Ships under attack in the middle east
- Thread starter XeNoN89
- Start date
Just put me on ignore, probably for the best.Ha, didn't realise you were joking
There goes trying to be diplomatic in my disagreement!
We're on the winning side, no? May the best man win and all that.
Just so many possibilities - even just Iran itself is a complex one with factions that believe the regime isn't doing enough to combat the US and might be behind it and other groups that want the current leadership gone and probably wouldn't stop at trying to incite war or atleast trying to incriminate them to achieve it. Never mind all the other possibilities - Saudi Arabia would be high up my list as well - in the long run they are definitely going to start throwing their weight around more in that region.
Caporegime
This completely unsubstantiated claim has been making the rounds for years. The funniest part is that the prediction failed; the invasions never happened.
Pfft, Iran has never had that potency, load of ***** comparing it to the powerhouse that German states have almost always been. Too bad the US can't really say much when it allowed Riyadh to massacre thousands of American citizens, the right to life of which was swiftly removed and abused to go to war with some totally irrelevant nation.
The US can't moralise Iran whilst forgetting it's supporting an even more abrasive 'ally', who happily exports the absolute worst death cults and faith schools around the world. As well Iran only being an enemy because the CIA failed to overthrow a democratic government is hardly a high point, this is a self-inflicted wound like everything else it's done there since the early 20th century.
Soldato
Might even be an off the books Blackwater type mercenary job. Trump did hire Betsy DeVoss after her family gave him significant campaign contributions and her brother Eric Prince is a well known warmonger who has even openly wanted to privatise US wars for profit. 
Caporegime
Yes, that's what I'm saying.
We're not talking about some two bit Middle Eastern dictatorship here; Iran is a seriously powerful nation. The USA would suffer a world of hurt for no gain whatsoever. It would make the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan look like a Sunday School picnic.
There is literally no benefit for the USA whatsoever in a war with Iran.
Evidence please. Also, you said the USA has a history of 'using false flags/lies to justify war', but you can only think of one (alleged) example? Not only that, but the USA was already fighting Syria when the Douma attack occurred, so...
I'm disputing his claim that this is a false flag incident; a claim for which he has presented no evidence whatsoever.
Not in this case.
Murray has pushed conspiracy theories surrounding Mueller (whom he claims is 'entirely corrupt'; an assertion that was completely destroyed by Mueller's careful handling of the Trumpgate case), the Skripal poisoning (he repeated the Russian propaganda claim that the Metropolitan Police photos of the suspects were 'impossible', and was later forced to admit he was wrong) and the Russian hack of the DNC (he claims the emails were personally handed to him in a woodland near American University, and that none of them came from the Russians!)
Last edited:
I think he was talking, wrongly or rightly, in terms of aspiration rather than potential. Other than the hardline units most everyday Iranians have no interest in war - Nazi Germany had something like a million plus committed professional soldiers as well as the everyday forces I doubt modern Iran would prevail against WW2 Germany in all out war for that matter.
Soldato
Why? Iran are no threat to us.
Soldato
you'd do well to not even entertain discussion with the troll.To be fair they posted enough credible information in the Syria/ISIS thread that shoots the official Western narrative full of holes unfortunately they also tend to swallow all the Russian propaganda whole with it and there is no definite proof as to the actual nature of the event.
While the US has been involved with Syria aside from the missile strikes against supposed chemical warfare related infrastructure it has been largely support for various groups and a limited presence bordering Iraq and they've not had much of a pretext for more significant involvement although I'm not sure as they really need one - although saying that several times Obama set "red lines" that Syria then crossed without much repercussion should the US be looking for a pretext.
Caporegime
There are no holes in Western accounts of the Douma incident (which are consistent with local accounts, and independent.
Yes there is. The independent Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons found clear evidence of a chemical attack, as did the UN Commission of Enquiry on Syria.
The OPCW Fact Finding Mission confirmed:
* a weapon containing reactive chlorine was used (most likely molecular chlorine)
* there was no evidence of a local facility being used by Syrian rebels to produce chemical weapons (contrary to Russian and Syrian government propaganda)
Trump semt ~2,500 US troops to Syria during 2017 (nearly a year before the Douma attack) then promised to remove them all in December 2018, then changed his mind and decided to keep a garrison of 400. The US government's current policy is to maintain what it calls an 'open-ended military presence' in Syria.
Soldato
Iran has previously intimated that they would shut down the Gulf of Hormuz if attacked. That would have big economic consequences. And they could do it. If Iran is behind this then a motivation would be to try and get the USA to back off by demonstrating capability and willingness. The USA is causing a lot of harm to the Iranian people. Their sanctions are extreme, they broke the treaty that had been agreed. It's as if a local bully went round and told all your neighbourhood shops to ban you and you were forced to try and grow your own food in your back garden. The USA has been pressuring Iran for years (to do what, is hard to say). Sooner or later, Iran will have to do something. This could be an early stage "back off, we are prepared to respond". Maybe just a demonstration the USA can't protect ships.
And we (the West) sponsored rebels in Libya who rounded up and executed Black people and are now conducting a literal slave trade. We have supported ISIS, Al Quaeda and others. Don't assume that the leaders of Iran are stupid or crazy. They're perfectly rational.
Iran and ISIS are enemies. Chances of collaboration are very slim. I'm also not sure what ISIS has in the way of frogmen.
I'm pretty sure they're being humorous. I've actually learned to spot jokes quite well now.
For the American people? No. For soldiers? No. For factions and individuals within the USA who could gain financially or politically and are in positions of influence? Sadly yes. You also have psychopaths like John Bolton who ideologically want complete hegemony and are happy to start wars to get it. But it also doesn't need to be an either / or of it being one of the USA or Iran. There are enemies of Iran with this capability that would be happy to force the USA's hand. Israel, Saudi Arabia. False Flag by someone other than the USA is a very real possibility. There's also the fact that Shale Oil has significantly changed things politically for the USA. It has a lot more freedom from economic consequences of aggression towards Venezuela or Middle Eastern oil states. Indeed the USA now wants to be a net supplier of oil (they've been doing pretty much everything they can for years to shut down the Nordstream 2 pipeline project to hinder Europe buying Russian oil - the US wants us to buy theirs). So shutting down traffic in the Strait of Hormuz would be a big economic disruption but... not the catastrophe for the USA it would have been just ten years ago.
Because November 5th is a long way away and he's impatient?
Yep, it can't happen right now because the population isn't quite that indoctrinated. But some of the leaders would take things that far if they could, they are on that level of nastiness.
The problem is one day they might be able to do it if we ignore them. The fact Russia is backing them just speaks volumes about them as well tbh.
Last edited:
Soldato
Aggressively targeting the country with heavy sanctions causing widespread shortages and attacking its neighbours will definitely slow down any efforts to persuade the Iranian people to militarise. Without doubt. If we didn't do these things and just ignored the country, why the populace would see us as a threat almost overnight.
Last edited:
Because the leaders are power mad and they always want more.