Huge crowds in Iran for commander's funeral, daughter warns U.S. of 'dark day'

[NanLaew]

15 minutes ago, JHolmesJr said:

Apparently 'fuming' is all it takes to establish guilt these days.

 

But nobody here has claimed it does so it's all a bit strange that you would make this rather abstruse linkage.

[meand]

1 hour ago, rabas said:

How can Soleimani be on official diplomatic trip when he was banned from travel outside Iran by the United Nations Security council?

 

Also under 2231, which was adopted unanimously and passed under Chapter VII (i.e. with the powers of enforcement) of the U.N. Charter, the Council banned Soleimani from any travel outside of Iran.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2020/01/03/around-the-halls-experts-react-to-the-killing-of-iranian-commander-qassem-soleimani/

 

===

The rest of your post is all Russian propaganda (FAKE) from the well known Russian propaganda site Southfront, set up to misinform the US military.

 

Joel Harding, a former Army intelligence officer who now works as independent researcher, describes Veterans Today, Veterans News Now and South Front as “Russian proxy sites.” Harding said that in combination with other components of Russian influence efforts, the sites could successfully influence the military community over the long term. https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/06/12/how-russia-targets-the-us-military-215247

 

 

If he was on an official diplomatic mission, which is what the PM of Iraq claims at this point, it will be known to us soon I would think, for obvious reasons. It was "official". 

 

And, if it is proven to be an official diplomatic visit, that will open up an entirely new can of worms for the US. 

 

This is one thing where we just need to let the facts shake out. I have not heard a single source saying he was not allowed to be in Iraq. In fact, an official diplomatic mission could be one of the few reasons he was legally let into Iraq if what you say is true. 

 

To me, the important part at this point is, either way, a high official was assassinated on Iraqi soul, without Iraq knowing and without their approval. How would you feel as a xxx citizen if two countries were illegally bombing and killing each other in your country. This is why the US is getting swiftly ejected completely from Iraq. It does not look good best case scenario for the US decisions at this point to me. At best they have lost billions in military investments in Iraq. 

[NanLaew]

1 minute ago, Expat Brad said:

They call it American interests, or oil. For gods sake the oil is not in America but, in other sovereign nations!!!

Exactly.

 

The US's current world leading oil production is totally unsustainable so once again, another POTUS belatedly realizes that they will forever be dependent on middle east oil. So they'd better get cracking on backup plans since the febrile new Saudi leadership can't be counted on any more.

[Expat Brad]

3 minutes ago, marinediscoking said:

Poll: Forty-three percent of Americans approve of Trump's airstrike of Soleimani

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2020/01/06/americans-approve-soleimani-airstrike-but-needed-congress-approval/2827554001/

Brainwashing has proven to be a near complete success. America is the Greatest ideology is a problem that will effect us all...... NEGATIVELY!!!

[meand]

3 minutes ago, meand said:

If he was on an official diplomatic mission, which is what the PM of Iraq claims at this point, it will be known to us soon I would think, for obvious reasons. It was "official". 

 

And, if it is proven to be an official diplomatic visit, that will open up an entirely new can of worms for the US. 

 

This is one thing where we just need to let the facts shake out. I have not heard a single source saying he was not allowed to be in Iraq. In fact, an official diplomatic mission could be one of the few reasons he was legally let into Iraq if what you say is true. 

 

To me, the important part at this point is, either way, a high official was assassinated on Iraqi soul, without Iraq knowing and without their approval. How would you feel as a xxx citizen if two countries were illegally bombing and killing each other in your country. This is why the US is getting swiftly ejected completely from Iraq. It does not look good best case scenario for the US decisions at this point to me. At best they have lost billions in military investments in Iraq. 

One interesting aspect of all this to me, let's just say in a week from now the UN finishes up their investigation and announces Soleimani was in fact there on an official diplomatic mission, and they condemn the assassination. 

 

The irony of that is, the US will obviously have some ridiculous answer, and the US has absolutely no credibility any longer on the world stage, so even if they are in fact telling the truth it will still be seen as a lie. That is what liars get, the inability of people to believe you. 

[rabas]

16 minutes ago, meand said:

One interesting aspect of all this to me, let's just say in a week from now the UN finishes up their investigation and announces Soleimani was in fact there on an official diplomatic mission, and they condemn the assassination. 

 

The irony of that is, the US will obviously have some ridiculous answer, and the US has absolutely no credibility any longer on the world stage, so even if they are in fact telling the truth it will still be seen as a lie. That is what liars get, the inability of people to believe you. 

Just one problem,  Soleimani was banned from travel outside Iran by the United Nations Security council. Maybe he was a bad guy like they say.

 

Also under 2231, which was adopted unanimously and passed under Chapter VII (i.e. with the powers of enforcement) of the U.N. Charter, the Council banned Soleimani from any travel outside of Iran.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2020/01/03/around-the-halls-experts-react-to-the-killing-of-iranian-commander-qassem-soleimani/

 

In paragraph 14 of his December report, Guterres (sec Gen UN) noted the following: “Information from Iraqi media outlets suggests that Major General Soleimani has undertaken travel inconsistent with the travel ban provisions of the resolution. I call upon all Member States to diligently implement the restrictive measures imposed on the individuals and entities on the list maintained pursuant to resolution 2231.”

 

[DrTuner]

36 minutes ago, Expat Brad said:

 Why doesn't America <deleted> off all together from the Middle East and simply let them kill themselves?

 

That would be the optimal solution. Build a wall around them, throw a bunch of knives in and let them do their medieval routines.

 

Just need to figure out how to get the oil from under them.

[metisdead]

Some troll posts have been removed. 

[Sujo]

3 hours ago, Chazar said:

Yes  I was expecting that answer............now try asking ALL the women in  Iran where they would  rather  live, Iran or the USA https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/03/07/the-flame-of-feminism-is-alive-in-iran-international-womens-day/

I know quite a few iranian women and none have said they wanted to live in any place except iran. They hate their leaders and want them out. But they still rather be home.

 

None showed any interest in usa.

[candide]

1 hour ago, marinediscoking said:

Poll: Forty-three percent of Americans approve of Trump's airstrike of Soleimani

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2020/01/06/americans-approve-soleimani-airstrike-but-needed-congress-approval/2827554001/

We know that was the true objective. It did not even work that well as 43% is about the usual rate of approval for Trump in polls.

[marinediscoking]

2 hours ago, Expat Brad said:

Brainwashing has proven to be a near complete success. America is the Greatest ideology is a problem that will effect us all...... NEGATIVELY!!!

Is that you Vladimir?

[Pique Dard]

the biggest certainty about trump is that besides tweetting time and time, a great of deal his political decisions is just improvisations

[meand]

7 hours ago, rabas said:

Just one problem,  Soleimani was banned from travel outside Iran by the United Nations Security council. Maybe he was a bad guy like they say.

 

Also under 2231, which was adopted unanimously and passed under Chapter VII (i.e. with the powers of enforcement) of the U.N. Charter, the Council banned Soleimani from any travel outside of Iran.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2020/01/03/around-the-halls-experts-react-to-the-killing-of-iranian-commander-qassem-soleimani/

 

In paragraph 14 of his December report, Guterres (sec Gen UN) noted the following: “Information from Iraqi media outlets suggests that Major General Soleimani has undertaken travel inconsistent with the travel ban provisions of the resolution. I call upon all Member States to diligently implement the restrictive measures imposed on the individuals and entities on the list maintained pursuant to resolution 2231.”

 

I have already responded to this. You wont copy and paste it again to this response, will you? 

[Scott]

Post with deliberately misspelled politicians' names removed along with a trolling meme.

 

[Chazar]

13 hours ago, billd766 said:

What a clever little person you are knowing my answer before I bothered to answer it.

 

Why should I bother about all the women in Iran when you already know what my answer will be.

 

Better still, why don't YOU pop over to Iran and ask the question for me as you seem to know the answer.

I  had  another  question but you already answered that one as  well

[Chazar]

11 hours ago, Sujo said:

I know quite a few iranian women and none have said they wanted to live in any place except iran. They hate their leaders and want them out. But they still rather be home.

 

None showed any interest in usa.

Like they have a  choice, and youd  have to ask their  husbands/Fathers  first.

As of 02 July 2019, Iranian citizens had visa-free or visa on arrival access to 39 countries and territories, ranking the Iranian passport 101st in terms of travel freedom (tied with passports from Bangladesh, Eritrea, Lebanon and North Korea) according to the Henley Passport Index.

[Monomial]

14 hours ago, marinediscoking said:

It does not surprise me how many dilousinal people think executing him is a bad thing.  Finally someone had courage to punch the bully in the nose instead of appeasing Iran as many here think the world should cower down to them and let them continue killing without consequence.   Iran may think twice now about capturing passing ships and taking hostages in international waters. 

 

The problem is Iran is not just a scared bully that you can punch and who might just give up if someone stands up to him.

 

Iran is a warlord, and the US has effectively just started a gang war. I would be surprised if anyone was excited about the possibility of 2 rival gangs going after each other and all the collateral damage that entails. I agree that this confrontation is inevitable, but I'd rather this occur after I have lived a long and healthy life and am peacefully pushing up daisies.  I think most people feel the same. Kick the can as far as you can and for as long as you can.

 

If Iran thinks twice, it won't be to reflect on their beliefs, it will only be to find softer targets on whom to exact their revenge.

[userabcd]

17 hours ago, rabas said:

Just one problem,  Soleimani was banned from travel outside Iran by the United Nations Security council. Maybe he was a bad guy like they say.

 

Also under 2231, which was adopted unanimously and passed under Chapter VII (i.e. with the powers of enforcement) of the U.N. Charter, the Council banned Soleimani from any travel outside of Iran.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2020/01/03/around-the-halls-experts-react-to-the-killing-of-iranian-commander-qassem-soleimani/

 

In paragraph 14 of his December report, Guterres (sec Gen UN) noted the following: “Information from Iraqi media outlets suggests that Major General Soleimani has undertaken travel inconsistent with the travel ban provisions of the resolution. I call upon all Member States to diligently implement the restrictive measures imposed on the individuals and entities on the list maintained pursuant to resolution 2231.”

 

That great UN institution based in the USA which is very heavily controlled and lobbied by the US as to who they will allow to attend meetings or not at this allegedly universal institution.

 

 

[bristolboy]

17 hours ago, rabas said:

Just one problem,  Soleimani was banned from travel outside Iran by the United Nations Security council. Maybe he was a bad guy like they say.

 

Also under 2231, which was adopted unanimously and passed under Chapter VII (i.e. with the powers of enforcement) of the U.N. Charter, the Council banned Soleimani from any travel outside of Iran.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2020/01/03/around-the-halls-experts-react-to-the-killing-of-iranian-commander-qassem-soleimani/

 

In paragraph 14 of his December report, Guterres (sec Gen UN) noted the following: “Information from Iraqi media outlets suggests that Major General Soleimani has undertaken travel inconsistent with the travel ban provisions of the resolution. I call upon all Member States to diligently implement the restrictive measures imposed on the individuals and entities on the list maintained pursuant to resolution 2231.”

 

And the penalty for violating such a ban is death? Was Soleimani's assassination also ordered by the UN? 

[meand]

War profiteers speaking on ways to start a war with Iran, all out in the open. Imagine how they talk in private! 

https://youtu.be/PfoaLbbAix0

Edited January 8, 2020 by meand

[Guitarzan]

Iran fired missiles and purposely missed American bases in Iraq to appease the warmongering hard liners. They said that was it, we are even now, we don’t want war!   Trump says OK!  WWIII avoided.

 

its so entertaining reading all these expert foreign advisors here on TV predicting doom!  It’s a nothing burger you all can relax now and carry on.m, At ease gentlemen. Don’t quit your day jobs.  

[JHolmesJr]

1 minute ago, Guitarzan said:

Iran fired missiles and purposely missed American bases in Iraq to appease the warmongering hard liners. They said that was it, we are even now, we don’t want war!   Trump says OK!  WWIII avoided.

 

its so entertaining reading all these expert foreign advisors here on TV predicting doom!  It’s a nothing burger you all can relax now and carry on.m, At ease gentlemen. Don’t quit your day jobs.  

certainly appears to lean that way.

he'll be on soon so lets see what he says.

Its amazing the statistics racked up after the Soleimani affair....one general, one earthquake, 50 odd mourners,

one passenger aircraft. I hate to think what would happen if Trump actually went to town on them.

 

They need to be brought to the table now and made to see the benefits of non nuclear existence....and told 

in no uncertain terms that the Soleimani treatment will continue for any acts of proxy terror that cost American lives

and losses.

[RickBradford]

1 minute ago, JHolmesJr said:

Its amazing the statistics racked up after the Soleimani affair....one general, one earthquake, 50 odd mourners,

one passenger aircraft. 

I'm sure the "progressive" Left will find an easy way to blame President Trump for each and every one of those incidents.

[klikster]

On 1/7/2020 at 7:30 AM, legend49 said:

And you believe what the MSM writes, LOL.

Irony is truly wonderful sometimes.

[Opl]

15 hours ago, meand said:

War profiteers speaking on ways to start a war with Iran, all out in the open. Imagine how they talk in private! 

https://youtu.be/PfoaLbbAix0

but it's exactly the conclusion the rest of the world already has come to, and this suspicion is what Americans denounce as "anti-americanism": first trade wars, then wars, sanctions, maximum pressure, extraterritoriality of U.S laws etc, etc.. it's all about war in America, and Trump is totally transparent about his motivations.        

Edited January 8, 2020 by Opl

[candide]

2 hours ago, Opl said:

but it's exactly the conclusion the rest of the world already has come to, and this suspicion is what Americans denounce as "anti-americanism": first trade wars, then wars, sanctions, maximum pressure, extraterritoriality of U.S laws etc, etc.. it's all about war in America, and Trump is totally transparent about his motivations.        

And now Trump calls on NATO countries to side with him, lol. Nobody wants to follow the orange moron, apart from paying lip service.

[marinediscoking]

1 hour ago, candide said:

And now Trump calls on NATO countries to side with him, lol. Nobody wants to follow the orange moron, apart from paying lip service.

You may not be a native english speaker otherwise you would have understood. He wanted them to step up in the region not side with him. Guess you wanted WW3?

[candide]

1 hour ago, marinediscoking said:

You may not be a native english speaker otherwise you would have understood. He wanted them to step up in the region not side with him. Guess you wanted WW3?

WW3?

Anyway, whatever you call it, they are not keen to do it.

https://www.defensenews.com/smr/nato-2020-defined/2020/01/08/trump-wants-nato-to-be-more-involved-in-the-middle-east-that-may-take-some-convincing/

 

Edited January 8, 2020 by candide

[Cryingdick]

10 hours ago, JHolmesJr said:

certainly appears to lean that way.

he'll be on soon so lets see what he says.

Its amazing the statistics racked up after the Soleimani affair....one general, one earthquake, 50 odd mourners,

one passenger aircraft. I hate to think what would happen if Trump actually went to town on them.

 

They need to be brought to the table now and made to see the benefits of non nuclear existence....and told 

in no uncertain terms that the Soleimani treatment will continue for any acts of proxy terror that cost American lives

and losses.

 

Now Iran is playing games with the black box from the plane. Refusing to give it up. If they weren't involved they would be trying to prove it anyway they could. Either way if they don't give up the black box I would think the next move is banning all passenger aircraft from landing at their airport.

[RickBradford]

Meanwhile, the BBC treated Soleimani's funeral with about the same reverence as Fidel Castro's funeral was treated by the Cuban state media.

 

At one point I expected the BBC to play martial music in the days immediately after Soleimani’s death, so somber was their coverage of his funeral. Their correspondent in Beirut on Monday came across more like a spokesman for Tehran.