2 hours ago, puipuitom said:

This general fought ISIS for only one reason: to get a lot more Iranian influence in Iraq and Syria.

It played a role, as for the other countries. However, the main reason was that ISIS was killing and oppressing Shia Muslims. It's the same reason why they initially started to arm Shia militia: because they were attacked by Sunni terrorists. Iran took advantage of problems but did not create them.

4 hours ago, rabas said:

Of course you have to read the article first.

 

That opinion comes from a well known Irani professor at Tehran University who is famous both inside and outside Iran for his studies of Iran history and politics. You can't find a better source.

 

  Sadegh Zibakalam (Persian: صادق زیباکلام‎, lit. 'honest eloquent-speaker';^[4]  He is a professor at University of Tehran^[9] and appears frequently on international news outlets^[10] including the BBC News and .  His books "How Did We Become What We Are?" and "An Introduction to Islamic Revolution" are among bestsellers and prominent books on Iranian contemporary politics.^[1]

 

Wow

 

Yes I did read it and my response is the same.

3 hours ago, candide said:

He knew it already. And it will not prevent him from posting the same fake argument again in a few minutes, hours or days.....

Of course, but we still can't fix blinkered people.

10 hours ago, steven100 said:

just bomb the s_hit out of em...

I havent read all 11 pages, do apologies if alreay stated, but it seems very likely that this is exactly what Trump will do if it gets that far.  Meanwhile, he will pick off strategic targets and people that form an imminent risk to the safety of any Americans and non-Iran people.

 

Unlike several previous POTUS who thought they could 'solve' the problem by bombing and sending in troops, or by supporting one group over another, Trump sees that the best way to solve the problem is to kill the problem. Clearly that is the right way, as Trump did more to destroy ISIS in a year than anything the previous POTUS did.  I can see Trump telling his Generals to destroy the Iran leadership (military, political and religious) by using the technology they have - and to limit any field troops involvement unless absolutaly necessary. 

 

I hope it doesnt get that far - but if it does, I bet on Trump destroying the regime completely. 

 

18 minutes ago, billd766 said:

Of course, but we still can't fix blinkered people.

On the other hand, as they always repeat the same claims, it's easy to have the answer ready for copy/paste. ????

10 hours ago, Sujo said:

Perhaps someone could explain how pulling out of the iran deal has made the world a safer place. Thats what started all this.

I think the 'deal' just papered over the cracks. By having the Iran deal in place, the Iranian leadership (through Soleimani) have been able to slowly extend their tentacles across the Middle East, in Iraq, Syria etc., killing thousands along the way, gaining footholds in strategic territory. Practically taking over Iraq by stealth. 

 

And do you honestly think the Islamic Republic of Iran under it's current dictatorship, with it's open hate and hostility toward the West and Israel will ever stop trying to develop nuclear capability? Appeasement (with a 'deal') doesn't work with a country like Iran under it's current leadership.

 

I fear the consequences of the US and it's allies engaging in a war to end the Ayatollah's regime. But I also fear the consequences of allowing them to continue on their current trajectory. 

 

 

11 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

I think the 'deal' just papered over the cracks. By having the Iran deal in place, the Iranian leadership (through Soleimani) have been able to slowly extend their tentacles across the Middle East, in Iraq, Syria etc., killing thousands along the way, gaining footholds in strategic territory. Practically taking over Iraq by stealth. 

 

And do you honestly think the Islamic Republic of Iran under it's current dictatorship, with it's open hate and hostility toward the West and Israel will ever stop trying to develop nuclear capability? Appeasement (with a 'deal') doesn't work with a country like Iran under it's current leadership.

 

I fear the consequences of the US and it's allies engaging in a war to end the Ayatollah's regime. But I also fear the consequences of allowing them to continue on their current trajectory. 

 

 

The message is quite clear...... that the US has never attacked a country with nuclear weapons and if Donald doesn't further attack they are going to get them. 

Off topic posts and replies have been removed. 

3 hours ago, Thaidream said:

The ultimate goal  should be to get out of the Middle East- bring the troops home.  Let the waelthy Gulf States and Saudia Arabia  take over  as the protector of the region  and maintain a detente with Iran/  Enough American blood and money has been spent  in the Middle East while Americans go bankrupt with inadequate healthcare and a crumbling infrastructure. Trillion dollars spent  in the Middle East on this nonsense

In an ideal world this would happen. But I fear if the US and allies pull out, and the Iranian regime are allowed to continue with their power grab across the ME, and manage to attain nuclear capability, the consequences don't bear thinking about. 

 

The world would be a much better place if this had never happened...

 

"A discovery by nuclear physicists in a laboratory in Berlin, Germany, in 1938 made the first atomic bomb possible, after Otto Hahn, Lise Meitner and Fritz Strassman discovered nuclear fission."

 

7 hours ago, Orton Rd said:

We will attack the White House- several old missiles fired into the next Muslim country ????

 

 Well its the thought that counts .

    Donald , we await your next move .

    Why delay the inevitable ..

 

8 hours ago, DannyCarlton said:

A common but inexplicable misconception. Iran and ISIS are sworn enemies. US spent years trying to rid Syria of ISIS, then Russia and Iran joined the fray and cleared Syria of ISIS in months. Iran has always been our ally in the fight against ISIS.

My main point was, that ISIS would not have taken over so much of Iraq if we had maintained a presence. I would know a little about that, I was in Al Assad, and Tikrit. ISIS in Syria, was their problem.

8 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

It should not surprise you that the media does not report on what you personally feel to be probable events.

Give them time.

7 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

The world would be a much better place if this had never happened...

 

"A discovery by nuclear physicists in a laboratory in Berlin, Germany, in 1938 made the first atomic bomb possible, after Otto Hahn, Lise Meitner and Fritz Strassman discovered nuclear fission."

Somewhat short sighted.... this was a critical step towards developing warp drive, which is essential to enable mankind to join the intergalactic community.... which in turn is key to the survival of the human race, as it becomes increasingly endangered due to irresponsible environmental mismanagement. 

 

I thought this common knowledge... there are several documentaries/ movies on the subject. 

8 minutes ago, jany123 said:

Somewhat short sighted.... this was a critical step towards developing warp drive, which is essential to enable mankind to join the intergalactic community.... which in turn is key to the survival of the human race, as it becomes increasingly endangered due to irresponsible environmental mismanagement. 

 

I thought this common knowledge... there are several documentaries/ movies on the subject. 

  Interesting reply .

   Links to the documentaries and movies , would be much appreciated , thank you .

 

 

4 minutes ago, beechguy said:

They have been picking the fight for years, this didn't start during the Trump Administration.

This started with the Greeks, Ottamans,  later the British, and so on ????

Sadly IMO this is the beginning of the end of US assumptions of supreme right in world events.

While we are  all supposedly distracted  by this  current event there are strategic political and economic events that incrementally are undermining the relevance of the US position in the desire to  attain the culmination of it's  long  held agenda.

Unavoidably unknown is the impact of the ongoing  geopolitical reassignment of relative  harmonious leadership and eventual adoption of acquiesence to that reality albeit it reservedly.

Who  can deny that  globally there has been a  devolution in the assumed application of genuine  "democratic " principles despite the attempts by such as the US  to  inflict only the  concept  of  that ideology rather than the practice of it over the  course  of many  decades?

The US  itself is  currently embroiled  in a test of  exactly  the same issue.

Supreme  might  is  Right? Enforced by  military means? By obfuscation and  manipulation of the previously accepted conditions of protections defined in such as a glorious Constitution??

Personally I  foresee Trump will be the  catalyst  for  the  eventual demise of any claim of the US acclaim to any rights of geopolitical  superiority. The  saddest and sickest aspect of that  is also  likely to involve acrimonious retaliation and  gross  destruction  in  objection to the  fact.

 

 

 

 

target the launch sites 

8 hours ago, Dumbastheycome said:

Sadly IMO this is the beginning of the end of US assumptions of supreme right in world events.

While we are  all supposedly distracted  by this  current event there are strategic political and economic events that incrementally are undermining the relevance of the US position in the desire to  attain the culmination of it's  long  held agenda.

Unavoidably unknown is the impact of the ongoing  geopolitical reassignment of relative  harmonious leadership and eventual adoption of acquiesence to that reality albeit it reservedly.

Who  can deny that  globally there has been a  devolution in the assumed application of genuine  "democratic " principles despite the attempts by such as the US  to  inflict only the  concept  of  that ideology rather than the practice of it over the  course  of many  decades?

The US  itself is  currently embroiled  in a test of  exactly  the same issue.

Supreme  might  is  Right? Enforced by  military means? By obfuscation and  manipulation of the previously accepted conditions of protections defined in such as a glorious Constitution??

Personally I  foresee Trump will be the  catalyst  for  the  eventual demise of any claim of the US acclaim to any rights of geopolitical  superiority. The  saddest and sickest aspect of that  is also  likely to involve acrimonious retaliation and  gross  destruction  in  objection to the  fact.

 

 

 

 

Exactly. A geopolitical turning point which will end US primacy. Well said.

1 hour ago, jany123 said:

1 hour ago, CG1 Blue said:

The world would be a much better place if this had never happened...

 

"A discovery by nuclear physicists in a laboratory in Berlin, Germany, in 1938 made the first atomic bomb possible, after Otto Hahn, Lise Meitner and Fritz Strassman discovered nuclear fission."

Somewhat short sighted.... this was a critical step towards developing warp drive, which is essential to enable mankind to join the intergalactic community.... which in turn is key to the survival of the human race, as it becomes increasingly endangered due to irresponsible environmental mismanagement. 

 

I thought this common knowledge... there are several documentaries/ movies on the subject. 

I think I'd still rather it never happened.  I mean, which are we closer to right now; intergalactic travel, or destruction from nuclear weapons? 

1 hour ago, Tagged said:

This started with the Greeks, Ottamans,  later the British, and so on ????

No, the current situation started with the revolution in i979 when the people overthrew the Shah. He, with the help of his secret police SAVAK, had ruled with a rod of iron, murdering and torturing thousands of dissenters and making himself unbelivably wealthy. He had been installed by the British and Americans in 1954 as a puppet of the West primarily for them to take control of Iran's oil reserves. He eventually dismissed the government and declared himself absolute ruler.

 

After the revolution, the Americans were peed off because they no longer had control of the oil and did everything in their power to overthrow the revolutionary government. This is the primary cause of the Iranian people's resentment of the US and the US's ongoing propoganda campaign to demonise the Iranian government.

 

It's worth noting that many Iranian exiles who have settled in the West are ex SAVAK and would face certain death for the many crimes they committed, if they ever returned to Iran. Not nice neighbours.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Reza_Pahlavi

 

"During Mohammad Reza's reign, the British owned oil industry was briefly nationalised, under Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh, until a UK- and US-backed coup d'état deposed Mosaddegh and brought back foreign oil firms under the Consortium Agreement of 1954."

 

 

10 minutes ago, DannyCarlton said:

No, the current situation started with the revolution in i979 when the people overthrew the Shah. He, with the help of his secret police SAVAK, had ruled with a rod of iron, murdering and torturing thousands of dissenters and making himself unbelivably wealthy. He had been installed by the British and Americans in 1954 as a puppet of the West primarily for them to take control of Iran's oil reserves. He eventually dismissed the government and declared himself absolute ruler.

 

After the revolution, the Americans were peed off because they no longer had control of the oil and did everything in their power to overthrow the revolutionary government. This is the primary cause of the Iranian people's resentment of the US and the US's ongoing propoganda campaign to demonise the Iranian government.

 

It's worth noting that many Iranian exiles who have settled in the West are ex SAVAK and would face certain death for the many crimes they committed, if they ever returned to Iran. Not nice neighbours.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Reza_Pahlavi

 

"During Mohammad Reza's reign, the British owned oil industry was briefly nationalised, under Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh, until a UK- and US-backed coup d'état deposed Mosaddegh and brought back foreign oil firms under the Consortium Agreement of 1954."

 

 

You are right, Iran have always had a war going on, either internal or external. Middle east is a ring of fire with or without our help. 

 

 

List of Iran/Persia conflicts

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_Iran

 

 

Trump about to speak. Markets are up. Oil was up 5% and now down 2.8%.

 

A regional county fair in a flyover state produces more fireworks than the might of the Iranian army. Life is good. Quite a few chuckles going on the biz news.

4 minutes ago, Cryingdick said:

Trump about to speak. Markets are up. Oil was up 5% and now down 2.8%.

 

A regional county fair in a flyover state produces more fireworks than the might of the Iranian army. Life is good. Quite a few chuckles going on the biz news.

Controversial point, Iran sent out warning to Iraq and Iraqs allies. I think they actually made a good point right there versus Trump and US. 

Just now, Tagged said:

Controversial point, Iran sent out warning to Iraq and Iraqs allies. I think they actually made a good point right there versus Trump and US. 

 

It means there was no serious threat. They aren't going to do anything about their beloved, dead, jihadist. 

Just now, Cryingdick said:

 

It means there was no serious threat. They aren't going to do anything about their beloved, dead, jihadist. 

It could be a smart move if you ask me, thinking about their future allies in the Middle east. 

Just now, Cryingdick said:

 

It means there was no serious threat. They aren't going to do anything about their beloved, dead, jihadist. 

Don't speak too soon. revenge is a dish best served cold.

1 minute ago, DannyCarlton said:

Don't speak too soon. revenge is a dish best served cold.

 

Okay I will tell the army to stay on full alert. Thanks for the tip.

7 minutes ago, Tagged said:

Waiting 25 min for his speaks. Might be conflict backstage, or Trump getting his orders for what he is going to say, to make sure he doesnt fall out and go solo again. 

BREAKING : Under a tight military leash Trump backs down. China and Russia see new opportunities to sanction bust 

1 minute ago, URMySunshine said:

BREAKING : Under a tight military leash Trump backs down. China and Russia see new opportunities to sanction bust 

I heard he called for Nato! Clear message

2 minutes ago, DannyCarlton said:

Might be better to put the Secret Service on code red. You know what happened to JFK when he wound the Russians up.

 

Markets move straight up during Trump's statement. Very firm statement and very reasonable. Well done Mr' President. he takes these things in such stride when the uninformed panic and start ranting about doom and gloom. 

 

He will be known one day as the clutch president. Cool under pressure and always delivers.