| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
sojusucks
Joined: 31 May 2008
|
 Posted: Sat Sep 11, 2010 5:08 pm Post subject: Why won't SK back US 100% |
 |
|
| Quote: |
| http://gretawire.blogs.foxnews.com/why-wont-south-korea-back-us-100-we-dont-need-95-we-need-100/ |
| Quote: |
Why won't South Korea back us 100% ? We don't need 95%, we need 100%
Greta Van Susteren | September 9, 2010 11:26 AM
Let's face it - sanctions do NOT work and will not work if there is a leak or hole in them. So it is perplexing that a country - South Korea - that we have been protecting with American lives for 60 years is playing us over Iran. Why? money over principle and long term safety to this planet.
Here is the story: We have asked South Korea to join us in imposing sanctions on Iran. This is for us, for them and for the world.
Until Wednesday, South Korea has dragged its feet in response to our request (what's with that? you would think they would jump in and help at once since we just helped them with North Korea over the sinking of their ship and loss of 46 sailors.....not to mention 60 years of American troops and lost lives.) South Korea is announcing they are imposing some....but not all. There is a major gap in what they are willing to do. And, guess what happens when sanctions are half baked? have gaps and leaks? I don't need to tell you it means the sanctions are limp and worthless at creating the intended effect - here to discourage Iran from going nuclear. I know our State Department is publicly acting happy with South Korea like we got all we asked for but that is simply not so. (And let me repeat, of all countries to snub us!)
Here is the what they have agreed to do: South Korea, with US pressure, has added 102 Iranian firms and 24 people to a blacklist of who South Koreans can not do business with .....and promised to inspect cargo more diligently (more diligently? how about completely?) and hold back on investment in oil and gas business deals.
BUT...South Korea REFUSES to shut down Bank Mellat - which is the Iranian bank in South Korea that is critical to Iranian business. This bank operating in South Korea is very important to Iran. We asked South Korea to shut down this bank. They are not. They refused us. This is NOT insignificant - not only does it snub us (how about those American troops at the DMZ protecting them? or how about Secretary of State Clinton and Secretary of Defense recent symbolic visit to the DMZ?) but worse it provides a leak in the sanctions and renders sanctions worthless.
I don't need to tell you that South Korea knows about the danger of nuclear weapons. South Korea is the country most nervous about a North Korea armed country (and of course we spend lots of our time and our resources on that problem for them) but a nuclear armed Iran is a threat to the world.
I realize that sanctions would create a short term economic hardship for South Korea but what about long term hardship for the world? If everyone is going to cheat when it comes to sanctions, why do we kid ourselves and impose them?
So while our State Department can praise South Korea for its announcement, I think it is lousy of South Korea.
Am I wrong? |
Good points. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
sojusucks
Joined: 31 May 2008
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 11, 2010 5:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
http://joongangdaily.joins.com/article/view.asp?aid=2925837
| Quote: |
U.S. praises Korea for sanctions against Iran
September 10, 2010
The United States government welcomed South Korea�s decision yesterday to slap tough sanctions on Iran the day before, in face of mounting demands for Iran to come forward and discuss its nuclear aims with the world.
�These actions strengthen the growing international resolve to prevent proliferation and Iran�s development of nuclear weapons and to press Iran to return to serious negotiations on its nuclear program and meet its international obligations,� said Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner in a joint statement commending South Korea�s decision to impose sanctions.
�We welcome in particular the Republic of Korea�s decision to impose sanctions in a number of Iranian economic sectors that have been exploited for proliferation-related purposes by entities and individuals of concern,� continued the statement.
The penalties dictated by Seoul virtually halted all financial activities at the Seoul branch of Iran�s Bank Mellat, although local financial authorities have yet to decide a specific form of penalty. The bank had been under fire previously in other countries for being involved in illegal financial transactions.
The move to penalize the bank would �demonstrate to Iran the consequences of its failure to meet its international obligations,� said Clinton and Geithner.
�The Republic of Korea�s robust inspections framework, its prohibition on the export of strategic, controlled items and its prohibition of new investments or sale of goods, services and technology to Iran�s energy sector will also further limit Iran�s ability to conduct its illicit activities. Additional pressure on Iran�s leaders is essential to making clear the choice Iran faces and to achieving the goal of a diplomatic resolution,� the cabinet secretaries stated.
South Korea is the fifth country to take unilateral measures against Iran�s nuclear objectives, following the United States, Australia, Canada and Japan.
By Christine Kim [[email protected]] |
Now I am confused. Which is it? Is the US happy or not happy about SK's enforcement of sanctions on Iran? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 11, 2010 5:28 pm Post subject: Re: Why won't SK back US 100% |
|
|
| sojusucks wrote: |
| Quote: |
| http://gretawire.blogs.foxnews.com/why-wont-south-korea-back-us-100-we-dont-need-95-we-need-100/ |
| Quote: |
Why won't South Korea back us 100% ? We don't need 95%, we need 100%
Greta Van Susteren | September 9, 2010 11:26 AM
Let's face it - sanctions do NOT work and will not work if there is a leak or hole in them. So it is perplexing that a country - South Korea - that we have been protecting with American lives for 60 years is playing us over Iran. Why? money over principle and long term safety to this planet.
Here is the story: We have asked South Korea to join us in imposing sanctions on Iran. This is for us, for them and for the world.
Until Wednesday, South Korea has dragged its feet in response to our request (what's with that? you would think they would jump in and help at once since we just helped them with North Korea over the sinking of their ship and loss of 46 sailors.....not to mention 60 years of American troops and lost lives.) South Korea is announcing they are imposing some....but not all. There is a major gap in what they are willing to do. And, guess what happens when sanctions are half baked? have gaps and leaks? I don't need to tell you it means the sanctions are limp and worthless at creating the intended effect - here to discourage Iran from going nuclear. I know our State Department is publicly acting happy with South Korea like we got all we asked for but that is simply not so. (And let me repeat, of all countries to snub us!)
Here is the what they have agreed to do: South Korea, with US pressure, has added 102 Iranian firms and 24 people to a blacklist of who South Koreans can not do business with .....and promised to inspect cargo more diligently (more diligently? how about completely?) and hold back on investment in oil and gas business deals.
BUT...South Korea REFUSES to shut down Bank Mellat - which is the Iranian bank in South Korea that is critical to Iranian business. This bank operating in South Korea is very important to Iran. We asked South Korea to shut down this bank. They are not. They refused us. This is NOT insignificant - not only does it snub us (how about those American troops at the DMZ protecting them? or how about Secretary of State Clinton and Secretary of Defense recent symbolic visit to the DMZ?) but worse it provides a leak in the sanctions and renders sanctions worthless.
I don't need to tell you that South Korea knows about the danger of nuclear weapons. South Korea is the country most nervous about a North Korea armed country (and of course we spend lots of our time and our resources on that problem for them) but a nuclear armed Iran is a threat to the world.
I realize that sanctions would create a short term economic hardship for South Korea but what about long term hardship for the world? If everyone is going to cheat when it comes to sanctions, why do we kid ourselves and impose them?
So while our State Department can praise South Korea for its announcement, I think it is lousy of South Korea.
Am I wrong? |
Good points. |
Maybe they aren't taking us too seriously after that whole Yellow Cake and Weapons of Mass Destruction thing a few years ago with that other I-word Middle Eastern country. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Louis VI
Joined: 05 Jul 2010
Location: In my Kingdom
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 11, 2010 6:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Independence is overrated. LAPDOG WANTED. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gwangjuboy
Joined: 08 Jul 2003
Location: England
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 11, 2010 6:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The international community doesn't need to fear, because in Israel we have a country which will never let the Iranians go nuclear. There is only one thing worse than attacking Iran, and that is a nuclear-armed Iran. The Israelis will never let it happen, and understand more fully than the rest of the world why this window dressing and geopolitical gamesmanship is all irrelevant. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wintermute
Joined: 01 Oct 2007
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 11, 2010 11:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sometimes it helps to back up and examine the premises of our arguments.
Could you spell it out for me why a nuclear armed Iran is a threat to the world?
Threat to US interests in the gulf, in that they can't be pushed around and exploited, sure.
A threat to Israels desire for a hegemony over the region, definitely.
How do we go from "a threat to US and Israeli interests" to "a threat to the world", exactly? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Louis VI
Joined: 05 Jul 2010
Location: In my Kingdom
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 12, 2010 1:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| wintermute wrote: |
| A threat to Israels desire for a hegemony over the region, definitely. |
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shinramyun
Joined: 31 Jul 2009
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 12, 2010 1:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| South Korea and Iran has been having good relationship. This is the main reason why SK has been so reluctant to impose a sanction over Iran until now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gwangjuboy
Joined: 08 Jul 2003
Location: England
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 12, 2010 2:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| wintermute wrote: |
Sometimes it helps to back up and examine the premises of our arguments.
Could you spell it out for me why a nuclear armed Iran is a threat to the world? |
It's in nobody's interests: period. Iran is a brutal theocracy which has strongly intimated in the past that it desires the complete destruction of Israel. If you want a shadowy group of Islamic scholars and a Holocaust denier with a penchant for executing homosexuals, links to terrorism, and a history of political oppression one button away from nuclear chaos that's your prerogative, but I would feel uncomfortable it under any circumstances.
I don't believe that the right to develop nuclear weapons should be determined by some kind of international equal opportunities policy either.
| Quote: |
| A threat to Israels desire for a hegemony over the region, definitely. |
I think that you should elaborate significantly with respect to your claims that Israel has hegemonic desires over the entire region. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sojusucks
Joined: 31 May 2008
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 12, 2010 3:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gwangjuboy wrote: |
| The international community doesn't need to fear, because in Israel we have a country which will never let the Iranians go nuclear. There is only one thing worse than attacking Iran, and that is a nuclear-armed Iran. The Israelis will never let it happen, and understand more fully than the rest of the world why this window dressing and geopolitical gamesmanship is all irrelevant. |
That's great but we all know what it means to be friendly with SK. They wouldn't mind helping their buddy get some. Maybe even use connections with NK for a little help. You never know in this country. And the international community wouldn't know until it is too late. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gwangjuboy
Joined: 08 Jul 2003
Location: England
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 12, 2010 6:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| sojusucks wrote: |
That's great but we all know what it means to be friendly with SK. They wouldn't mind helping their buddy get some. Maybe even use connections with NK for a little help. You never know in this country. And the international community wouldn't know until it is too late. |
I find it very hard to believe that SK would assist Iran in the development of nuclear weapons. Anyhow, my point was that Israel will not wait for the international community to act; they will act unilaterally. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
caniff
Joined: 03 Feb 2004
Location: All over the map
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 12, 2010 8:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| shinramyun wrote: |
| South Korea and Iran has been having good relationship. This is the main reason why SK has been so reluctant to impose a sanction over Iran until now. |
Thanks for the insight.
(shinramyun scratches head and picks up dictionary)
edit: I'm not ranking on his poor English, I just don't particularly like his online persona. Maybe he's a swell guy in real life, I dunno (doubt it).
Last edited by caniff on Sun Sep 12, 2010 8:26 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Happy Warrior
Joined: 10 Feb 2010
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 12, 2010 8:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
I don't like the tone of the article: insistent, demanding, self-righteous.
If South Korea doesn't want to back sanctions on Iran, the US still has a great deal of leverage to employ. Indeed, this is one justification for having our troops there, they more than protect SK from NK, but also provide the US with a great deal of national security heft.
Also, it seems to me SK's 'cheating' the sanctions is far less than China's. And that probably has a lot to do with SK being our ally. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wintermute
Joined: 01 Oct 2007
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 12, 2010 8:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gwangjuboy wrote: |
| wintermute wrote: |
Sometimes it helps to back up and examine the premises of our arguments.
Could you spell it out for me why a nuclear armed Iran is a threat to the world? |
It's in nobody's interests: period. |
Well, it's in Iran's interest, so that's not quite true. And since they are a sovereign country, that's good enough for them. They probably feel that countries with a nuclear deterrent get raped and pillaged less often.
| Gwangjuboy wrote: |
| Iran is a brutal theocracy which has strongly intimated in the past that it desires the complete destruction of Israel. If you want a shadowy group of Islamic scholars and a Holocaust denier with a penchant for executing homosexuals, links to terrorism, and a history of political oppression |
"Wipe israel off the map" - poorly translated out of context remark, used as a slogan rather than a meaningful statement. Do you have any other comments or info which supports the idea that this is a real and plausible policy?
"Holocaust denier" = threat to the world? Pfft. That's just a label.
Turbulent political history due in part to aggressive meddling by western nations? Sure, but coups, sanctions and wars give rise to fanaticsm. The current climate of scaremongering and lingering threats of war empowers the extremists, and makes the need for a nuclear deterrent all the more pressing, thus making it a self-fulfilling prophecy. The worst thing is we will find out too late that it was 95% spin anyway.
Leave them alone let them conduct their sovereign affairs in peace, even if it is less profitable for certain countries or special interest groups.
A nuclear deterrent is just as likely to have a stabilizing effect, since the less imminent the threat of invasion or neo-colonial meddling, the better chance for moderate and reasonable leadership.
The idea that they would use those weapons to immediately launch a nuclear Jew/gay holocaust doesn't seem plausible to me.
Still no reason why Iran is a "threat to the world".
| Quote: |
| wintermute wrote: |
| A threat to Israels desire for a hegemony over the region, definitely. |
I think that you should elaborate significantly with respect to your claims that Israel has hegemonic desires over the entire region. |
That's just an opinion which is not relevant to the question I posed, so I'm not going to follow it up right now, except to say that in this case, they seem to be seeking to proactively eliminate potential threats in the region. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
caniff
Joined: 03 Feb 2004
Location: All over the map
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 12, 2010 8:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
SK is our "friend" up until the point it decides it's not worth maintaining the relationship.
I guess that happens amongst individuals too, so maybe that is the natural order of things. Still, Hillary's comment about Korean historical amnesia rang very true. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
