Turkey and Brazil Humiliated!
Gary Sick blog / Gary Sick
19-May-2010 (5 comments)

Well, that didn’t take long.

In my previous note (yesterday, below) I wondered if we were smart enough to declare victory and take yes as an answer from Tehran. Today, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, announced that a new package of sanctions against Iran had been approved by the major powers and would be sent to the UN Security Council later in the day.

In case anyone overlooked the significance of this action, which followed by one day the announcement by Brazil and Turkey of the successful conclusion of their negotiations with Iran, she added: “I think this announcement is as convincing an answer to the efforts undertaken in Tehran over the last few days as any we could provide.”

Take that, Tehran! But it turns out that this lifted middle finger was not limited to Iran. Only hours before Clinton’s announcement, the foreign minister of Turkey held his own press conference. Obviously unaware of what was about to happen, he described in some detail not only the tortuous negotiation process with Iran, but his perception that he was acting directly on behalf of the United States.

According to Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, he had been in “constant contact” with Clinton herself and with national security adviser James Jones, while his prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, had face-to-face encouragement from President Obama in December and April.

The objective of Tur... >>>

recommended by vildemose

Balatarin
Share/Save/Bookmark

 
hamsade ghadimi

farokh jan, i took your

by hamsade ghadimi on Wed May 19, 2010 04:07 PM PDT

farokh jan, i took your advice and re-read your earlier comment to no avail.  it seems that you have a lot of pent-up anger.  and you make such harsh accusations! so, i'm a religious person who'se advocating sanctions on iran!  that's a doozy. with such brilliant observations, i find it hard not to doubt the credibility of the "facts" you're offering.  it seems that my impression on your intelligence was on the mark after all. :)

i thought the british brought khomeini to iran!  o.k. o.k. u.k or u.s. it's all the same.  whatever it was, it wasn't us, it was them who did it to us...  it also seems that you answered your angry questions with your own comments: u.s. supported nuclear ambitions of iran under the shah, and is supporting israel's nuclear program (tacitly), because these countries were friendly to the u.s. interest.  u.s. is against iri because iri is not friendly to the u.s. interests.  is that hypocrisy?  why don't you add pakistan and india too.  they're friendly to the u.s. and u.s. doesn't/didn't bother putting sanctions on them.

if you're so much against the mullahs, focus your anger on them, not the evil outsiders and others who're against the mullahs.  have a nice day and don't forget your medication.


  •  
Darveesh

an abscure blog from Gary Sick who is he any ways?

by Darveesh on Wed May 19, 2010 02:28 PM PDT

an obscure blog by Gary Sick, which hardly has any visitor is hardly eligible to be re-posted and considered a credible source.

Maybe its only me who hasn't even heard about this renowned blogger!


  •  
farokh2000

Ghadimi Jan

by farokh2000 on Wed May 19, 2010 01:25 PM PDT

I guess you didn't bother to read all of my commnet and don't know who brought the criminal Mullahs to power to begin with.

Was it not CIA that protected Khomeini for over 25 years in exile?

Was it not CIA that brought him back when Shah had used up his usefulness to them at the end?

All I am sayning is this is a game of swapping Puppets when their usefulness expires. As long as they benefit the Master, they are wanted and as soon as they are not good for them anymore, they must go.

I wish the Mullahs were never brought to power, and unlike you, I don't follow Islam or any other Religions. Please don't judge people before you know something about them.

But hipocrisy is unlimited here in the USA. They support Israel with all their Nuclear arsenal and all their crimes, but the innocent people of Iran, who have commited no crimes should be punished because of the criminal Mullahs. Of course, it is not the Mullahs who would suffer by the sanctions, it is the people and you are ok with that?

Shame on you.


  •  
hamsade ghadimi

farokh jan

by hamsade ghadimi on Wed May 19, 2010 11:01 AM PDT

you're very astute to point out that the u.s. supported nuclear energy in iran when a puppet government was in power but now that an unfriendly government is in power in iran, they don't support it.  you must be very well-read to figure out these facts.  it just doesn't make sense to you, does it?  don't worry, as you claimed: "this kind of mentality will sink them one day soon": the day mahdi climbs out of the well in qom.


  •  
farokh2000

Their way or the Highway!

by farokh2000 on Wed May 19, 2010 10:24 AM PDT

The Unbited States is so full of itself that they think people around the World would have to bend over backward for them and let them do it to them, no matter what the case may be.

United Staes was the Country that supported Nuclear Energy in Iran during Shah's government and offered to help them get things going.

Now that their other puppets, the Mullahs are not following their orders, they are not very pleased!?

No matter what the criminal Mullahs do, it will not be enough, just as no matter what Saddam did wouldnot/couldnot save his butt. They wanted him dead and out, so that they could split the Resources as they pleased.

It is the same case with the Mullahs now.

It is really sad and outrageous, but that is the way the Super Powers are thinking. The USSR is dead, we can now take whatever we like.

This kind of mentality will sink them one day soon.


  •