• 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!

Trump administration sanctions Iran on missile test

JANFU

JANFU

Land by the Gulf Stream
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Dec 27, 2014
Messages
59,385
Reaction score
38,941
Location
Best Coast Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...n-1040a:homepage/story&utm_term=.74888c258110

The sanctions were imposed on several Iranian officials and entities involved in procurement of material for the missile testing, which the administration said is not part of the 2015 nuclear deal, officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA.

"Iran's continued support for terrorism and development of its ballistic missile program poses a threat to the region, to our partners worldwide, and to the United States," said John Smith, acting director of Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control. "Today's action is part of Treasury's ongoing efforts to counter Iranian malign activity abroad that is outside the scope of the JCPOA. We will continue to actively apply all available tools, including financial sanctions, to address this behavior."
Click to expand...

Seems to be minor sanctions???
Wonder what possible sanctions may come later
Thoughts are?
 
joG said:
I thought we still had all the impressive sanctions in place. But the only ones that do anything much are the measures and their financial risks that international banks and companies fear the US might take against them for dealing with Iran.
Click to expand...

IIRC for the Nuke deal specific sanctions were lifted??
The ballistic missile tests fall under a separate Sec Council resolution

Resolution 2231 (2015) | Specific restrictions - Ballistic missile-related transfers and activities
Resolution 2231 (2015)
Ballistic missile-related transfers and activities
What are the restrictions on Iranian ballistic missile activities?

Paragraph 3 of Annex B of resolution 2231 (2015) calls upon Iran not to undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles designed to be capable of delivering nuclear weapons, including launches using such ballistic missile technology.
Click to expand...
 
joG said:
I thought we still had all the impressive sanctions in place. But the only ones that do anything much are the measures and their financial risks that international banks and companies fear the US might take against them for dealing with Iran.
Click to expand...

Having an extra $150 billion at ones disposal makes dealing with others more fruitful.
 
WCH said:
Having an extra $150 billion at ones disposal makes dealing with others more fruitful.
Click to expand...

But not less dangerous.
 
ludin said:
wait I thought the whole iran deal was to prevent this from happening?

:roll:

you mean iran isn't sticking by the deal they made? no I can't believe it.
Click to expand...

and you thought wrong

the purpose of the deal was to prevent iran from producing nuclear weapons

the annex/side agreement was intended to prevent iran from developing the ability to launch ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads
 
justabubba said:
and you thought wrong

the purpose of the deal was to prevent iran from producing nuclear weapons

the annex/side agreement was intended to prevent iran from developing the ability to launch ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads
Click to expand...

I guess that didn't work out to well.
who would have though iran would abide by a deal.
 
WCH said:
Having an extra $150 billion at ones disposal makes dealing with others more fruitful.
Click to expand...

IIRC -Money in accounts frozen by different Countries Govts. After paying off debt, China for example that amount is significantly lower.
 
JANFU said:
IIRC -Money in accounts frozen by different Countries Govts. After paying off debt, China for example that amount is significantly lower.
Click to expand...

Yes, frozen by the UN.
 
WCH said:
Yes, frozen by the UN.
Click to expand...

Funds were Iranian. A substantial amount was for outstanding debt with China and other countries.
Another amount (unknown) was to be paid for in products and services to Iran by various countries.

Amounts in cash after all that from what I have found is between 50-60 Billion.
Would that be reasonable accurate?
 
ludin said:
I guess that didn't work out to well.
who would have though iran would abide by a deal.
Click to expand...

what evidence do you have which shows iran is working on a missile to project nuclear warheads
 
JANFU said:
Funds were Iranian. A substantial amount was for outstanding debt with China and other countries.
Another amount (unknown) was to be paid for in products and services to Iran by various countries.

Amounts in cash after all that from what I have found is between 50-60 Billion.
Would that be reasonable accurate?
Click to expand...

Who knows. Look at the parties making up the number. There were many countries and companies that were ignoring the bans anyway. China for one.
 
WCH said:
Who knows. Look at the parties making up the number. There were many countries and companies that were ignoring the bans anyway. China for one.
Click to expand...

True.
 
As a novice president, Trump will surely be tested by Moscow, Beijing, Pyongyang, and Tehran (again).

Comparatively speaking, the Trump sanctions are a minor slap on the wrist.
 
WCH said:
Because the world knows they are. Plus they share technology with North Korea,

North Korea-Iran nuclear ties probably deep: report - Washington Times

Then there's this.

Iran said to test second nuclear-capable missile | The Times of Israel
Click to expand...

then you acknowledge there is no evidence of iranian violation of the ballistic missile side agreement which prohibits that nation from developing missiles to project nuclear devices. nothing prevents iran from developing conventional ballistic missiles
 
justabubba said:
then you acknowledge there is no evidence of iranian violation of the ballistic missile side agreement which prohibits that nation from developing missiles to project nuclear devices. nothing prevents iran from developing conventional ballistic missiles
Click to expand...

Give me a break. The 'agreement' did nothing to stop Iran from doing exactly what it wanted to. Recent tests have shown that to be true.
 
WCH said:
Give me a break. The 'agreement' did nothing to stop Iran from doing exactly what it wanted to. Recent tests have shown that to be true.
Click to expand...

under that agreement we find iran has not developed any nuclear weapons. something projected to have otherwise resulted by now but for the 'deal'
under the annex to said agreement, which prohibited development of nuclear ballistic capacity, nothing prohibited development of conventional capacity
now, it is up to you to offer evidence that iran is developing nuclear deployment capacity and not conventional capacity in its ballistic missile program
i suspect you aren't going to be up to that
but that's OK, because tRump isn't either
 
UN Resolution 1929 (2010) says the Security Council "decides that Iran shall not undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles capable of delivering nuclear weapons, including launches using ballistic missile technology, and that States shall take all necessary measures to prevent the transfer of technology or technical assistance to Iran related to such activities."

The above shall not undertake any activity is a definite prohibition.

UN Resolution 2231 (2015) terminated Resolution 1929 (above) and added the language: "Iran is called upon not to undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles designed to be capable of delivering nuclear weapons, including launches using such ballistic missile technology, until the date eight years after the JCPOA Adoption Day or until the date on which the IAEA submits a report confirming the Broader Conclusion, whichever is earlier."

The above called upon not to undertake any activity is a strong suggestion, but not a definite prohibition.

Another point of contention is that Resolution 2231 does not specify/clarify the meaning of: "related to ballistic missiles designed to be capable of delivering nuclear weapons" The key word is designed

Iran is arguing that this particular ballistic missile is "designed to be capable of delivering conventional weapons" although it could, in theory, also be capable of delivering nuclear weapons"

The above are document/language loopholes that Iran is exploiting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom