US kills Iran's General Soleimani

gronf · 3 Jan 2020 at 17:03

jsmoke said:
Good summary of Iran/US relations.

https://news.sky.com/feature/why-the-us-and-iran-hate-each-other-11634650

Can't access that article currently - does it include Britain's involvement?

Iran's oil was once under control of Britain. After Mossadegh nationalised Iran's oil (because Britain refused to properly share with Iran) it was the British that wanted Mossadegh removed the most. Britain approached America for help, but the British instigated and were full partners in the overthrow. Obviously the overthrow was successful, and Britain continued its economic rape of Iran for a while longer...until Khomeini's takeover.

Uther said:
So what's the plan, turn Iran into another basket case like Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan?

Besides theft, I wonder if that was part of the plan when Britain overthrew Iran's popularly supported government?

E: Double-post, lol.

banbom44 · 3 Jan 2020 at 17:03

Minusorange said:
Just like the last cruise missile strikes on Syrian targets after the faux chemical attack, nothing will come of this, the Eastern powers don't want WW3 no matter how hard the Western powers try poking for it to escalate

Who's trying to provoke WW3 if you wanted to start WW3 you would just attack russia or china wouldn't you?

banbom44 · 3 Jan 2020 at 17:06

Skunkworks said:
I'm not making any predictions on the success of the revolution, it’s too early for that, but if Iran returns to a pre-1979 state that’s undoubtedly a good thing.

Yeah it was a much much better place a bit like Afghanistan before all the religious nutjobs took over.

Mr Jack · 3 Jan 2020 at 17:06

ivrytwr3 said:
Fair point, but he was still a legitimate target.

The US and Iran are not at war. The idea that assassination is legitimate in such cases is troubling at best. I wonder how would support Iran assassinating General Davidson on such a basis?

banbom44 · 3 Jan 2020 at 17:10

jsmoke said:
Serf nation that lovingly and generously supplies oil at the click of a finger.

Maybe a peaceful nation that lives with its neighbours instead of causing trouble all the time.

Greebo · 3 Jan 2020 at 17:13

banbom44 said:
Maybe a peaceful nation that lives with its neighbours instead of causing trouble all the time.

You mean like it was before the west overthrew their democratically elected government?

StriderX · 3 Jan 2020 at 17:14

banbom44 said:
Who's trying to provoke WW3 if you wanted to start WW3 you would just attack russia or china wouldn't you?

How did WW1 start? Woeful.

Johno please? · 3 Jan 2020 at 17:17

jsmoke said:
Let's face it, there's an election coming up and it's meant to make him look both strong and feared.

ahah like Bill Clinton, but at least Trumps target was legitimate and not some pharmaceutical factory in Africa.

banbom44 · 3 Jan 2020 at 17:18

StriderX said:
How did WW1 start? Woeful.

Lol so you think WW3 is going to start because some Iranian General is assassinated no chance.

ubersonic · 3 Jan 2020 at 17:20

Skunkworks said:
if Iran returns to a pre-1979 state that’s undoubtedly a good thing.

Not for the people of Iran, the entire reason they revolted against the USA's puppet dictator in '79 was because they got fed up of him brutalising the country for decades. A good thing would be if it returned to the pre-1953 democratic state.

banbom44 · 3 Jan 2020 at 17:20

Greebo said:
You mean like it was before the west overthrew their democratically elected government?

No go look at pictures of Tehran before the overly religious backward nutters took over in the 70's.

Moley · 3 Jan 2020 at 17:27

banbom44 said:
Lol, so you think WW1 is going to start because some Austrian Archduke is assassinated? No chance.

Greebo · 3 Jan 2020 at 17:27

banbom44 said:
No go look at pictures of Tehran before the overly religious backward nutters took over in the 70's.

I was referring to the 1953 U.S. organized coup to remove Mosaddeq because he was nationalising the oil industry.

Roar87 · 3 Jan 2020 at 17:44

I missed the thread where people were outraged at the US civilian being killed in Iraq which caused this escalation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_K-1_Air_Base_attack

People talking about WW3 over Iran are brain dead

StriderX · 3 Jan 2020 at 17:52

Roar87 said:
I missed the thread where people were outraged at the US civilian being killed in Iraq which caused this escalation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_K-1_Air_Base_attack

People talking about WW3 over Iran are brain dead

How is it brain dead? Can you be 100% certain that a world war isn't possible when the world's supply of oil is under threat from increasing tensions in the area with the majority of production?

It's pretty ******* brain dead to think it's impossible.

Also why should we be outraged over US bases being attacked? It's their fault they are there, they should deal with the consequences of the policy. Anyway I thought the US said they'd stop having troops in the area, what happened to that policy? Why are they there at all when they literally elected someone to stop meddling there?

ajf · 3 Jan 2020 at 17:52

banbom44 said:
Lol so you think WW3 is going to start because some Iranian General is assassinated no chance.

He wasn’t just ‘some’ general.
It’s unlikely to go that far I agree, but wars have started for less, and this can easily escalate depending on how Iran responds.
US are also sending over 3000+ extra troops already.

Jono8 · 3 Jan 2020 at 17:55

Roar87 said:
People talking about WW3 over Iran are brain dead

History must not be your strong point....

This sort of thing is how the seeds of war get sown. Whilst i think it is unlikely that this will cause WW3, it is events like this that can snowball out of control.

Calling someone brain dead for articulating this is just stupid.

Roar87 · 3 Jan 2020 at 18:03

StriderX said:
How is it brain dead? Can you be 100% certain that a world war isn't possible when the world's supply of oil is under threat from increasing tensions in the area with the majority of production?

It's pretty ******* brain dead to think it's impossible.

Also why should we be outraged over US bases being attacked? It's their fault they are there, they should deal with the consequences of the policy. Anyway I thought the US said they'd stop having troops in the area, what happened to that policy? Why are they there at all when they literally elected someone to stop meddling there?

So how does the worlds supply of oil being under threat cause tension between China/Russia and the US? Are either of them threatening to stop that supply?

So you're outraged at an Iranian General being killed whilst he's in Iraq, but not outraged at a US Civilian being killed in Iraq? Why not actually just go live in Iran and join their Revolutionary Guard if you hate the West so much?

Roar87 · 3 Jan 2020 at 18:06

Jono8 said:
History must not be your strong point....

This sort of thing is how the seeds of war get sown. Whilst i think it is unlikely that this will cause WW3, it is events like this that can snowball out of control.

Calling someone brain dead for articulating this is just stupid.

Geopolitics isn't yours if you think China or Russia are defending Iran from America, who's military budget is larger than Iran, China and Russia combined.

StriderX · 3 Jan 2020 at 18:06

Roar87 said:
So how does the worlds supply of oil being under threat cause tension between China/Russia and the US? Are either of them threatening to stop that supply?

So you're outraged at an Iranian General being killed whilst he's in Iraq, but not outraged at a US Civilian being killed in Iraq? Why not actually just go live in Iran and join their Revolutionary Guard if you hate the West so much?

You're the one saying i'm outraged, i'm not, i would just like the US to make it's ******* mind up.

I've had it with the UK sucking the US's **** every waking moment, i'm not so sycophantic to think much of a US military base being attacked as something I should as a British person care about. The US should do whatever it wants alone if it has to, the UK should actually start having a mind of it's own.