Iran sanctions lifted

[Sarmatian]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-35342439

A few weeks late, but I felt we need a break from all the immigration, hence the religious thread and this one.

What does it mean? How will it affect things in the long run? A new oil and gas supplier near Europe, little less reliance on Russian energy maybe?

Will Iran respect the deal and so on...

Go for it.

[Beskar]

I think we had a topic on it at some point.

[Sarmatian]

I don't think so. The stellar number of responses this one got might be the reason why, though.

Immigration room, indeed.

One might have a better chance of a stimulating intellectual discourse at a football stadium, it appears.

[Fragony]

The oil-price is so low now that it will hardly benefit them. Good news for your ordinary Iranian though if we can just trade again.

[AE Bravo]

That's just bad news for the rest of the Arab states. Iran blew their cover right after the execution of Nimr.

It’s a radical regime with radical roots and those types’ appetite for aggression often become boundless. It once seemed that they were mainly focused on stabilizing the region but all they’ve been doing is filling vacuums and restricting the breathing space of Saudi Arabia and its allies.

This is the most ambitious state in the region. Rouhani, sitting at dinner with a Kuwaiti official, once said something along the lines of that it’ll be easy to embrace the Gulf countries and they’ll be easily digested just like this bastani (Persian ice cream.)

- Violated the sovereignty of Al Khalifa in Bahrain during the Arab Spring. This revolution was completely ruined for Shia as a result of Iran associating themselves with them while at the same time claiming Bahrain to be their “fourteenth province”

- Smuggling weapons, spy cells in Kuwait for the past two or so years

- Qassim Suleimani threatening Saudi Arabia after the execution of Nimr. Despite Nimr being a non-violent dissident (perhaps even a reasonable one), it’s nonetheless a national security matter that Iran has nothing to do with just as much as Saudi Arabia has nothing to do with the Sunni or Arab dissidents in Iran

- Occupation of Iraq and dedicating its economy in service to the Islamic Republic, supporting Assad and making Hezbollah (which was initially a resistance movement) into a transnational monster

- Their nuclearization is likely going to set a chain reaction in a region with paranoid regimes

The only way to reach a settlement would be for Iran to stop the aggression and stop its overstretched imperialism. Start cooperating with the Gulf as it’s already doing with Oman or Dubai for example, where they have over 9000 companies and way over $200bn in assets. They owe the creation of their middle class and their social progressiveness to the Gulf so it’s time to act like it.

I'm not too sure they'll respect the deal.

[Fragony]

No government ever survived a lack of middle-class supporf, I am kinda hoping that Iran will be solid ally in the near future.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

That's just bad news for the rest of the Arab states. Iran blew their cover right after the execution of Nimr.

Iran is not an Arab state - they're also considerably more moderate than the Saudis and unlike the surrounding Arab states they have a functioning middle class and a vibrant, though restricted, political discourse.

The mad days of the Iranian Revolution are far behind us and whilst today's Iran is a long way from perfect it is, from a humanitarian perspective, a more palatable partner for Western countries than Saudi Arabia.

[AE Bravo]

Grammar mistake. That may well be true and all but so does Kuwait, and no Gulf state besides Saudi Arabia (who barely surpasses it) executes as many people as Iran does. This sugarcoating of an Islamist society is getting tiresome. The only reason Saudi Arabia is more visibly hostile in its Islamism is because they’re not afraid to draw attention to it, knowing you’ll always back them.

The mad days of the Iranian Revolution are far behind us and whilst today's Iran is a long way from perfect it is, from a humanitarian perspective, a more palatable partner for Western countries than Saudi Arabia.
No, days aren't over. They may be a more palatable partner but this doesn’t matter to your government for now and that is why they’ve a mutual defense pact and will side with the Arab Gulf in the event of a cross-gulf confrontation. I've listed only some of the offenses of Iran towards Arabs but this doesn't matter to yourself because you have a problem with Arabs.

It seems that few state officials actually trust Iran, it's only a few guys in this board, and even that's often just because they hate Arabs.

[Gilrandir]

I've listed only some of the offenses of Iran towards Arabs


Then go all the way and list some offenses that went in the opposite direction.

[AE Bravo]

Opposite direction doesn't have nuclear capabilities.

What are some offenses against Iran from the Gulf besides treating them the same way the west has? If not better...

They allowed the Saudi embassy to get mobbed and their major general released a threat to Saudi Arabia. The current Iranian regime has religious and nationalist impulsion to assert themselves over the Arabian peninsula.

[Gilrandir]

Opposite direction doesn't have nuclear capabilities.

... which kinda rules out offenses?



What are some offenses against Iran from the Gulf besides treating them the same way the west has?

How about executing that Shia leader?

Generally speaking, if a person less favorably predisposed towards the Arab states and aware of the regional relations put on a thinking hat he might have come up with no fewer grievances Iranians have towards Arabs.

[Pannonian]

Grammar mistake. That may well be true and all but so does Kuwait, and no Gulf state besides Saudi Arabia (who barely surpasses it) executes as many people as Iran does. This sugarcoating of an Islamist society is getting tiresome. The only reason Saudi Arabia is more visibly hostile in its Islamism is because they’re not afraid to draw attention to it, knowing you’ll always back them.

No, days aren't over. They may be a more palatable partner but this doesn’t matter to your government for now and that is why they’ve a mutual defense pact and will side with the Arab Gulf in the event of a cross-gulf confrontation. I've listed only some of the offenses of Iran towards Arabs but this doesn't matter to yourself because you have a problem with Arabs.

It seems that few state officials actually trust Iran, it's only a few guys in this board, and even that's often just because they hate Arabs.

I wouldn't blame them for hating Arabs, considering their long history of "friendship" with the Arab states and the crap they've got in return, plus the fact that the Arab allies are barely any better than Iran, and that being highly debatable. I've never paid much attention to the difference between Sunni and Shia Islam, but I'm currently better disposed to the latter, given that most of the problems we've had have been with the former. Not that I like the latter, but if we need oil from somewhere, I'd rather deal with Iran and Russia than with Saudi Arabia and the rest of that lot. I'd rather deal with people whom I dislike and distrust than with people whom I despise.

[Gilrandir]

I wouldn't blame them for hating Arabs, considering their long history of "friendship" with the Arab states and the crap they've got in return, plus the fact that the Arab allies are barely any better than Iran, and that being highly debatable.


I don't blame anyone, I'm sure both sides can produce valid reasons for hating their opponents. Just one more story of pot and kettle.



I've never paid much attention to the difference between Sunni and Shia Islam, but I'm currently better disposed to the latter, given that most of the problems we've had have been with the former.
Maybe it is because the former numerically prevail?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shia%E2%80%93Sunni_relations


The demographic breakdown between the two denominations is difficult to assess and varies by source, but a good approximation is that 85-90% of the world's Muslims are Sunni and 10-15% are Shia

[Fragony]

Long watch, but something is cooking there https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F48SinuEHIk

Recepy,

Young population who don't know nothing other than the ayattola's
A disgrunted middle-class that is directly hit by economic sanctions
A rather odd love of hanging people in a very very painfull way, and often for no reason at all.

Resulting dish, wait a while

[HopAlongBunny]

And peace broke out all over the Middle-East!

:shakehands:

[AE Bravo]

... which kinda rules out offenses?
Which means they in particular should act less crazy.

How about executing that Shia leader?
He was a Saudi Arab cleric. By overreacting the way they did, Iran proved they're willing to use the sectarian card just like Saudi Arabia. They're not as pragmatic as they've been making themselves out to be and they have nothing to do with how Saudi handle their domestic affairs.

If Saudi Arabia lost its shit every time Iran killed a Sunni would people stand in defense of Saudi Arabia? Iran executed around a thousand people last year, look it up.

I wouldn't blame them for hating Arabs, considering their long history of "friendship" with the Arab states and the crap they've got in return
First off, there is no long history of friendship besides with Oman, whom it has an invaluable relationship with by offering it free gas in exchange for access through the strait. Iran has a history of bullying the smaller Gulf states. The UAE, which has huge economic ties with Iran, wasn't recognized by the Shah as a state at first and had an island hijacked by them with no repercussion. Kuwait has always been worried about the Iranian spy cells infiltrating their country and weapons smuggling. Bahrain, on the other hand, is believed by Iran to be its fourteenth province and they constantly try to undermine the Al Khalifa regime.

When Iran was suffering from sanctions, who helped them? You people? Nope, it was the UAE (which btw has good relations with Iran depending on how you look at it) welcoming Iranian business into their free trade zones and tax free business environments. So I think it's a bit rich that a bunch of EU people have a hardon for Iran all of a sudden when they have been the most hostile towards them. Arabs and Iranians have cooperated better than your country ever has towards anybody in the region, despite being mortal enemies.

EU has done nothing for Iran besides slowing its progress, they don't like you and rightfully so. The only state that matters to current ME actors is all of them except for broke-ass Europe crying over foreign domestic issues. :no:

I'd rather deal with Iran and Russia than with Saudi Arabia and the rest of that lot. I'd rather deal with people whom I dislike and distrust than with people whom I despise.
Just because we're inclined to side with Saudi Arabia, our patron, to boost international relations standing doesn't mean we like it. I don't think you understand how much the Gulf benefitted your country especially economically. The problem with your view, and why your government doesn't share it, is that it doesn't take into account the individual Gulf states.

[Pannonian]

Which means they in particular should act less crazy.

He was a Saudi Arab cleric. By overreacting the way they did, Iran proved they're willing to use the sectarian card just like Saudi Arabia. They're not as pragmatic as they've been making themselves out to be and they have nothing to do with how Saudi handle their domestic affairs.

If Saudi Arabia lost its shit every time Iran killed a Sunni would people stand in defense of Saudi Arabia? Iran executed around a thousand people last year, look it up.

First off, there is no long history of friendship besides with Oman, whom it has an invaluable relationship with by offering it free gas in exchange for access through the strait. Iran has a history of bullying the smaller Gulf states. The UAE, which has huge economic ties with Iran, wasn't recognized by the Shah as a state at first and had an island hijacked by them with no repercussion. Kuwait has always been worried about the Iranian spy cells infiltrating their country and weapons smuggling. Bahrain, on the other hand, is believed by Iran to be its fourteenth province and they constantly try to undermine the Al Khalifa regime.

When Iran was suffering from sanctions, who helped them? You people? Nope, it was the UAE (which btw has good relations with Iran depending on how you look at it) welcoming Iranian business into their free trade zones and tax free business environments. So I think it's a bit rich that a bunch of EU people have a hardon for Iran all of a sudden when they have been the most hostile towards them. Arabs and Iranians have cooperated better than your country ever has towards anybody in the region, despite being mortal enemies.

EU has done nothing for Iran besides slowing its progress, they don't like you and rightfully so. The only state that matters to current ME actors is all of them except for broke-ass Europe crying over foreign domestic issues. :no:

Just because we're inclined to side with Saudi Arabia, our patron, to boost international relations standing doesn't mean we like it. I don't think you understand how much the Gulf benefitted your country especially economically. The problem with your view, and why your government doesn't share it, is that it doesn't take into account the individual Gulf states.

Maybe broke-ass Europe should look to cooperate better with Iran in the future, rather than work with the :daisy:s in Saudi Arabia who are constantly looking to foment fundies over here.

[rory_20_uk]

We should have transnational relationships with all of them and leave them to slaughter each other and leave us alone.

~:smoking:

[AE Bravo]

Not the point. I'm just saying that your opinions are contrary to the direction your country is going. What you "should" or shouldn't do doesn't concern me.

But please keep repeating yourselves in every thread about the middle east.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Grammar mistake.

That's your line and you're sticking to it, right?


That may well be true and all but so does Kuwait, and no Gulf state besides Saudi Arabia (who barely surpasses it) executes as many people as Iran does. This sugarcoating of an Islamist society is getting tiresome. The only reason Saudi Arabia is more visibly hostile in its Islamism is because they’re not afraid to draw attention to it, knowing you’ll always back them.

The point was that Iran does not have the hangups or baggage of modern Arab states, they know they've been around for thousands of years in the same place, with the same society. The Persian nobility may have gradually converted to Islam but today they are not rules by Arabs and they did not assimilate to Arab culture as the Levantines and Copts largely have.


No, days aren't over.

No, they really are. Iran may still be a Theocracy but today the Islamic Republic has more prosaic concerns than stamping out other religions or enforcing Islamic standards of dress. Yes, women still have to wear headscarves and on-Muslims are still second-class citizens but the latter fair no better in Gulf States by and large and the former are considerably better off.


They may be a more palatable partner but this doesn’t matter to your government for now and that is why they’ve a mutual defense pact and will side with the Arab Gulf in the event of a cross-gulf confrontation.

My government hears "Iran" and thinks "Persia", we can't wait for the complete normalising or relations so that we can open up cultural and economic exchange to its fullest.

Maybe you mean America?


I've listed only some of the offenses of Iran towards Arabs but this doesn't matter to yourself because you have a problem with Arabs.

I've spent pages in the past listing the offences, current and historic, of "Arabs" against Non-Arabs, which includes against Levantine/Arab-Christians. You ignored me, so I'll ignore you.

You see, I don't have a problem with Arabs, I just have a problem with your definition of "Arab" and the fact you tried to include Iranians in that definition is good justification, I think, along with you calling rvg a "Coconut Arab".


It seems that few state officials actually trust Iran, it's only a few guys in this board, and even that's often just because they hate Arabs.

None of us trust Iran, but we sense that this is the time to offer the Olive Branch, and if we show we are not actually devil-worshipping savages then that will undercut the Regime's historic opposition to the West and Western ideas. Iran already has a functioning democracy, unlike most Gulf States, it just needs to be unshackled from religious control.

[Pannonian]

We should have transnational relationships with all of them and leave them to slaughter each other and leave us alone.

~:smoking:

I'd be ok with that. I'd be happier if Anjem Choudary and his mates put their money where their mouth is and make the trip to Syria to join their beloved caliphate. Although that may be asking a bit much, considering that his partner Omar Bakri Muhammad, who isn't even British (and has excoriated Britain throughout his stay here), wanted to return here when the middle east got a bit hot for him. I suppose that's the way most of these supposedly devout Muslims roll: always hating on the west for not being Islamist, but not actually wanting to live in an Islamist reality, preferring the comfort of life in the west.

[AE Bravo]

Seeing as how you believe I'd deliberately call Iranians Arabs for some reason, calling me a liar, bringing up the past, and can't have a discussion without diverting it to irrelevant nonsense you're going on block, old man. Keep being stuck in the past.

Tired of your miserable demeanor, bye bye.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Seeing as how you believe I'd deliberately call Iranians Arabs for some reason, calling me a liar, bringing up the past, and can't have a discussion without diverting it to irrelevant nonsense you're going on block, old man. Keep being stuck in the past.

Tired of your miserable demeanor, bye bye.

I'm pretty sure you've called me worse, in fact you called me a racist in your last post.

What's it like inside your head?

[Gilrandir]

Which means they in particular should act less crazy.

Countries with nuclear weapons should act less crazy? :laugh4::laugh4::laugh4: I have only one word which refutes this idea: RUSSIA.



He was a Saudi Arab cleric. By overreacting the way they did, Iran proved they're willing to use the sectarian card just like Saudi Arabia. They're not as pragmatic as they've been making themselves out to be and they have nothing to do with how Saudi handle their domestic affairs.

If Saudi Arabia lost its shit every time Iran killed a Sunni would people stand in defense of Saudi Arabia? Iran executed around a thousand people last year, look it up.

I don't deny Persians are acting inadequately sometimes, I'm against painting only them black.

[AE Bravo]

Countries with nuclear weapons should act less crazy? I have only one word which refutes this idea: RUSSIA.
...Which is a good friend of Iran.

I don't deny Persians are acting inadequately sometimes, I'm against painting only them black.
I criticize Saudi all the time. The difference is that one of them is a threat to Arab values and independence. Fact remains that Iran is a foreign entity that keeps tightening its grip on Arab nations, to the benefit of nobody but the corrupt Iraqi/Syrian regimes and themselves.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

...Which is a good friend of Iran.

I criticize Saudi all the time. The difference is that one of them is a threat to Arab values and independence. Fact remains that Iran is a foreign entity that keeps tightening its grip on Arab nations, to the benefit of nobody but the corrupt Iraqi/Syrian regimes and themselves.

And there it is - the nasty Persians wasn't to oppress the poor Arabs and their righteous values.

Just like the nasty British and the nasty French and the nasty Americans... Wait... If this is what you believe why are you surprised we want to make nice with them?

I honestly can't keep up with your flip-flopping.

[Gilrandir]

...Which is a good friend of Iran.

Birds of a feather flock together.



I criticize Saudi all the time. The difference is that one of them is a threat to Arab values and independence. Fact remains that Iran is a foreign entity that keeps tightening its grip on Arab nations, to the benefit of nobody but the corrupt Iraqi/Syrian regimes and themselves.

Tightening its grip is way too far-fetched. One confessionally different and not very well-to-do country can't exercise such an influence upon a whole bunch of rich Arab nations as you paint (or fear) it.

[AE Bravo]

Not the rich Gulf states, Arab nations in general. I'm simply confused as to why Iran is seen by most people here as the lesser evil when I've just listed a few of their aggressive policies towards other ethnicities and sects. They're no better than Saudi, and constantly oppress their Afghan, Kurdish, and Arab population.

Iran is still driven by exporting the Islamic revolution and expanding wilayat-al-faqih. What they are doing in Iraq is imperialism and that goes neglected why? Because they have a more progressive society, a more educated population, and a self-reliant scientific workforce? How does this give them the right to expand?

I blocked PFH because he has a very simplistic view of the situation (and because he makes everything personal by bringing up older posts). X is more progressive and Y is an ugly collection of countries with ugly customs (a generalization of 6 different countries btw), thus Y has it coming and its people can go to hell.

Rory's view > PFH's view because at least it's fair.

[Pannonian]

Not the rich Gulf states, Arab nations in general. I'm simply confused as to why Iran is seen by most people here as the lesser evil when I've just listed a few of their aggressive policies towards other ethnicities and sects. They're no better than Saudi, and constantly oppress their Afghan, Kurdish, and Arab population.

Iran is still driven by exporting the Islamic revolution and expanding wilayat-al-faqih. What they are doing in Iraq is imperialism and that goes neglected why? Because they have a more progressive society, a more educated population, and a self-reliant scientific workforce? How does this give them the right to expand?

I blocked PFH because he has a very simplistic view of the situation (and because he makes everything personal by bringing up older posts). X is more progressive and Y is an ugly collection of countries with ugly customs (a generalization of 6 different countries btw), thus Y has it coming and its people can go to hell.

Rory's view > PFH's view because at least it's fair.

People think Iran is the lesser evil because they don't carry their Islamic fundamentalism into western countries. I care not what they do with their own ethnicities.

[AE Bravo]

It should still be considered that Iran's foreign policy endangers the region. You may not lose sleep over them, but other people are and that's worth noting.

[Fragony]

People think Iran is the lesser evil because they don't carry their Islamic fundamentalism into western countries. I care not what they do with their own ethnicities.

True, glad to be rid of it. Almost all Persian migrants here are really succesfull as well. Persians are different.

[AE Bravo]

Migrants have nothing to do with this. There's a shit ton of immigration threads that you can repeatedly bang your heads against the walls in sync with.

[Crandar]

Bald eagle is sad. (http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/photos-iran-us-sailors-crying-219073)

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

People think Iran is the lesser evil because they don't carry their Islamic fundamentalism into western countries. I care not what they do with their own ethnicities.

European Government also see Iran as more likely to secularise because it already has the necessary social conditions and political machinery, just dominated by the clergy. The thinking is that if we open up to the Iranians we reduce the leverage of the more radical clerics and hopefully they will be gradually replaced with more moderate ones. If we continue to include Iran and be respectful (which is not the same as letting them do what they want) then the ultimate hope is that the Clergy will eventually become either benign or irrelevant as the Iranian political establishment doesn't actually need them to function, run elections, form governments etc.

Of course, the US has a less nuanced position - as evidenced by them pointlessly slapping on new sanctions as soon as their sailors were returned.

[AE Bravo]

http://abcnews.go.com/International/iran-mocks-us-sailors-revolution-day-parade/story?id=36861619

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/iran-marks-revolution-death-america-chants-n516406

Progressive. It's becoming increasingly clear that the clerical revolution of the 70s is losing its magic.

[Gilrandir]

http://abcnews.go.com/International/iran-mocks-us-sailors-revolution-day-parade/story?id=36861619


In Donetsk People's Republic they march Ukrainian prisoners of war along the streets letting the onlookers kick and hit them - and no one bats an eyelid.

But otherwise Iran is not much better or worse than its Arab neighbors:
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SG.GEN.PARL.ZS

[AE Bravo]

I think it's laughable that people who come to Iran's defense use that argument when they're not accomplishing much on that end either. Nothing but a mask, still have religious police, and conduct savage state-sponsored protests.

Go progressive Iran.

[Gilrandir]

I think it's laughable that people who come to Iran's defense use that argument when they're not accomplishing much on that end either. Nothing but a mask, still have religious police, and conduct savage state-sponsored protests.

Go progressive Iran.

I don't defend anyone - I just want to show that neither of the sides is good or bad. Both are real, which presupposes a combination of good and bad sides to them.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I think it's laughable that people who come to Iran's defense use that argument when they're not accomplishing much on that end either. Nothing but a mask, still have religious police, and conduct savage state-sponsored protests.

Go progressive Iran.

I don't think anyone would claim Iran was Progressive really, the point is they appear to be making progress.

The recent theatre is unpleasant but a few years ago the French were referring to the "Anglo-Saxon" bankers as being responsible for the financial crash and that was code for "Anglo-Jewish". A few years before that during the Oil spill from a rig in the Gulf of Mexico Obama suddenly forgot that BP Plc was no longer the State-Sponsored British Petroleum.

The fact that the Iranians are currently stirring up domestic feeling to counter charges of them suddenly becoming an American puppet are entirely expected.