• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

U.S. Preparing New Sanctions On Iran Over Missile Tests

If sanctions could actually encourage the Iranian people to rise up, they would've done so by now. But it hasn't happened, in spite of 40 years of sanctions on Iran.

So you're argument is that if something doesn't work, keep doing it? :rolleyes:


So let me get this straight, in your logical, non-emotional, rational thought process, if the economic life/well-being of a people (Iranian or any-other) suddenly IMPROVES (via lifting of sanctions or by other means) those people will be MORE likely to over-throw their government?!?, rather than just roll with the status quo?!? LOL!!!

Please give me your examples from history of when that happened.
 
Last edited:
If sanctions could actually encourage the Iranian people to rise up, they would've done so by now. But it hasn't happened, in spite of 40 years of sanctions on Iran.

So you're argument is that if something doesn't work, keep doing it? :rolleyes:

Sanctions, regime change, pre-emptive wars, choosing sides between Shia/Sunni quarrels; none of it has worked.
 
So let me get this straight, in your logical, non-emotional, rational thought process, if the economic life/well-being of a people (Iranian or any-other) suddenly IMPROVES (via lifting of sanctions or by other means) those people will be MORE likely to over-throw their government?!?, rather than just roll with the status quo?!? LOL!!!

Please give me your examples from history of when that happened.

Maybe Iranians are smart. Maybe they've looked around the region and seen that the Arab Spring is having ****ty results and prefer the status quo. :shrug:
 
Maybe Iranians are smart. Maybe they've looked around the region and seen that the Arab Spring is having ****ty results and prefer the status quo. :shrug:

One small difference, like for example, Obama's backed terrorist group the Muslim Brotherhood trying to over-throw a moderate government in Egypt? If all the BS is true about the majority of the population of Iran being moderate, it is just the opposite.
 
One small difference, like for example, Obama's backed terrorist group the Muslim Brotherhood trying to over-throw a moderate government in Egypt? If all the BS is true about the majority of the population of Iran being moderate, it is just the opposite.

:shrug: I remain no fan of Obama's Egyptian policy.
 
A link would be nice right about now...

I read quite a bit, but never what you claim... so the CIA was in place and ready to crank up it's coup support in a couple of months? We had no problem with Iran until Mossadegh 'seized' power?

Many dictators seize power- why did we care about Iran? Why did we install a Shah instead of new DEMOCRATIC elections? Why did we never push the Shah for true elections? Why did we help his Secret Police suppress opposition?

The BEST you can claim is we substituted one dictator for another- not very noble of us at all...

But do link the referendum vote, a time table of how it came about would be nice... :peace

Check out the wiki sections on the coup, the Shah and Mossadeq, it's all in there. We wanted Mossadeq out because we thought he was sympathetic to the communists and would align Iran with the Soviets. We didn't push the Shah out because under the Iranian Constitution he was the legitimate head of state and we did push for reforms they are known as the White Revolution which inevitably led to his overthrow by the Mullahs.m

Here is a good detailed article discussing the events that led up to the removal of Mossadeq:

After the protests, the Majlis became the main seat of anti-Mosaddeq agitation. Since Mosaddeq's ascension to the premiership, his seemingly arbitrary decision-making, his inability to end the oil crisis, and the narrowing of his circle to a few trusted aides had gradually alienated many parliamentarians. In response, the prime minister decided to eliminate the threat by simply dissolving the Majlis. Doing so required executing a ploy of dubious legality, however: on July 14, all the National Front deputies loyal to Mosaddeq resigned their posts at once, depriving the chamber of the necessary quorum to function. Mosaddeq then called for a national referendum to decide the fate of the paralyzed legislature. But this was hardly a good-faith, democratic gesture; the plebiscite was marred by boycotts, voting irregularities, and mob violence, and the results surprised no one: Mosaddeq's proposal to dissolve parliament was approved by 99 percent of the voters. Mosaddeq won his rigged election, but the move cost him what remained of his tattered legitimacy.


What Really Happened in Iran - Council on Foreign Relations
 
Last edited:
Check out the wiki sections on the coup, the Shah and Mossadeq, it's all in there. We wanted Mossadeq out because we thought he was sympathetic to the communists and would align Iran with the Soviets. We didn't push the Shah out because under the Iranian Constitution he was the legitimate head of state and we did push for reforms they are known as the White Revolution which inevitably led to his overthrow by the Mullahs.m

Here is a good detailed article discussing the events that led up to the removal of Mossadeq:

After the protests, the Majlis became the main seat of anti-Mosaddeq agitation. Since Mosaddeq's ascension to the premiership, his seemingly arbitrary decision-making, his inability to end the oil crisis, and the narrowing of his circle to a few trusted aides had gradually alienated many parliamentarians. In response, the prime minister decided to eliminate the threat by simply dissolving the Majlis. Doing so required executing a ploy of dubious legality, however: on July 14, all the National Front deputies loyal to Mosaddeq resigned their posts at once, depriving the chamber of the necessary quorum to function. Mosaddeq then called for a national referendum to decide the fate of the paralyzed legislature. But this was hardly a good-faith, democratic gesture; the plebiscite was marred by boycotts, voting irregularities, and mob violence, and the results surprised no one: Mosaddeq's proposal to dissolve parliament was approved by 99 percent of the voters. Mosaddeq won his rigged election, but the move cost him what remained of his tattered legitimacy.


What Really Happened in Iran - Council on Foreign Relations

I did check it out, once again the TIMELINE throws your claims into question. FIRST the US helps depose one Shah for a youngster (You'd call him a puppet if the Soviets had done so). Next the US pushes to have Mossadeqh removed as the ELECTED Prime Minister. Mossadeqh resigns and the Shah asks him to RESUME being the PM as POPULAR support for Mossadeqh is massive. More outside agitation by Western Powers, more civil unrest stirred up and as a final act to try and quell the CIA backed operations Mossadeqh calls for a referendum... (Ya kinda leave all that out now don't ya)

His inability to end the oil crisis is more CIA BS. The British and American interests FROZE Iranian assets to try and strong arm Iran back into a very lopsided oil agreement. His inability is due to the West's refusal to negotiate with Iran like they did with the Saudis... :doh

But do spin on... :peace
 
Greetings, Objective Voice. :2wave:

I was under the impression that it was their money that was put under sanction by the international community, and they made it a condition that it would be released the minute the deal was signed, if I am remembering correctly. It may have been released by now, but I haven't heard so I don't know. Their neighbors don't trust them, and they know how they operate better than we do, so why we should trust anything they say is anybody's guess.

Obama was releasing money even before the signing. The balance should already have been dispersed.
 
Again, whether it is Egypt, Syria, Iran or any other of the Obama ME policy F*-ups, what would any rational person think was going to happen considering Obama's #1 puppet master/adviser is Iranian? ME/radical Muslim interests first, America's interest a distant second.
 
So let me get this straight, in your logical, non-emotional, rational thought process,

Illogical, overtly emotional "thought" processes belong only to conservatives, which explains their insistence on more sanctions to discourage Iran's military ambitions, even though it has failed for the last 40 years :rolleyes:.

if the economic life/well-being of a people (Iranian or any-other) suddenly IMPROVES (via lifting of sanctions or by other means) those people will be MORE likely to over-throw their government?!?, rather than just roll with the status quo?!? LOL!!!

Yes, because the Iranian people will know that they don't have to risk their security or sovereignty (i. e. the possibility of US military intervention in their affairs) if they overthrow their government.

The argument that they'd be more likely to overthrow their regime w/sanctions in place makes no sense at all, esp. considering they did not do so for the last 40 years when sanctions were in place.
 
A preliminary UN sanctions investigating panel has reported to the UN Security Council that Iran's Emad missile test on 10 October 2015 violated Paragraph 9 of UN Security Council Resolution 1929 passed in 2010. The sanctions panel assessed that the missile test violated both the allowed payload weight and the allowed missile range.

Britain, France, Germany and the United States had requested the inquiry. France emphasized the importance of an "appropriate response" after the UN report's findings and Britain's envoy Matthew Rycroft said the council must "respond effectively to what appears to be a breach." Also being assessed is a followup Iranian ballistic missile test that occurred on 24 November 2015.
 
I did check it out, once again the TIMELINE throws your claims into question. FIRST the US helps depose one Shah for a youngster (You'd call him a puppet if the Soviets had done so). Next the US pushes to have Mossadeqh removed as the ELECTED Prime Minister. Mossadeqh resigns and the Shah asks him to RESUME being the PM as POPULAR support for Mossadeqh is massive. More outside agitation by Western Powers, more civil unrest stirred up and as a final act to try and quell the CIA backed operations Mossadeqh calls for a referendum... (Ya kinda leave all that out now don't ya)

His inability to end the oil crisis is more CIA BS. The British and American interests FROZE Iranian assets to try and strong arm Iran back into a very lopsided oil agreement. His inability is due to the West's refusal to negotiate with Iran like they did with the Saudis... :doh

But do spin on... :peace

Ah yes Mossadeq, such a beacon of democracy he just had to fraudulently dissolve parliament and grant himself dictatorial powers. He so loved democracy in Iran he had to destroy any semblance of an elected representation.
 
Back
Top Bottom