Yes, Bessent was just bragging about this in Davos. These aren't international sanctions, they're not approved by the UN. These are unilateral sanctions by the Burger Reich and their vassals used as a form of siege warfare against Iran.
this post was submitted on 01 Feb 2026
29 points (93.9% liked)
Asklemmy
52761 readers
230 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
The UN doesn't have any particular claim to the word "international", except insofar as anything they do is international because the UN itself is international.
Other organisations, or even loosely affiliated groups of nations, can do international things because the word just means something like "between nations".
That's pure nonsense. There is only one version of international law and the UN is the only globally recognized organization to enforce it. These other organization are just unilateral tools of specific countries representing their interests. And sanctions such as the ones the west does against their adversaries are unilateral actions by these states.
i don't think they are arguing about international law, they are making an irrelevant and pedantic point about the meaning of the word international in general
good point
Only enforcement there is is possible sanctions
And those are often only made by some of their members
UN is mostly there for all countries to have a place to talk
Its not the police
UN can absolutely impose sanctions, the actual problem is that the west is a bunch of rogue states that take unilateral action ignoring the UN.
Failing color revolution
Failing
how can we tell it's failing?
News says ten trillion Iranian protestors have died. Don't need to propagandize that side that hard when you're winning?
Do need to lay the groundwork for "addressing the violence against their own people" for the ground invasion or air campaign.
Sanctions crippled the Iranian economy. Ordinary people initially took to the streets to protest these conditions. Later, rioters backed by Israel, by Israeli admission, joined in, escalating the situation toward civil conflict and attacking mosques even when people including kids are inside and police officers. The Iranian autocratic regime then used these events as justification to suppress all protests indiscriminately.
Violence occurred on both sides, and it difficult to find fully trustworthy sources on the situation
I don't know, but what I **can **tell you is that
I have noticed that there had been an awful lot of Iranian in European media in Europe flying pro-monarchy flags and by awful lot, I mean all protests in at least four Western countries outside of Iran, and that it's presented by EU media as normal or semi-normal when it should not be.
We live in the 21st century, not the middle ages or renaissance times.
Then, there's 'the Iranian flag replacement on X' by Elon Musk.
I guess he likes seeing the return of monarchies too.
US pulling color revolution shit again. There are legitimate grievances of the public but they are being steered by the west to topple the government for the purposes of western interests. Same shit with kidnapping Maduro. Look what just happened there, now the government is signing deals to privatize their oil.
Because Iran is the biggest threat to israel and the US interests in the middle east, so the claims are that the mossad are instigating, escalating, and inciting violence in the streets to topple the current regime in order to put a zionist puppet in the government, just like they have in all the arab countries, the latest example is the newly appointed Syrian president who was a wanted extremist terrorist by the same government that appointed him. Can you guess which government? This is just a brief explanation, you can do your further research.
Iran is a threat to the settler colonial power Israel but not to the USA
US interests (mainly oil) and all it's military bases in the area.
American elite interests only not the population and the military bases make the USA a threat to Iran not the opposite
Exactly, the people, all people, are victims of their governments and get microscopic crumbs from what they devour. And not just a threat to iran but the whole region.
It's connected to many different things, but mainly it's drought. They really don't have water, very close to a country-ending disaster. All other stuff are putting pressure on their ability to gain water from outside sources. And without water, a lot of industries can't function, hence a spiralling free fall towards collapse.
Water is the new oil. Time to stock up!
Yeah, but as soon as they discover something valuable, they will be democratized.
https://nitter.net/mikepompeo/status/2007180411638620659
It's so obviously and unashamedly driven by the empire, so why do you give the empire's news reporting any weight at all?