Re:New documents link Huawei to suspected front companies in...
by rgbrenner on Tuesday January 08, 2019 @02:37PM
(#18858819)
The deal with Iran is not relevant.. since Huewai's and Meng's actions are from 5+ years ago, when Iran was subject to UN approved sanctions.
Re:New documents link Huawei to suspected front companies in...
by koube on Tuesday January 08, 2019 @02:43PM
(#18858894)
You're correct, although I would say the Iran deal is still relevant to Iran sanctions in the general sense.
[dead]
Re:New documents link Huawei to suspected front companies in...
by acali on Tuesday January 08, 2019 @02:50PM
(#18858964)
The quotes are by individuals associated with the organizations, it doesn't appear to be the official position of the think-tanks. I think it is unfair to call the Brookings Institute a "right-wing pay-to-play lobbying group" but you are just sourcing from a left-leaning activist group.
Re:New documents link Huawei to suspected front companies in...
by austinheap on Tuesday January 08, 2019 @03:02PM
(#18859103)
My intention was to highlight the sources of funding for each -- not to make a pedantic left v right argument -- and people should question _all_ DC think tanks. Re: Brookings Institute, it's clear that their foreign sources of funding should cause pause:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#Funding_...
Re:New documents link Huawei to suspected front companies in...
by koube on Tuesday January 08, 2019 @02:44PM
(#18858902)
Brookings and Rand are considered centrist, Rand sometimes center left, and Cato is conservative. I linked them because the case has already been made on the left, the case is usually being made to the right, so conservative sources would be relevant here.
> By torpedoing U.S. adherence to the accord, Trump has all but guaranteed its collapse, a move that opens the door to the unfettered resumption of Iran’s nuclear program and unleashes unpredictable escalatory pressures in an already volatile Middle East.
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2018/05/08/a...
> Although the deal didn’t address every concern, it was successfully preventing Iran from developing a nuclear weapon. Trump has instead opted for an uncertain future, raising the risks of an Iranian bomb and a U.S-Iranian conflict.
https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/trumps-iran-dea...
> The United States is left without good options moving forward. It is hard to see how this decision serves U.S. interests or regional stability.
https://www.rand.org/blog/2018/05/the-strategic-fallout-of-u...
In addition I believe there are long term costs for a country to be violating agreements for no discernible benefit.