War with Iran is it imminent

[Magic Sponge]

 

Sil', meet Magic Sponge. Magic Spong, meet Sil'. You two should get along well.

 

I put you in your place yesterday.

 

Get over it, sweet cheeks.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

I put you in your place yesterday.

 

You did, the 'I didn't call you a cunt, I called you a boring cunt' part was especially damaging and hard to take.

[Magic Sponge]

 

You did, the 'I didn't call you a cunt, I called you a boring cunt' part was especially damaging and hard to take.

 

Clearly.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

Bump 

 

Cunts who tried to get a war when Bush was President are sensing their best chance now.  This is getting truly fucking scary.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

Craig Murray on the USS Maine Gulf of Tonkin WMDs Iranian attacks on tankers.

 

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2019/06/the-gulf-of-credibility/?fbclid=IwAR1d0v-Ea_SeXFJmf4mnT6j4zNx_R5Nn-dFsH2vtBQCK--c7yRtBtqSa4PM

 

I really cannot begin to fathom how stupid you would have to be to believe that Iran would attack a Japanese oil tanker at the very moment that the Japanese Prime Minister was sitting down to friendly, US-disapproved talks in Tehran on economic cooperation that can help Iran survive the effects of US economic sanctions.

 

The Japanese-owned Kokuka Courageous was holed above the water line. That rules out a torpedo attack, which is the explanation being touted by the neo-cons.*

 

The second vessel, the Front Altair, is Norwegian owned and 50% Russian crewed (the others being Filipinos). It is owned by Frontline, a massive tanker leasing company that also has a specific record of being helpful to Iran in continuing to ship oil despite sanctions.

 

It was Iran that rescued the crews and helped bring the damaged vessels under control.

 

That Iran would target a Japanese ship and a friendly Russian crewed ship is a ludicrous allegation. They are however very much the targets that the USA allies in the region – the Saudis, their Gulf Cooperation Council colleagues, and Israel – would target for a false flag. It is worth noting that John Bolton was meeting with United Arab Emirates ministers two weeks ago – both ships had just left the UAE.

 

The USA and their UK stooges have both immediately leapt in to blame Iran. The media is amplifying this with almost none of the scepticism which is required. I cannot think of a single reason why anybody would believe this particular false flag. It is notable that neither Norway nor Japan has joined in with this ridiculous assertion.

 

*Since this was published, we are now told that it was Iranian limpet mines wot did it.

 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

Reasons to be fearful.

 

http://www.stopwar.org.uk/index.php/news-comment/3398-why-the-risks-of-war-with-iran-are-real

 

War with Iran is closer than it has ever been. Just like in the run up to war in Iraq, there is a very powerful Washington lobby who think it is sound policy. In general, the Washington foreign policy establishment is on a rebound from the perceived timidity of the Obama years, in particular the situation with Iran is becoming tenser by the day. War can be avoided but the anti-war movement needs to be active and organised.

[TheHowieLama]

Good bounce to this thread Aot -- the discussion was happening in the Corbyn thread.

I will pose the same questions here to you.

 

Do you think the 6 attacks in the last 6 weeks are unrelated coincidence? Do you think that proof that they were flying explosives not mines exonerates Iran?

 

And now for the big one - if it isn't Iran either directly or sanctioned do you believe these are Western covert actions?

[Rico1304]

Ask him about the Skripals. 

[Rico1304]

3 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

Good bounce to this thread Aot -- the discussion was happening in the Corbyn thread.

I will pose the same questions here to you.

 

Do you think the 6 attacks in the last 6 weeks are unrelated coincidence? Do you think that proof that they were flying explosives not mines exonerates Iran?

 

And now for the big one - if it isn't Iran either directly or sanctioned do you believe these are Western covert actions?

What proof? Really interested to see it. 

[Babb'sBurstNad]

Very worrying times.

 

On a side note, Craig Murray is a nut job.

[Creator Supreme]

Before this country is complicit with gun happy yanks in bombing a country to bollocks and beyond, I'd prefer to see a bit of concrete proof that they were responsible for these attacks and the others that have happened recently!

 

Even then, I'd rather avoid the bombing bit as there tends to be a habit of killing innocent human beings!

[Jairzinho]

Hope we get beat.

[moof]

3 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

Good bounce to this thread Aot -- the discussion was happening in the Corbyn thread.

I will pose the same questions here to you.

 

(1)Do you think the 6 attacks in the last 6 weeks are unrelated coincidence? (2)Do you think that proof that they were flying explosives not mines exonerates Iran?

 

(3)And now for the big one - if it isn't Iran either directly or sanctioned do you believe these are Western covert actions?

1) no, it would seem unlikely that the incidents are unrelated. 

 

2) no, it doesn’t “exonerate” Iran, although it does expose the official US story as phoney - which is cause for alarm

 

3) I don’t know if any of us here are in the position to say that, but common sense and a substantive knowledge of historic US imperialist aggression would suggest that they might be involved, yeah. 

[moof]

3 minutes ago, Babb'sBurstNad said:

Very worrying times.

 

On a side note, Craig Murray is a nut job.

Hmm...

[Guest Pistonbroke]

3 minutes ago, Creator Supreme said:

Before this country is complicit with gun happy yanks in bombing a country to bollocks and beyond, I'd prefer to see a bit of concrete proof that they were responsible for these attacks and the others that have happened recently!

 

Even then, I'd rather avoid the bombing bit as there tends to be a habit of killing innocent human beings!

Then the right wing of politics can spread the fear amongst the weak who inevitably go along with things, regardless of the consequences. Those who don't are called traitors to national interests. 

[Red Phoenix]

US Oil Administration at it again by the looks of it after the Venezuela oil grab fizzled out. Bolton and Pompeo are off their fucking rockers and so is Trump for choosing them.

[Creator Supreme]

1 minute ago, Pistonbroke said:

Then the right wing of politics can spread the fear amongst the weak who inevitably go along with things, regardless of the consequences. Those who don't are called traitors to national interests. 

And the problem continues to escalate, frigging nightmare isn't it?

[Babb'sBurstNad]

9 minutes ago, moof said:

Hmm...

Is that a real Hmm, or one of those false flag Hmms, as befell the Skripals?

[Guest Pistonbroke]

Just now, Creator Supreme said:

And the problem continues to escalate, frigging nightmare isn't it?

 

Like a really shit roundabout mate. Ii was Göhring who said at his trial when asked about War, 'Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.'

[Jairzinho]

2 minutes ago, Red Phoenix said:

US Oil Administration at it again by the looks of it after the Venezuela oil grab fizzled out. Bolton and Pompeo are off their fucking rockers and so is Trump for choosing them.

You still have otherwise relatively sane people going along with their fairy tales though.

 

That, for me, is easily the scariest aspect of these situations. 

 

That insane, lying, warmongering, imbeciles aren't treated like the insane, lying, warmongering imbeciles that they are.

[Creator Supreme]

1 minute ago, Pistonbroke said:

 

Like a really shit roundabout mate. Ii was Göhring who said at his trial when asked about War, 'Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.'

They were spot on!

[AngryOfTuebrook]

15 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

Good bounce to this thread Aot -- the discussion was happening in the Corbyn thread.

I will pose the same questions here to you.

 

Do you think the 6 attacks in the last 6 weeks are unrelated coincidence? Do you think that proof that they were flying explosives not mines exonerates Iran?

 

And now for the big one - if it isn't Iran either directly or sanctioned do you believe these are Western covert actions?

It would be incredible if the attacks on 12th May and the attacks on Thursday were unrelated.  I strongly suspect that whoever was responsible for the 4 attacks in May was responsible for the 2 attacks on Thursday.  So, no - they are not a coincidence.  There is no evidence of Iranian involvement in any of the attacks.

 

As I said on the other thread, the USA's attempt to provide "evidence" hinged on Thursday's explosions being caused by limpet mines.  The fact that the explosions were caused by missiles destroys the USA's case against Iran; conversely, it does offer proof of the USA fabricating evidence to justify an illegal attack in the Middle East - again.

 

As for "the big one", I'll wait to see some more concrete evidence.  From what little we know so far, it fits in more with the USA's long-practised tactic of engineering an incident or fabricating a threat to justify imperialist aggression; I'm not aware of Iran having any form for randomly attacking other nation's vessels for no apparent reason.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

22 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

Ask him about the Skripals. 

You're such a helmet.

[TheHowieLama]

4 minutes ago, Pistonbroke said:

 

 It works the same way in any country.'

The mindset that propped up the Soviet Union for decades

[Section_31]

Tuesday.