A senior official with the US State Department says that they have been warning countries around the world, particularly US allies, to stop all purchases of Iranian oil. They say purchases must end by November, and the US is unlikely to offer any further exemptions to allow any more purchases.
“We are asking them to go to zero,” the official confirmed. He said China and India, two major customers of Iran, are among those the US has warned. The US withdrew from the Iran nuclear deal last month, and intends to again ban oil purchases.
Yet the Iran deal itself is still intact, without the US. China is even a signatory to that deal, and almost certainly won’t agree to stop buying Iranian oil just because the US tells them they can’t. This is doubly true because remaining signatories are trying to save the Iran deal.
Iran has reportedly already met with Chinese customers to ask them to keep buying oil, and while they haven’t gotten any guarantees, China appears to have plenty of justification to continue doing so. Iran has also requested EU nations commit to buying oil from them as part of a deal to remain in the nuclear pact.
For most nations, this will likely depend chiefly on the economic cost of ending Iran trade compared to what the US might do to them. So long as the nuclear deal remains in place, any US attempt to punish other countries will likely lead to a backlash, and limit the US ability to isolate anyone.
China and India are already set up for oil payments outside the swift monetary system. Iran sanctions will be by US and allies only, whoever they are.
Articles like this are buried. Only pro Trump articles make the headlines. Tomorrow is Thursday so maybe Justin can tell us more about the Korean summit by the man of peace in the white house.
The best way to stop a schoolyard bully (USA) is for the other kids to gang up and beat the crap out of him.
ISIS, out;
NKorea, out;
next up Russia, and Iran.
It looks more like there is a real sheriff in town for a change.
ISIS is out because of Russia and Shia militias like those from Iran. ISIS was created because of our invasion of Iraq.
Could you give me the details on the nuke deal with North Korea?
The “real sherriff” wants to be friends with Russia, one of the few things he’s right about.
If Trump didn’t take out ISIS, why were the bombing sorties at a higher and much more intense rate than either Bush or Obama?
Why were 2 Marine Artillery brigades sent their?
You are absurd.
Re. the NK, sure, Kim agreed to get rid of all his nuke weapons and will allow us to monitor for verification.
Trump always said he is a negotiator.
Just like with Kim, Trump wants to deal with Putin, what’s your problem with that?
No Russia or Iran or Kurds for that matter, and ISIS would still be in business. We bombed cities to rubble after others did the dirty work. We’re good at bombing.
Is there a text of the deal posted somewhere that I can read? Any sunset clauses? Can Kim have nuclear power plants? Will every inch of North Korea be open for inspection at the demand of the US? Will North Korea be allowed to have any allies?
My problem with Trump meeting with Putin? None. That’s why I said Trump wanting to be friends with Russia was one of the few good things he has done. But you are the one who said Russia and Iran were next up.
The US provided Air and Artillery support for a variety of ground troops from different factions, yes, smart, inexpensive and effective.
Dude, the PRINCIPLES have been agreed to, the details take time.
Yet Kim has already destroyed one test site, release US hostages, opened a dialogue with the South, CANCELLED (!) their annual “Hate America Festival and is scheduled for rounds of meetings to finalize the terms.
Remember, Clinton, Bush and Obama could get to first base, be patient.
Exactly. They gave support. To damn near everyone including al Qaeda. But that means they didn’t do the necessary grunt work that it took to defeat ISIS.
If Trump thought the JCPOA was bad then he must have a more intrusive deal in mind. Something similar to Pompeo’s 12 demands that he made on Iran, to keep the US in that deal, should be included in any deal with North Korea. Will they be? I mean wouldn’t it be appeasement to North Korea and Kim if we don’t demand the same?
Exactly,
US AIR and ARTILLERY defeated ISIS by backing their enemies, SMART!
NK has come to heel,
Iran will also once the full leverage is brought to bear on your theocratic dictatorship that you worship.
let’s see… last ISIS pockets to survive are next to illegal US bases in Syria, they are thriving in Lybia (which the US “liberated”), and “US AIR and ARTILLERY” did exactly nothing for the 4 years they were supposed to fight ISIS, except bomb a deserted Raqqa to rubble after having guaranteed safe-passage to ISIS fighters to the Iraq border. Sure, dream on kid ;).
North Korea has agreed to exactly that: “DPRK commits to work towards
the complete denuclearisation of the Korean peninsula”. Implementing the “freeze-for-freeze” concept pushed by China means that the US will also
progressively stand down with their invasion exercises and “work towards” a real peace treaty. If that’s “coming to heel” for you, you have a problem with basic grammar. But hey, by all means, please keep trolling on!
Sure, seen any new ISIS beheading films lately, no, neither have I.
They are a remnant force, thank you Pres. Trump.
Re. NK, Clinton, Bush and Obama couldn’t get anything.
Kim blinked, he ASKED for the meeting.
NO meeting was granted unless total de-nuclearization was the agreed topic.
Faced with crippling sanction,
skillfully removed Chinese support and
the 7th Fleet, assorted bombers and Seal Team Six practicing decapitation scenarios, you better believe Kim,
“came to heel”.
Right. Backing al Qaeda is “smart”.
Why won’t you answer my question? Will the Korean nuke deal be as intrusive as the JCPOA and shouldn’t a similar list of demands, like Pompeo’s with Iran, be included?
Of course I must “love” the theocratic government of Iran because I don’t want another never ending war. You are a babbling ziocon.
Enemy of my enemy, … Why can’t you comprehend the obvious.
Communist Russia fought with the allies against Germany. most Indian tribes were defeated using other Indians who hated the tribes under attack more than they did whites.
ISIS is neutered and at minimal cost to the US, that’s the only point.
The answer to your question is YES, the NK “deal” will be as intrusive as Pompeo’s Iran demands, just watch.
You continue your slavish, apologetic, support for the theocratic, dictatorial regime and ignore the people protesting the regime in the streets. Hezbollah wants war,
it is not Antiwar,
you are blinded by your hate for Israel.
So al Qaeda attacks us on 9/11 and we invade Iraq although they had nothing to do with 9/11. Our invasion creates a situation where al Qaeda is able to forge a presence in Iraq that ultimately morphs into something even worse, ISIS. So we back al Qaeda rebels to fight the very group we helped create and you think this is SMART. Yes ISIS is neutered while several countries are rubble but to you this was “effective”.
Please tell me how anything I said about Iran could be construed as “slavish, apologetic, support for the theocratic dictatorial regime”. Zionists just can’t handle the truth.
Obama created ISIS and protected it, not smart.
Trump used indigenous locals to demolish ISIS,
by supporting them with air and artillery. It’s very simple, even a millennial might be able to understand it.
Bottom line ISIS (which is Sunni) GONE!
Again, you didn’t address what I said. Our foreign policy is responsible for the creation of al Qaeda and ISIS. Backing one stateless terrorist organization against another stateless terrorist and thinking that will result in anything positive is ludicrous. al Qaeda ultimately wasn’t responsible for ISIS demise but instead it was the Russians and the Shia militias that did the grunt work that did them in. You know those dastardly Shiites that Trump and the Saudi’s want to destroy.
Pitting one jihado group against another is brilliant.
The Russians and Shia militias did their part, but it wasn’t until serious air and artillery power was used (and a change in the ROE) that real progress was achieved. You are just in denial.
Obama funded the “rebels” to oust Assad. We didn’t pit al Qaeda against ISIS, that was a natural occurrence between two extremist groups. Both groups are Sunni. The real change occurred when Russia intervened and turned the war in Assad’s favor. Any air power that the US used against ISIS was helping the shia militias and kurds. The rules of engagement were changed to turn cities into rubble and drive out the already beaten ISIS. Russia did the same in Syria.
Obama assisted ISIS;
Trump with air and artillery support and local fighter destroyed ISIS,
with the Russians, Syrians and Iranians doing the same thing.
I don’t deny that Shiite/Russian and Assad forces were fighting ISIS also.
ISIS was getting it from both sides.
And US casualties the lowest, for a change.
That’s fighting smart.
The US always has the lowest casualties because they fight from the sky. So Trump destroyed ISIS but he needed help from the Russians, Iranians, Syrians and local fighter. So Trump in reality didn’t destroy ISIS because without the others you mentioned, it doesn’t get done. Thank you for finally admitting that.
Trump didn’t “need” anyone.
He needed an agreement for a “de-confliction” zone
so we (the US and Russians didn’t hit each other) and he got it.
But the turning point was US Sp. Forces coordinating with local militias
with air and artillery support.
You’re an idiot. You say Trump didn’t need anyone and then you say the turning point was the “US SP. Forces coordinating with LOCAL MILITIAS. Hilarious.
He didn’t “need” the Russians or Syrians,
because he had the locals,
backed by our Sp. Forces, air and artillery.
You “think” being obtuse is a clever debating strategy.
Bottom line, ISIS gone, at minimum costs.
Just Trump and the Kurds? After all, the Kurds were our allies fighting ISIS in Syria after we stopped backing the rebels(al Qaeda). He didn’t need for Russia to turn the war in Assad’s favor and he didn’t need the Iranian militias or Hezzbollah to do the grunt work?
We weren’t talking about whether ISIS is gone or even if it was done on the cheap, it wasn’t. This is about you saying Trump got rid of ISIS without the “need” of anyone else and you’re wrong.
So thousands of sorties and 2 Marine artillery brigades just sat around waiting for Putin to do the heavy lifting,
is that your “argument”?
Have a glorious FOURTH of JULY!!!
No, my argument was that Trump needed help from the Russians, Iranians, Syrians, Kurds and Shia militias while you said he didn’t “need” anyone other than special ops and local militias. You’re wrong and I’m right.
Trump had to work around those people,
they made the task more complex.
But ultimately the small contributions they made did help.
Man, you just won’t admit you’re wrong. At least you have them making small contributions now. But I find it funny how those CONTRIBUTIONS made Trump’s “task more complex” and he had to work around them. It’s like you don’t even care if you make sense.
Without delicate ‘Non-confliction” negotiations with the Russians and Turks (and their various factions)
it would have been easy to annihilate ISIS.
What happened to the “US Sp. Forces coordinating with local militias” being the turning point? Ending argument: We can annihilate anyone so I’m right.
The last two weeks the markets have been in a down trend.
Last week Trump had been complaining about the rising price of oil.
So, what does he do, he urges allies to stop buying Iranian oil, thus goosing oil prices and oil stocks/markets
He also asked the Saudi to increase output, they agreed.
The markets are nervous about trade, get over it, markets go up and down.
Right, I’m sure he got Bibi’s approval
Only in your bubble.
Who appointed the USA “sheriff” of the world, stokr? If you’re referring to the gunboat diplomacy and outright thuggery that characterize our dealings with the rest of the world, we’re more like a mob boss than a sheriff.
ISIS was attacking us;
Korea was threatening Guam and our allies;
the theocratic dictatorship of Iran (that you apparently support)
preaches “Death to America”;
Putin wants chunks of Eastern Europe and
control of oil pipelines across ME.
Those are aggressive moves by dictators
(your kind of people, apparently).
“ISIS was attacking us;” -> which specific attacks are you referring to?
“Korea was threatening Guam and our allies;” -> you mean meekly answering the regular invasion exercises with nuclear bombers the US love to set up with their boys in South Vie.. Korea (sorry)?
Iran does preach “Death to America”, which I guess would be fair when that America has their dog Saddam invading them with their help, money and arms, or blowing up hundreds of your citizens on an airline flight with a SA missile just “because they could”. Not even talking about regime changes here, kid. Read, don’t watch CNN. Does a lot of good.
which “chunks” of Eastern Europe are you referring to? could you name “them”? because except from Crimea, which is 80% russian, I don’t see them. Oh, and control of oil pipelines across ME? that wouldn’t be the typical US game, now, would it?
ISIS inspired attacks have occurred all over the US and EU.
SK has always issued bellicose warning re. attacks on SK and more recently Guam.
“Death to America” is their go-to rallying cry. You may be sympathetic
but it is encouraged by their Supreme Leader,
only fools, like John “the chump” Kerry would ignore.
Crimea and Eastern Ukraine. If the US leaves a vacuum re. oil pipe lines the Russkies or Chinese will surely fill it, you are naive.
So EU is now under America`s administration. Woao
India has strong economic ties, including large investments, with Iran which it won’t drop.
May 31, 2018 —
India is also buying Russia’s S-400 missile system, causing the US to threaten sanctions for that.
The US is using its position economically to try and strangle Iran completely and render it defenseless and ripe for invasion and conquest. This much is crystal clear. What isn’t clear is the effect this current course of action will have on the dollar economy. Iran doesn’t accept dollars for its oil, as far as I know, so the sanctions against nations that continue trade with Iran would only affect the trade that nation has with the United States. One reason Renault decided to stay in Iran: they don’t do any business with the US…
Will this hasten a slow and reluctant movement away from the US economy as a safe haven for investment?
Blackmail will succeed if the countries which are being bullied back down. It is bad enough that the USA has left an international agreement, but to insist that everyone else destroys Iran, which has done nothing wrong, should not be accepted at all.
“A senior official with the US State Department says …”
Hmmmm. I wonder who the “senior official might be”. A State Dept Neocon, Israeli agent holdover, perhaps? I guess we’ll never know, will we? But if Trump could sweep aside Bolton and Pompeo to make peace with North Korea, he can surely sweep aside this unnamed State Department Neocon hiding in the shadows.