War with Iran page 1
Jerome
6th February 2012, 08:42 PM
Obama Orders New Sanctions Against Iran's Central Bank (http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/02/obama-orders-new-sanctions-on-irans-central-bank/)
“I have determined that additional sanctions are warranted, particularly in light of the deceptive practices of the Central Bank of Iran and other Iranian banks to conceal transactions of sanctioned parties, the deficiencies in Iran’s anti-money laundering regime and the weaknesses in its implementation, and the continuing and unacceptable risk posed to the international financial system by Iran’s activities,” the president wrote in a letter to Congress.
The executive order states that all assets of the Iranian government and banks held in the United States are “blocked and may not be transferred, paid, exported, withdrawn or otherwise dealt in.” The sanctions were included as an amendment to the defense authorization bill that Obama signed into law at the end of 2011.
The move comes amid speculation of a possible Israeli attack on Iran. On Sunday, Obama stressed that diplomacy was still the “preferred solution.”
“I have determined that additional sanctions are warranted, particularly in light of the deceptive practices of the Central Bank of Iran and other Iranian banks to conceal transactions of sanctioned parties, the deficiencies in Iran’s anti-money laundering regime and the weaknesses in its implementation, and the continuing and unacceptable risk posed to the international financial system by Iran’s activities,” the president wrote in a letter to Congress.
The executive order states that all assets of the Iranian government and banks held in the United States are “blocked and may not be transferred, paid, exported, withdrawn or otherwise dealt in.” The sanctions were included as an amendment to the defense authorization bill that Obama signed into law at the end of 2011.
The move comes amid speculation of a possible Israeli attack on Iran. On Sunday, Obama stressed that diplomacy was still the “preferred solution.”
Jerome
6th February 2012, 08:44 PM
http://newsone.com/files/2011/03/obama-peace-prize.jpg
Hermit
7th February 2012, 02:40 AM
Oh. New economic sanctions. "War", as it is used in the thread title, is obviously not meant to signify a shooting war.
Jerome
7th February 2012, 02:45 AM
This is the same action taken against Libya just before the shooting started.
Grumps
7th February 2012, 05:01 AM
This is the same action taken against Libya just before the shooting started.
lol.
lol.
Hermit
7th February 2012, 05:29 AM
Yes, the shooting may start some time in the future, but it has not happened yet, nor is it inevitable. The Israelis might send a couple of jets in again to bomb Iran's nuclear facilities to smithereens. Cuba has been blockaded since 1958, and apart from the Bay of Pigs fiasco no shooting war has eventuated in the next 44 years. The entire Eastern Block had economic sanctions placed on it and collapsed without the USA waging shooting wars on the Soviet Union and its Satellites.
I would welcome the removal of every existing dictatorship, and particularly theocracies, by force as a last resort and if that is a feasible solution.
I would welcome the removal of every existing dictatorship, and particularly theocracies, by force as a last resort and if that is a feasible solution.
Jerome
7th February 2012, 12:40 PM
It is planned, it has been planned since even before 9/11. Read the Project for a New American Century.
The nations without central banking tied directly into the world banking system have been the targets all along.
The nations without central banking tied directly into the world banking system have been the targets all along.
Jerome
7th February 2012, 12:41 PM
it and collapsed without the USA waging shooting wars on the Soviet Union and its Satellites.
Korea, Vietnam?
Multiple conflicts (mostly by proxy) in South America?
:dunno:
Korea, Vietnam?
Multiple conflicts (mostly by proxy) in South America?
:dunno:
Hermit
7th February 2012, 01:36 PM
it and collapsed without the USA waging shooting wars on the Soviet Union and its Satellites.
Korea, Vietnam?
Multiple conflicts (mostly by proxy) in South America?
:dunno:Cherrypicking won't do you any good. I said a shooting war is not inevitable. I also said economic sanctions =|= a shooting war. The title of this thread is grossly misleading.
Korea, Vietnam?
Multiple conflicts (mostly by proxy) in South America?
:dunno:Cherrypicking won't do you any good. I said a shooting war is not inevitable. I also said economic sanctions =|= a shooting war. The title of this thread is grossly misleading.
Jerome
7th February 2012, 01:38 PM
The west is at war with the middle-east, it has been a shooting war since Bush I.
Hermit
7th February 2012, 01:50 PM
At shooting war with the middle east? I guess the Saudis and Kuwaitis better start worrying.
Jerome
7th February 2012, 10:34 PM
At shooting war with the middle east?
Yea, there has been an ongoing shooting war in the middle-east since Bush I.
Do you not read the papers?
Yea, there has been an ongoing shooting war in the middle-east since Bush I.
Do you not read the papers?
Hermit
7th February 2012, 11:05 PM
At shooting war with the middle east?
Yea, there has been an ongoing shooting war in the middle-east since Bush I.
Do you not read the papers?Yes, I have. Must have skated past the battles of Saudi Arabia.
Yea, there has been an ongoing shooting war in the middle-east since Bush I.
Do you not read the papers?Yes, I have. Must have skated past the battles of Saudi Arabia.
Jerome
7th February 2012, 11:09 PM
Do you not read the papers?Yes, I have. Must have skated past the battles of Saudi Arabia.
That is a retarded as saying that there was no American shooting civil war because there was no shooting in Minnesota.
That is a retarded as saying that there was no American shooting civil war because there was no shooting in Minnesota.
Jerome
9th February 2012, 06:24 AM
http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2012/02/07/us-military-beginning-review-of-syria-options/
"Before we start talking about military options, we very much want to ensure that we have exhausted all the political, economic and diplomatic means at our disposal," Ambassador Susan Rice said on CNN's “Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer.”
The president has also said that the U.S. is working on non-military options first.
"I think it is very important for us to try to resolve this without recourse to outside military intervention, and I think that's possible," Obama said in an interview with NBC News that aired during the Super Bowl on Sunday.
But the military is beginning to look at what can be done. One of the senior U.S. officials called the effort a “scoping exercise” to see what capabilities are available given other U.S. military commitments in the region.
Both officials pointed out that this type of planning exercise is typical for the Pentagon, which would not want to be in the position of not having options for the president, if and when they are asked for.
It would be Gen. James Mattis, head of U.S. Central Command, who would provide details on what U.S. military assets are available, what missions they could perform if asked, and what risks U.S. forces might face.
“The Pentagon is closely monitoring developments in Syria. It wouldn’t be doing its job if it didn’t put some ideas on the table,” one of the senior U.S. officials told CNN. “But absolutely no decisions have been made on military support for Syria.”
"Before we start talking about military options, we very much want to ensure that we have exhausted all the political, economic and diplomatic means at our disposal," Ambassador Susan Rice said on CNN's “Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer.”
The president has also said that the U.S. is working on non-military options first.
"I think it is very important for us to try to resolve this without recourse to outside military intervention, and I think that's possible," Obama said in an interview with NBC News that aired during the Super Bowl on Sunday.
But the military is beginning to look at what can be done. One of the senior U.S. officials called the effort a “scoping exercise” to see what capabilities are available given other U.S. military commitments in the region.
Both officials pointed out that this type of planning exercise is typical for the Pentagon, which would not want to be in the position of not having options for the president, if and when they are asked for.
It would be Gen. James Mattis, head of U.S. Central Command, who would provide details on what U.S. military assets are available, what missions they could perform if asked, and what risks U.S. forces might face.
“The Pentagon is closely monitoring developments in Syria. It wouldn’t be doing its job if it didn’t put some ideas on the table,” one of the senior U.S. officials told CNN. “But absolutely no decisions have been made on military support for Syria.”
Hermit
9th February 2012, 07:48 AM
Contingency plans have been developed. What a revelation.
Jerome
9th February 2012, 02:08 PM
http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm
Hermit
9th February 2012, 02:50 PM
Point?
Jerome
9th February 2012, 02:53 PM
This have all been planned for a long time, in 1997 it was considered a conspiracy theory (right wing wackos that hated Clinton), today we see that is has been coming to pass.
Hermit
9th February 2012, 03:05 PM
The Pentagon has made contingency plans for many more decades than that. I still don't get your point. Maybe I am not sufficiently familiar with whoever or whatever it is you are talking about.
Jerome
9th February 2012, 03:16 PM
The purpose has been to overthrown nations that do not have central banking tied into and controllable by the world banking system.
If you notice the first thing the 'rebels' in Libya did, before the fighting even really started, was to establish a central bank.
If you notice the first thing the 'rebels' in Libya did, before the fighting even really started, was to establish a central bank.
Hermit
9th February 2012, 03:34 PM
"People who bought the above post also bought into the the NWO conspiracy theory, Zeitgeist - the movie, and intergalactic lizards."
Jerome
9th February 2012, 03:43 PM
http://www.cnbc.com/id/42308613/Libyan_Rebels_Form_Their_Own_Central_Bank
Monday, 28 Mar 2011
Libyan rebels in Benghazi say they have formed their own central bank. The rebel group known as the Transitional National Council released a statement last week (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-21/libyan-rebel-council-sets-up-oil-company-to-replace-qaddafi-s.html)announcing that they have designated the Central Bank of Benghazi as a monetary authority competent in monetary policies in Libya, and that they have appointed a governor to the Central Bank of Libya, with a temporary headquarters in Benghazi, according to Bloomberg.
Is this the first time a revolutionary group has created a central bank while it is still in the midst of fighting the entrenched political power? It certainly seems to indicate how extraordinarily powerful central bankers have become in our era.
Robert Wenzel of Economic Policy Journal thinks (http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2011/03/libyan-rebels-form-central-bank.html) the central banking initiative reveals that foreign powers may have a strong influence over the rebels.
Monday, 28 Mar 2011
Libyan rebels in Benghazi say they have formed their own central bank. The rebel group known as the Transitional National Council released a statement last week (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-21/libyan-rebel-council-sets-up-oil-company-to-replace-qaddafi-s.html)announcing that they have designated the Central Bank of Benghazi as a monetary authority competent in monetary policies in Libya, and that they have appointed a governor to the Central Bank of Libya, with a temporary headquarters in Benghazi, according to Bloomberg.
Is this the first time a revolutionary group has created a central bank while it is still in the midst of fighting the entrenched political power? It certainly seems to indicate how extraordinarily powerful central bankers have become in our era.
Robert Wenzel of Economic Policy Journal thinks (http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2011/03/libyan-rebels-form-central-bank.html) the central banking initiative reveals that foreign powers may have a strong influence over the rebels.
Hermit
9th February 2012, 03:47 PM
Yeah, verily, I say unto you, it's a conspiracy. [Cologne 47:11]
Jerome
9th February 2012, 03:49 PM
lol that they say they are going to do it, they do it, and you dismiss it like it hasn't happened.
Hermit
9th February 2012, 03:51 PM
Where am I dismissing it like it hasn't happened?
Grumps
9th February 2012, 08:38 PM
The west is at war with the middle-east, it has been a shooting war since Bush I.
You're right. There been absolutely no conflict between any Western nation, and the Middle East prior to Bush the first.
You're right. There been absolutely no conflict between any Western nation, and the Middle East prior to Bush the first.
Nhận xét
Đăng nhận xét