War with Iran is it imminent

[Section_31]

Told you, he's fucking full of shit.

 

However, he told reporters it could have been the result of human error, saying: "I find it hard to believe it was intentiona

[Duff Man]

Apparently during a recent briefing he was surprised to learn that all this shit could actually lead to war. Obviously Pompeo and Bolton would be more than happy to jump in, but I doubt Trump wants it, especially with an election around the corner.

[Section_31]

"The drone was in international waters"

 

Erm

[Strontium]

31 minutes ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

And to put that in context, it's the USA that is threatening to start the war, so what is the Iranian response supposed to be - "Give us a minute, we're not ready"?

 

I must have missed the US threatening to start a war. Do you happen to know who said it?

[Duff Man]

Are they applying his fake tan with a sandblaster these days?

 

 

[Bjornebye]

2 minutes ago, Sixtimes Dog said:

 

I must have missed the US threatening to start a war. Do you happen to know who said it?

President Trump shrugged off attacks on oil tankers in the Gulf of Oman as “minor” but said he would wage war if Iran tried to obtain a nuclear arsenal.

“I would certainly go over nuclear weapons,” Trump told Time magazine in an interview published on Tuesday, “and I would keep the other a question mark.”

 

He then Tweeted 'Iran has made a big mistake' 

[Nelly-Szoboszlai]

Christ. Nobody has suggested that America or Trump said "Ready For War." 

 

The comment was that I hope he (Trump) wasn't watching Fox News. If it was being suggested that Trump had said this, surely he'd know what was said and wouldn't have to watch Fox News to establish what was said? 

 

Nobody took anything out of context. Instead, people applied their own context to it as they're the kind of saddo who'd try to start an argument in an empty room.

 

My post was instead trying to suggest that Trump appears to be heavily influenced by Fox News and having brash, bold graphics like that might get him a bit over excited. 

[SasaS]

2 hours ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

Al Qaeda were irrelevant in Iraq largely because of the mutual hatred between them an Saddam. The Mahdi Army were opponents of Saddam, too. So, yeah, like I said, it wasn't Saddam supporters who led the resistance. 

 

You've confused me with the suggestion that the American occupation wasn’t the main reason for the insurgency against the American occupation. I've always assumed there was a link there.

The insurgency was equally fueled by the marginalization of the Sunnis and the Baath party members, as you may recall, most casualties were Iraqi and came as a consequence of sectarian strife. It continued well after the Americans left, ISIS for example. Moqtada Al-Sadr's militia was less important than the Sunni insurgency, it was fighting more for its influence in the new Iraq than against the Americans. It wasn't just Iraqi insurgents against the foreign invasion. 

 

[Red Phoenix]

That war stuff from Fox News on the previous page is fucking deranged. So is this :

 

 

 

[aRdja]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jun/21/united-airlines-halts-some-flights-mumbai-to-avoid-iran-after-drone-attack?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

 

Donald Trump reportedly gave initial approval for the military to launch strikes on Iran...

[Jairzinho]

8 hours ago, Red Phoenix said:

That war stuff from Fox News on the previous page is fucking deranged. So is this :

 

 

 

Feed him to pigs.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

11 hours ago, Sixtimes Dog said:

 

I must have missed the US threatening to start a war. Do you happen to know who said it?

What the fuck do you think Bolton is talking about when he talks about regime change?

 

Please stop pretending to be stupid. 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

10 hours ago, Red Phoenix said:

That war stuff from Fox News on the previous page is fucking deranged. So is this :

 

 

 

What he means is that the dead will be brown people who talk funny and won't disrupt the TV schedules too much.

 

So... good news.

[Numero Veinticinco]

40 minutes ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

What he means is that the dead will be brown people who talk funny and won't disrupt the TV schedules too much.

 

So... good news.

If it happens, these people are in for one hell of a shock. 

[Bjornebye]

I hope it doesn't end in war because I don't want Strontz to lose his house 

[Section_31]

3 hours ago, viRdjil said:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jun/21/united-airlines-halts-some-flights-mumbai-to-avoid-iran-after-drone-attack?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

 

Donald Trump reportedly gave initial approval for the military to launch strikes on Iran...

Yeah I'm sure he did!

[House of Dirk]

3 hours ago, Jairzinho said:

Feed him to pigs.

*David Cameron likes this.

[M_B]

What I don't get with the current drive to war with Iran is the willingness to do it without the support of allies. Normally they try to blag us into it. Maybe they are waiting for Boris to become PM.

 

Are they really that hawkish to go it alone?

[TheHowieLama]

Good take here -- 

 

 

Iran may be pursuing its own high-stakes version of a "regime change" policy too. It may see the current US administration as aggressive, but equally as indecisive and lacking support from its key western allies. By drawing the Americans into a costly and open-ended conflict, the Iranian leadership may believe that they can absorb the pain while damaging President Trump's chances in the next Presidential race. An Iranian reading of the US political scene may see the Democrats as more likely to return to some kind of nuclear deal and as more willing therefore to relax economic sanctions.

[Scooby Dudek]

20 hours ago, Red Phoenix said:

That war stuff from Fox News on the previous page is fucking deranged. So is this :

 

 

 

On a network full of cunts, that cunt is right up there at the top.

[aRdja]

12 hours ago, TheHowieLama said:

Good take here -- 

 

 

Iran may be pursuing its own high-stakes version of a "regime change" policy too. It may see the current US administration as aggressive, but equally as indecisive and lacking support from its key western allies. By drawing the Americans into a costly and open-ended conflict, the Iranian leadership may believe that they can absorb the pain while damaging President Trump's chances in the next Presidential race. An Iranian reading of the US political scene may see the Democrats as more likely to return to some kind of nuclear deal and as more willing therefore to relax economic sanctions.

That is certainly an interesting take. Could you please send through the link to the whole article?

[Jose Jones]

13 hours ago, TheHowieLama said:

Good take here -- 

 

 

Iran may be pursuing its own high-stakes version of a "regime change" policy too. It may see the current US administration as aggressive, but equally as indecisive and lacking support from its key western allies. By drawing the Americans into a costly and open-ended conflict, the Iranian leadership may believe that they can absorb the pain while damaging President Trump's chances in the next Presidential race. An Iranian reading of the US political scene may see the Democrats as more likely to return to some kind of nuclear deal and as more willing therefore to relax economic sanctions.

Haha, that is the stupidest thing I’ve seen in a long time.

[Numero Veinticinco]

Just now, Jose Jones said:

Haha, that is the stupidest thing I’ve seen in a long time.

Yeah, it's up there. 

[Mudface]

5 minutes ago, Jose Jones said:

Haha, that is the stupidest thing I’ve seen in a long time.

Exactly what I was thinking. 'Let's get the US to bomb us. That's sure to result in a Democrat president and they're well known for not being cunts'.

[Guest Pistonbroke]

Yeah, plus the small matter of the Yanks just thinking they are in charge of World affairs.