Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Laayla

Will Bolton Get His War?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

50 minutes ago, Haji 2003 said:

They want complete destruction of Iran & make a new weak state with name of Iran ,that endlesly will be in war with its neighbors & inside of it 

Iraqi parliament votes on bill to force US out of Iraq ,As it pushed for war with Iran

Potential Iran  falseflag as rocket falls 

 near the us embassy in Iraq & explosion hits Israeli base

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4:46 it will make the 10 years in Iraq look like child's play in Iran

80 million, four times the size of Iraq

men under arms and women too  :grin:

I wish they put Col. Larry Wilkerson on Fox TV maybe Trump would listen to him.

 

With a thirty year Boeing veteran at the Pentagon, Patrick Shanahan as Acting Secretary of Defense, and with John Bolton and Mike Pompeo at the helm, war with Iran is likely says the former chief of staff to Secretary of State, Col. Larry Wilkerson

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ around 13 min mark, someone thinks that they are having a snack on the quiet (dipping their fingers into a pot), but it's all caught in the reflection.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A U.S. war with Iran is neither supported by Congress nor by the American people right now.

The general consensus is that Trump is being manipulated into attacking Iran by Bolton, Pompeo, MBS and Netanyahu. However, public support for this is at an unbelievably low level. 

Also, its a poorly kept secret in D.C. that its the U.S. military giving Trump the biggest brushback in D.C. They consider an invasion of Iran to be something that will result in a massive loss of life on both the U.S. military side as well on the Irani civilian side, to say nothing of the problems that the terrain and geography will present. Iraq is also denying the U.S. permission to use Iraq as a staging ground for U.S. forces. In the opinion of the U.S. military this is disastrous course of action.

Any intel reports that are being pushed out as propoganda are being rejected outright by Democrats who get the same intel briefings.

MBS continues to push for this in the background. Netanyahu appears to have realized that there are problems preventing this from happening so he has cooled off somewhat, but the jahil MBS continues to push for it. This is who really wants this war and invasion of Iran...Saudi. They are the ones driving this from behind with petrodollars since all Trump does is think about making more money for himself, even at the expense of U.S. military lives.

The chances of this war happening are very slim, and even if it does it will result in Trump losing the election and a Dem President coming to power with the intention of pulling out of any invasion that might have happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Akbar673 said:

They consider an invasion of Iran to be something that will result in a massive loss of life on both the U.S. military side as well on the Irani civilian side, to say nothing of the problems that the terrain and geography will present.

I don't think a land invasion of any description is on the cards. More likely would be bombing of the Iranian military, perhaps followed by bombing of key civilian infrastructure. 

A less ambitious objective would be to have either a change of Iranian government or Iranian foreign policy that cuts off Iran from the rest of the Middle East. So no more links with Hz or the Iraqi militias etc. The Ayatollahs can stay, but their remit would only run as far as the Iranian borders. Israel would then have a completely free hand throughout the Middle East.

A more ambitious objective would be to have a new system of Iranian government in place where the US/Israel can choose the leadership. Just as they do in Saudi.

Of course, the less ambitious objective could lead to the more ambitious one, over a period of months or years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Haji 2003 said:

I don't think a land invasion of any description is on the cards.

Yup...the U.S. military knows that. The terrain alone would be similar to how they spent years in the Afghani mountains looking for Al Qaeda and accomplished next to nothing.

1 hour ago, Haji 2003 said:

More likely would be bombing of the Iranian military, perhaps followed by bombing of key civilian infrastructure. 

Even so...you can’t win without ground forces. Air and Naval activity is only effective when its in support of ground action.

1 hour ago, Haji 2003 said:

A less ambitious objective would be to have either a change of Iranian government or Iranian foreign policy that cuts off Iran from the rest of the Middle East. So no more links with Hz or the Iraqi militias etc.

That's the current strategy with the sanctions. To starve the Irani people to the point they lash out at the govt. for putting them in that place thus ensuring a regime change.

1 hour ago, Haji 2003 said:

The Ayatollahs can stay, but their remit would only run as far as the Iranian borders.

I've never been opposed to a regime change if the Irani people will benefit from it econmically. Just because the country isn't ruled by the clergy doesn't equate to Shi'a Islam fading out. Many people are of the mindset that regime change in Iran will result in a drop in religiosity when in actuality the two aren't connected. A religious person stays religious regardless of their setting, a non-religious person stays that way as well regardless of where they are.

1 hour ago, Haji 2003 said:

Israel would then have a completely free hand throughout the Middle East.

Only Israel? Don't forget that Saudi is pushing this more than Israel. U.S. support will prop up Israel regardless of whatever happens in Iran because of the American Evangelical lobby. Its Saudi that truly wants to eliminate Iran's regime so it can then control the entire region. Evangelicals want Israel to exist so all Jews can be killed there, thus bringing about the reappearance of Jesus (عليه السلام). 

Both Evangelicals and Saudis want the same thing. An elimination of a group of people to advance their religious beliefs. Saudis want to get rid of Shi'a, Evangelicals want to get rid of Jews.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Akbar673 said:

Yup...the U.S. military knows that. The terrain alone would be similar to how they spent years in the Afghani mountains looking for Al Qaeda and accomplished next to nothing.

Even so...you can’t win without ground forces. Air and Naval activity is only effective when its in support of ground action.

That's the current strategy with the sanctions. To starve the Irani people to the point they lash out at the govt. for putting them in that place thus ensuring a regime change.

I've never been opposed to a regime change if the Irani people will benefit from it econmically. Just because the country isn't ruled by the clergy doesn't equate to Shi'a Islam fading out. Many people are of the mindset that regime change in Iran will result in a drop in religiosity when in actuality the two aren't connected. A religious person stays religious regardless of their setting, a non-religious person stays that way as well regardless of where they are.

Only Israel? Don't forget that Saudi is pushing this more than Israel. U.S. support will prop up Israel regardless of whatever happens in Iran because of the American Evangelical lobby. Its Saudi that truly wants to eliminate Iran's regime so it can then control the entire region. Evangelicals want Israel to exist so all Jews can be killed there, thus bringing about the reappearance of Jesus (عليه السلام). 

Both Evangelicals and Saudis want the same thing. An elimination of a group of people to advance their religious beliefs. Saudis want to get rid of Shi'a, Evangelicals want to get rid of Jews.

Brother Akbar,

You confuse me sometimes.  What are you trying to say?  You want a "regime change" for Iran?  Or do you have a problem with theocracy?  WF?  Please clarify your position, I know you're interested in running for political office in IL, so are you calling for a "regime change" or what?

Shouldn't you be concerned of a "regime change" in your own country?  The two Muslim congresswomen Tlaib and Omar are asking for impeachment hearings to take place for your president.  I don't hear them calling for a regime change in Iran.

You think the mo2mneen in Iran will go against their marja3 Sayyid Ali Khamanei, because they are being hit in their pockets?  God tests us with fear, loss of money, and hunger.  Why would Iranians blame it on Sayyid Ali and not on your erratic president Dumbo Trump?  Iranians are smarter than that, they are not your average mindless Americans.

M3 Salamah, FE AMIN Allah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Akbar673 said:

Even so...you can’t win without ground forces. Air and Naval activity is only effective when its in support of ground action.

All the Americans need to win is enough Iranians (beyond those who have Ahura Mazda tattoed on their shouldes) asking "Why are we in Leb/Iraq, why are we helping Arabs etc'? You likely know the Persoid mantras.

7 hours ago, Akbar673 said:

Only Israel? Don't forget that Saudi is pushing this more than Israel.

I think the Saudi angle is very much for the optics in the Sunni world. I didn't feel the need to repost the material here, but MbS is very much an Israeli creation. At the time of the Khashoggi incident, based on press reports, I did point out that if MbS stayed in power he'd be owned by the Israelis. Everyone else wanted him gone, but they stuck by him.

7 hours ago, Akbar673 said:

A religious person stays religious regardless of their setting, a non-religious person stays that way as well regardless of where they are.

Various scientific behaviour change models would disagree. Someone may have the niyat to lead a religious life, if the State can empower them to do so by enacting laws that make sin harder and virtue easier, it makes the fulfilment of that niyat more likely.

 

Edited by Haji 2003

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

 

Donald Trump has asserted rarely used emergency powers to sidestep congressional objections, and give the green light to an arms deal involving Saudi Arabia and the UAE.

The US secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, told the leaders of several congressional committees the president was claiming a national emergency existed because of a purported threat from Iran and was, as a result, giving permission for 22 arms deals with around $8bn (£6.3bn).

 

https://www.independent.co.United Kingdom/news/world/americas/us-politics/Trump-Saudi-arabia-deal-bombs-uae-arms-trade-congress-yemen-a8929741.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

John Bolton’s Quest for a new Pearl Harbor |Iran Sanctions 4

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For all the flag waving American Muslims who are blindly patriotic, you know who you are.

1:00 how many US military bases surrounding Iran

4:00 The Washington Institute of Near East Policy, Patrick Clawson speaking publicly how to get to war when it is in US interest.  How previous presidents started war in different countries.  What will be the tactics US will use to start a war with Iran?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...