Guest views are now limited to 12 pages. If you get an "Error" message, just sign in! If you need to create an account, click here.

Jump to content
  • CRYPTO REWARDS!

    Full endorsement on this opportunity - but it's limited, so get in while you can!

Trump says US ‘moving forward’ with additional sanctions on Iran


yota691
 Share

Recommended Posts

serok-pdk.jpg

 

Barzani condemns attacks on Kurdish cities in Syria

 

KurdistanMassoud Barzanibombings Al - Qamishlibombings AfrinAl - Hasakah bombings

 2019/07/12 05:37:13

 

The Kurdish leader Massoud Barzani condemned the bloody attacks targeting Kurdish areas in Syria and the death toll on Thursday. 
Barzani said in a statement, "with sadness and pain we received news, the death of a number of citizens and injuring a number of others, as a result of a series of terrorist bombings in the cities of Qamishlo, Afrin and Hassaka." 
"We strongly condemn these terrorist acts," he said. "We extend our condolences to the families of the victims of these unfortunate incidents and we wish the wounded a speedy recovery."

https://www.shafaaq.com/ar/كوردســتانيات/بارزاني-يندد-بهجمات-استهدفت-مدنا-كوردية-بسوريا/

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Iranian Revolutionary Guard announces the bombing of sites on the border with the Kurdistan Region

harass.jpg

 

KordstaniatIranian shelling offorces Kurdishprovince of Kurdistan

 2019/07/12 06:02:48

 

The Iranian Revolutionary Guards announced the bombing of sites said that they belong to the "terrorist groups" on the border with the Kurdistan Region of Iraq with missiles and artillery.

The Revolutionary Guard said in a statement Friday: "We bombed the centers of terrorist organizations located on the borders of the Kurdistan Region of Iraq with missiles and artillery."

"A large number of terrorists were killed and wounded in the operation, which came in response to the death of three members of the Revolutionary Guard a few days ago in the city of Piranshahr near the Iraqi border."

He explained that: "The missile and artillery operation of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards extended areas within the Kurdistan Region of Iraq, came after several warnings to the Iranian authorities in the Kurdistan region to prevent the activity of terrorist organizations against the Islamic Republic."

https://www.shafaaq.com/ar/كوردســتانيات/الحرس-الثوري-الإيراني-يعلن-قصف-مواقع-على-الحدود-مع-إقليم-كوردستان/

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Iran’s IRGC Attacks Iranian Opposition Targets in Iraq’s Kurdistan - Reports (Video)

IRGC Ground Force Commandos (File)

 

CC BY 4.0 / Hossein Zohrevand / IRGC Ground Force Commandos

MIDDLE EAST

14:08 12.07.2019(updated 14:43 12.07.2019)Get short URL

250

Iran's Revolutionary Guards have attacked targets of Iranian opposition forces in Iraq's autonomous Kurdish region with missiles and drones, the Fars news agency has reported, quoting a statement by the IRGC.

"During this operation, which involved missiles, artillery strikes and drone units of the IRGC, terrorist strongholds, also known as centres for anti-revolutionary training, were destroyed, and rebels were killed", the statement reads.

The coordinated attack is reported to be in response to the killing of several members of the IRGC in the west of Iran. 


 

https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201907121076225510-irans-irgc-attack-iranian-opposition-iraqs-kurdistan/

Edited by Butifldrm
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1663436-988626011.jpg?itok=GOm-HXmz

 

Iran calls on Britain to immediately release its seized supertanker

 

Next

Updated 18 sec ago

REUTERS

July 12, 201908:07

Iran has warned of reciprocal measures if the tanker is not released by Britain

British Royal Marines seized an Iranian oil tanker last week on suspicion that it was breaking European sanctions

DUBAI:: Iran called on Britain on Friday to immediately release its oil tanker which British Royal Marines seized last week on suspicion that it was breaking European sanctions by taking oil to Syria, a foreign ministry spokesman told state news agency IRNA.
“This is a dangerous game and has consequences ... the legal pretexts for the capture are not valid ... the release of the tanker is in all countries’ interest,” the spokesman, Abbas Mousavi, said.
Iran has warned of reciprocal measures if the tanker is not released by Britain.
Britain said on Thursday that three Iranian vessels tried to block a British-owned tanker passing through the Strait of Hormuz, which controls the flow of Middle East oil to the world, but backed off when confronted by a Royal Navy warship. Iran denied that its vessels had done any such thing.
Tension between Iran and the West has increased a week after Britain seized the tanker and London said the British Heritage, operated by oil company BP, had been approached in the strait between Iran and the Arabian peninsula.
Britain is among European parties to Iran’s 2015 nuclear deal, which President Donald trump pulled out of last year and reimposed and toughened sanctions on Tehran.
“Foreign powers should leave the region because Iran and other regional countries are capable of securing the regional security,” Mousavi said.

http://www.arabnews.com/node/1524546/middle-east

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Britain to deploy second warship to the Gulf amid tensions with Iran

1663816-303969127.jpg?itok=F8gcpP9V

 

Updated 13 sec ago

REUTERS

July 12, 201910:28

Relations between Tehran and the West have been increasingly strained

Talks between Britain and the US on building up their military presence in the Gulf are ongoing

LONDON: Britain said on Friday it would deploy the destroyer HMS Duncan warship to the Gulf to replace HMS Montrose, maintaining a continuous presence there during a time of heightened tension in the region.

Relations between Tehran and the West have been increasingly strained after Britain seized an Iranian tanker in Gibraltar and London said HMS Montrose had to fend off Iranian vessels which sought to block a British-owned tanker passing through the Strait of Hormuz.

“As part of our long-standing presence in the Gulf, HMS Duncan is deploying to the region to ensure we maintain a continuous maritime security presence while HMS Montrose comes off task for pre-planned maintenance and crew change over,” the government said.

“This will ensure that the UK alongside international partners can continue to support freedom of navigation for vessels transiting through this vital shipping.”

Discussions between Britain and the United States on building up their military presence in the Gulf are ongoing, Prime Minister Theresa May’s spokeswoman said on Friday amid tensions with Iran.

Britain is not seeking to escalate the situation with Iran, foreign minister Jeremy Hunt said on Friday, as tensions continue between London and Tehran over a seized Iranian tanker and the passage of vessels through the Strait of Hormuz.
"We are reacting to what is happening in a measured and careful way and we are being clear to Iran that we are not seeking to escalate this situation," Jeremy Hunt told Sky News.

Bahrain said on Friday it "strongly condemned" what it called an Iranian attempt to intercept a British tanker in the Gulf, according to a statement from its foreign ministry.
"This hostile action embodies Iran's insistence on threatening security and peace, and harming maritime navigation," the statement said.

Relations between Tehran and the West have been increasingly strained after Britain seized an Iranian tanker in Gibraltar and London said the British Heritage, operated by oil company BP, had been approached in the strait between Iran and the Arabian peninsula.
“We are talking to the US about building on our presence in the face of recent threats to shipping in the area,” May’s spokeswoman said on Friday.

http://www.arabnews.com/node/1524646/middle-east

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Synopsis said:

 

 

 

So, per the above video, Iran never signed any agreement with the United States regarding limiting enriching uranium or continuing with developing nuclear weapons?  They just verbally agreed to it, no signed documents?  

 

Well, well!  Whaddaya know about that?  Surprise!  Surprise!

Another job well done by the left!

Aren't they just terrific?

As you might guess, I am seething!  

 

  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Floridian said:

 

So, per the above video, Iran never signed any agreement with the United States regarding limiting enriching uranium or continuing with developing nuclear weapons?  They just verbally agreed to it, no signed documents?  

 

Well, well!  Whaddaya know about that?  Surprise!  Surprise!

Another job well done by the left!

Aren't they just terrific?

As you might guess, I am seething!  

 

Trump fan?? 😂

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Floridian said:

 

So, per the above video, Iran never signed any agreement with the United States regarding limiting enriching uranium or continuing with developing nuclear weapons?  They just verbally agreed to it, no signed documents?  

 

Well, well!  Whaddaya know about that?  Surprise!  Surprise!

Another job well done by the left!

Aren't they just terrific?

As you might guess, I am seething!  

 

 

Yes, THAT is correct Floridian AND The Very Best Of Your Weekend To You!!! :tiphat:

 

NO official signatories ARE ACTUALLY ON THE JCPOA FROM the Insanians, OR the 5+1 entities (The United States Of America, United Kingdom, France, Russia, China, AND/OR Germany) since NO parliamentary RATIFICATIONS HAVE OCCURRED!!!

 

JUST a bunch of money changed hands to facilitate the deal FOR Iran!!!

 

So, WHO, pray tell, knows HOW FAR the Insanians HAVE SINCE DEVELOPED THEIR NUCLEAR WEAPONS CAPABILITY!!!

 

NO Muddle East Peace WITH the Insanians, to INCLUDE the Insanian IRGC, fomenting Corruption AND Terrorism IN THEE Muddle East.

 

26 minutes ago, Jaygo said:

Trump fan?? 😂

 

:facepalm3:   :facepalm3:   :facepalm3:

 

WHAT, pray tell, does NOT having a properly installed JCPOA have to do with being OR NOT being a True The United States Of America Patriot President Donald J Trump fan???!!!

 

THEE True The United States Of America Patriot President Donald J Trump IS PROPERLY ADMINISTERING The Constitituion Of The United States Of America TO INCLUDE The Ratified Bill Of Rights APPLICABLE Articles FOR the POSTERITY Of The United States Of America AND The United States Of America Patriot Citizens!!!

 

Go MAGA!!!

 

Go True The United States Of America Patriot President Donald J Trump NOW through 2024!!!

 

Go True The United States Of America Patriots!!!

 

Go Obliteration Of The Useless JCPOA BY ALL ASSOCIATED COUNTRIES TO INCLUDE NEUTRALIZING THEE Insanians, to INCLUDE the Insanian IRGC, IN THE Muddle East AND Iran!!!

 

Go Red Rubymeisters - THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU in advance for ALL The Red Ruby Citations As Badges Of Honor For ME For "Display Of Intellectual Speed And Powers"!!!

 

:bravo:   :bravo:   :bravo:

 

Go Moola Nova (YEAH AND YEE HAW, BABY, READY WHEN YOU ARE BROTHER (OR SISTER) - LET 'ER BUCK!!!)!!!

:rodeo:   :pirateship:

Edited by Synopsis
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Synopsis said:

Go Red Rubymeisters - THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU in advance for ALL The Red Ruby Citations As Badges Of Honor For ME For "Display Of Intellectual Speed And Powers"!!!

 

:bravo:   :bravo:   :bravo:

 

Go Moola Nova (YEAH AND YEE HAW, BABY, READY WHEN YOU ARE BROTHER (OR SISTER) - LET 'ER BUCK!!!)!!!

:rodeo:   :pirateship:

 

WOWZERS!!!

 

A Red Rubymeister REALLY DID give ME a Red Ruby Citation As A Badge Of Honor For ME For "Display Of Intellectual Speed And Power"!!!

 

THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU in advance for ALL The ADDITIONAL Red Ruby Citations As Badges Of Honor For ME For "Display Of Intellectual Speed And Powers"!!!

 

:bravo:   :bravo:   :bravo:

 

Go MAGA!!!

 

Go True The United States Of America Patriot President Donald J Trump NOW through 2024!!!

 

Go True The United States Of America Patriots!!!

 

Go Obliteration Of The Useless JCPOA BY ALL ASSOCIATED COUNTRIES TO INCLUDE NEUTRALIZING THEE Insanians, to INCLUDE the Insanian IRGC, IN THE Muddle East AND Iran!!!

 

Go Moola Nova (YEAH AND YEE HAW, BABY, READY WHEN YOU ARE BROTHER (OR SISTER) - LET 'ER BUCK!!!)!!!

:rodeo:   :pirateship:

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/6/2019 at 10:45 AM, 10 YEARS LATER said:

Let’s call this “ Let’s Make a Deal “ Iran. Behind One of the 2 Curtains is a peaceful and prosperous solution. Behind the OTHER Curtain is well “ Absolute Curtains “ for YOU.

 

Good luck Iran. Life is all about Choice and Chance. Take a Chance, you’ve made a Choice. Make a Choice, you’ve taken a Chance. 

 

10YL+6&:rocking-chair:

 

 

You have a great way with words my friend.You remind me of my grandpa when I was little..................He was crusty too !! LOL :)

 

pp

  • Haha 3
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

An Iranian newspaper reveals a "very dangerous" US plan against Iraq

10:52 - 13/07/2019
0
%D8%A7%D9%85%D8%B1%D9%8A%D9%83%D8%A7-2-6

BAGHDAD - 
The Iranian newspaper Jomhuri Islami on Saturday revealed a US -led plan that it described as "extremely dangerous" aimed at destabilizing Iraq's security and stability 
"The United States is planning to carry out a major and extremely dangerous move to destabilize Iraq , a plan that reflects the depth of its deep hatred of the popular crowd, " the paper said in a report 
"Washington's goal of coordinating with the banned Baathists to destabilize Iraq by targeting popularleaders is to step up pressure on Baghdad to pursue policies consistent with US aggressive strategies and plans against countries in the region," it said.
The commander of Anbar operations for the popular crowd Qasim Musleh revealed in a previous statement to the information about the existence of an American plan to assassinate leaders in the popular crowd in the province, pointing out that some spies and weak souls leaked information about the presence of the popular crowd a year ago. 
While a member of the Committee on Security and Defense Parliamentary Karim Aliawi in a previous statement to / information, / a conspiracy led by the United States in cooperation with officers of the former regime (Baathists) to assassinate symbols of the popular crowd . Ending / 25

https://www.almaalomah.com/2019/07/13/417407/

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Israel could be ‘wiped out’ in a war with Iran, Hezbollah leader warns

1664276-270052592.jpg?itok=1Fhd8Hun

 

An image grab taken from Hezbollah's al-Manar TV on July 12, 2019, shows Hasan Nasrallah, the head of Lebanon's militant Shiite movement Hezbollah, giving an interview in Lebanon. (AFP / AL-MANAR TV)

Updated 13 July 2019

AFP

July 13, 201902:51

Nasrallah said Israel would not be “neutral” if a war broke out between the US and Iran

And Iran can bombard Israel with ferocity and force, he said on Hezbollah TV

BEIRUT: The head of Lebanon’s Tehran-backed Hezbollah said Friday that US ally Israel would not be “neutral” if a war broke out between the United States and Iran.
And “Iran is able to bombard Israel with ferocity and force,” Hassan Nasrallah said in an interview broadcast on Hezbollah’s Al-Manar television.
His remarks came after weeks of increasing tensions between the US and Iran, and as US President Donald Trump steps up his war of words with the Islamic Republic.
“When the Americans understand that this war could wipe out Israel, they will reconsider,” Nasrallah said.
“Our collective responsibility in the region is to work toward preventing an American war on Iran,” he said.
On Friday, the US House of Representatives voted to restrict Trump’s ability to attack Iran, voicing fear that his hawkish policies are pushing toward a needless war.

Hezbollah is considered to be a terrorist organization by the United States, and is the only faction not to have disarmed after the Lebanese 1975-1990 civil war.
But it is also a major political player in the small Mediterranean country, taking 13 seats in parliament last year and securing three posts in the current cabinet.
Nasrallah also said he had decreased the number of his movement’s fighters supporting the Damascus regime in neighboring war-torn Syria.
“The Syrian army has greatly recovered and has found that today it does not need us,” he said.
“We are present in every area that we used to be. We are still there, but we don’t need to be there in large numbers as long as there is no practical need,” he said.
The head of the Iran-backed Shiite movement, which has been fighting in Syria since 2013, did not give details on the extent of the reduction.
Backed by Russia and Iran, the Damascus government has taken back large swathes of territory from rebels and jihadists since 2015, and now controls around 60 percent of the country.
Nasrallah spoke after Washington announced fresh sanctions Tuesday against Hezbollah, targeting elected officials from the movement for the first time.
Nasrallah said none of his fighters were currently involved in fighting in Syria’s northwestern region of Idlib, where regime and Russian forces have increased deadly bombardments on a jihadist-run bastion since late April.
But “if there was a need to return, all those who were there would go back” to Syria, he added.
Responding to a question about repeated Israeli air strikes on Syria, he said the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was “deceiving his people.”
“He is playing a game of brinkmanship, because Iran will not leave Syria,” he warned.
Israel has carried out hundreds of strikes in neighboring Syria against what it says are Iranian and Hezbollah military targets. It has vowed to keep Iran from entrenching itself militarily there.
Nasrallah’s interview came to mark the start of his movement’s 2006 war with Israel, which killed more than 1,200 Lebanese, mostly civilians, and more than 160 Israelis, mostly soldiers.
Both countries are still technically at war, and a UN peacekeeping force has said three tunnels have been found to have dug under the border from Lebanon into Israel since late last year.
The group’s leader warned that key Israeli installations along the Mediterranean coast including Tel Aviv were “within range of our rockets.”

http://www.arabnews.com/node/1524856/middle-east

  • Haha 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Leaked UK memo claims Trump axed Iran nuclear deal to spite Obama

1666061-943156815.jpg?itok=g9tZll86

UK ambassador Kim Darroch said President Donald Trump pulled out of the nuclear deal with Iran as an act of ‘diplomatic vandalism’ to spite his predecessor, Barack Obama. (AFP)

Updated 4 sec ago

AP

July 14, 201910:01

UK newspaper publishes more leaked memos from Britain’s ambassador in Washington on Sunday

UK ambassador Kim Darroch branded the Trump administration dysfunctional and inept

LONDON: A UK newspaper published more leaked memos from Britain’s ambassador in Washington on Sunday, despite a police warning that doing so might be a crime.
In one 2018 cable published by the Mail on Sunday, UK ambassador Kim Darroch says President Donald Trump pulled out of an international nuclear deal with Iran as an act of “diplomatic vandalism” to spite his predecessor, Barack Obama.
The memo was written after then-Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson visited Washington in a failed attempt to persuade the US not to abandon the Iran nuclear agreement.
“The outcome illustrated the paradox of this White House: you got exceptional access, seeing everyone short of the president; but on the substance, the administration is set upon an act of diplomatic vandalism, seemingly for ideological and personality reasons — it was Obama’s deal,” Darroch wrote.
Darroch announced his resignation last week after the newspaper published cables in which he’d branded the Trump administration dysfunctional and inept. The White House responded by refusing to deal with him, and Trump branded the ambassador a “pompous fool” in a Twitter fusillade.
UK police are hunting the culprits behind the leak — and, contentiously, have warned journalists that publishing the documents “could also constitute a criminal offense.”
Yet both Johnson and Jeremy Hunt, the two contenders to become Britain’s next prime minister, have defended the media’s right to publish.
“We have to make sure that we defend the right of journalists to publish leaks when they are in the national interest,” Hunt said.
British officials have said they have no evidence that hacking was involved in the documents’ release, and that the culprit is likely to be found among politicians or civil servants in London.
Police are investigating the leak as a potential breach of the Official Secrets Act, which bars public servants from making “damaging” disclosures of classified material. Breaking the act carries a maximum sentence of two years in prison, though prosecutions are rare.

http://www.arabnews.com/node/1525431/middle-east

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  
%D8%B9%D8%A7%D8%AF%D9%84-%D8%B9%D8%A8%D8

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - 
MP Yonadam Kanna denied on Sunday that there was any American reservation on the visit of Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi to Washington, noting that Abdul Mahdi succeeded in managing international relations on an exceptional basis. 
He said in a statement to Al-Maaloumah that "the news that there was a US refusal to visit Adel Abdul-Mahdi to Washington during this month is totally unfounded," noting that "the United States continues to send delegations and meetings with Iraqi officials periodically without the presence of Any reservation or reference to bad relations. " 
"Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi has managed to manage foreign relations in an ideal manner and achieved international balance despite the difficulty of Iraq's position on the regional crisis between Iran and America," Kana said.
Political sources have revealed a White House refusal to visit Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi at the end of this month to Washington because of his positions from the crowd and Iran. Ending / 25 d

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tehran welcomes the entry of Iraqi investors and pledges to provide them with favorable conditions

11:44 - 14/07/2019
0
%D8%B7%D9%87%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%86-696x377.j


TEHRAN (Reuters) - Tehran's governor Anoushirwan Mohseni Bendabi said on Sunday that he is ready to cooperate with Iraqi investors in all fields, especially petrochemicals, while pledging to create the conditions for them. 
"The Iranian private sector is ready to export Iraqi oil products after it is imported from Iraq in raw form," Mohseni was quoted as saying after meeting the Iraqi ambassador 
"The export of engineering services is one of the most important and best potentials of Tehran, for the large number of learners in the fields of architecture and technology," he said. 
He expressed "the willingness of the province to cooperate with Iraq in the provision of advisory services and participation in the therapeutic areas and the establishment of housing and the export of building materials."
The governor of Tehran "invited the Iraqi investors to visit Tehran and learn about its economic activities and identify its production centers." Ending / 25

https://www.almaalomah.com/2019/07/14/417610/

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Butifldrm said:

In one 2018 cable published by the Mail on Sunday, UK ambassador Kim Darroch says President Donald Trump pulled out of an international nuclear deal with Iran as an act of “diplomatic vandalism” to spite his predecessor, Barack Obama.

 

:facepalm3:   :facepalm3:   :facepalm3:

 

What is FAILED to be mentioned is NO Country associated with the JCPOA whether The United States Of America, The United Kingdom, France, Russia, China, Germany AND Iran RATIFIED the JCPOA in EACH of THEIR respective Parliaments. WHATEVER "signatures" ARE ON the JCPOA are AS VALID AS YOURS, MINE, AND/OR ANY OTHER PERSON OF NON AUTHORITY!!!

 

So, ANY Country of the JCPOA IS NOT LEGALLY BOUND ON ANY LEGAL BASIS for NOT observing the JCPOA!!!

 

The Question IS, "Have the Insanians, to INCLUDE the Insanian IRGC, been observing ANY AND ALL conditions of the JCPOA THEY are RESPONSIBLE FOR IN THE JCPOA???!!!"!!!

 

The Answer IS, "ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!"!!!

 

The Insanians, to INCLUDE the Insanian IRGC, HAVE BEEN advancing THEIR nuclear weapons program IN SECRET SINCE the JCPOA was "signed"!!!

 

Sure, SOME of the nuclear weapons activities were slowed AND/OR TEMPORARILY halted BUT the "progress" WILL SOON BE REVEALED!!!

 

The True The United States Of America President Donald J Trump IS ABSOLUTELY RIGHT TO COMPLETELY TERMINATE THE NON BINDING COOPERATION WITH THE JCPOA BECAUSE THE JCPOA WILL NEVER ACCOMPLISH THE STATED PURPOSES AND Iran, to INCLUDE the Insanian IRGC, WILL ADVANCE Corruption AND Terrorism IN The Muddle East IN FUTURE UNPRECEDENTED MEASURES IF NOT PRESENTLY NECESSARILY ADDRESSED!!!

 

Go MAGA!!!

 

Go True The United States Of America Patriot President Donald J Trump!!!

 

Go True The United States Of America Patriots!!!

 

Go Red Rubymeisters!!!

 

THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU In Advance To ALL The Red Rubymeisters For ALL The Red Ruby Citations As Badges Of Honor For ME For "Display Of Intellectual Speed And Power"!!!

 

:bravo:   :bravo:   :bravo:

 

Go Moola Nova (YEAH AND YEE HAW, BABY, READY WHEN YOU ARE BROTHER (OR SISTER) - LET 'ER BUCK!!!)!!!

:rodeo:   :pirateship:

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14-07-2019 04:42 PM
image.php?token=c2065f2ebf32406aa6f17039cfdc7676&c=3983137&size=
 


 

Baghdad: 

LONDON (Reuters) - Britain's Ardmore has confirmed rising premiums for its cargoes, which have sailed through the Strait of Hormuz repeatedly over the past two months, on the back of regional escalation. 

Anthony Gorny, CEO of the Cork-based company, pointed out that insurance premiums have increased tenfold over the last two months as six commercial ships in the Gulf of Oman were targeted by an unknown destination, Amid a sharp escalation between the United States and Iran in the region. 

The company, valued at $ 285 million, takes security risks in the region very seriously and takes the necessary measures to ensure the security of its staff and vessels, the official said. 

The United States and Saudi Arabia have blamed Iran for targeting tankers in the Gulf, and Tehran categorically rejects the charges. 
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Synopsis said:

 

:facepalm3:   :facepalm3:   :facepalm3:

 

What is FAILED to be mentioned is NO Country associated with the JCPOA whether The United States Of America, The United Kingdom, France, Russia, China, Germany AND Iran RATIFIED the JCPOA in EACH of THEIR respective Parliaments. WHATEVER "signatures" ARE ON the JCPOA are AS VALID AS YOURS, MINE, AND/OR ANY OTHER PERSON OF NON AUTHORITY!!!

 

So, ANY Country of the JCPOA IS NOT LEGALLY BOUND ON ANY LEGAL BASIS for NOT observing the JCPOA!!!

 

The Question IS, "Have the Insanians, to INCLUDE the Insanian IRGC, been observing ANY AND ALL conditions of the JCPOA THEY are RESPONSIBLE FOR IN THE JCPOA???!!!"!!!

 

The Answer IS, "ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!"!!!

 

The Insanians, to INCLUDE the Insanian IRGC, HAVE BEEN advancing THEIR nuclear weapons program IN SECRET SINCE the JCPOA was "signed"!!!

 

Sure, SOME of the nuclear weapons activities were slowed AND/OR TEMPORARILY halted BUT the "progress" WILL SOON BE REVEALED!!!

 

The True The United States Of America President Donald J Trump IS ABSOLUTELY RIGHT TO COMPLETELY TERMINATE THE NON BINDING COOPERATION WITH THE JCPOA BECAUSE THE JCPOA WILL NEVER ACCOMPLISH THE STATED PURPOSES AND Iran, to INCLUDE the Insanian IRGC, WILL ADVANCE Corruption AND Terrorism IN The Muddle East IN FUTURE UNPRECEDENTED MEASURES IF NOT PRESENTLY NECESSARILY ADDRESSED!!!

 

Go MAGA!!!

 

Go True The United States Of America Patriot President Donald J Trump!!!

 

Go True The United States Of America Patriots!!!

 

Go Red Rubymeisters!!!

 

THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU In Advance To ALL The Red Rubymeisters For ALL The Red Ruby Citations As Badges Of Honor For ME For "Display Of Intellectual Speed And Power"!!!

 

:bravo:   :bravo:   :bravo:

 

Go Moola Nova (YEAH AND YEE HAW, BABY, READY WHEN YOU ARE BROTHER (OR SISTER) - LET 'ER BUCK!!!)!!!

:rodeo:   :pirateship:

State Department Affirms That Iran Deal Is Only a Political Commitment

 Saturday, November 28, 2015, 2:10 PM
 

In a letter recently released by Representative Mike Pompeo (R-KS), the State Department emphasized that the Iran deal – the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) – is not binding under international law. The letter was in response to Pompeo’s inquiry about why the JCPOA transmitted to Congress lacked signatures. The State Department said, in part:

The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) is not a treaty or an executive agreement, and is not a signed document. The JCPOA reflects political commitments between Iran, the P5+1 (the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Russia, China) and the European Union. As you know, the United States has a long-standing practice of addressing sensitive problems in negotiations that culminate in political commitments.

The success of the JCPOA will depend not on whether it is legally binding or signed, but rather on the extensive verification measures we have put in place, as well as Iran’s understanding that we have the capacity to re-impose – and ramp up – our sanctions if Iran does not meet its commitments.

This is not a new development, though it is interesting to see the administration assert it so explicitly. Both Jack Goldsmith and John Bellinger (among others) made this clear when the deal was announced this summer. Jack noted that the deal was not a pure executive agreement but merely a political agreement, which “do[es] not create legally binding obligations, even if [it has] normative force in the political (or moral) context.”And, as John argued, while the UN Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) that implemented some of the terms of the JCPOA is binding under international law, the JCPOA itself is not. Nor does the UNSCR require the U.S. to lift domestic sanctions.

While this issue is not new, it has received some heightened scrutiny in the wake of multiple Republican presidential candidates vowing to repudiate the deal if elected. Marco Rubio, for example, said this very thing in September.

There are two related issues here. First, as noted above, as a political agreement the JCPOA is not binding under international law. The second issue is whether the commitments made in the JCPOA are binding under domestic law. An article in the Atlantic flatly asserted Rubio was wrong, equating the Iran deal to congressionally authorized executive agreements such as the International Monetary Fund, World Bank, NAFTA, and World Trade Organization.

But the JCPOA is not such an agreement, as the State Department’s letter makes clear. It is only a political commitment. (Mike Ramsey has a fuller explanation here.)  Because the President already had authority under the domestic law to waive sanctions against Iran, there was no need for him to get Congress to change the law. Thus, in implementing the JCPOA by lifting sanctions, the President is essentially telling Iran he will exercise his statutorily authorized discretion to waive the sanctions. A future President could use that same authority to tell Iran he or she is re-implementing the sanctions in the interest of national security. It would be odd to say that President Obama’s use of his statutory discretion to waive sanctions somehow legally prevented a future president from using that same discretion to re-impose sanctions. The law never changed. It still gives the president discretion to apply those sanctions against Iran.

Nor did the Iran Review Act constitute congressional authorization of the Iran deal. It merely delayed the President from waiving sanctions until Congress had a chance to review it; it did not change the underlying law.

As Jack noted, the President and his legal team carefully crafted the deal to get around congressional opposition. The President knew he did not have sufficient congressional support to amend domestic law such that the JCPOA would become legally binding on future presidents. But he also calculated that even under the Iran Review Act, Congress could not muster a supermajority to stop him from using his statutory authority to waive the sanctions. So he settled for what he could get, even though, as his State Department now admits, this is only a political commitment (and therefore does not bind future presidents).

Thus, the next president will stand on solid legal ground should he or she choose to repudiate the deal. Under both international and domestic law, a future president (or this president, for that matter) is not bound to continue waiving sanctions. It is, of course, a separate question whether it is good policy for the United States to repudiate the deal.

https://www.lawfareblog.com/state-department-affirms-iran-deal-only-political-commitment

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The ‘Iran Deal’ Was Not Signed by Iran or Anyone Else

Neither Iran nor any other party has signed the 'Iran Deal.' That means there is no formal agreement. That means nothing bars Iran's race to nuclear weapons.

 6 Tishri 5776 – September 19, 2015
49
 
 
Photo Credit: Wikimedia
Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-KS-04)
 

The Nuclear Iran Deal that is at the epicenter of a Congressional battle and the focus of so much attention for months is not actually any deal at all, as not one of the parties, including any representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran, has signed the Agreement.

This morning, Sept. 18, Cong. Mike Pompeo (R-KS-04) sent a letter to Secretary of State John Kerry. In that letter Pompeo informed the Secretary that while reviewing the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (Nuclear Iran Deal), he noted that there are no signatures on the so-called final Agreement.

 

Without signatures, there can be no legally binding contract.

There apparently is no “Iran Deal.”

Pompeo asked Kerry to provide a copy of the JCPOA with signatures and signing authority, so that members of Congress and the rest of the American people know that the parties to the agreement have “confirm[ed] each country’s commitment to the agreement” and that “makes clear precisely who the parties to the agreement are and the authority under which that nation entered into the agreement.”

International affairs scholar and Iran expert Michael Ledeenpointed out more than two months ago that Iran’s Ayatollah Khameini would not allow his country to sign the JCPOA. Ledeen’s point then, and today, is that the desperation exhibited by the Obama administration made clear to the Iranian leader that “there is no reason for him to approve a hated deal with the devil. It’s much better to keep talking until all the sanctions are gone, and Iran’s ‘right’ to pursue its nuclear projects is fully recognized.”

It appears that Ledeen’s prediction was dead-on. If there is no signed agreement, even the feeble conditions placed on Iran by Team Kerry’s negotiators are unenforceable.

When asked what then, is the current status of the JCPOA, assuming the administration did not just, oh, forget to distribute to Congress the signed version, Ledeen told the JewishPress.com: “It’s a verbal agreement. It means the diplomats meeting in Vienna thought it was a good agreement, but that is all. It is not enforceable.”

Ledeen said he could not think of any other major international agreement, certainly not any of the portentous nature of the Iran Deal, where lawmakers moved forward to begin implementation without having a signed agreement in place.

“Anyone who has read in the media that the ‘Iran Deal’ was signed has to now know they were lied to, it has not happened.”

So what next?

Congress could, conceivably, pass a law forbidding the lifting of sanctions. That’s been tried, you say? True, but will the same members of Congress who support the deal, the same ones who never read significant portions of the deal, and who had those portions explained to them by people who themselves never read the deal are willing to once again vote against or even bar a vote on a stay on the lifting of sanctions when they know there is nothing preventing Tehran from violating any of the purportedly agreed-to conditions? Will they really?

Cong. Pompeo’s letter to Secretary Kerry follows:

 

Dear Secretary Kerry:


I have reviewed the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) between the P5+1 and Islamic Republic of Iran – or at least the parts of the agreement that were provided to Congress by the administration.  As you know, pursuant to H. Res. 411, the House of Representatives considers the documents transmitted on July 19, 2015 incomplete in light of the fact that the secret side deals between the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the Islamic Republic of Iran were not provided to Congress.  I look forward to seeing the entire agreement – including the two secret side deals that are part of the JCPOA – so that Congress may continue to evaluate the JCPOA and, depending on the outcome of the vote under the relevant provisions of the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act, potentially end the current and continuing prohibition of the lifting of sanctions on Iran.

During that review, I found that the copies provided to Congress of the JCPOA are not signed by any of the P5+1 members nor by Iran.  Having never seen an international agreement of this magnitude not signed by the parties or an agent of the parties, I assume this is simply an oversight or an administrative error.  That is, Congress must not have the final version of the agreement that would necessarily be signed.  I request that you provide us with copies of a final, executed copy of the JCPOA.  In the event that the JCPOA has not yet been signed by the parties, please inform us (a) when signatures will be placed on the agreement, (b) what parties will be signing, and (c) which person you anticipate will sign on behalf of each of those parties, including on behalf of the United States.

I am confident that you intended for the JCPOA to be signed by each of the P5+1 participants.  I can find no international agreement of this “historic” nature that was not signed by the parties.  Each of the past five major nuclear agreements to which the U.S. is a party – SALT I, SALT II, START I, START II and the 1994 Agreed Framework between the United States and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea – were signed by representatives of each nation that was party to the agreement.  This is not a mere formality.  Those signatures represent the commitment of the signatory and the country on whose behalf he or she is signing.

A signature also serves to make clear precisely who the parties to the agreement are and the authority under which that nation entered into the agreement.  In short, just as with any legal instrument, signing matters.

This is particularly important with respect to JCPOA.  Iranian President Hassan Rouhani has made clear that he does not believe that JCPOA is legally binding on his nation, saying, “If the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action is sent to (and passed by) parliament, it will create an obligation for the government.  It will mean the president, who has not signed it so far, will have to sign it.  Why should we place an unnecessary legal restriction on the Iranian people?”

Given the many benefits that will accrue to the ayatollahs, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, and other unsavory elements of the Iranian regime, I believe that Iran should, at the very least, bind itself to the few requirements placed on it under the JCPOA by signing the agreement.  I also believe that the United States and its P5+1 partners on the JCPOA should execute the agreement on behalf of their countries.  I look forward to your response.

We all do.

https://www.jewishpress.com/news/breaking-news/the-iran-deal-was-not-signed-by-iran-or-anyone-else/2015/09/19/

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Butifldrm said:

It would be odd to say that President Obama’s use of his statutory discretion to waive sanctions somehow legally prevented a future president from using that same discretion to re-impose sanctions. The law never changed. It still gives the president discretion to apply those sanctions against Iran.

 

:twothumbs: Thank You, Butifldrm, AND The Very Best Of The Rest Of Your Weekend AND Up Coming Week To You!!! :tiphat:

 

I am compelled to add.......................................

 

You GO, GIRL!!! :twothumbs:

 

Your due diligence, exemplary skills of assessment, AND EXTREMELY HIGH INTELLIGENCE are VERY much APPRECIATED!!!

 

Thank You for sharing, Butifldrm!!!

 

Go Moola Nova!

:pirateship:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Synopsis said:

 

:twothumbs: Thank You, Butifldrm, AND The Very Best Of The Rest Of Your Weekend AND Up Coming Week To You!!! :tiphat:

 

I am compelled to add.......................................

 

You GO, GIRL!!! :twothumbs:

 

Your due diligence, exemplary skills of assessment, AND EXTREMELY HIGH INTELLIGENCE are VERY much APPRECIATED!!!

 

Thank You for sharing, Butifldrm!!!

 

Go Moola Nova!

:pirateship:

 

Synopsis, we all love reading your analysis of news and events concerning Iran and Iraq.  It takes a lot of effort and I appreciate your hard work immensely.  There is one thing I would like to bring forward about JCPOA and that is that I have always believed Valerie Jarret had a major influence on Obama and that influence could have been a huge push for the Obama Administration to go ahead with such a rediculous deal that is now causing one of the largest threats geopolitically to the World.

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Valerie Jarrett and Iran again?

Comments
Permalink
 
Posted by William A. Jacobson    Monday, November 18, 2013 at 9:14am
Obama-Jarrett-Iran-Fox-News-2012-620x402

Almost exactly one year ago reports surfaced that Valerie Jarrett was engaged in “secret” negotiations with Iran as Obama’s personal emissary.

The reports originated with Iranian bloggers, and was reported also by The New York Times. The Obama administration categorically denied the reports.

Now Israeli television is reporting similar involvement, via the Times of Israel, ‘Geneva talks a facade, US-Iran worked secretly on deal for past year’:

The Geneva negotiations between the so-called P5+1 powers and Iran are a mere “facade,” because the terms of a deal on Iran’s nuclear program have been negotiated in talks between a top adviser to President Barack Obama and a leading Iranian nuclear official that have continued in secret for more than a year, Israeli television reported Sunday….

White House spokesman Bernadette Meehan was quoted by Haaretz as saying that the report was “absolutely, 100 percent false.”

The report, which relied on unnamed senior Israeli officials, said the US team to the secret talks was led by Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett. Her primary interlocutor, the report said, was the head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, Ali Akbar Salehi. The talks have been taking place in various Gulf states.

 

In the course of the talks, the report said, the Americans offered the Iranians a series of “confidence-building measures,” which underlined American readiness to conclude a deal and undercut sanctions pressure.

It was the deal discussed in these secret talks, the report said, that the Americans then brought to Geneva earlier this month, where it was largely adopted by the P5+1 nations — the US, Britain, France, Russia, China, plus Germany.

It’s hard to know what’s true and not.  It does make sense that there have been secret backchannels established, because both Israel and France seemed surprised as John Kerry was ready to sign a weak agreement with Iran.  The Israelis in particularly were furious that they had been misled as to the terms until the last minute.

Whether Jarrett was involved, though, is another thing.

https://legalinsurrection.com/2013/11/valerie-jarrett-and-iran-again/

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.