“Sanctions” is Doublespeak for War Provocation

October 19, 2017 in News by RBN Staff


Source: WHTT |  

Peacemaking is never used in the same context as “Sanctions” because they are mutually exclusive concepts.  All sanctions are intended provocations, the most serious step toward making a new war acceptable.

Sanctions have been a precursor to major war in modern history, a conditioning process to harden the working class on both sides to accept war. 

Those who promotes “sanctions” are helping the beneficiary of war, including our banks and the Military/Industrial complex.

The  USA sanctioned and virtually embargoed Japan’s access to Indonesian oil just before WWII, knowing that it would probably result in Japan’s Mutual Defense Treaty with Germany.  The oil embargo helped provoke Japan’s Pearl Harbor attack on Dec 7, 1941, that eventually resulted in the atomic experiment in mass murder at Nagasaki and Hiroshima four years later.

A review of recent wars reveal that all, or most of US victims were hit with “sanctions” or embargos before being attacked by the US.  We must ask, if they are so bad, why not just bomb Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Iran with pre-emptive strikes?  Why the charade of first placing sanctions?  An obvious answer is that sanctions are a propaganda tool to legitimize an already planned attack that lacks any reasonable justification. They are a pre-war action, or “pre-cursor to war, as Congressman Ron Paul put it.  Sanctions convince people at home that the targeted country deserves to be bombed. Sanctions condition our own people to “a need for war.” But what is the result on the less wealthy people in the targeted country?

Sanctions punish the most vulnerable and poorest, working class, but have little impact on leaders, the rich and politicians.  Wars result, ultimately leading to a boom for the US war industries.  

Obviously dangerous sanctions are those on Russia, pugnacious North Korea, China and Iran.  But there is much more.  The size of US Treasury and other Departments’ lists of countries under “Embargo” and those under “Sanctions” is staggering.  Most, like Cuba, Fiji, Haiti, and the Congo are obviously too small or weak to be good war candidates. But the lists do not say which ones are being enforced.

Sanctions and Embargoes are disguised acts of war. The US State Department and the Treasury list of of victim countries are copied below*. -Editor CEC

*The State Department lists embargoed countries or territories: Afghanistan, Balkans, Belarus, Central African Republic, China (PR), Côte d’Ivoire, Crimea Region of Ukraine, Cuba, Cyprus, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Eritrea, Fiji, Haiti, Iran …

Additionally, The US Treasury, under “Sanction Programs and Country Information”, lists 28 states and jurisdictions, plus two “inactive programs.”  each one with a link:

 Balkans-Related Sanctions


Belarus Sanctions04/28/2017

Burundi Sanctions 06/02/2016

Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act of 2017 (CAATSA)10/13/2017​​​Central African Republic Sanctions04/12/2017

Counter Narcotics Trafficking Sanctions10/06/2017

Counter Terrorism Sanctions10/13/2017

Cuba Sanctions08/22/2017

Cyber-related Sanctions​09/14/2017

Democratic Republic of the Congo-Related Sanctions ​06/01/2017

Iran Sanctions10/13/2017

Iraq-Related Sanctions​04/04/2016

Lebanon-Related Sanctions​07/30/2010

Libya Sanctions  ​04/13/2017

Magnitsky Sanctions​01/09/2017

Non-Proliferation Sanctions10/13/2017

North Korea Sanctions  ​09/26/2017

Rough Diamond Trade Controls05/21/2008

Somalia Sanctions​07/05/2012

Sudan and Darfur Sanctions10/12/2017

South Sudan-related Sanctions​09/06/2017

Syria Sanctions06/21/2017

Transnational Criminal Organizations 10/04/2017

Ukraine-/Russia-Related Sanctions09/29/2017

Venezuela-Related Sanctions10/03/2017

Yemen-Related Sanctions04/14/2015

Zimbabwe Sanctions​04/12/2017

Click here for information on SDN List program tags and their definitions​