Since the US are not respecting what they signed, why doesn't the world decide sanctions against them?

Since the US are not respecting what they signed, why doesn't the world decide sanctions against them?

Attached: téléchargement (3).jpg (292x172, 13K)

it wasn't a treaty, which is a valid argument

respecting what

Because it would be economic suicide to stop selling stuff to the largest net importer of goods and services in the world

He's probably referring to the Iran agreement.

Whilst either not understanding, or refusing to accept, that executive agreements hold zero legal weight.

nowhere in Wikipedia states that anything was signed at all

So this is forged?

Attached: JCPOA_Signatures.png (400x400, 206K)

Because we're pretty much the only ones in the world who make useful trade deals and enforce sanctions.
You would also need to be united and focused on action, which is funny, as it would take at least 6 months for your EU parliament to decide on a color scheme with which to decorate the rapefugee accommodations in the viewing terraces for your historic announcements.

There was even a resolution at the UN.

>your EU parliament

>American education

So you don't disagree with the rest?

Alright Russian proxy fag, time for more sanctions on your pathetic country

Attached: 1525995647410.jpg (1200x630, 83K)

It's simple math - Iran's economy is ~$400 billion, the United States' economy is ~$18 trillion.

I read Wikipedia again and all of the rioting and fires that happened immediately after really makes you think

Richest cunt decides the world rules. It's always been like that. For example, let's say Weedman was to disagree with the USA on any world issue, Canada would be a 3rd world shithole by 2020.

try it lol

(((The rest))) is insubstantiated opinion, you nitwit. You're implying only the US makes money off trade.

I'd like an explanation of how my opinion in response to your assumption is somehow invalid.
Yes, I am implying permission here, as it is your thread.

It's my thread actually, not his.

But he is right, you sound like the typical brainless American.

>Because we're pretty much the only ones in the world who make useful trade deals

I'm not sure you even understand what is a trade deal and to whom it is supposed to be useful.

What the fuck are you talking about? I didn't say it was invalid, I said it was insubstantiated. I don't need to explain shit to point out logical errors in your reasoning.

West is always cheating. Always.

Attached: Budo-Mas-Oyama1.jpg (399x543, 40K)

They have total control over the "lingua franca" of the currencies and basically control the world financial system. Alsi mosg powerful military in the world. That's why.

Semantics.
OK, we'll do it this way: because it was our deal to reject. Not yours. You want control? I repeat: Take action.

>Semantics
>The branch of linguistics and logic concerned with meaning
Yes burger, we are concerned with the meaning of your statement, is that not why you made it? Is there any other reason to put forth a claim on an anonymous board where lust for fame and recognition is moot?
The action is being taken, but the position the US has made for itself (read: the playground bully) it's not feasible for European nations to oppose the US on such a deal. The only reason is US would gladly and willingly rescind parts of their military commitment to the NATO and UN contingent. You can say there is always the choice of biting the bullet, which is technically true, but not a real choice in this context. Not by far. You do see this, burger?

Take a deep breath, user.
Look around.
See what you have done.
You insult the person who tries to explain things from a culture and perspective unlike your own.
You avoid addressing my suggestions, instead focusing on the words which deliver them.
You will remain safe, yet ignorant, in your bubble, and I will continue to do real things in the real world.
Regardless, I do hope that you will find some value in our conversation.