So being a trading partner is not financially advantageous to Iran? Is that what you're saying? I'm not flip-flopping shit, you disingenuous turd. I mean exactly what the fuck I said. They are a financial backer of Iran. Being a financial backer takes many forms, not just shipping them stacks of cash, idiot.Damn, are you clueless! I never said trade isn't advantageous. Let me make it as simple as your pea-sized brain can grasp. Sellling you a car doesn't make me your "financial backer". Providing the financing for you to buy a car does. That's elementary. Only an idiot can't see the difference.
"Trade relations between the two increased from US$1 billion in 2005 to $3.7 billion in 2008"
"According to Reuters (Wed Apr 2, 2014), Iran and Russia have made progress towards an oil for goods deal sources said would be worth up to $20 billion." Originally Posted by WombRaider
But even if I were to cut you some slack and overlook your flip-flopping redefinition of "chief financial backer" to mean "chief trading partner", you still look clueless. Here are Iran's top 5 trading partners last year, according to your favorite source of information (wikipedia):
Exports - China, Turkey, India, Japan, South Korea.
Imports - UAE, China, India, South Korea, Turkey.
So Russia is not Iran's "chief trading partner" either. In fact, it's not even among the top 5! And a multi-year barter trade deal isn't enough to change that picture, especially since most other countries will also be expanding trade with Iran as sanctions are lifted.
Give it up, sewer rat. I'm tired of schooling you all the time. Stay on the sidelines when the topic involves economics, finance, trade, oil markets or geopolitics. Stick to the gloryhole business since it's obviously the only thing you know well.
.