• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

A Political Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
As if Trump pardoning a literal war criminal Navy SEAL, who bragged about murdering women and children and was reported by his own troops to higher command, wasnt enough: he's now decided to kill a very high ranking Iranian military official in an airstrike in Iraq.
I'm not saying the guy was a saint but the US have been wanting to top him for a while and specifically named his branch of the Iranian military as a terrorist organisation to justify it (not to say they didn't get up to some real shady ****, but it's how they justify the assassination).
The guy was a borderline celebrity in Iran and arguably the second most powerful man behind their supreme leader, there's no way to know what the reaction will be - but it could be huge.

American military should really be thinking this right now:
8ubGFLt.gif




Donny T called it a few years ago:
https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/1212924802631176192?s=20
 
So American commits a drone strike within the territory of another sovereign country (at Baghdad Airport) and kills a high ranking government official of another sovereign country and the Iraqi militia leader.

All this because of the protests in Iraq at the US embassy which all started due to a previous US strike in Iraq which killed civilians and militia

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-50979463

Mental
 
I've read in places that the Iranian was the second most important person in the country and only dwarfed in presence by the ayatollah who is the supreme leader of Iran.

If that's the case it's effectively like someone killing the US vice president.

Pretty unreal
 
So American commits a drone strike within the territory of another sovereign country (at Baghdad Airport) and kills a high ranking government official of another sovereign country and the Iraqi militia leader.

All this because of the protests in Iraq at the US embassy which all started due to a previous US strike in Iraq which killed civilians and militia

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-50979463

Mental
Yeah would suggest you look the guy up before blaming protests
 
Trump went all Game of Thrones on this one,

USA asked Iraq to talk to Iran to try and calm things down,
Soleimani turns up for peace talks and gets drone striked now that the Americans know where he is,
No evidence of a direct or imminent threat to US life/personnel, just a straight up assassination of a foreign government official on third party land/a separate sovereign state.

I don't think anyone is claiming this guy was a saint (at least no one who has read about the things he/Quds have had their hands in) but to go about it in this way is just ludicrous.

How many hundreds/thousands of civilians have been killed by US drone strikes in the middle east?
There's no innocent party/"Good Guy" in this situation.
 
I see the echo in here is stronger and more disturbing than ever. If I was the owner of this forum I would be worried about the sympathetic tone towards the wrong people on here. Surely not good for business.

.

All this because of the protests in Iraq at the US embassy which all started due to a previous US strike in Iraq which killed civilians and militia

The "protests" were in fact an attack by Iranian created, backed and allied Kata'ib Hezbollah (look at the pictures, you can see their yellow and green flag) which was a retaliation to the US bombing Kata'ib Hezbollah weapons depots and command centers in Iraq and Syria, which killed 25 militiamen. No civilians were killed. You're so far off from the truth here it's disturbing.

US bombed Kata'ib Hezbollah depots and centers because they launched 30 rockets at the K-1 Air Base which killed a US contractor and wounded 4 service personnel. That attack was one of 11 that occurred over a couple of months on bases hosting coalition troops. It's well documented that Iran uses Hezbollah and other terrorist groups as proxies, with Soleimani being the alleged puppet master.

In response to the US bombings Kata'ib Hezbollah attacked the US Embassy in Baghdad.

And as retaliation the US took out Soleimani because he got caught planning further attacks on US assets and personnel. He reportedly was on a bit of a tour around the region doing this.

Trump went all Game of Thrones on this one,
USA asked Iraq to talk to Iran to try and calm things down,
Soleimani turns up for peace talks and gets drone striked now that the Americans know where he is,
No evidence of a direct or imminent threat to US life/personnel, just a straight up assassination of a foreign government official on third party land/a separate sovereign state.

Peace talks? Who told you that? The Islamic Republic of Iran or the now defunct Iraqi prime minister back by Iran? What about trying to restore peace in Iran where at least 1500 protesters have been killed by the Iranian government.

As above he was in and around Iraq planning further attacks, just like he's proxies have been executing for several months, and got caught. Iran knows that the US would take them all out in a month so they play dirty using terrorist groups. US has the authority to operate in Iraq.


Honestly, if I was you guys I'd be wondering why the news sources you read got it so wrong. Pull your snouts out of the Trump hating news outlets troughs for a minute and smell the roses.
 
Interesting that every single country condemns this yet you choose to blindly believe what trump says


Loving the leap from "This guy was bad but this wasn't the right way to go about it" to "this website is all terrorist sympathizers" - a career writing daily mail headlines is in your future


Inb4 you claim no one would care if it was a liberal leader, ignoring the multiple pages of me calling the most successful Labour leader in recent history a war criminal
 
One of the better, readable analysese.

Personally, I just think that war crimes are bad - regardless of who carries them out. As is intending / threatening to conduct future war crimes; and, quite honestly, bullying of any stripe.

Before we get all caught up in nationalistic furor at the prospect of another US military adventure in the Middle East I'd like to make a few points.

1) Opposing war does not mean supporting one side or the other. It is simply a recognition that war is NEVER the best option.

2) You can't claim to be acting in self-defense when you have your armies 10,000 miles away and are literally surrounding another country that you have been attacking for 70 years.

3) ALL countries, even Iran, have a right to legitimate self-defense. The right to self-defense does not allow pre-emptive acton. Pre-emptive action is OFFENSE. Period. That includes both Iranian and American actions in the middle east. If your military is outside of your country you are on offense.

4) There has been plenty of jackassery on both sides over the past 70 years but the US started this in 1953 and both sides have been at it ever since. Hundreds of thousands of lives have been lost, the vast majority have been Iranian.

While America tends to believe they are reacting to events in the past weeks and/or months, most of the rest of the world has a much longer time frame. So let's review.

In 1953 America started this conflict when the CIA overthrew the DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED leader of Iran in order to protect British oil interests

They replaced him with a puppet government run by the brutally oppressive dictator the Shah who was friendly to American business interests. His secret police tortured and executed 10's of thousands of political prisoners over 25 years (google SAVAK)

By 1979 the Iranian people had enough and they booted out the Shah and installed an Islamic theocracy run by the Ayatollah Khomeini. In order to prevent further American interference in their domestic affairs, they took 52 American hostages. Note they did not kill them, they took them hostage and released them 444 days later on the day that Ronald Reagan was inaugurated.

America retaliated by encouraging our then ally Saddam Hussein to start a war with Iran. We supplied Iraq with chemical weapons and satellite imagery (new technology at the time and a huge advantage) showing the location of Iranian troops. At the same time the Reagan administration was secretly and in violation of US law, selling arms to Iran in order to fund another secret proxy war in Nicaragua. Over a million iranian and Iraqi lives were lost in this war which nobody won, partly because America was helping both sides.

In 1991 the US invaded Iraq under false pretenses and encouraged the Iraqi Shia (religious sect that were minority in Iraq but majority in Iran and closely connected) to rebel against Saddam Hussein. They did and the US did not defend them and hundreds of thousands were killed by Saddam helicopters.

In 2001 and 2003 the US invaded Afghanistan and Iraq (again under false pretenses) and US forces now literally surrounded the country. The US was shocked that the Iraqi Shia, who we had stabbed in the back only 10 years before, did not greet them with flowers, Many in the second Bush administration were advocating an invasion of Iran as well and they accelerated their nuclear program in true self-defense.

The US and Iran have been involved in proxy wars in the middle-east for many decades but We are the ones who overthrew their government, we are the ones who installed a brutal puppet dictator and got rich off THEIR oil, Our actions in the mid-east have resulted in hundreds of thousands of Iranian deaths. We are the one's who currently have their country entirely surrounded (see graphic). We are without doubt the aggressors in this conflict and any claim to further US aggression in the name of self-defense is complete and utter bull-****. Don't believe it.

Iran is not entirely innocent. Their government has done wrong. American lives have been lost, but they are a drop in the bucket compared to the Iranian lives lost due to America's actions and our aggression strengthen's their islamic regime by giving them legitimate reason to rally their citizens in the name of Iranian self-defense.

The only way to break the cycle of violence is to break the cycle of violence. Iran is not Iraq. It is a country of 82 million people, most of which do not support the islamic regime. It has a million trained troops and the ability to call up 11 million more reserves in case of a war. It is the 18th largest economy in the world despite devastating US economic sanctions. If you think Iraq and Afghanistan were hard battles, Iran will be orders of magnitude more difficult.

But the difficulty of winning a war with Iran is irrelevant. America has been brutalizing the country for 70 years and has no legitimate claim for military action against them. Most Iranians are moderates. It was a secular country under the Shah. The Iranian revolution occurred not because the people wanted an islamist regime but because the American supported Shah was a brutal dictator and they wanted freedom from foreign intervention. The Iranian's I have known have been wonderful people, just like you and I and they are proud of their country and love their country even if they don't love their government. Just like you and I. They are the ones who will suffer.

America simply needs to get off the oil-teat and get out of the Middle East. We are destroying the world with our oil addiction, and the world knows it. We are becoming the bad guys. If we continue in our current course we will go the way of the Greeks, Persians, Romans, Spanish, British, Germans, Russians, and every other civilization that has attempted to maintain a world-wide empire through military power. And we will deserve it.
81271966_10215453562804169_3587252008123367424_n.jpg
 
Was the first gulf war really under false pretenses? Iraq very definitely invaded and annexed Kuwait.....that sort of thing unless your Russia usually deserves a response.

I also don't like the term war criminal when get it get bandied about just because you don't like the reasons for war or they way the government at the time went about presenting the evidence doesn't make them illegal.



Still the actions by Trump are all about stoking up tensions to invigorate his base and that is pretty obvious to anyone paying the slightest amount of attention. Will it cause world war 3? Unlikely that's pure hyperbole, willit lead to a war with Iran? Iran knows it would likely lose heavilly as would anyone outside of China/Russia to the USA. They might retaliate but I suspect they'll be careful.
 
Interesting that every single country condemns this yet you choose to blindly believe what trump says

Again, where are you reading this?

Countries who condemned the attack: Iraq, Syria, Russia, China (of course Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Palestinian Authority) <-- nice bunch right there who respect freedom and liberty

Countries who said Soleimani brought this on himself: Germany, UK, Canada, Israel <-- don't go to these countries, they're a bunch of baddies

Countries who have not condemned any side but asked everybody to chill: Brazil, Afghanistan, France

So no, you're wrong about that too.

You're also wrong about me "blindly believing what trump says". I get most of my facts from Wikipedia. I think I might of first read about the planned attacks from Pompeo though.
I'm sick and tired of reading 8 news articles by journalists/news outlets with agendas, (from both sides) to try and find out what objectively happened. Wikipedia is not perfect but it cuts through a lot of fluff/lies/deceit/hatred.

Loving the leap from "This guy was bad but this wasn't the right way to go about it" to "this website is all terrorist sympathizers" - a career writing daily mail headlines is in your future

Write back at ya about the Daily Mail. I didn't even nearly say "this website is all terrorist sympathizers".

But let's look at the evidence of what's been said about the different parties in the last page or so:

Attackers of the US Embassy
  • They were "protestors"
  • They were protesting the killing of civilians
0/2 of the above is correct

Soleimani
  • He wasn't a "saint"
  • His branch of the Iranian military has been unjustly classified as a terrorist organisation
  • Was in Iraq for "peace talks"
  • He and the Quds have gotten up to "some real shady ****"
0.5/4 of the above is correct ("some real shady ****" gets half a point, just)

Trump
  • Ordered the killing somebody for elections and/or oil
  • Ordered the attack unprovoked ("No evidence of a direct or imminent threat to US life/personnel")
  • Committed a "straight-up assassination"
0/3 of the above is verifiable or correct

US military
  • Gif with a person wearing a Nazi uniform saying "Are we the baddies?"
This... doesn't deserve a response...

Blair
  • Is a war criminal
I know little of Blair, but given your recent track record, I'm going to take a guess and say you've completely misrepresented him too



Yeah, woah, you guys really laid into Soleimani about not being a "saint" who did "some real shady ****". Sounds more like you're describing naughty teenagers or something.

Luckily Blair got off light with the label "war criminal" and Trump/US also got off easy by only being accused of murdering civilians and taking out terrorist leaders for purely political/election reasons and/or for oil...

Inb4 you claim no one would care if it was a liberal leader, ignoring the multiple pages of me calling the most successful Labour leader in recent history a war criminal

[/QUOTE]

How about actually addressing the points I've put forward instead of trying to read my mind.
 
Here's a Wikipedia article for you, seeing as you seem to think America are the world police and are infallible
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655?wprov=sfla1

Why oh why would people in the middle East not want them there.
You know other than senselessly slaughtering almost 300 innocent civilians and refusing to apologize for it.

You're obviously not going to change your mind about anything so just keep going about your day calling us all bigots for not wanting more body bags in the desert.
 
Here's a Wikipedia article for you, seeing as you seem to think America are the world police and are infallible
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655?wprov=sfla1

Why oh why would people in the middle East not want them there.
You know other than senselessly slaughtering almost 300 innocent civilians and refusing to apologize for it.

That truly is a terrible tragedy.

How does that, which happened 30 years ago, relate to recent events between Kata'ib Hezbollah, Trump and Soleimani?

I never said or implied the USA is infallible, and I never would because people are inherently fallible. Everybody. Nobody is inherently virtuous.

Once again trying to read my mind and not respond to what I'm actually saying.

You're obviously not going to change your mind about anything so just keep going about your day calling us all bigots for not wanting more body bags in the desert.

What am I supposed to change my mind about?
 
Slightly off topic but been looking into the Aussie bush fires.
Damn Scott Morrison is a piece of work.

I dread to think what Australia will be like in 25 years time if things don't change, both on land and in the ocean.
 
He took a massive chunk of coal into parliament and was like "There's nothing to be afraid of with fossil fuels" - I wonder who he gets backed/lobbied by?
 
It's funny how a couple of precision strikes on a few empty buildings is enough to save face and keep your population on side. A bit like North Korea firing rockets into the sea as a way of flexing their muscles. Although it's serious stuff I can't help but think it's also a bit pathetic.
 
I'm just gonna stop listening to the news and stay away from twitter. I imagine if we enter WWIII I'll found on here.

Also Grimes and Elon Musk are having a baby so it just gets worse.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top