By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Qassem Suleimani is obviously a nasty piece of work but this really isn't the way to go about things and to tweet an Amercian flag just before the announcement is something a 10 year old would do.
Nothing to do now but wait and see how the Iranians react. It's an election year don't forget so standard presidential playbook seems to have been enacted and a war never hurt any sitting presidents chances.
SB
Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula
4
Trump doing his bit for world peace again on 09:59 - Jan 3 with 2480 views
Well no-one cared too much when Iranian-backed militias were murdering hundreds of protesters in Baghdad in recent weeks. Suleimani is hardly an innocent here and yet the Trump administration has been built on loyalty rather than expertise so this is a lashing out rather than a considered response.
I think this right too:
As usual the inability of people to hold 2 slightly challenging thoughts simultaneously. 1. The man who has spread more death in the region than any other in the past 2 decades is dead. 2. Trump and his misadministration are not who you want to be handling this new war.
Trump doing his bit for world peace again on 10:00 - Jan 3 by Pippin1970
Any American citizen , soldier will have to leave surrounding areas ASAP. This has definitely lit a fuse and start of a huge Middle East war..
Yeah, their embassy is already advising US citizens to leave. It'll be interesting, but also potentially gruesome watching to see what happens next. And also to see what stance we take.
Trump doing his bit for world peace again on 09:59 - Jan 3 by Steve_M
Well no-one cared too much when Iranian-backed militias were murdering hundreds of protesters in Baghdad in recent weeks. Suleimani is hardly an innocent here and yet the Trump administration has been built on loyalty rather than expertise so this is a lashing out rather than a considered response.
I think this right too:
As usual the inability of people to hold 2 slightly challenging thoughts simultaneously. 1. The man who has spread more death in the region than any other in the past 2 decades is dead. 2. Trump and his misadministration are not who you want to be handling this new war.
Trump doing his bit for world peace again on 10:11 - Jan 3 by homer_123
Did you hear the Iranian Professor on R4 this morning?
His final sentence (I think) when asked if Iran will respond was along the lines of 'it doesn't matter how you frame this....' - I think he's right.
No one comes out of this looking good but irrespective - this could well act as a major flash point (again).
It doesn't necessarily need to be major flash point to be a problem. In the last year Iranian-backed forces have taken out a large part of Aramco's crude processing facilities and attacked tankers in the Gulf. We're far more likely to see continued escalation than a real war.
That seems to be Trump'#s approach to foreign policy, fire off a few missiles or sanctions and wait for enemy to agree with him. A strategy familiar to anyone who has ever spent much time with a small child.
Trump doing his bit for world peace again on 09:59 - Jan 3 by Steve_M
Well no-one cared too much when Iranian-backed militias were murdering hundreds of protesters in Baghdad in recent weeks. Suleimani is hardly an innocent here and yet the Trump administration has been built on loyalty rather than expertise so this is a lashing out rather than a considered response.
I think this right too:
As usual the inability of people to hold 2 slightly challenging thoughts simultaneously. 1. The man who has spread more death in the region than any other in the past 2 decades is dead. 2. Trump and his misadministration are not who you want to be handling this new war.
Yes it’s quite reasonable think that Donald Trump is an complete and utter w4nker and believe that the death of an Iranian general responsible for the deaths of tens if not hundreds of thousands of innocent people is not a bad thing.
Trump doing his bit for world peace again on 10:29 - Jan 3 by GlasgowBlue
Yes it’s quite reasonable think that Donald Trump is an complete and utter w4nker and believe that the death of an Iranian general responsible for the deaths of tens if not hundreds of thousands of innocent people is not a bad thing.
Not in isolation perhaps but it rather depends what happens now.
Iran aren't just going to pack up and go home now that Soleimani is dead.
The political impact of this within Iran could be quite interesting.
There may be much shouting about martyrdom, but the removal of Soleimani from the scene could strenghten the hand of Rouhani and the (relative) moderates if there is nobody as competent and dynamic to take his place.
It's a critical time. With Supreme Leader Khamenei now in his 80s, there will be a succession struggle and with it a decision on the future direction of Iran. Soleimani was a major player in all that (much more so than his nominal commander Hassan Salami (head of the Revolutionary Guard).
Trump doing his bit for world peace again on 09:59 - Jan 3 by Steve_M
Well no-one cared too much when Iranian-backed militias were murdering hundreds of protesters in Baghdad in recent weeks. Suleimani is hardly an innocent here and yet the Trump administration has been built on loyalty rather than expertise so this is a lashing out rather than a considered response.
I think this right too:
As usual the inability of people to hold 2 slightly challenging thoughts simultaneously. 1. The man who has spread more death in the region than any other in the past 2 decades is dead. 2. Trump and his misadministration are not who you want to be handling this new war.
It's David Blaine type stuff too. "Watch me make my impeachment disappear with a trick of the hand and a diversion."
The man is an absolute menace to this world.
Please note: prior to hitting the post button, I've double checked for anything that could be construed as "Anti Semitic" and to the best of my knowledge it isn't. Anything deemed to be of a Xenophobic nature is therefore purely accidental or down to your own misconstruing.
Trump doing his bit for world peace again on 10:31 - Jan 3 by m14_blue
Not in isolation perhaps but it rather depends what happens now.
Iran aren't just going to pack up and go home now that Soleimani is dead.
But they have just lost their most effective operator.
Plus there is a limit to what the Iranians can practically do. Attempting to close the Straits of Hormuz would immediately trigger a war which they are unlikely to win, plus it would strangle their own oil export industry (what's left of it under US sanctions). They could attack Israel, but only indirectly and with limited impact. Damaging Saudi oil installations would risk further retaliation, tho it would spread economic alarm.
Trump doing his bit for world peace again on 10:29 - Jan 3 by GlasgowBlue
Yes it’s quite reasonable think that Donald Trump is an complete and utter w4nker and believe that the death of an Iranian general responsible for the deaths of tens if not hundreds of thousands of innocent people is not a bad thing.
That was always the dilemma over Iraq. Regime change is morally dubious, but Saddam Hussein al Tikriti was really not a very nice man.
What a bloke. Someone nominate him for a Nobel Peace prize......
Assumption is to make an ass out of you and me.
Those who assume they know you, when they don't are just guessing.
Those who assume and insist they know are daft and in denial.
Those who assume, insist, and deny the truth are plain stupid.
Those who assume, insist, deny the truth and tell YOU they know you (when they don't) have an IQ in the range of 35-49.
Trump doing his bit for world peace again on 11:07 - Jan 3 by Guthrum
But they have just lost their most effective operator.
Plus there is a limit to what the Iranians can practically do. Attempting to close the Straits of Hormuz would immediately trigger a war which they are unlikely to win, plus it would strangle their own oil export industry (what's left of it under US sanctions). They could attack Israel, but only indirectly and with limited impact. Damaging Saudi oil installations would risk further retaliation, tho it would spread economic alarm.
This is pretty much spot on.
They can obviously wage war through terrorist attacks but in a direct confrontation they don't really have many options:
1). Attack Saudi infrastructure - doubt the US and the Saudis would let this pass a second time and would likely result in the US crippling Iranian oil infrastructure which wouldn't be hard for them.
2). Attack Israel - this isn't a confrontation that Iran can realistically "win" even if the US don't get involved. It would just be bad for everyone and seems a bit pointless.
3). Closing the Straits of Hormuz would likely end in the sinking of most of the Iranian navy by the US - it's always been stated as a red line for them.
It's entirely possible that the Iranians have overplayed their hand recently, feeling it to be stronger than it is in reality.
At the moment thought it seems pretty hard to predict what is going to happen. Ideally your initial point on the moderates gaining more influence would be nice but really hard to know.
SB
Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula
1
Trump doing his bit for world peace again on 11:22 - Jan 3 with 2136 views
Trump doing his bit for world peace again on 11:17 - Jan 3 by StokieBlue
This is pretty much spot on.
They can obviously wage war through terrorist attacks but in a direct confrontation they don't really have many options:
1). Attack Saudi infrastructure - doubt the US and the Saudis would let this pass a second time and would likely result in the US crippling Iranian oil infrastructure which wouldn't be hard for them.
2). Attack Israel - this isn't a confrontation that Iran can realistically "win" even if the US don't get involved. It would just be bad for everyone and seems a bit pointless.
3). Closing the Straits of Hormuz would likely end in the sinking of most of the Iranian navy by the US - it's always been stated as a red line for them.
It's entirely possible that the Iranians have overplayed their hand recently, feeling it to be stronger than it is in reality.
At the moment thought it seems pretty hard to predict what is going to happen. Ideally your initial point on the moderates gaining more influence would be nice but really hard to know.
SB
On that last point, this thread is interesting:
2/ US also held its own line: a US person killed meant retaliation. It targeted the militia that did the attack. It was reciprocal, but also punitive to send a message. Iran-backed militia escalated against US embassy. US managed the attack, didn't blow everything up. #Soleimani
5/ The most important part of Soleimani's killing, isn't his killing (as big as that is), it is the deep US intelligence penetration around Iran's most important military leader that it revealed. Signals and human intel. This is what is going to spook the Iranian camp the longest
11/ There are many so-called anti-imperialists who always criticise Western intervention but justify Iranian/Russian intervention. Iran is not a legit actor in Iraq/Syria/Leb/Yemen. Its crimes there are no less reprehensible than those by the US or colonialists. #Soleimani
Trump doing his bit for world peace again on 10:58 - Jan 3 by Guthrum
The political impact of this within Iran could be quite interesting.
There may be much shouting about martyrdom, but the removal of Soleimani from the scene could strenghten the hand of Rouhani and the (relative) moderates if there is nobody as competent and dynamic to take his place.
It's a critical time. With Supreme Leader Khamenei now in his 80s, there will be a succession struggle and with it a decision on the future direction of Iran. Soleimani was a major player in all that (much more so than his nominal commander Hassan Salami (head of the Revolutionary Guard).
John Bolton clearly hopes so:
Congratulations to all involved in eliminating Qassem Soleimani. Long in the making, this was a decisive blow against Iran's malign Quds Force activities worldwide. Hope this is the first step to regime change in Tehran.
Trump doing his bit for world peace again on 11:30 - Jan 3 by soupytwist
John Bolton clearly hopes so:
Congratulations to all involved in eliminating Qassem Soleimani. Long in the making, this was a decisive blow against Iran's malign Quds Force activities worldwide. Hope this is the first step to regime change in Tehran.
Trump doing his bit for world peace again on 11:24 - Jan 3 by Steve_M
On that last point, this thread is interesting:
2/ US also held its own line: a US person killed meant retaliation. It targeted the militia that did the attack. It was reciprocal, but also punitive to send a message. Iran-backed militia escalated against US embassy. US managed the attack, didn't blow everything up. #Soleimani
5/ The most important part of Soleimani's killing, isn't his killing (as big as that is), it is the deep US intelligence penetration around Iran's most important military leader that it revealed. Signals and human intel. This is what is going to spook the Iranian camp the longest
11/ There are many so-called anti-imperialists who always criticise Western intervention but justify Iranian/Russian intervention. Iran is not a legit actor in Iraq/Syria/Leb/Yemen. Its crimes there are no less reprehensible than those by the US or colonialists. #Soleimani
Trump doing his bit for world peace again on 11:35 - Jan 3 by Guthrum
Think he's looking at something a little more radical than what I was talking about.
Why are people with influence and power when they have no understanding whatsoever of human reactions and psyche?
Hard to think this would result in regime change. more likely to result in people coming together and supporting their regime on principle: same as most humans do when they feel their own are under attack.
The presence of those seeking the truth is infinitely to be preferred to the presence of those who think they've found it.
(Sir Terry Pratchett)
Trump doing his bit for world peace again on 11:39 - Jan 3 by sparks
Why are people with influence and power when they have no understanding whatsoever of human reactions and psyche?
Hard to think this would result in regime change. more likely to result in people coming together and supporting their regime on principle: same as most humans do when they feel their own are under attack.
Possibly because they've spent too much time moving in a rarefied world of ambition, power struggles, influence and paranoia, where someone else's (or even national) misfortune is an opportunity to seize an advantage. Perhaps that gives them a better insight into the mindset of other powerful people.
Indeed, an event like this can be a useful distraction of anger from the government themselves over the current economic crisis in Iran.