Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Sun Feb 16 16:15:46 PST 2020

Utopia Talk / Politics / Iran top diplomat 2
Paramount
Member
Sun Jan 05 12:46:51
Jergul,

”Speaking of games. Iraq just passed legislation expelling the US from the country.

So are you going to leave, or are you going to become an occupying force again?”


Yes Rugian, what is the US going to do now? Will the US respect the will of the Iraqi parliament and people? Or will the US mafia regime make threats and use extortion as they so often do to force their will upon other people?
Rugian
Member
Sun Jan 05 12:53:47
"Will the US respect the will of the Iraqi parliament and people?"

Grouping "parliament and people" together is a joke. The government literally machine-gunned the last group of people that attempted to express their "will." With the approbation of Suleimani, no less.
Paramount
Member
Sun Jan 05 12:54:01
Tumbleweed
Sun Jan 05 12:26:07
Iranian state television reports that Iran will no longer abide by any of the limits of its 2015 nuclear deal.

hard to blame them... a nuclear-armed madman is threatening to blow up cultural sites after legally questionably assassinating a top general

btw, attacking cultural sites is a war crime under an international treaty supposedly


- -

Yes, it is quite bold and insolent of the EU to keep asking Iran to abide by the JCPOA when the USA has violated and abandoned it, and when the EU itself can’t live up to their part.
Rugian
Member
Sun Jan 05 12:59:59
Oh, and it's hardly surprsing that Suleimani would have approved of the Iraqi massacres. Even if you ignore his own history of barbarity and atrocities, using excessive force against protestors is just standard operating procedure when it comes to Iran:

"Special Report: Iran’s leader ordered crackdown on unrest - 'Do whatever it takes to end it'

December 23, 2019

About 1,500 people were killed during less than two weeks of unrest that started on Nov. 15. The toll, provided to Reuters by three Iranian interior ministry officials, included at least 17 teenagers and about 400 women as well as some members of the security forces and police.

The toll of 1,500 is significantly higher than figures from international human rights groups and the United States. A Dec. 16 report by Amnesty International said the death toll was at least 304. The U.S. State Department, in a statement to Reuters, said it estimates that many hundreds of Iranians were killed, and has seen reports that number could be over 1,000.

The figures provided to Reuters, said two of the Iranian officials who provided them, are based on information gathered from security forces, morgues, hospitals and coroner’s offices. "

http://www...-takes-to-end-it-idUSKBN1YR0QR
jergul
large member
Sun Jan 05 13:01:17
"literally machine-gunned the last group of people"

I wonder what Nato countries sponsored those soldiers' training.

Ruggy
Here is a tip: Stop acting in ways that imply moral equivalency.

The desire to be liked is perhaps one of the more tiresome of American traits.

Tip 2: We don't like you went you do stupid shit.
Rugian
Member
Sun Jan 05 13:01:41
1,500 people killed so that a theocratic despotic regime can keep a hold on its power: nobody bats an eye.

Some nigger in the US gets shot while assaulting a cop: everybody loses their minds!

This place, basically.
Paramount
Member
Sun Jan 05 13:04:55
I never thought I’d see Rugian quoting Amnesty International. Lol
Rugian
Member
Sun Jan 05 13:06:40
Jergul,

I'd respect your opinion more if you didnt simultaneously root for Russia, Syria, and Iran when they do the same "stupid shit."
jergul
large member
Sun Jan 05 13:09:06
On your last post. I have called Iran a fascist technocracy for 2 decades now.

Along similar lines, I have said that Russia's annexation of Crimea is more serious than the US invasion of Iraq.

1500 is probably a bit high (there are problems with the method used that gives higher counts. No need to rehash Iraq body count and other such discussions?).

But more than 1000 for sure. Civic unrest in the context of maximum pressure was bound to be slapped down hard.
Rugian
Member
Sun Jan 05 13:09:20
And there is no moral equivalency. There arent 1,500 dead Americans who were shot by the government for the crime of protesting. Just as the United States hasn't been turned into a banana republic that relies on oil to prop up its shirtless dictator and his corrupt cadres.

We are a beacon of morality compared to the alt6.
Rugian
Member
Sun Jan 05 13:13:46
Jergul,

And during that same period, you continually expressed wide-eyed flee at the prospect of Iran being able to degrade American strategic capability in the ME.

Apparently fascist technocracies are fine when it comes to bringing down the Great Satan.
jergul
large member
Sun Jan 05 13:25:33
Ruggy
You mean the gas riots that are a direct consequence of the US policy of maximum pressure?

You know, the one introduced in spite because Trump wanted to tear up as much of Obama's legacy as possible.

Trump is doing shit that Trump wants to do. There is no policy beyond that. And certainly no morality involved in his decisions.

There is ultimately no "we" involved. Executive powers are pretty much unchecked abroad. Trump can do what he wants and he is doing just that.

There is tons of moral equivalency. Its inherent to a crack-pot despot with a fondness for gold plating doing whatever mischief he wants abroad from his warroom in Mar-o-lago.

It is however not your fault. The powers vested in the president grant him crack-pot dictator powers in actions abroad.

Its a systemic flaw.
jergul
large member
Sun Jan 05 13:30:19
Iran has a solid conventional deterrent and has had so for a while. You people had trouble accepting that, so we exchanged words.

By "degrade American strategic capability in the ME", you mean bombing Iran on a whim has costs?

By "glee", you mean I am glad Iran has not been bombed to crap?

Sure.
Rugian
Member
Sun Jan 05 13:34:27
jergul,

The nuclear deal was nothing but a stopgap measure designed to kick the issue of Iranian nuclearization down the road. Its ultimate success hinged on the prospect of Tehran experiencing some sort of regime change in the interim. Which is never going to happen

(For all the talk about Iran's "moderates," they have never once this century held anything more than a secondary post of influence in determining foreign policy - the West needs to stop pretending that they have the ability to gain actual power under the current system).

European "pragmatism" in regards to the Iran deal was the equivalent of a single-minded "what is realistically possible to accomplish" approach - ignoring the fact that what is "realistically possible" is still blatantly unacceptable. A nuclear Iran is blatantly unacceptable.
Rugian
Member
Sun Jan 05 13:35:21
Hence the current economic squeeze.
Victim
Member
Sun Jan 05 13:41:38
"Some ni**r in the US"

Ban Rugian, please.
jergul
large member
Sun Jan 05 13:47:07
Ruggy
lol. No.

Trump did it to spite Obama.

Are you so much in denial that you do not see that?

A nuclear USA is blatantly unacceptable!

Wow. That was a fun thing to say. I get why you say things like that.

Fact of the matter is. The ME will be a mess for as long as Israel is the sole nuclear power. It is profoundly destabilizing.

So yah. Egypt, Iran, Turkey and Saudi Arabia will probably end up with arsenals at some point.
Paramount
Member
Sun Jan 05 14:13:17
I think I have seen news flashes missiles has struck nearby the US embassy in Iraq on two different occasions the past day.

Either the militias sucks and can’t hit the embassy.

Or, they are consciously letting the missiles land nearby in a ”psychological warfare” to keep the marines in a state of constant insecurity until they gets tired and leave?

Hmm...
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Sun Jan 05 14:54:25
"Fact of the matter is. The ME will be a mess for as long as Israel is the sole nuclear power. It is profoundly destabilizing."

And it is pretty easy to see for anyone who isn't wrapped up in some "Empire" delusions.
Allahuakbar
Member
Sun Jan 05 16:18:29
I blame Trump:

http://edi...actors-killed-kenya/index.html


Three Americans were killed in Sunday's terror attack in Kenya.

The Americans -- a US service member and two civilian contractors working for the Defense Department -- were killed in the attack carried out by Al-Shabaab, US Africa Command, which is responsible for military relations with nations on the continent, confirmed to CNN. Two DOD members wounded in the attack are now in stable condition and are being evacuated, Africa Command said.
The attack occurred at a Kenya Defense Force in Manda Bay, Kenya. Sources have previously told CNN that the base was used by US Special Operations forces working with the Kenyans.

Africa Command said the US uses the airfield for missions such as providing training to African allies, responding to crises and protecting US interests in the region.
The names of those who were killed and wounded have not been released.
jergul
large member
Sun Jan 05 16:31:13
Audacious assault'

By BBC World Service Africa editor Will Ross

This was an audacious pre-dawn raid by al-Shabab militants.

It is not yet possible to verify al-Shabab's version of events, but there are unconfirmed reports that one of the aircraft destroyed in the attack is a US plane used for spying in the region.

The fact that this happened close to the popular tourist destination of Lamu Island is also alarming.

Since 2011, when Kenya sent troops to fight al-Shabab in Somalia, the jihadist group has carried out frequent attacks on Kenyan soil.

Almost exactly a year ago, 21 people were killed during a raid on the Dusit hotel complex in the capital Nairobi.

==================

BBC managed to not call the attack "terrorism".

"One of the aircraft destroyed..."

Let see if Trump can stay focused. Americans have been killed. In Kenya. Which is a different country than Iran.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Sun Jan 05 23:07:09
perhaps Obamas father led the attack

-------

"They’re allowed to kill our people. They’re allowed to torture and maim our people. They’re allowed to use roadside bombs and blow up our people. And we’re not allowed to touch their cultural sites? It doesn’t work that way"
~ lawless fraud dictator

he decides what's legal...
Allahuakbar
Member
Sun Jan 05 23:29:23
Is Iraq a colony of the USA?

http://www...eatens-sanctions-idUSKBN1Z409A


Trump also threatened sanctions against Iraq and said that if U.S. troops were required to leave the country, Iraq’s government would have to pay Washington for the cost of a “very extraordinarily expensive” air base there.

He said if Iraq asked U.S. forces to leave on an unfriendly basis, “we will charge them sanctions like they’ve never seen before ever. It’ll make Iranian sanctions look somewhat tame.”
Habebe
Member
Mon Jan 06 01:14:31
You know Trump is usually good at selling his policies....not so much at this one...so fat seems like a bad idea.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Mon Jan 06 01:56:17
one would hope that some R's are getting a bit nervous about backing a moron clown fraud criminal

Iraq should just give Trump a package with "The Oil" written on it to appease him
Habebe
Member
Mon Jan 06 02:07:02
Tumbleweed Thats always the first place you go.

Now I'm skeptical of this event.Even though it may have an unintended sode effect if we get out of Iraq (yay).

But who would then lead? Biden?
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Mon Jan 06 02:25:12
it will be someone who thinks getting information before making decisions is important* and who is capable of stating information accurately and can behave like an adult and be professional (I never would've guessed it possible we'd have a president who failed at even one of those, Trump is amazing indeed)

*it may not always work out, but having a mentally ill fraud who knows nothing while assuming he knows everything surely is not better
Paramount
Member
Mon Jan 06 02:41:13
” He said if Iraq asked U.S. forces to leave on an unfriendly basis, “we will charge them sanctions like they’ve never seen before ever. It’ll make Iranian sanctions look somewhat tame.”

The hallmarks of a mafia regime. The USA is now using threats and extortion to NOT LEAVE Iraq.

What are you saying, Rugian? Didn’t you vote for Trump because he promised you that he wanted to leave the ME and Iraq?
Paramount
Member
Mon Jan 06 02:49:42
“They’re allowed to kill our people. They’re allowed to torture and maim our people. They’re allowed to use roadside bombs and blow up our people. And we’re not allowed to touch their cultural sites? It doesn’t work that way,” he said.”


Wtf?
jergul
large member
Mon Jan 06 04:33:52
I think Trump is outraged because he did not see lateral pushback coming.

He is prolly all geared up to deal with Iran, but not with events in Kenya or diplomatic stuff in Iraq.

From his POV, it must seem like irritating distractions. People are mucking up his new deal with Iran.
jergul
large member
Mon Jan 06 04:37:30
"Prime Minister Adil Abdul Mahdi said he had been scheduled to meet Soleimani on the day he was killed to discuss an initiative to ease Iran-Saudi tensions."

Lol, the diplomat was on a state visit and a guest of Iraq.

hehehe, I was right to be interested in the Iraqi response.

Yah, you will get your withdrawal from Irak habebe. Either that, or a new occupation.
RugianLovesTheCock
Member
Mon Jan 06 05:04:47
...pretending to love american cocks to protect their interests is beautiful irony.
Habebe
Member
Mon Jan 06 10:01:12
Jergul, I hope not the latter.

I like the Saudis, especially this new Prince. I actually grew up around a bunch of Saudis one even lived with us during the Gulf war and taught me karate whenn I was like 6.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Mon Jan 06 10:16:38
Saudi Karate, I imagine a dojo where everyone is dressed like Jihadis and yell takbir after the moves instead of the typical kiyaa! Uts! Takbir! Uts! Takbir!
Paramount
Member
Mon Jan 06 10:50:23
” I like the Saudis, especially this new Prince.”

Are you Hot Rod?
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Mon Jan 06 11:30:07
hah
Forwyn
Member
Mon Jan 06 13:47:39
lol @ "diplomat"
swordtail
Anarchist Prime
Mon Jan 06 14:05:59
http://www...e-illegal-murder-of-soleimani/
Paramount
Member
Mon Jan 06 14:47:51
Nice article. It should make most people (even Rugian) shut up and give up their frivolous defence of Trump/USA.
Forwyn
Member
Mon Jan 06 15:02:25
We were arguing in 2008 about Iran upgrading Shia militias in Iraq with EFPs to defeat US armor during the surge.

Now we're pretending it didn't happen. lulz
jergul
large member
Mon Jan 06 15:03:20
BAGHDAD (Reuters) - The United States-led military coalition against Islamic State said on Monday that it was pulling out of Iraq and would be repositioning forces over the next few days and weeks, a letter seen by Reuters showed.

“Sir, in deference to the sovereignty of the Republic of Iraq, and as requested by the Iraqi Parliament and the Prime Minister, CJTF-OIR will be repositioning forces over the course of the coming days and weeks to prepare for onward movement,” read a letter from United States Marine Corps Brigadier General William H. Seely III, the commanding general of Task Force Iraq.

The authenticity of the letter, which was addressed to the Iraqi defense ministry’s Combined Joint Operations Baghdad, was confirmed to Reuters independently by an Iraqi military source.

“We respect your sovereign decision to order our departure,” it said.

===================

The USMC is something else. This is some supreme tail wagging dog stuff.

Notice the exact wording. Seely is acting within his authority (positioning stuff in Iraq) and pretty much forcing the administration to follow through with actually ordering the withdrawal.

The verdict is in. If the USMC really hates Suleimani's assassination, then no one should like it.
jergul
large member
Mon Jan 06 15:07:27
Forwyn
How are we pretending it did not happen?
Forwyn
Member
Mon Jan 06 15:20:55
"Let us now move on to the next lie, which is being widely repeated, this time originated by Donald Trump, that Soleimani was responsible for the “deaths of hundreds, if not thousands, of Americans”. This lie has been parroted by everybody, Republicans and Democrats alike.


Really? Who were they? When and where?"
Habebe
Member
Mon Jan 06 17:10:39
Nimatzo, the guys name was Nahzi Shihabi ( nah-zee ) there were a few others I remember Abdul Rahman...they were all going to college in the US and worked for Aramco oil. My dad was the building super. They were all super friendly, smoked a lot of hash.

Paramount, Omg no. He ( Prince) has been working on some good reforms and is an ally tonthe US.
jergul
large member
Mon Jan 06 17:20:35
The top US general said Monday a letter suggesting the US would withdraw troops from Iraq was released by mistake and poorly worded, telling reporters "that's not what's happening."
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley scrambled to address the confusion that began after the leak of an unsigned letter from the US Command in Baghdad notifying the Iraqi government that US troops were being repositioned in the region.
It seemed to suggest American forces were being moved out of the country and fueled an immediate wave of questions as US officials in Baghdad confirmed its authenticity but said it did not indicate US troops were being withdrawn.

At the Pentagon, Milley and Defense Secretary Mark Esper were asked about the letter by reporters.
Uproar and consequences mount for Trump after Soleimani killing
Uproar and consequences mount for Trump after Soleimani killing
"We are repositioning forces throughout the region," Esper said. "That letter is inconsistent of where we are right now."
But the confusion lingered even after the two men left the Pentagon briefing room and persisted until Milley returned to clarify further.
"That letter is a draft. It was a mistake, it was unsigned, it should not have been released ... (it was) poorly worded, implies withdrawal, that is not what's happening," Milley said.
"It's an honest mistake ... it should not have been sent," he added.
Ultimately, it became clear that the US had not ordered troops out of Iraq but had sent notice that some of its forces would be repositioned.
A US official in Baghdad told CNN that the letter was a notification about repositioning of troops from one place to another. The official said that such notifications are standard.

The move comes after Iraq's Parliament voted nearly unanimously to force the government to work toward the removal of US and other foreign troops inside the country, a clear rebuke to Washington over the strike that killed Iranian commander Qasem Soleimani.
This story is breaking and will be updated.

===================

Lulz, they are trying to talk back the letter. And how carefully they are hedging.

My take on it is that the USMC in theatre is furious about the assasination and is making the point clearly that it cannot complete its mission.

The USMC is very mission focused.

I think it either wants to leave, or surge and reoccupy Iraq. It does not want to defacto occupy Iraq with 5000 US servicemen and whatever soldiers Nato countries are unable to extract.

Makes sense.

The talk back seemed mostly designed to leave the decision in the hands of the president: Surge or leave?

The USMC and other Nato troops under its command is standing down until a decision is made.
jergul
large member
Mon Jan 06 17:29:55
I have always been ambivalent about the USMC. It has done its share of attrocities, but at least it was not casualty adverse. It put men on the line to meet objectives (mostly cleaning up the dog's breakfast the Army it replaced had spewed up).

True for Al-Anbar at least.

It never got behind the idea that the other side must be cheating somehow if American soldier were actually killed.

Got to respect that.












Rugian
Member
Mon Jan 06 17:57:47
jergul,

As long as we're glibly talking about US soldier being killed, what exactly is the "other side" of this military conflict that you're referring to?

You need to figure out what your narrative is already. Either Iran is at war with the United States within the Iraqi theater, or it isn't.

If it is not, then how is it those US servicmen keep getting blown up again?

If it is, then what exactly is the fucking problem with taking out a legitimate military target within the theater of conflict?
jergul
large member
Mon Jan 06 18:11:52
Ruggy
I was talking about Al Anbar, the dog's breakfast the 82nd airborne made of it, and the lives the USMC sacrificed to stabilize the province.

The other side would be sunni militia from all of the tribes in Al-Anbar.

In Iraq today, US forces are occassionally targetted by both sunni and shia militia. The main focus is putting down fragments of sunni militia groups. Some of them might even be ISIS.

Suleimani's role since 2013 has been to support and mobilized efforts aimed at breaking sunni militia groups in the Levant. Its seems confusing because you think some of the sunni militia are good guys and some of them are bad guys.

What is wrong with taking out a senior official on a state visit in a country that is hosting you?

Well, pragmatically, your ME policy collapses.

===================

"Yet at the same time, Trump tweeted about drawing up a 52-target list in Iran, including sites of cultural heritage. This has drawn predictable ire from Iran.
"A reminder to those hallucinating about emulating ISIS war crimes by targeting our cultural heritage: Through MILLENNIA of history, barbarians have come and ravaged our cities, razed our monuments and burnt our libraries. Where are they now? We're still here, & standing tall," Zarif tweeted Sunday."

Yah, threatening to blow up Iranian culture was not smart.
Forwyn
Member
Mon Jan 06 18:16:13
Curious that Zarif is so butthurt, as he should have been the one making diplomatic visits, and is not subject to a UN travel ban
Wrath of Orion
Member
Mon Jan 06 18:19:41
"Well, pragmatically, your ME policy collapses."

But this is what Rugian and people like him want, so you can see why he's all for it.
jergul
large member
Mon Jan 06 18:32:19
Forwyn
He is butt-hurt because he is Iranian and they do not like threats against their cultural heritage.

I get that the concept is difficult for you. Are there any 300 year old buildings in the US?

I doubt it.
TJ
Member
Mon Jan 06 18:39:17
jergul->I get that the concept is difficult for you. Are there any 300 year old buildings in the US?

I doubt it.

Your doubt is wrong. There are quit a few actually.
jergul
large member
Mon Jan 06 18:47:14
http://en....buildings_in_the_United_States

Rugian
Member
Mon Jan 06 18:50:46
"This list is incomplete; you can help by expanding it."

Unless you really believe that the US only has a few dozen buildings that date back to the 19th century...lol.
Rugian
Member
Mon Jan 06 18:53:23
Anyway.

So you are effectively denying that Iran has waged a war against the US in Iraq for nearly twenty years now?

Fair enough. The alternative explanation is that it's been conducting asymmetrical warfare against the US. In which case, it 110% deserves the terrorist designation that has been bestowed upon it, and Suleimani just learned what it means to be on the wrong side of the GWOT.
jergul
large member
Mon Jan 06 18:55:37
Ruggy
You too miscounted a century. I was aiming for before 1620, not 1720. Neither of course are the 19th century.
Rugian
Member
Mon Jan 06 18:56:41
jergul

My point being is that that list in general is woefully lacking. No matter which century you're looking at.
Forwyn
Member
Mon Jan 06 18:57:24
jergul posts link showing several dozen 17th century buildings, lol
Rugian
Member
Mon Jan 06 18:57:32
Also

2020 - 300 = ?
jergul
large member
Mon Jan 06 19:01:05
I am indeed effectively denying that.

The alternative explanation is that Iraq is a violent country deeply embroiled in tribal honour concepts.

You are attributing stuff Iraqis do on Iran.

Truth of the matter - Iran is riding the tiger as much as the US is. Hold on tight, because who knows where those crazy Arabs will end up running.
jergul
large member
Mon Jan 06 19:02:23
Let it rest. I meant 400 years, just like you meant the 18th century in your flippant comment.
Rugian
Member
Mon Jan 06 19:03:54
Also also

I find it completely laughable that the Norwegian who regularly dismisses the aesthetic and historic appeal of ancient properties as foolish nostalgia is now suddenly crying about Iranian cultural monuments.

I mean, ffs. This is what a supposedly "historic" city looks like in Norway:

http://upl...gen_med_St._Hallvard_kirke.jpg

So much for respecting the past.
jergul
large member
Mon Jan 06 19:08:47
Ruggy
You are tiresome. I am saying that you upset all Iranians when you threaten their old stuff. They are odd that way.

I am not an Iranian. You have bombed far worse things that old heritage sites.
jergul
large member
Mon Jan 06 19:10:25
My part of Norway was torched in 1944. I am not sentimental about old stuff.
Rugian
Member
Mon Jan 06 19:12:28
jergul,

No, I meant 19th century. Because that section most clearly demonstrates the flaws of that list (Boston alone literally has thousands of 19th century buildings, never mind the rest of the country).

It's a little late to be denying Iranian involvement in efforts to blow the limbs off of US soldiers, given that you already conceded that to Forwyn.

Does it ever occur to you that between your hatred of human procreation and your hatred of human architectural achievements, that you might just hate humanity in general? Frankly, I don't put it past you.
jergul
large member
Mon Jan 06 19:24:41
Ruggy
Not to mention how many 20th century buildings are missing from the list. But cute that you could actually conceive of listing every building from the 19th century.

Riding the tiger. The US was prouncing about inside of shia militia strongholds. Sunni massacres of shia were in livid memory (remember Sadr's dad?) and sunni militiar were armed to the teeth and with lots of military experience.

So the US goal of disarming the shia was not going to happen. Nor would Iran want that to happen. Duty to protect (d2p) and all that.

The cone-shaped explosive devices you are referring to are actually quite elegant. A smallish directed blast aimed at immobilizing or destroying armoured vehicles. They are access denial weapons. They could be made in any shack with off the shelf material, so it is more the know-how than the actual armament we are talking about.

So no more joy rides into shia strongholds.

It worked out quite well. You did not completely piss off the shia like you did the sunnis (enter AQ, then ISIS).
jergul
large member
Mon Jan 06 19:26:31
I am not sentimental about procreation or architecture. It does not infer hatred. Nor does sentimentality infer lack of hatred - Hitler loved his dog Blondi by all accounts. The sentimental fool.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Tue Jan 07 00:52:34
The US limbs blown apart by Iranian weapons are only a fraction of the Iranian lives sacrificed to defend Iran from the rabid dog (Saddam) that the US supported for 8 years. The narrative is lacking, as if the world started after 9/11. It is tedious to walk this conflict back to it’s origin in 1953 and it will ultimately land in >stop intervening<, go home, respect the international framework for sovereignty and rules of law. You only have one job, be civilized.
jergul
large member
Tue Jan 07 01:21:24
Nimi
The cone-shape devices were de-escalatory. The alternative was burying 150mm arty shells like the sunnis were fond of doing. Those have huge blast zones and use raw explosive force to crack open vehicles.

Deployed for access denial to protect militia strongholds. From vehicles, not limbs. Entering strongholds was not something you did on foot.

Thinking Iran got involved to spite the US is silly.

Part of the reason was to stop a roll-back that might re-install the sunnis in power at the expense of democracy (Iran could likely imagine that the US would figure out at some point that democracy in Iraq means a shia dominated Iraq).

Another part is wanting to avoid failed states next door as terrorist incubators.

Finally, there is the duty to protect. Sunnis have traditionally been very unpleasant in their dealings with the majority shia population. A sunni resurgence against an unprotected shia population would not have ended well.

So the shia militia got weapons, training, and advice.

If anything, Iran played a strongly moderating role in Iraq. Claiming it is destablizing is only true from a perspective where stabilizing means the US should be able to arm and disarm whoever it likes and have free operational mobility at all times.

This is not to say that the shia militia are not asshats. Or stop being asshats when in government uniform. But that is not Iran's fault. They were asshats from the start.
jergul
large member
Tue Jan 07 01:33:00
There were a number of spectacular terrorist acts agains the shia. In sum far more deadly than 9-11.

Seriously, would a rational Iran have done things any differently than the Iran we know?

As to the nuclear weapons. Iran did have a programme. It cause lots of issues. The equivalent of its Scotus weighed in and ruled the weapons illegal and prohibited in Iran.

Part of the reason is their uselessness. The weapons are unusable. This is where the mad-dog theory is dangerous. The legality of nuclear weapons in Iran is highly dependent on Iran being sure no one will nuke them.

If that becomes questionable, then the weapons do gain a function as a deterrent, though their use would still remain illegal. Particularly for first strikes.

But for now, Iran remains confident that its conventional deterrent is sufficient to deter conventional attacks.

It probably thought it sufficient to deter assassinations too, so is likely currently re-evaluating how it should proceed.

Though nothing realistic would seem scary to the current generation of decision-makers. They actually fought the Iran-Iraq war. 52 targets is a laughable flea-bite.
Paramount
Member
Tue Jan 07 01:41:48
So there’s a big rift in the USA. First, they claim that letter of witdrawal was a mistake. Now Pentagon says they refuse to follow President Trump’s threats to bomb cultural sites.

Pentagon says will not break law of war, despite Trump threat

http://www...rump-threat-idUSKBN1Z527H?il=0
jergul
large member
Tue Jan 07 01:45:42
Iran is in other words a fascist technocracy that does things in a fascist technocratic way.
jergul
large member
Tue Jan 07 01:49:03
"Pentagon says will not break law of war, despite Trump threat"

Never fear. Intelligence, or rather claims that intelligence, always indicates that Iran was using cultural heritage sites as shield to protect its assets, so attacking them is perfectly according to law of war.
jergul
large member
Tue Jan 07 01:57:51
Hitting Iran at all will almost certainly damage something of cultural note because those things are everywhere.

Nothing would strengthen the regime more. To a point where recruitment amongst the 6 million Iranians living abroad will become a major concern.

The US may want to dust off those Japanese internment camps. Perhaps use money for the wall on that?

jergul
large member
Tue Jan 07 03:44:56
Seems US border control grabbed ahold of that sentiment and ran with it.

Iranian-Americans have reportedly been harassed at border crossings (BBC).
Habebe
Member
Tue Jan 07 04:23:45
So what really happened? I think we can all agree Trump speaks right off the top of his head.

He overspoke his boundaries so to
speak.

Then the spin team came in to clean it up by blatantly pissing on your leg while staring you in the face and telling you its raining.
swordtail
Anarchist Prime
Tue Jan 07 09:05:58
06 January 2020



Trump moves to unite the Middle East! (irony)

Teevee coverage of the recent events in the ME has been predictable. Those who hated Trump continue to hate him, etc.

A few observations:

1. I had hoped that Trump's decision to kill an Iranian general engaged in a diplomatic mission (among other things) while the man was on the soil of a supposed ally of the US was something Trump pulled out of his fundament either inspired by war movies or on the recommendation of "our greatest ally" but I am informed that in fact some idiot in the DoD included this option in the list of possibilities that was briefed to the CinC in Florida. The decision process in such matters requires that when options are demanded by the CinC the JCS prepares a list supported for each option by fully formulated documentation that enables the president to approve one (or none) and then sign the required operational order. Trump himself chose the death option. I would hold General Milley (CJCS) personally responsible for not striking this option from the list before it reached the CinC.

2. The Iranians are a subtle people. IMO they will bide their time whilst working out the "bestest" way to inflict some injury on the US and/or Israel. When the retaliation comes it will be imaginative and painful.

3. Trump is now threatening the Iraqis with severe sanctions if they try to enforce their parliamentary decree against the future presence of foreign (US mostly) troops on their soil. IMO a refusal to leave risks a substantial Shia (at least) uprising against the US forces in Iraq. We have around 5,500 people there now spread across the country in little groups engaged in logistics, intelligence and training missions. They are extremely vulnerable. There are something like 150 marines in the embassy. There are also a small number of US combat forces in Syria east and north of the Euphrates river. These include a battalion of US Army National Guard mechanized troops "guarding" Syria's oil from Syria's own army and whatever devilment the Iranians might be able to arrange.

4. This is an untenable logistical situation. Supply and other functions require a major airfield close to Baghdad. We have Balad airbase and helicopter supply and air support from there into Baghdad is possible from there but may become hazardous. Iraq is a big country. It is a long and lonely drive from Kuwait for re-supply from there or evacuation through there. The same thing is true of the desert route to Jordan.

5. Trump's strategery appears to be based on the concept that the Iraqis will submit to our imperial demands. "We will see." pl

http://tur...ite-the-middle-east-irony.html
jergul
large member
Tue Jan 07 10:01:24
It will be interesting to see how this plays out. Carter's approval rating at this time in his first term was 13 points higher than Trump's (55% to 42%).

I mention this because the Iran hostage crisis was a full two months old at the time.
Sam Adams
Member
Tue Jan 07 10:16:43
Lol 60 iranian mourners were crushed to death during an animalistic stampede at the dudes funeral.
swordtail
Anarchist Prime
Tue Jan 07 11:53:37
Trump Threatens War Crimes Against Iran: A Closer Look

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OEiwoY_6ll8
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Tue Jan 07 12:37:45
Canada pausing operations & moving people out of Iraq
http://twitter.com/CanadianForces/status/1214585738215460864

i guess they missed when Pom-PEO said this assassination made everyone safer
Allahuakbar
Member
Tue Jan 07 13:34:33
Take that!

http://www...l-its-affiliates-as-terrorists

Majlis designates Pentagon, all its affiliates as terrorists

Politics

January 7, 2020

TEHRAN — The Iranian parliament on Tuesday passed a triple-urgency resolution which designated the U.S. military, the Pentagon and affiliated organizations, as “terrorists”.

All 233 present members of the parliament voted in favor of the motion, according to ISNA.

The Iranian lawmakers chanted “Down with the U.S.” after the bill was passed.

The move came after Lieutenant General Qassem Soleimani, the commander of Iran’s IRGC Quds Force, was assassinated in an attack by the U.S. military in Iraq’s capital, Baghdad.

The attack was directly ordered by U.S. President Donald Trump.

The assassination of the top Iranian commander along with Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, the deputy head of Iraq’s anti-terror Popular Mobilization Units, and eight others has sent shock waves across the world.

Both Soleimani and Muhandis played a key role in defeating Daesh (ISIS) which at its peak, threatened a complete take-over of Iraq and Syria.

The bill was confirmed immediately by the Guardian Council.
jergul
large member
Tue Jan 07 13:42:08
That actually matters.

Say Iran were to capture 52 Americans belonging to those designated organizations. Well, terrorism is a capital crime.

It increases the pressure the Trump administration would be under to resolve the hostage/terrorist crisis.

Paramount
Member
Tue Jan 07 13:51:44
“The attack was directly ordered by U.S. President Donald Trump.”


The fatwa was issued by Ayatollah Donald Trump.

Fixed.
Allahuakbar
Member
Tue Jan 07 16:25:25
At least one Usanian shows some dignity, but it is too late, war will come:

http://www.instagram.com/p/B67TpRLHgVL/

michaelfmoore

I have just sent the Ayatollah of Iran a personal appeal asking him not to respond to our assassination of his top General with violence of any kind, but rather let me & millions of Americans fix this peacefully.

I recorded and DM’d him a message on my podcast, “RUMBLE”. You can hear it on any podcast platform like Apple or Spotify for free. We need to prevent war, any war.
Now.
When the Ayatollah responds, I’ll post his reply.
Habebe
Member
Tue Jan 07 17:04:24
Honestly if I were the ayatollah id be more offended by Michael Moore messaging me than having my number two killed....why dont we have Kathy Griffin and Rosie oddonel meet with him....at least then I couldn't be mad at him for killing us I mean at that point we eatned it.
kargen
Member
Tue Jan 07 17:06:50
Moore looking to become semi relevant again so he doesn't end up as one of those what is he doing now stories.
jergul
large member
Tue Jan 07 17:08:36
I think the best Iranian plan is to apprehend some terrorists, interrogate them (in sense of interview, not torture) and put them on trial.

According to a post above, quite a number of Americans recently became members of terrorist organizations. A law was passed you see.

Iran hostage crisis 2.0 :D.

jergul
large member
Tue Jan 07 17:26:54
Trump's best move now is to executive order sanction relief on Iran and offer to meet and negotiate a new deal.

It would leave Iran as the only party non-compliant with the nuclear deal and would set the stage for EU and US sanctions to be renewed.
Seb
Member
Tue Jan 07 17:38:06
I do wonder if the stronger move would have been to kill Soleimani in a slightly more deniable way.

Forwyn
Member
Tue Jan 07 17:40:22
Yeah, shoulda slapped a few EFPs down on the road for extra lulz
Seb
Member
Tue Jan 07 17:43:00
I am somewhat sympathetic with the point of view that America couldn't go on letting Iran play this game of covert warfare.

I rather think Bush and Obama may have been to indulgent, but there are ways of hitting back firmly that provide greater flexibility for behavioral change by Iran.

I think Trump has been captured by more conventional military thinking that probably blames Iran for the lack of conclusive military victory in Afghanistan and Iraq and is looking to clobber Iran.

Strategically this is a dead end.

Renzo Marquez
Member
Tue Jan 07 17:56:34
Getcha popcorn ready:

http://www...ets-us-airbase-iraq/index.html
Sam Adams
Member
Tue Jan 07 17:58:47
If any US troops ate hurt its fucking on. Time for itan to die.
Sam Adams
Member
Tue Jan 07 18:01:47
Dozens of scud type weapons fired at US bases accross Iraq?

Ohhhhh its on
show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message:
Bookmark and Share