Iran's Rouhani warns Trump about 'mother of all wars'

 

FILE PHOTO: Iran's President Hassan Rouhani attends a news conference at the Chancellery in Vienna, Austria July 4, 2018. REUTERS/Lisi Niesner/File Photo

 

DUBAI (Reuters) - Iranian President Hassan Rouhani on Sunday cautioned U.S. President Donald Trump about pursuing hostile policies against Tehran, saying "war with Iran is the mother of all wars", but did not rule out peace between the two countries.

 

Iran faces increased U.S. pressure and looming sanctions after Trump's decision to withdraw the United States from a 2015 international deal over Iran's nuclear programme.

 

Addressing a gathering of Iranian diplomats, Rouhani said: "Mr Trump, don't play with the lion's tail, this would only lead to regret," the state new agency IRNA reported.

 

"America should know that peace with Iran is the mother of all peace, and war with Iran is the mother of all wars," Rouhani said, leaving open the possibility of peace between the two countries, at odds since the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

 

"You are not in a position to incite the Iranian nation against Iran's security and interests," Rouhani said, in an apparent reference to reported efforts by Washington to destabilise Iran's Islamic government.

 

In Washington, U.S. officials familiar with the matter told Reuters that the Trump administration had launched an offensive of speeches and online communications meant to foment unrest and help pressure Iran to end its nuclear programme and its support of militant groups.

 

Current and former U.S. officials said the campaign painted Iranian leaders in a harsh light, at times using information that is exaggerated or contradicts other official pronouncements, including comments by previous administrations.

 

Rouhani scoffed at Trump's threat to halt Iranian oil exports and said Iran has a dominant position in the Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz, a major oil shipping waterway.

 

"Anyone who understands the rudiments of politics doesn't say 'we will stop Iran's oil exports'...we have been the guarantor of the regional waterway's security throughout history," Rouhani said, cited by the semi-official ISNA news agency.

 

Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on Saturday backed Rouhani's suggestion that Iran may block Gulf oil exports if its own exports are halted.

 

Rouhani's apparent threat earlier this month to disrupt oil shipments from neighbouring countries came in reaction to efforts by Washington to force all countries to stop buying Iranian oil.

 

Iranian officials have in the past threatened to block the Strait of Hormuz in retaliation for any hostile U.S. action.

 

On Sunday, Iran's ground forces commander became the latest military figure to back Rouhani's apparent threat, the semi-official news agency Tasnim reported.

 

"The Strait of Hormuz region must either be safe for all or be insecure for everyone," said General Kioumars Heydari, quoted by Tasnim.

 

Separately, a top Iranian military commander warned that the Trump government might be preparing to invade Iran.

 

"The enemy's behaviour is unpredictable," Tasnim quoted military chief of staff General Mohammad Baqeri as saying.

 

"Although the current American government does not seem to speak of a military threat, according to precise information it has been trying to persuade the U.S. military to launch a military invasion (of Iran)," Baqeri said.

 

Iran's oil exports could fall by as much as two-thirds by the end of the year because of new U.S. sanctions, putting oil markets under huge strain amid supply outages elsewhere.

 

Washington initially planned to shut Iran out of global oil markets completely after Trump abandoned the deal that limited Iran's nuclear ambitions, demanding all other countries stop buying Iranian crude by November.

 

But the United States has somewhat eased its stance, saying it may grant sanction waivers to some allies that are particularly reliant on Iranian supplies.

 

(Reporting by Dubai newsroom; editing by Jason Neely and Dale Hudson)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-07-23

If it were the mother of all wars it would have to be the first one. Perhaps he means the angry daughter of all wars.

28 minutes ago, webfact said:

the mother of all wars

Now why does the name Comical Ali spring to mind!

 

33 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

If it were the mother of all wars it would have to be the first one. Perhaps he means the angry daughter of all wars.

What with the waring Arab/Muslim and the ' mother of this and mother of that'? i guess it sound better in arabic of farsi, Iran better better address the mother of all economic woes and the people's discontent that are sweeping the country than wage war on a country that is vastly superior to Iran....

Edited July 23, 20187 yr by ezzra

1 hour ago, ezzra said:

What with the waring Arab/Muslim and the ' mother of this and mother of that'? i guess it sound better in arabic of farsi, Iran better better address the mother of all economic woes and the people's discontent that are sweeping the country than wage war on a country that is vastly superior to Iran....

Ignoring of course Trump who has deliberately caused Iran's economic woes by reneging on a US agreement and completely unnecessarily sabotaging a nuclear deal that was working and threatening sanctions against anyone who trades with Iran.

 

For the past year plus Trump has been itching to fight Iran to distract voters, with his strings well pulled by corrupt aristocratic dictatorships and fascist apartheid regimes in the Middle East with whom he has lucrative arms deals.

 

When the proverbial hits the fan I hope folks recall who needlessly started this whole schmozzle.

Having alienated most of his allies, they will have more sense this time around and the great war hero Trump will be on his own.

Edited July 23, 20187 yr by dexterm

I somehow suspect that a "coalition" will be harder to put together for this one, if it comes down to it, than for the USA's last two attempts to fight regimes that they dislike in this part of the world.

 

Even allowing for Mr Trump's inspired leadership of Western Democracy!

"mother of all wars" vs "Father of lies". Look out Iran: although Trump prefers domestic violence, he's not above taking swings at friends and foes alike... maybe you should learn Russian?

2 hours ago, webfact said:

war with Iran is the mother of all wars

Really? That must be one sick, old and weak mother, and Rouhani must be one of the retarted offsprings.

Oh no not another Mother... 

I say they are both mother........

In response, Trump will point out the size of his button, start calling Rouhani "Atom man", threaten fire and fury, and then meet with him on an island somewhere before declaring mutual admiration and love between them and announcing that Iran is no longer a threat.

1 hour ago, dexterm said:

Ignoring of course Trump who has deliberately caused Iran's economic woes by reneging on a US agreement and completely unnecessarily sabotaging a nuclear deal that was working and threatening sanctions against anyone who trades with Iran.

 

For the past year plus Trump has been itching to fight Iran to distract voters, with his strings well pulled by corrupt aristocratic dictatorships and fascist apartheid regimes in the Middle East with whom he has lucrative arms deals.

 

When the proverbial hits the fan I hope folks recall who needlessly started this whole schmozzle.

Having alienated most of his allies, they will have more sense this time around and the great war hero Trump will be on his own.

So assuming that Trump was the instigator of all the so called, itching for a fight', dose that give Iran the right to threatened the US with the 'mother of all wars'? which begs the question, who is the aggressor here? Iran is notoriously mindless when it comes to sending soldiers to the battlefields and suffering hundreds of thousands of casualties as in the Iraq-Iran war, suppose Iran had full nuke capabilities, something that the crave very much, Iran will be than holding their nukes against the world doing the N. Korea all over again, and thus be a formidable foe to contain any longer, and thanks to Netanyahu and Trump, this is not going to be the case...

Edited July 23, 20187 yr by ezzra

Big Don will take you out with a single Tweet just wait for the covfefe.

I would tweet back: "Guess who's the Daddy!" But that would probably go right over his turban-thing.

4 minutes ago, klauskunkel said:

I would tweet back: "Guess who's the Daddy!" But that would probably go right over his turban-thing.

not really!

 

(guess who's the daddy) would be a 'real' question - considering they'd have to do at least 12 paternal DNA tests for very kid

3 hours ago, bluesofa said:

Now why does the name Comical Ali spring to mind!

 

        Baghdad Bob also comes to mind.     (Mohammed Saeed al-Sahhaf)

5 minutes ago, Catoni said:

        Baghdad Bob also comes to mind.     (Mohammed Saeed al-Sahhaf)

same-same but not different!

Baghdad Bob or Comical Ali are two nicknames that were given to former Iraqi Information Minister Mohammed Saeed al-Sahhaf

https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/comical-ali-baghdad-bob

 

I think I must have seen him at a nightclub in Baghdad when he was keeping down his second job.

 

That's a very tight battle space, it would be messy indeed. 

Just now, bluesofa said:

same-same but not different!

Baghdad Bob or Comical Ali are two nicknames that were given to former Iraqi Information Minister Mohammed Saeed al-Sahhaf

https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/comical-ali-baghdad-bob

 

I think I must have seen him at a nightclub in Baghdad when he was keeping down his second job.

 

555555 ?    Baghdad Bob/Comical Ali had quite a following for a while...  the former Iraqi Information Minister was one of a kind trying to tell everyone that the Iraqi army had the U.S. and British forces on the run ..defeating the U.S nd British everywhere...he was so... so.... funny....  I'm sure he could have gotten a job as a stand-up comic at Yuk-Yuks...     

Just now, Catoni said:

555555 ?    Baghdad Bob/Comical Ali had quite a following for a while...  the former Iraqi Information Minister was one of a kind trying to tell everyone that the Iraqi army had the U.S. and British forces on the run ..defeating the U.S nd British everywhere...he was so... so.... funny....  I'm sure he could have gotten a job as a stand-up comic at Yuk-Yuks...     

He had a job as a stand-up comic - didn't he? Just that his world tour was as limited as the Iraqi army - he was confined to barracks.

 

Why is there so much hostility?  I'm 100% totally certain if they'd just allow our oil companies to go in there and suck out their oil at cheap prices we'd be friends again.

8 minutes ago, bluesofa said:

He had a job as a stand-up comic - didn't he? Just that his world tour was as limited as the Iraqi army - he was confined to barracks.

 

      You're absolutely correct...  ha, ha   

British and American forces crushed the Iraqi Army in 100 hours.  Now Iran is different in that if the Us  goes after Iran- the Iranians will fight to the death. They have modern weapon systems and in a war with the US- the Russians will supply Iran as much as it neds to keep the Americans fighting.

 

Trump made a stupid and dangerous decision to obviate a signed agreement with Iran. Now he is trying to destroy Iran's ability to sell oil which  could be considered an attack on Iran.  As much as I dislike Iran and their system- a country has a right to  exist and Trump is trying to squeeze it. He maybe hoping for Iran to strike militarily- giving ohm an excuse to go to Congress and get the green light for war. Naturally Netanayu and Israel are urging him on- they have been looking for an excuse to strike Iran for a long time I hope Sec Def General Mattis is able to stop this march towards war before it's too late.

2 minutes ago, james1995 said:

Why is there so much hostility?  I'm 100% totally certain if they'd just allow our oil companies to go in there and suck out their oil at cheap prices we'd be friends again.

 

     The U.S. doesn't need it.  The Americans and British already gave the oil fields back to the Iraqis......

 

      The U.S. is now the world's number one producer on their own...  and no longer needs Iraqi oil...  The U.S. also gets oil peacefully from Canada...doesn't have to go to the other side of the world to get it.   If they needed other oil...there's lots in Venezuela much closer to home also... 

... and the British have the North Sea oil...      Who needs Iraqi oil ? ?  

38 minutes ago, Catoni said:

 

     The U.S. doesn't need it.  The Americans and British already gave the oil fields back to the Iraqis......

 

      The U.S. is now the world's number one producer on their own...  and no longer needs Iraqi oil...  The U.S. also gets oil peacefully from Canada...doesn't have to go to the other side of the world to get it.   If they needed other oil...there's lots in Venezuela much closer to home also... 

... and the British have the North Sea oil...      Who needs Iraqi oil ? ?  

Yes, who need the oil, the contracts, the need for sending experts, and everything that goes with the oil production, investments the cash flow etc? 

 

You have no idea how much Us need to controll their production, and who they part with. When Saudi Arabia have their own secured and security, you can only hope they still stand by Us 

 

However Us production of energy is one of the most dirty on the planet, not up to western standards and not sustainable. 

Edited July 23, 20187 yr by Hummin

12 minutes ago, Catoni said:

 

     The U.S. doesn't need it.  The Americans and British already gave the oil fields back to the Iraqis......

 

      The U.S. is now the world's number one producer on their own...  and no longer needs Iraqi oil...  The U.S. also gets oil peacefully from Canada...doesn't have to go to the other side of the world to get it.   If they needed other oil...there's lots in Venezuela much closer to home also... 

... and the British have the North Sea oil...      Who needs Iraqi oil ? ?  

Who needs Iraqi (and Iranian) oil?  There's the rub.  Preventing a third party getting the oil, even when you don't need it, often leads to a bigger fight than trying to control it for your own consumption.

4 hours ago, ezzra said:

What with the waring Arab/Muslim and the ' mother of this and mother of that'? i guess it sound better in arabic of farsi, Iran better better address the mother of all economic woes and the people's discontent that are sweeping the country than wage war on a country that is vastly superior to Iran....

The war with Iraq and it's aftermath wasn't the walk in the park that they thought it would be.

 

Iran is physically 3 times bigger, with 3 times the population.

 

As someone said recently, if Israel were the 51st state it would have 2 senators, they currently have 100. Israel's what Iraq was about, and what Iran would be about.

4 hours ago, JAG said:

I somehow suspect that a "coalition" will be harder to put together for this one, if it comes down to it, than for the USA's last two attempts to fight regimes that they dislike in this part of the world.

 

Even allowing for Mr Trump's inspired leadership of Western Democracy!

 

Agree with that. But not sure Trump would care about a coalition with traditional partners like UK, France and NATO members. Saudi, UAE, Israel, Iraq all hate Iran enough to bury any differences and fight them.

 

What would Russia do? Support Iran, it's friend? Maybe. And would China get involved or sit and watch from the side? And the EU, UK and NATO members? 

 

It's certainly brewing in many parts of the world. Just needs a flash point IMO.

2 hours ago, Thaidream said:

British and American forces crushed the Iraqi Army in 100 hours.  Now Iran is different in that if the Us  goes after Iran- the Iranians will fight to the death. They have modern weapon systems and in a war with the US- the Russians will supply Iran as much as it neds to keep the Americans fighting.

 

Trump made a stupid and dangerous decision to obviate a signed agreement with Iran. Now he is trying to destroy Iran's ability to sell oil which  could be considered an attack on Iran.  As much as I dislike Iran and their system- a country has a right to  exist and Trump is trying to squeeze it. He maybe hoping for Iran to strike militarily- giving ohm an excuse to go to Congress and get the green light for war. Naturally Netanayu and Israel are urging him on- they have been looking for an excuse to strike Iran for a long time I hope Sec Def General Mattis is able to stop this march towards war before it's too late.

 

That was the same Iraqi army that had more than held their own against Iran in a war. The Iraqis had some very (supposedly) good Russian equipment. Their armored regiments were slaughtered by the American and British ones. 

 

The Iranian RG's are fanatics who would fight but aren't noted for their military capability against armed forces. More into bullying civilians. The rest of their military maybe think twice as many Iranians no longer support their extreme Muslim leadership.

 

The danger is Russia and it's ME allies taking an active role supporting Iran against the US and it's ME allies.

19 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Agree with that. But not sure Trump would care about a coalition with traditional partners like UK, France and NATO members. Saudi, UAE, Israel, Iraq all hate Iran enough to bury any differences and fight them.

 

What would Russia do? Support Iran, it's friend? Maybe. And would China get involved or sit and watch from the side? And the EU, UK and NATO members? 

 

It's certainly brewing in many parts of the world. Just needs a flash point IMO.

I promise you, russia and China, just waiting for it to happen, so they can let a new flow of emmigrants arriving Europeen borders. The Persians have very few friends in the Gulf, and who would take the responsibillity to support them, except Russia and China with loads of weapons. 

 

Someone want Eu broken up for sure. Just waiting for a Iranian attack on Us soon, and we have to deploy under a new slogan. Either you with us or against us. 

 

New times will come, and China can just sit and play their non violent cards against the world order as we know it.