OT: effect of US Govt shutting down software accounts

Would you have felt the same if similar tactics were used against apparteid SA?

It's basically a terrible policy approach. Consider, Trump pulled out of the Iran nuclear deal, against the wishes of most of the rest of the world. Now he is ramping up punishments to companies, etc., in the EU if they ignore his Iran edicts. He has activated a new tool to create mayhem, his favorite activity.

--
 Thanks, 
    - Win

So I will infer you think it was ok to apply these pressures to SA. Just checking to see if this is just another "orange man bad" thing

Well, there's certainly enough bad orange man things to go around. But I'm against SaS, and not being able to own critical items, free and clear. Go purchase a product, should be yours to use without interference, even if you're a bad guy. I continue to own my Altium CAD product, even if I stop buying maintenance updates. I own older copies of Adobe and MS office software, so I'm free from making their monthly payments. But I am worried about what's going to happen in the future.

--
 Thanks, 
    - Win

Whatever you think about that, right or wrong, it's trivial compared to what Trump has done with Iran. Not only has he applied severe sanctions to Iran, blocking US companies from doing business with them, but he has also put the full force of the US against any foreign companies that have any US presence, forcing them to also cease doing business with Iran, or face US penalties on them. What he's done there, IMO, amounts to an act of war. That is exactly what the US would consider it if some foreign power not only cut off trade with us, but used it's power to force most other companies around the world to cut off trade, against their will. Imagine the US with 20% unemployment, high inflation, GDP shrinking 10% a year and what we would do.

hatever you think about that, right or wrong, it's trivial compared to what Trump has done with Iran. Not only has he applied severe sanctions to Iran, blocking US companies from doing business with them, but he has also put the full force of the US against any foreign companies that have any US presence, forcing them to also cease doing business with Iran, or face US penalties on them. What he's done there, IMO, amounts to an act of war. That is exactly what the US would consider it if some foreign power not only cut off trade with us, but used it's power to force most other companies around the world to cut off trade, against their will. Imagine the US with 20% unemployment, high inflation, GDP shrinking 10% a year and what we would do.....

Trump is doing the right thing here. Iran is a rogue state and trump is tir ed of wars where we shed blood and spend money. This is how you effect need ed change without going to war. , Bolton, Romney, Kristol, all of those go p folks are itching to drop bombs

People foolishly prefer subscription deals. They used to buy VCRs and now they rent DVRs. Setting the VCR clock was such a big challenge.

What!? Trump was unhappy the agreement allowed Iran to start thinking about nuclear weapons on 10 years, despite its taking away Iran's nuclear material and reinstating inspections, so he killed the deal, so they can start right away? That's good!?

--
 Thanks, 
    - Win

The worst kind of mayhem is Russian forces deployed in the middle east for the first time ever, which began the day after the Iran deal was signed. That's what happens when you signal retreat.

Yes, 10 years goes by pretty fast, and inspections are useless with countries that have hidden facilities.

ance-us-sanctions

Ummm- don't let yourself be manipulated by the ultra left wing press and st upid articles almost always written by ridiculously unqualified people. Thi s article was written by a ditz head nerd who doesn't know anything about g eopolitics.

Nobody doing business with an American business has to worry about a thing as long as their country has not been officially designated a national secu rity threat to the United States. I mean seriously!

And maybe you missed the part about this new EO being an expansion of EO 13

692 issued by Obama. Obama's EO was the typical ineffective fluff that acco mplished very little because it went after specific individuals in the Vene zuelan government instead of the whole place like it should have. I mean se riously! He probably had to deliberately tone it down to give his Wall Stre et buddies time to disinvest themselves of Venezuela interests.

From the new EO: "...in order to take additional steps with respect to the national emergenc y declared in Executive Order 13692 of March 8, 2015 (Blocking Property and Suspending Entry of Certain Persons Contributing to the Situation in Venez uela), as amended..."

.pdf

From Obama:

Screw Adobe.

Sanctions against South Africa were imposed by the UN. How effective they were may be open to debate, but the end result was the end of apartheid.

John

behance-us-sanctions

He's doing the same thing will dollar payments via the banking system. This is having the effect of forcing countries like Iran, Russia, China et al to set up their own trade currency backed by minerals and gold. The USD hasn't been backed by anything but faith in it since 1971 so it's not something that should be used as a weapon; far too risky.

--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via  
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other  
protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of  
GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet  
protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.

I beg to differ. The Iranians are constantly portrayed as such in the Western media but that doesn't make it so. Iran has several enemies in the ME and must be allowed to defend itself just as all its neighbours are. Stop meddling in Iran's internal politics; foster good relations with it and they'll be the firm friends with us that they'd really ideally love to be. You'll exert far more influence as a friend than an enemy, because intimidation wont work and is frankly totally counterproductive in this instance.

--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via  
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other  
protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of  
GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet  
protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.

On Tuesday, October 8, 2019 at 10:37:21 AM UTC-4, snipped-for-privacy@columbus.rr.com w rote:

s

ired of wars where we shed blood and spend money. This is how you effect ne eded change without going to war. , Bolton, Romney, Kristol, all of those gop folks are itching to drop bombs

Sure, Iran is going to change into Sweden, through sanctions. Have sanctio ns worked in North Korea? We;ve been sanctioning them for decades. The histo ry of sanctions working is not good. And there is no predictable path here, Trump is a moron who can't analyze anything, he just acts out impulsively. What he has started has already resulted in Iran shooting down a $150 mil US drone, attacking oil tankers, blowing up Saudi oil fields. And Trump already ordered up an air strike on Iran, then with planes in the air on their way, he wussed out and changed his mind. He was even so dumb that he tried to claim that only at that point did he ask about casualties and when told that 100 Iranians could die, he called it off.

That's another Trump lie. This isn't the Pentagon's first rodeo and it's

99% that with any briefing for a president before airstrikes, they go through the same drill, the options, the expected results, collateral damage possibilities, casualties, etc. Trump just wussed out, for whatever reason, probably saw something on Fox or talked to someone on the phone. Like, "Ivanka, I'm guess what, I'm going to bomb Iran" and she said, "Oh no, that's a mistake...."

And with the new agreement that Trump says is coming, those inspections will be super trumptastic and most excellent, right? No hidden facility issues either? Why would any country, eg Iran, NK, reach a agreement with the US when they just saw Trump renege on one the US made just a few years ago?

Since Iran was already violating the agreement in multiple ways, which Obama supporters choose to ignore, and since NK would do the same, why would we make an agreement with them or any dictatorship? Only if the concessions they must make are absolutely certain - that's why. Which was the case with Pinochet and with Quadaffi. We agreed not to prosecute Pinochet if he relinquished power peacefully, and when he stepped down that was undeniably verifiable, yet the left insisted on prosecuting him anyway. We also agreed not to overthrow Quadaffi if he handed over his WMD, which he did and we could verify that he had no program to make more, since he had bought what he had and never had the ability to make it, yet a Democratic administration overthrew him anyway, and created ISIS in the aftermath.

Clearly, you haven't heard that several nations got all their visa privileges revoked, early in this administration, for no particular reason. So, Iran, Libya, Syria, Somalia, Yemen, Sudan, all think your reassurances are empty.

Sudan is off that list now, never having done anything to go ONTO it. The 'officially designated' bludgeon has been wielded many times, and even China, on the Huawei-and-Iran situation, has been blindsided, because that 'designation' is a hard-driven... whim. It's nothing but a whim of one official.

Some cover language has been put up, regarding 'identity management' and 'information-sharing', but that's just a way to add in more officials, with more ... whims. They can all say NO.

And the elephant in the room, is the trade war; clearly, the US hasn't been a stable trading partner.

Yes, how very logical, renege on a deal because it only lasts another ten years. Call my silly, but it seems better to worry about the ten year part in say 8 years. And if inspections are useless, then how is the new wonderful agreement that Trump says he's going to negotiate, going to be enforced? You've admitted that the real goal is 'regime change", even after the abysmal record of not only failure but disasterous, far worse outcomes that we've seen from the previous failed attempts.

Trumptards never cease to amaze.