Ron Paul Speaks out against Iran Sanctions

Matt Ciepielowski
Apr 23, 2010 at 12:43 PM

That sounds a little like common sense, the enemy of the PARTY.  In fact, common sense is now heresy if the PARTY says so.  Afterall, how do you know that 2+2 =4 and not 5.  You have a better chance of hitting the lottery twice in the same year than these jokers listening to the words of wisdom.

jtny730's picture

My head is spinning from that one. Other than the general ineffectiveness of sanctions, I think I disagree with it all.

It almost sounds like he's OK with Iran acquiring a nuke. If that happens, we will likely go to war with Iran ourselves or via Israel which has already guaranteed an attack if it appears Iran is anywhere near a nuke.

The reason Pakistan continues to have nukes and sanctions are being used against Iran is because no one wants a war with either of them any more than we want one with North Korea.

If Paul thinks we will stop trading with the Chinese over sanctions, he has another think coming.

Brien Wright's picture

A "trade war" doesn't necessarily mean you stop trading with someone. I believe it generally just implies that the countries would restrict trade via tariffs, etc.

Matt Ciepielowski's picture

'The sanction bill literally says that, any country that trades or sends oil into Iran, we will no longer trade with them...We are theoretically under this bill not to trade with them. Can you think of anything more chaotic than having a trade war with China at this particular time?'

Was he just hyperbolizing? We already practice protectionism with China, and they have their own form of it with us.

Brien Wright's picture

I assume the reason he said "theoretically" was that it was clear that we wouldn't actually do that. Which makes the purpose of including that provision in the sanctions questionable, since we won't follow it anyway.

Matt Ciepielowski's picture

Which is more questionable, a provision we won't follow or arousing fear over a provision we won't follow?

In other reports on this legislation, it is described as merely another tariff. But I haven't seen the actual language. I don't see how we could ever categorically stop trading with China, even in specific industries, without hurting ourselves a great deal. But China seems to be coming on board with sanctions.

Brien Wright's picture