may be rude Posted January 4, 2020 Share Posted January 4, 2020 susan rice, nat sec advisor from '13 - '17 put an op-ed out in the times, this morning. Quote Americans would be wise to brace for war with Iran. Full-scale conflict is not a certainty, but the probability is higher than at any point in decades. Despite President Trump’s oft-professed desire to avoid war with Iran and withdraw from military entanglements in the Middle East, his decision to order the killing of Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani, Iran’s second most important official, as well as Iraqi leaders of an Iranian-backed militia, now locks our two countries in a dangerous escalatory cycle that will likely lead to wider warfare. How did we get here? What are the consequences of these targeted killings? Can we avoid a worse-case scenario? The escalatory cycle began in May 2018, when President Trump recklessly ignored the advice of his national security team and the opposition of our allies in unilaterally withdrawing from the Iran nuclear deal — despite Iran’s full adherence to its terms and its efficacy in rolling back Iran’s nuclear program. Since then, the Trump administration has had no coherent strategy to constrain Iran’s program or to counter other aspects of its nefarious behavior. Mr. Trump’s “maximum pressure campaign” to impose ever more debilitating economic sanctions did not force Iran to capitulate; instead, predictably, it induced Tehran to lash out with a series of increasingly bold military provocations against Sunni Arab and Western targets while restarting important aspects of its nuclear program. Iran’s destabilizing activities in the region, notably in Syria, Yemen and Lebanon, have only intensified. At the same time, it has conducted a brutal crackdown on its civilian population. None of the Trump administration’s stated objectives have been met; if anything, the United States’ security and strategic positions in the region have weakened. In deciding to eliminate General Suleimani, Mr. Trump and his team argue they were acting in self-defense to thwart imminent attacks on Americans in Iraq and the region. This may be true, as General Suleimani was a ruthless murderer and terrorist with much American blood on his hands. Unfortunately, it’s hard to place confidence in the representations of an administration that lies almost daily about matters large and small and, even in this critical instance, failed to brief, much less consult, bipartisan leaders in Congress. Second, even if the killing of General Suleimani is justified by self-defense, it doesn’t make it strategically wise. Given the demonstrably haphazard and shortsighted nature of the Trump administration’s national security decision-making process (including calling off strikes against Iran 10 minutes before impact, inviting the Taliban to Camp David and abandoning the Kurds), it’s doubtful the administration spent much time gaming out the second and third order consequences of their action or preparing to protect American military and diplomatic personnel in the region. To assess the fallout of killing General Suleimani, we must understand that the Iranian regime cannot survive internal dissent or sustain its powerful position in the region if it backs down from this provocation. For Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, a strong response is essential. For the United States, the question is: What form will it take and how quickly will it come? One thing is clear: Americans are not safer, as Secretary of State Mike Pompeo argued on Fox News the morning after. Rather, American citizens are at greater risk of attack across a far wider battlefield than before. That is why the State Department has urged all Americans to depart not only Iraq but also Pakistan, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates. In Iraq, Iranian-backed militias have attacked United States and allied installations, and can continue to do so around the country. The government in Baghdad has declared the killing a violation of the terms of the American military presence in Iraq. We will face mounting pressure to withdraw our military and diplomatic personnel from the country. If we leave, the United States will suffer a major strategic defeat: Iran will justifiably claim victory, and the gains of the fight against ISIS will be lost as the terrorist group rebuilds. There is no hope now to revive, much less strengthen, the Iran nuclear deal, and we must expect Iran will accelerate its efforts to revive its nuclear program without constraint. The global economy is imperiled, as the Gulf States’ energy infrastructure faces the risk of an Iranian attack, and commercial shipping through the Strait of Hormuz and the larger Gulf region is threatened. United States military, diplomatic and commercial operations as well as civilian targets throughout the Middle East are in range of both Iranian missiles and terrorist cells. From Afghanistan and Europe to Africa and Latin America, Iranian proxies — once latent — can stage asymmetric attacks against American and allied targets without warning. Even in the United States, we have reason to fear that terrorist sleeper cells could be activated. Worse, we face these threats now substantially alone, as the Trump administration apparently neglected to consult or even warn our key allies and partners about the impending risks to their interests that result from killing General Suleimani. In the face of Iranian reprisals, it will be difficult for the United States to de-escalate tensions and avoid a larger conflict. Iran gets the next move. The United States has failed to deter Tehran thus far, even with the deployment of 14,000 additional American troops to the Gulf region since May. The announcement this week that the Pentagon was sending 3,500 more soldiers from the 82nd Airborne Division seems unlikely to change things. When Iran does respond, its response will likely be multifaceted and occur at unpredictable times and in multiple places. President Trump will then face what may yet be the most consequential national security decision of his presidency. If he reacts with additional force, the risk is great that the confrontation will spiral into a wider military conflict. If he fails to react in kind, he will likely invite escalating Iranian aggression. It’s hard to envision how this ends short of war. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Extralife Posted January 4, 2020 Share Posted January 4, 2020 8 minutes ago, very honest said: susan rice, nat sec advisor from '13 - '17 put an op-ed out in the times, this morning. That is truly terrifying. I would love to think that the Trump team have thought rationally about this attack...but they clearly have not. Imagine the ways the world can change for the worse due to the actions of this sociopathic president. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dingformung Posted January 4, 2020 Share Posted January 4, 2020 1 hour ago, ambergonk said: I just realized there won't be a WWIII after all because Trump doesn't have any allies left lol As for Germany, we have a government that gladly would join any US led war. We just missed out on the Iraq war because some filthy social democrats were in power but luckily this isn't the case anymore. They are in power but as the junior partner of the conservatives and they aren't real social democrats anymore, they would love to bomb Iran if it benefits them. A lot of our politicians would really like to have lucrative jobs in American companies after their political career. Our next Chancellor in 2021 will probably this BlackRock chairman Merz who would gladly follow orders from his American company. And our former defence minister Von der Leyen (pronounced: lyin') that got her kids jobs at McKinsey in exchange for stealing tax money is now the European Commission President that wants to double national defence spending and on top of that establish a European Army that could help the US army without the approval of annoying national parliaments. Too bad there are so many Iranians living here who wouldn't like it but if they complain we could just send them back home and bomb them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rubin Farr Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 5 hours ago, very honest said: susan rice, nat sec advisor from '13 - '17 put an op-ed out in the times, this morning. What is frightening, and not being said yet, is American civilians overseas might bear the brunt of their retaliation. Iran operates like a terrorist regime, and will target any resource they see as valuable, or that can provide optics to keep the regime in place, and garner the adulation of the Iranian public by playing to their desire to see a strong Iran again, always the victim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rubin Farr Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 Fucking Christ, the first two Gulf Wars didn't give him a goddamn clue?? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goDel Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 lol he'll be thinking about building trump hotels in tehran Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goDel Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 Iraq voted US out. Guess that makes Iran a more powerful presence in Iraq. Boy, US strategy is brilliant nowadays. (you get the president you deserve, you dipshits. vote this idiot out, please) https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jan/05/anti-isis-coalition-suspends-operations-as-iraqi-mps-vote-to-expel-us-troops Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ignatius Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 2 hours ago, Rubin Farr said: Fucking Christ, the first two Gulf Wars didn't give him a goddamn clue?? the laughter in the background is super scary too. none of these idiots in the room are taking this seriously. the adults left long ago. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dingformung Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 3 hours ago, goDel said: you get the president you deserve, you dipshits. vote this idiot out, please Gerrymandering, main stream media and Wall Street election interference through campaign funding, tho 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ambermonk Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 3 hours ago, goDel said: Iraq voted US out. Guess that makes Iran a more powerful presence in Iraq. Boy, US strategy is brilliant nowadays. (you get the president you deserve, you dipshits. vote this idiot out, please) https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jan/05/anti-isis-coalition-suspends-operations-as-iraqi-mps-vote-to-expel-us-troops I didn't vote for the motherfucker. I wanted him gone from day one. Can't say I blame Iraq. I don't care if that sounds like treason. We've been taken hostage by a complete madman. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dingformung Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 Just make all your lazy friends not be lazy at election day. It's easier to make 10 left leaning otherwise non-voters go vote than to convince 1 right leaning idiot to vote left. 10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
auxien Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 4 hours ago, goDel said: Boy, US strategy is brilliant nowadays. (you get the president you deserve, you dipshits. vote this idiot out, please) this is legally foreign interference in the US elections. expect the united states military to knock on your door soon (or one of our drone representatives) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goDel Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 you finished your billion times transcoding wav->flac experiment already? you should be working on your experiment instead of getting the men in black to knock on my door 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
auxien Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chenGOD Posted January 6, 2020 Share Posted January 6, 2020 so uhhh yeah, looks like el Trump might have done a wee bit of a war crime (perfidy). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squee Posted January 6, 2020 Share Posted January 6, 2020 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
may be rude Posted January 6, 2020 Share Posted January 6, 2020 (edited) Iran Abandons Nuclear Deal Limitations In Wake Of Soleimani Killing Edited January 6, 2020 by very honest 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zero Posted January 6, 2020 Share Posted January 6, 2020 I think there's a reasonable solution to this mess that would be fair to both parties - we give them donnie. "look, we're real sorry about your guy, but here's the asshole that did it, so please just take him and leave the rest of us alone, ok?" they could march him around shoving bayonets and sticks up his ass, and there'd be victory parades from tehran to san francisco. kumba-fuckin-ya! 4 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ambermonk Posted January 6, 2020 Share Posted January 6, 2020 Yeah they can have him. I sure as hell won't miss him. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joshuatxuk Posted January 6, 2020 Share Posted January 6, 2020 19 hours ago, darreichungsform said: Just make all your lazy friends not be lazy at election day. It's easier to make 10 left leaning otherwise non-voters go vote than to convince 1 right leaning idiot to vote left. This, talking honestly but non-condescendingly to co-workers who get most of their politics via Joe Rogan Experience and memes has been a lot more productive than trying to reason with my CHUD relatives, most of who have essentially become complicit fascists at this point. 6 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nebraska Posted January 6, 2020 Author Share Posted January 6, 2020 8 hours ago, Squee said: how about the people that voted for him into power and continue to shilling his behavior? no problems with them either huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dingformung Posted January 7, 2020 Share Posted January 7, 2020 Emperor Wilhelm Trump II 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goDel Posted January 7, 2020 Share Posted January 7, 2020 6 hours ago, Nebraska said: how about the people that voted for him into power and continue to shilling his behavior? no problems with them either huh? I'm a bit confused by your post. This anonymous video tries to compel viewers to protest against further escalation. And you make it sound as if it's an example of the Trump supporters who will support him into another war. (I mean, you used it as a counterexample to that tweet, right?) Also, must say that compared to some bullshit article on the newstateman (or somesuch) that was linked to on this forum, this vid makes a hell of a lot more sense. The reporting on Iran in US media tends to be heavily biased. It's practically propaganda, if you ask me. Intentionally, or unintentionally. I'm certainly no expert on the matter, but anytime you read something related to the middle east with a clear good guy/bad guy narrative, you can safely assume it's either incompetent journalism or blatant propaganda. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goDel Posted January 7, 2020 Share Posted January 7, 2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caze Posted January 7, 2020 Share Posted January 7, 2020 (edited) 4 hours ago, goDel said: Also, must say that compared to some bullshit article on the newstateman (or somesuch) that was linked to on this forum, this vid makes a hell of a lot more sense. The reporting on Iran in US media tends to be heavily biased. It's practically propaganda, if you ask me. Intentionally, or unintentionally. I'm certainly no expert on the matter, but anytime you read something related to the middle east with a clear good guy/bad guy narrative, you can safely assume it's either incompetent journalism or blatant propaganda. You think this video by some random neckbeard makes more sense than the one written by a journalist who's actually spent time in the region, has spent years developing sources and hearing stories from the people who actually live in the region? It's hilarious you mention a guy/bad guy narrative, and think the video makes a lot of sense, when the video itself is guilty of doing exactly that, just turning the tables and painting the US as the pantomime villain. Iran isn't some valiant underdog trying to defend the rights of Iraqi's to establish a sovereign state, they're an imperialist theocratic fascist state intent on establishing their own hegemonic control of the region, while killing as many Sunnis as possible. They want to do with Iraq what they've already done in Lebanon, install their own puppet government (who they'll bump off, like they did with Hariri, if they refuse to play ball). The video is naive and ignorant bullshit. There are no good guys and bad guys in this situation, just bad guys, worse guys, even worse guys and innocent bystanders. Edited January 7, 2020 by caze 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts