|
Post by serpico on Jan 14, 2020 9:33:44 GMT
Even if the US achieve regime change what type of regime do they think will come to power ? It’s unlikely to be pro American/pro democracy, and why is America so obsessed with Iran anyway ? It doesn’t make much sense, they’re not a threat to the US as we’ve just seen, their military is pretty weak and they have no nuclear weapons.
Imo it only makes sense from the perspective that it’s all about two other nations in that region.
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Jan 14, 2020 10:06:56 GMT
Even if the US achieve regime change what type of regime do they think will come to power ? It’s unlikely to be pro American/pro democracy, and why is America so obsessed with Iran anyway ? It doesn’t make much sense, they’re not a threat to the US as we’ve just seen, their military is pretty weak and they have no nuclear weapons. Imo it only makes sense from the perspective that it’s all about two other nations in that region. Simple America is in hock to Israeli supporters money Whilst Iran is a threat to Israel The American monkey will dance to the Israeli organ grinder
|
|
|
Post by The Drunken Communist on Jan 14, 2020 10:13:16 GMT
How many years have people been saying the US want war with Iran for now? For a country that will happily invade other countries over the tiniest of details, they anit half taking their time with this one.
|
|
|
Post by serpico on Jan 14, 2020 10:29:42 GMT
How many years have people been saying the US want war with Iran for now? For a country that will happily invade other countries over the tiniest of details, they anit half taking their time with this one. I think some in the US want war with Iran, I don’t think trump does particularly but his “maximum pressure” strategy could lead the US into one, I think he’s being manipulated by some of his advisors.
|
|
|
Post by The Drunken Communist on Jan 14, 2020 10:32:04 GMT
I think some in the US want war with Iran, I don’t think trump does particularly but his “maximum pressure” strategy could lead the US into one, I think he’s being manipulated by some of his advisors. If Trump is the 'problem' stoping them going to war with Iran, why didn't they do it when Obama was President? Or Bush? Or Clinton?...
|
|
|
Post by foster on Jan 14, 2020 11:10:58 GMT
Even if the US achieve regime change what type of regime do they think will come to power ? It’s unlikely to be pro American/pro democracy, and why is America so obsessed with Iran anyway ? It doesn’t make much sense, they’re not a threat to the US as we’ve just seen, their military is pretty weak and they have no nuclear weapons. Imo it only makes sense from the perspective that it’s all about two other nations in that region. Simple America is in hock to Israeli supporters money Whilst Iran is a threat to Israel The American monkey will dance to the Israeli organ grinder I agree. It's all about Israel and preventing the spread of Shia islam in the region. Should be noted that ISIS are sunni muslims and so Iranians shouldn't be bundled into that terrorist bracket. Just saw that Boris has said we should adopt the trump nuclear deal with Iran. Yeah,let's just scrap all the work done by a host of nations including the US and go with whatever Trump says. What a muppet.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Jan 14, 2020 11:15:16 GMT
How many years have people been saying the US want war with Iran for now? For a country that will happily invade other countries over the tiniest of details, they anit half taking their time with this one. Iran have close ties with Russia, and the US are only good at picking on nations they know they can easily dominate.
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Jan 14, 2020 11:17:17 GMT
I think some in the US want war with Iran, I don’t think trump does particularly but his “maximum pressure” strategy could lead the US into one, I think he’s being manipulated by some of his advisors. If Trump is the 'problem' stoping them going to war with Iran, why didn't they do it when Obama was President? Or Bush? Or Clinton?... Another simple answer America with all its superior fire power has one problem it doesn't particularly like to take someone on who has the temerity to fightback If Iraq actually had weapons of mass destruction saddham would still be in charge There quite happy to kick the shit out of anything that can't fight back America the country of arrogant hypocritical bullies
|
|
|
Post by serpico on Jan 14, 2020 11:37:50 GMT
I think some in the US want war with Iran, I don’t think trump does particularly but his “maximum pressure” strategy could lead the US into one, I think he’s being manipulated by some of his advisors. If Trump is the 'problem' stoping them going to war with Iran, why didn't they do it when Obama was President? Or Bush? Or Clinton?... They almost did under Bush, probably only the fact the Iraq war went so badly stopped them.
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Jan 14, 2020 11:50:04 GMT
If Trump is the 'problem' stoping them going to war with Iran, why didn't they do it when Obama was President? Or Bush? Or Clinton?... They almost did under Bush, probably only the fact the Iraq war went so badly stopped them. The Iraq war went very well It was the peace they completely fucked up
|
|
|
Post by serpico on Jan 14, 2020 12:13:21 GMT
Simple America is in hock to Israeli supporters money Whilst Iran is a threat to Israel The American monkey will dance to the Israeli organ grinder I agree. It's all about Israel and preventing the spread of Shia islam in the region. Should be noted that ISIS are sunni muslims and so Iranians shouldn't be bundled into that terrorist bracket. Just saw that Boris has said we should adopt the trump nuclear deal with Iran. Yeah,let's just scrap all the work done by a host of nations including the US and go with whatever Trump says. What a muppet. It’s all been a total and complete waste of time, Iran wasn’t even violating the agreement, they haven’t moved towards attaining a nuke either, yes they sponsor certain groups in the region but which country doesn’t ? They’re all at it. I wouldn’t be totally surprised if we wake up one day and a deal has been done.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Jan 14, 2020 12:13:46 GMT
How many years have people been saying the US want war with Iran for now? For a country that will happily invade other countries over the tiniest of details, they anit half taking their time with this one. This war would be way way harder then any war US has taken on since 1945,that's why.
|
|
|
Post by Davef on Jan 14, 2020 12:14:32 GMT
They almost did under Bush, probably only the fact the Iraq war went so badly stopped them. The Iraq war went very well It was the peace they completely fucked up Well yeah, apart from the 12-15,000 civilian deaths that is.
|
|
|
Post by The Drunken Communist on Jan 14, 2020 12:22:10 GMT
How many years have people been saying the US want war with Iran for now? For a country that will happily invade other countries over the tiniest of details, they anit half taking their time with this one. This war would be way way harder then any war US has taken on since 1945,that's why. You're now the third or fourth person who have said something along the lines of the US being scared to start a war with Iran... Unyet just a few days ago this place was absolutely certain that WWIII had started & it was all the evil US/The Don's fault 'cos they'd been itching to start a war with them. It can't be both so which is it?
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Jan 14, 2020 12:41:21 GMT
Even if the US achieve regime change what type of regime do they think will come to power ? It’s unlikely to be pro American/pro democracy, and why is America so obsessed with Iran anyway ? It doesn’t make much sense, they’re not a threat to the US as we’ve just seen, their military is pretty weak and they have no nuclear weapons. Imo it only makes sense from the perspective that it’s all about two other nations in that region. It's Irans development of it's nuclear programme and nuclear weapons hidden in that, and their wanting to wipe Israel off the face of the earth that is the reason. We all know that it is a very repressive regime and the majority want it to end, but the regime rules with an iron fist.
|
|
|
Post by thequietman on Jan 14, 2020 12:44:11 GMT
This war would be way way harder then any war US has taken on since 1945,that's why. You're now the third or fourth person who have said something along the lines of the US being scared to start a war with Iran... Unyet just a few days ago this place was absolutely certain that WWIII had started & it was all the evil US/The Don's fault 'cos they'd been itching to start a war with them. It can't be both so which is it? I figure it's a bit of both, DC.
Looking at it cynically, it's election year and little helps a political campaign as much as a good war. Or at least a good war you can win.
Trump can throw his international political weight around like Giant Haystacks and he's certainly done that in small-scale, limited-extent incidents. But so far at least he's stopped short of all-out war - either because of 23rd hour diplomacy or because the other side has feared he really will go balls in.
There's probably two things that's stopping an all-out US war with Iran:
a) even the few wars that have had clear victors in the region in the last 100+ years haven't produced any lasting political & social stability. There are just too many factions even within any one country for long-term peace to work. So America could go to war with Iran, and maybe meet their immediate objectives, but the peacekeeping would screw them financially and politically in the eyes of the rest of the world.
b) Trump is as aware as any former US President that, regardless of the technology and armaments at his disposal, any war in that region will necessarily require a heavy land army presence and there will inevitably be US troop deaths. Deaths of too many US troops doesn't go down so well when it comes to elections.
So a "clean" in & out assassination without going to full blown war may not give Trump 100% of what he wants, but at least it might get him what he's after in terms of the US voting public.
Plenty to argue about there, I'm sure, and I've not even touched on the oil & gas in Iran, but that's my take on it.
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Jan 14, 2020 12:47:24 GMT
The Iraq war went very well It was the peace they completely fucked up Well yeah, apart from the 12-15,000 civilian deaths that is. I was talking about military victory As for civilian deaths Blair should be in the Hague on war crimes charges
|
|
|
Post by The Drunken Communist on Jan 14, 2020 13:00:42 GMT
You're now the third or fourth person who have said something along the lines of the US being scared to start a war with Iran... Unyet just a few days ago this place was absolutely certain that WWIII had started & it was all the evil US/The Don's fault 'cos they'd been itching to start a war with them. It can't be both so which is it? I figure it's a bit of both, DC. Looking at it cynically, it's election year and little helps a political campaign as much as a good war. Or at least a good war you can win. Trump can throw his international political weight around like Giant Haystacks and he's certainly done that in small-scale, limited-extent incidents. But so far at least he's stopped short of all-out war - either because of 23rd hour diplomacy or because the other side has feared he really will go balls in. There's probably two things that's stopping an all-out US war with Iran: a) even the few wars that have had clear victors in the region in the last 100+ years haven't produced any lasting political & social stability. There are just too many factions even within any one country for long-term peace to work. So America could go to war with Iran, and maybe meet their immediate objectives, but the peacekeeping would screw them financially and politically in the eyes of the rest of the world.
b) Trump is as aware as any former US President that, regardless of the technology and armaments at his disposal, any war in that region will necessarily require a heavy land army presence and there will inevitably be US troop deaths. Deaths of too many US troops doesn't go down so well when it comes to elections. So a "clean" in & out assassination without going to full blown war may not give Trump 100% of what he wants, but at least it might get him what he's after in terms of the US voting public. Plenty to argue about there, I'm sure, and I've not even touched on the oil & gas in Iran, but that's my take on it.
Wars usually come to the surface in election years when the leader needs a boost, The Don will likely piss a second term & the people love that he isn't getting into wars & is instead bringing their boys home. The last thing he would want/need this year is a war. Just during his time as 'Leader of the free world' Iran have - Bombed oil fields in Saudi Arabia. Seized numerous ships from multiple nations in the Strait of Hormuz/Persian Gulf. Shot down US Drones. Attacked the US Embassy. Fired multiple missiles at US targets. He's had plenty of chances to kick it all off with Iran if he wanted to... Not to mention he also refused to invade Syria or escalate things with North Korea. Maybe, just maybe he isn't the blood thirsty war-mongerer he's made out to be.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Jan 14, 2020 13:00:54 GMT
You're now the third or fourth person who have said something along the lines of the US being scared to start a war with Iran... Unyet just a few days ago this place was absolutely certain that WWIII had started & it was all the evil US/The Don's fault 'cos they'd been itching to start a war with them. It can't be both so which is it? I figure it's a bit of both, DC. Looking at it cynically, it's election year and little helps a political campaign as much as a good war. Or at least a good war you can win. Trump can throw his international political weight around like Giant Haystacks and he's certainly done that in small-scale, limited-extent incidents. But so far at least he's stopped short of all-out war - either because of 23rd hour diplomacy or because the other side has feared he really will go balls in. There's probably two things that's stopping an all-out US war with Iran: a) even the few wars that have had clear victors in the region in the last 100+ years haven't produced any lasting political & social stability. There are just too many factions even within any one country for long-term peace to work. So America could go to war with Iran, and maybe meet their immediate objectives, but the peacekeeping would screw them financially and politically in the eyes of the rest of the world.
b) Trump is as aware as any former US President that, regardless of the technology and armaments at his disposal, any war in that region will necessarily require a heavy land army presence and there will inevitably be US troop deaths. Deaths of too many US troops doesn't go down so well when it comes to elections. So a "clean" in & out assassination without going to full blown war may not give Trump 100% of what he wants, but at least it might get him what he's after in terms of the US voting public. Plenty to argue about there, I'm sure, and I've not even touched on the oil & gas in Iran, but that's my take on it.
The US have gone to war with Iran - politically and economically. They'll slowly squeeze and starve Iran, destroying their economy and turning the people against their own government. We've already seen the strength of the Iranian currency decline and Trumps tweets in support of anti-government protesters. Iran retaliated by tearing up the nuclear agreement and that's backfired as the EU countries are complaining about it. This means they'll side with the US and Iran will be even more isolated. If the US can dispose of the Iranian leadership and influence the next ones without losing any troops in the process then that's good for them. Unfortunately I feel like even if they manage to get rid of the leaders it will just lead to more chaos in the middle east...which is also good for them. They can continue taking the resources while all the different factions are focused on fighting each other. Once the US get what they want they'll jump ship and start the same process against another country. Just look at what the US have done recently in Syria (deserting the Kurds) and LATAM. They destabilise other nations whilst consolidating power and control in their own. It's glaringly obvious but there's nothing anyone is willing or can do about it.
|
|
|
Post by serpico on Jan 14, 2020 14:46:10 GMT
Even if the US achieve regime change what type of regime do they think will come to power ? It’s unlikely to be pro American/pro democracy, and why is America so obsessed with Iran anyway ? It doesn’t make much sense, they’re not a threat to the US as we’ve just seen, their military is pretty weak and they have no nuclear weapons. Imo it only makes sense from the perspective that it’s all about two other nations in that region. It's Irans development of it's nuclear programme and nuclear weapons hidden in that, and their wanting to wipe Israel off the face of the earth that is the reason. We all know that it is a very repressive regime and the majority want it to end, but the regime rules with an iron fist. There’s no evidence Iran has a nuclear weapons program, even if they Got a bomb would they immediately use it to bomb Israel ? Not likely, they wouldn’t last long after doing it if they did, they’re not suicidal.
|
|
|
Post by thequietman on Jan 14, 2020 16:46:57 GMT
I figure it's a bit of both, DC. Looking at it cynically, it's election year and little helps a political campaign as much as a good war. Or at least a good war you can win. Trump can throw his international political weight around like Giant Haystacks and he's certainly done that in small-scale, limited-extent incidents. But so far at least he's stopped short of all-out war - either because of 23rd hour diplomacy or because the other side has feared he really will go balls in. There's probably two things that's stopping an all-out US war with Iran: a) even the few wars that have had clear victors in the region in the last 100+ years haven't produced any lasting political & social stability. There are just too many factions even within any one country for long-term peace to work. So America could go to war with Iran, and maybe meet their immediate objectives, but the peacekeeping would screw them financially and politically in the eyes of the rest of the world.
b) Trump is as aware as any former US President that, regardless of the technology and armaments at his disposal, any war in that region will necessarily require a heavy land army presence and there will inevitably be US troop deaths. Deaths of too many US troops doesn't go down so well when it comes to elections. So a "clean" in & out assassination without going to full blown war may not give Trump 100% of what he wants, but at least it might get him what he's after in terms of the US voting public. Plenty to argue about there, I'm sure, and I've not even touched on the oil & gas in Iran, but that's my take on it.
Wars usually come to the surface in election years when the leader needs a boost, The Don will likely piss a second term & the people love that he isn't getting into wars & is instead bringing their boys home. The last thing he would want/need this year is a war. Just during his time as 'Leader of the free world' Iran have - Bombed oil fields in Saudi Arabia. Seized numerous ships from multiple nations in the Strait of Hormuz/Persian Gulf. Shot down US Drones. Attacked the US Embassy. Fired multiple missiles at US targets. He's had plenty of chances to kick it all off with Iran if he wanted to... Not to mention he also refused to invade Syria or escalate things with North Korea. Maybe, just maybe he isn't the blood thirsty war-mongerer he's made out to be. As you say DC, what he's doing may actually be an astute bit of politicking. He's taking guerilla tactics to an international scale. Quick, strategic hit & runs without engaging in a face-to-face bloodbath on the ground. And as Foster says, the economic and political sanctions have undoubtedly got some of the people stirred against Iran's ruling regime.
Syria has some parallels too. Not exactly divide and conquer; being a conqueror involves responsibility for the populace and social structure when all the fighting stops. More like divide, withdraw and watch the carnage from a safe distance, then whoosh in to pick off what you want when it's safe to do so. Not unlike what he's done throughout his personal business career.
I'm absolutely no fan of his, and some of what he's doing is catastrophic for the everyday Joes in Syria, Iran, etc. But who could argue that it isn't good in the long-term for the US economy in general and The Don in particular?
There's still plenty of time before the November voting, though. Where will he stir the pot next? Central America? There's resources galore to be plundered although it may be a bit close to home re potential retaliation. The corrupt regimes in central & north-central Africa, perhaps.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Jan 14, 2020 17:25:35 GMT
This war would be way way harder then any war US has taken on since 1945,that's why. You're now the third or fourth person who have said something along the lines of the US being scared to start a war with Iran... Unyet just a few days ago this place was absolutely certain that WWIII had started & it was all the evil US/The Don's fault 'cos they'd been itching to start a war with them. It can't be both so which is it? I said no such thing Merely pointed out that a war with Iran would , on every level, be the most difficult since 1945.
|
|
|
Post by RedandWhite90 on Jan 14, 2020 17:29:16 GMT
Even if the US achieve regime change what type of regime do they think will come to power ? It’s unlikely to be pro American/pro democracy, and why is America so obsessed with Iran anyway ? It doesn’t make much sense, they’re not a threat to the US as we’ve just seen, their military is pretty weak and they have no nuclear weapons. Imo it only makes sense from the perspective that it’s all about two other nations in that region. There is a 3 letter word that Iran has roughly a 10% total share of in the entire world which explains why America (and the rest of the west for that matter) is so obsessed by Iran.
|
|
|
Post by RedandWhite90 on Jan 14, 2020 17:30:47 GMT
You're now the third or fourth person who have said something along the lines of the US being scared to start a war with Iran... Unyet just a few days ago this place was absolutely certain that WWIII had started & it was all the evil US/The Don's fault 'cos they'd been itching to start a war with them. It can't be both so which is it? I said no such thing Merely pointed out that a war with Iran would , on every level, be the most difficult since 1945. Couldnt agree more Lord, and it is explained in one very simple question:- How would you know if you had won?
|
|
|
Post by serpico on Jan 14, 2020 17:44:22 GMT
Even if the US achieve regime change what type of regime do they think will come to power ? It’s unlikely to be pro American/pro democracy, and why is America so obsessed with Iran anyway ? It doesn’t make much sense, they’re not a threat to the US as we’ve just seen, their military is pretty weak and they have no nuclear weapons. Imo it only makes sense from the perspective that it’s all about two other nations in that region. There is a 3 letter word that Iran has roughly a 10% total share of in the entire world which explains why America (and the rest of the west for that matter) is so obsessed by Iran. Do the Americans ever actually get the oil though ? And at what cost ? The Iraq war cost The US trillions of dollars, they could have bought all the oil in Iraq for that much!
|
|
|
Post by RedandWhite90 on Jan 14, 2020 18:10:00 GMT
There is a 3 letter word that Iran has roughly a 10% total share of in the entire world which explains why America (and the rest of the west for that matter) is so obsessed by Iran. Do the Americans ever actually get the oil though ? And at what cost ? The Iraq war cost The US trillions of dollars, they could have bought all the oil in Iraq for that much! It's not about the importing of oil to the US it's about where Iran exports the oil to (namely the specific countries). In terms of Iraq it depends whether you are looking at Gulf 1 or the most recent war? Broadly speaking and it depends on what you have read of probably more importantly what media outlet you use for your news but the below are the 'main' given reasons. Gulf 1 - Responce to the invasion of Kuwait Gulf 2 - Removal of Islamic extremism/WMD Oil is a dirty business though, and in both cases one eye would firmly have been on protection of interests.
|
|
|
Post by serpico on Jan 14, 2020 18:29:42 GMT
Do the Americans ever actually get the oil though ? And at what cost ? The Iraq war cost The US trillions of dollars, they could have bought all the oil in Iraq for that much! It's not about the importing of oil to the US it's about where Iran exports the oil to (namely the specific countries). In terms of Iraq it depends whether you are looking at Gulf 1 or the most recent war? Broadly speaking and it depends on what you have read of probably more importantly what media outlet you use for your news but the below are the 'main' given reasons. Gulf 1 - Responce to the invasion of Kuwait Gulf 2 - Removal of Islamic extremism/WMD Oil is a dirty business though, and in both cases one eye would firmly have been on protection of interests. The invasion of Iraq in 91 was a set up, the Americans pretty much oked the Kuwait incursion and then used it as an excuse to invade, stopping short of going to Baghdad. That war was all about having a successful military intervention to erase “Vietnam syndrome” as bush called it.
|
|
|
Post by raythesailor on Jan 14, 2020 18:33:14 GMT
It is not only who has the oil.
It is about controlling the price per barrel.
It is daily manipulated at our expense.
|
|
|
Post by CalgaryPotter on Jan 14, 2020 19:03:35 GMT
The best way to look at world oil and US influence:
1. Venezuela - US sanctions (17.9%) 2. Saudi Arabia - Aramco (Arab America Company) (15.7%) 3. Canada - heavily targeted by US environmental groups and Hollywood Celebs to stop the oil and gas getting to tidewater. These groups are funded by the Rockerfeller's. One major customer only, the US (10%) 4. Iran - US sanctions (9.3%) 5. Iraq - Chaos (8.8%) 6. Russia - No win (6.3%) 7. Kuwait - US friendly (6%) 8. UAE - US friendly (5.8%) 9. US (2.9%) 10. Libya - Chaos (2.9%)
85.6% of proven oil reserves on the planet are listed above.
It ain't rocket science.
|
|
|
Post by RedandWhite90 on Jan 14, 2020 19:06:59 GMT
It's not about the importing of oil to the US it's about where Iran exports the oil to (namely the specific countries). In terms of Iraq it depends whether you are looking at Gulf 1 or the most recent war? Broadly speaking and it depends on what you have read of probably more importantly what media outlet you use for your news but the below are the 'main' given reasons. Gulf 1 - Responce to the invasion of Kuwait Gulf 2 - Removal of Islamic extremism/WMD Oil is a dirty business though, and in both cases one eye would firmly have been on protection of interests. The invasion of Iraq in 91 was a set up, the Americans pretty much oked the Kuwait incursion and then used it as an excuse to invade, stopping short of going to Baghdad. That war was all about having a successful military intervention to erase “Vietnam syndrome” as bush called it. Like I say Serps, depends what you read/believe and where you get your news from. I'm not a huge subscriber to these set up theories but there is evidence to support some of the claims. With it involving a coalition of over 30 different countries and not just America being involved I would say this one is a bit of a stretch. But in relation to your original point oil and it's export makes up s large % of the US obsession. Well worth a read about the back and forth struggle in Iran since the 50s though including where we were involved, certainly an eye opener.
|
|