1 hour ago, riclag said:

“The Islamic Republic’s actions represent a dangerous escalation that violates the sovereignty of multiple states and threatens regional stability,” the statement released on Sunday said.

“The targeting of civilians and of countries not engaged in hostilities is reckless and destabilizing behavior.”

https://edition.cnn.com/world/live-news/us-israel-iran-attack-03-01-26-intl

Those countries house the military bases as well as the intelligence agencies of the aggressor nations (Israel and the US) who began this war of aggression while pretending to hold diplomatic negotiations with the Iran, which is an act of perfidy. Israel's and the US attack are acts of war. Iran has the right to defend itself, so the attacks on US (Israel) military resources in the region are all fair game. It's a bad choice to host the militaries of countries who engage in unprovoked wars of aggression.

Omani Foreign Minister Sayyid Badr Al Busaidi stated the following in a February 27th interview on CBS Face The Nation:

Al Busaidi described the negotiations as having achieved "significant progress" and stated that a "peace deal is within our reach" if diplomacy is afforded the necessary space. He specifically highlighted Iran's agreement in principle to "never, ever have nuclear material that will create a bomb," emphasizing "zero stockpiling," down-blending of existing enriched uranium to the lowest possible level, conversion into irreversible fuel, and full verification by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). He characterized this as a "very important breakthrough that has never been achieved any time before," directly addressing U.S. concerns over potential weaponization.

Al Busaidi also reiterated elements of this optimism in a follow-up X post after meeting U.S. Vice President JD Vance on February 27, 2026, stating "Peace is within our reach" while noting progress toward "no nuclear weapons. Not ever. Zero stockpiling. Comprehensive verification."

So under cover of optimistic negotiations, the US engaged in pefidy, again, and use it to attack Iran who perceived that a diplomatic solution was attainable.

For those with a limited vocabulary, the term "perfidy" means the following:

It is prohibited to kill, injure or capture an adversary by resort to perfidy. Acts inviting the confidence of an adversary to lead him to believe that he is entitled to, or is obliged to accord, protection under the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict, with intent to betray that confidence, shall constitute perfidy.

This prohibition applies in both international and non-international armed conflicts and is recognized as customary international law (see ICRC Customary IHL Rule 65).

The core elements are:

Inviting the adversary's confidence by leading them to believe they are entitled to (or obliged to grant) protection under international humanitarian law.

Doing so with the specific intent to betray that confidence. 👈

Resulting in the killing, injury, or capture of the adversary. 👈

Examples of perfidy include:

Feigning an intent to negotiate 👈.

Feigning surrender.

Feigning incapacitation by wounds or sickness.

Feigning civilian, non-combatant, or protected status (e.g., misusing the Red Cross emblem to approach and attack).

13 hours ago, mymonkeyhusb said:

Good question. Quite a few Muslim countries have condemned Iran’s missile strikes on neighbouring countries and US/Israeli bases. This seems to be a conservative response. Probably want to keep their own governments stable and appear as mere observers of the strikes on Iran; cautious about being drawn into direct confrontation with two superpowers. In otherwords, no pro-Iran Muslim bloc. Hearing in the news that the nearby countries are actually breathing a sigh of relief now that the regime who used to be the bully is really being dismantled bit by bit. Also these countries have to consider their economies regarding trade and Western relations.

I guess how radical the government is that fills the power vacuum will determine the attitude towards Israel. Seems like most Muslim countries were rather polite towards Israel. Were these Muslim countries sincere or just letting Iran do the dirty secret work? I don't know for sure. 5Do you agree?

There won't be any pro-Iran Muslim block because other Muslim countries are Suni or Suni-led (apart from Irak).

11 hours ago, Roadsternut said:

The Gulf States have to tread carefully. The Gulf States and Eastern seaboard of Saudi Arabia have substantive Shia populations. Bahrain has a majority Shi'ite population. The old Shah claimed Bahrain as an Iranian province, and so has the Islamic Republic. I was in Bahrain in 1981 when Iran invaded; it happened, it wasn't reported and I know the chaps who mustered BDF units to drive off the Iranians. But back in the day, when you wandered into villages like A'ali, it was pretty clear who they spiritually backed. The Shia was treated like <deleted>; I knew of good men in the Bahraini Army passed over for promotion because of their religion. The 2011 uprisings were Shia. Most of the police are Sunni recruits from Baluchistan or Syria, including Salafists. So much so, that in Hamed Town (basically cop town), ISIS flags were being displayed.

The Gulf States know, like Vietnam, the Americans will lose interest. They still have to live next to Iran. And Iran was just as bad to them when the Shah was about.

Thanks for your reply. I appreciate your sharing your experience.

Good point that all the tensions you mentioned predate the Islamic Republic. Wow, all neighboring governments have to factor in domestic stability, regional rivalry, and the long memories on all sides when they establish policy. To your point, the Sunni–Shia accomodation and alliances with neighboring countries may shift over time, but geography doesn’t. My opinion is the Middle East has its own peculiar constant state of flux because the idea of forgive and forget cannot take root in their culture.

Game over?

The Ayotollah was what, 85? The regime he headed has run Iran for over 40 years. It is almost certain that the succession was in place anyway.

The IRGC is a mature military and political organisation, with a ruthless hold on Iran and their proxies. It too will certainly have a detailed practiced chain of command and further echelons of leadership in place.

You can bomb and rocket them for as long as you like. In the absence of any insurgent force you will only change the regime by putting troops in, on the ground, to occupy the country and install a new government. America won't do that, it would involve massive casualties; and unlike Iraq and Afghanistan there is no coalition, willing or unwilling, to take part.

Sooner or later Netanyahu will lose power at the hands of the Israeli electorate. Trump will similarly be effectively powerless, even if he manages to cling to office, even if he manages somehow to swing a further term, he will probably die in office.

I would suggest that in both events the Islamic Republic of Iran will still exist.

Top Shia cleric Ayatollah Makarem Shirazi declares jihad against US and Israel
According to Mehr News Agency, Makarem Shirazi declared that jihad against the United States and Israel was required, stating that “avenging the blood...

Source: https://english.mathrubhumi.com/news/world/iran-top-cleric-declares-jihad-on-us-israel-after-khamenei-killing-oegqxole

The gloves are coming off. Unless the Western countries are willing to round up all Shia Muslims in their countries, this could begin the process of destabilizing those countries domestically.

17 hours ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

That doesn't matter. What matters is that fake news consumers/notorious pushers of conspiracy theories and irrational Trump haters on forums are happy. They are not. The citizens of Iran and Venezuela are of minimal importance compared to these sensitive hatefilled forum dwellers.

Irrational Trump haters versus warmongering MAGA cultists.

Must be Monday!

2 hours ago, connda said:

Top Shia cleric Ayatollah Makarem Shirazi declares jihad against US and Israel
According to Mehr News Agency, Makarem Shirazi declared that jihad against the United States and Israel was required, stating that “avenging the blood...

Source: https://english.mathrubhumi.com/news/world/iran-top-cleric-declares-jihad-on-us-israel-after-khamenei-killing-oegqxole

The gloves are coming off. Unless the Western countries are willing to round up all Shia Muslims in their countries, this could begin the process of destabilizing those countries domestically.

Terrorist and extremist networks in Western countries are mainly Suni, and often Salafi. Not sure this fatwa will have much consequences.

2 hours ago, JAG said:

The Ayotollah was what, 85? The regime he headed has run Iran for over 40 years. It is almost certain that the succession was in place anyway.

He did designate his successor, but he was taken out during the "12-day war" and, such was his sense of divine immortality, the dead Ayatollah never got around to naming a new successor.

I also read that the top-pick for new spiritual leader is Ali Larijani. As recently as last week, he was tasked by the dead Ayatollah to work up a security plan for Khamenei and his fellow madnesses, just in case Trump dropped the hammer again. Since Larijani has once lost and twice been disqualified from running for the Iranian presidency, I wonder why he's so rubbish about other people's security?

3 hours ago, connda said:

Top Shia cleric Ayatollah Makarem Shirazi declares jihad against US and Israel
According to Mehr News Agency, Makarem Shirazi declared that jihad against the United States and Israel was required, stating that “avenging the blood...

Source: https://english.mathrubhumi.com/news/world/iran-top-cleric-declares-jihad-on-us-israel-after-khamenei-killing-oegqxole

The gloves are coming off. Unless the Western countries are willing to round up all Shia Muslims in their countries, this could begin the process of destabilizing those countries domestically.

These Iranian leaders aren't actually the leaders of all Shia. They are self appointed. It's not the same as killing the Pope. The Supreme Leader who was killed wasn't even that much of a religious scholar. Yeah, some will feel inspired, but most won't.

4 hours ago, connda said:

Those countries house the military bases as well as the intelligence agencies of the aggressor nations (Israel and the US) who began this war of aggression while pretending to hold diplomatic negotiations with the Iran, which is an act of perfidy. Israel's and the US attack are acts of war. Iran has the right to defend itself, so the attacks on US (Israel) military resources in the region are all fair game. It's a bad choice to host the militaries of countries who engage in unprovoked wars of aggression.

Omani Foreign Minister Sayyid Badr Al Busaidi stated the following in a February 27th interview on CBS Face The Nation:

Al Busaidi described the negotiations as having achieved "significant progress" and stated that a "peace deal is within our reach" if diplomacy is afforded the necessary space. He specifically highlighted Iran's agreement in principle to "never, ever have nuclear material that will create a bomb," emphasizing "zero stockpiling," down-blending of existing enriched uranium to the lowest possible level, conversion into irreversible fuel, and full verification by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). He characterized this as a "very important breakthrough that has never been achieved any time before," directly addressing U.S. concerns over potential weaponization.

Al Busaidi also reiterated elements of this optimism in a follow-up X post after meeting U.S. Vice President JD Vance on February 27, 2026, stating "Peace is within our reach" while noting progress toward "no nuclear weapons. Not ever. Zero stockpiling. Comprehensive verification."

So under cover of optimistic negotiations, the US engaged in pefidy, again, and use it to attack Iran who perceived that a diplomatic solution was attainable.

For those with a limited vocabulary, the term "perfidy" means the following:

It is prohibited to kill, injure or capture an adversary by resort to perfidy. Acts inviting the confidence of an adversary to lead him to believe that he is entitled to, or is obliged to accord, protection under the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict, with intent to betray that confidence, shall constitute perfidy.

This prohibition applies in both international and non-international armed conflicts and is recognized as customary international law (see ICRC Customary IHL Rule 65).

The core elements are:

Inviting the adversary's confidence by leading them to believe they are entitled to (or obliged to grant) protection under international humanitarian law.

Doing so with the specific intent to betray that confidence. 👈

Resulting in the killing, injury, or capture of the adversary. 👈

Examples of perfidy include:

Feigning an intent to negotiate 👈.

Feigning surrender.

Feigning incapacitation by wounds or sickness.

Feigning civilian, non-combatant, or protected status (e.g., misusing the Red Cross emblem to approach and attack).

Your Aggressor has been pleading for them to stop with the nonsense of building bombs for years.

The terrorist regime has started endangering innocent people by sending missiles over to those countries your talking about . They P'ed off Starmer enough that he felt the need to call out the reckless state of terror.

Starmer added: "Iran can end this now.

"They should refrain from further strikes, give up their weapons programme and cease the appalling violence and oppression of the Iranian people – who deserve the right to determine their own future."

Sir Keir also said protections for British bases and personnel had been stepped up to their highest level".

Starmer speaks to Trump after UK joins defensive operatio...

Sir Keir Starmer says protections for British bases and personnel have been stepped up to their highest level.

4 hours ago, connda said:

Top Shia cleric Ayatollah Makarem Shirazi declares jihad against US and Israel
According to Mehr News Agency, Makarem Shirazi declared that jihad against the United States and Israel was required, stating that “avenging the blood...

1 hour ago, candide said:

Terrorist and extremist networks in Western countries are mainly Suni, and often Salafi. Not sure this fatwa will have much consequences.

The same cleric issued a fatwa in 2025 that was interpreted as calling for the death of Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu. Ironically, he said in that fatwa the two leaders deserved capital punishment because they had threatened the lives of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and other Iranian leaders.

Top Iranian cleric issues 'fatwa' against Trump, Netanyahu

Religious decree follows 12-day conflict where Trump-backed operations damaged Iran's nuclear capabilities

https://www.foxnews.com/world/top-iranian-leader-issues-religious-ruling-against-trump-netanyahu

Numerous fatwas have been issued through the years against U.S. citizens by Muslim clerics. The most famous was the 1998 fatwa by Osama Bin Laden calling on Muslims to kill Americans wherever they were in the world.

1 hour ago, Evil Penevil said:

Numerous fatwas have been issued through the years against U.S. citizens by Muslim clerics. The most famous was the 1998 fatwa by Osama Bin Laden calling on Muslims to kill Americans wherever they were in the world.

Why do you think he did that? I mean what did the US do to cause such a thing?

On 3/1/2026 at 8:23 AM, Summerinsiam said:

An idiotic decision, that has the fingerprints of serial war monger and criminal Netanyahu all over it. It was clearly not pr-emptive but a war of choice, with no legal justification. They did it because they could. While it will likely result in a limited conflict until Iran exhausts its missile supply there is clearly no endgame. The Americans never seem to learn, with the clueless Trump now following Bush down the rabbit hole. Even if he is dead, it will be meaningless, as he named four successors and will likely be replaced by one of them or hardline members of the revolutionary guard. There will be no liberal democracy, just like there wasn't in Iraq or in Libya, which is still a failed state. But of course, Bibi, who thinks it will boost his re-election and keep him out of jail, and Trump and his useful idiots Rubio and Hegseth think they know better.

Very well commentated.

Israel is finished, in the next 10/20 years they won't exist.

USA is going to suffer terribly.

30 minutes ago, JimCM said:

Why do you think he did that? I mean what did the US do to cause such a thing?

The U.S. is a secular Western democracy; that was enough for Bin Laden to hate it. He was a Salafi, a Muslim who advocates a return to the "pure" Islam of the Prophet Mohammad and his earliest followers. Bin Laden wanted to establish a global caliphate under Sharia law and considered the U.S. the biggest obstacle to that goal. He felt once the U.S. had fallen, the rest of the world would quickly follow and the world would come under Muslim rule.

You can read it in Bin Laden's own words in his “Declaration of War Against the Americans Occupying the Land of the Two Holy Places,” from 1996.

https://ctc.westpoint.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Declaration-of-Jihad-against-the-Americans-Occupying-the-Land-of-the-Two-Holiest-Sites-Translation.pdf

21 minutes ago, Evil Penevil said:

The U.S. is a secular Western democracy; that was enough for Bin Laden to hate it. He was a Salafi, a Muslim who advocates a return to the "pure" Islam of the Prophet Mohammad and his earliest followers. Bin Laden wanted to establish a global caliphate under Sharia law and considered the U.S. the biggest obstacle to that goal. He felt once the U.S. had fallen, the rest of the world would quickly follow and the world would come under Muslim rule.

You can read it in Bin Laden's own words in his “Declaration of War Against the Americans Occupying the Land of the Two Holy Places,” from 1996.

https://ctc.westpoint.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Declaration-of-Jihad-against-the-Americans-Occupying-the-Land-of-the-Two-Holiest-Sites-Translation.pdf

Nothing to do with the US invading Kuwait?

US troops in Saudi, US unconditionally support of Israel?

You do know al queda were formed after conflict in Afghanistan where USA supported Mujahedeen?

Your unconditional support of Israel is frankly weird and immoral.

The USA is far from a democracy.

28 minutes ago, Evil Penevil said:

The U.S. is a secular Western democracy; that was enough for Bin Laden to hate it. He was a Salafi, a Muslim who advocates a return to the "pure" Islam of the Prophet Mohammad and his earliest followers. Bin Laden wanted to establish a global caliphate under Sharia law and considered the U.S. the biggest obstacle to that goal. He felt once the U.S. had fallen, the rest of the world would quickly follow and the world would come under Muslim rule.

You can read it in Bin Laden's own words in his “Declaration of War Against the Americans Occupying the Land of the Two Holy Places,” from 1996.

https://ctc.westpoint.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Declaration-of-Jihad-against-the-Americans-Occupying-the-Land-of-the-Two-Holiest-Sites-Translation.pdf

1 hour ago, JimCM said:

Your unconditional support of Israel is frankly weird and immoral.

Your time is over. You lost.

13 hours ago, connda said:

Those countries house the military bases as well as the intelligence agencies of the aggressor nations (Israel and the US) who began this war of aggression while pretending to hold diplomatic negotiations with the Iran, which is an act of perfidy. Israel's and the US attack are acts of war. Iran has the right to defend itself, so the attacks on US (Israel) military resources in the region are all fair game. It's a bad choice to host the militaries of countries who engage in unprovoked wars of aggression.

Omani Foreign Minister Sayyid Badr Al Busaidi stated the following in a February 27th interview on CBS Face The Nation:

Al Busaidi described the negotiations as having achieved "significant progress" and stated that a "peace deal is within our reach" if diplomacy is afforded the necessary space. He specifically highlighted Iran's agreement in principle to "never, ever have nuclear material that will create a bomb," emphasizing "zero stockpiling," down-blending of existing enriched uranium to the lowest possible level, conversion into irreversible fuel, and full verification by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). He characterized this as a "very important breakthrough that has never been achieved any time before," directly addressing U.S. concerns over potential weaponization.

Al Busaidi also reiterated elements of this optimism in a follow-up X post after meeting U.S. Vice President JD Vance on February 27, 2026, stating "Peace is within our reach" while noting progress toward "no nuclear weapons. Not ever. Zero stockpiling. Comprehensive verification."

So under cover of optimistic negotiations, the US engaged in pefidy, again, and use it to attack Iran who perceived that a diplomatic solution was attainable.

For those with a limited vocabulary, the term "perfidy" means the following:

It is prohibited to kill, injure or capture an adversary by resort to perfidy. Acts inviting the confidence of an adversary to lead him to believe that he is entitled to, or is obliged to accord, protection under the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict, with intent to betray that confidence, shall constitute perfidy.

This prohibition applies in both international and non-international armed conflicts and is recognized as customary international law (see ICRC Customary IHL Rule 65).

The core elements are:

Inviting the adversary's confidence by leading them to believe they are entitled to (or obliged to grant) protection under international humanitarian law.

Doing so with the specific intent to betray that confidence. 👈

Resulting in the killing, injury, or capture of the adversary. 👈

Examples of perfidy include:

Feigning an intent to negotiate 👈.

Feigning surrender.

Feigning incapacitation by wounds or sickness.

Feigning civilian, non-combatant, or protected status (e.g., misusing the Red Cross emblem to approach and attack).

Ha ha you lost

5 hours ago, Evil Penevil said:

The same cleric issued a fatwa in 2025 that was interpreted as calling for the death of Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu. Ironically, he said in that fatwa the two leaders deserved capital punishment because they had threatened the lives of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and other Iranian leaders.

Top Iranian cleric issues 'fatwa' against Trump, Netanyahu

Religious decree follows 12-day conflict where Trump-backed operations damaged Iran's nuclear capabilities

https://www.foxnews.com/world/top-iranian-leader-issues-religious-ruling-against-trump-netanyahu

Numerous fatwas have been issued through the years against U.S. citizens by Muslim clerics. The most famous was the 1998 fatwa by Osama Bin Laden calling on Muslims to kill Americans wherever they were in the world.

Shia Fatwas are seen as legally non-binding in the Sunni world; they really do hate each other, a schism far deeper than Papist versus Protestant.

Fatwas are basically opinions. There has been a fatwa against smoking for almost 150 years. And another issued very recently. No one takes any notice of them. You mention a fatwa issued by OBL, but seem to deliberately ignore the fatwa issued against OBL in 2004, and the fatwa against terrorism by the Deobands. Fatwas could be seen as equivalent to virtue signalling. They're really not that important to the ordinary man on the street. Sure, they could get a few hotheads energised, people who really don't need that much to motivate them. Every culture has nut jobs like that, with black hearts. Explain the existance of IRA and UVF supporters in a modern society.

30 minutes ago, JimCM said:

Nothing to do with the US invading Kuwait?

US troops in Saudi, US unconditionally support of Israel?

You do know al queda were formed after conflict in Afghanistan where USA supported Mujahedeen?

In Bin Laden's deluded mind, the U.S. campaign to drive Iraqi forces out of Kuwait and the presence of U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia with the permission of the Saudi government may have supported his hatred of the U.S. As Bin Laden hated Jews even more than Americans, U.S. support of Israel, which is far from unconditional, was certainly part of his mindset. That doesn't change the fact his hatred of the U.S. and other Western countries had its roots in his Salafist beliefs.

30 minutes ago, JimCM said:

You do know al queda were formed after conflict in Afghanistan where USA supported Mujahedeen?

The enemy of my enemy is my friend. That proverb has been been part of relations between groups since the days of Og the Caveman. When the Soviet Union was involved in Afghanistan, the U.S. supported the groups fighting it. When the Soviet Union withdrew from Afghanistan, some of those groups turned against the U.S. Circumstances change rapidly in the modern world and that sort of switch is not unusual..

30 minutes ago, JimCM said:

Your unconditional support of Israel is frankly weird and immoral.

My support is based on the beliefs I share with Israelis about what is best for the world's Jews. I strongly believe Israel has the right to exist behind secure borders as the homeland of the world's Jews and only Jewish majority state. My support is not unconditional. If and when the Israeli government acts in a fashion I deem detrimental to Jews, I will oppose it

If you find that weird and immoral, nothing I can write will change your mind. From my perspective, I find it weird and immoral that people have sympathy for, much less support, a terrorist group like Hamas or a terrorist state like the Islamic Republic of Iran.

4 hours ago, JimCM said:

Why do you think he did that? I mean what did the US do to cause such a thing?

Why? He was an opportunist. Hitler might have had a point about Versailles, but that doesn't mean he had a point. OBL had a good war against the Soviets. Within his family, he was basically a feckless loser. And suddenly he was out of work and looking for an another war; don't discount the grift that comes with being a guerilla leader. Hence, quick to support the Saudis against Iraq, even though his fellow Yemenis were treated like crap by the Saudis.

OBL and Hitler both seized upon populist policies, which were oddly reminiscent of populist policies in the West, and Hitler. eg Xenophobia, a touch of racism and deranged economic ideas, with unemployment as the recruiting sergeant.

If you attempt to justify Al Qaeda, then you are attempting to justify Nazism.

On 3/1/2026 at 5:30 PM, KhunLA said:

Huge issue with regime change, as Libya & Iraq are fine examples of. Syria hasn't self imploded yet. Egypt may be worse now with

On 3/1/2026 at 5:30 PM, KhunLA said:

Huge issue with regime change, as Libya & Iraq are fine examples of. Syria hasn't self imploded yet. Egypt may be worse now without Mubarak, and heavy handed ruling since, and he'll be in power for a few more years, at least.

On 3/1/2026 at 5:32 PM, Schoggibueb said:

There will be no regime change as long no israeli or u.s. boots are on the ground in Iran.

That‘s just the way it is.

My GP in Oz is Iranian and pleased Israel and US have killed the current leadership. He is of the opinion regime change will not occur for a number of years. The people are not armed, armed militias control the streets and IRGU are armed, control a great deal of commerce and political power. I find it bizarre senior members of the Trump administration have differing talking points as to why US has attacked Iran in cofunction with Israel. From the outside looking appears to be a great deal of wishful thinking by Trump which is not a good look for the future of Middle East.

15 minutes ago, simple1 said:

My GP in Oz is Iranian and pleased Israel and US have killed the current leadership. He is of the opinion regime change will not occur for a number of years. The people are not armed, armed militias control the streets and IRGU are armed, control a great deal of commerce and political power. I find it bizarre senior members of the Trump administration have differing talking points as to why US has attacked Iran in cofunction with Israel. From the outside looking appears to be a great deal of wishful thinking by Trump which is not a good look for the future of Middle East.

Just a more moderate leadership would be a plus. Restore freedom back to women, let them dress as they please, and allowed to get a damn education at Uni of their choice, unrestricted.

Knocking their nuclear & missile advancement back a decade or so, is always good. Along with them supplying terrorist and oppressive regime with arm, in the region and beyond.

5 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Just a more moderate leadership would be a plus. Restore freedom back to women, let them dress as they please, and allowed to get a damn education at Uni of the choice, unrestricted.

How is the killing of the religious leader likely to trigger a choice of a more moderate leader? 😃

Assume it's day xxx and the war ends and the new US-Israeli puppet is put in office in Iran. What would obviously happen ? The various fractions or gangs will plainly make Iran into another Libya, Irak or Afghanisthan. I hope I am wrong ? or not ? Let's see.

9 minutes ago, SingAPorn said:

Assume it's day xxx and the war ends and the new US-Israeli puppet is put in office in Iran. What would obviously happen ? The various fractions or gangs will plainly make Iran into another Libya, Irak or Afghanisthan. I hope I am wrong ? or not ? Let's see.

I am unsure if the people in this region can self-govern due to their tribal nature; they require a strong leader to maintain peace.

1 minute ago, Fact said:

I am unsure if the people in this region can self-govern due to their tribal nature; they require a strong leader to maintain peace.

Which of the cited regions are you refering to ?

On 3/2/2026 at 11:43 AM, JimCM said:

Nothing to do with the US invading Kuwait?

US troops in Saudi, US unconditionally support of Israel?

You do know al queda were formed after conflict in Afghanistan where USA supported Mujahedeen?

Your unconditional support of Israel is frankly weird and immoral.

Franky, you don't understand the situation. The USA did not invade Kuwait; rather, the US liberated Kuwait from Iraq.

Your unconditional hate of Israel is frankly weird and immoral.

50 minutes ago, Fact said:

Your unconditional hate of Israel is frankly weird and immoral.

Or just the usual rants of a troglodytic prole hating his betters becasue they are better.

Pax Judaica baby