Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JohnM who wrote (16456)	4/10/2006 10:14:23 PM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541755

The more I think of the Gordon and Daadler approach, the less I like it. It has been largely overtaken by events as it does not take into account Russian and Chinese refusal to allow Iran to be sanctioned in a way that would make a difference. Although they don't see Chinese and Russian refusals to be particularly important, the fact of the matter is that they take the prestige of a Security Council resolution out of the picture and makes any nation that acts in concert with the US look like a pariah. I don't see any major western powers getting excited about the notion that they should cut off trade with Iran. This will result simply in their own oil supplies becoming cut off. Plus, the prospect of Iranian nukes is not particularly threatening to them. Now what do we do with this "perfectly reasonable" [your words] approach? Sanctions were a very big part of their program. Once the sanctions regime is gone, IMO the choices become much more limited.