Posts in "Sanctions"

United States should stay out of Iran’s nuclear business

Mar 3, 2013 at 4:32 PM

obamadrone Obama’s presidency has been a busy one for American interventionism.

His administration has overseen a costly troop surge in Afghanistan, a disastrous police action in Libya, and an unprecedented campaign of drone warfare across Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia. With the largest military budget since World War II, the president has kept US forces stationed in over 150 countries around the world. This includes a contingent of 28,000 troops protecting the Korean border – 6,000 more than the number of agents employed by the entire border patrol of the United States.

With our national debt climbing beyond $16.5 trillion, one might expect our government to scale back its litany of overseas entanglements and look inward. In fact, according to a January 2011 Gallup poll, more Americans favor cutting foreign aid than any other area of spending. Our government, however, seems to think that America is still not policing the world enough.

In his January 2012 State of the Union address, President Obama announced that “America is determined to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, and I will take no options off the table to achieve that goal.” Although it’s been just over a year since U.S. troops completed their withdrawal from Iraq, our policymakers apparently have short memories. We may now be closer than ever before to the fulfillment of the president’s Iran threat.

Iran Sanctions Continue to Hurt the Wrong Target

Jul 24, 2012 at 6:24 PM

By Bonnie Kristian

Millions of Iranians are struggling to afford basic food necessities thanks to a spike in food prices caused by US sanctions. Those sanctions continue to be implemented despite the fact that "Washington admits Iran has no weapons program and has not made the decision to start one."

In short, these sanctions:

Hurt average Iranians,
Have increased Iranian unemployment,
Do not hurt Iran’s leaders,
Punish a nonexistent wrong,
Are not effective, and
Could be construed as an act of war

And yet, the sanctions continue.

What It Means to Be Pro-Life (Part 2)

Feb 3, 2012 at 9:26 PM

By Zach Foster

Continued from Part I: How the Left Justifies Killing

Part II: How the Right Justifies Killing

Rightists love to award themselves the moral high ground for opposing abortion while simultaneously supporting wars of aggression with high civilian casualties. Indeed, on the economic front, conservatives who ironically subscribe to Keynesian economic theory are convinced that America’s entry into World War II is what restored economic prosperity -- that war is a good cure for economic depression. What a pro-life sentiment: War is good for the economy! Who cares about the loss of innocent life war always entails -- any time the country falls into economic recession, all Americans need to do is go to war and all will be well! </sarcasm>

Currently many Republicans are incredibly nervous about Iran developing nuclear weapons. Many of these unrepentant warhawks are crying out for the U.S. to “stop Iran from getting the bomb!” Yet they fail to think through what this means in practice.

How does one country stop a hostile country from doing something? Should the United States throw sanctions on Iran? That has already been done! Should the U.S. throw more sanctions at the rogue republic? Such an effort would be useless! Sanctions are a waste of time and also an agent of death when used against third world dictatorships. After all, cutting off food, trade, and other needed commodities will not change the plans of the Ahmadinejad regime; the regime is not representative of the Iranian people and no matter what, both Ahmadinejad and the Ayatollah will still eat gourmet meals while the poorest of the poor in Iran will die of starvation from the sanctions.

BP Bans Fueling Iranian Airliners Due to New Sanctions

Jul 6, 2010 at 2:05 PM

By Jihan Huq

According to new reports, BP will refuse to refuel airliners from Iran because of last week's new sanctions, which put restrictions of refined petrolium. Though Britain and Germany denied that they had any involvement with the order to stop refueling Iranian civilian aircrafts, most officials even go further and deny that this has anything to do with crippling Iran's economy.

Anyways, I am sure everyone knows BP's history with Iran and the coup of 1953. Here is a mini-documentary about about the coup:

Ron Paul Speaks out against Iran Sanctions

Apr 23, 2010 at 12:43 PM

By Matt Ciepielowski

Comments (6)

"Commerce and Honest Friendship"

Mar 8, 2010 at 4:58 PM

By Brian Beyer

Thomas Jefferson famously said, "I deem [one of] the essential principles of our government [to be] peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none." If only the foreign policy wonks in Washington had heeded to Mr. Jefferson's advice, the United States would not be trying to starve Iran into submission. Or fight a "War on Terror." Or maintain an empire. Unfortunately, Washington has turned a deaf ear to Jefferson's wisdom. Those listening to Jefferson are not in the marble palaces of DC, but in the Kremlin and Beijing.

Sanctions do not work. This coming October marks the 50th anniversary of sanctions against Cuba. The Castro family is still having their annual birthday bashes, throwing dissidents in prison, and trampling on the rights of Cubans. Regime change was and still is the goal of the embargo ("The United States cooperated with its European and other allies to assist the difficult transitions from Communist regimes in Eastern Europe. Therefore, it is appropriate for those allies to cooperate with United States policy to promote a peaceful transition in Cuba.") However, the "peaceful transition" never came -- nor will it unless a new course is taken.

US Anticipated To Step Up On More Iran Sanctions

Dec 13, 2009 at 12:41 PM

By Jihan Huq

Or, in better words, is "optimistic" to step up the sanctions.

The Obama administration is indicating that it could (or most likely will) put additional sanctions on Iran. The indication of this derives from Robert Gates' speech in Kirkuk, Iraq, where he said Iran is most likely on its way to "significant additonal sanctions." Secretary of State Hillary Clinton also jumped on the wagon and said that the administration has given Iran the entire month to accept the "engagement."

And of course, the European Union supports this plan, clearly having learned from some of its members' mistaken involvement in other US wars of aggression in the Middle East.

Can someone please remind the president of his early campaign rhetoric?

Sanctions Work...If You're Punishing the Poor

Jun 13, 2009 at 2:12 AM

By Justin Head

In his article for the Daily Times, Brian Cloughley argues that the sanctions the US uses to try to put an end to nuclear ambitions of “rogue” nations succeeds only in punishing the already destitute civilian population of the targeted country. Meanwhile, the leaders of those countries continue to ride high with lifestyles MTV Cribs should consider for their next episode: