Jump to content
Note to existing users - password reset is required Read more... ×
Sign in to follow this  
PurpleCanary

President Trump

Recommended Posts

Meanwhile: this smacks of "nice country, would be a shame if you lost it" mafia like protection racket tactics. 

U.S. Warns Iraq It Risks Losing Access to Key Bank Account if Troops Told to Leave

Loss of access to New York Fed account, where international oil sale revenue is kept, could creating cash crunch in Iraq’s financial system

https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-warns-iraq-it-risks-losing-access-to-key-bank-account-if-troops-told-to-leave-11578759629

 

Share this post


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

If he is, based on what criteria? And does that make President Trump a war criminal too? Or Obama, Bush, Cameron, May? 

He and Bush started an illegal war under false pretences of weapons of mass destruction being harboured by Iraq.   He is also IMO responsible for the death of Dr David Kelly who was courageous in exposing Blair's 'sexing up' document for its disingenuousness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Moyo, like the majority of the country at the time ,egged on by the right wing press, supported the Iraq war. Now it has been proven to be a disastrous decision, based on lies and misinformation they desperately try to distance themselves from it. And to his shame he has let the government do exactly the same thing to him again. Will he be calling Johnson a criminal in 10/20 years time??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, ron obvious said:

Conspiracy theory no. 5,976(a)

 Soleimani was killed with the collusion of iran.

Or at least factions within the government. He was out of control, his strategy was not working & any benefits were negated by the increasing effects of sanctions on the populace (witness the riots, & their suppression, within Iran).

Iran's 'revenge' could hardly have been more of a sham. Trump's response even enabled them to maintain face, in that he was (amazingly!) enigmatic about losses.

This had twin benefits for Iran; the focus of hatred now goes back to The Great Satan, & they can now start some sort of meaningful dialogue with said Satan about reducing sanctions. Meanwhile Satan gets rid of a major irritant to trade in the region; they know he'll be replaced, but it'll be a bit like replacing Raheem Stirling with Dennis Srbeny.

And the startling efficiency with which Soleimani was removed will concentrate the minds of any successors. As Mike Tyson said, everyone has a plan till they get a smack in the mouth. It's noticeable that (as far as I'm aware) there've been no reported chemical weapons attacks in Syria since America's response to the last one, which was spectacular but caused remarkably little loss of life.

The brutal truth is the USA can simply crush countries like Iran. It doesn't do so because of the longer term ramifications involving Russia & China. But the damage that Iran can do to soft (unprotected civilian) targets in the area under someone like Soleimani is considerable & there comes a point where they will react as they did.

P.S. Something is definitely happening in Iran; their climbdown over the airliner catastrophe is unprecedented.

This is all pure speculation. It'll be interesting to see how it all plays out.

Where's Len when you need him??:classic_biggrin:

Iran's 'revenge' could hardly have been more of a sham. Trump's response even enabled them to maintain face, in that he was (amazingly!) enigmatic about losses.

If you like conspiracy theories, think about that a little more, Ron.

 

So Iran apparently fires off some missiles hitting military bases in Iraq and there are apparently no casualties and nothing more is said.

Now military bases tend to be occupied by a lot of military personnel. Particulary if they are home to overseas US military. How come these missiles missed everybody? How come they missed any nearby housing? Why isn't Iraq protesting at the UN about an attack on its soil? Why no pictures of bloodied children being rushed to hospitals, or homes of civilians being destroyed? Why no stories in the mainstream media telling us the number of missiles launched, for example? Why no interviews with military commanders or eyewitness accounts?  Why is amateur video footage of a missile striking the Ukrainian plane making its way to the internet but no similar video footage of the missile attacks on the military bases. The whole story is not being reported by the mainstream news.

Now it could be that US intelligence is so good that it has hacked into the Iranian military comms at the highest level and they had time to evacuate the sites, or just maybe the Iraqi government was given prior warning and passed this information on to the Americans, who allowed it to go ahead as a face-saving measure.

Whatever, we need Len back to explain this.

Edited by Rock The Boat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure a few will be along to defend Iran and tell us how popular the governing regime is with the people

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Van wink said:

I'm sure a few will be along to defend Iran and tell us how popular the governing regime is with the people

Quite a lot of footage on this twitter feed showing Iranians protesting against the regime.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The things was the Iranian regime was facing a lot of internal opposition until someone stupidly decided to assassinate one of their ministers. 

So yes some protests But on the whole, no. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Surfer said:

 

So yes some protests But on the whole, no. 

I think you may be misjudging this. Don’t be taken in by the state sponsored protests and outrage shown initially. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This ridiculous notion that if you are against Trump's actions you must be pro-Iran is entirely vacuous and rather stupid thinking from lazy people. Not everything is black and white and can be put in the "them or us" bracket.

Are Iran and Soleimani bad? Yes. Obviously.

Did Trump assissnate the man with no clear plan? Yes. Obviously.

Has it helped stabilise a volatile area? No. Obviously.

What was the point of it? Nobody knows.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Herman said:

This ridiculous notion that if you are against Trump's actions you must be pro-Iran is entirely vacuous and rather stupid thinking from lazy people. 

 

That’s absolutely right, I’m not sure many see this in black and white terms. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Van wink said:

That’s absolutely right, I’m not sure many see this in black and white terms. 

Some idiot does.

"I'm sure a few will be along to defend Iran and tell us how popular the governing regime is with the people."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Herman said:

Some idiot does.

"I'm sure a few will be along to defend Iran and tell us how popular the governing regime is with the people."

And how is that see things in black and white terms? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You don’t have to believe that most Iranian people support the actions of their government to observe that hundreds of thousands came out onto the streets to mourn the death of Soliemani. And in some cities known to be anti-regime. This isn’t North Korea, so let’s take that as having some value and not immediately discount that as staged. 
 

Because if you do, you run the risk of falling into the “we will be welcomed as liberators” BS that was rolled out before the invasion of Iraq. 

Edited by Surfer
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Surfer said:

You don’t have to believe that most Iranian people support the actions of their government to observe that hundreds of thousands came out onto the streets to mourn the death of Soliemani. And in some cities known to be anti-regime. This isn’t North Korea, so let’s take that as having some value and not immediately discount that as staged. 
 

Because if you do, you run the risk of falling into the “we will be welcomed as liberators” BS that was rolled out before the invasion of Iraq. 

I didn’t say it was staged Surfer, but having lived in Turkey and seen rallies for Erdogan populated by teachers and civil servants given time off on the strict instructions to attend and wave flags, under fear of retribution, I merely advise caution in drawing conclusions for public displays.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, A Load of Squit said:

Is Irans economy able to support hundreds of thousands of teachers and civil servants?

 

Iran is neither overly wealthy nor overly poor. It does have a large, well-educated middle-class so it probably does have a large public sector though I couldn't put a number on it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Van wink said:

I didn’t say it was staged Surfer, but having lived in Turkey and seen rallies for Erdogan populated by teachers and civil servants given time off on the strict instructions to attend and wave flags, under fear of retribution, I merely advise caution in drawing conclusions for public displays.

Also there is the Revolutionary Guard who are 'Morality Police' and you wouldn't risk your neighbour shopping you to the RG for not turning up to a protest. That's how they keep people in line. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Herman said:

 

Did Trump assissnate the man with no clear plan? Yes. Obviously.

 

I think your prior view of trump is clouding your judgement.  

Iran has been pushing the boundaries for many years now but whilst the nation has suffered as a result there is little evidence that the ruling elite around the supreme leader have done so to a material extent.   Well at least one of them has done so now and all will have seen him do so

Perhaps this was a opportunistic strike or maybe part of an operation long in the making, we can only guess at but to suggest the it is 'obvious' that there is no plan is a disingenuous statement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump has been lying since he got in. The current count of lies is 13000 I think. So no, I don't believe a word he says. Even his defence secretary hasn't seen the evidence that there was an upcoming threat. He's having to take Trump's word for it.

So if you want me to believe there was a plan then you are going to have to erase the last three years of his **** reign.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Herman said:

Trump has been lying since he got in. The current count of lies is 13000 I think. So no, I don't believe a word he says. Even his defence secretary hasn't seen the evidence that there was an upcoming threat. He's having to take Trump's word for it.

So if you want me to believe there was a plan then you are going to have to erase the last three years of his **** reign.

That's a straightfoward lie, Herman. Read the Washington Post of January the third:

Jan. 3, 2020 at 8:02 a.m. GMT

BAGHDAD — A U.S. airstrike killed Iranian Quds Force commander Qasem Soleimani in Baghdad late Thursday, the Pentagon said, a dramatic escalation of tensions between the two countries that could lead to widespread violence in the region and beyond.

Defense Secretary Mark T. Esper said the Pentagon had taken “decisive defensive action” against Soleimani, the revered military figure who had close links to a network of armed groups backed by Iran across the Middle East and, according to the United States, bore responsibility for hundreds of American deaths.

“Gen. Soleimani was actively developing plans to attack American diplomats and service members in Iraq and throughout the region,” Esper said in a statement. “This strike was aimed at deterring future Iranian attack plans.”

 

Time to quit your BS, Herman.

Edited by Rock The Boat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s time to put your own BS detector to work RTB. 

In interviews today Esper was unable to identify ANY specific information about any imminent attacks. He just blabbed on about “belief”. 

Well I will consult my Pastor about belief, from my government I want truth and facts not made up war fantasies or his gut feelings, thank you.

Edited by Surfer
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RTB, do you remember when you lost the ability to think for yourself? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or possibly there was intelligence they don’t want to share. Or maybe it’s just black and white, “everything Trump does must be wrong”

I’m no Trump supporter but I am prepared to keep an open mind about events,  it’s an odd quirk of this thread that those who claim the moral high ground of Liberalism are some of the most biased and judgmental.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m no Trump supporter but I am prepared to keep an open mind about events,

I think we all are. It is just how you perceive things in this situation.

I find it ridiculous that a nation that is actually in the Middle East, Iran, is condemned so much for wanting an influence in the region. But Saudi Arabia is welcomed with open arms and no sign of sanctions for their war in Yemen.

It is obvious that the West wants all the influence because of its dependence on oil. I can understand that. We are long standing customers and need to know we will get continued supply. We like our way of life and want it to continue.

But lets not get holier than thou about the West's political contortions in the area. Why did our Ambassador have to go to the "vigil"? He would have known it would lead to greater political consequences. And of course there is an opposition in Iran. There always has been. There was one when the Shah was supreme ruler. But he chose the West as allies and the west overlooked his barbarism. But when it suits us, the opposition are terrorists or freedom fighters.

I just do not like thought of greater tension in the area or the world. There are too many conflicts taking place now and the loss of life, property and finance is not going to improve countries who can ill afford to be caught up in it. How long will it take Syria to recover for instance? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Surfer said:

It’s time to put your own BS detector to work RTB. 

In interviews today Esper was unable to identify ANY specific information about any imminent attacks. He just blabbed on about “belief”. 

Well I will consult my Pastor about belief, from my government I want truth and facts not made up war fantasies or his gut feelings, thank you.

It's military intelligence. You don't go on Twitter and blabber to the world what you know ffs.

Step into the real world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course there is military intelligence. And then there is making stuff up to justify actions after the fact. 

The US and UK got into a war in Iraq over stuff made up, and look at the real world consequences of that. 

 

If they had intelligence that threats were "imminent" they would have been able to share that with Congress.

As both Republicans and Democrats members said they didn't - that led to follow up questions on Sunday.

 

Like the boy who cries wolf, if you lie about everything, your credibility is shot to pieces for the important stuff. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Surfer said:

Of course there is military intelligence. And then there is making stuff up to justify actions after the fact. 

The US and UK got into a war in Iraq over stuff made up, and look at the real world consequences of that. 

 

If they had intelligence that threats were "imminent" they would have been able to share that with Congress.

As both Republicans and Democrats members said they didn't - that led to follow up questions on Sunday.

 

Like the boy who cries wolf, if you lie about everything, your credibility is shot to pieces for the important stuff. 

There is no doubt on that one for sure. And Blair has still not been held to account.

Edited by Van wink

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, keelansgrandad said:

I’m no Trump supporter but I am prepared to keep an open mind about events,

I think we all are. It is just how you perceive things in this situation.

I find it ridiculous that a nation that is actually in the Middle East, Iran, is condemned so much for wanting an influence in the region. But Saudi Arabia is welcomed with open arms and no sign of sanctions for their war in Yemen.

It is obvious that the West wants all the influence because of its dependence on oil. I can understand that. We are long standing customers and need to know we will get continued supply. We like our way of life and want it to continue.

But lets not get holier than thou about the West's political contortions in the area. Why did our Ambassador have to go to the "vigil"? He would have known it would lead to greater political consequences. And of course there is an opposition in Iran. There always has been. There was one when the Shah was supreme ruler. But he chose the West as allies and the west overlooked his barbarism. But when it suits us, the opposition are terrorists or freedom fighters.

I just do not like thought of greater tension in the area or the world. There are too many conflicts taking place now and the loss of life, property and finance is not going to improve countries who can ill afford to be caught up in it. How long will it take Syria to recover for instance? 

I really don’t think Trump is that bothered about the Middle East anymore. He clearly waves the Israeli flag and any risk of Iran acquiring nuclear weapons is a red line, as is attacks on US interests in the area. But imo he would be quite happy to get as many US troops out of the area as possible, as has been demonstrated in Northern Syria with catastrophic results for the Kurds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The worry is his ME policies are being driven by his, or his supporter's financial interests. Not US security interests. 

And of course he's pro-israel because a big portion of his voters are pro-israel. 

 

Meanwhile he's lying again this morning - this time on healthcare. It really never stops, every day new lies.

 

https://www.vice.com/en_ca/article/epgn84/trump-doj-says-supreme-court-shouldnt-hear-obamacare-lawsuit-before-november-2020-election

Lies.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×