تحريم و جنگ


Share/Save/Bookmark

Daniel M Pourkesali
by Daniel M Pourkesali
30-Jul-2008
 

واژه نامه فرهنگ، تحريم را " تحميل محدوديتهاى تجارى و مالى يک کشور بر روى کشورى ديگر به دلايل سياسى" معرفى ميکند. عملى که استفاده از آن در سالهاى اخير به يک وسيله تسلط عمده اى منطقه اى و جهانى براى مشتى از قدرتمندترين کشورهای دنيا ، خصوصا ايالات متحده آمريکا در آمده است.

با عضويت دائم در شوراى امنيت سازمان ملل، آنها در طى بيست سال اخير به آسانى تحريمات اقتصادى متعددى برعليه بيش از دوجين کشور ديگر گذرانده اند که ميان آنها يوگسلاوى قبلى، کوبا، ليبى، سومالى، ليبريا، هائيتى، عراق، و ايران را ميتوان نامبرد. در صورت مواجهه با يا ناتوانى از کسب رضايت اکثريت در شو راى امنيت ، ايالات متحده بيش از هر کشورى ديگر به طور يگانه و يک طرفه عمل کرده و از سال ١٩۴۵ تا کنون[1] ، بيش از دو سوم تمام تحريمات معرفى شده در شورا را آغاز کرده است که سه چهارمشان به صورت کاملا يک طرفه و بدون پشتيبانى يا مشارکتى معنى دار از سوى ساير ملل تحميل شده و ميشوند . اين گونه تحريمات يک جانبه و تجاوز انگيز توسط اکثر سياستمداران و اعضای کنگره آمريکا بعنوان يک فرم ديپلُماسى جايگزين جنگ بحث شده و به تصوير کشيده ميشوند.

وليکن کشورهاى روى به دريافت اين اعمال و بقيه اجتماع بين المللى به طورى فزاينده اين گونه تحريمات را غير مشروع ، تنبيه کننده و غير انسانى ديده و تردید جدى راجع به مطابقت آنها با قوانين بين المللى و انسان دوستانه و تاثيرشان بر آنان دارند. تحميل محدوديتهاى تجارى و مالى باعث بستن کارخانه ها، مزرعه ها، و معادن شده و در نتيجه درجه بندی حرفه اى جامعه را ضعيف کرده و بدين طريق تاثيرى بسيار منفى بر روى نيروهاى مخالف با هر گونه حکومت مطلقه و يا ديکتاتورى دارد.

حقيقت زشت و مستند[2] اينست که مابين پانصد هزار و يک ميليون کودک زير پنج سال عراقى جان خود را به خاطر تحريم اقتصادى شوراى امنيت بر روى مواد و تجهيزات "دوگانه" مربوط به تغذيه، بهبودى و آموزش در طى ١٢ سال قبل از تهاجم نظآمى به آن کشور از دست دادند. وليکن با وجود اين گونه مدارک هراس انگيز و تکان دهنده که ثابت کرده و ميکند که اولين قربانيان تحريم ا قتصادى کودکان، افراد مسن و بيمار هستند که کمترين مسئوليت در تعيين خط و مش دولتشان دارند، بسیاری هنوزازاستفاده آنها بصورت يک وسيله صلح آميز و موجه براى به کار بستن فشار ديپلُماتيک دفاع ميکنند.

تحريم اقتصادى خود يک نوع جنگ بيهوده و خشونت آميز است که بر اصيلترين حقوق اساسى بشر تجاوز ميکند و بايد از ابزار خط و مش خارجى همه کشورهاى متمدن جهان برداشته شود.

[1] //www.un.org/Docs/sc/unsc_resolutions.html

[2] //www.fourthfreedom.org/Applications/cms.php?page_id=7


Share/Save/Bookmark

Recently by Daniel M PourkesaliCommentsDate
Neither wrong nor illegal
7
Dec 06, 2010
National Interest
6
Jun 17, 2009
True intentions
14
May 13, 2009
more from Daniel M Pourkesali
Daniel M Pourkesali

Thank you

by Daniel M Pourkesali on

Dear Jamshid,

Let me assure you that I'm not "one of them" and I do agree with everything you've stated. Thank you for your comments.


IRANdokht

now I see...

by IRANdokht on

You have more respect for the IRI supporters than the people who you think "might be" IRI supporters... That "suspicion" alone justifies calling them names and ignoring their valid points while you feel a certain kind of respect for the likes of Xerxes.

Faced with that kind of logic, I am just speechless.

I thought we should be more concerned with the issues, but apparently most of the conflicts on this site is more on a personal/emotional level.

Thank you for the clarification, my mistake...

IRANdokht


jamshid

Re: Irandokht

by jamshid on

I know sanctions make life more difficult. I really don't need to be reminded of that. Nor do I support such blind knee jerk sanctions by foreign powers.

That is not the issue that I want to debate. The issue I have is with regime supporter wolves that hide in sheep's clothes and beat their chest for the people of Iran, the very same people whom these regime supporters are directly or indirectly making miserable.

I could at least hold some level of respect for a regime supporter such as Xerxers who is an open regime supporter and leaves comments in this site, and who opposes sanctions, but at the same, time he openly admits that he is a regime supporter. At least he is honest with his intentions and he is not a hypocrite.

His words and intentions are the same. Obviously, I don't expect such individual to criticize his beloved regime. 

Then there are closet IRI supporters that don't openly admit to their true intentions: The survival of the regime at the cost of Iranian people suffering. They are deceitful hypocrites. They must not be allowed to pose as "deeply concerned" for the well being of Iranians while in reality they only care for the survival of the regime.

If Mr. Poursaleki is not one of them, then there isn't any problems, and he most likely would even agree with the above.


IRANdokht

Re: Jamshid

by IRANdokht on

Yes we do disagree, not only on the way people should be writing their articles, but also on what to call the economical hardships due to the malpractices of the government. You call them IRI sanctions against the people, I call it bad management of a corrupt system. IRI has a lot of problems. The international sanctions for a country that imports all of its people's necessities, will just make life many times tougher for the poor, the elderly and the sick. The corrupt and the rich are not the ones who will suffer.

IRANdokht


jamshid

Irandokth

by jamshid on

I guess we'll just have to disagree. Contrary to your opinion, I do believe that when writing about sanctions, we have to be thorough and include ALL sanctions, not just foreign sanctions.

When a writer solely focuses on foreign sanctions and disregard IRI's even more severe sanctions against the people of Iran, sanctions that have already been in place for many years and hurting Iranians, then he must be trying to protect the regime, not the people.

It is the writer's hypocrisy that bothers me, not his words.


default

Solution you asked?

by virtual activist (not verified) on

Here is my 100+ point-answer:

1. Keep fighting it out here and on other sites with assumed identites and at personal levels.
2. Feed each other with bogus stats and hypthetical scenarios.
3. Protect the regime in Iran at all costs.
4. Call each other names, like "vatnforoush", and "IRI supporter" and deny it in your next comment (and hope no one would catch you out) - it usually works.
5. Boast about your being a political activist to your friends and family and tell them what a great writer you are.
6. Don't forget going to the parties and celebrations enjoying good food, wine and music but dance through the night, never mind about the folks back home who may not have such privileges.
7. Protect teh regime in Iran at all costs.
8. Keep monitoring this site and get involved with any one who remotely suggests that the regime is, how should I put it, not so good.
9. Call them warmongers, Shahollahis, Zionists, Neocons, atc.
10. Protect the regime in Iran at all costs.
12. Hope JJ would delete this comment
13. Protect the regime in Iran at all costs.
14. Protect the regime in Iran at all costs.
15. Protect the regime in Iran at all costs.
16. Protect the regime in Iran at all costs.
17. Protect the regime in Iran at all costs.
18. .......................................
19. .......................................
.
.
.
.
100.Protect the regime in Iran at all costs.
.
.
.
ps - cesnors: Please delete this comment,

nnn. Protect the regime in Iran at all costs.


IRANdokht

Re: Jamshid

by IRANdokht on

There is no doubt in anyone's mind that all you said about the situation in Iran is true. The question remains: what can we do about it without making it worse. 

To suggest that when Mr Pourkesali is writing about the sanctions, he should also speak of other issues and problems sounds a little like nick-picking: I have seen articles written to discuss one subject alone. Why should we feel alarmed and try to shut someone's voice by calling them thugs and IRI agents, or neo-cons and war-mongers etc... just based on whether or not we see a red flag? Are you denying the facts that were given in this article? Are you saying those kids did not die because of the 12-year sanctions that were imposed on Iraq? Isn't there anything in this article that you should not be dismissing just because the writer did not include some very well-known facts?

I appreciate your not calling me a thug this time. Please tell me what you propose to fix the current IRI imposed sanctions on the people.

Thank you  

IRANdokht


jamshid

Re: Irandokht

by jamshid on

I am glad to hear that you are both aware of and also doing something about IRI's violations.

I want to point out that IRI's crimes against the people of Iran includes violations of human rights, but it also includes economical oppression, strong financial and commercial sanctions against ordinary citizens, mismanagment of Iran's riches (which belongs to Iranians), promoting an environment of corruption, hopelessness, stress, and violent political and religious oppression. The list is long.

A true Iran loving person who is concerned about the affairs of those Iranians, speaks against both possible foreign sanctions AND the already imposed IRI sanctions against its people, not just one and not the other.

Mr. Pousaleki, and many others in this site, only speak about the "possibility" of tougher foreign sanctions, but never speak of the "already" imposed IRI economical sanctions against its citizens which has hurt the Iranian people far more than any foreign threat has. 

This rightfully raises a red flag indicating either support for the regime, or indifference and muteness towards the misery that the IRI is handing to Iranians on a daily basis. No matter of justifications can change this fact.

You have to be aware who is hurting the ordinary Iranians the most. It is not the US neocons nor communist China nor any other foreign country. It is however, the IRI regime that has spread a dark and tragic cloud of misery over the entire nation.


IRANdokht

Thank you for allowing me to clarify

by IRANdokht on

Dear Anonymous4now 

I would never bunch you up the way you described. I am sorry if it was taken that way: what I was doing was merely naming some of the Iranians who expressed their objection to this article. That's all!

With regards to that hypothetical situation: whether or not the members of this site decide on the subject of the war or surgical attacks and sanctions, in practice we're not making any difference to the actual outcome of the game of chicken that IRI is playing with USA. Being able to present our case to one another and discuss them without animosity and cruel labeling would be the best outcome of such discussions.

The first step is to accept that everyone here is entitled to their opinion and the second step is to acknowledge that the majority of us have the best of our country in mind.

All that said, if you or anyone else suggest that an aerial strike is "the only way" (as you stated), you show that you're not open to any discussions. I wasn't suggesting a referendum on the subject. To learn the mentality of free speech and healthy debates we should not confine ourselves to "only one" possibility and we should be able to hear others out without allowing our emotions to take hold of us.

Someone who would argue with your hypothetical surgical strike could easily show you statistics on such attacks and the number of civilian casualties from every case those techniques were used. Then you would have to justify the human collateral and prove that the outcome would be desirable. Attacking Iran even right after the chaos of 1979-80, did not work against the current regime. Iranians are known to defend their country and set aside their domestic battles and join in to defend their homeland.

Another argument against such attacks: Iraq and Afghanistan are good examples of what happens when this administration decides to change a government by force. They didn't go to  war against the people, they bombed those countries to save them from their ruling dictators Saddam and the Talibans and the whole world agrees those were brutal, inhumane and hated rulers.

Are they better off now? After hundreds of thousands killed and millions of people displaced, those wars never ended. Do we really have to see the same fate for Iran before we accept that such military attacks will not work? Same goes for sanctions, as Mr Pourkesali has brought proof in his article.

We're not different than our neighboring countries, heck, ask people around you, they can't even tell us apart! How can such fate be acceptable by us? Do you have family in Iran? Were you in Iran when Saddam bombed our cities every night? Do you still live in Iran? I guess it's easier for the people who will not be harmed by such attacks to promote and advocate them. To me, it doesn't make any difference whether I am being bombed on or my parents or some poor kids in a school in Natanz or... 

Please realize that "people are sanctioned and being killed every day by IRI" is not a winning argument for even more poverty and violence.

I am sure a lot of the folks here have many more sophisticated arguments and better debating skills to present to you. I am speaking from my heart, just like I did when I was a young teenager and used to get into arguments with my classmates who thought Dr Bakhtiar was trying to stop Iran from becoming their promised "heaven on earth". I believe any uprising against the IRI has to be from the inside and a threat against the sovereignty of Iran should not be the best answer.

Best

IRANdokht


Anonymous4now

Thank you Irandokht for your response!

by Anonymous4now on

But shouldn’t your argument be reciprocated?  You bunch up me, Jamshid, JR, Shameful and others together, but as far as I can tell each one of us has a different view on what course of action to take. Isn’t that your complaint against others?

 

Let me ask you a hypothetical question.  If I were to propose that the only solution for Iran’s problem, right now, is for the IRI to be weakened by an aerial strike so Iranians dare to revolt, and took a vote on this site for or against this proposal and 51 were in agreement and 49 in opposition, would those 49 accept the vote of the majority or slander the majority as war mongers, traitors and vatanforoosh?  I think the latter.  The problem is we have all learnt the value of freedom of speech but have not developed the culture for it.  The very fact that one cannot even mention U.S. intervention as an option (this worked in 1945 when the Russinas would not leave Iran, it also worked in Europe and Japan) and argue it in a civil manner without being shredded apart as a traitor, is reciprocated by people who do not understand how you could seemingly protect the IRI by opposing such a move.

 

The case in point here is on sanctions and how they may hurt people in Iran, but the counter argument is that Iranians have been under economic sanctions by the IRI and have been suffering.  No external pressure, will prolong their agony, where as sanctions could break the back of the regime, and I don’t think they will, but these are differences of opinion, and we are all here to discuss our differences. 

 

It seems to me illogical and extremely emotional for Mr. Pourkesali to call for the abandonment of economic sanctions by the world community, as inhumane, but never to hear him speak about the atrocities of the IRI, which should be abhorred by all nations of the world, before sanctions are even discussed as inhumane treatment.    


IRANdokht

Dear Anonymous4now

by IRANdokht on

First of all: thank you for not shooting!

IRI has been very stubborn in their ways and have shown little respect for Human Rights groups, UN and Amnesty international. But they have learned that they are being watched and that has been a big step.

One of the reasons that not much has taken effect in the past 30 years could be what we're witnessing here in this cyber world: when a group of Iranians get together to find a solution or discuss possibilities, the first thing they do is point fingers at one another. Our wrong approach has worked against us and against the interest of our people. In 30 years we have not come up with a common goal because we were too busy shooting each other down.

What solution is there right now? sit the fight out and let foreign powers destroy our country? Is that even a viable solution in any true Iranian's mind?

Is it right to shoot down someone who is writing an article that explains how the sanctions didn't work against Saddam but killed half a million children?  Accusing people, using a condescending tone to put down anyone who is not in agreement with us,  throwing people in buckets that are labeled: thugs, MKE, islamist, fascists, leftist etc... can't be the right way, that's how we wasted 30 years already.

What options do you propose?

Can we check our over-inflated ego at the door for once and try to find a common ground?

I don't doubt that you, Jamshid, shameful, JR, and all others love your country. I don't doubt that for a second. I am just saying we should love our country more than we hate IRI. Believe me, I have many personal reasons to hate them too, but I can't allow myself to justify a foreign military or economic attack on the people. Every single life matters to me, and these sanctions will destroy numerous lives, so will the Israel and US bombs.

As I already asked shameful before s/he completely insulted me, if there are other points to mention which I know there are plenty, please write them down. It seems we're waiting for someone else to fight for us. In this case, Mr Pourkesali was asked to write a completely new article and explain the atrocities of IRI. Well, why don't we all pitch in and talk about what we wish to happen, what we don't like about IRI and US and Israel and the UN? Why wait until someone opens their mouth and attack them for not covering it all?

Criticizing someone for their point of view is easy, but coming up with common grounds and building upon them is what will help us move forward.

Sorry I didn't mean to write such a long comment, but you asked...

IRANdokht


Anonymous4now

Irandokht Khanoom:

by Anonymous4now on

I will not shoot first and will take your word for it that you are involved in a Human Rights campaign against HR violations by the IRI.  My first question is how long have you been doing it, and do you know of others who have been at it longer than you.  My point being, do you believe your efforts (you and your colleagues) have made the slightest bit of change in the IRI attitude in the past 30 years, and how long more do you think this campaign should continue before a perceptible change in the IRI attitude is observed?  Are 30 years not enough for people to decide that it is time to take action?  Do you have any realistic hope that the IRI will respond to your efforts and change? 


IRANdokht

Re: Jamshid

by IRANdokht on

What makes you so certain that I do not work with human rights groups and that I am not actively involved in speaking up against the atrocities committed by IRI?

I hope you're not a follower of "shoot first, ask questions later" policy, but that's how it sounds when you accuse people solely based on them speaking up against war and sanctions. 

You seem to be "assuming" too much dear. People who care about  human rights can and mostly are actively opposing IRI and at the same time speaking up against any war!  Actually it comes hand in hand. 

IRANdokht


jamshid

Re: Irandokht

by jamshid on

IRI supporters do not and cannot care for the "innocent" people of Iran since they are supporting a regime that has brought only poverty, oppression and other miseries for those "innocent" people.

So if you have an iota of care for those "innocent" people, then you would oppose both foreign sanctions AND IRI's domestic sanctions against the poeple of Iran.

Got it? Both. What part of this do you object to?


IRANdokht

Re: Jamshid

by IRANdokht on

Stop accusing people of being IRI thugs just because they care about Iran and iranian lives, are against war, oppose international sanctions on the innocent people and don't see the world as black and white as you do. I do not wish for Iran to become destroyed and occupied like Iraq and I don't really care if that is not acceptable to you!

I don't appreciate being bullied. Please don't even try it.

IRANdokht


jamshid

Re: Irandokht

by jamshid on

Stop accusing people of being vatanforoosh just because they have strong feelings against the IRI.

Whenever someone criticizes the IRI, you jump in and label him/her as a vatanforoosh. vatanforoosh are those who are supporting this regime at the cost of Iranians living in abject misery. vatanforoosh are those who either in the name of Allah or in the name of a foreign threat are crushing any voice of opposition.

Your behavior is similar to that of the IRI thugs in Iran who make the exact same claims against the internal opposition. Fortunately, in this cyber world, you do not have the same power than those thugs.


Anonymous4now

تحريم اقتصادى

Anonymous4now


تحريم اقتصادى خود يک نوع جنگ بيهوده و خشونت آميز است که بر اصيلترين حقوق اساسى بشر تجاوز ميکند و بايد از ابزار خط و مش خارجى همه کشورهاى متمدن جهان برداشته شود.

Emotional hyperbole and self endulging clap trap.

How about starting with stoning, chopping limbs off, hanging in public, taking political prisoners and torturing them….

 


IRANdokht

shame shame

by IRANdokht on

pssst:

it's garrulous, rebuttals, loyalty, sophomoric...

if you insist on showing off, at least use the correct spelling :0) in other words: lotfan hol nasho

You're most certainly welcome

:0)

IRANdokht


default

Mrs. Irandokht: Thank you

by shameful (not verified) on

Mrs. Irandokht: Thank you for proving all of my points. As usual, your juvenile response comes through exquisitely.

In the interest of preventing you from being more garrolous, I will not respond to your infantile and immature "scathing rebuttles". Have a splendid day.


IRANdokht

Shameful:

by IRANdokht on

did I hit a nerve? you couldn't wait to run amuck with insults and accusations, could you?

Please STOP wishing for Iran's destruction and the death of our people before you accuse anyone else of lacking character.

IRANdokht


default

Mrs. Irandokht: I will not

by shameful (not verified) on

Mrs. Irandokht: I will not sink to your level by responding to your groundless and conceited allegations.

I've read your previous comments on different blogs and I find you to be rash, with hypocritical pretensions, and worst of all, servile attitude, bordering shilling, for NIAC et al; and quite frankly, it informs me of futility of debating with such characters.

Please refrain from further slander, false accusations and perhaps grotesque display of sophmoric sense of loyality to your buddies.

Question for you:

Why do you think I need your permission to express my opinions in a manner of your liking???

p.s. I'm shameful of having to waste my precious time and energy in tackling snake oil merchants day in day out.


IRANdokht

to: Shameful

by IRANdokht on

Why is it that you are expecting someone else to write about those issues when you seem more than capable to do so yourself? It's obviously not the time constraints since you found enough time to write such a long comment pointing out all the issues you want someone else to discuss on your behalf. You seem too concerned with what Mr Pourkesali may or may not think or do!

Personally, I think people who want our hamvatans harmed are the ones who are not concerned about Iran and Iranians. Hurting the poor people who are already under a lot of pressure is only accepted by the vatan-foroush and the ones who are blinded by their hatred of IRI so much that they don't even care if people die as long as akhounds get hurt a little.

I find your last comment absolutely offensive and out-of-line, that was enough reason for me not to put any value on what you thought you had to say.

Good ID for you to pick for yourself: You should be!

IRANdokht


default

Iran today imports more

by shameful (not verified) on

Iran today imports more than 80% of their own refined product. Iran is rationing gasoline. Iran has 25% unemployment and 25% inflation.

Iran is diverting billions of dollars it can't afford, into an ill advised nuclear program instead of building refineries or maintaining their upstream oil infrastructure. An oil infrastructure they've let let decay since 1979. French oil concern ELF Aquitaine said several years ago, 2001-2 that Iran then needed to invest more than $20 billion in the next 5-8 years in order to keep their oil economy running. They have not done this. Oil fields in constant production since the 1930's are starting to play out.

Getting more and better oil out of them requires more expensive high tech methods like steam injection.

Like any other dictatorship, jobs are handed out as political favors to ensure loyalty and curry favor. The energy portfolio in Iran is run by ideologues who need to suck revenue out of it in order to fund The Islamic Revolution, Hezbollah and regional terrorism. This is not an ideal organization for maintaining the oil infrastructure.

Iran sees its role, its destiny as being THE regional super power. They will spend and spend to that end. Now they are realizing that oil alone cannot fuel the revolution. Oil alone failed to wrest control of Iraq from the US. Oil alone hasn't eradicated the Jew Menace. THAT's why they're at the table, however pointless that exercise is. And all parties already agreed that Iran came with no reasonable intention to accomplish anything but a stalling manuever. Nothing in fact was accomplished.

Will Mr. Pourkesali et al ever write an essay condeming/highlighting these most egregious incompetencies by those who are unqualified to run a burger king let alone an entire country of 70 Million?

Is Mr. Pourkesali ever bothered by the out-and-out wasteful, uneconomical, inept, ineffective management of the economy?

Will we ever see an essay written by Mr. Pourkesali about the corruption, misappropriation, fraud, cheating, embezzlemnt, misuse, opportunity cost of ravaging limited natural resources, pocketing, and sheer collosal squandering of the national wealth in the most treasonous fashion??

Is Mr. Pourkesali ever perturbed by the treasonous dealings of the Islamic republic with Russia such as giving away the enormous natural gas resources beneath the Caspian Sea to the Russians?? Or giving China almost free oil for 25 years in exchange for dubious exploration of gas fields???

Or his main concern is to prolong the existence of the regime and his own access to the ATM???


default

Pofessor Ala

by just curious (not verified) on

Why should using real names be so important to you? Are you saying that those, like me, who use a non real name are any less than those who use theit real names when it comes to expressing their opinions?

Why are you so uncomfortable with made up names? This is a right that is given to us by JJ and we sure use it out of respect for him, if nothing else. By emphasizing so much on revealing one's identities you are beginning to sound like regime interrogators Professor.


Sadaia_qesa

Dear Mr. Pourkesali

by Sadaia_qesa on

 

 

Thank you for having the courage to stand up and also, having the courage to state the plane truth.

THANKS.

 


Jahanshah Rashidian

Sanctions on Mullahs

by Jahanshah Rashidian on

I agree with many Iranians that sanctions in any form affect people. Nor war is another solution. I do not like any war in the Middle East, including an attack on Iran. And this is actually the core idea of many people on this site who however want a regime change in Iran.
Being against the IRI means being also pro Iranians, who suffer at most under the IRI, not the contrary because the pro-IRI are not considered true Iranians.

Sanction in this concept does not mean in a scale of sanctions on Iraq, Cuba or other victims of the West. It should only target at the IRI, not people. It has another meaning and functions than routinely described and labeled on any opponent by IRI’s supporters.

The IRI is in deed the real executor of sanctions on Iranian people. This is
in fact an internal sanction imposed by an occupying regime on Iranians
to deprive people from their own national wealth and prosperity.

Besides the judicially and diplomatically punishing of the IRI, limited sanctions on their financial asserts, war preparing means, and military related industry can reduce the capacity of repressive organs of the IRI.

Oil sanction remains a difficultly realisable action. Of course, the West seems not having interests to impose it because they can have oil / gas with a price below market price from the IRI. Contrary to Mossadegh’s national government in 50th, the IRI is neither a notional government nor a protector of Iranian resources; therefore oil sanctions from the Western site does not seem likely, but can however be demanded from UN in response to Human rights violations of the IRI.

It has been proved that oil in the hands of Mullahs creates the most immoral source of corruption, repression and a series of international terrorist affair. Mafia trade and smearing corruption in the region remain the oil monopoly of Sheiks and Mullahs who form the most client states of international oil consortium. Therefore Western oil sanction à la Mossadegh does not seem likely.

Oil embargo in a measured scale is a wish, but hard to be realised. In fact, oil is not a determinant factor of general poverty for the Iranian national economy. Only 20% of oil income goes on people's pockets under governments salaries, the rest goes in the loose packets of Mullahs, their repressive organs, their propaganda and lobby groups in and out of the country.

The rate of poverty, inflation, unemployment, prostitution, and other economy-related problems climb under the IRI while the oil production / price rise continuously.

An Indian refinery company, Reliance, cheaply imports Iranian crude oil and then exports up to 580,000 barrels per day gasoline to the IRI with much more exploiting price. An oil embargo on the IRI can only be mentionable when supported by a strong voice of opposition. A stop of oil cargoes from India through a UN mandated force in the Persian Gulf suffices to paralyse the regime and results into a possibility of a regime change by people of Iran.

In the light of oil plundering by Mullahs’s regime, the National Iranian Oil Company (NIOC) produces oil to be selling out, bribing out, and wasting out, but is not invested on a refinery for the whole national capacity—BTW, an atomic Iran does not really need to build a proper refinery?


Mohammad Ala

Thanks for your contribution

by Mohammad Ala on

Let me join others who have thanked you by saying: Thanks for your contributions(s).

It is important to stand up for your belief and defend helpless people such as children, sick, and elderly.  Indeed these people suffer the most during sanctions and wars.

Thanks for being honest by using your real name and defending the right of our people.


default

Sanction

by Esfandiar (not verified) on

I suffice to say that the pseudo intellectuals who favor sanction against Iran need to take, or re-take, political economy 101 to have a better understanding of the consequences of such inhumane action.


default

My name is Anonymous

by My name is Anonymous (not verified) on

My name is Anonymous. I can question you. You must answer me. This is called freedom.

I live in a free country, but I do not wish to release my name because I am free. But I can ask you questoins and you must answer, otherwise you are an IRI supporter.

I can hide and ask questions and you must answer them. Otherwise, you are a coward not me.


default

Thanks

by AnonymousFish (not verified) on

Thanks for your efforts.