5 Iran tankers sailing to Venezuela amid US pressure tactics

Incidentally, this video -- while focusing on steel production historically -- nonetheless does a great job showing the historical ups and downs in the actual economic and manufacturing power in the world, even if the current Ponzi-scheme that is the global economic system underpinned by the US $, and its profits and losses, aren't based on any real productive output at all.

 

This is a rather bold and, above all, questionable claim that is not really sharedby more as clear majority that way outside the US border!
You are ... the ancient Greeks from onmce put aside ... for sure the oldest democracy so far ... but not more as that.

And you have definitely not been a role model for the rest of the world for a long time. Apart from the numerous grievances and problems in your country ... you have partly supported and protected the worst dictatorships of the Nazis in the world, as long as these regimes turned out to be anti-communist or in some other way crawled deep inside the butt of the United States.
There you have been and continue to be a really great role model of how to prevent and suppress freedom, democracy and the rule of law.
For example, you Americans give still a damn about that Saudi Arabia is everything but not even a hint of democracy etc. Or let's take Egypt, where you have supported the dictator Mubarak over the years until he couldn't hold out in the wake of the so-called "Arab Spring". Then there were free, democratic elections for the first time ... but unfortunately someone won, whom you can't accept at all and who was admittedly bad in my eyes. But it was the decision of the Egyptians. Pormpt then the Egyptian army put the election winner away and that the USA was behind the coup is as safe as amen in a Christian church.
And I don't have to mention all the El Presidente in Central and South America which you supported, or do I?
Or let's take the Honduran coup in 2009, against the president who was completely democratically elected, even according to your ratings ... where the United States was again behind the coup because this president became uncomfortable for you. Everyone in the world, your enemies and friends, have condemned this coup and ALL states from Central and South America have withdrawn their ambassadors and do not recognize the new regime ... only the USA does.

The Contras were clearly terrorists who were illegally funded and supported by you even under your own laws. But since they were fighting against the evil Communists (Sandinista) in Nicaragua, you and many other Americans do not consider them as terrorists once or today, but rather as heroic freedom fighters.
Really great heroes involved in drug trafficking, torture, mass murder, rape, terror bombings and other bad things! Not that the Sandinista were better, but what the Contras did was completely irrelevant or is still denied by many Americans till today.
Oh yes ... Contras and Iran, there was something there under Reagan, isn't it?

 

Back to the topic:

According to The Wall Street Journal and Fox, 2 ships that were to arrive after the flotilla of 5 carried supplies to Venezuela, were forced to cancel when the country they were registered in was threatened with sanctions.

It is understood that the two vessels were the Bering and the Bella. Both are registered in Liberia and owned by Greek shippers. They were supposed to arrive in Venezuela after a five-tanker flotilla that was scrambled to supply fuel, additives and spare parts for Venezuelan refineries. The first four Iranian tankers from that flotilla have already safely docked in Venezuela, and the fifth is still en route.

As first reported by The WSJ, the Bering and the Bella were forced to turn back after US officials contacted the Liberian government and threatened with sanctions should they proceed with the delivery. They also have been in direct communication with the ships and threatened their Greek owners with sanctions and legal action, according to the report.​

Liberia is said to have immediately revoked the ships' accreditation; otherwise, they would lose access to international banking and maritime insurance. The ships were reportedly heading south off the coast of Senegal near Liberia on Thursday.

​

​

Sanctions guys is what I am,
or I wouldn't be Sam - Jeannette


​

​

 

I mentioned these reports in an earlier post, but since 4 of the 5 vessels have already docked, and since I have not yet seen in further confirmation of these reports by anyone else anywhere, for now I am skeptical these reports by FOX/WSJ are correct. In fact, a few hours ago after that report by FOX/WSJ, there was a picture of the 4th tanker docked in an Iranian media outlet:


I suggest we wait and see. I haven't seen any other major media outlet or wire service report touch this claim so far, while many have reported the 4th tanker has docked in Venezuela waters.

 

How can you say the nomad Arabs from the Gulf, were the same as the people that lived in Syria, Palestine, Lebanon, etc. Wouldn't that be the same as saying the German tribes couldn't have invaded Rome since they both spoke Indo European languages and therefore were the same people?

The indigenous people in the Near East, Middle East and N. Africa were the Christians, since it was part of the Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantine Empire). Most though were ethnically cleansed in the past 100 years. It's still going on. Before that, they were probably the majority in most areas.

 

You substituted your narrative for an honest answer to my question.
Care to try again?

 

https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2020/06/flight-iran-venezuela.html#ixzz6Or2nwQ2W
Aid flight arrives from Iran to Venezuela despite continued US pressure

 

And no one noticed.

 

Those who were supposed to notice, noticed it for sure. After all, the Venezuela government thanked Iran for the assistance it has been offering and delivering. If you mean Iran's enemies didn't notice, they noticed too. Not much they can do, other than pretend to being doing something, with more 'sanctions' which repeat in specific designation what they had already 'sanctioned' generally.

 

Thanks.

 

Since Venezuela is also under maximum pressure by the US, it is one of those countries which can work more openly with Iran without having to worry about "US" sanctions being imposed on it.

https://abcnews.go.com/Internationa...pment-food-venezuela-latest-delivery-71373829
Iran sends shipment of food to Venezuela in latest delivery
Iranian officials say one of their cargo ships is expected to dock in Venezuela loaded with food to launch the first Iranian supermarket in the South American nation

 

We have a carrier and MEUs stationed off its coast?
We've enacted, and are enforcing, an blockade of their ports?
No?
Your statement has no basis in reality.

 

LOL
Which part of my "statement"? My statement, in its entirety, was uncharacteristically short, as follows:

If you are referring the so-called "maximum pressure" campaign against Iran and Venezuela mentioned in my passage, then you need to make your points with the Trump administration. That is the label they have coined for their policies of sanctions and bullying everyone else to not to engage in trade with Iran. And the label they also sometimes use for somewhat similar (but far less comprehensive or stringent) policies against Venezuela as well.

 

delete

 

I quoted the part of your statement that has no basis in reality:

 

If you think the statement you quoted has no basis in 'reality' because of what you mention, then I suggest you take that up with the Trump administration officals who use the same label they have coined for US policy on Iran to apply to Venezuela as well.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...on-venezuela-sanctions-official-idUSKCN1RA0A3
U.S. bringing 'maximum pressure' on Venezuela: sanctions official

 

You claimed "maximum pressure".
This is -obviously- not true as considerably more pressure could be applied.
Thus, your statement has no basis in reality.

 

I used a label that the Trump administration uses to describe its policies.

 

And you chose to use a label you knew was wrong.

 

It is a label and as such it stands to mean (without requiring anyone to list them) a slew of measures against Iran and, these days, many similar ones against Venezuela. I didn't invent the label, the Trump administration did. This argument to me is nonsense. A waste of time.

 

Maximum:
adjective: maximum
as great, high, or intense as possible or permitted.

You know the US is able to apply more pressure than it currently does.
Thus, you know you chose to use a term that has no basis in reality.

But, I understand - absent anything of substance, you are forced to revert to hyperbole.

 

Since I didn't invent the label, but rather is the description of US policies by the US government itself, the semantic arguments should be addressed to them.

But as for the substance of the matter, lets be clear: the US was debating taking measures of a more forceful nature (such as seizing the Iranian tankers) to prevent trade between the two sides. And Iran told the US that if it does so, Iran would seize US vessels that operate in our region of the world.

 

Your post:



Where do you make reference to the characterization of US efforts to be anyone but yours?
Did you put the tem in quotes?
Did you add 'as said by the Trump administration"?
No.
It's YOUR term. You CHOSE to use a term you knew had no basis in reality.
Why do you choose to use terms you know have no basis is reality?

Cite the source, quote the text

As if the US cannot prevent this.

 

The thing that has 'no basis in reality' is your arguments about a well known label that is applied by the US to its measures against Iran and Venezuela. Otherwise, if you had simply said that I should put "maximum pressure" in quotes because it isn't really the 'maximum' the US could do, I could have then responded on the more substantive points below.

I have cited the reports on the issue here previously. You can find them if you wish. Or maybe this article will let you understand what happened better (although I doubt anything can help you understand things better
https://www.ft.com/content/4cf1a2d4-28d8-4280-b186-3abd63907556
‘If you hit us, we’ll hit back’: Iran’s message to US with Venezuela oil shipments

A more recent report gives the spin by the revolutionary guards on the whole thing
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020...uel-shipment-top-general-200611075123852.html
Iran 'imposed its will' with Venezuela fuel shipment: Top general

There is a whole thread about what would happen in case of war with Iran (see below). You can go there and spout your views. I am not going to rehash what is already been discussed there, here once again.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/hypothetical-war-with-iran.571723/page-10

 

It does not matter how you try to cover the fact you chose to use a term you knew was not true - you chose to use a term you knew was not true.

Ah.
You know full well the US can prevent Iran from seizing US ships.
Good.