Leaderboard
Popular Content
Showing content with the highest reputation on 05/01/20 in all areas
-
No you're dead wrong, they'll send highly trained unarmed personel to look closely anything they do and give a strongly worded condemnation if anything bad happens.3 points
-
2 points
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
There was a lot of condemnation about the destruction of historical sites in Iraq and Syria, it's just the world knew that we were dealing ISIS maniacs who were beyond reason. So there wasn't a hell of a lot that we could do about it, except to get rid of ISIS. The mainstream media did cover a lot of sites that were damaged or destroyed and many were appalled by what happened. However, we expect much better from a leader of the United States of America. So expect much more media scrutiny and questions about accountability, if the US were ever to destroy such historical sites.1 point
-
1 point
-
I’m glad I read that last paragraph. I love ya mate and you know it but... ooooof that was not a pleasant read & didn’t come off across too great.1 point
-
1 point
-
Killing either is entirely dependent on wether you believe that their removal will lead to a more advantageous future I suppose. You could argue that killing Suleimani will lead to an initial spike in violence but it will lessen over time before a resolution and therefore less violence in the long run. Me or anyone being for or against removal of figures is a case by case basis. On this I’m not going to miss this guy, will it be the smart thing to have done? time will tell. Personally I’m more happy than concerned about Trump putting his foot down. America are the big dog and in any hierarchy based on strength of arms then you can’t start appeasement it ultimately weakens the leadership. America is a cunt but it’s the cunt that ultimately is the best cunt. Would you rather Putin or China was in the driving seat? No but it’s Poorly thought out from Corbyn to lament this given Suleimani’s connection with Hezbollah and his own issues with anti Semitism. Iran won’t be allowed to get nukes, you can’t have a state that is beholden to the insanity disease that is Islam with nuclear capability. I’d disagree anyway because you’re always going to be on a lose lose with invasion and nationalism. Even if the Americans would have gone in as s peacekeepers as part of the UN to stop the Iranians killing their own they would eventually become the oppressors after any kind of regime change. This is not an operation to win Iranian hearts and minds, the Yanks don’t really give a fuck about the Middle East long term now. This was far more a line in the sand to say attack our embassies we will fire back. Bo appeasement cash or talks, they’re going to take out serious targets. Why do you think we have such a drive for renewable energy? So that we’re not going to have to be involved with the sectarian clusterfuck that is the Middle East, China will move in eventually as they have in Africa. The west will leave the Middle East to its fate. We won’t get involved we want our shipping lanes open and access to the black stuff. This was happening periodically anyway, you’re just presenting it to show an escalation in the region.1 point
-
1 point
-
Yeah and it wasn’t that long ago the US was arming Saddam Hussein with chemical weapons (when it was okay if Iraq had weapons of mass destruction lol) to use on Iran. Unfortunately, I fully anticipate the US to go to war with Iran. John Bolton has been wanting war with Iran for decades, he’s a key advisor to Trump. He helped manufacture the WMD evidence to invade Iraq. He’s got the Saudi’s pulling him by the strings and dictating his Middle East policy - and they would love to have their biggest rival crushed. The fact that the US president domestically always mired in scandal, is seemingly unable to get legislation through anymore, and has falling poll numbers make me think war is more likely. No US wartime president has ever lost their reelection. I think as things get more desperate with him, the more war looks appealing to him. For me, personally, I think it’s a fucking disaster. I’ve got family members who are probably going to be bombed because of an idiot president and the evil people that pull his strings. What seems to be the US (or at least John Bolton’s) plan for regime change in Iran is to topple the Islamic Republic and put Mujahideeh e-Kahlq (MEK) into power. That plan is fucking insane. MEK were actually instrumental in removing the US’s puppet from power in the revolution - they were initially formed as an Islamist-Marxist (weird mix, I know) party in opposition to the Shah’s forced secularisation and against the Shah’s crackdown on left leaning political figures (which ranged from things like censorship to having SAVAK, the secret police, kick in your door at night and drag you to Evin prison for torturing, and anything in between). In the aftermath of the revolution, however, MEK and many other political groups (like the Tudeh party) were purged more brutally than anything the Shah did. The MEK took this betrayal as an act of war. They left Iran and set up shop in Iraq. In the Iran-Iraq war they fought alongside Saddam’s forces gassing Iranians, so virtually every Iranian considers them traitors. Since then, both Iran AND Iraq consider MEK a terrorist group (the US did as well until very recently) - that should clue you into how MEK have operated in the Middle East since the 80s. What I’ve actually noticed though is that a lot of MEK members are all over the west. They are the Iranians who cheering the loudest in support for Trump to go ahead and devastate their country. When you couple that with the news that’s John Bolton takes money from MEK it really explains itself. The history of MEK should explain why Iranians wouldn’t want MEK in command of their day to day lives. A history of western intervention in the Middle East, particularly Iran, demonstrate to everybody why nobody should want this. It will cause shitloads of death, destabilise the region, and likely cause a headache the rest of the world will have to deal with for decades or more. I think what’s most sad about frustrating about this is Iran has a pretty young population that has shown it will push for political reforms through their own political processes. They have very very high voter turnout, so despite the oppressive government, they believe their votes matter. And since the 80s Iran has reformed pretty significantly. And relations with Iran and the US were reaching their highest point under Obama after the JCPOA was signed by Iran, the US, the EU, Russia and China. This led to big big support for reformist politicians over hardliners. Gradual political reform in Iran is possible without bombing anyone or killing anyone. Soon all the people associated with the revolution will be dead. But the hardliners who were against making a deal with the US said things like “you can’t ever trust America” and “this is a trap, they want to invade and they don’t want us to be able to defend themselves.” For a while it looked like egg on their faces. And then Trump proved them right. He backed out of the deal, he reimposed and introduced new sanctions (which affect ordinary people the most, the Mullahs are corrupt and will smuggle the oil they can no longer export - then they’ll get their money) and is threatening them with war. This must be devastating to the reformists in Iran, so much political momentum lost. But that isn’t so important to them if they’re about to go to war. You could not have made better anti-US propaganda for the Islamic Republic of Iran. They made a deal with the US, they followed through with the deal - the US broke it. They kept following through with the deal, to try to at least keep relations warming with the EU, the US introduced new and harsher sanctions. Iran looks to the EU and sees they aren’t willing to violate US sanctions and also sees the US park a fleet next door, then says they’re going to have to violate parts of the agreement to protect themselves. But you know how the hardliners will spin that story? “The reformists let our guard down and trusted them, now invaders are here to destroy your country like they did to Iraq.” This is why a mentally handicapped person shouldn’t be president of the United States1 point
-
0 points