Continued from Part One here…
And which of these labels would the cyber attack on Iran by the U.S. and Israel know as Stuxnet fall under? Is that an incentive or a sanction? Or is a cyber attack an act of war as the Pentagon has deemed such an action by one country against another? I’m sure Iran is just going to consider that water under the bridge and will bow to whatever demands the countries that have already attacked them want. As for the sanctions:
Those sanctions, including a European oil boycott, are crippling Iran’s economy…No wonder sanctions have not yet convinced Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, to stop his country’s march into the nuclear club.
Sanctions are “crippling” Iran but apparently not enough. I’m not sure how one can give such a glowing promotion of the policy regarding sanctions and then admit it isn’t really working a few sentences later. And the not working part seems to be very true as reported by Reuters earlier this year. Iran’s economy has absorbed the blow to this point and it’s doubtful it would break because of any further sanctions.
A religious extremist whose religious pronouncements do not matter to the people pointing out his extremism.
And the insinuation Khamenei is letting his country “march into the nuclear club?” Kind of a curious claim since someone in Iran’s leadership issued a fatwa in 2005 saying his countrymen were not allowed to pursue nuclear weapons technology. Who was it in Iran’s leadership that did that?…Who was it?…Name is coming to me…Oh, yeah. It was Khamenei himself. This statement by the Tribune is truly absurd when they are willing to call the regime “Islamic despots” yet have no respect for this particular aspect of Islam and the power the fatwa carries. Might want to do a tad more research on that next time.
Republican U.S. Sen. Mark Kirk of Illinois and other lawmakers are putting the finishing touches on legislation that would sharply intensify the pressure on Iran…The goal: a complete banking and trade embargo against Iran. We’ve long backed such an embargo.
And why wouldn’t people back a trade embargo as a path to vastly changing the behavior of a government? Look how quickly the trade embargo on Cuba rushed Fidel Castro out of power. The U.S. starts the embargo and roughly five quick decades later Castro hands power over to his longtime rival and political opponent, Raul…something. His last name escapes me at the moment but I’m sure he is nothing like Fidel Castro. Not related in any way. All systems go on that trade embargo! It will work wonders for this Iran thing!
The Tribune’s take on Iran is incredibly ignorant of the situation and has no business appearing in a major publication moonlighting as informed opinion. Freedom of speech is wonderful. But it would be so much better if people would just admit they do not know what they are talking about when they know so very little about a subject. Then they can plague the world with their horrible assessments of situations with a clear and fair warning to their readers of their lack of knowledge.
