Unsafe at work: Thai experts sound the alarm on Mental Health Day

[Morch]

11 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/15/britain-germany-committed-to-iran-nuclear-deal-theresa-mays-office-says.html


Oh, so Britain and the EU are going to carry on the nuclear deal with Iran, even if Washington does pull out ?

How about this ?  Washington pulls out, and puts up massive sanctions against Iran. At the same time, Europe and the rest of the world will carry on trade links with Iran, and all other links as well. Not one drop of Iranian oil will enter America. And if Iran wants American goods, well, it will be okay for British companies to import American goods, and then re-export to Iran.

This way, everybody is happy.

 

It's a good question whether the framework of the agreement can be maintained if the USA withdraws, and/or if the USA was to reimpose unilateral sanctions. It is not clear how the other signatories (Russia, the PRC and Iran) will react, even if the EU and the UK remain committed to the agreement.

 

USA sanctions will have implications not just for Iran, but also for countries and companies wishing to do business with Iran (at least with regard to areas addressed by the sanctions). What you describe doesn't conform with what sanctions are about.

[tonbridgebrit]

5 hours ago, Morch said:

 

Iran is not "harmless", and it is a threat to world peace. This is evident from the widely accepted sanctions which were in place for years, and the agreement signed toward curbing Iran's nuclear ambitions.

 

 

See, this is what I mean. You're saying ["Iran is not "harmless", and it is a threat to world peace."].

And, because unfortunately, a third of all Americans have this opinion, well, that's why Donald Trump wants to bring back sanctions against Iran. Going back to having sanctions against Iran, it appears to be that most posters on ThaiVisa are against this. And indeed, people here on ThaiVisa do actually represent the views of most people.

Trump is doing this, just to make certain voters happy.

[Morch]

3 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

See, this is what I mean. You're saying ["Iran is not "harmless", and it is a threat to world peace."].

And, because unfortunately, a third of all Americans have this opinion, well, that's why Donald Trump wants to bring back sanctions against Iran. Going back to having sanctions against Iran, it appears to be that most posters on ThaiVisa are against this. And indeed, people here on ThaiVisa do actually represent the views of most people.

Trump is doing this, just to make certain voters happy.

 

Iran is not "harmless" regardless of what Trump does or doesn't do. If Iran was "harmless" there wouldn't be any sanctions to begin with, nor a nuclear agreement to discuss. The reason it exists is precisely because Iran is not considered "harmless".

 

Trump's foreign policy, as far as he's got one, is a mess. This doesn't make Iran "harmless". There is no contradiction between opposing Trump's view on the nuclear agreement, and holding that Iran isn't "harmless".

 

 

[tonbridgebrit]

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/trump-tells-paris-berlin-keep-161750694.html

Okay, so Washington has not got a problem with France and Germany carrying on their trade with Iran. When talking about France and Germany, Donald Trump said " "Don't worry. You just keep making money."

And Mr Trump also said "They are friends of mine. They really are. I get along with all of them. Whether it's Emmanuel or Angela," .


So, yes, we will probably see the following. America will put back sanctions against Iran. But France and Germany will continue trade. And Trump can say "look, I put the sanctions back onto Iran, the deal done by Obama was no good" to his supporters. And everybody is happy. Trump might go down in history as a master at diplomacy.

Edited October 24, 2017 by tonbridgebrit

[Morch]

4 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/trump-tells-paris-berlin-keep-161750694.html

Okay, so Washington has not got a problem with France and Germany carrying on their trade with Iran. When talking about France and Germany, Donald Trump said " "Don't worry. You just keep making money."

And Mr Trump also said "They are friends of mine. They really are. I get along with all of them. Whether it's Emmanuel or Angela," .


So, yes, we will probably see the following. America will put back sanctions against Iran. But France and Germany will continue trade. And Trump can say "look, I put the sanctions back onto Iran, the deal done by Obama was no good" to his supporters. And everybody is happy. Trump might go down in history as a master at diplomacy.

 

Trump says one thing, Tillerson another. Nothing new there. Just another sad example of the current POTUS's style. That you choose to treat what Trump says as a clear indication of how things will pan out - is at a disconnect with how his term develops so far.

 

If the USA will impose sanctions on trade with Iran, they will effect other countries decisions on continuing to do business with Iran, or making new investments. Even now, just discussing the possibility of sanctions being imposed is enough to make governments and companies hesitate.

Edited October 24, 2017 by Morch

[DaddyWarbucks]

Trump's dickering with the Iran nuclear deal is a sideshow and a diversion.

What is really at issue is the rise of Iran as a regional power, the threat that it poses to Israel, and how to deal with that new reality.

The Israelis see the outcome of the six-year Syrian civil war as a strategic disaster.

Hezbollah, stronger than ever, is part of Assad's victorious coalition. Iran may have secured its land corridor from Tehran to Beirut. It's presence in Syria could now be permanent.

Netanyahu knows that if he provokes further hostilities a clamor will arise in Congress to have the US rush to Israel's aid.

Closing its Sunday editorial the Washington Post instructed the president:

"A failure by the United States to defend its allies or promote new political arrangements for [Syria and Iraq] will lead only to more war, the rise of new terrorist threats, and ultimately, the necessity of more US intervention."

The interventionist Post is saying:  The situation is intolerable. Confront Assad and Iran now, or fight them later.

Trump is being led to the Rubicon. If he crosses , he joins Bush II in the history books.