Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has warned of a possible future US president from attempts to annul the "nuclear" treaty with Iran

15 2016 June 31

The spiritual leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran (Iran’s Supreme Leader) Ayatollah Ali Khamenei warned the future US administration against any attempt to revise the “nuclear” agreement. Recall that in his speech, the candidate of the US Republican Party, Donald Trump, repeatedly stated that if elected, he would cancel the agreement with Iran and restore the sanctions that previously existed in relation to the Islamic Republic.

According to Ayatollah Khamenei, in case of violation of the treaty by the United States, Iran reserves the right to simply burn the contract and to throw ashes to the wind.
Iranian Spiritual Leader Quotes News Agency Associated Press:

We do not violate the contract. But if the other party violates it, if she tramples the agreement, then we will burn it and throw ashes into the wind.

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has warned of a possible future US president from attempts to annul the "nuclear" treaty with Iran

Khamenei’s appeal, as noted, was directed specifically to Trump, since another candidate, Hillary Clinton, considers the agreement reached with Iran to be successful.

In addition, Khamenei noted that with Tehran’s full compliance with the terms of the treaty, the United States is still delaying the time for the lifting of sanctions. In particular, restrictive measures remain in relation to the Iranian banking sector, as well as the insurance system.

Recall that in exchange for the refusal of uranium enrichment, the United States promised to remove from Iran the existing sanctions against it.

It is noted that Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif is going to discuss in the coming days the fulfillment of the obligations of the parties to the treaty with US Secretary of State John Kerry. The meeting is scheduled to be held in Germany.

Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.

sever.56

+10

15 June 2016 13: 11

http://topwar.ru/uploads/images/2016/787/yapb286.png

Believe Clintonsha's words - disrespect yourself!
God forbid, if she becomes the "president" of the states, she will make such a mess that all the previous wars of Hubby Bill, both Bush and Obama will seem like toys in a children's sandbox.
Clintonsha is a hawk of hawks, the most ardent "neocon" who will go to any lengths to implement the slogan: - "Yuesei - uber alles".
Guy hawks, miserable puppies in US politics compared to her.
1. Petr1
  
  +3
  
  15 June 2016 13: 35
  
  Do you really think the grandmother will be given something to decide, whoever wins the relationship will be as before "partnership"
2. tiredwithall
  
  0
  
  15 June 2016 14: 29
  
  Quote: sever.56
  http://topwar.ru/uploads/images/2016/787/yapb286.png
  
  Believe Clintonsha's words - disrespect yourself!
  God forbid, if she becomes the "president" of the states, she will make such a mess that all the previous wars of Hubby Bill, both Bush and Obama will seem like toys in a children's sandbox.
  Clintonsha is a hawk of hawks, the most ardent "neocon" who will go to any lengths to implement the slogan: - "Yuesei - uber alles".
  Guy hawks, miserable puppies in US politics compared to her.
  
  Are you overly ostentatious? What? Where? How? Clowns of owners of money independently solved or decide? Do you really believe in the power of the screen?
  I also read your comments earlier, therefore, as with Stanislavsky - I do not believe it!
  1. sever.56
    
    +2
    
    15 June 2016 15: 27
    
    Quote: tiredwithall
    Are you overly ostentatious? What? Where? How? Clowns of owners of money independently solved or decide? Do you really believe in the power of the screen?
    
    And what is my naivety? In the words that the clintonsha is a hawk cleaner than other peasant hawks? Was she not one of the main inspirers of the destruction of Libya as a state? Wasn't she almost experiencing an orgasm, looking at the brutal murder of Gaddafi? Is she not one of the main ideological inspirers of a tough policy towards Russia?
    As for the "clowns" of the owners of money, I will say the following: - not a single clown will be in the presidency of the United States without these "owners of money", as you say, and will do what the owners order.
    
    Quote: tiredwithall
    I also read your comments earlier, therefore, as with Stanislavsky - I do not believe it!
    
    This is your right, but I would like to know - what do you not believe?
    1. weksha50
      
      +3
      
      15 June 2016 15: 52
      
      [quote = sever.56]And what is my naivety? [/ Quote]
      
      Do not tear your soul ... We are all different here, both in age and in experience of life, therefore our judgments differ ...
      
      The fact that all presidents are governed by capital is clear to the donkey ... However, at least in some way, outwardly, they show their "I" (at least they try) ...
      
      In this case, of course, Trump is desirable, not Clinton (for Russia) ... Mad woman (sorry, women, but the language doesn’t turn to call her a woman) ... Although Trump is a decent ... political inadequacy ...
      
      But the best way out for mankind is the collapse of the United States due to internal problems ... But these are personal fantasies that we are unlikely to see during this lifetime ...
      1. olimpiada15
        
        +1
        
        15 June 2016 20: 49
        
        Quote: weksha50
        Mad woman (sorry, women, but the language does not turn to call her a woman) ...
        
        Not even a woman, in relation to this specimen, the concept of "woman" does not fit, unless only "individual".
        This is for Gaddafi and Libya: such a delight in a person, especially a woman can not be.
    2. tiredwithall
      
      -3
      
      15 June 2016 17: 08
      
      "Clintons is a hawk of hawks, the most ardent" neocon "who will go to any lengths to realize the slogan: -" Yuesei - uber alles "."
      
      The embodiment of the slogan announced above is not the essence of the lady’s personal position. Or is it a real order of the owners of money, which is very doubtful, or election rhetoric with the permission of the owners of money. There are no politicians at this level nothing personal, only extremely loyal service or, in the mild case, impeachment (Nixon, the threat of impeachment), in the hard case - a bullet (Kennedy). In general, and is it not too much time that we devote to VO such empty topics as the US election theater?
3. siberalt
  
  +1
  
  15 June 2016 15: 49
  
  If the Iranian Glavpop agreed with the sadistic Clinton, then he considers her the future president. Then why scare Trump? Maybe because he is an adversary of radical Islam?
4. Ros64
  
  0
  
  15 June 2016 19: 59
  
  Why? Looking from what to describe!
Holsten

+2

15 June 2016 13: 17

Well, the Ayatollah could not resist and took part in the American election campaign. And I used to have a higher opinion of the notorious Eastern wisdom. Or do they have the concept of "wisdom" from a different root?
1. iliitchitch
  
  -1
  
  15 June 2016 13: 34
  
  Quote: Holsten
  Or do they have the concept of "wisdom" from a different root?
  
  . .
2. Asadullah
  
  +6
  
  15 June 2016 13: 57
  
  And I used to have a higher opinion of the notorious oriental wisdom
  
  And what is wrong? If Clinton wins, Ayatollah as if declares her support. In the event of Trump’s victory, which is not at all as simple as it might seem, Iran half-voice recalls that the agreements are unshakable. That is, changing the status quo will not work. Persia in the East today is like a compressed spring with enormous potential, primarily intellectual. That is why the West is trying to restrain it. Otherwise, it could become such a catalyst for the Middle East, as Japan has become for the Far.
  1. L. A. A.
    
    +1
    
    15 June 2016 14: 29
    
    If Iran does not restrain the West, it could pose a threat to Russia.
    1. Asadullah
      
      +3
      
      15 June 2016 14: 43
      
      If Iran does not restrain the West, it could pose a threat to Russia.
      
      Can you tell me when the last three hundred years Iran posed a threat to Russia? Only in fact, without sophistry.
      1. Mikado
        
        +6
        
        15 June 2016 14: 58
        
        Quote: Asadullah
        Can you tell me when the last three hundred years Iran posed a threat to Russia? Only in fact, without sophistry.
        
        If in fact, then (incomplete list)
        The Russian-Persian War (1796) is the response of the Russian Empire to the capture of Tbilisi by Persia.
        The Russian-Persian War (1804 — 1813) is Persia’s response to the accession of East Georgia to Russia.
        The Russian-Persian War (1826 — 1828) is Iran’s attempt to recover the territories lost in the Trans-Caucasus under the Gulistan Treaty.
        As it were, Persia unleashed all three wars. True, the interests of the parties intersected in Georgia. Now Georgia is not our ally. Iran - keeps its line, conditionally temporary ally, but anything can happen at any moment.
        Absolutely, with respect to you
        
        Asadullah
        
        +5
        
        15 June 2016 15: 40
        
        As it were, Persia unleashed all three wars.
        
        Yes, yes, I just operated on these last events, but you won’t throw the birds out of the song, that’s why you are absolutely right in your remarks, except for one thing, in general, Persia wanted to return her, no more. Today, the territory is not a matter of desire, since without a population it is a practically toxic asset. The main value and wealth, the people. Western Ukrainians would live in Crimea, joining Russia would be impossible. So Iran, today is not due to an ethnic barrier, but more confessional. This barrier also directs the development of the country and foreign policy. Respect for the interests of Iran, respect for the state system and development philosophy, is the only criterion for good relations. Moreover, Iran is very consistent and constant, as evidenced by smooth and close ties with China. By the way, in Chinese science, there are a lot of Iranian scientists working as business travelers. But the Russian Federation, in relation to Iran, behaved very incorrectly, at first it held this state as a bargaining chip in relations with the West, then moving it closer to please the political context, then it went on about the Sunni lobby of Russia, which essentially lobbied the interests of the Saudis. And only the threat of the American isolation plan allowed Russia to approach Persia at a distance of a handshake. And I will tell you more, there is nothing more fundamental than the mutual permeability of interests. In the axis Russia-Iran-Pakistan (Afghanistan) -China, absolute permeability, without a hint of a conflict of interest. A possible connection of the Caspian Sea with the Indian Ocean channel, practically doomed Russia with Iran to symbiosis for centuries. Already today, our tourists discovering Iran in rafting, mountain climbing, and even on beach vacations, return there again and again. Potential is what brings the two countries together. And do not be afraid of it. Unfortunately we go to the realization of the subject with very small checkers.
        
        weksha50
        
        +5
        
        15 June 2016 16: 04
        
        Quote: Asadullah
        Today, the territory is not a matter of desire, since without a population it is a practically toxic asset
        
        If you are talking about Georgia (I, at least, understood this), then it’s great to notice ...
        
        Well, for the rest, I completely agree with your statements ... Much now in the BV depends on our - God forbid - smart policy in relations with Iran ...
        
        Mikado
        
        +3
        
        15 June 2016 16: 08
        
        Quote: Asadullah
        
        Yes, yes, I just operated on these last events, but you won’t throw the birds out of the song, that’s why you are absolutely right in your remarks, except for one thing, in general Persia wanted to return hers, no more.
        Potential is what brings the two countries together. And do not be afraid of it. Unfortunately we go to the realization of the subject with very small checkers.
        
        Well, damn it, according to the first paragraph - this is geopolitics, each country has its own interests. I don’t presume to talk about whose, my own, not my own; It is now, for the last 50 years, that the borders in the world seem to have settled down, but before there was a constant redistribution. Some countries collapsed, others expanded. I do not want to justify anyone, to denigrate too.
        About the interaction you are absolutely right! Iran now bribes with independence, despite the absolute differences in culture. Iran is a conditional ally, and Pakistan is associated with a nuclear bomb, which may not be clear in whose hands. East is a delicate matter
        
        weksha50
        
        +2
        
        15 June 2016 16: 00
        
        Quote: Mikado
        Iran - keeps its line, conditionally temporary ally, but anything can happen at any moment
        
        That's it, golden words ...
        But, in general, in this case, even taking into account the Russian-Persian wars, we should have adhered to the principle: "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" ... Let not a friend, but an ally on a certain segment of the development path ...
        
        Russia had not so many problems from Iran-Persia than from other "warriors" ...
        And - again: the war was not going on because Russia wanted to seize the Iranian territories, or - on the contrary ... Fights went over the buffer territory ... Cynically, but - fact ...
        
        Iran is now our rival in the hydrocarbon sales market ... However, Iran is now an ally (to some extent) against the "world hegemon" ...
        
        So Russia now would have to support Iran (not like a LADY in its time) ... Not forgetting about his some help in resolving issues in Syria ... That is, Iran in this case went to meet US, and not a strange "coalition" ...
        
        Mikado
        
        +2
        
        15 June 2016 17: 21
        
        Quote: weksha50
        
        Iran is now our rival in the hydrocarbon sales market ... However, Iran is now an ally (to some extent) against the "world hegemon" ...
        
        So Russia now would have to support Iran (not like a LADY in its time) ... Not forgetting about his some help in resolving issues in Syria ... That is, Iran in this case went to meet US, and not a strange "coalition" ...
        
        I fully join your opinion!
        Help there, I think, is tangible. Yes, with the S-300 it turned out ugly. in Iran they guess too well what it means to cooperate with the "strange calolids" and how it will all end. There is solid (not possessed!) Sharia rule, but it is their choice! This is significantly better than the Middle Eastern leaders in Iraq and Syria that sold the Yankees for dollars. Although the Israelis think differently, this is their right. How many peoples - so many opinions!
Igor39

+2

15 June 2016 13: 19

Damn it, I thought that they would burn something else, not a contract. Do not beat him Kim
V.ic

+5

15 June 2016 13: 24

An agreement with SssiShiAshniki costs no more than the paper on which it is written / printed.
1. Talgat
  
  0
  
  16 June 2016 20: 47
  
  And the Iranians are well aware of this - and have repeatedly talked about it openly. That despite all the latest treaties, etc., the United States remains their enemy. And they will not trust them.
  Iran seeks an alliance with Russia and the CSTO. By the way, quite successfully. Several years ago they managed to make us "strategic partners"
  
  I sympathize with the desire of Iran for freedom and independence from world rulers. Their desire for an alliance with Eurasia (both with Russia and Kazakhstan, and with the CSTO and the EAC as a whole)
  
  But I am against letting them into both the CSTO and the EAU. All the same, they are a foreign culture and very peculiar. And they are very close by the way to get into us "in full". They want to be in the SCO, even in the CSTO, wherever they want to - just to get protection from the United States and Europe and to tie us up with an alliance.
  
  The maximum that you can agree to military mutual assistance and the free trade zone with the EAU.
cerbuk6155

+5

15 June 2016 13: 25

Well done. So RUSSIA must be done with those treaties that the US violates.
1. weksha50
  
  0
  
  15 June 2016 16: 07
  
  Quote: cerbuk6155
  Well done. So RUSSIA must be done with those treaties that the US violates.
  
  Hmm ... An interesting situation ...
  
  On the one hand, I completely agree with your statement ...
  
  On the other hand, I scratch my turnips and say: "If we did this all the time, then the third world war would have taken place long ago" ... Although it has been going on for a long time, practically ...
Corsair0304

+8

15 June 2016 13: 32

in full compliance with the terms of the agreement by Tehran, the United States still postpones the lifting of sanctions

How reminds me of the Minsk agreement! In no case should you trust mattresses for:
"Provide capital with 10% profit, and the capital agrees to any use, with 20% it becomes lively, with 50% it is positively ready to break its head, with 100% it violates all human laws, with 300% there is no crime for which it does not would venture to go, at least under fear of the gallows " Karl Marx in the book Capital
cap

+6

15 June 2016 13: 46

"As the Iranian Supreme Leader noted at his yesterday's meeting with the country's leadership, US foreign policy still reflects the hostile nature of the Reagan era, and there is no difference in this regard between Democrats and Republicans. Ayatullah Khamenei, speaking of" strengths and weaknesses. " of the agreement, noted that the US authorities in words and in their directives say that there are no barriers to banking operations with Iran, but in fact they do so that many banks do not dare to establish cooperation with Tehran. "
http://parstoday.com/ru/news/iran-i30568

As a result, "horseradish radish is not sweeter."
rotmistr60

+3

15 June 2016 13: 49

But if the other side violates it, if it crushes the agreement, we will burn it and let the ashes go in the wind.

It is said of course east much. That's just the states deep down to the bulb what the Iranians will do with paper, which, as practice shows, does not oblige Americans to anything.
31rus2

+3

15 June 2016 14: 17

Dear, the United States can easily terminate any agreement with any country with anyone, and Iran and the agreement can very easily become a bargain for Syria, apparently anticipating this and warning Tehran. How Tehran will behave is not known
1. weksha50
  
  +1
  
  15 June 2016 16: 09
  
  Quote: 31rus2
  How Tehran behaves is not known
  
  A lot will depend on a competent and balanced foreign policy of Russia ... A lot ...
The comment was deleted.
Sleepless 2014

-1

15 June 2016 16: 27

"... burn the treaty and let the ashes go down the wind ..." - wind chime.
1. The comment was deleted.
samarin1969

+1

15 June 2016 18: 45

Khamenei's worthy speech, as well as the position of Iran as a whole ... They live under sanctions for years and do not whine, keep afloat the 18th economy of the world, their army forces itself to be respected, has an original culture, and has sporting successes.