US and Iran Relations (News and Discussion)

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

17 minutes ago, Larry said:

Maybe just be, but I thought it was a gangster. 

He kinda was, sort of. Hell of a movie.

[Jumbo]

26 minutes ago, Zguy28 said:

I oscillate between this ^^ and "crazy... like a fox."

 

 

he has a very crippled nature to his base intellect and rational/logical and abstract thinking as a major part of the resulting persona from his development, to speak crudely on it, but what he has in spades is an aptitude and a liking for the myriad social-predator manipulations and "using" skills that advance one's own interests above all else, and we add all the obstructing elements of several separate mental health issues (i think of them more as"seriously  problematic cognitive functioning patterns" in such a  case), developmentally and genetically (predispositions) i'd say, including according to family history

 

humans being what we are, many major historical figures who were also leaders of governments or movements or institutions of significant scope (inc. kings, popes, and potuses) have been some pretty effed in the head peeps, but given the way that things are set up in human doings, such a domination of dark talents with little to no decency or 'good' traits doesn't block them from gaining great power and influence

 

so once again, not everyone is on the same page....again 

[Cooked Crack]

22 minutes ago, nonniey said:

Question how many of you posting here had a substantial knowledge base on who Soleimani was prior to his death?

I didn't and I consume a lot of news. Might have heard it in passing but never enough to stick it to memory. 

[Hersh]

21 minutes ago, Rdskns2000 said:

He maybe crazy but he is really mentally a 7 year old. He acts like a 7 year old. He talks like a 7 year old.

 

100 percent accurate. I texted this to someone earlier today. 
 

My 5 year old does what Trump is doing. My son tells me he know all about an issue and makes statements as if they are fact. I correct him and he temporarily doubles down. Claims to know everything. It’s adorable when my son does it cause he doesn’t control a nuclear arsenal. POTUS dumb **** has such thin skin that he can’t be wrong about anything and does what my son does. 

[The Sisko]

43 minutes ago, nonniey said:

Question how many of you posting here had a substantial knowledge base on who Soleimani was prior to his death?

 

And yes i did (Which was why I was pretty happy hearing the news that he was killed and we were the ones who killed him).

I did but I have been a M.E. news junkie for some time...albeit somewhat less so in recent years. My view of him and the Iranians is probably a bit different than yours. Iran has/had good reasons for much of the so-called troublemaking in the region. After all, we backed the overthrow of a democratically elected head of state there and reinstalled the Shah. IMO in the context of Islam, life with Savak would easily make most people into extremists. I don’t think it’s too far off to say that made countering US/British influence/threats their version of the Jews’ “never again”. I don’t say that to excuse the Iranian government’s repression of certain groups and I hate theocracy in general. However, they are far from the crazed, irrational boogiemen that hate the US just because, that they’ve been painted as in our news media.

 

Interestingly, there was a minority of folks in Iran/Iraq that hated Soleimani, but that kind of got drowned out by the funeral and Tя☭mp’s subsequent threat to destroy cultural sites. A few months ago the Iranian govt. was shooting demonstrators in the streets and now this has galvanized their populace who are understandably quite proud of their ancient heritage. Nice job Tя☭mp. I bet you can declare mission accomplished twice as quickly in Iran as W. did in Iraq. Good luck with that bub.

Edited January 6, 2020 by The Sisko

[twa]

37 minutes ago, nonniey said:

Question how many of you posting here had a substantial knowledge base on who Soleimani was prior to his death?

 

 

 

 

I've followed the IRG and Hezbollah for a long time, so obviously yes.

 

 

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

The scary thing is Trump's entire leadership style is doubling down and doubling down until he finally just gives up entirely. This means that in a hot war, I would assume that all options would be on the table with little thought to casualties on either side right until the moment he decides that casualties are too great and then we pull out completely and unexpectedly.

 

My prediction is a series of escalations that leads to wide-scale destruction in Iran, escalating terrorist attacks around the world, and then a total withdrawal from Iraq which leaves it a proxy state of Iran.

[twa]

1 minute ago, The Sisko said:

A few months ago the Iranian govt. was shooting demonstrators in the streets and now this has galvanized their populace who are understandably quite proud of their ancient heritage.

 

Almost half the population are not Persian and we shall see if dissent still exists.

[The Sisko]

Just now, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

The scary thing is Trump's entire leadership style is doubling down and doubling down until he finally just gives up entirely. This means that in a hot war, I would assume that all options would be on the table with little thought to casualties on either side right until the moment he decides that casualties are too great and then we pull out completely and unexpectedly.

 

My prediction is a series of escalations that leads to wide-scale destruction in Iran, escalating terrorist attacks around the world, and then a total withdrawal from Iraq which leaves it a proxy state of Iran.

Probably not. Remember, Tя☭mp is a little **** at heart. He has a track record of talking a bunch of smack, only to back down and buddy up with the person he’s trying to bully. The buddying up thing isn’t likely in this case, but I can definitely see him backing down and negotiating a new deal that gives them all kinds of concessions, then declaring a great foreign policy victory. You never can tell with morons like him though.🙄

2 minutes ago, twa said:

 

Almost half the population are not Persian and we shall see if dissent still exists.

Saddam maintained control for many years in spite of a 60+% Shiite majority. They seized their chance when we overthrew Saddam but they also had/have a big powerful Shiite neighbor next door. Not so much for the minorities in Iran. In any event, your boy should go for it. Just like with healthcare, it’ll be easy. After all, it’s not like the Iranians have any experience with militia groups and asymmetric warfare or anything. I predict a similar quagmire as Iraq, just with more dead on both sides and probably a recession to boot.

[88Comrade2000]

13 minutes ago, twa said:

 

 

I've followed the IRG and Hezbollah for a long time, so obviously yes.

 

 

So, you admit you are an Iranian?

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

8 minutes ago, twa said:

I've followed the IRG and Hezbollah for a long time, so obviously yes.

Big follower of Hezbollah, huh?? I’ll just be reporting this to Homeland Security I think...

[Jumbo]

5 hours ago, nonniey said:

Question how many of you posting here had a substantial knowledge base on who Soleimani was prior to his death?

 

And yes i did (Which was why I was pretty happy hearing the news that he was killed and we were the ones who killed him).

 

to answer your question---a little, but enough to know who he was and a fair amount of what he's been linked to, and that like any of "those guys", i prefer them dead and don't care how they got killed, other than---and this of course is what most folks here are up about, as anyone thinking and not being disingenuous should be able to get, inc. twa and you---if the context causes or reflects problems that result in a setback as significant as any gain or even outweighs the inherent value of his departure, and begs to be evaluated in the "why now" in weighing risk/benefit because that matters, and on more than one front (implications)

 

and that's certainly where we are if you're a thinking person imv....it's a worthy conversation screaming for examination, most particularly because of what trump's motives might have been among other things (like consequences)...not a blithe "it's all good, no need to ask questions, he's a terrorist and a killer"

 

if there really was what the admin says there was in him leading some expansive and imminent plan of attack on american interests that was going to be deployed, that's fine....i'd like to see the rationale/some evidence presented in some way where "nat'l security" isn't used to perhaps obstruct truth

 

i.e. at minimum, the gang of 8 being shown the reasons and saying 'ok', the claim of imminent attacks was legit, even if there are political arguments to still be made against it, as a start

 

trump and his admin can hardly be accorded much, if any, benefit of the doubt from any reasonable thinker on the matter

 

 

 

[twa]

4 minutes ago, Rdskns2000 said:

So, you admit you are an Iranian?

 

I wouldn't doubt some ancestor is, we love beautiful women.

[Jumbo]

16 minutes ago, twa said:

 

 

I've followed the IRG and Hezbollah for a long time, so obviously yes.

 

 

 

 

well **** dude 

 

what subject in all of human history are you not a knowledgeable authority on? 

 

 

fwiw, most auto mechanics who also own the shop i've known are the same way 

 

 

i'm busting on twa, but he really does know a lot about a lot of stuff (glass half full)

 

at least that what he tells me

 

[nonniey]

36 minutes ago, Jumbo said:

 

to answer your question---just a little, but enough to know who he was and a fair amount of what he's been linked to, and that like any of "those guys', i prefer them dead and don't care how they got killed, other than--and this of course is what most folks here are up about, as anyone think and not being disingenuous should be able to get, inc twa and you---if the context of it causes or reflects some problems that result in a setback as significant as any gain or even outweighs the inherent value of his departure, or begs to be evaluated in 'why now" in weighing risk/benefit because that matters

 

and that's certainly where we are if you're a thinking person imv....it's a worthy conversation screaming for examination most particularly because of what trump's motives might have been among other things (like consequences)...not a blithe "it's all good, no need to ask questions, he's a terrorist and a killer"

 

if there really was what the admin says there was in him leading some expansive amd imminent plan of attack on american interests that was going to be deployed, that's fine....i'd like to see the rationale presented in some way where "nat'l security" isn't used to perhaps obstruct a less palatable truth

 

i.e. at minimum, the gang of 8 being shown the reasons and saying 'ok', the claim of imminent attacks was legit, even if there are political arguments to still be made against it, as a start

 

trump and his admin can hardly be accorded much, if any, benefit of the doubt from any reasonable thinker on the matter

 

 

 

Problem is one can fall into binary responses to everything. (Trump did it therefore I oppose it, Trump opposes it therefore I support it, Trump nominates so and so therefore he is scum... etc.)  I'm no fan of Trump but it was an opportune time to kill Soleimani given the actions of the IRGC conduct over the last year and the US responses to that conduct (until late last month it was very restrained -heck almost bent over backward restrained).

 

Sure my views may be colored by personal/professional experience but I definitely think killing him was the right decision and was in the best interests of the United States. 

Edited January 6, 2020 by nonniey

[Cooked Crack]

1 minute ago, nonniey said:

Sure my views may be colored by personal experience but I definitely think killing him was the right decision and was in the best interests of the United States. 

Do/did you think Iraq was the right move?

[nonniey]

36 minutes ago, Jumbo said:

 

 

well **** dude 

 

what subject in all of human history are you not a knowledgeable authority on? 

 

 

fwiw, most auto mechanics who also own the shop i've known are the same way 

 

 

i'm busting on twa, but he really does know a lot about a lot of stuff (glass half full)

 

at least that what he tells me

 

I know more.😜

6 minutes ago, Cooked Crack said:

Do/did you think Iraq was the right move?

At the time yes.  I'm not infallible - no one is (Including Presidents).  People and  Presidents make mistakes, you have to adjust accordingly when you make those mistakes (Do/Did you think pulling out of Iraq in 2011 was the right move?)

Edited January 6, 2020 by nonniey

[Chachie]

1 hour ago, nonniey said:

Question how many of you posting here had a substantial knowledge base on who Soleimani was prior to his death?

 

And yes i did (Which was why I was pretty happy hearing the news that he was killed and we were the ones who killed him).

 

 

I had never heard of him but I'm certainly not shedding any tears for the man. I also don't know enough about his history, his military accomplishments or his current military plans to make a judgement about what the US should/should not have done.

 

I have heard of Donald Trump and I know a good bit about his history and his military accomplishments. I won't shed any tears for him either.

[Hersh]

2 minutes ago, nonniey said:

Problem is one can fall into binary responses to everything. (Trump did it therefore I oppose it, Trump opposes it therefore I support it, Trump nominates so and so therefore he is scum... etc.)  I'm no fan of Trump but it was an opportune time to kill Soleimani given the actions of the IRGC conduct over the last year and the US responses to that conduct (it was very restrained -heck almost bent over backward restrained).

 

Sure my views may be colored by personal experience but I definitely think killing him was the right decision and was in the best interests of the United States. 

 

The problem is this administration isn't clear on the reasoning as to why now and there is no indication of a long term strategy. Can you imagine the Trump administation coming out and saying:

1. Here is exactly why we did this now. 

2. Here is why we determined, even after others have passed on the opportunity in that past, why it was the right time. 

3. We spoke with multiple allies and informed Congress before the mission. 

4.  Here is our long term objective with Iran. Should they attempt to retaliate we will strike military installations. 

 

Ya know, general compentency. 

[visionary]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 6, 2020 by visionary

[nonniey]

4 minutes ago, Hersh said:

 

The problem is this administration isn't clear on the reasoning as to why now and there is no indication of a long term strategy. Can you imagine the Trump administation coming out and saying:

1. Here is exactly why we did this now. 

2. Here is why we determined, even after others have passed on the opportunity in that past, why it was the right time. 

3. We spoke with multiple allies and informed Congress before the mission. 

4.  Here is our long term objective with Iran. Should they attempt to retaliate we will strike military installations. 

 

Ya know, general compentency. 

Again, I'm not going to defend the competence of Trump (Heck I knew he'd shoot his mouth off over the weekend in enormously counter-productive ways). All I'm saying is killing Soleimani was the right move.  (I'm sure if Trump was in charge during the Bin Laden raid he'd be poking the Pakistanis in the eye in the worst ways imaginable).

Edited January 6, 2020 by nonniey

[Cooked Crack]

 

🤔

[Llevron]

I dont know how you stop "possible war" from being the focus of attention though. Especially when considering how irresponsible our media seems to be with their influence. 

[visionary]

 

 

 

 

 

[Llevron]

I wish there was a way to measure the boon in international influence Russia and China have gotten over the years.