Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Monday, April 22, 2019

The Trump administration announced Monday that all countries that continue to import Iranian oil will be subject to US sanctions. In a statement, the White House said President Donald Trump "has decided not to reissue" waivers regarding sanctions against countries importing Iranian oil when the waivers expire "in early May."

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

As any good capitalist should know, all this action will do will be to reduce the cost of Iranian oil. When the cost of the oil is below the cost of the sanctions, Iran will still be able to sell as much oil as they can pump. The difficult decision for Iran will be how low can they take the price of their oil until they are selling at a loss. And, if they sell at a loss, how long can it be sustained.

The provenance of sanctioned Iranian oil will get "laundered" to make it seem as though it was from some other supplier.

#1 | Posted by FedUpWithPols at 2019-04-22 11:52 AM | Reply

The provenance of sanctioned Iranian oil will get "laundered" to make it seem as though it was from some other supplier.

Iranian crude has a distinctive "signature" which will show up in tests. It's one of the dirtiest crudes in the world with a high sulfur content. In fact, you need a special refinery to process Iranian crude. Ordinary refineries can't do it.

Can they mix it with other crude oils from other oil fields? Maybe. But who will let them? Not worth the trouble for any nation that tries it.

Some of the cleanest, sweetest, crude oil, comes from Venezuela, BTW.

#2 | Posted by J_Tremain at 2019-04-22 12:00 PM | Reply

While Russia meddles in our elections and Trump removes rather than enforces sanctions on them.

#3 | Posted by danni at 2019-04-22 12:22 PM | Reply

The bully has spoken.

#4 | Posted by fresno500 at 2019-04-22 01:07 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

What right does any country have to deny another country the right to earn a living as best they can?

#5 | Posted by bayviking at 2019-04-22 01:23 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

You don't need a right, just a big navy.

#6 | Posted by REDIAL at 2019-04-22 09:46 PM | Reply


@#6 ... you don't need a right, just a big navy. ...

Yup, might makes right, as the old expression goes.

Similar to the intimidation used by gun toters here in the US.

#7 | Posted by LampLighter at 2019-04-22 09:49 PM | Reply

"Some of the cleanest, sweetest, crude oil, comes from Venezuela, BTW.
#2 | POSTED BY J_TREMAIN"

What the F are you talking about?

Venezuelan crude is heavy and sour, meaning it is extremely dense and contains a high percentage of sulfur. Globally, most refineries process light sweet crude into gasoline, jet fuel, diesel and other fuels and products

theconversation.com

#8 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-04-22 11:37 PM | Reply

The only reason Trumpenstein has a ------ for Iran is that Obama favored the country. It's all connected to the birther controversy.

BTW, Putin translated in Spanish means a short male whore (with an accent on the i. When talking about Putin, the journalists on Telemundo and Univision fight HARD to keep from laughing on air.

#9 | Posted by MisterCarajo at 2019-04-23 12:18 AM | Reply

No more wars for Isntreal.

#10 | Posted by berserkone at 2019-04-23 12:32 AM | Reply

The only reason Trumpenstein has a ------ for Iran is that Obama favored the country. It's all connected to the birther controversy.
#9 | POSTED BY MISTERCARAJO

That is just stupid. The reason why Trump AND EVERY OTHER US POLITICIAN has a ------ for Iran is because Israel views them as their only worthy adversary in the region. That is why all establishment politicians squealed like stuck pigs when Trump was going to pull out of Syria, which is Iran's client state at this point. Birther controversy? Really?!?

#11 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-04-23 01:21 AM | Reply

No more wars for Isntreal.
#10 | POSTED BY BERSERKONE

Good luck with that. Even AOC is towing the line on US support for Israel now. As long as the Jewish lobby accounts for 50% of all Dem campaign cash, you think the Dems are going to say no to anything Israel related? If you want less Israel influence, the GOP only had 25% of their campaign money come from Jews. Maybe you are backing the wrong party....you know, those Dems that want infinity war in Syria, war with Russia, and arming Israel to the teeth.

#12 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-04-23 01:25 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

Are you assuming my political affiliation?

Honk honk

#13 | Posted by berserkone at 2019-04-23 01:37 AM | Reply

Assumptions aside our newfriend IraGoldberg is correct in his commentary.

#14 | Posted by berserkone at 2019-04-23 01:39 AM | Reply

"Trumpenstein "

spicy

#15 | Posted by berserkone at 2019-04-23 01:41 AM | Reply

"As long as the Jewish lobby accounts for 50% of all Dem campaign cash,"

pulled directly from his ass.

#16 | Posted by danni at 2019-04-23 07:11 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#16 - as was everything else in that stupid post of his.

#17 | Posted by YAV at 2019-04-23 07:23 AM | Reply

"As long as the Jewish lobby accounts for 50% of all Dem campaign cash,"
pulled directly from his ass.
#16 | POSTED BY DANNI

Unless my ass is the ---- Jerusalem Post, your comment is poor attempt at a deflection or fake news.

www.jpost.com

#18 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-04-23 08:40 AM | Reply

"As long as the Jewish lobby accounts for 50% of all Dem campaign cash,"
pulled directly from his ass.
#16 | POSTED BY DANNI
Unless my ass is the ---- Jerusalem Post, your comment is poor attempt at a deflection or fake news.
www.jpost.com
#18 | POSTED BY IRAGOLDBERG

That's not quite accurate. It actually depends on how you measure the donations and what fund is being discussed.

For example, Pro-Israel groups only spend about $10-20 million a year on lobbying.

Another example, in 2012, Jewish donors only gave major party nominees a combined $160 million.

#19 | Posted by Sycophant at 2019-04-23 11:49 AM | Reply

Nice to see the Free Market at work!

Congratulations, Republicans. You built that.

#20 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-04-23 11:54 AM | Reply

Trump... worst Deal Maker ever.

#21 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-04-23 05:04 PM | Reply

What a stupid move withdrawing from the Iranian deal was. Here they were doing with the world community, and especially is real one of them to do, which was ending the enrichment of uranium. They did that and what did they get in return? A slap in the face.

#22 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-04-23 07:32 PM | Reply

What a stupid move withdrawing from the Iranian deal was. Here they were doing with the world community, and especially is real one of them to do, which was ending the enrichment of uranium. They did that and what did they get in return? A slap in the face.

#23 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-04-23 07:32 PM | Reply

Right-wingers won't be happy until Iran has nukes.

Then we can nuke them for being a clear and present danger.

#24 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-04-23 07:37 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I rarely access this site on my phone. From the looks of my post, talk to text doesn't always work perfectly LOL

#25 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-04-23 08:04 PM | Reply

Iran getting nukes would be the best thing for the middle east. Israel would turn its spending towards bomb shelters and away from offensive weapons. Basically, conventional weapons spending would cease to have meaning and then Iran could spend its money on modernizing its economy. The country that will reform the middle east in a functioning 1st world region will not be Israel, Saudi Arabia, or Turkey - it will be Iran.

#26 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-04-24 01:36 AM | Reply

You don't need a right, just a big navy.

#6 | Posted by REDIAL at 2019-04-22

How did that work out for the British destroyer HMS Sheffield in the Battle of the Falklands in 1982? Those Exocet missiles were some special nasty. I am sure the Iranians have acquired some fine ship-destroying missiles from their allies in recent years. How would an aircraft carrier fare under multiple and subsequent missile attacks? 4,000-plus dead American sailors could be on the evening news.

#27 | Posted by john47 at 2019-04-24 10:53 AM | Reply

Our dealings with Iran since the 1950s have mostly been fraught with bellicosity and tainted by America's assumption that we have dominion over the world oil supply. This stance has not served us well and in my opinion has been a major factor in creating the terrorist threat we continue to face today. Trump's love for Netanyahu and his disdain for anything Obama did are icing on the (yellow)cake.

#28 | Posted by cbob at 2019-04-24 04:00 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2019 World Readable

Drudge Retort