Bank Savings Interest Rates 2023

[Solinvictus]

2 hours ago, BestB said:

False, Iran was never invited, Iran just went in. Russia was asked for help and Russia also told Iran to get out, which Iran ignored and thus good reason why Russia has hardly made  any arms sales to Iran or has shown any support since the disagreement over Syria.

"False.." You're wrong poster. They were in fact invited. "Iran just went in." lol at such blatant disregard for the truth. I'm no apologist for them but such comments are way out of touch.

[BestB]

1 minute ago, Solinvictus said:

You're exactly right. Syria invited Iran into their country.

 

Interesting, as Iraq just declared it as an act of war and is now demanding the imperial corporation to remove it's troops.

Got any links to that invitation?

[BestB]

Just now, Solinvictus said:

"False.." You're wrong poster. They were in fact invited. "Iran just went in." lol at such blatant disregard for the truth. I'm no apologist for them but such comments are way out of touch.

Great, show me the link to that invitation., show me the truth

[Solinvictus]

2 hours ago, dexterm said:

Baloney. Links please to where Syria has objected to Iranian presence as an ally in Syria. 

 

I am damned sure Israel was not invited to the Syrian territory of illegally annexed Golan Heights. 

Again, you are exactly right @dexterm  Don't feed into a troll's inability to adhere to a discussion. That poster, is on one when it comes to Israel. 

[BestB]

Just now, Solinvictus said:

Again, you are exactly right @dexterm  Don't feed into a troll's inability to adhere to a discussion. That poster, is on one when it comes to Israel. 

????????

[Morch]

22 minutes ago, BestB said:

There never was an invitation, Iran was an ally and was providing some support and training, however Iran was never invited to set up any kind of base, perhaps why Iran did not send in regular Iranian army but only a proxy, Hezbollah

 

Both Russia and Israel seem to have same objective, which is not to allow Iran to set up any base in Syria

 

You are however correct, there have been no reports of Assad taking either sides, May be he is milking both sides.

 

 

 

As said, I wouldn't be surprised if there wasn't a public, official one. That doesn't mean the Iranians "just went in", though. They are obviously there by agreement. They did not arrive against Assad's wishes. ou want to claim there was no "invitation" - go right ahead. Comes down to potato vs. potato.

 

Doubt Iran set up bases, massive arms transfers and shipped all that hardware in without Assad's consent. Iran not sending in regular troops is incorrect. That they relied heavily on Hezbollah, and Iraqi based militias is another thing.

 

Iran already go bases in Syria, by one name or another. Some facilities are/were located in Syrian bases, notably airfields.

 

I think Russia's interest is to curb Iran's activities, influence and presence in Syria - but not throw them out altogether. They come in handy as boots on the ground, and they keep Israel from getting to comfy.

 

Throwing the Iranians out (if they'd go, that's a good question), would leave Assad without their boots on the grounds support, and make him solely reliant on Russia. Then again, he's probably not thrilled about all them Israeli attacks, which revolve around Iran's activities and presence. Guess he's in a bit of tough spot there.

[Scott]

One troll post removed.   Continue and face a suspension.

 

[Solinvictus]

27 minutes ago, BestB said:

Great, show me the link to that invitation., show me the truth

@dexterm @BestB “After all, the United States' troops were not invited into Syria, only Russian and Iranian forces were there of course to prop up the Syrian government of Bashar al-Assad.” From NPR…

https://www.npr.org/2017/10/17/558390497/no-clear-end-game-for-u-s-military-in-iraq-and-syria

"Iran has been present in Iraq and Syria at the invitation of the legitimate governments of these countries, and sided with the regional nations based on the common interests of the countries," Javani told Iran's semiofficial Tasnim News Agency. https://tinyurl.com/yyqvx272

And here is a yet another source from Yahoo. https://www.yahoo.com/news/iran-tells-u-were-invited-175855806.html

If you keep up with geopolitical news and commentary you would know this already.

(drops the mic)

Edited August 27, 2019 by Solinvictus

[BestB]

1 minute ago, Solinvictus said:

“After all, the United States' troops were not invited into Syria, only Russian and Iranian forces were there of course to prop up the Syrian government of Bashar al-Assad.” From NPR…

https://www.npr.org/2017/10/17/558390497/no-clear-end-game-for-u-s-military-in-iraq-and-syria

"Iran has been present in Iraq and Syria at the invitation of the legitimate governments of these countries, and sided with the regional nations based on the common interests of the countries," Javani told Iran's semiofficial Tasnim News Agency. https://tinyurl.com/yyqvx272

And here is a yet another source from Yahoo. https://www.yahoo.com/news/iran-tells-u-were-invited-175855806.html

If you keep up with geopolitical news and commentary you would know this already.

(drops the mic)

Do not tell me about US not being invited, Show me evidence Iran was invited into Syria to set up bases

 

And you actually really linking to a source what revolutionary guard says as your evidence?????

[dexterm]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

Haaretz is a left-wing venue, perhaps not quite a neutral source when it comes to Israel's domestic politics. As for the article being "interesting" - do tell. Nothing new in the comments made, no new information exposed. It's an opinion peace. 

 

Fair enough that the upcoming elections might play a part in considerations. This been commented on extensively. Then again, it would also be true that in this neighborhood, there's always something on, ready to go boom!. 

 

And, of course, tying things to the upcoming elections works both ways - there's also commentary that suggests Israel's adversaries banking on the Israeli government's reluctance to go to war just a few weeks before the elections - hence taking their chances.

 

I introduced into this thread the idea of the OP being another Netanyahu election PR stunt, simply because he and other Israeli politicians have a track record of doing similar around election times. In the past his escalation antics have sometimes gotten out of hand with dozens of IDF casualties. I found it interesting that the same issue is being covered by one of Israel's oldest and most respected newspapers, which makes it mainstream.

 

Just hope this current escalation doesn't get out of hand yet again; escalations often have unforeseen consequences...this time far more deadly with hundreds not dozens of IDF and civilians on both sides affected.

 

If it does, just remember who started this.

[Morch]

10 hours ago, dexterm said:

I introduced into this thread the idea of the OP being another Netanyahu election PR stunt, simply because he and other Israeli politicians have a track record of doing similar around election times. In the past his escalation antics have sometimes gotten out of hand with dozens of IDF casualties. I found it interesting that the same issue is being covered by one of Israel's oldest and most respected newspapers, which makes it mainstream.

 

Just hope this current escalation doesn't get out of hand yet again; escalations often have unforeseen consequences...this time far more deadly with hundreds not dozens of IDF and civilians on both sides affected.

 

If it does, just remember who started this.

 

Yawn.

 

That you repeat the views aired in the opinion peace quoted still doesn't make them real. You do not even attempt to discuss the "idea", but apparently accept it without question. As for "most respected", again - hyping the source is all very well, but it's still a left-wing (and on some issues, extreme left) with a clear political agenda. No problems with that, just need to be kept in mind when reading editorial and opinion pieces. As for it being "mainstream" - the venue still is, some of the regular journalists contributing to the opinions section aren't. We've been through that on multiple past topics.

 

I wouldn't know that it is possible to put all of a country's security issues on hold pending elections. It's not like adversaries and events politely wait for the process to end.

 

And as for "escalating" - well, judging from your many posts it would appear any action by Israel can be labeled an escalation. This stems from your insistence on ignoring any related actions taken by Israel's adversaries. Apparently, Iran's build up of offensive infrastructure targeting Israel in Syria, Lebanon and Iraq is legit, whereas addressing these efforts is not.

 

I don't think "who started this" is quite as simple as your try to paint it.

[Morch]

 

@dexterm

 

From the same source (and similar information appears on other venues):

 

Beirut Strike's Target: A Vital Iranian Device for a Precision Hezbollah Missile Assembly Line

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-beirut-strike-s-target-a-vital-iranian-device-for-a-precision-missile-assembly-line-1.7761938

 

Wonder how that fits with your "escalation" narrative.