The US government seized nearly 1 million barrels of Iranian crude oil allegedly bound for China, according to newly unsealed court documents and a statement released by the Department of Justice on Friday.
If I were wrong, there would be no wars. Why do you think countries fight with each other? It’s because sovereign nations can’t tell other sovereign nations what to do.
The EU also has sanctions on Iran so a Greek company broke the sactions imposed by its country. They used the US banking system to transfer the money as well and the USA upheld the sanctions of another country.
Okay, so the Russian sanctions are hurting the American economy, causing unemployment and starvation. So, the US thinks the sanctions are illegal and decide to smuggle hamburgers to Europe for money. Russia intercepts the ships and confiscates the burgers. America objects, but is overruled by Russia and its financial institutions. Should the United States agree with the legality of the situation, even though they never agreed to the sanctions and their people are starving? Also, is it okay for Russia to do this even though it unduly hurts the people of America?
Well it’s not smuggling if the hamburgers go to Europe and there is no sanctions. So yes that would be wrong as the trade never touched Russia. Unless the EU is also sanctioning the USA then no it would be enforcing sanctions of the EU countries.
Sanctions are enacted usually in reaction to something so as I don’t know why these hypothetical sanctions are in place I can’t comment on the ethicality of them.
Countries also don’t agree to sanctions being imposed on them. That doesn’t make sense. Thats like saying a murderer who was sent to prison should agree with the punishment or it’s wrong.
Just to point out that isn’t similar to the original article for the points I made in my previous comment.
Great job at avoiding the dilemma. I too can use words to avoid answering questions that place my argument in an uncomfortable position. Better to pretend to be answering the question than have to admit that I don’t have an answer. That’s why this makes perfect sense. /s
This entire story is about Iran. They are a sovereign country. It doesn’t matter what laws the US makes up and uses to justify piracy.
US company, China, US money and multiple moves made to avoid US government from knowing.
Sure kid
Again daughter, Iran is not bound by US law. Recursive logic is still recursive.
Okay well you’re just wrong I can’t help you
If I were wrong, there would be no wars. Why do you think countries fight with each other? It’s because sovereign nations can’t tell other sovereign nations what to do.
The EU also has sanctions on Iran so a Greek company broke the sactions imposed by its country. They used the US banking system to transfer the money as well and the USA upheld the sanctions of another country.
I don’t know why nobody else pointed that out.
If Russia placed a sanction on the United States and started seizing transport ships, would that be legal?
If any part from purchase to delivery touched Russia or any other country that is sanctioning the USA, yes.
It’s kind of how sanctions are enforced.
Okay, so the Russian sanctions are hurting the American economy, causing unemployment and starvation. So, the US thinks the sanctions are illegal and decide to smuggle hamburgers to Europe for money. Russia intercepts the ships and confiscates the burgers. America objects, but is overruled by Russia and its financial institutions. Should the United States agree with the legality of the situation, even though they never agreed to the sanctions and their people are starving? Also, is it okay for Russia to do this even though it unduly hurts the people of America?
Well it’s not smuggling if the hamburgers go to Europe and there is no sanctions. So yes that would be wrong as the trade never touched Russia. Unless the EU is also sanctioning the USA then no it would be enforcing sanctions of the EU countries.
Sanctions are enacted usually in reaction to something so as I don’t know why these hypothetical sanctions are in place I can’t comment on the ethicality of them.
Countries also don’t agree to sanctions being imposed on them. That doesn’t make sense. Thats like saying a murderer who was sent to prison should agree with the punishment or it’s wrong.
Just to point out that isn’t similar to the original article for the points I made in my previous comment.
Great job at avoiding the dilemma. I too can use words to avoid answering questions that place my argument in an uncomfortable position. Better to pretend to be answering the question than have to admit that I don’t have an answer. That’s why this makes perfect sense. /s