Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 54

Thread: How Are Sanctions an Act of War?

  1. #1
    Southerner Rifleman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    2,418

    Default How Are Sanctions an Act of War?

    I've been reading on here that sanctions are an act of war. I'm curious as to what type of sanctions are considered such.

    Are we talking about purely economic sanctions and withdrawing from trade or is this a military blockade?



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2

    Default

    Let's say a person came to your house and nailed all the windows and doors shut so you couldn't get anything in/out. Would you be upset? What would you consider the person who did this to you?

  4. #3

    Default

    "If goods don't cross borders, armies will."

    -Bastiat

  5. #4
    Truth is treason ... Occam's Banana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Empire of Lies
    Posts
    8,195

    Default

    Sanctions are acts of war when country X uses force to adversely affect trade/commerce going into or out of country Y.

    Withdrawing from trade is not an act of war (and is not really a "sanction" in this sense) - it's just a unilateral decision by country X not to engage in trade with country Y.
    In this case, no use of force is necessary - between X and Y, that is. Country X might use force to prevent its own citizens from engaging in trade with country Y, but that wouldn't be an act of war against country Y.

    Blockades ARE acts of war - they require the aggressive (non-defensive) application of force against some other target country in order to be implemented.

    You could use aggressive force to intervene in your own internal affairs, but if you ever tried doing so against another country in any way, you were considered to be committing an act of war. My understanding is that this was more or less the standard view until some time in the not-too-distant past (not exactly sure when, but surely no more than a century - if that).
    Last edited by Occam's Banana; 12-17-2011 at 10:12 AM.
    tu ne cede malis, sed contra audentior ito fiat justitia, ruat caelum sic semper tyrannis
    The Bastiat Collection - FREE PDF

    Frdric Bastiat
    • "When law and morality are in contradiction to each other, the citizen finds himself in the cruel alternative of either losing his moral sense, or of losing his respect for the law."
      - The Law (p. 54)
    • "Government is that great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
      - Government (p. 99)
    • "[W]ar is always begun in the interest of the few, and at the expense of the many."
      - Economic Sophisms - Second Series (p. 312)
    • "There are two principles that can never be reconciled - Liberty and Constraint."
      - Harmonies of Political Economy - Book One (p. 447)

  6. #5
    Southerner Rifleman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    2,418

    Default

    When we are talking about sanctions on Iran, does anyone know the specifics?

    I guess I am trying to justify a defensive war based on sanctions.

  7. #6

    Default

    Everything the state does is an act of war. Everything.
    Im not a libertarian. Im not advocating everyone run around with no clothes on and smoke pot.

  8. #7

    Default

    This describes sanctions against Iran since 1979 and their effects-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._sanctions_against_Iran
    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Paul
    The government is incapable of doing what it's supposed to do. A job like the provision of security is something best left to private institutions.
    My music/art page is here"government is the enemy of liberty"-RP
    That which doesn't kill me has made a grave tactical error
    Quote Originally Posted by Anti Federalist View Post
    This whole board is a thoughtcrime in progress.
    Quote Originally Posted by danke View Post
    I carry my man purse for fashion, not function.

  9. #8

    Default

    Madelin Allbright admitted that 500,000 Iraqi children died due to sanctions, but stated that it was worth it.

    I'd consider causing the death of 1 American child, by another countries actions an act of war. Times that by half a million.
    "The journalist is one who separates the wheat from the chaff, and then prints the chaff." - Adlai Stevenson

    I tell you that virtue does not come from money: but from virtue comes money and all other good things to man, both to the individual and to the state. - Socrates

  10. #9
    Member newbitech's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Tampa, FL
    Posts
    8,433
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rifleman View Post
    When we are talking about sanctions on Iran, does anyone know the specifics?

    I guess I am trying to justify a defensive war based on sanctions.
    well a very easy one is the banking system.

    banks are not allowed to transact with Iranian companies. accounts of companies and individuals are frozen by fiat (government decree).

    Government doesn't just sanction countries either. For instance, the same type of sanctions I mentioned above are applied to online gambling, albeit not as severe in the seizing of assets (frozen accounts). Government make it a civil offense and sometimes criminal for banks to transact with companies who conduct certain types of business.

    These sanctions are acts of war against a country because the serve to put a country at a tactical and strategic disadvantage that has military implications. Sanctions are aggressive in the sense that they project hostile relations inside the borders of an adversary.

    Contrasting sanctions to normal trade relations, sanctions are those economic restrictive acts that occur without formalized relations and occur outside the realm of diplomacy. Tariffs are formalize trade relation consequences that are carried out within a specific set of rules and moderated by by the trade agreements.

    Sanctions can be imposed on countries with formal trade relations at the risk of jeopardizing normal trade relations and agreements.

    This is my understanding and not an academic lesson. I have no sources or links, but I can scratch the surface if you need citations.

  11. #10
    Member newbitech's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Tampa, FL
    Posts
    8,433
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default

    here ya go.

    http://www.crosscurrents.org/gordon.htm

    t
    hink siege warfare.

  12. #11
    Truth is treason ... Occam's Banana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Empire of Lies
    Posts
    8,195

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rifleman View Post
    I guess I am trying to justify a defensive war based on sanctions.
    In that case, you're going to have to wait until Iran militarily attacks us or forcibly imposes economic sanctions on us.
    I don't see any way around that - not if you want justice on our side.
    tu ne cede malis, sed contra audentior ito fiat justitia, ruat caelum sic semper tyrannis
    The Bastiat Collection - FREE PDF

    Frdric Bastiat
    • "When law and morality are in contradiction to each other, the citizen finds himself in the cruel alternative of either losing his moral sense, or of losing his respect for the law."
      - The Law (p. 54)
    • "Government is that great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
      - Government (p. 99)
    • "[W]ar is always begun in the interest of the few, and at the expense of the many."
      - Economic Sophisms - Second Series (p. 312)
    • "There are two principles that can never be reconciled - Liberty and Constraint."
      - Harmonies of Political Economy - Book One (p. 447)

  13. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ctiger2 View Post
    Let's say a person came to your house and nailed all the windows and doors shut so you couldn't get anything in/out. Would you be upset? What would you consider the person who did this to you?
    You have described a blockade (active measure to prevent trade) as opposed to refusing to do business with an entity (a passive measure).
    Out of every one hundred men they send us, ten should not even be here. Eighty will do nothing but serve as targets for the enemy. Nine are real fighters, and we are lucky to have them, upon them depends our success in battle. But one, ah the one, he is a real warrior, and he will bring the others back from battle alive.

    Duty is the most sublime word in the English language. Do your duty in all things. You can not do more than your duty. You should never wish to do less than your duty.

  14. #13

    Default

    Tariffs are an act of war as well.
    It was too weird to live, and too rare to die - hunter s. thompson .
    ..this is the darkest timeline..

  15. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainAmerica View Post
    Tariffs are an act of war as well.
    How so? No one has a "right" to do business with me under terms and conditions to which I do not agree. If I name a price you do not like, that is not an act of war.
    Out of every one hundred men they send us, ten should not even be here. Eighty will do nothing but serve as targets for the enemy. Nine are real fighters, and we are lucky to have them, upon them depends our success in battle. But one, ah the one, he is a real warrior, and he will bring the others back from battle alive.

    Duty is the most sublime word in the English language. Do your duty in all things. You can not do more than your duty. You should never wish to do less than your duty.

  16. #15

    Default

    I could see where it may be considered an act of war, but definitely a precursor to war.

  17. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pericles View Post
    You have described a blockade (active measure to prevent trade) as opposed to refusing to do business with an entity (a passive measure).
    Sanctions are the former. Boycotts are the latter.
    Im not a libertarian. Im not advocating everyone run around with no clothes on and smoke pot.

  18. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pericles View Post
    How so? No one has a "right" to do business with me under terms and conditions to which I do not agree. If I name a price you do not like, that is not an act of war.
    export/import taxes are an act of war against another nation.
    It was too weird to live, and too rare to die - hunter s. thompson .
    ..this is the darkest timeline..

  19. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pericles View Post
    How so? No one has a "right" to do business with me under terms and conditions to which I do not agree. If I name a price you do not like, that is not an act of war.
    But if CA and I want to make an exchange between us in which we agree on a certain amount of money for a certain good, and if you demand a cut of the action without us agreeing to your involvement, that is an act of war. And that's what a tariff is.
    Im not a libertarian. Im not advocating everyone run around with no clothes on and smoke pot.

  20. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainAmerica View Post
    export/import taxes are an act of war against another nation.
    Let's try this again. A is friends with B and does not particularly like C. A has two widgets to sell and sells a widget to B for $10 and sells a widget to C for $20. Has A committed an act of war against C?
    Out of every one hundred men they send us, ten should not even be here. Eighty will do nothing but serve as targets for the enemy. Nine are real fighters, and we are lucky to have them, upon them depends our success in battle. But one, ah the one, he is a real warrior, and he will bring the others back from battle alive.

    Duty is the most sublime word in the English language. Do your duty in all things. You can not do more than your duty. You should never wish to do less than your duty.

  21. #20

  22. #21
    Member newbitech's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Tampa, FL
    Posts
    8,433
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default

    dbl post

  23. #22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pericles View Post
    Let's try this again. A is friends with B and does not particularly like C. A has two widgets to sell and sells a widget to B for $10 and sells a widget to C for $20. Has A committed an act of war against C?
    No. But the statement you were replying to wasn't about free exchanges between individuals, it was about tariffs.
    Im not a libertarian. Im not advocating everyone run around with no clothes on and smoke pot.

  24. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by erowe1 View Post
    No. But the statement you were replying to wasn't about free exchanges between individuals, it was about tariffs.
    First, we need to clarify the notions of the rights involved. There is not a "right" to buy anything. If we agree that property rights are a characteristic of the property itself - I have a "right" to sell or use the property I own, but no right to property I do not own. Thus, any infringement on the ability to do commerce is an infringement on the rights of the seller, not the buyer.

    In the case of a tariff, applied by a third party, without consent, is an infringement on the seller, making his property less valuable in the market, because it carries a higher price. It is not an act of war, as the owner still retains his property, and is free to sell it to anyone who pays the price. It is just that different potential buyers may face different prices for the same property. Any recourse is the seller's to make, not the potential buyer.

    Not an act of war.
    Out of every one hundred men they send us, ten should not even be here. Eighty will do nothing but serve as targets for the enemy. Nine are real fighters, and we are lucky to have them, upon them depends our success in battle. But one, ah the one, he is a real warrior, and he will bring the others back from battle alive.

    Duty is the most sublime word in the English language. Do your duty in all things. You can not do more than your duty. You should never wish to do less than your duty.

  25. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pericles View Post
    First, we need to clarify the notions of the rights involved. There is not a "right" to buy anything. If we agree that property rights are a characteristic of the property itself - I have a "right" to sell or use the property I own, but no right to property I do not own. Thus, any infringement on the ability to do commerce is an infringement on the rights of the seller, not the buyer.
    If I own an ounce of silver and want to give it to you for a box of ammo, am I the seller or the buyer?

    And regardless of which I am, how does some third party attain the right to involve itself in that transaction without our permission and demand that one of us give it something when we make it?

    And suppose we do not agree to give that third party its cut and that third party does some act of violence against one of us as a punishment for our insubordination to it, then does it become an act of war?
    Last edited by erowe1; 12-17-2011 at 12:00 PM.
    Im not a libertarian. Im not advocating everyone run around with no clothes on and smoke pot.

  26. #25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by erowe1 View Post
    If I own an ounce of silver and want to give it to you for a box of ammo, am I the seller or the buyer?

    And regardless of which I am, how does some third party attain the right to involve itself in that transaction without our permission and demand that one of us give it something when we make it?

    And suppose we do not agree to give that third party its cut and that third party does some act of violence against one of us as a punishment for our insubordination to it, then does it become an act of war?
    What act of "war" was committed by who and against whom?
    Out of every one hundred men they send us, ten should not even be here. Eighty will do nothing but serve as targets for the enemy. Nine are real fighters, and we are lucky to have them, upon them depends our success in battle. But one, ah the one, he is a real warrior, and he will bring the others back from battle alive.

    Duty is the most sublime word in the English language. Do your duty in all things. You can not do more than your duty. You should never wish to do less than your duty.

  27. #26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pericles View Post
    What act of "war" was committed by who and against whom?
    The act of war is committed by whatever regime takes the tariff, and against whomever they take it from.

    But I'm not sure I understand your question. Is it regarding something I said in the quoted text?
    Im not a libertarian. Im not advocating everyone run around with no clothes on and smoke pot.

  28. #27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by erowe1 View Post
    The act of war is committed by whatever regime takes the tariff, and against whomever they take it from.

    But I'm not sure I understand your question. Is it regarding something I said in the quoted text?
    How is that different from collecting a toll?
    Out of every one hundred men they send us, ten should not even be here. Eighty will do nothing but serve as targets for the enemy. Nine are real fighters, and we are lucky to have them, upon them depends our success in battle. But one, ah the one, he is a real warrior, and he will bring the others back from battle alive.

    Duty is the most sublime word in the English language. Do your duty in all things. You can not do more than your duty. You should never wish to do less than your duty.

  29. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pericles View Post
    How is that different from collecting a toll?
    You keep asking questions that don't look to me like they relate to anything in the quote you're supposedly asking about.

    How is what different from collecting a toll? And when did I ever say anything at all about tolls?
    Im not a libertarian. Im not advocating everyone run around with no clothes on and smoke pot.

  30. #29

    Default

    My field
    Short: YES OR NOT ACT OF WAR CAN BE DEBATED BUT IT GAVE IRAN "JUST CAUSE" FOR WAR!!!!

    According to "Just war doctrine" sanctions on Iran are not "act of war" but are giving Iran "jus ad bellum"- the right to go to war because they will do this: "the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain"... USA sanction will cause lasting, grave, and certain and irreparable damage to the Iranian people and economy.
    Diplomatic sanctions-done
    Economic sanctions-done( USA declared minimum of two acts of war: 1. against Irans banks and 2. against anyone in the world that tries to do business with an Iranian bank. ) and more
    Military sanctions-dont know

    Also LOL what a sweet irony (definition of Terrorism accepted by USA Law schools):
    the term “international terrorism” means activities that—
    (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
    (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
    (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and

    (4) the term “act of war” means any act occurring in the course of:
    (A) declared war;
    (B) armed conflict, whether or not war has been declared, between two or more nations; or
    (C) armed conflict between military forces of any origin


    If you got any more questions about this feel free to ask. Ill be glad to help if I can.


    *I do not support Irans government or take sides on this I just explain legal situation and answer asked question!
    Last edited by Barrex; 12-17-2011 at 01:54 PM. Reason: It is a Lie I didnt!
    So you gave up on this:
    H
    elp with documenting voting rights violations and election fraud abuses!?
    Shame. Nothing encourages crime than not punishing it. You are letting them get away with it.FAIL.


    Quote Originally Posted by orenbus View Post
    If I had to answer this question truthfully I'd probably piss a lot of people off lol, Barrex would be a better person to ask he doesn't seem to care lol.


  31. #30

    Default

    Sanctions are actually not an act of war, nor are they an act of aggression in legal terms understood by the international community.

    Now, if a country declares in advance that any sanctions imposed on them would be considered an act of war, then they could legitimately declare them to be an act of war once imposed.

    Jimmy Carter declared that sanctions on mid east oil would be declared an act of war. The Iranians AFAIK have not declared sanctions on their central bank to be an act of war. Therefore, the US government imposing sanctions on the Iranian central bank are NOT an act of war because it doesn't fit the definition, nor do the Iranians consider it to be.

    Blockades on the other hand are indeed an act of war.

    In my next post I will give law review articles which discuss this in depth and in legal terms:
    Last edited by ZanZibar; 12-17-2011 at 02:01 PM.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast




« Previous Thread | Next Thread »


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •