Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Aviation Sanctions Against Iran Designed To Kill  
User currently offlineflightfan4ever From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (1 year 10 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 2079 times:

There is an excellent article by Professor Karim Pakravan in the Huffington Post, which touches upon US aviation sanctions against Iran:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/karim-...ctions-the-case-f_0_b_1951074.html

To quote from the article:

"About 20 years ago, in my banking career, I was talking to a Treasury official about the impact of some of these sanctions on the average Iranian. As an example, I stated that the lack of spare parts for civilian aircraft was creating a danger for Iranians flying on the national airline, and could lead to deadly crashes. His blunt answer was that it was exactly the intent. It seems to me that the American political class has adopted a similar attitude today".

So the intent of the US aviation sanctions against airlines in Iran is to cause deadly crashes. How disgraceful.

24 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4590 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (1 year 10 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 2075 times:

Quoting flightfan4ever (Thread starter):
There is an excellent article by Professor Karim Pakravan in the Huffington Post, which touches upon US aviation sanctions against Iran:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/karim-...ctions-the-case-f_0_b_1951074.html

To quote from the article:

"About 20 years ago, in my banking career, I was talking to a Treasury official about the impact of some of these sanctions on the average Iranian. As an example, I stated that the lack of spare parts for civilian aircraft was creating a danger for Iranians flying on the national airline, and could lead to deadly crashes. His blunt answer was that it was exactly the intent. It seems to me that the American political class has adopted a similar attitude today".

So the intent of the US aviation sanctions against airlines in Iran is to cause deadly crashes. How disgraceful.

You know what is disgraceful?
The fact that the Iranians are putting so much money into nuclear power, when they can't even fix a plane.



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlinejetblueguy22 From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 2788 posts, RR: 4
Reply 2, posted (1 year 10 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 2071 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD MODERATOR

The article cites a Treasury official. For all we know this could be a guy who files reports. The article is meant to hurt their aviation sector, but imagine the outcry if one of those planes did crash because Boeing wouldn't sell them say a fuel pump. The American people don't want Iranians to die, they want them to stop making a bomb that could kill many more people.
Blue



You push down on that yoke, the houses get bigger, you pull back on the yoke, the houses get bigger- Ken Foltz
User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4590 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (1 year 10 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 2066 times:

Quoting jetblueguy22 (Reply 2):
The article cites a Treasury official. For all we know this could be a guy who files reports. The article is meant to hurt their aviation sector, but imagine the outcry if one of those planes did crash because Boeing wouldn't sell them say a fuel pump. The American people don't want Iranians to die, they want them to stop making a bomb that could kill many more people.
Blue

If they fly the plane without a fuel pump, then they are failing to do mtc and grounding the plane. That would be on operational issue on their part.



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29795 posts, RR: 58
Reply 4, posted (1 year 10 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 2066 times:

To quote Col. Potter, Horse-nuggets!

The Iranians have the option of not flying the aircraft if they think they are unsafe. If a plane crashes becayse of lack od spares it was because they chose to fly it.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlinefr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5400 posts, RR: 14
Reply 5, posted (1 year 10 months 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 2019 times:

Let's be clear on this: the point of sanctions is to make life hard. Not only on the government, but on the people, also.

The Iranians don't have to fly the aircraft in question.



When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
User currently offlineflightfan4ever From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (1 year 10 months 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 1974 times:

Quoting casinterest (Reply 1):

You know what is disgraceful?
The fact that the Iranians are putting so much money into nuclear power, when they can't even fix a plane.

With respect, you not appear to understand the intent of the sanctions:

Quoting flightfan4ever (Thread starter):
"About 20 years ago, in my banking career, I was talking to a Treasury official about the impact of some of these sanctions on the average Iranian. As an example, I stated that the lack of spare parts for civilian aircraft was creating a danger for Iranians flying on the national airline, and could lead to deadly crashes. His blunt answer was that it was exactly the intent. It seems to me that the American political class has adopted a similar attitude today".

The intent is discraceful.


User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4590 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (1 year 10 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 1969 times:

Quoting flightfan4ever (Reply 6):
With respect, you not appear to understand the intent of the sanctions:

The sactions are there to punish Iran for it's indiffernce to the world's concerns. It is not the rest of the world's worry to concern itself with the aviation industry in Iran, If they are sanctioned, they can either build their own with their own resources, or stop flying
.



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12471 posts, RR: 25
Reply 8, posted (1 year 10 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 1958 times:

Quoting flightfan4ever (Reply 6):
The intent is discraceful.

Yes, it is disgraceful and even worse for the Iranian authorities to authorize flights that might not meet acceptable safety standards. Why do you think they do that?



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineflightfan4ever From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (1 year 10 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 1928 times:

Quoting casinterest (Reply 7):
The sactions are there to punish Iran for it's indiffernce to the world's concerns. It is not the rest of the world's worry to concern itself with the aviation industry in Iran, If they are sanctioned, they can either build their own with their own resources, or stop flying

"Worlds concerns" give me a break...So far after all these years there has yet to be any evidence ever shown (Iraq deja vu) to provide a valid and logical basis for the "Worlds concerns". What we have instead is fearmongering and baseless paranoia spread by entities who are unable to provide a single shred of evidence to back up their claims.

I am a firm believer in the philosophy and spirit of habeas corpus. Relating this to the Iranian nuclear power program, where there is an objection, or concern, such matters should in the spirit of habeas corpus, be brought before a judge, which in this case is the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to objectively assess the facts and evidence.

For those of you who are willing to reach a verdict before objective consideration of relevant evidence, please consider the following questions:

* As a supposedly impartial organization under the mandate of the UN, why has the IAEA dismally failed to confront Israel regarding Israel's covert nuclear weapons program? Surely I'm not the only one who finds this to be strange?

* How credible is the IAEA as a regulatory body, and for that matter, are UN weapons inspectors, based upon their previous shameful failures in implementing an objective anlaysis of Iraq's alleged nuclear / weapons of mass destruction program? I.e. why was the "concerned world" lead to believe that Iraq possesed nuclear weapons / WMD's without the existence of a SINGLE PIECE of irrefutible evidence?

* Why is the "concerned world" unable to see that the same flawed logic and illegitimate tactics that were used to invade Iraq, are being maneuvered into place as a basis for launching an illigitimate attack on Iran?

* What objective evidence has been supplied so far indicating that Iran's nuclear energy program is anything but peaceful?

* What IAEA inspections have taken place so far at regional nuclear facilities including those of Israel, Pakistan and India?

* Why have successive US presidents and presidential candidates, including (wannabe Romney) failed to confront Israel over it's possession of nuclear weapons in such a volatile region of the world?

The list can go on and on, but logical responses BACKED UP WITH EVIDENCE to the above points will suffice in determining the legitimacy of the "worlds concerns". If you are unable to provide evidence to back up your "concerns" then you simply have NO CASE - and that's the way it should be.


User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4590 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (1 year 10 months 4 weeks ago) and read 1875 times:

Quoting flightfan4ever (Reply 9):

"Worlds concerns" give me a break...So far after all these years there has yet to be any evidence ever shown (Iraq deja vu) to provide a valid and logical basis for the "Worlds concerns". What we have instead is fearmongering and baseless paranoia spread by entities who are unable to provide a single shred of evidence to back up their claims.

A president that denies the holocaust and calls for the anhilation of Israel is enough worldly concern that they should not and can not be trusted with Nuclear power.

The rest of your response is not pertenant to the discussion, and my answer still stands. If they are so woried about aviation issues, they can stop flying if they have no interest in pursuing rational discourse on the Nuclear questions.



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7496 posts, RR: 18
Reply 11, posted (1 year 10 months 4 weeks ago) and read 1875 times:

Quoting flightfan4ever (Thread starter):
Huffington Post

Aaaaaaaaaand I immediately stop reading. They're not "news." They're just ignorant.

Quoting casinterest (Reply 1):
The fact that the Iranians are putting so much money into nuclear power, when they can't even fix a plane.

   Bingo. They have all their priorities screwed up

Quoting flightfan4ever (Reply 9):
* How credible is the IAEA as a regulatory body, and for that matter, are UN weapons inspectors, based upon their previous shameful failures in implementing an objective anlaysis of Iraq's alleged nuclear / weapons of mass destruction program?

It's because Iraq was also as screwed up as Iran was when it came to nuke matters. Since they didn't have any I don't know why they just didn't let the IAEA in in the first place. It makes no sense.



次は、渋谷、渋谷。出口は、右側です。電車とホームの間は広く開いておりますので、足元に注意下さい。
User currently offlineflightfan4ever From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 1845 times:

Quoting casinterest (Reply 10):
A president that denies the holocaust and calls for the anhilation of Israel is enough worldly concern that they should not and can not be trusted with Nuclear power.

Mahmaoud Ahmadinejad's comments concerning Israel have been widely mistranslated. If you choose to form your opinions based upon mistranslations by the media then I pity you:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud...and_Israel#Translation_controversy

Quoting casinterest (Reply 10):
The rest of your response is not pertenant to the discussion, and my answer still stands.

Lol, as you are clearly unable to grasp the concepts of evidence and habeas corpus, and apparently form your opinions based on flawed media translations, exactly what pertinant contributions are you making to this thread? Simply put, if you wish to accuse somebody of doing something you need to show evidence in order to be taken seriously.


User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15735 posts, RR: 27
Reply 13, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 1822 times:

Quoting flightfan4ever (Thread starter):
I stated that the lack of spare parts for civilian aircraft was creating a danger for Iranians flying on the national airline, and could lead to deadly crashes.

...is not the same as...

Quoting flightfan4ever (Thread starter):
Aviation Sanctions Against Iran Designed To Kill  

The sanctions are indeed designed to cause danger. Because of that, the Iranians would either not fly or passengers would be hesitant to fly knowing the aircraft are not properly maintained. The inability to have safe and reliable air travel is indeed a significant hardship and hopefully stifles economic activity, which is the whole point of the sanctions.

If we wanted to kill Iranians, we'd just shoot them. The Navy got one unintentionally anyway.

Quoting flightfan4ever (Reply 12):
Lol, as you are clearly unable to grasp the concepts of evidence and habeas corpus

There is no habeas corpus for states. States are the highest authorities on the planet, no supranational organization can enforce any sort of due process between countries. If Canada wants to sanction Andorra because the prime minister thinks their flag is ugly, they can and no organization can stop them. Other states could take action in response, like sanctions against Canada, bombing, or an outright invasion but again, those decisions lie solely with states.

And in fact, that's more or less exactly what happened with Iran. They don't have to let anyone inspect anything, but their refusal to do so led the US to sanction them.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineflightfan4ever From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 1818 times:

Quoting flightfan4ever (Reply 12):
They don't have to let anyone inspect anything, but their refusal to do so led the US to sanction them.

Currently all nuclear energy sites in Iran are open to IAEA inspectors, so I'm not sure what you are driving at?


User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15735 posts, RR: 27
Reply 15, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 1810 times:

Quoting flightfan4ever (Reply 14):
Currently all nuclear energy sites in Iran are open to IAEA inspectors, so I'm not sure what you are driving at?

The ones people know about anyway.

The point is that Iran can embark on whatever nuclear program they wish. However, other states are free to not like it and use whatever leverage they have against Iran, up to and including the use of force, to stop it.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9340 posts, RR: 29
Reply 16, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 1808 times:

Quoting flightfan4ever (Reply 9):
which in this case is the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to objectively assess the facts and evidence.
Quoting flightfan4ever (Reply 14):
Currently all nuclear energy sites in Iran are open to IAEA inspectors, so I'm not sure what you are driving at?

you are joking, right? Iran is playing cats and mouse with the IAEA since years. If it wasn't sad, one could write a Monthy-Pythonish comedy about how Iran is messing around with that institution.

Sad enough that the world is risking, with open eyes, sanctions or not, that insane religious fanatics, without any democratic control, get a hold of nuclear bombs, if nothing happens real soon.



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlineflightfan4ever From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 1803 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 15):

The point is that Iran can embark on whatever nuclear program they wish. However, other states are free to not like it and use whatever leverage they have against Iran, up to and including the use of force, to stop it.

As a signatory of the NPT (unlike Israel, India or Pakistan) Iran is OBLIGED to refrain from nuclear weapons development -therefore it is simply not correct to state that "they can embark on whatever nuclear program they wish".

Futhermore, if other states suspect that an infringement of the NPT is taking place, then they need to show REAL evidence (not FAKE evidence used to launch an invasion on Iraq) to back up their suspicions and claims. If they are unable to produce irrefutible evidence that nuclear weapons are being developed, then they have ZERO MANDATE to attack another country. Doing so would be the equivalent to executing somebody simply because you suspected them of committing an offence.

So far ZERO evidence has been provided (aside from Netanyahu's pathetic cartoon bomb...) demonstrating that Iran is in violation of its obligations under the NPT.


User currently offlinecedarjet From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 8093 posts, RR: 54
Reply 18, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 1803 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 11):
It's because Iraq was also as screwed up as Iran was when it came to nuke matters. Since they didn't have any I don't know why they just didn't let the IAEA in in the first place.

No, they DID let them in, you will recall inspections in the 90s which were ended because the inspection team was so riven by CIA spies (true) that Iraq expelled them. In the lead up to the 2003 invasion, Iraq provided a full declaration of it's weaponry and a day before the deadline imposed upon them; and allowed inspection teams complete access. It was the US that pulled the teams out of the country. This repeated nonsense about Saddam "bluffing" has never made the slightest bit of sense to me - Iraq always insisted they DIDN'T have the weapons and that turned out to be totally true. Where's the bluff?

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 16):
Sad enough that the world is risking, with open eyes, sanctions or not, that insane religious fanatics, without any democratic control, get a hold of nuclear bombs, if nothing happens real soon.

Shows how brainwashed we are. Iran has no nuclear weapons programme and repeatedly and consistently states it doesn't want one. The National Intelligence Estimate, which is a committee that all 16 or 17 US intel services report to, states every year that Iran does not have a nuclear weapons programme. Israel's NIE equivalent says the same thing.



fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
User currently offlineflightfan4ever From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 1780 times:

Quoting cedarjet (Reply 18):
Shows how brainwashed we are. Iran has no nuclear weapons programme and repeatedly and consistently states it doesn't want one. The National Intelligence Estimate, which is a committee that all 16 or 17 US intel services report to, states every year that Iran does not have a nuclear weapons programme. Israel's NIE equivalent says the same thing.

Finally some words of wisdom, thank you friend.


User currently offlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9340 posts, RR: 29
Reply 20, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 1760 times:

Quoting cedarjet (Reply 18):
Shows how brainwashed we are. Iran has no nuclear weapons programme and repeatedly

...and Snow White is not a fairy tale and Adolf Hitler was Jewish.

What they need the centrifuges for then? Why do they locate all this macheriery required to build the bomb deep under the ground?
Brainwashed yes, certainly not me.



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8840 posts, RR: 24
Reply 21, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1724 times:

Quoting cedarjet (Reply 18):
Shows how brainwashed we are. Iran has no nuclear weapons programme and repeatedly and consistently states it doesn't want one. The National Intelligence Estimate, which is a committee that all 16 or 17 US intel services report to, states every year that Iran does not have a nuclear weapons programme. Israel's NIE equivalent says the same thing.
http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomac...toward-nuclear-capability-1.456921

Quote:
President Barack Obama recently received a new National Intelligence Estimate report on the Iranian nuclear program, which shares Israel's view that Iran has made surprising, significant progress toward military nuclear capability, Western diplomats and Israeli officials have informed Haaretz.

This NIE report on Iran was supposed to have been submitted to Obama a few weeks ago, but it was revised to include new and alarming intelligence information about military components of Iran's nuclear program. Haaretz has learned that the report's conclusions are quite similar to those drawn by Israel's intelligence community.

The NIE report contends that Iran has made surprising, notable progress in the research and development of key components of its military nuclear program.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15735 posts, RR: 27
Reply 22, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 1680 times:

Quoting flightfan4ever (Reply 17):
As a signatory of the NPT (unlike Israel, India or Pakistan) Iran is OBLIGED to refrain from nuclear weapons development -therefore it is simply not correct to state that "they can embark on whatever nuclear program they wish".

Their a sovereign state, they can do whatever they wish and then change their minds and do something else. It isn't like there's a sanctioning body that can fine them or something.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6618 posts, RR: 9
Reply 23, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 1606 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 13):
And in fact, that's more or less exactly what happened with Iran. They don't have to let anyone inspect anything, but their refusal to do so led the US to sanction them.

Can Iran visit US installations ? Can I ?

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 20):
...and Snow White is not a fairy tale and Adolf Hitler was Jewish.

What they need the centrifuges for then? Why do they locate all this macheriery required to build the bomb deep under the ground?
Brainwashed yes, certainly not me.

They need the centrifuges to refine uranium for a civilian reactor. And they do it under ground because Israel openly says it will bomb the installations and has already done so in the past in Iraq.



New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15735 posts, RR: 27
Reply 24, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 1603 times:

Quoting Aesma (Reply 23):
Can Iran visit US installations ?

Nope. But if they really hate it that much they can refuse to do business with America.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
UN Passes Sanctions Against Iran posted Sat Dec 23 2006 21:43:18 by RJpieces
Iran Paying Taliban To Kill U.S. Troops posted Sun Sep 5 2010 13:09:58 by flanker
UN To Relax Sanctions Against Iraq posted Fri May 10 2002 11:17:59 by SAS23
Big Mall Near JFK Airport To Kill A Few Hours posted Thu Dec 16 2010 11:22:59 by teahan
Iran Threatens To Escort Gaza Blockade Runners posted Sun Jun 6 2010 20:15:38 by Dreadnought
Mom Forces Son To Kill Pet With Hammer posted Sat Jan 23 2010 22:36:15 by Alias1024
Iran Planning To Build 10 Nuclear Facilities posted Sun Nov 29 2009 15:14:19 by FuturePilot16
What If Iran Were To Sell Their Nuclear Weapons? posted Wed Sep 30 2009 10:16:09 by Slider
Islamist Gangs Use Internet To Kill Iraqi Gays posted Mon Sep 14 2009 11:36:52 by ManuCH
Lyme Disease Is About To Kill My Friend posted Sun Feb 8 2009 04:30:03 by PC12Fan
UN To Relax Sanctions Against Iraq posted Fri May 10 2002 11:17:59 by SAS23
Big Mall Near JFK Airport To Kill A Few Hours posted Thu Dec 16 2010 11:22:59 by teahan
Iran Threatens To Escort Gaza Blockade Runners posted Sun Jun 6 2010 20:15:38 by Dreadnought
Mom Forces Son To Kill Pet With Hammer posted Sat Jan 23 2010 22:36:15 by Alias1024
Iran Planning To Build 10 Nuclear Facilities posted Sun Nov 29 2009 15:14:19 by FuturePilot16
What If Iran Were To Sell Their Nuclear Weapons? posted Wed Sep 30 2009 10:16:09 by Slider
Islamist Gangs Use Internet To Kill Iraqi Gays posted Mon Sep 14 2009 11:36:52 by ManuCH