Upcoming War in Iran?

Weak, very weak.

Trump wrote:

Ciro wrote:

I’m a stupid lib turd!

I love Obama!

Still butt hurt because Hillary lost!

Orange Man Bad!

Why don’t you argue the points raised instead of resorting to childish tantrums and name calling?

It’s a sure sign you’ve got nothing. Agree with Janeruns, very weak.

ex-runner wrote:

No, no. The US directly engaged with Soleimani throughout the years. You can read about meetings he had with the CIA and governments of the past and provided intelligence to help in the Iran-Iraq war. Everyone likes to forget facts that look distasteful years later. Like the CIA arming the Taliban.

You are completely forgetting that he was a military commander, whose job it was to protect Iran in a similar way General Joseph Martin is to the US. He acted in the interest of Iran only. That is at odds with the US allegiance with Saudi Arabia and Israel and here we are today.

War is war. There are sides. If you believe one side is all good and one is all bad you are a fool.

Maybe the U.S. did directly engage with Soleimani, but it hasn't been in best interest of US. Ultimately That doesn't disprove any of my major points, which again are: 1) Soleimani was not a good guy, deserved what he got. 2) The Middle East is a mess. 3) The strike on Soleimani right now was a bad idea.

I don't know what you know about US involvement in Afghanistan. When you say the US armed the Taliban, I'm assuming you're referring to the US arming the Mujahideen in the 1980s Soviet-Afghan war. Some of the Mujahideen became Taliban, yes. But some because Northern Alliance that fought against the Taliban.

I'm not forgetting Soleimani was a military commander. He obviously was. But your comparison of Soleimani and General Martin is ridiculous. Martin didn't personally arrange for arming of Hezbollah, militant Shia proxies in Lebanon, Iraq, and Syria like Soleimani did. Martin didn't OK the protection of core AQ guys in Iran like Soleimani did. Bad comparison.

Soleimani deserved what he got. However, ILL SAY IT AGAIN: this strike was a bad idea. You'll notice the nuance of me criticizing both something Iran did - its support for terrorism by criticizing Soleimani and also me criticizing something the US is doing under Trump by executing this strike now. Saudi Arabia is a state supporter of Islamoterrorism as well, obv.

Make up your mind. You can either say Soleimani was just a Iranian General doing his duty to defend Iran (in complete defiance of the facts) or you can lecture us about moral/ethical ambiguity in war. You can't do both.

Trump wrote:

https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/15/politics/house-ethics-committee-investigations/index.html

Cross the powers that be and pay the price;

And some of them became Osama bin Laden, whatever happened to that guy?

It seems like nearly all terrorist groups are proxy armies for some government or other, including the US, or offshoots.

WW3 has been happening, it’s just a long, drawn out series of conflicts and proxy wars between superpowers in the Middle East.

Every major country is involved in the Syrian War somehow and will probably be drawn into any Iran conflict.

Some times your friend becomes your enemy years later...see: Sadam, Bin Laden.

I thought Trump was getting us out of the endless Middle East conflicts?....see: Syria.

As far as Iran goes. It's all talk and saber rattling until boots are on the ground in Tehran taking out their capital.....which ain't happening.

We will, and have, send thousands of troops overseas to build up our defensive posture.

Iran doesn't have an economic or political leg to stand on.....unless Trump starts committing war crimes by bombing cultural sites.

Alan

If Iran just shuts their mouths and do what they are told (By President Trump) there will NOT be a War. Iran could avoid their doom by doing those 2 SIMPLE Things.

The more I think about it, this seems the perfect time to get the F-35 into combat and to integrate its use most effectively with the F-22. Job number one will be to destroy Iran's air defense infrastructure and to kill as many important military decision makers as possible. Destroy military air and naval assets as well. Take down their telecommunications and command/control nodes and then vamoosh.

Iran has still never paid a real price for killing so many Marines in their Lebanon barracks in the early 1980s. If Tehran takes a major hit how much will they have left to support and coordinate Hizballah and other proxy groups, not to mention their subversion of their Iraqi neighbors? It would be wonderful to truly hobble the mullahs.

know nothing wrote:

Dashiell Hammett wrote:

I don't know what you know about US involvement in Afghanistan. When you say the US armed the Taliban, I'm assuming you're referring to the US arming the Mujahideen in the 1980s Soviet-Afghan war. Some of the Mujahideen became Taliban, yes. But some became Northern Alliance that fought against the Taliban.

And some of them became Osama bin Laden, whatever happened to that guy? It seems like nearly all terrorist groups are proxy armies for some government or other, including the US, or offshoots.

Sigh. U.S. didn't arm bin Laden and what became al Qaeda. The U.S. armed, trained, funded groups that became, among other groups, the Taliban. Thats bad enough. You don't need to romanticize the folly of US foreign policy in greater Middle East by claiming it gave money directly to guy who orchestrated 9/11 because it didn't.

Bin Laden was a member of the Afghan Arabs sect of the Afghan Mujahideen. This was a term for Islamist fighters who came to Afghanistan from all over the Muslim world to fight Soviets. The U.S. and CIA predominantly funded, trained, and armed not the Afghan Arabs but the indigenous Afghan Mujahideen. The U.S. wasnt funding bin Laden.

Besides, bin Laden came from a very wealthy family and this was way before he alienated the Saudi and then later the Sudanese governments. Bin Laden had his own funding. He also didnt like America or Westerners that much even way back then. He came to really hate the U.S. though after US Presence in Kuwait, Saudi Arabia circa Desert Storm, Desert Shield.

Dashiell Hammett wrote:

know nothing wrote:

And some of them became Osama bin Laden, whatever happened to that guy? It seems like nearly all terrorist groups are proxy armies for some government or other, including the US, or offshoots.

Sigh. U.S. didn't arm bin Laden and what became al Qaeda. The U.S. armed, trained, funded groups that became, among other groups, the Taliban. Thats bad enough. You don't need to romanticize the folly of US foreign policy in greater Middle East by claiming it gave money directly to guy who orchestrated 9/11 because it didn't.

You’re extrapolating arguments that aren’t there. Never said “directly”.

However, the US didn’t “not fund bin Laden”. Don’t make me construct a rabbit hole. Shan’t.

In any case we agree on “the folly of US foreign policy in greater Middle East”.

It looks like that commercial plane with 176 passengers that went down was shot down by Iran.

Accidentally

X-Runner wrote:

It looks like that commercial plane with 176 passengers that went down was shot down by Iran.

Accidentally

You do not know that! More than likely U.S. or a nation friendly to U.S. shot down the airline flight thinking the airline was a bomber headed toward Iraq and toward U.S. troops.

Dashiell Hammett wrote:

Maybe the U.S. did directly engage with Soleimani, but it hasn't been in best interest of US. Ultimately That doesn't disprove any of my major points, which again are: 1) Soleimani was not a good guy, deserved what he got. 2) The Middle East is a mess. 3) The strike on Soleimani right now was a bad idea.

The real reason Trump wanted Soleimani dead is that he is part of Trump worst money laundering deal ever. When Soleimani tried to use front men to "fund" a property deal in Azerbaijan only the Trump Organization was willing to work with them. The project was called The Trump Tower Baku. Ivanka was the frontman for Trump Org. That project was somewhat built, but has never opened, and appears to have never intended to open. Rather the purpose was to launder money that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard could use ... much like the U.S. government has done to "fund" certain covert operations over the years.

How many TOR M@U 9M331's are under US control in IRAN?

https://twitter.com/BabakTaghvaee/status/1214974920263979009

poster, you're speculating wrote:

X-Runner wrote:

It looks like that commercial plane with 176 passengers that went down was shot down by Iran.

Accidentally

You do not know that! More than likely U.S. or a nation friendly to U.S. shot down the airline flight thinking the airline was a bomber headed toward Iraq and toward U.S. troops.

In 1988, the USS Vincennes misidentified an Iran Air Airbus A300 civilian airliner, Iran Air Flight 655, as an attacking F-14 Tomcat fighter aircraft. The U.S. military shot the plane down and murdered 290 civilians. The U.S. claimed "oops, friendly fire."

poster, you're speculating wrote:

X-Runner wrote:

It looks like that commercial plane with 176 passengers that went down was shot down by Iran.

Accidentally

You do not know that! More than likely U.S. or a nation friendly to U.S. shot down the airline flight thinking the airline was a bomber headed toward Iraq and toward U.S. troops.

random6 wrote:

How many TOR M@U 9M331's are under US control in IRAN?

Enough for a False Flag operation.

Trump has done these two things:

1) Eliminated all control of the Iran nuclear program

2) Given Iran incentive to sprint to a nuclear weapon.

I have no doubt that Iran now feels its only path to survival is get a nuke and put it on one of those very accurate ballistic missiles we now know they have. They made a point of showing how well they work. They'll aim one at Riyadh and the other at Tel Aviv.

So Iran will be quiet for a little while as they sprint for nukes.

The Republican Party is the most dangerous organization on the planet.