Quassim Solemani is Dead

Author: Vader

Posts

Total: 292
ResurgetExFavilla
ResurgetExFavilla's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 627
3
2
7
ResurgetExFavilla's avatar
ResurgetExFavilla
3
2
7
-->
@Greyparrot
Iran already has strained relations with many countries. Closing the strait would ensure a global coalition against them, maybe even getting Russia to denounce them as well.
It would not. Russia and China are resource-rich with many land-based pipelines flowing in and out. Russia and China want to crack our global hegemony, and this would be a perfect instance where it would hurt us way more than it would hurt them. They also know exactly what would happen to one of our carrier groups in the Gulf, and would relish seeing it happen. This war could easily be the equivalent of the historical confrontations between England/Russia and Japan: a collision of new technology/tactics with outdated, ossified SOP that upends the traditional world order. This is also why the conflict has a possibility of going global.

This is what Russia would do:

1. Use the soaring oil prices to increase their influence over Europe. We have been drilling so much to drive down the price of fossil fuels, which has hurt their economy and their influence. Soaring oil prices would be a godsend for them.

2. Sell weapons into Iran, which would bleed over the border into Shi'a areas in Iraq and Syria, igniting regional proxy wars and eroding our influence.

3. Reinforce their positions in the Arctic and Black Sea (Crimea) while we are distracted.

China, similarly, will focus on the Belt and Road and on solidifying their hold on the South China Sea and Strait of Malacca, the most important shipping lane in the world.

Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,992
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@ResurgetExFavilla
You're right China would actually suffer far more than Russia if the straits were closed off.
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,167
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@ResurgetExFavilla
He already escalated and guaranteed an Iranian response. The killing of Suleimani incenses and unites the PEOPLE of Iran. If the leadership tries to stop escalation, it will undermine their own power at this point. They have no choice.

An attack on American soil is an escalation my friend. This was a response. He’s not Obama who’d send 1.4 billion in cash just to appease the mullahs
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,167
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@ResurgetExFavilla
Iran has the capability to close the Strait of Hormuz and to harass traffic through the Bab-el-Mandeb through Shi'a proxies. This will cripple global shipping, especially oil traffic, and would trigger a worldwide economic crash. We would have to respond by sending our Navy to the Persian Gulf, a situation which will NOT end well for us.

They can’t close the Strait with the USS Harry S. Truman operating in the Persian Gulf lol. Not to mention countless American destroyers and cruisers in the areas. And thanks to Trump, the US is energy independent, affecting us much much less pressuring other nations to take action instead. Iran has no option except for its proxies which just give us another excuse for more air strikes. Simple.
ResurgetExFavilla
ResurgetExFavilla's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 627
3
2
7
ResurgetExFavilla's avatar
ResurgetExFavilla
3
2
7
-->
@Greyparrot
As the largest oil importer in the world, China would be hit hard. But the end result of that would be bad for us: China would seek replacement oil from the most reliable, closest source: Russia. A pipeline runs through Kazakhstan right into China. So we would drive the two other biggest rivals of America closer together just when we should be splitting them apart.

So what's the upside? There's plenty of upside to the Saudis, who bribe Trump and many other Congressmen. The Quds Forces has been one of the main foils to Saudi-sponsered terror in the Middle East, as well as their main rivals both in Iraq and on the Arabian Peninsula. There's also plenty of upside for Israel, a parasitic nation which bribes our congressmen, spies on us, sells our military secrets to foreign countries, and receives exorbitant aid packages from us despite being one of the wealthiest countries on earth. The Quds force don't target Americans outside of the Middle East by and large, mostly focusing on American military targets engaged in proxy conflicts. Their main target, as well as that of Hezbollah (to whom they are tied), is Israel.

And that's what the warmongers will never mention: there are different kinds of 'terrorists'. Shi'a terrorists typically target Sunni groups like ISIS and Al Qaeda and Israeli targets, going after American personnel only when we're engaging in operations within Shi'a territory. These groups almost never target Western countries, largely fighting asymmetric insurgency battles and proxy wars in their own back yards. Sunni (especially Salafi) terror groups, on the other hand, do not. They are the ones who organize the overwhelming majority of attacks on American and European soil.

So to anyone reading and understanding this, it must not make much sense. Why are we allied with countries like Saudi Arabia, who fund groups like ISIS and possess ties to Al Qaeda and Al Shabaab? Why do we consider a Shi'a group, which targets these groups and Israeli targets, as a super-serious threat to the US, but our CIA has been funding and arming the very groups who target us at home (Operation Timber Sycamore)? Does this make ANY sense to anyone? Why are we about to start a war with likely catastrophically bad consequences for our armed forces, and a cost in the trillions, to fight the Shi'a groups?

Well, I'll tell you. It's because Trump sold out. He promised us an America First foreign policy, which put our interests first and kept us out of Middle East quagmires. But he's not exercizing an America First foreign policy. He's exercizing an Israel First and Saudi First foreign policy. And he's not the only one. Israel buys out and threatens the vast majority of American Congressmen. If they go against Israeli interests, their primary opponents will see a sudden influx of cash from a dispersed network of Israeli PACs run by dual citizens of the US and Israel. If they play ball, they will get nice free trips to Israel with VIP treatment and healthy campaign donations.

We're worried about RUSSIAN interference in US election? The Saudis are renting out extra rooms in Trumps hotel to feed money into his business, and mysteriously seem to get anything they want out of him. Why isn't Congress investigating that!? Well, it's because most of them have half their bodies in the trough as well. That's why we're funding the same Syrian terrorist groups that want to kill us. It's why we're selling bombs to the Saudis that end up being launched at school-buses full of Shi'a children in Yemen. It's why we just killed a national hero to Shi'a Muslims not just in Iran, but in Iraq, Syria, and Yemen as well, right after he just got done helping us clean ISIS's clock. This is why Trump wants to send your buddies, your family, to go bleed out in the Middle East. Not to avenge fallen Americans; we're allied with the people who funded the groups that killed most of them. It's because Saudi Arabia wants to project its power further into Iraq. It's because if the Shi'a militias start to gain a foothold in Iraq and Syria, Israel will feel threatened. That's why Trump wants to send your sons and daughters to die. That's not what I voted for.

Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,992
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@ResurgetExFavilla
We can only hope for lemonade at this point.
ResurgetExFavilla
ResurgetExFavilla's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 627
3
2
7
ResurgetExFavilla's avatar
ResurgetExFavilla
3
2
7
-->
@ILikePie5

Iran has the capability to close the Strait of Hormuz and to harass traffic through the Bab-el-Mandeb through Shi'a proxies. This will cripple global shipping, especially oil traffic, and would trigger a worldwide economic crash. We would have to respond by sending our Navy to the Persian Gulf, a situation which will NOT end well for us.

They can’t close the Strait with the USS Harry S. Truman operating in the Persian Gulf lol.
They can easily close the strait. You don't need to sit a bunch of ships there standing bravely, flags snapping in the wind. You mine it or resort to asymmetric tactics.

Not to mention countless American destroyers and cruisers in the areas.
All of those destroyers and cruisers will be blown out of the water by maneuverable, small boat suicide attacks, advancing mines, and ship-killing cruise missiles. We've done wargame simulations against Iran in the Persian Gulf. It ended up with most of the carrier group at the bottom of the sea, and 20,000 dead US personnel. It was such a humiliation that they restarted the simulation with handicaps on the Iranian side, and the US officer who led that side resigned in disgust because they were choosing to prioritize making a flattering report to the Pentagon over actually addressing the weaknesses in the US Navy to asymmetric naval warfare. We've been using our carrier groups as floating artillery for so many years that we're completely unequipped for a real naval engagement. Look up Millennium Challenge 2002.
And thanks to Trump, the US is energy independent, affecting us much much less pressuring other nations to take action instead.
Being energy independent does absolutely ZERO to offset a global economic collapse. Also, we aren't energy independent. We import about 9 million barrels of crude a day.

Iran has no option except for its proxies which just give us another excuse for more air strikes. Simple.
Air strikes don't win a war. Iran is extremely mountainous, with notoriously fanatical fighters and arms flowing in from Russian and possible Chinese allies. It would be a nightmare to invade.
ResurgetExFavilla
ResurgetExFavilla's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 627
3
2
7
ResurgetExFavilla's avatar
ResurgetExFavilla
3
2
7
-->
@ILikePie5
He already escalated and guaranteed an Iranian response. The killing of Suleimani incenses and unites the PEOPLE of Iran. If the leadership tries to stop escalation, it will undermine their own power at this point. They have no choice.
An attack on American soil is an escalation my friend. This was a response.

There's really no response to that as you clearly don't know what either of those words mean. An attack on an embassy is a provocation. A non-escalatory response would be to deploy troops to defend the embassy or launch some strikes on proxy groups. If taking out a key regional political figure with a drone strike isn't an escalatory response then the term has no meaning.

He’s not Obama who’d send 1.4 billion in cash just to appease the mullahs
But he is Obama who'd destabilize an entire region of the Middle East and waste trillions of dollars because Israel yanked on his leash.
ResurgetExFavilla
ResurgetExFavilla's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 627
3
2
7
ResurgetExFavilla's avatar
ResurgetExFavilla
3
2
7
BTW, we're contemplating wasting trillions on this, but still no wall. Still no infrastructure bill. Still no mandatory e-verify.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,992
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@ResurgetExFavilla
BTW, we're contemplating wasting trillions on this, but still no wall. Still no infrastructure bill. Still no mandatory e-verify.

All of this has to start with Congress.
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,167
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@ResurgetExFavilla
They can easily close the strait. You don't need to sit a bunch of ships there standing bravely, flags snapping in the wind. You mine it or resort to asymmetric tactics.

Assuming we sit there, correct. The military isn’t stupid lmao.


All of those destroyers and cruisers will be blown out of the water by maneuverable, small boat suicide attacks, advancing mines, and ship-killing cruise missiles. We've done wargame simulations against Iran in the Persian Gulf. It ended up with most of the carrier group at the bottom of the sea, and 20,000 dead US personnel. It was such a humiliation that they restarted the simulation with handicaps on the Iranian side, and the US officer who led that side resigned in disgust because they were choosing to prioritize making a flattering report to the Pentagon over actually addressing the weaknesses in the US Navy to asymmetric naval warfare. We've been using our carrier groups as floating artillery for so many years that we're completely unequipped for a real naval engagement. Look up Millennium Challenge 2002.
You’re really telling me that the same result that happened in 2002 will happen in 2020? You don’t even know what you’re saying dude. In 18 years the technology has expanded exponentially especially considering we spend drastically higher amounts of money for defense spending. We have bases all over the Middle East and we have ships as well. All fortified over the last two decades while Iranian technology remains the same.Oh and I forgot, we have the nukes too. It would be foolish for them to escalate it.

Being energy independent does absolutely ZERO to offset a global economic collapse. Also, we aren't energy independent. We import about 9 million barrels of crude a day.
And nations will try to prevent a global economic collapse. That’s what Greyparrot was saying earlier. As for energy independent. I suggest you look up the definition first. Energy independence means that we are a net exporter, meaning we have sufficient energy for ourselves. Thanks to Trump btw.

Air strikes don't win a war. Iran is extremely mountainous, with notoriously fanatical fighters and arms flowing in from Russian and possible Chinese allies. It would be a nightmare to invade.
You don’t need to invade to win. Just dissolve the enemies’ morale and will to fight. This is all however assuming that Iran escalates, which they know is suicide against the worlds best military.
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,167
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@ResurgetExFavilla
There's really no response to that as you clearly don't know what either of those words mean. An attack on an embassy is a provocation. A non-escalatory response would be to deploy troops to defend the embassy or launch some strikes on proxy groups. If taking out a key regional political figure with a drone strike isn't an escalatory response then the term has no meaning.

As I mentioned earlier, Iran has been escalating its attacks. It started with the Oil Tankers. Trump didn’t do much. Then Iran shot down a US Military drone. Trump did nothing. Then Iran killed an American contractor and stormed the embassy. If that’s not escalation then I don’t know what is. What Trump did was retaliate, something the Obama Administration couldn’t do.

But he is Obama who'd destabilize an entire region of the Middle East and waste trillions of dollars because Israel yanked on his leash.
You’re an anti-Semite for not supporting a Jewish State and instead succumbing to the Iranian cries for Death to Israel.


Tell me one thing. Do you agree that Soleimani should’ve died for what he did?
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,167
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@ResurgetExFavilla
BTW, we're contemplating wasting trillions on this, but still no wall. Still no infrastructure bill. Still no mandatory e-verify.

The wall is being built as we speak. Infrastructure bill is Congress and E Verify is Congress. Guess the problem lies with Congress. Wait not Congress as a whole, Democrats who were wanting to impeach him since Day 1. 
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,167
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@Greyparrot
We can only hope for lemonade at this point.

He’s an islamophobe and an anti-semite. Pretty simple. 
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,992
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@ILikePie5
Energy independence means that we are a net exporter, meaning we have sufficient energy for ourselves. Thanks to Trump btw.

We are not precisely independent yet as there are certain grades of oils that are cheaper for us to import, but we definitely do not need the Saudis anymore as the sole supplier of that oil.

ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,167
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@Greyparrot

We are not precisely independent yet as there are certain grades of oils that are cheaper for us to import, but we definitely do not need the Saudis anymore as the sole supplier of that oil.

Meh semantics 🤷‍♂️
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,992
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@ILikePie5
Venezuela has 3x the amount of Saudi reserves. jus sayin.
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,167
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@Greyparrot
Venezuela has 3x the amount of Saudi reserves. jus sayin.

Damn commies
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,616
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Vader
War takes various aggressions by different countries to start up.

Not when one is speaking of an Islamic State, it doesn't.. One only has to write a novel or even draw a cartoon and  most Islamic nations want  to kill all westerners.

Qassem Suleimani was a terrorist and all administrations before knew he was. He was clever and ruthless and behind and involved in  many terrorist operations  in the Middle East and Africa.

I personally don't know if this was a preemptive strike to save the lives of Americans. I believe going by recent events that Trump has been pretty tolerant and has shown restraint and has not been the warmongering trigger happy racist sex mad tyrant the left are desperate to have  him to be.



n8nrgmi
n8nrgmi's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,499
3
2
3
n8nrgmi's avatar
n8nrgmi
3
2
3
-->
@ILikePie5
why would you think iran wouldn't escalate the situation? all they have to do is use their proxies, their funded terrorist groups. we can't just nuke or strong arm our way out of that. we can bomb more motherfuckers, but it's just swatting flies at that point. the thing is, we'd be swatting a bunch more flies. they dont care if they die or lose people. thus, there would be more terrorism going on from iran, and nothing we can do but try to manage a situation made worse by trump
n8nrgmi
n8nrgmi's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,499
3
2
3
n8nrgmi's avatar
n8nrgmi
3
2
3
-->
@Greyparrot
yes i would tolerate some terrorism happening. i would use limited responses to manage those situation. see my last post above to the pie guy for how trump made things worse. 
Vaarka
Vaarka's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 696
2
1
5
Vaarka's avatar
Vaarka
2
1
5
WW3 get hype
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@ILikePie5
Oh and I forgot, we have the nukes too. It would be foolish for them to escalate it.
The fool is you and those who support Trump another stupid escalating the situation stunt by this immoral, corrupt narcissist brain. Distract from his impeahcment and all of his associates who are in prison or soon going to prison.



ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@Greyparrot
All of this has to start with Congress.
All of this started with you cult followers lickin this dictators narcissist ego from day one.

People around here like to poo poo ideas of nuclear WW3.   If we at war with Iran, we can only hope it does not somehow ignite Pakistan{ hydrogen bombs } and India { hydrogen bombs } hot bed of hate.

Pakistan >< India

USA/Israel >< Iran-? ? ? { Russia-China }

Kim Ung Poo, like Orange-bad-man, may not like not being on front page, and push nuclear button to keep his ego on par with other hydrogen bomb front page players.

So if the any insanity above begins, where does it end?  Who are the sane, mature, responsible adults who are in positions of authority that are going stop those who are stupid enough to start WW3?






Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,992
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@n8nrgmi
I guess we will see how it plays out. many critics thought JFK and Reagan provoked WWIII with their actions as well at the time, but we know better from history.
Vader
Vader's avatar
Debates: 30
Posts: 14,984
5
8
11
Vader's avatar
Vader
5
8
11
-->
@Vaarka
Rare Vaarka sighting 
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,167
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@n8nrgmi
why would you think iran wouldn't escalate the situation? all they have to do is use their proxies, their funded terrorist groups. we can't just nuke or strong arm our way out of that. we can bomb more motherfuckers, but it's just swatting flies at that point. the thing is, we'd be swatting a bunch more flies. they dont care if they die or lose people. thus, there would be more terrorism going on from iran, and nothing we can do but try to manage a situation made worse by trump

Peace through strength buddy. Look it up. Your buddy Obama used air strikes 2800 times. 
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,992
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@ILikePie5
The only time appeasement stopped or slowed oppression, aggression, and terror historically was...never.
n8nrgmi
n8nrgmi's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,499
3
2
3
n8nrgmi's avatar
n8nrgmi
3
2
3
-->
@ILikePie5
you evaded the question. i pointed out that iran can increase its terrorism against us and all we can do is try to manage a worse sitatuion. after i pointed that out, your non response was 'peace through strength'. how does that negate that they could and probably would increase their terrorism against us? 
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,167
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@n8nrgmi
you evaded the question. i pointed out that iran can increase its terrorism against us and all we can do is try to manage a worse sitatuion. after i pointed that out, your non response was 'peace through strength'. how does that negate that they could and probably would increase their terrorism against us? 

Avoid direct conflict with Iran = peace through strength. What do you mean about terrorism? How?

Let me ask you a question. What should Trump have done after the Iranians assaulted our embassy and killed an American?