Boehner defies Obama on Iran sanctions, invites Netanyahu

[Publicus]

The ayatollahs in Tehran are paying attention to the Republican controlled Congress that wants additional sanctions the P5+1 Iran nuclear negotiators led by the United States agree are not needed at this time.

The ayatollahs and the Iran legislature are paying attention to the Republican controlled Congress as it teams up with Israeli PM Netanyahu to oppose the foreign policy of the United States and to try to sabotage the negotiating position of the P5+1 that are negotiating with the ayatollahs over Iran's nuclear energy and weapons program.

The P5+1 = US, UK, France, Russia, China + Germany. The other P5 of the P5+1 are watching the the Congress of the United States in this too as the Republicans that control it walk hand in hand with their newest Republican party member, Bimi Netanyahu as they together seek to destroy US policy coherence in the nuclear negotiations.

The chief US negotiator btw told Congress last year that deception is in the DNA over there, in Tehran. Nobody trusts Iran and most Americans don't trust or believe the whacked out Republican party controlled Congress and the prime minister of our vital ally Israel who seems to like his new suit as a Republican party Senator in Washington.

[Chicog]

Iran's parliament has started to draft a law that would allow the country's nuclear scientists to intensify their

uranium enrichment, a step that could complicate ongoing talks with world powers.

The move, announced Saturday by parliament's National Security and Foreign Policy Committee, comes

after U.S. lawmakers said they were planning legislation that could place new sanctions on Iran.

I wonder if one is possibly related to the other?

And who needs sanctions anyway, they're getting stuffed with the oil price as it is.

[Steely Dan]

I see Obama is wasting no time in trying to reverse Saudi opposition to his Iranian strategy. I hope he gets no change whatsoever out of them.

http://app.debka.com/p/article/24359/US-Saudi-summit-in-Riyadh-to-deal-with-pivotal-issues-of-oil-prices-Iran-and-Yemen

[Publicus]

There will be no changes to current Saudi Arabian policies concerning Iran, oil prices and supply, IS or anything else. The new king has been running the place for several years now and all the current policies are his and his alone. Prez Obama and the king will talk about Iran and the nuclear issue, as they will talk about IS and a lot of other things and, unless they surprise themselves, there will be no sudden changes of policies by either government.

[Ulysses G.]

And who needs sanctions anyway, they're getting stuffed with the oil price as it is.

Sanctions plus low oil prices is even more incentive to stop enriching uranium. More leverage is a good thing.

[Publicus]

Why don't we just drop the sanctions idea and let Obama have his way with the negotiations?

Here's one very big reason.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Iran Lawmakers Drafting Law on Nuclear Enrichment Hike

by Naharnet Newsdesk 1 hour ago

Iran's parliament has started to draft a law that would allow the country's nuclear scientists to intensify their

uranium enrichment, a step that could complicate ongoing talks with world powers.

The move, announced Saturday by parliament's National Security and Foreign Policy Committee, comes

after U.S. lawmakers said they were planning legislation that could place new sanctions on Iran.

The negotiations between Iran and the permanent members of the U.N. Security Council -- Britain, China,

France, Russia and the United States -- plus Germany, face a June 30 deadline for a final deal.

But with two deadlines already missed last year both sides have admitted big differences remain on the

hard detail of what a comprehensive agreement would look like.

http://www.naharnet.com/stories/en/164583-iran-lawmakers-drafting-law-on-nuclear-enrichment-hike

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Surely we can trust the Iranians!

Maybe the ayatollahs that run Iran could invite House Speaker John Boehner and the leader of the new Republican majority in the Senate Mitch McConnell to speak before the Iran parliament in Tehran.

Boehner could tear into Prez Obama's foreign policy to tell Iran how Obama benefits them since the ayatollahs believe otherwise. And Sen McConnell could speak for the senators that agree with him that the president and the P5+1 governments don't know what they're doing in the nuclear negotiations.

[Ulysses G.]

Boehner could tear into Prez Obama's foreign policy to tell Iran how Obama benefits them since the ayatollahs believe otherwise.

I'm pretty sure that the ayatollahs know that Prez Obama's foreign policy benefits them, but they are good poker players and can keep a straight face in order to get even more concessions from the Neville Chamberlain clone.

Edited January 25, 2015 by Ulysses G.

[Publicus]

Boehner could tear into Prez Obama's foreign policy to tell Iran how Obama benefits them since the ayatollahs believe otherwise.

I'm pretty sure that the ayatollahs know that Prez Obama's foreign policy benefits them, but they are good poker players and can keep a straight face in order to get even more concessions from the Neville Chamberlain clone.

That's a persisting mythology predicated in an inferiority complex which its sufferers need to keep among themselves.

During the Cold War every treaty or agreement the US made with the Soviet Russians was denounced by the Cold Warriors back home as anything from Washington being bamboozled by Moscow to Washington selling out to Moscow. The post above seems to think that was correct and that Russia won the Cold War, which is completely wrong as history attests. The fact is the US scalped 'em every time.

The US has a group of paranoids that always see us losing out to the smart and clever Old World schemers, poker players, supposed chessmasters, as if the US itself hasn't any aces up its sleeve or any chickens in the pot, as if the US had no smarts, patience or muscle.

Prez Obama and the P5+1 have put the screws to the ayatollahs and the ayatollahs are hurting. Anyone who thinks otherwise is blind to reality, same as the old US Cold Warriors were in their armchairs at home.

[Ulysses G.]

Prez Obama and the P5+1 have put the screws to the ayatollahs and the ayatollahs are hurting.

Sounds like wishful thinking.

Charles Krauthammer said Friday on “Special Report with Bret Baier” that President Obama is "negotiating out of weakness and desperation" when he says that Congress must hold off on imposing new sanctions on Iran while the administration continues to negotiate a nuclear deal with that country.

"[Obama] says, 'nobody doubts that I have the ability to get new sanctions. True," the syndicated columnist and Fox News contributor said. "But nobody in the world believes that he has the willingness to get these sanctions.

"Nobody, including the Iranians, has any faith in the fact that he will actually impose sanctions. The Iranians know that, and that's why they know that he's negotiating out of weakness and desperation."

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/01/16/krauthammer-obama-negotiating-out-weakness-and-desperation-with-iran-986510208/

[Publicus]

I'm pretty sure that the ayatollahs know that Prez Obama's foreign policy benefits them, but they are good poker players and can keep a straight face in order to get even more concessions from the Neville Chamberlain clone.

That's a persisting mythology predicated in an inferiority complex which its sufferers need to keep among themselves.

During the Cold War every treaty or agreement the US made with the Soviet Russians was denounced by the Cold Warriors back home as anything from Washington being bamboozled by Moscow to Washington selling out to Moscow. The post above seems to think that was correct and that Russia won the Cold War, which is completely wrong as history attests. The fact is the US scalped 'em every time.

The US has a group of paranoids that always see us losing out to the smart and clever Old World schemers, poker players, supposed chessmasters, as if the US itself hasn't any aces up its sleeve or any chickens in the pot, as if the US had no smarts, patience or muscle.

Prez Obama and the P5+1 have put the screws to the ayatollahs and the ayatollahs are hurting. Anyone who thinks otherwise is blind to reality, same as the old US Cold Warriors were in their armchairs at home.

Prez Obama and the P5+1 have put the screws to the ayatollahs and the ayatollahs are hurting.

Sounds like wishful thinking.

Charles Krauthammer said Friday on “Special Report with Bret Baier” that President Obama is "negotiating out of weakness and desperation" when he says that Congress must hold off on imposing new sanctions on Iran while the administration continues to negotiate a nuclear deal with that country.

"[Obama] says, 'nobody doubts that I have the ability to get new sanctions. True," the syndicated columnist and Fox News contributor said. "But nobody in the world believes that he has the willingness to get these sanctions.

"Nobody, including the Iranians, has any faith in the fact that he will actually impose sanctions. The Iranians know that, and that's why they know that he's negotiating out of weakness and desperation."
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/01/16/krauthammer-obama-negotiating-out-weakness-and-desperation-with-iran-986510208/

Iran has been under US sanctions for a long time and the sanctions are hurting, same as in Russia although its more immediate and more visible as the sanctions affect Russia.

Your post documents and verifies my analysis of American paranoids who always think the other guys get the best of we poor saps who go into the world out there to get fleeced.

We dropped the atomic bombs to win WW2, we won the Cold War and presently we are doing fine, thank you. I reiterate the ayatollahs are hurting and have been hurting for a long time.

The rocking chair warriors in the US just can't accept the facts or the realities that sanctions exist, are hurting Iran, and that the sanctions are the work of the P5+1 led by the United States.

Edited January 25, 2015 by Publicus

[Ulysses G.]

We dropped the atomic bombs to win WW2, we won the Cold War and presently we are doing fine, thank you.

Luckily, Neville Chamberlain Barack Obama was not in charge back then.

Edited January 25, 2015 by Ulysses G.

[Jay Sata]

UG must have too much time on his hands or want a blinkered red neck opinion on the world to bother to watch the joke channel Fox.

Edited January 25, 2015 by Jay Sata

[Ulysses G.]

You always add something clever to the conversation.

[Publicus]

We dropped the atomic bombs to win WW2, we won the Cold War and presently we are doing fine, thank you.

Luckily, Neville Chamberlain Barack Obama was not in charge back then.

Barack Obama defeated Sen John 'Bomb Bomb' McCain and Mitt 'Fix Bayonets' Romney.

The people on the far right live in a world of their own myths.

And in order to believe their own myths they have to keep pounding away at 'em.

They're off their rockers too much for their own good.

[NeverSure]

-snip-

sanctions exist, are hurting Iran, and that the sanctions are the work of the P5+1 led by the United States.

Have these sanctions resulted in stopping Iran from going full steam ahead with its nuclear program? (Rhetorical question.)

As recently as 2009 (when your best bud was already POTUS,) your best but stupid bud thought that sanctions would cause Iran to run out of raw uranium known as "yellow cake." But soon after, President Ahmadinejad (pronounced "I'm a dinner jacket") made it clear that Iran was mining it's own yellow cake from its Southern mines.

LINK

So the sanctions which were largely intended to stop Iran from getting yellow cake have failed. Wise men want different and more sanctions.

[NeverSure]

We dropped the atomic bombs to win WW2, we won the Cold War and presently we are doing fine, thank you.

Luckily, Neville Chamberlain Barack Obama was not in charge back then.

Barack Obama defeated Sen John 'Bomb Bomb' McCain and Mitt 'Fix Bayonets' Romney.

The people on the far right live in a world of their own myths.

And in order to believe their own myths they have to keep pounding away at 'em.

They're off their rockers too much for their own good.

How about the "myths" I posted above? It's your bud Obama who's off his rocker and it's you who won't look at the facts. Left to his own, Obama would stupidly sit by and let Iran get nukes.

Stopping Iran from getting nukes could avert a serious war. Either a future POTUS or even Israel could wake up one morning and decide to relieve Iran of its nuclear program with a few well placed bunker busters, and while they are at it, relieve Iran of its airports, air force and shipping facilities including navy ships so it couldn't hit back. Think Pearl Harbor with modern weapons.

We don't need another rogue Islamic state which has nukes, and I predict that wiser men will see to it that it doesn't happen.

Edited January 25, 2015 by NeverSure

[Publicus]

-snip-

sanctions exist, are hurting Iran, and that the sanctions are the work of the P5+1 led by the United States.

Have these sanctions resulted in stopping Iran from going full steam ahead with its nuclear program? (Rhetorical question.)

As recently as 2009 (when your best bud was already POTUS,) your best but stupid bud thought that sanctions would cause Iran to run out of raw uranium known as "yellow cake." But soon after, President Ahmadinejad (pronounced "I'm a dinner jacket") made it clear that Iran was mining it's own yellow cake from its Southern mines.

LINK

So the sanctions which were largely intended to stop Iran from getting yellow cake have failed. Wise men want different and more sanctions.

Some people here sound like the ayatollahs which is why I suggested the ayatollahs running Iran (into the ground) invite Speaker Boehner and Republican leader Sen Mitch McConnell to address the Iranian parliament to denounce Barack Obama there too. Sort of establish something of an equalibrium with Netanyahu addressing the US Congress in opposition to US foreign policy and the P5+1 nuclear negotiations with the ayatollahs.

Iran is at breaking point under US sanctions – and its leaders feel the heat

Despite talk of a defiant 'resistance economy', the consequences may be dire if a nuclear deal with the west does not come soon

Officially speaking, the government of President Hassan Rouhani, which took office last August, maintains that the punitive UN, US and EU sanctions imposed in the row over Iran's nuclear programme, which have steadily intensified since 2006, have had little or no impact.

In particular, it says, sanctions have played no role in forcing Tehran back to the nuclear negotiating table. The talks, which resumed last week without making progress, are expected to continue in June in Vienna.

But on the streets of Tehran, and in the capital's shops, garages, markets, businesses and private homes, the story is very different. Isolated and ostracised to an unusual degree, Iran is a nation under appalling stress. The strains are telling. The ties that bind are fraying. The leadership is feeling the heat

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/18/iran-us-sanctions-economy-nuclear-programme

Edited January 25, 2015 by Publicus

[chuckd]

We might want to consider the real myth in all this story. That myth is that there are economic sanctions preventing Iran from selling oil.

While it is true the US has enacted legislation ever since 1996 placing economic sanctions on countries doing business with Iran, those same laws gave a rather broad scope of waiver powers to the Executive branch.

In other words, nobody can do business with Iran unless the President says it is really OK for certain countries to do business with Iran.

The latest Report on those countries exempted from the sanctions and still purchasing Iranian oil was in late July 2014. Those exempted countries are... India, China, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and Turkey. There were at one time an additional 10 EU countries considered exempt from the sanctions.

What the sanctions presently amount to are sanctions against those countries that were previously not buying oil from Iran anyway. Their former customers are still happily using Iranian oil and gas as they always have been.

The real reason Obama doesn't want any new legislation is Senator Menendez (D-NJ) wishes to curtail the Executive branch waiver policy. Obama doesn't want to lose that power so is threatening veto against a bill co-sponsored by Sen Menendez and 5 other Democratic Senators.

All this has little to do with the Republicans. It is all about Obama and a Democratic power struggle.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/ten-miles-square/2013/10/president_obama_can_ease_sanct047474.php

http://www.ukpandi.com/publications/article/circular-7-14-iran-sanctions-circular-on-the-extension-of-sanctions-relief-under-the-joint-plan-of-action-130287/

[Jay Sata]

You always add something clever to the conversation.

The truth hurts but you won't find it watching Fox News.

[beechguy]

You always add something clever to the conversation.

The truth hurts but you won't find it watching Fox News.

Or MSNBC either.

[Publicus]

We might want to consider the real myth in all this story. That myth is that there are economic sanctions preventing Iran from selling oil.

While it is true the US has enacted legislation ever since 1996 placing economic sanctions on countries doing business with Iran, those same laws gave a rather broad scope of waiver powers to the Executive branch.

In other words, nobody can do business with Iran unless the President says it is really OK for certain countries to do business with Iran.

The latest Report on those countries exempted from the sanctions and still purchasing Iranian oil was in late July 2014. Those exempted countries are... India, China, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and Turkey. There were at one time an additional 10 EU countries considered exempt from the sanctions.

What the sanctions presently amount to are sanctions against those countries that were previously not buying oil from Iran anyway. Their former customers are still happily using Iranian oil and gas as they always have been.

The real reason Obama doesn't want any new legislation is Senator Menendez (D-NJ) wishes to curtail the Executive branch waiver policy. Obama doesn't want to lose that power so is threatening veto against a bill co-sponsored by Sen Menendez and 5 other Democratic Senators.

All this has little to do with the Republicans. It is all about Obama and a Democratic power struggle.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/ten-miles-square/2013/10/president_obama_can_ease_sanct047474.php

http://www.ukpandi.com/publications/article/circular-7-14-iran-sanctions-circular-on-the-extension-of-sanctions-relief-under-the-joint-plan-of-action-130287/

All presidents since Jimmy Carter have imposed sanctions against Iran and each president has had the waiver provision concerning oil in order to minimize external impacts on oil prices in the US.

Each president waived some oil sanctions for some period of time against some certain countries doing oil business with Iran in order to protect oil price fluctuations in the US.

The far right always -- always -- presents some piece of an actual fact then runs up and down the hills with it howling at the moon.

The sanctions against Iran by the US, EU, UN include trade and investment, weapons development in Iran, nuclear materials to include yellowcake, financial dealings, assets possession and access, refining petroleum, Canada alone recently added 82 new energy producing or related agencies to the sanctions ban.

This is a comprehensive accounting of sanction categories, by whom, and their extent, provided by Foreign Policy which is the journal of the private Council on Foreign Relations in New York.

The Lengthening List of Iran Sanctions

Sanctions, and their impact on the Iranian economy, appeared to be a significant factor in the country's June 14, 2013 presidential elections. New President Hassan Rouhani said his election reflected the desire of Iranians to resolve steep economic problems and he vowed to try to lift the sanctions.

U.S. Treasury Under-Secretary David Cohen. News reports have shown that the cost of doing business with Iran has become so onerous that many firms are dropping their transactions entirely.

Iranian officials have continued to dismiss sanctions as ineffective, but some have also said lifting them should be a major point of any new talks. Whether these sanctions will deter the nuclear program remains up for debate.

http://www.cfr.org/iran/lengthening-list-iran-sanctions/p20258

Edited January 25, 2015 by Publicus

[NeverSure]

-snip-

sanctions exist, are hurting Iran, and that the sanctions are the work of the P5+1 led by the United States.

Have these sanctions resulted in stopping Iran from going full steam ahead with its nuclear program? (Rhetorical question.)

As recently as 2009 (when your best bud was already POTUS,) your best but stupid bud thought that sanctions would cause Iran to run out of raw uranium known as "yellow cake." But soon after, President Ahmadinejad (pronounced "I'm a dinner jacket") made it clear that Iran was mining it's own yellow cake from its Southern mines.

LINK

So the sanctions which were largely intended to stop Iran from getting yellow cake have failed. Wise men want different and more sanctions.

Some people here sound like the ayatollahs which is why I suggested the ayatollahs running Iran (into the ground) invite Speaker Boehner and Republican leader Sen Mitch McConnell to address the Iranian parliament to denounce Barack Obama there too. Sort of establish something of an equalibrium with Netanyahu addressing the US Congress in opposition to US foreign policy and the P5+1 nuclear negotiations with the ayatollahs.

Iran is at breaking point under US sanctions – and its leaders feel the heat

Despite talk of a defiant 'resistance economy', the consequences may be dire if a nuclear deal with the west does not come soon

Officially speaking, the government of President Hassan Rouhani, which took office last August, maintains that the punitive UN, US and EU sanctions imposed in the row over Iran's nuclear programme, which have steadily intensified since 2006, have had little or no impact.

In particular, it says, sanctions have played no role in forcing Tehran back to the nuclear negotiating table. The talks, which resumed last week without making progress, are expected to continue in June in Vienna.

But on the streets of Tehran, and in the capital's shops, garages, markets, businesses and private homes, the story is very different. Isolated and ostracised to an unusual degree, Iran is a nation under appalling stress. The strains are telling. The ties that bind are fraying. The leadership is feeling the heat

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/18/iran-us-sanctions-economy-nuclear-programme

Bottom line. Have the sanctions, which were designed to get Iran to stop its nuclear program worked?

The answer is no.

Have "talks" worked? Heck no. Iran loves talks.

Eventually someone is going to have to put the screws to those people and I hope it isn't after they get nukes.

[Morch]

Heh...

Netanyahu on Peres US visit in 1996: Ploy to win votes

Nearly 20 years ago, Netanyahu slammed then-Prime Minister Peres' US visit shortly before Israelis went to polls, calling it a 'cynical attempt' to improve his chances for re-election.

``I can't find an example of any previous Israeli government whose prime minister, on the eve of elections, made a cynical attempt to use relations between Israel and the United States as a party advertisement,'' Prime Minister Netanyahu said in remarks in 1996, while serving as opposition leader, blasting then-Prime Minister Shimon Peres' decision to travel to the US less than a month before the Knesset elections.

Benjamin Netanyahu accused Prime Minister Shimon Peres of exploiting his close relations with President Clinton and several Arab leaders to improve his chances for re-election, using harsh words in his condemnation.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4618781,00.html

Actually, a US president did host an Israeli PM just before elections

WASHINGTON — As tensions rose between Israel and the Obama administration over Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s early March visit to Washington to address Congress and AIPAC, and President Barack Obama’s refusal to meet with him, the White House tossed out a justification Thursday for its apparent snub. The president, the White House said, was not boycotting the prime minister because he had set up the Congressional address behind the White House’s back, but because “as a matter of long-standing practice and principle, we do not see heads of state or candidates in close proximity to their elections, so as to avoid the appearance of influencing a democratic election in a foreign country.”

White House spokeswoman Bernadette Meehan’s statement is correct as regards Obama, not so as regards all previous administrations.

A check of over 50 meetings with world leaders at the White House during the Obama administration reveals that none of those meetings was conducted two weeks before any of the visitors’ elections. The closest such session was a 2009 meeting with Chancellor Angela Merkel, who sat with Obama in Washington just over two months before German federal elections, which she won. French president Nicolas Sarkozy spoke with Obama in 2012 less than a month before his defeat by the Socialist Francois Hollande, but that was a video teleconference, not a face-to-face at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

http://www.timesofisrael.com/actually-a-us-president-did-host-an-israeli-pm-just-before-elections/

[Publicus]

-snip-

sanctions exist, are hurting Iran, and that the sanctions are the work of the P5+1 led by the United States.

Have these sanctions resulted in stopping Iran from going full steam ahead with its nuclear program? (Rhetorical question.)

As recently as 2009 (when your best bud was already POTUS,) your best but stupid bud thought that sanctions would cause Iran to run out of raw uranium known as "yellow cake." But soon after, President Ahmadinejad (pronounced "I'm a dinner jacket") made it clear that Iran was mining it's own yellow cake from its Southern mines.

LINK

So the sanctions which were largely intended to stop Iran from getting yellow cake have failed. Wise men want different and more sanctions.

Some people here sound like the ayatollahs which is why I suggested the ayatollahs running Iran (into the ground) invite Speaker Boehner and Republican leader Sen Mitch McConnell to address the Iranian parliament to denounce Barack Obama there too. Sort of establish something of an equalibrium with Netanyahu addressing the US Congress in opposition to US foreign policy and the P5+1 nuclear negotiations with the ayatollahs.

Iran is at breaking point under US sanctions – and its leaders feel the heat

Despite talk of a defiant 'resistance economy', the consequences may be dire if a nuclear deal with the west does not come soon

Officially speaking, the government of President Hassan Rouhani, which took office last August, maintains that the punitive UN, US and EU sanctions imposed in the row over Iran's nuclear programme, which have steadily intensified since 2006, have had little or no impact.

In particular, it says, sanctions have played no role in forcing Tehran back to the nuclear negotiating table. The talks, which resumed last week without making progress, are expected to continue in June in Vienna.

But on the streets of Tehran, and in the capital's shops, garages, markets, businesses and private homes, the story is very different. Isolated and ostracised to an unusual degree, Iran is a nation under appalling stress. The strains are telling. The ties that bind are fraying. The leadership is feeling the heat

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/18/iran-us-sanctions-economy-nuclear-programme

Bottom line. Have the sanctions, which were designed to get Iran to stop its nuclear program worked?

The answer is no.

Have "talks" worked? Heck no. Iran loves talks.

Eventually someone is going to have to put the screws to those people and I hope it isn't after they get nukes.

Stay the course, steady as she goes.

It's the only rational approach short of war or military action as you suggest. If it comes down to military action we need to let 'em have it and to do it decisively, with finality to their nuclear program.

The current prez there marks the return of a reformer to the office, in contrast to the fascist I'madinnerjacket guy, which is a recent additional internal pressure and force toward getting the ayatollahs to give it up.

Nobody knows if the ayatollahs will give in on this...there may never be a formal agreement about it if they do say uncle, sparing them the public climbdown, so I'm not looking for any big and loud pronouncement that Iran has sworn off nuclear weapons. If it does eventually happen, it will be done very quietly without public fanfare.

Edited January 25, 2015 by Publicus

[Scott]

This may be a little off-topic, but what effect is the drop in oil prices having on Iran?

[NeverSure]

A lot. Iran, while not as oil rich as some countries, is still dependant on it for a decent economy. These ME oil countries neglected to diversify into other industries and other exports and are very vulnerable just as Russia is.

"This price plunge has been driven by Saudi Arabia, OPEC’s dominant power. While it’s true that part of Riyadh’s actions respond to the energy renaissance in North America, the greater motivation is breaking Iran’s will.

The Saudis believe they can no longer rely on the US to contain Tehran’s imminent nuclear threat, so they’re out to do what our lukewarm sanctions couldn’t.

There’s no love lost between the Saudis and the Russians, either. The Saudis want the Assad regime in Syria to go. Moscow props it up."

LINK

[Chicog]

This may be a little off-topic, but what effect is the drop in oil prices having on Iran?

At this point, they're virtually giving it away so quite a significant one I would imagine.

[SiSePuede419]

"Israel is not dependent on the USA. It is a prosperous country with a healthy, rapidly growing and diverse economy"

And if anyone threatens to cut off aid, AIPAC calls them "anti-semetic".

As to the size of Israel's economy, it's small and insignificant, 291 Billion (2013).

Iran has a larger economy, 368 Billion (2013).

Even Iraq has a 222 Billion economy.

Without America and London "backstopping" Israel with it's military and financial empire, it would collapse...

Edited January 26, 2015 by SiSePuede419

[Ulysses G.]

Without America and London "backstopping" Israel with it's military and financial empire, it would collapse...

Horse doo. Haters will hate, but they are not much on facts.

The government has learned from economic disaster, embraced high-skilled immigrants, played venture capitalist, and imported one heck of a good central banker.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/08/its-not-just-the-culture-stupid-4-reasons-why-israels-economy-is-so-strong/260610/

Iran and Iraq are huge compared to Israel and have oil revenue. Israel's economy does not depend on oil, but it looks like it might end up as oil rich as Saudi Arabia in the imminent future.

http://world.time.com/2013/04/30/can-israel-become-as-oil-rich-as-saudi-arabia/

Edited January 26, 2015 by Ulysses G.

[Morch]

A lot. Iran, while not as oil rich as some countries, is still dependant on it for a decent economy. These ME oil countries neglected to diversify into other industries and other exports and are very vulnerable just as Russia is.

"This price plunge has been driven by Saudi Arabia, OPEC’s dominant power. While it’s true that part of Riyadh’s actions respond to the energy renaissance in North America, the greater motivation is breaking Iran’s will.

The Saudis believe they can no longer rely on the US to contain Tehran’s imminent nuclear threat, so they’re out to do what our lukewarm sanctions couldn’t.

There’s no love lost between the Saudis and the Russians, either. The Saudis want the Assad regime in Syria to go. Moscow props it up."

LINK

Iran bleeding over oil price drop created by Saudi Arabia makes it much easier for the USA administration to carry on the negotiations with Iran, without resorting to enforcement of further sanctions. Got to wonder if Iran sees it as a coordinated move.

Apart form direct effects on Iranian economy, this might make providing further support for Assad and the Hezbollah more of an issue. The same goes for possible arms and nuclear purchases from Russia (which would also serve to deny Russia a financial respite).