Jump to content
PurpleCanary

President Trump

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Two points.

It's clear the UK was not forewarned, asked or consulted yet we have troops in Iraq. Nor is it the first time with Trump - the Kurd 'pull-out' or indeed the now defunct Iran nuclear 'deal'.

If we have no say in the decisions taken by an erratic Trump and are simply hostages to fortune in the region - then let's get out

Secondly - all this will do is empower the populist nationalists in Iran - same as in the USA. In  many ways they both have the same unthinking mindset.

Edited by Yellow Fever
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Rock The Boat said:

How odd that Democrats are wailing like spoilt children while Iraquis and Iranians are celebrating. Your derangement would be laughable if it wasn't so tragic. At least the Democrats will never be elected to the Presidency 

How odd that racists and Islamophobes care what Iraquis and Iranians think. Odd also that if it does kick off more Muslims will be fleeing these countries, trying to get into Europe, which will set the same racists and Islamophobes off whining again. It's like they don't have any capability of long term thinking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How odd that Democrats are wailing like spoilt children while Iraquis and Iranians are celebrating. Your derangement would be laughable if it wasn't so tragic. At least the Democrats will never be elected to the Presidency 

If celebrating is burning the flags of the US, UK and Israel, then I will give the party a miss. Really Trumps Boy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Rock The Boat said:

How odd that Democrats are wailing like spoilt children while Iraquis and Iranians are celebrating. Your derangement would be laughable if it wasn't so tragic. At least the Democrats will never be elected to the Presidency 

Perhaps the UK Government “wailing” would be more to your taste then. You are being pathetic.

https://www.businessinsider.com/uk-warns-donald-trump-against-launching-war-iran-qassem-soleimani-2020-1?r=US&IR=T

Share this post


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

Secondly - all this will do is empower the populist nationalists in Iran - same as in the USA. In  many ways they both have the same unthinking mindset.

The regime in Tehran is under a lot of pressure and losing popularity, the US sanctions are hitting home,  presumably that was part of the calculation the US made and Trump felt they could afford to take this action at this moment in time. Trump wants to draw the EU and UK into taking a side and becoming more hostile towards Iran.

Share this post


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

The regime in Tehran is under a lot of pressure and losing popularity, the US sanctions are hitting home,  presumably that was part of the calculation the US made and Trump felt they could afford to take this action at this moment in time. Trump wants to draw the EU and UK into taking a side and becoming more hostile towards Iran.

You are thinking Trump has a plan at all ? Not sure anybody else does.

It's also wishful thinking that an attack on Iran (and this is what it was) will do anything other than swing the vast majority of the Iranian population behind their government and sense of national pride. It's a played for gift to the regime. Trump is playing the same card to his base as well.

No. I fear with both camps locked into their worldviews it can only get worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

You are thinking Trump has a plan at all ? Not sure anybody else does.

It's also wishful thinking that an attack on Iran (and this is what it was) will do anything other than swing the vast majority of the Iranian population behind their government and sense of national pride. It's a played for gift to the regime. Trump is playing the same card to his base as well.

No. I fear with both camps locked into their worldviews it can only get worse.

He will have a plan, it may be a poorly thought out one but it will be there, and I have no doubt he is hoping to provoke Iranian attacks against the West in an effort to get the West to come to heel and introduce sanctions.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An attack on one's Embassy is tantamount to an attack on home soil. What are you going to do when you are attacked, nothing? That's called being a doormat and no self-respecting country would tolerate such behaviour. Instead of carpeting Iran with bombs a la Obama in Syria, the President has very sensibly taken out Terrorist no. 1 and as an added bonus got Terrorist no. 2 as well. It's a message to Khamanei - we know where you are and we can take you out if we want to.

That's a brilliant piece of work by the US military and every terrorist leader around the world will be sh!tting bricks from now on, wondering if they'll be next.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

Trump wants to draw the EU and UK into taking a side and becoming more hostile towards Iran.

Assuming this is his plan, to what end does the President want the UK and EU to become more hostile to Iran? 

Share this post


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

Assuming this is his plan, to what end does the President want the UK and EU to become more hostile to Iran? 

Sanctions.......are you being deliberately dim :classic_unsure:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose it's a good distraction from his impending impeachment.......

Share this post


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

Sanctions.......are you being deliberately dim :classic_unsure:

No, just asking a question: so if it is “sanctions” to what end does he want them to do that? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, Van wink said:

Sanctions.......are you being deliberately dim :classic_unsure:

Well, it was Trump who tore up the nuclear deal that, while having some faults, was generally regarded by the rest of the world as working reasonably well.

But in any events your 'sanctions' is not an answer to Surfer's question, which was asking to what end - to what purpose - should the UK and the EU become more hostile to Iran.

Sanctions would be a way of being more hostile, but Surfer wants to know what are the specific tactical and/or strategic changes/results that would flow from that hostility. What is the answer?

PS. And while typing that Surfer has asked the same question.

Edited by PurpleCanary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump will I suspect take the view that the more Iran is squeezed through the application of sanctions the more unrest will develop within the Iranian people and there will be greater pressure from within for regime change.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Thank you Purple. 

Van Wink, I appreciate that your comments are not necessarily your point of view, maybe just an answer to my question.

Based on the images out of Iran this morning, if that was the intent, it has backfired. Anyone could have foreseen it would. When you believe - righty or wrongly - you have been attacked, the country will rally around its leaders. 

And based on the comments and vote by the Iraqi PM and Parliament this morning, if that was the intent, it has also backfired. When you kill representatives of Iraqi and Iranian governments - whether you say they sponsor terrorists or not - on Iraqi soil, and who may have been on a peace mission request by President Trump, the country will rally around its leaders. Who at this time happen to be pro-Iranian. 

Edited by Surfer
  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Thank you Purple. 

Van Wink, I appreciate that your comments are not necessarily your point of view, maybe just an answer to my question.

Based on the images out of Iran this morning, if that was the intent, it has backfired. Anyone could have foreseen it would. When you believe - righty or wrongly - you have been attacked, the country will rally around its leaders. 

And based on the comments and vote by the Iraqi PM and Parliament this morning, if that was the intent, it has also backfired. When you kill representatives of Iraqi and Iranian governments - whether you say they sponsor terrorists or not - on Iraqi soil, and who may have been on a peace mission request by President Trump, the country will rally around its leaders. Who at this time happen to be pro-Iranian. 

You are confusing several things, the images this morning would not have been unexpected, the sanctions issue is more about  long term dissatisfaction. There was also much celebration amongst the Sunni population in Iraq and other middle eastern states, which has received little coverage on mainstream tv.

As for my comments, I'm trying to imagine what Trumps strategic motives are rather than expressing my own view. There is clearly political advantage from distraction tactics, but having said that non of us know the intelligence information he was given.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those sanctions against the other paymaster in terrorism err Saudi Arabia . . . what effect are they having?

Aw siht, we need the oil. but not Iran's.

And anyway, let's be normal US and fight all our battles on somebody else's territory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Van wink said:

You are confusing several things, the images this morning would not have been unexpected, the sanctions issue is more about  long term dissatisfaction. There was also much celebration amongst the Sunni population in Iraq and other middle eastern states, which has received little coverage on mainstream tv.

Maybe there were - but the only video I could find is this one shared across several pro-Trump web sites and by Sec State Pompeo. A few hundred people at most. 

http://english.alarabiya.net/en/News/middle-east/2020/01/04/Iraqis-in-Baghdad-celebrate-death-of-top-Iranian-commander-Soleimani.html

Compared that crowd size with what's happening in Iran itself. That's the problem now; and Iran has just absolved itself from any responsibility to follow the restrictions agreed in the nuclear agreement. So this maybe was Trump (and Bolton's) plan all along, but it's fully his sh*t show now. 

https://twitter.com/FarsNews_Agency/status/1213839329216385025/photo/1

"Young people in Tehran, old people in Tehran, are uniting behind the government in a way they haven't in a very long time. ... If President Trump wanted to put the regime on the ropes, it seems to have done just the opposite." -- @RichardEngel. NBC News Chief Foreign Correspondent

Edited by Surfer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
 
"Young people in Tehran, old people in Tehran, are uniting behind the government in a way they haven't in a very long time. ... If President Trump wanted to put the regime on the ropes, it seems to have done just the opposite." -
 
If they expected anything other than this they were mugs. Protests and visible mourners were inevitably going to result from the action taken. I honestly can’t see how they could have expected anything else. 
An attack by the west of this nature will be seen by the Muslim world as an attack on their faith, that’s certainly the way the propaganda in the region will be written,  even the most moderate members in 
the Arab world and further afield will be outraged.
Edited by Van wink

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
27 minutes ago, Van wink said:
 
"Young people in Tehran, old people in Tehran, are uniting behind the government in a way they haven't in a very long time. ... If President Trump wanted to put the regime on the ropes, it seems to have done just the opposite." -
 
If they expected anything other than this they were mugs. Protests and visible mourners were inevitably going to result from the action taken. I honestly can’t see how they could have expected anything else. 
An attack by the west of this nature will be seen by the Muslim world as an attack on their faith, that’s certainly the way the propaganda in the region will be written,  even the most moderate members in 
the Arab world and further afield will be outraged.

I don't see this as yet as an 'Islamic-USA' issue. It's purely an Iran (Shia) vs USA issue. The Sunnis dont generally care  much for Iran !

That said. I'm quite sure that Trump can still make it much worse in ignorance. Sadly there will be consequences for the USA's action.

Edited by Yellow Fever

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

I don't see this as yet as an 'Islamic-USA' issue. It's purely an Iran (Shia) vs USA issue. The Sunnis dont generally care  much for Iran !

That said. I'm quite sure that Trump can still make it much worse in ignorance. Sadly there will be consequences for the USA's action.

It’s such a hugely complicated region it really is impossible to predict how things will develop. You are certainly correct about the Sunnis and as I said above Sunnis in Iraq for example were celebrating. There is overlay upon overlay of different issues at play here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, PurpleCanary said:

Well, it was Trump who tore up the nuclear deal that, while having some faults, was generally regarded by the rest of the world as working reasonably well.

But in any events your 'sanctions' is not an answer to Surfer's question, which was asking to what end - to what purpose - should the UK and the EU become more hostile to Iran.

Sanctions would be a way of being more hostile, but Surfer wants to know what are the specific tactical and/or strategic changes/results that would flow from that hostility. What is the answer?

PS. And while typing that Surfer has asked the same question.

I don't pretend to know what will be the consequences of the assassination by the US of someone I'd never heard of until that happened. But two points:

Firstly, all US presidents, and other world leaders, factor in potential local political advantage when deciding on military action. You cannot help doing that. Invading the Falklands may have been the right  thing to do, but Thatcher knew it would help her then bad polling numbers (conversely I suspect Blair realised going along with Bush on Iraq would damage him).

The problem with Trump is that his behaviour as president so far makes it likely that boosting his polling numbers was the only consideration he had (unlike Thatcher), totally irrespective of whether it was a good idea in geo-political terms.

Secondly, that if the rationale for this, with sanctions imposed, is that economic hardship will prompt the Iranian people to rise up and overthrow the current regime, then that will just be another in the long line of totally mistaken assumptions made by the US about how people in a non-western country will react to US pressure or wishes.

The US always sees things in ideological and/or purely economic terms, never understanding that a people could value their nationhood and freedom from outside control and inteference above hardship. Odd, given how the US came into being but there it is.

Share this post


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

It’s such a hugely complicated region it really is impossible to predict how things will develop. You are certainly correct about the Sunnis and as I said above Sunnis in Iraq for example were celebrating. There is overlay upon overlay of different issues at play here.

I think the next issue is what will Iran do? If it's a broad anti USA attack then that will only inflame US public opinion in exactly the same way Trump's actions have in Iran. One can hope that more thought would be applied (they will look to severely embarrass Trump and create domestic pressure on him ... ease US sanctions?) and a way to deescalate found. Else we are looking at something terrible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I suspect we will see very little direct action from Iran, maybe a few innocent  souls arrested on “trumped” up charges in Iran, a few cargo ships hassled, more likely that the insurgents that they sponsor in other regions of the Middle East, Africa and Asia will become far more active. Quite likely a rise generally in terror related incidents in the USA and possibly UK. Who knows, so difficult to predict.

A further consideration for the Iranians is that they are dealing with Trump and they are going to have think about the fact that he is “unorthodox” , it’s hard for them to predict how he will react. That could precipitate something terrible or may cause them to act with restraint.

Edited by Van wink

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems that Sec of State Mike Pompeo was behind all of this - Congress needs to get his a*s in front of them to explain. 

Meanwhile the House is not taking this action lightly.... 

 

Pompeo.jpg

Pompeo.jpg

Pompeo.jpg

Pompeo.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

×
×
  • Create New...