| Submit your comments on this article |
| Syria-Lebanon-Iran |
| US to sanction countries cooperating with Iran |
| 2007-10-13 |
| MOSCOW - The United States is considering imposing new sanctions on countries cooperating with Iran, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said on Friday after high-level Russia-US talks. “The United States will not allow Iran to take advantage of the international financial system, the benefits of which it distributes to support international terrorism,” she declared at a news conference. “The fact that Iran continues to challenge the international community means that ... those who do business with Iran represent a threat,” Rice added. The US State Department had imposed sanctions on arms companies in August 2006 for allegedly supplying equipment to Iran, which it said broke US laws banning the sale to Tehran of equipment capable of helping develop weapons of mass destruction. The sanctions stop US firms working with companies, including Russian aircraft manufacturer Sukhoi and arms manufacturer Rosboronexport. These reacted by saying that it was a means to stop them competing with US arms dealers. Sukhoi meanwhile denied having any contracts with Tehran, saying it has not worked with the country in six years. Moscow last year signed a deal worth 700 million dollars to supply surface-to-air missiles to Tehran, and is building Iran’s first nuclear power station in Bushehr. |
| Posted by:Steve White |
| #9 McZ, I think you've been reading too much Tom Clancy. Russia is not now nor would have been amenable to such activity. Everyone else has just about nailed it. 1) We had to try. 2) It may still work. 3) Political Islamo-facism is very dangerous. 4) The only (hopefully) saving grace is that Musslemen are so bloody incompetent. As that Israeli said, the best thing the IAF had going for it is they were fighting Arabs. |
| Posted by: AlanC 2007-10-13 12:04 |
| #8 The Middle East Democratic Initiative was a catastrophic error; it conferred perverse legitimacy on political-Islam. Absolutely, McZ. However, as twobyfour notes, within the current political milieu, there was no real alternative. Rest assured that there should have been an entirely different reaction to newly liberated Muslim majority nations re-adopting shari'a law. But that, too, has gone by the boards despite being the one single avoidable factor that indeed "conferred perverse legitimacy on political-Islam." To paraphrase David D.: After we have been obliged to turn the MME (Muslim Middle East) into a smoldering glass plain, when our children ask how we could have been so idiotic as to try and import democracy into the MME, we must be able to answer that at least we tried. Even if Muslims are in many ways, the least deserving of such an expenditure of priceless human life and vast treasure in their interest, we owe it to ourselves in order that there be greater moral clarity regarding the need to annihilate political Islam. Let there be no question. Political Islam, like Nazism, must be erased from the face of this earth. Few other ideologies in all of human history are so dangerous or so toxic to individual liberty and freedom. At present, Iran is the pinnacle of political Islam. In accordance with accepted political norms, the West must escalate through all usual channels until the unavoidable need for military intervention arises as the only measure by which regime change can be effected. However glacial and—in light of Iran's dogged pursuit of nuclear weapons—thereby risky this pace is, it's what we have and I will give Bush due credit for finally getting off the dime and instituting measures whereby Iran necessarily is being isolated from the global community. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2007-10-13 11:04 |
| #7 Manchester, NH? |
| Posted by: Raj 2007-10-13 09:47 |
| #6 Venezuela? |
| Posted by: Grunter 2007-10-13 08:01 |
| #5 McZoid, it was not an error. The idea may ultimately fail. That is not yet a certainity. But even so, it had to be tried. If it fails, then there would not be any qualms about properly dealing with the situation when time comes, because the avenue was explored. If it fails not, then the advantages are apparent. There was no possibility of getting an agrement with Russia in the scope you've suggested. Not with triangulating Pooty at helm. Too much explaining why. |
| Posted by: twobyfour 2007-10-13 03:53 |
| #4 Where would we be if we made a post 9-11 deal with Russia to enable the joint takeover and occupation of the Saud, Iraq and Iran terrorist entities? In the scenario I envision, terrorists wouldn't dare plant IEDs or snipe at US troops. Occupied peoples would jump hoops for their new masters, or die. The Middle East Democratic Initiative was a catastrophic error; it conferred perverse legitimacy on political-Islam. Do we want Islamofascists to vote, or die? |
| Posted by: McZoid 2007-10-13 03:15 |
| #3 UPI > BMD FOCUS - BARAK'S BMD STRATEGY PARTS I, II; + OUTSIDE VIEW: JASSM IN CRISIS PARTS I,II. Israel's BMD focii is Iran's nuclear-capable SHAHID-3 IRBMS + circa dozen or so Ukrainian-supplied Cruise Missles, whilst SYRIA has Russian-supplied ISKANDER-M [E?] SRBMS-TBMS. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2007-10-13 01:02 |
| #2 Austria? |
| Posted by: 3dc 2007-10-13 00:38 |
| #1 Germany? |
| Posted by: 3dc 2007-10-13 00:37 |