this post was submitted on 11 Sep 2024
86 points (96.7% liked)

World News

38978 readers
3114 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The US, UK, France and Germany have announced new sanctions on Iran, formally accusing it of sending ballistic missiles to Russia for the first time after weeks of warnings. They plan to sanction the aviation sector.

all 15 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] HamsterRage@lemmy.ca 12 points 1 month ago (2 children)

I think there might be a better way to deliver "ballistic missiles to Russia".

[–] rockerface@lemm.ee 5 points 1 month ago

We only wait for permission, believe me

[–] Valmond@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

I heard it's in the makings!

[–] aeronmelon@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago (2 children)

What is the deal with writing headlines that don’t come across as valid English? ‘Cave Man’ speak is easier to read.

“For Their Transfer of Ballistic Missiles to Russia, the US and Multiple European Countries Impose New Sanctions Against Iran.”

Easy.

[–] Shard@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Why waste time say lot word when few word do trick?

[–] rockerface@lemm.ee 3 points 1 month ago

Could be a genuine artifact of the movable type era, to save on the ink and paper space

[–] aeronmelon@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Eloquently put.

[–] Saleh@feddit.org -2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I doubt that they care much.

Trump broke the JCPOA and sanctioned Iran randomly. Then after a brief time of lip services from the European countries they also fell in line with Trump to sanction Iran. Biden was happy to continue Trumps policy.
Instead of stabilizing the region and opening Iran to the West, which was probably Obamas greatest diplomatic achievement, they doubled down on pushing Iran to China and Russia.

Iran was heavily sanctioned before. They didn't budge, because they know the US to be lying traitors and the Europeans to just do the bidding of the US. Adding more sanctions on top now will not change that.

Unless the US and Europeans develop some resemblance of political quality of the Obama administration, there is no reason for Tehran to listen to either of them.

[–] nonailsleft@lemm.ee 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Tbh the idea under Obama to bait the Iranians to drop their religious nuclear nutjobbery with money was naive at best. Even under the agreement, they were doing everything they could to advance towards nukes.

[–] Saleh@feddit.org 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The IEA and everybody else involved in the oversight disagrees.

Also "Iran is one year from developing a nuke" was the go to scare headline for like the past decade.

[–] nonailsleft@lemm.ee 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

They just shifted their resources to the missile development side of the puzzle, and the deal itself would only limit their uranium enrichment for 15 years. It just kicked the can down the road to 2031 for Iran to have their nukes 'legally'.

[–] Saleh@feddit.org 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

This is just nonsense, i am sorry. 15 years is a long time. The goal was to establish diplomatic ties with Iran again. Instead the US pushed for military hostility. Also it is cynical to demand Iran to have no missiles while the US is stationing missiles in bases and ships in the region.

[–] nonailsleft@lemm.ee 3 points 1 month ago

I can agree that it's debatable whether it was a good idea, but how is it 'nonsense' that the fact that sunset clause makes the deal very awkward? Why do you think the Iranians wanted it in, if not for the freedom to just develop nukes later?

Also the Iranian regime think they have a good shot at going to paradise because they allow men to rape their child brides, amongst other horrific shit. I can see the case we don't want these kind of people with the power of nuclear weapons.

[–] MediaBiasFactChecker@lemmy.world -4 points 1 month ago

DW News - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for DW News:

MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - Germany
Wikipedia about this source

Search topics on Ground.Newshttps://www.dw.com/en/ballistic-missiles-to-russia-us-europe-sanction-iran/a-70181326
Media Bias Fact Check | bot support