan and Iraq. I'm only 23. I guess I was around for the Gulf War but I was a little kid.
Do not confuse vices and liberty. Vices are used by TPTB as an opiate of the masses (literally, in the case of British colonial rule in China). Furthermore, you need never worry that TPTB will cut off the vices which are popular in a particular region. They might play carrot and stick with them. The populace might have to fight for access to vices they have not traditionally enjoyed out in the open (porn in China or pot in California, etc.) but the biggest mistake a government can make is to ban outright a popular vice. The people of the United States repealed a Constitutional amendment - that takes super-majorities upon super-majorities! - to get their liquor back and through the duration of Prohibition, it is not clear that business actually significantly slowed. Product quality went to shit and prices went to the stratosphere but business was booming - cops and Bible-thumping prohibitionists be damned.
Vice is a cheap substitute for liberty. While prohibition is every bit as repulsive as any other form of tyranny, I think it is a mistake for liberals to be appeased by concessions to vice which do have a corrupting influence. Whole liberty includes both vicious and virtuous action and without the freedom to puruse virtuous action, the freedom only to vicious action does, in fact, corrupt society. If we are free to choose good or evil, industry or sloth, some people will choose the low path but most people will not. But when our choices are between being free to be hedonistic, slothful and licentious on the one hand or to join the slavery of the political economy on the other hand, society cannot be said to be in any sense free. It is enslaved and corrupted.
Is this supposed to be rhetoric or truth? China is far freer than it was several decades ago, and the people on average are far better off. Can you really compare a country where even the poorest workers can eat meat every day to one in which starvation is not a freak event (the latter is what China also used to be like)?
Or the fact that China's government doesn't control every step of the vast majority of its citizens like it used to - in the past it was nearly impossible to get permission to move to another city, now migrant populations in many cities are greater than the original populations?
Or the fact that today China is the number 1 car market in the world?
Or has three times the KFCs as America? (lol)
Absolute political freedom? Of course not, China is still much less free than America in this and many other respects. But freer and more prosperous?