The Freeing of Europe

Discussion of current events
User avatar
SteveFoerster
Posts: 1394
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:17 pm
Location: Northern Virginia, USA and Dominica, West Indies
Contact:

Re: The Freeing of Europe

Post by SteveFoerster » Wed May 16, 2018 8:15 am

IBTimes was a little less breathless about it:

"European countries are considering dumping the dollar in favor of the euro when it comes to making payments to Iran for its crude oil, Russian media reported Wednesday, citing a diplomatic source who had knowledge of the development."

In other words, there's no reason yet to assume this is anything more than Russian dezinformatsiya. Although I do agree with you that the Empire of the U.S. Dollar cannot last forever.
Writer, technologist, educator, gadfly.
President of New World University: http://newworld.ac

User avatar
Doc
Posts: 1858
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:09 pm
Location: Cradle To Grave

Re: Pondering European options in response to US economic aggression

Post by Doc » Wed May 16, 2018 11:29 am

SteveFoerster wrote:
Sun May 13, 2018 9:52 pm
cassowary wrote:
Sun May 13, 2018 2:49 am
I don't think Iran is a rational actor. They are the Shiite version of ISIS. They wish for Islam to dominate the world except that their version of Islam is the Shiite version. That is why their priority is not the welfare of their people. Instead, they spend their oil money, not on giving their people a better life, but in supporting regional wars - from Houthis to Hizbollah. They seek a regional empire. I don't consider this to be rational.
Right, if Iran didn't want to be viewed as aggressive, why did they place their country so close to all those U.S. military bases?

https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/inter ... 67298.html
cassowary wrote:
Sun May 13, 2018 2:49 am
If the Americans have an anti-Iran obsession, it's because of the frequent demonstrations in Iran of crowds chanting, "death to America". Maybe you will also be anti-Iran if they are chanting "Death to France."
Iran is halfway around the world from the U.S. Any Americans negatively obsessed with Iran do so entirely by choice.
Or a Jew or a Sunni Muslim.

Personally I put some responsibility for the issues you bring up on the US allowing dual citizenship. I am not sur ewhen that was changed but legal immigration that allows people to live in two places is basically a very flawed idea. People immigrating should be "From" someplace else and not be in the country they are living on an extended vacation.

Globalization is a massive failure. There is no such thing as a "Citizen of the world" in reality. Just people with unrealistically divided loyalties
“"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros

User avatar
SteveFoerster
Posts: 1394
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:17 pm
Location: Northern Virginia, USA and Dominica, West Indies
Contact:

Re: Pondering European options in response to US economic aggression

Post by SteveFoerster » Wed May 16, 2018 12:01 pm

Doc wrote:
Wed May 16, 2018 11:29 am
SteveFoerster wrote:
Sun May 13, 2018 9:52 pm
cassowary wrote:
Sun May 13, 2018 2:49 am
I don't think Iran is a rational actor. They are the Shiite version of ISIS. They wish for Islam to dominate the world except that their version of Islam is the Shiite version. That is why their priority is not the welfare of their people. Instead, they spend their oil money, not on giving their people a better life, but in supporting regional wars - from Houthis to Hizbollah. They seek a regional empire. I don't consider this to be rational.
Right, if Iran didn't want to be viewed as aggressive, why did they place their country so close to all those U.S. military bases?

https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/inter ... 67298.html
cassowary wrote:
Sun May 13, 2018 2:49 am
If the Americans have an anti-Iran obsession, it's because of the frequent demonstrations in Iran of crowds chanting, "death to America". Maybe you will also be anti-Iran if they are chanting "Death to France."
Iran is halfway around the world from the U.S. Any Americans negatively obsessed with Iran do so entirely by choice.
Or a Jew or a Sunni Muslim.

Personally I put some responsibility for the issues you bring up on the US allowing dual citizenship. I am not sur ewhen that was changed but legal immigration that allows people to live in two places is basically a very flawed idea. People immigrating should be "From" someplace else and not be in the country they are living on an extended vacation.
I'm originally from the U.S., spent years in Dominica, returned to the U.S. for family reasons while going back and forth often, and may well end up back there permanently in a few years. Please explain exactly what harm I'm doing to either society by living freely?
Doc wrote:
Wed May 16, 2018 11:29 am
Globalization is a massive failure. There is no such thing as a "Citizen of the world" in reality. Just people with unrealistically divided loyalties
This is only a failure if one's goal is a world full of nationalists.
Writer, technologist, educator, gadfly.
President of New World University: http://newworld.ac

User avatar
Doc
Posts: 1858
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:09 pm
Location: Cradle To Grave

Re: Pondering European options in response to US economic aggression

Post by Doc » Wed May 16, 2018 12:24 pm

SteveFoerster wrote:
Wed May 16, 2018 12:01 pm
Doc wrote:
Wed May 16, 2018 11:29 am
SteveFoerster wrote:
Sun May 13, 2018 9:52 pm
cassowary wrote:
Sun May 13, 2018 2:49 am
I don't think Iran is a rational actor. They are the Shiite version of ISIS. They wish for Islam to dominate the world except that their version of Islam is the Shiite version. That is why their priority is not the welfare of their people. Instead, they spend their oil money, not on giving their people a better life, but in supporting regional wars - from Houthis to Hizbollah. They seek a regional empire. I don't consider this to be rational.
Right, if Iran didn't want to be viewed as aggressive, why did they place their country so close to all those U.S. military bases?

https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/inter ... 67298.html
cassowary wrote:
Sun May 13, 2018 2:49 am
If the Americans have an anti-Iran obsession, it's because of the frequent demonstrations in Iran of crowds chanting, "death to America". Maybe you will also be anti-Iran if they are chanting "Death to France."
Iran is halfway around the world from the U.S. Any Americans negatively obsessed with Iran do so entirely by choice.
Or a Jew or a Sunni Muslim.

Personally I put some responsibility for the issues you bring up on the US allowing dual citizenship. I am not sur ewhen that was changed but legal immigration that allows people to live in two places is basically a very flawed idea. People immigrating should be "From" someplace else and not be in the country they are living on an extended vacation.
I'm originally from the U.S., spent years in Dominica, returned to the U.S. for family reasons while going back and forth often, and may well end up back there permanently in a few years. Please explain exactly what harm I'm doing to either society by living freely?
Dominica is not a country I would be particularly upset about concerning dual citizenship. I am thinking more about middle Eastern countries. (Without exception I can think of) Too often they seem to still be living where they are "from" even while present in the US. I have the right to citizenship in three different countries. But I have finally decided that I am "from" here. Unless of course here changes into something completely different from what it is. Then I might end up being "from" someplace else.
Doc wrote:
Wed May 16, 2018 11:29 am
Globalization is a massive failure. There is no such thing as a "Citizen of the world" in reality. Just people with unrealistically divided loyalties
This is only a failure if one's goal is a world full of nationalists.
GLobalization has failed. Large corporation have gotten quite a lot of profits from it, but the number of destroyed lives is huge.
“"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros

User avatar
Alexis
Posts: 183
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2016 2:46 pm

"Wo ein Wille ist, ist auch ein Weg" ?

Post by Alexis » Wed May 16, 2018 2:00 pm

Not clear yet if Europeans will succeed in salvaging the Iran deal, in coordination with Teheran. One thing is sure though: they are earnestly trying.

Iran FM Says ‘Good Start’ for EU Efforts to Save Nuclear Deal
Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif appeared optimistic, saying that he believes Europe has made a good start, and that they believe they are on the “right track.” Actually securing the deal’s survival, Zarif said, will take weeks of additional planning.

He offered few specifics, but EU diplomatic chief Federica Mogherini was a big more specific, saying that proposals to save the deal included shielding EU banks from US sanctions, using EU funding to finance deals, and continuing to buy Iranian oil and gas.

Mogherini added that the efforts to salvage the deal were going to be “very difficult,” and would involve Europe significantly deepening economic ties to Iran. Protecting European companies from US sanctions is clearly a major part of this effort, if it is to get anywhere.
I am not sure helping Iran by motivating Europeans to deepen economic ties with it, nor lowering vulnerability of EU banks to US sanctions, were among of the US administration objectives when they decided to withdraw from JCPOA. If that happens, these will be unintended consequences.

Europe’s Counterpunch to America Over the Iran Deal
Something is changing in the transatlantic relationship that gives hope to those seeking to maintain the JCPOA and to augment Europe’s role as a major economic and diplomatic player.

“There was until now no political will” to challenge the U.S. in this way, said Delphine O, a member of the French National Assembly, speaking on May 15 at the Atlantic Council. “I think this has changed.”

(...) With Vietnam, he said, Europeans were “touched by the pictures” of suffering Vietnamese; with Iraq, “no one had an idea if there was a plan for the day after” and didn’t anticipate the chaos the removal of Saddam Hussein would bring to the Middle East. With the Iran deal, however, he said, “the core security interests of Europe are touched.”

(...) “There is a shrinking political space in our countries for people who will support this transatlantic relationship,” warned the French parliamentarian, O, who comes from the La République En Marche party of President Emmanuel Macron.

(...) “I’ve never seen such a mobilization at all levels…on this issue,” O said. “Not because people care about Iran so much” but because of patriotism and “a way of saying ‘we do not bend to the Americans.’”
Interesting to see where this will lead.

Shielding European trade with Iran from US extra-territorial sanctions won't be easy. But as the Germans use to say "Wo ein Wille ist, ist auch ein Weg": where a will exists, a path can be found.

User avatar
Alexis
Posts: 183
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2016 2:46 pm

Re: Pondering European options in response to US economic aggression

Post by Alexis » Wed May 16, 2018 2:11 pm

SteveFoerster wrote:
Mon May 14, 2018 9:44 am
cassowary wrote:
Mon May 14, 2018 6:23 am
Nobody? Tell it to the South Koreans. They are paying the US half the cost of American troops stationed on their soil. If they don't need US protection all they have to do is to ask them to go. That's what the Philippines did. But the S Koreans are even prepared to pay.
Wow, half. So generous of them.
I understand what you say, but on the other hand South Koreans do pay part of the cost, while they probably could get away with paying less or even much less.

The basic policy of maintaining major military bases and permanent large troop deployments is decided and confirmed by nobody else than the American people, through their elected representatives. It's not South Koreans nor any other who take that decision, they only decide to accept or not US bases on their territory.

If Americans decide to spend less for their military and to focus it on their core strategic interests rather than on maintaining protection over a host of allies in Europe, the Middle East and Asia, again it's not South Koreans - nor German, Saudis, Italians, Japanese, Turks, Qataris... - who will be in a position to approve nor disprove.

America decides where it wishes to exert military influence through protection of allies.

Sertorio wrote:
Mon May 14, 2018 3:48 am
Nobody has tasked the US with the so-called protection of any states. The US does it to serve its own economic and strategic interests. US "protection" has caused millions of victims since the end of WW II, in Korea, Vietnam and the Middle East. Hopefully the number of countries capable of stopping the US continuing with this racket is increasing, and the imperial days may be over for the US.
Many among US allies are functioning democracies where a majority seemingly agrees with accepting US protection - or else they would elect leaders who would refuse it.

It's true that nobody has tasked the US to do that. But many do accept US protection, and find granting Washington influence over their foreign and security policies an acceptable price to pay.

User avatar
Alexis
Posts: 183
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2016 2:46 pm

Re: Pondering European options in response to US economic aggression

Post by Alexis » Wed May 16, 2018 2:24 pm

cassowary wrote:
Sun May 13, 2018 2:49 am
If the Americans have an anti-Iran obsession, it's because of the frequent demonstrations in Iran of crowds chanting, "death to America". Maybe you will also be anti-Iran if they are chanting "Death to France."
This is a demonstration of hostility. Not enough reason to focus one's diplomacy on the country demonstrating such hostility. Except of course if words are translated into actual hostile actions, such as terror attacks in your country or attack on your ships.

But this is precisely what is not happening.

And it's been quite a long time now that it is not happening... Sunni Jihadists kill civilians in terror attacks in America. They attack US ships (USS Cole).

The Shias don't.

cassowary wrote:
Sun May 13, 2018 5:00 pm
The 11 hijackers might have been Saudi, not Iranian. But the Saudis don't try to gain nukes and ballistic missiles.
Saudis already have ballistic missiles, bought from China.

Iran has not built nukes. The aim is to ensure it continues not to.

Europe is within range of Iranian missiles.
And?

Europeans are within range of Russian, Chinese and Israeli missiles. They are, or will soon be, within range of North Korean missiles. They will soon be within range of Indian missiles.

If Iran built nuclear-tipped IRBMs, what would that change?

France and Britain would continue being protected by their respective deterrents. Other Europeans would continue to believe they are protected by the US deterrent. :)

User avatar
Doc
Posts: 1858
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:09 pm
Location: Cradle To Grave

Re: The Freeing of Europe

Post by Doc » Wed May 16, 2018 2:38 pm

SteveFoerster wrote:
Wed May 16, 2018 8:15 am
IBTimes was a little less breathless about it:

"European countries are considering dumping the dollar in favor of the euro when it comes to making payments to Iran for its crude oil, Russian media reported Wednesday, citing a diplomatic source who had knowledge of the development."

In other words, there's no reason yet to assume this is anything more than Russian dezinformatsiya. Although I do agree with you that the Empire of the U.S. Dollar cannot last forever.
What they are talking about is de-linking the Dollar as their reserve currency. Which is basically what the EU already does internally in Europe. So how did that work out in Southern Europe?
“"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros

User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 1563
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: The Freeing of Europe

Post by Sertorio » Thu May 17, 2018 10:35 am

EU will use 'blocking statute' to protect its firms from US sanctions for operating in Iran
https://www.rt.com/business/427015-eu-b ... s-juncker/

The European Union will activate legislation banning the bloc’s companies from complying with US sanctions against Iran as soon as Friday, according to European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker.

The law also does not recognize any court rulings enforcing penalties, which could be potentially introduced by the White House against European corporations doing business in the Islamic Republic.

“As the European Commission we have the duty to protect European companies,” the Commission president said at a news conference after a meeting of EU leaders. “We now need to act and this is why we are launching the process of to activate the 'blocking statute' from 1996. We will do that tomorrow morning at 10:30.”

“We also decided to allow the European Investment Bank to facilitate European companies' investment in Iran. The Commission itself will maintain its cooperation with Iran,” Juncker said.

The move followed Washington’s decision to withdraw from the Iran nuclear deal, clinched three years ago between Tehran and the P5+1 powers (China, France, Russia, UK, US, plus Germany) and to reintroduce sanctions that were lifted after signing the pact.

The US Treasury Department said it would give European businesses six months to wind up their investments in the country or risk US sanctions – forbidding them from signing new contracts.

Following a decades-long financial and economic blockade, the 2015 nuclear deal, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), opened Iran as one of the biggest global markets to dozens of multinationals across the globe. The EU's biggest companies rushed to sign multi-billion euro deals with Tehran shortly after the sanctions were lifted. As for Iran, the energy-rich republic got an opportunity to ramp up its presence in the global oil markets.

The EU has a lot of experience protecting its interests, Dawood Nazirizadeh, chairman of the Wiesbaden Academy for integration, told RT.

Europe will defend its companies in Iran despite threat of US sanctions – Macron — RT Business News
Leaders of European states will maintain the nuclear deal with Iran and protect their corporations against potential US sanctions for doing business in the Islamic Republic, according to French...

“In 1996 it defended itself against US secondary sanctions with the ‘blocking statute’. As a result, the US granted exemptions to European companies. However, under the current US administration, we are not optimistic about the future for such an agreement,” said Nazirizadeh.

The EU also agreed to stick to the Iran nuclear deal, aiming to protect the interests of European corporations dealing with Tehran against US sanctions, according to European Council President Donald Tusk.

“On Iran nuclear deal, we agreed unanimously that the EU will stay in the agreement as long as Iran remains fully committed to it. Additionally the Commission was given a green light to be ready to act whenever European interests are affected,” the top EU official said.
This statute, if put into practice, will block all US blackmailing of European firms. Time to push the US off.

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 2058
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: Pondering European options in response to US economic aggression

Post by cassowary » Thu May 17, 2018 5:40 pm

Alexis wrote:
Wed May 16, 2018 2:24 pm
cassowary wrote:
Sun May 13, 2018 2:49 am
If the Americans have an anti-Iran obsession, it's because of the frequent demonstrations in Iran of crowds chanting, "death to America". Maybe you will also be anti-Iran if they are chanting "Death to France."
This is a demonstration of hostility. Not enough reason to focus one's diplomacy on the country demonstrating such hostility. Except of course if words are translated into actual hostile actions, such as terror attacks in your country or attack on your ships.

But this is precisely what is not happening.

And it's been quite a long time now that it is not happening... Sunni Jihadists kill civilians in terror attacks in America. They attack US ships (USS Cole).

The Shias don't.

cassowary wrote:
Sun May 13, 2018 5:00 pm
The 11 hijackers might have been Saudi, not Iranian. But the Saudis don't try to gain nukes and ballistic missiles.
Saudis already have ballistic missiles, bought from China.

Iran has not built nukes. The aim is to ensure it continues not to.

Europe is within range of Iranian missiles.
And?

Europeans are within range of Russian, Chinese and Israeli missiles. They are, or will soon be, within range of North Korean missiles. They will soon be within range of Indian missiles.

If Iran built nuclear-tipped IRBMs, what would that change?

France and Britain would continue being protected by their respective deterrents. Other Europeans would continue to believe they are protected by the US deterrent. :)
It all depends on whether you trust the Iranians to keep their side of the bargain. You are not allowed to inspect their facilities. Trusting them is like trusting Hitler.

Post Reply