-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Uhhh... I think John Bolton is trying to start his Iran war...
- Thread starter Veliladon
- Start date
They're totally going to start something aren't they....
Especially with the heat still coming after the Mueller Report and the subpoenas, etc...
Especially with the heat still coming after the Mueller Report and the subpoenas, etc...
They are attempting to destroy Iran yes...all you need to know is that its clearly fabricated.
Iran are not to blame, and if we had any sense at all, someone would act for the millions of lives that could be lost in Iran unjustly after WE as is usually the case, started the fire
Iran are not to blame, and if we had any sense at all, someone would act for the millions of lives that could be lost in Iran unjustly after WE as is usually the case, started the fire
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/03/bolton-denies-promising-trump-he-wouldnt-start-any-wars.html
Always struck me as wild that we had reports at all about him promising not to start wars when he began in the admin. Speaks volumes regarding how little confidence people had in his judgement.
Always struck me as wild that we had reports at all about him promising not to start wars when he began in the admin. Speaks volumes regarding how little confidence people had in his judgement.
For what, this crisis? The IRI is most certainly part of the problem of this shit.
Yes.
Do you mind if I ask where you got this question / inquiry from? Another poster asked the same thing in another thread a couple days ago, and to see the same question a couple days in a row makes me think there's a disinformation meme going around.
You can't claim Iran trying to follow procedure and do everything they are supposed to do(even things they arent bound to) while having the US walk away from the deal and then impose crippling sanctions on them would not lead to this result. Its exactly what the war mongers in the biggest imperial military in the world would do.
This is the exact same shit people talk about in regards to Israeli crimes. Oh wow Israel is a clear human rights abuser and has essentially destroyed countless Palestinian lives unjustly and dont even consider Palestinians people? Of course when there is sectarian violence we can just point at the other side and go "see? they are attacking us, that's why what we're doing is completely fine")
Dont gimme that, Bolten and the rest have been clear that they think making up any excuses for war would be a great political strategy and make them money. And the media play great pawns in that.
What result? Trying to blackmail the EU, Russia and China? Because that's what it is, the levels Iran now wants to stockpile it's uranium is unnecessary and the recent threat that they would send their Afghan refugees to Europe if they don't protect them from US sanctions is classic extortion.
Except it isn't. You cannot dismiss IRI's role in the current crisis. Zarif and Rouhani promised the deal would lead to positive political change, no warmongering from Iranian officials and other reforms. It didn't. I hate John Bolton as much as everyone, but there's no need to whitewash the actions of the Islamic Republic. Its a vile terroristic regime.
I don't think a war is starting anytime soon honestly. The USA has enough problems with the trade talks in China, and the situation in Venezuela and North Korea, Starting a war now is not going to end well. Plus since Putin and Trump are "good Buddies" I don't think Trump is going to wanna piss Putin off considering Russia and Iran are friends.
This is just Bolton and Trump wanting to establish Iran as the Bitch in the relationship.
This is just Bolton and Trump wanting to establish Iran as the Bitch in the relationship.
Apparently an Iranian general went on TV to talk about hitting US bases in Qatar, the United Arab Emirates and and Afghanistan
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/49493993/this-is-fine.0.jpg)
I think it's also incredibly dangerous to think this is only exclusive to the person John Bolton, when lots of people with political, economic, and military power wants to invade Iran ever since the revolution in the 70's. It's like an American tradition that's been going on for 40+ years.
Bullfuckingshit, the JCPOA was never about anything other than the Nuclear program and that's it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Comprehensive_Plan_of_Action#Sanctions
Not about Iran's political, regional, military or economic ambitions, just about the nuclear program, not more and not less.
Iran abides by every single fucking thing they had to commit to for JCPOA until the US betrayed their part and the Europeans turned out to be useless. Nowhere does the JCPOA states that Iran has to change politically or otherwise.
As for the blackmail part that's called blowback, you don't like Iran firing back? Well boohoo guess you shouldn't have walked out of the deal you fucking signed on in the first place.
This is typical Trump apologist tactic, Iran should've stopped supporting it's militias, Iran should've changed regime, wha wha wha, guess what? That was never part of the signed deal.
Yes, Iran abided. That's why I wan't my country to remain in the deal(they are). But it does not exempt them from broken promises. As your own article states, every country, including IRI, said this would lead to 'peace', stability, a new chapter, change etc. It didn't. And that makes them part of this shitty mess.
Firing back at whom? Russia, China, EU is still in the deal, but why is IRI threatening to send refugees over here, why is the IRI holding European citizens hostage, why is the IRI commiting terror attacks on European soil?
https://euobserver.com/foreign/143854
But yeah, not wanting terrorism, that's all apologistic tactic's, sure.
You're forgetting terrorism. And yes, this makes the IRI partly responsible for the current situation.
You know that's BS, don't you? Yes, the EU, Russia and China are still in it, but the USA did not just withdraw from the agreement. They also put up sanctions in a way that others, in particular the EU, can't properly keep their part of the nuclear deal anymore.
Excuse me? But what is exactly your definition of change here? Peace? JCPOA being in effect guaranteed no confrontation between the US their allies and Iran, there's your peace and stability, nowhere was JCPOA about Iran changing its regional behavior and agenda.
That's some bullshit goalpost moving from anyone detracting the JCPOA. FYI Iran lost more soldiers fighting against ISIS than any other country in the middle east after Iraq and Syria, while the Saudis were bombing and slaughtering the Yemenis, the Iranians were rolling back ISIS, they actually were able to that since JCPOA let them focus on that.
Firing back at the EU, they are cosignatories on the deal, they are responsible for guaranteeing lifting economic sanctions, they chickened out in face of US pressure and sanctions, so hell yes Iran is entitled to put pressure on them to keep their end of the deal, if they don't then might as well cancel JCPOA because as it stands it's a useless piece of paper, unless the EU grow some balls and help Iran against the US sanctions to salvage the deal.
Yes, because even those are unrelated to JCPOA. The deal is about nuclear program, not the external activities of Iranian intelligence services.
You want to negotiate on those? Stop Mossad and CIA activities in Iran and stop supporting Iranian opposition, make a new deal simples.
Nothing to do with the nuclear deal, sorry, at the negotiating table, Iran refused to talk about Quds force or IRGC activity or Missile program, the deal went ahead regardless. So nope, using "terrorism" as an argument is null and void.
Shall we take the definition of IRI's officials here?
https://geopoliticalfutures.com/iran-broken-promises-fix-broken-economy-1/
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/20/opinion/mohammad-javad-zarif-a-message-from-iran.html
Both Zarif and Rouhani were very clear. This deal was not only about nuclear negotiations, but about engagement, improving relations with the region and the west, and improving the economic and social situation for Iranians. Did this happen? Not at all. You think Iranians accept the fact that economic growth from lifting of the sanctions did not trickle down? 'Sorry, nowhere was written that JCPOA was about improving social conditions'. Who cares that it wasn't written down, they promised again and again that after JPCPOA more positive steps would follow. They broke that promise, instead they showed IRI is unwilling to any tangible positive reform and are accountable for this misery they brought on Iranians. Do they care? Not one bit.
They were already in Iraq before JCPOA, nothing to do with that. And no, Nigeria, Chad, Libya, Syrian and Iraqi Kurds lost more people than the IRI.
Great, whitewashing terrorism and extortion. The EU didn't fire a shot, they remained in the deal, did their part, Russia, China and the EU are not responsible for the IRI's or America's behaviour.
Sure, giving asylum and basic rights to Iranian opposition is totally comparable with launching suicide bombers on European territory.
Again Bullshit, the deal wasn't even in place long enough for economic reforms, the deal was supposed to be in place for 15 years for the Iranian economy to recover, some of the major sanctions aren't going to be lifted until 8 years after the deal went into effect, you expect an economy that suffered over 40 years of isolation and international sanctions to recover over the course of two years? What kind of logic is that, the deal isn't some magic fucking wand that turns shit into gold.
Wow look at that, politicians making extravagant promises to help secure a multinational deal to save their country, will you look at that.... And guess what none of this shit is in the deal and irrelevant to it, see the response above.
Who cares? Then don't fucking blame Iran from backing away from the deal if no one cares what was written down on the deal, it's called a fucking deal for a reason, it means both parties agreed on the conditions written down not anything else outside the deal, the blame would be on the fucking idiot that pulled away from said deal not the country retaliating.
No fucking shit, Iran was in Iraq before JCPOA, what does that have to do with anything? And I already pointed out Iraq and Syria lost more soldiers that Iran against ISIS, Chad, Nigeria and Libya are in Africa not ME, lol. Iran managed to turn the tide of the Iraqi government against ISIS, was the first responding aiding the Iraqi government while the US was calling for Maliki to resign in the meantime ISIS was slaughtering cadets in Tikrit. Please I live here, don't tell me what and what did not happen.
No the EU are not observing their part of the deal, their companies are not operating in Iran, they've withdrawn, the EU are cowering away from business with Iran due to US sanctions, it's a bullshit handwave to say the EU is maintaining their end while the sanctions that were supposed to be lifted are back in place and worse and crippling Iranian economy, at this point what does Iran gain from staying in the deal? nothing.
And this is something irrelevant to the nuclear deal, and the sanctions that were placed on Iran because of it. And welcome to geopolitics, guess what the EU and the US also negotiate with "terrorists" and give weapons to them all the time, what a shock I know.
This is going to be Nam level of losses for the US. Another embarrassing war all because Iran don't want to give them oil.
Saudi oil is pegged to our US dollar and Iran oil is not. Money over everything.
trump doesn't have the guts for this. bolton is a warmongering psychopath but I think theres a good chance he gets shitcanned before he can really make things irretrievable
Does he know enough to know he doesn't have the guts for it? Or what's actually happening?
i'm fully expecting a false flag operation soon. it may not be us but it will be an enemy country of iran and we will happily involve ourselves in an altercation with them. perhaps the warhawks feel that trump might not win his reelection and if they want to start their war it has to be now.
probably not but if the media starts calling him the power behind the throne like they did with bannon he might get the axe. they'll almost inevitably come into conflict (i hope)
then again the media, including the Maddows of the world are perenially thirsty for dead midddle easterners whereas they like to pretend that people like bannon are too distasteful for them
Wasn't the EU supposed to implement an alternative to Swift by now? If the EU wanted to save the JCPOA they could have already.
The Saudi alliance is now claiming Saudi oil tankers were attacked in the Persian Gulf by Iranian-backed forces. Israeli TV recently ran a report stating that Iran was targeting Saudi oil production for a military attack.
I don't want to give hits to shitty far right sites, so here's the WaPo report which is a little lighter on accusations:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...907108-755e-11e9-bd25-c989555e7766_story.html
Yup. And Dem presidential candidates, too. Buttigieg is practically salivating at the prospect of war with Iran.
As the article mentions, Germany and Netherlands have also suspended their training missions in Iraq
Yup, allies don't want to get involved in a potential U.S.-Iran conflict in the region.
How do people decide to blame the EU in this thread? This isn't on us.
Sigh. This is about fucking up the election next week, isn't it?
Sigh. This is about fucking up the election next week, isn't it?
Some crazy shit is going down and there's, like, no allies with the Trump people right now.
This article in the NYTimes was making me crazy with all its not-so-oblique references to the Iraq war buildup.
This article in the NYTimes was making me crazy with all its not-so-oblique references to the Iraq war buildup.
I can't speak for the European perspective. From the U.S. perspective, this looks a lot like the run up to the Iraq War, with the intent of fucking up the 2020 Presidential election. The same manufactured threat, the same old "don't change horses midstream" argument will be trotted out (the idea that choosing a new leader during wartime is somehow more dangerous), the same empty rhetoric about the strongman president protecting us from the scary foreigners on the other side of the world.
Why would we help with his phony war? Trump's burned every bridge.
The big time discrepancy here though is that there is no catalyzing event to build any popular support for this like 9/11 was for Iraq.
If this is the endgame, it's going to backfire. Little domestic support, little international support. It will be an attack on a nation with far more landmass, personnel, and resources than any recent theater, and it will be a god damned disaster.
Don't blame the EU for wanting no part of this whatsoever.
Yes, despite the parallels, it is quite a different situation politically. Add to that, Iran 2019 is not Iraq 2003. A conflict with Iran would not be like the Iraq War. It would be worse.