Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Monday October 23 2017, @02:06AM   Printer-friendly
from the We-have-always-been-at-war-with-Eurasia dept.

Iran Doesn't Have a Nuclear Weapons Program. Why Do Media Keep Saying It Does?

When it comes to Iran, do basic facts matter? Evidently not, since dozens and dozens of journalists keep casually reporting that Iran has a "nuclear weapons program" when it does not—a problem FAIR has reported on over the years (e.g., 9/9/15). Let's take a look at some of the outlets spreading this falsehood in just the past five days:

Business Insider (10/13/17): "The deal, officially called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), aims to incentivize Iran to curb its nuclear weapons program by lifting crippling international economic sanctions."

New Yorker (10/16/17): "One afternoon in late September, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson called a meeting of the six countries that came together in 2015 to limit Iran's nuclear weapons program."

Washington Post (10/16/17): "The administration is also considering changing or scrapping an international agreement regarding Iran's nuclear weapons program."

CNN (10/17/17): "In reopening the nuclear agreement, [Trump] risks having Iran advance its nuclear weapons program at a time when he confronts a far worse nuclear challenge from North Korea that he can't resolve."

The problem with all of these excerpts: There is no documentation that Iran has a nuclear weapons program.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 23 2017, @08:31AM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 23 2017, @08:31AM (#586231)

    Iran may be tempted not to escalate the issue outside the deal if the vetoer buy their petrol preferentially.

    They don't need to buy it preferentially. And it's not just about oil. Iran needs external investment and it needs trade with outside world. It has certain resources it can export beyond oil, and it needs other resources from outside to grow.

    But yes, China has already been very active in all sectors of Iranian economy. The problem is European and other international businesses are weary because morons like Trump can slap *them* with sanctions if they go against US's unilateral sanctions. And US market is still much more important than anything Iran can provide.

  • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday October 23 2017, @10:23AM

    by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Monday October 23 2017, @10:23AM (#586254) Journal

    The problem is European and other international businesses are weary because morons like Trump can slap *them* with sanctions if they go against US's unilateral sanctions.

    China's One belt one road [wikipedia.org] initiative.
    Here's a map with country names on [smh.com.au]
    So, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Iran, Turkey, Europe.

    Now, Iran will be the gateway to the Gulf's oil - something tells me China will side with Iran the same way Russia sided with Syria**. Let's look a bit on what's happening around.
    Ah, yes,Aramco [wikipedia.org] (100% owned by Saudis) plans a float in 2018 [ft.com] China may or may not buy a share into it (I bet it will), but... there are some troubles there:

    While New York is being considered for the primary listing, US legislation that allows families of victims of the 9/11 attacks to sue Saudi has complicated matters.

    Ooops. The Brexiters also have a pain with this float [qz.com] - only 5% of Aramco is planned to be floated this round, and London exchange rules want at least 25% for listing.
    We'll see if China offers or not better conditions in HK exchange as the IPO launching place - if it does, I'm quite afraid that this can non-ambiguously interpreted as China courting the Saudis... which, if this happens, may slip slowly out of the traditional partnership with US; if this happens, one can ask when (not if) we'll see petro-yuans coexisting with petrodollars. Should I go ahead an explore what the notion of petro-yuans would mean?

    ---

    ** you hear the deafening silence in the news about Syria coming just about after Trump sent those rockets into that Syrian base? I wonder why, but beyond that wonder a thing is clear: US suddenly "lost interest" in Syria and Russia can have what it seeks there.

    --
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford