The coverage about HP being accused of knowingly selling printers to Iran through 3rd party distributors in violation of U.S. law is mildly interesting.
HP is violating the trade embargo if its executives cut a deal with Redington knowing its printers would be sold in Iran, according to the Globe. But despite a crackdown on U.S. companies who sell products in Iran, some American companies whose products are sold through third-party distributors have so far avoided scrutiny.
What is interesting is following the comments on the stories. In several of the stories I have read the comments basically trend to “what’s the point of trade embargoes anyway” or “it’s only printers” or “this is more neocon strategy to inflict harm on the innocent people of Iran”. Few people even bring up the issue of why there is a trade embargo on Iran in the first place.
What is ironic is that the same people who say it’s okay to violate trade embargoes on Iran or Cuba are apocalyptic about the notion of Swiss bankers aiding wealthy Americans to avoid taxes (legally or otherwise) which is just another form of trade at it’s core. Stepping away from the class warfare dimension for a moment, how about the appropriateness of willfully selling printers to Sudan or Zimbabwe, both subjects of general trade embargoes? How about trading in palm oil from Indonesia in spite of an embargo over deforestation issues as a result of palm oil production?
We will end up in a very dangerous place when it becomes acceptable to simply ignore laws you don’t agree with.