U.S. Seeking Tougher Sanctions Against Iran

The New York Times:

The Obama administration is scrambling to assemble a package of harsher economic sanctions against Iran over its nuclear program that could include a cutoff of investments to the country's oil-and-gas industry and restrictions on many more Iranian banks than those currently blacklisted, senior administration officials said Sunday.

Read the whole story: The New York Times

Comments

[raskefing]

Glad to see that Americans are finally beginning to see the truth about Israel.
research will show that the Federal Reserve is controlled by the same Elite that controls
the British Financial systems. and the real Headquarters is in Israel.
Americans are owned by Israeli Financial interest ! What is the most powerful lobby in the USA ?
The Israeli lobby and the Wall street interest.
I like Obama personally but the sad truth that just like most US presidents he is a General Manager for Israeli and Wall street interest .The admin staff is the US congress.
Follow the money, who has benefited from the Iraqi wars ? The creditors of the US government and the Israeli Government.

You the American people are left holding the bag !

[WarSkeptic]

I'm still unclear what part of the NPT they have violated to deserve sanctions

BTW if you cut off investment to their oil industry, which they are about to privatize 40% of. Wouldn't that be encouraging them to put more funding into their nationalized nuclear energy program?

[Truid]

Sanctions on highly centralized, oil rich countries have not had much effect on regimes and are very very harmful to citizens under those regimes (eg Iraq).

Furthermore, the Iraqi President has stated Iraqi airspace is off limits for military use by other countries.

Sanctions will also be ineffective as they will give incentive for Iraq to supply Iran with gas under the table.

As the state of Israel doesn't abide by IAEA inspections, the sanctions would deepen Israel's legal exceptionalism on the nuclear issue. This would further exacerbate tensions.

For specifics:

http://www.juancole.com/2009/09/iraq-steps-in-to-protect-iran.html#comments

[Peter007]

The United States plan is to ask or require that Venezuelan , India, and the UAE. stop gasoline sales to Iran. The Arab countries learned from their oil embargo in the 70's, never to mix business with politics. That embargo hurt them more than it hurt their customers.
If those countries stop exporting gasoline to Iran, they know , that their revenues will fall and they may never get Iran back as a customer.
What do they get back in return for losing a good customer and much needed revenue? A warm feeling inside that they have helped the USA score some political points?

[StJames]

You move forward with your weapons program. You allow Amahdinejad to rave like a lunatic because he is not in control and it makes you more palatable to your crazier Muslim neighbors. When you are strong enough to stand your ground against any of your neighbors you revert to type and make peace with Israel. Remember it was an Iranian (Persian) King who freed the Jews from Babylon and sent them back to rebuild the temple in Jerusalem. After 9/11 Iran & it's Ayatollah condemned the attacks. While the people of other Muslim countries were out dancing in the streets, Iranians had candlelight vigils mourning the deaths of innocent civilians. The oh so moral American people, while not out dancing in the streets, were just as entertained by the footage of the bombing of Bagdad. How many more civilians were killed then?

[StJames]

Let's look at this from a different perspective, Iran's. You share a border with Russia, not known for playing nice with it's neighbors. You are a Shi'a Muslim nation (more secular, less rabid...mo­re like our mainstream Christians) in a sea of Sunni Muslim nations. You have Oil. You had a democratically elected President overthrown by the CIA & their British counterparts in 1953. A repressive dictator was put in place and supported by U.S. money & arms. In 1979, you oust the Shah & take over the US Embassy. Hostages taken and returned alive. You were attacked by Iraq...the­y wanted your oil and the U.S. supplied arms to the dictator of that country. Try to make sense of that. It appears to you that the U.S. only backs repressive dictators (in fact the US does have a long history of backing such dictators). Israel has nuclear weapons, Pakistan has nuclear weapons, India has nuclear weapons. . Now, America and it's allies want you to give up your nuclear weapons program. What do you get in return? Grief from the Sunni Muslims around you? A treaty that says the U.S. will come to your aid if attacked? Ask the Poles & Czechs how much that is worth. Russia is not moving out of the neighborhood. And you still have OIL. U.S. middle east policy changes with each administration, so what one may guarantee the next could very well ignore. What would you do?

[qwerty911]

Know what would be the quickest way to get rid of lots of nuclear weapons? A worldwide nuclear war.

[MosheDayanHero]

SNL ga.y Ahamdinejad spoof. Funny.

http://www.hulu.com/watch/16771/saturday-night-live-digital-short-iran-so-far

[BKearney]

Here's a great read about iranian arms
http://english.aljazeera.net/focus/2009/08/200985121520362470.html

[joabear]

(...)
"Meanwhile it was only a couple of months ago that a couple of hundred of people were killed for peaceful purposes during the disputed election demonstrations in Iran. The sole purpose of those killings were to peacefully engrave in the brains of those dead people that IRI is a peaceful regime and there was no need for anyone to demonstrate peacefully to make a point about being peaceful. And since the peaceful Iranians did not understand the peaceful nature of the regime; several more people were peacefully raped while in custody to render their asses, and other parts of their bodies, more peaceful.

And, it was only a decade ago that a peaceful man by the name of Dariush Forouhar was sitting with his peaceful wife in his peaceful home and was drinking a peaceful cup of hot tea when a peaceful thug by the name of Saeed Emami conspired the assassination of peaceful dissidents, and since he did not get enough satisfaction from his peaceful activities he peacefully committed suicide in a prison by consuming vast amount of a hair removing chemical. Oogh! That must have tasted awfull. All and all more than 80 peaceful dissident writers, poets, journalists, and political activist died in the 1990's, but who is counting! It was all for peaceful purposes."
http://iranian.com/main/node/82188

[TheHandyman]

You know, from the sounds of it, Peace is just as dangerous and deadly as War! No wonder no one wants Peace to break out!

[davidwayneosedach]

Iran is sure to remember all these sanctions when they have nuclear weapons. And they will not be remembered fondly.

[MosheDayanHero]

Ha-ha. And what's Iran gonna do?. Send the at.tack pooddle Ahmad to ask U.S. for more apologies. LOL.

[rkimball]

iran santions are dead in the water. russia to soon deliver submarines & fighter jets to iran & china has been contracted to build iran's first aircraft carrier. expect a russia & chinese block at the un against any new iran sanctions. there is simply to much money at stake.

[MosheDayanHero]

When you wish upon Kaabaaaa..­... Makes no difference who you are
Your dreaaaams come truuuuu.

[ImissBush]

and $!0 a gallon gas

[wwoody]

When the press says "Iran is a threat to the region and its neighbor". That the code word for "threat to Israel". The last time Iran attack another country was over 1400 years old. We're fighting war on two fronts,...­..longer than WW1 and WW2 together. Let not get draw into a proxy war for Israel and spent 10 years fighting another war.

[cappilot]

And on Friday they tell us they had nuclear plants all along and then on Monday they launch long range missiles. Yeah they respect our new president. So Bush was right (hard to say) but this president better wake up Iran is not our friend.

[Americafirst2008]

NEITHER IS ISRAEL

[rbrinega]

I see you suffer from the same problem that Bush had, namely, a belief that international problems can be solved only by use of the military. Two flaws with that:
1) the military already is mired in two wars because of Bush (the first one continued and got worse because Bush took his eye off the first to pursue a deadly foolish policy in Iraq) and we don't have enough military/money to solve problems that way.
2) in most cases tough negotiations tend to work as well or better as military options without spending all that money and, more importantly, all those lives.
We are not treating Iran as a friend. It's not just your way or nothing, dude! There are other possibilities out there.

[LAThinker]

Bush was very bad President and yes International problems can not be solved by military force alone, but the military is a useful diplomatic tool and this option should be never taken off the table. One more thing: no one should forget the lessons of 1938 Munich

[rkimball]

obama has a plan. axe the eu missile defense in poland, distroy our nuclear deterance & disarm.
maybe obama can apologize & appease iran into submission.