BREAKING NEWS! Iran potentially triggers World War 3

[Brickleberry]

Just now, rabas said:

 

You have now been provided reasonable proof three times that the old information from US intelligence has been superseded. And you continue to imply that US intelligence is the most trustworthy of sources.  Do you know what they say about the Tehran regime? 

 

 

1) Two of the sources you provided were only one source - the same article from Iran International, a company I can't verify.

2) The 3rd source was even older than US intelligence updates - Dec 2023 - compared to the WSJ article which was written on Oct 8 2023.

 

Why does US say Iran was not involved. Why does Hamas say Iran was not involved. Why do you not believe them?

[Brickleberry]

3 minutes ago, rabas said:

 

You have now been provided reasonable proof three times that the old information from US intelligence has been superseded. And you continue to imply that US intelligence is the most trustworthy of sources.  Do you know what they say about the Tehran regime? 

 

 

Yes, I know that the Iranian regime is horrid. I don't care about that. I care about double standards, international law and fairness. Whilst I deplore the Iranian regime, they were perfectly within their rights to respond to the attack on their consulate. If states feel like they are not being treated fairly, they will do crazy things!

 

I would go even further, and say Iran was pretty damn responsible.

1) They went to the UN and tried to get the UN security council to condemn the attack on their consulate. US, UK & France didn't allow it to go through.

2) They telegraphed their response, allowing 2 weeks of prep (just as the Americans do)

3) They sent warnings about the attack

4) They sent just enough to show a forceful response, and that they knew Israel's military capabilities. It was a very carefully, calibrated response because they do not want to go to war... It might be the end of the regime if they do.

[BigBruv]

 

[Bkk Brian]

1 minute ago, Brickleberry said:

 

Yes, I know that the Iranian regime is horrid. I don't care about that. I care about double standards, international law and fairness. Whilst I deplore the Iranian regime, they were perfectly within their rights to respond to the attack on their consulate. If states feel like they are not being treated fairly, they will do crazy things!

 

I would go even further, and say Iran was pretty damn responsible.

1) They went to the UN and tried to get the UN security council to condemn the attack on their consulate. US, UK & France didn't allow it to go through.

2) They telegraphed their response, allowing 2 weeks of prep (just as the Americans do)

3) They sent warnings about the attack

4) They sent just enough to show a forceful response, and that they knew Israel's military capabilities. It was a very carefully, calibrated response because they do not want to go to war... It might be the end of the regime if they do.

I would go even further, and say Iran was pretty damn responsible.

 

Iran apologist  Iran has fueled Hamas for years along with other terror groups. Gave Hamas more than $200 million

 

Secret letters written by Hamas boss who planned October 7 attack reveal Iran paid the terror group £200million

[Nick Carter icp]

21 minutes ago, Brickleberry said:

 

It is a bit disingenuous to say I'm using old information, when the WSJ post you just sent was from the day after the original attack - October 8th 2023. US intelligence has since said they do not believe Tehran was involved. The US and Iran are hardly allies, so if they say they were not involved, I believe it because they hate each others guts! There is no reason for the US to lie in this way.

 

  Could you provide a link to the claim that the USA doesn't believe Iran was involved in Oct 7 

[Bkk Brian]

6 minutes ago, Brickleberry said:

 

Yes, I know that the Iranian regime is horrid. I don't care about that. I care about double standards, international law and fairness. Whilst I deplore the Iranian regime, they were perfectly within their rights to respond to the attack on their consulate. If states feel like they are not being treated fairly, they will do crazy things!

 

I would go even further, and say Iran was pretty damn responsible.

1) They went to the UN and tried to get the UN security council to condemn the attack on their consulate. US, UK & France didn't allow it to go through.

2) They telegraphed their response, allowing 2 weeks of prep (just as the Americans do)

3) They sent warnings about the attack

4) They sent just enough to show a forceful response, and that they knew Israel's military capabilities. It was a very carefully, calibrated response because they do not want to go to war... It might be the end of the regime if they do.

 

You said you believe the Americans right. So I guess you need to believe this also

 

“I’ve seen reporting that the Iranians meant to fail. That this spectacular and embarrassing failure was all by design.

I’ve also seen Iran say that they provided early warning to help Israel prepare its defenses and limit any potential damage. All of this is categorically false. To coin a phrase from the President, it is malarkey...

Given the scale of this attack, Iran’s intent was clearly to cause significant destruction and casualties.…the aim was to get as many of [the drones and missiles] through Israel’s defenses as possible.”

 

 

[Brickleberry]

4 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

I would go even further, and say Iran was pretty damn responsible.

 

Iran apologist  Iran has fueled Hamas for years along with other terror groups. Gave Hamas more than $200 million

 

Secret letters written by Hamas boss who planned October 7 attack reveal Iran paid the terror group £200million

 

"Secret letters written by Hamas boss who planned October 7 attack reveal Iran paid the terror group £200million"

 

Were you not just saying that it was Iran who planned the attacks, but now you send me proof that Hamas planned the attacks?

 

[Brickleberry]

3 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

 

You said you believe the Americans right. So I guess you need to believe this also

 

“I’ve seen reporting that the Iranians meant to fail. That this spectacular and embarrassing failure was all by design.

I’ve also seen Iran say that they provided early warning to help Israel prepare its defenses and limit any potential damage. All of this is categorically false. To coin a phrase from the President, it is malarkey...

Given the scale of this attack, Iran’s intent was clearly to cause significant destruction and casualties.…the aim was to get as many of [the drones and missiles] through Israel’s defenses as possible.

 

I would disagree with that analysis. I agree with this US analysis:

https://edition.cnn.com/2024/04/14/middleeast/iran-israel-attack-drones-analysis-intl/index.html

 

Quote

 

A decades-long shadow war burst out into the open overnight as Iranian drones and missiles lit up the night sky in Israel and the occupied West Bank. Tehran’s operation was highly choreographed, apparently designed to minimize casualties while maximizing spectacle.

This was a complex mission. Over 300 drones and missiles navigated above Iran’s neighbors, including Jordan and Iraq — both with US military bases — before penetrating the airspace of Iran’s mortal enemy, Israel. Israel’s allies helped shoot down the bulk of these weapons, but couldn’t prevent what was long believed to be the Middle East’s doomsday scenario, the Islamic Republic’s first-ever attack on Israel.

Israel’s fabled Iron Dome air defense system did not disappoint Israelis, many of whom took to bunkers. Only a small handful of locations were attacked, including a military base and an area in the Negev desert, injuring a Bedouin child, while the dome fended off one of the largest drone attacks in history

Yet it was an operation that seemed designed to fail — when Iran launched its killer drones from its own territory some 1,000 miles away, it was giving Israel hours of advance notice.

The symbolism of the attack did the heavy lifting. Rather than fire from one of the neighboring countries where Iran and its non-state allies are present, this was a direct attack from Iranian territory on Israeli territory. This compromised Iran’s ability to damage Israel because it robbed the operation of the element of surprise.

 

 

[Bkk Brian]

2 minutes ago, Brickleberry said:

 

"Secret letters written by Hamas boss who planned October 7 attack reveal Iran paid the terror group £200million"

 

Were you not just saying that it was Iran who planned the attacks, but now you send me proof that Hamas planned the attacks?

 

Did I say Iran did it alone? Would it be possible for Iran to do it alone? 

 

From the US who you believe:

 

Administration officials have said since the attacks began that Iran has long supported Hamas with material, financial and logistical support, but that to date no evidence had been unearthed to link the attacks, which killed more than 1,200 Israelis and wounded thousands more, to Tehran. 

"[W]e have said since the beginning that Iran is complicit in this attack in a broad sense because they have provided the lion's share of the funding for the military wing of Hamas, they have provided training, they have provided capabilities, they have provided support, and they have had engagement and contact with Hamas over years and years," national security adviser Jake Sullivan told reporters on Tuesday.  

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/iran-israel-iranian-officials-surprised-by-hamas-attack-israel/

[Bkk Brian]

1 minute ago, Brickleberry said:

 

I would disagree with that analysis. I agree with this US analysis:

https://edition.cnn.com/2024/04/14/middleeast/iran-israel-attack-drones-analysis-intl/index.html

 

 

Thats a CNN journalist article not the US Gov who you said you prefer to believe

[Brickleberry]

6 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Did I say Iran did it alone? Would it be possible for Iran to do it alone? 

 

From the US who you believe:

 

Administration officials have said since the attacks began that Iran has long supported Hamas with material, financial and logistical support, but that to date no evidence had been unearthed to link the attacks, which killed more than 1,200 Israelis and wounded thousands more, to Tehran. 

"[W]e have said since the beginning that Iran is complicit in this attack in a broad sense because they have provided the lion's share of the funding for the military wing of Hamas, they have provided training, they have provided capabilities, they have provided support, and they have had engagement and contact with Hamas over years and years," national security adviser Jake Sullivan told reporters on Tuesday.  

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/iran-israel-iranian-officials-surprised-by-hamas-attack-israel/

 

I agree with everything in this post. Particularly this part:

no evidence had been unearthed to link the attacks, which killed more than 1,200 Israelis and wounded thousands more, to Tehran. 

[Nick Carter icp]

11 minutes ago, Brickleberry said:

 

"Secret letters written by Hamas boss who planned October 7 attack reveal Iran paid the terror group £200million"

 

Were you not just saying that it was Iran who planned the attacks, but now you send me proof that Hamas planned the attacks?

 

 

    Could be that Hamas planned the attacks with Iran ?

[Bkk Brian]

1 minute ago, Brickleberry said:

 

I agree with everything in this post. Particularly this part:

no evidence had been unearthed to link the attacks, which killed more than 1,200 Israelis and wounded thousands more, to Tehran. 

Good for you, dated 11th Oct and as I said don't get too stuck on old reports, that is why I posted this one to point that very point out.

 

"We'll be looking at additional intelligence in the coming weeks and days to inform our thinking on this issue, including whether at least there were some in the Iranian system who either had a clear sense of what was coming or even contributed to aspects of the planning," said Matthew Miller, the State Department spokesman, in a Tuesday press briefing."

[Nick Carter icp]

4 minutes ago, Brickleberry said:

 

I agree with everything in this post. Particularly this part:

no evidence had been unearthed to link the attacks, which killed more than 1,200 Israelis and wounded thousands more, to Tehran. 

 

   That was reported a few days after the attack. So just after the attack , they hadn't found any links to Iran .

  Six months later, is there any update 

[thaibeachlovers]

5 hours ago, rabas said:

 

The extraterritoriality thing is more an old wives' tale. Consulate territory is not really Iran territory.  reference

 

Contrary to popular belief, diplomatic missions sometimes do not enjoy full extraterritorial status and are generally not sovereign territory of the represented state. The sending state can give embassies sovereign status but this only happens with a minority of countries. Rather, the premises of an embassy remain under the jurisdiction of the host state while being afforded special privileges (such as immunity from most local laws). [also note consulates don't even get the same protections as embassies]

 

Given that, do you still wish to protect the guy responsible for the Oct 7 operation that eventually led to the horrific deaths of thousands of innocent  Israelis and Palestinians?

 

I'm not "protecting" anyone, but I am pointing out that if netayahu blows up an Iranian consulate ( and it may or may not be on Iranian territory, but that isn't important ) it was very likely they would do something in return, which they did, and now netanyahu gets to divert world attention from Gaza and the West Bank- job done.

 

While Hamas was responsible for a bit over 1,000 deaths, your man is responsible for over 30,000, so don't lecture me about who is responsible for it.

 

Now that the warmonger netanyahu is promising retaliation on Iran, Iran will likely not be tardy in responding to it, and so the game of death expands.

If the next attack by Iran involves 3,000 UAVs and causes thousands of deaths in israel, perhaps your man may regret the consulate attack, but perhaps not.

[MangoKorat]

12 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

IMO it is obvious that he does not want all of Ukraine, as he could never control that much territory. What he wants is what he has already, plus a Ukraine without NATO between Russia and NATO border. From what I read on here, that was the agreement some years ago, but that was forgotten when noises were made by IMO idiots that Ukraine should join NATO. America risked nuclear war to stop Russia putting missiles into Cuba, and now it seems America wants to put missiles into Ukraine. What could possibly go wrong with that IMO barking idea?

I wouldn't be in favour of the US placing missiles in Ukraine but I doubt anyone knows what goes on in Putin's head.  He was never under any sort of threat - only threats that he perceived. He is on record as having stated that  he wants to put the old Soviet Union back together - the territory not the ideology.  As for agreements, don't forget that he took Crimea!  Overall and despite all previous agreements, Ukraine is a sovereign state and has every right to form alliances, pacts and economic agreements as it so wishes. The fact that Putin objects to such things merely illustrates his own personal insecurity.

 

NATO is a defensive organisation that has never been involved in any initial aggression. Had Ukraine been a member of NATO prior to 2014, Ukraine would almost certainly not be at war with Russia today. As a result of Putin's war on Ukraine, he now has an even bigger border with NATO as Finland is now a member.

 

Whereas Putin sees NATO as a threat, he in fact is the only party that has carried out aggressive actions - Georgia and Ukraine, direct threats towards Latvia and veiled threats towards other Baltic states. Putin's airforce have carried out documented horrific attacks on civillians in Syria.

 

There are now reports that Putin has warned Biden against getting involved in Iran, saying he will not sit back and do nothing - despite prior statements from both the US and the UK that they will not assist Israel in any action against Iran.

 

Unless I misunderstand, you appear to be promoting Putin as a non-aggressor who is simply trying to protect his country.  I'd suggest that his actions prove that he is anything but that and is responsible for the deaths of thousands of both his own and Ukrainian forces and civillians. This is the man who through his Minister of Foreign Affairs, stated that he had no intention of invading Ukraine - just hours before he did just that.

 

The man is a war monger with designs on creating an empire.  He achieves support at home by controlling the Russian media, manufacturing news and promoting a school of thought that the West is out to get Russia. He is a thug who quite clearly was involved in massive corruption as the former Soviet Union broke up. His election success is highly questionable, given that any real opposition in Russia is effectively banned.  A truly popular man, who was not afraid of his nation knowing what actually goes on, would not need to do that.

 

Quite how Russia can rebuke Israel at the UN for its attack on Iran when it invaded Ukraine and annexed Crimea beggars belief.

 

Although I don't want to see WW3, I think the time has come for the world to stand up to Putin, Khomeini and all other despotic, aggressive regimes. We will regret it otherwise and it is just possible that such action may actually avert a World War. 

[Wobblybob]

5 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I'm not "protecting" anyone, but I am pointing out that if netayahu blows up an Iranian consulate ( and it may or may not be on Iranian territory, but that isn't important ) it was very likely they would do something in return, which they did, and now netanyahu gets to divert world attention from Gaza and the West Bank- job done.

 

While Hamas was responsible for a bit over 1,000 deaths, your man is responsible for over 30,000, so don't lecture me about who is responsible for it.

 

Now that the warmonger netanyahu is promising retaliation on Iran, Iran will likely not be tardy in responding to it, and so the game of death expands.

If the next attack by Iran involves 3,000 UAVs and causes thousands of deaths in israel, perhaps your man may regret the consulate attack, but perhaps not.

Most people would have to agree if that structure entertained 5 top terrorists and those terrorists were liquidated that Israel deserves a Brucie Bonus.

 

[thaibeachlovers]

36 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

“I’ve seen reporting that the Iranians meant to fail. That this spectacular and embarrassing failure was all by design.

I’ve also seen Iran say that they provided early warning to help Israel prepare its defenses and limit any potential damage. All of this is categorically false. To coin a phrase from the President, it is malarkey...

Given the scale of this attack, Iran’s intent was clearly to cause significant destruction and casualties.…the aim was to get as many of [the drones and missiles] through Israel’s defenses as possible.”

The one talking malarkey is the president ( as usual ). If their intent had been to get as many of [the drones and missiles] through Israel’s defenses as possible they would have sent a lot more than a measly 300. More like 3,000, which would have overwhelmed israeli defenses by sheer numbers. Anyone that has the slightest bit of military knowledge knows that 300 is nothing, and also knows that israel's multi layered defenses would have no problem dealing with most of them.

 

However, keep believing the propaganda by all means.

[Bkk Brian]

1 minute ago, thaibeachlovers said:

The one talking malarkey is the president ( as usual ). If their intent had been to get as many of [the drones and missiles] through Israel’s defenses as possible they would have sent a lot more than a measly 300. More like 3,000, which would have overwhelmed israeli defenses by sheer numbers. Anyone that has the slightest bit of military knowledge knows that 300 is nothing, and also knows that israel's multi layered defenses would have no problem dealing with most of them.

 

However, keep believing the propaganda by all means.

However, keep believing the propaganda by all means.

 

Oh the irony from the one that worships Hama's favorite media outlet Al Jazeera 

[CG1 Blue]

2 hours ago, BarraMarra said:

So its ok to take out planners of attacks by targetting them in a different country CG1 Blue and in a consulate building ??

For all the terrorist activity they are behind, all the trouble they are stirring up across the ME, and the despicable way they treat their own citizens, the Iranian regime deserve zero protection IMO, no matter where they are. 

[Wobblybob]

1 minute ago, Bkk Brian said:

However, keep believing the propaganda by all means.

 

Oh the irony from the one that worships Hama's favorite media outlet Al Jazeera 

Be careful, Sgt Rock nearly went to Vietnam. 

 

[coolcarer]

15 minutes ago, MangoKorat said:

I wouldn't be in favour of the US placing missiles in Ukraine but I doubt anyone knows what goes on in Putin's head.  He was never under any sort of threat - only threats that he perceived. He is on record as having stated that  he wants to put the old Soviet Union back together - the territory not the ideology.  As for agreements, don't forget that he took Crimea!  Overall and despite all previous agreements, Ukraine is a sovereign state and has every right to form alliances, pacts and economic agreements as it so wishes. The fact that Putin objects to such things merely illustrates his own personal insecurity.

 

NATO is a defensive organisation that has never been involved in any initial aggression. Had Ukraine been a member of NATO prior to 2014, Ukraine would almost certainly not be at war with Russia today. As a result of Putin's war on Ukraine, he now has an even bigger border with NATO as Finland is now a member.

 

Whereas Putin sees NATO as a threat, he in fact is the only party that has carried out aggressive actions - Georgia and Ukraine, direct threats towards Latvia and veiled threats towards other Baltic states. Putin's airforce have carried out documented horrific attacks on civillians in Syria.

 

There are now reports that Putin has warned Biden against getting involved in Iran, saying he will not sit back and do nothing - despite prior statements from both the US and the UK that they will not assist Israel in any action against Iran.

 

Unless I misunderstand, you appear to be promoting Putin as a non-aggressor who is simply trying to protect his country.  I'd suggest that his actions prove that he is anything but that and is responsible for the deaths of thousands of both his own and Ukrainian forces and civillians. This is the man who through his Minister of Foreign Affairs, stated that he had no intention of invading Ukraine - just hours before he did just that.

 

The man is a war monger with designs on creating an empire.  He achieves support at home by controlling the Russian media, manufacturing news and promoting a school of thought that the West is out to get Russia. He is a thug who quite clearly was involved in massive corruption as the former Soviet Union broke up. His election success is highly questionable, given that any real opposition in Russia is effectively banned.  A truly popular man, who was not afraid of his nation knowing what actually goes on, would not need to do that.

 

Quite how Russia can rebuke Israel at the UN for its attack on Iran when it invaded Ukraine and annexed Crimea beggars belief.

 

Although I don't want to see WW3, I think the time has come for the world to stand up to Putin, Khomeini and all other despotic, aggressive regimes. We will regret it otherwise and it is just possible that such action may actually avert a World War. 

Think you and the other guy are in the wrong topic

[MangoKorat]

13 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

IMO we are a somewhat intelligent species ( a really intelligent species wouldn't destroy it's own environment ) led by morons idiots.

Agreed but.......money No.1

[thaibeachlovers]

8 minutes ago, MangoKorat said:

Unless I misunderstand, you appear to be promoting Putin as a non-aggressor who is simply trying to protect his country. 

Unless I am mistaken I said no such thing. I do think the west encouraged Zelensky to bait the bear in hopes of punishing Putin without getting themselves involved- better for Ukrainians to die than Americans and all that.

I also think they underestimated Russia ( just like Napoleon and Hitler ), and have found themselves stuck in a war they can't afford, but can't let go of.

 

11 minutes ago, MangoKorat said:

Although I don't want to see WW3, I think the time has come for the world to stand up to Putin, Khomeini and all other despotic, aggressive regimes. We will regret it otherwise and it is just possible that such action may actually avert a World War. 

You do realise that "standing up" to them ( short of nuclear annihilation ) involves a lot of western boys coming home in bags, unless you know of a very large mercenary force that could be used instead, don't you? The Ukrainians might have done, but they seem out of cannon fodder at present.

If it goes down as your druthers, I hope you are willing to accept the consequences.

[coolcarer]

24 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I'm not "protecting" anyone, but I am pointing out that if netayahu blows up an Iranian consulate ( and it may or may not be on Iranian territory, but that isn't important ) it was very likely they would do something in return, which they did, and now netanyahu gets to divert world attention from Gaza and the West Bank- job done.

 

While Hamas was responsible for a bit over 1,000 deaths, your man is responsible for over 30,000, so don't lecture me about who is responsible for it.

 

Now that the warmonger netanyahu is promising retaliation on Iran, Iran will likely not be tardy in responding to it, and so the game of death expands.

If the next attack by Iran involves 3,000 UAVs and causes thousands of deaths in israel, perhaps your man may regret the consulate attack, but perhaps not.

How many death?

[MangoKorat]

1 minute ago, coolcarer said:

Think you and the other guy are in the wrong topic

The situation in the Middle East, Africa and Ukraine are all potential contributors towards triggering WW3.  Putin is heavily involved with and an ally of Iran.

[MangoKorat]

3 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

You do realise that "standing up" to them ( short of nuclear annihilation ) involves a lot of western boys coming home in bags, unless you know of a very large mercenary force that could be used instead, don't you?

Do you see an alternative? One that works over the long term?

[thaibeachlovers]

9 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

For all the terrorist activity they are behind, all the trouble they are stirring up across the ME, and the despicable way they treat their own citizens, the Iranian regime deserve zero protection IMO, no matter where they are. 

You seem to think it will all go one way, but reality says that for every regime member assassinated, expect a few of your own to be targeted. That sort of thing is why civilised countries don't go around blowing up other countries consulates.

[coolcarer]

2 minutes ago, MangoKorat said:

The situation in the Middle East, Africa and Ukraine are all potential contributors towards triggering WW3.  Putin is heavily involved with and an ally of Iran.

Can we bring China and North Korea into it too? Nah you are in the wrong topic, this is not about Ukraine and Russia.

[MangoKorat]

5 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Unless I am mistaken I said no such thing. I do think the west encouraged Zelensky to bait the bear in hopes of punishing Putin without getting themselves involved- better for Ukrainians to die than Americans and all that.

I also think they underestimated Russia ( just like Napoleon and Hitler ), and have found themselves stuck in a war they can't afford, but can't let go of.

I just got that overall feeling based on your post.  As for letting go...........the Ukraine is in dire trouble right now and it is at serious risk of losing the war. That is entirely because its Western 'partners', especially the USA have let it down on supplies of weapons and equipment.  If we let that happen, all the supplies already sent and the lives lost, will have been in vain.