surajmal Posted March 15, 2012 Posted March 15, 2012 U.S. May Sanction India Over Level of Iran-Oil Imports India has failed to reduce its purchases of Iranian oil, and if it doesnÃÕ do so, President Barack Obama may be forced to impose sanctions on one of AsiaÃÔ most important nations, Obama administration officials said yesterday. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-03-15/u-s-may-sanction-india-over-level-of-iran-oil-imports.html Idiot Obama can't possibly be this stupid?
Sehwag1830 Posted March 15, 2012 Posted March 15, 2012 hot air They can't do anything to India apart from supporting terrorism and arming Pak military
surajmal Posted March 15, 2012 Author Posted March 15, 2012 It is funny when Ron Paul is the sane one with respect to foreign policy. Any sanctions would essentially put a cap on future of India-US relations. Sadly, I wouldn't put it past Obama and his posse to take such an action. He has already erased any gains made during the bush era.
yoda Posted March 15, 2012 Posted March 15, 2012 Seems like India is working actively to reduce it's Iranian dependency. Last thing we need is to depend heavily on a country which is busy digging it's own grave.
hari504504 Posted March 15, 2012 Posted March 15, 2012 If US wants to fight Iran - just go ahead and do it. What we buy from Iran is our business and shouldn't be blackmailed on that. Uncle sam must understand we will never be US puppets like Japan. China is buying Iranian oil as well..paying in gold.
Lurker Posted March 15, 2012 Posted March 15, 2012 Bunch of bs. In current scenario US will hardly bother to sanction India. Let it try and see how its already fragile economy collapses further, not to mention the hit strategic depth in Asia will have. This is just one of those media comments driven to pressure India. India and Iran have historical relationship, dont see that changing.
punjabi_khota Posted March 15, 2012 Posted March 15, 2012 Our so called 'historic relations' with Iran don't imply that we support a maniacal crazy ****head of a leader who is hell bent on getting his ego trips through dangerous means. I am betting 90% of Iranian public is ****ing sick of Ahmedanijad, I have met tonnes of Iranians in US and they all hate his guts, and even travelled long distances to cast their ballot against him in DC in 2009. The embargo on Iranian oil will hurt their public in short term, but if it actually leads to some negotiations, it will only be good in longer term, since otherwise there is going to be a war, no two ways about it.
jairamesh Posted March 15, 2012 Posted March 15, 2012 The sanctions look like potential banning dealing with US Banks regarding payments. Is that really anything to fret about?
Lurker Posted March 15, 2012 Posted March 15, 2012 Our so called 'historic relations' with Iran don't imply that we support a maniacal crazy ****head of a leader who is hell bent on getting his ego trips through dangerous means. I am betting 90% of Iranian public is ****ing sick of Ahmedanijad, I have met tonnes of Iranians in US and they all hate his guts, and even travelled long distances to cast their ballot against him in DC in 2009. The embargo on Iranian oil will hurt their public in short term, but if it actually leads to some negotiations, it will only be good in longer term, since otherwise there is going to be a war, no two ways about it. India has openly opposed Iran's nuclear ambition. :fail:
hari504504 Posted March 15, 2012 Posted March 15, 2012 Our so called 'historic relations' with Iran don't imply that we support a maniacal crazy ****head of a leader who is hell bent on getting his ego trips through dangerous means. I am betting 90% of Iranian public is ****ing sick of Ahmedanijad, I have met tonnes of Iranians in US and they all hate his guts, and even travelled long distances to cast their ballot against him in DC in 2009. The embargo on Iranian oil will hurt their public in short term, but if it actually leads to some negotiations, it will only be good in longer term, since otherwise there is going to be a war, no two ways about it. As long as there are nuclear double standards in the middle east.. it won't be resolved peacefully. Thats like India getting nukes and then telling Pak not to develop nukes.
punjabi_khota Posted March 15, 2012 Posted March 15, 2012 India has openly opposed Iran's nuclear ambition. :fail: Lip service :fail: Its pretty clear they are going to get a bomb if nothing is done.
punjabi_khota Posted March 15, 2012 Posted March 15, 2012 As long as there are nuclear double standards in the middle east.. it won't be resolved peacefully. Thats like India getting nukes and then telling Pak not to develop nukes. Well atleast US is trying :dontknow: It is not at all like india and pak. india and pak have had comparable influence in the world, while US/Israel Vs Iran is a mismatch, US can do and is doing much more than whining like us.
Lurker Posted March 15, 2012 Posted March 15, 2012 Lip service :fail: Its pretty clear they are going to get a bomb if nothing is done. Why should India do anything about it anyway? Let those who get affected by this deal with it. Its not like Iran is going to launch Nuclear missiles towards Praveen Kataria (the one on this mb) :winky:
Clarke Posted March 15, 2012 Posted March 15, 2012 I'm sure some middle ground will be reached. KSA/Iraq can compensate for Iranian crude & if China reduces her imports, we'll not be the only ones to hold fort.
surajmal Posted March 15, 2012 Author Posted March 15, 2012 Problem with cutting ties with Iran is that, it is an integral part of future Indian plans in Central Asia. Unless Balochistan break off from pakistan, Iran is the key. So it is not as simple as trying to switch suppliers of crude. I'm pretty sure IFS will give US the middle finger (if they have a voice in this matter). There is no point in looking towards the spineless congress' leadership to guide India through this sticky situation.
Clarke Posted March 15, 2012 Posted March 15, 2012 But then we managed to carry on with the Iranians despite voting against them in the IAEA resolution. Surely if a Chinese bank can back off from an Iranian gas pipeline project, we can't be the last ones clinging on to them. I am hoping India will still be able to maintain decent links with Iran and they will understand our limitations as a developing nation. Relations may not be as strong as either party might want but as is often said, we must not let perfect be the enemy of good.
hari504504 Posted March 16, 2012 Posted March 16, 2012 Like someone else quoted in another forum - India rose to where it is now after being resilient under US sanctions post-nuclear tests. We don't need to bow down to anyone. India can't simply slam Iran as an enemy - those nukes don't really affect us at all. Like Ron Paul rightly said, Iran is Israel's problem - stop playing big brother everywhere, Obama is a **** if he thinks Iran is NorthKorea and sanctions will bring them to the negotiations table.
yoda Posted March 16, 2012 Posted March 16, 2012 yea right, let's be friends with a nutter nation calling itself the Islamic Republic of Iran and get into a fight with the second largest democracy in the world. That's the way to go!
hari504504 Posted March 16, 2012 Posted March 16, 2012 Spreading Islamophobia ..all day all year ! --thats the way to go clearly .
yoda Posted March 16, 2012 Posted March 16, 2012 Spreading Islamophobia ..all day all year ! --thats the way to go clearly . any country which is based on religion is nutter in my opinion, cause they have no tolerance for those who don't practice their religion and will stab you in the back as a favor to another nutter nation of their own religion, read P@kistan. same goes for the Jewish state of Israel except that in their case they are just alone, and hence less dangerous.
Recommended Posts