US and Iran conflict thread. ( merged threads)
- Thread starter TEOTWAWKI inc.
- Start date
holdover
.475 A&M Magnum
For us it was,
spat
.950 JDJ
How can you possibly say Iran has more influence than they used to with a straight face ?
They used to be feared, not anymore.
UAE is actively striking them.
Half the region wants them gone.
Gulf allies privately make case to keep fighting until Iran is decisively defeated | PBS News Gulf allies privately make case to keep fighting until Iran is decisively defeated
spat
.950 JDJ
In what possible way does Iran control the straight ?
spat
.950 JDJ
Along with 2 other authors from London and Dubai.
Where else would you expect reporters on middle eastern affairs to be located ?
"That news about the Vietnam war must be bullshit, the reporter was in Saigon".
Steal2B
.700 Nitro Express
In fact, that was not my focus, there was a long string of inaccurate statements in this thread by a few posters. Some were slightly off others were outrageous. While we are on topic of Israel and Hamas .... Israel owns a piece of it but certainly did not create Hamas.
If you want to tell the truth, Sheikh Ahmed Ismail Hassan Yassin the Palestinian politician (the nearly blind quadriplegic oft photo oped from his wheelchair), member Muslim Brotherhood, member of a branch of the PLO, and imam is the founder of Hamas.
The Israel connection to Yassin is most accurately viewed as a comedy of errors .
Yassin was in the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood and in 1973 he started the Islamic charity Mujama al-Islamiya in Gaza. Six years later in 1979 this charity was recognized by Israel and Israel "discreetly" funded them under the logic that the Islamic schools, mosques, and food charities of Mujama al-Islama under Yassin would compete with and weaken the secular nationalist PLO in Gaza. The logic and intelligence was flawed in that the support given to the charity was used in part to stockpile weapons to use against Israel.
In the early 80s, Israeli funding of Yassin "charities" dried up after Yassin was arrested for secretly stockpiling weapons.
In 1985 Yassin was released as part of the Jibril Agreement (this was essentially an emptying of the Israeli prisons with a prisoner exchange of over one thousand muslim bombers, weapon hoarders, terrorists, etc for three Israelis captured during the 1982 Lebanon War). The emptying of the prisons for three Israeli soldiers was widely criticized, and the negotiators' careers ended. In hindsight it was a costly strategic failure.
Two years later 1987 Yannin founded Hamas and many of the released Muslim Brotherhood, PLO, and Jihad prisoners formed the core of Hamas.
In 1987, during the First Intifada, Yassin co-founded Hamas with Abdel Aziz al-Rantisi, originally calling it the "paramilitary wing" of the Palestinian Muslim Brotherhood.
In hindsight a number of strategic missteps arguably enabled the birth of Hamas, but it's disingenuous to claim Israel created Hamas.
After Hamas was founded, Yassin was arrested by Israel in 1989 (2 years after he found Hamas).
Yassin was released in a prisoner exchange again in 1997 for the release of 2 Mossad agents from Jordan. Yassin was physically feeble and "promised" on the conditon of his release he would stop calling for the bombing of Israel. Yassin lied and was eventually assassinated in early 2004 (apparently with PM Sharon overseeing the assassination of the founder of Hamas).
Last edited:
holdover
.475 A&M Magnum
I said dont use pro Israeli sources , which you did. Point is, your sources are biased.Thats what Im getting at. location has little to do with it .
Like me pointing out how great the Russian army is doing according to Tass. Doesn't hold a lot of weight
Last edited:
holdover
.475 A&M Magnum
They can control the shipping lanes with mines drones antiship missiles Artillery .Commercial ships cant pass through without insurance . Loyds of London wont insure them , so the ships cant move. So even just a threat to hit shipping , stops shipping through the straight
spat
.950 JDJ
And your definition of of a "pro Isreali source" is any source that reports anything favorable to the Isrealis ?
I'm starting to see why your view of the world is so distorted.
spat
.950 JDJ
So, by that definition we control the straight.
Nobody can pass without our permission either.
Probably Oman can do it too.
We have a complete naval blockade of Iran, so they don't control anything.
And ships *are* sailing through the straight, every day.
Steal2B
.700 Nitro Express
3.4M views · 56K reactions | Iran Just Played Its Last Card | The Parallel Truth
Iran Just Played Its Last Card
www.facebook.com
Steal2B
.700 Nitro Express
holdover
.475 A&M Magnum
Well I can see why yours is for sure.
Possibly it could be that a Jewish reporter from Tel aiv , is probably going to slant the story. I know that sounds so far far fetched to you because you tend to be guilty of what you just accused me of .
You have no concept of how the media really works . Even ours here in the US ,You sound like a parrot with no thoughts of your own
Last edited:
holdover
.475 A&M Magnum
How old are you? You asked how Iran can possibly control the straights, ( why you would even ask such a lame question speaks to your misundering of whats happening there) I gave an answer, and your response is so do we? WTF?
Yes that does seem to be the obvious situation . If the US actually controlled the straight, Iran could do nothing to stop it , but thats not the case. the straights are in contention with both sides capable of shutting it down . there is no clear ""winner"" at this point as gas prices in Europe are around $8.50 a gallon
spat
.950 JDJ
I understand them fine.
They all have an agenda and they all lie.
You seem to think you can trust anyone who hates the west.
holdover
.475 A&M Magnum
I dont think you have the slightest clue .
No I dont trust anyone at all . they all lie , You have this concept of myside and their side, good guys vs bad guys . they are all fucking bad . They are ass rapeing the American working man , and small business owner . and do what ever the fuck they want , they borrow money and were on the hook for it , They are never arrested and tried
The US, Israel, Britian China Russia , you name it, all of them have committed war crimes and atrocity's , all of them lie to the people . but some people arent hip to the bullshit yet. We lost our country years ago, this aint 1900 . Shit We cant even trust our voting anymore
spat
.950 JDJ
And yet you simp for Russia and Iran in every post because they're against us.
Yes, there are no good guys. There are only bad guys and worse guys.
But my side is unequivocally the United States of America, warts and all. It is by far the "least bad" of the available options.
Isreal is by far the "least bad" faction in the entire Middle East.
You can try to be the "good guys", that was basically the Carter foreign policy. He was probably the the most "good guy" president we've had in 100 years.
Spoiler alert, it did not go well for anyone.
spat
.950 JDJ
You claimed that the lack of traffic means Iran controls the straight.
I pointed out the inconsistency in your logic.
It's quite a clear double standard you have for anything on the west.
You claim that if Iran can shut down the straight, then they control it, but you don't apply that same standard somehow to us. Why not ?
You claimed that Russia was justified physicallh invading Ukraine because they didn't like that they were getting friendly with NATO.
But, somehow Iranian proxies launching actual attacks against Isreal and Us isn't sufficient justification for us to just eliminate their ability to launch those attacks.
So, pick one set of standards and apply them universally if you don't want to look ridiculous.
holdover
.475 A&M Magnum
no. thats not what I said . Neither Iran nor the US actually ""control"" the straight. either side can stop shipping so in a round about way they control the straight just as much as the US does . Iran has weapons that blow the shit out of cargo tanks if they choose . the US really cant stop that at this point .
How do you even come to the conclusion that the US controls the straight is beyond me. Unless they can stop Iran from attacking cargo ships they dont control it . Its contested waters at this point
no, not at all. There are many independent agency's that are far more accurate then the main stream . But I do not agree with some of policys of the west, that is certain. I am against globalism, I am against foreign lobbyists , I am against influence from major corporations I am againts the corruption. I am all for the American people. I believe our government has been covertly hijacked and its my duty as a citizen to say something about it .
No they dont actually control it nor more than we do . As long as they have the ability and will to sink ships they have a say in what happens there , same as The US . This is contested waters ,not sure why you cant grasp the concept .
I claimed Russia was justified because during the break up of the Soviet Union an agreement was made that Ukraine must remain neutral and any violation of this agreement would provide Russia with a causus belli for war , Ukraine agreed to this agreement . Russia had openly said every year since then that Nato encroachment was a red line and that Russia sees it as a serious threat and would not tolerate it. it had been their policy for 35 years , no secret.
Because you dont understand it, doesnt make me look ridiculous.
So you think Russia has justifcation to launch a nuclear war because were arming proxies?
but I suppose Isreal can make the case for attacking Iran, although its weak. but whats more important and what Im concerned with is they lack the ability to take over Iran and left it to us. thats my sore point
holdover
.475 A&M Magnum
sure, for us citizens it is . that doesnt mean I agree to all its foreign policy's , not at all . We can do a hell of a lot better.
Couldnt disagree more. the Zionists in control in Israel are insane , They mirror the Third Reich ,
you'd have to go back a little further back than that . Carter was weak because we just came out of a ten year war that cost billions and achieved nothing
Now Ronald Regan was a strong president but did not lead us into a major conflict either
spat
.950 JDJ
holdover
.475 A&M Magnum
Yup. what part dont ya get??
Iran can dictate whether cargo ships come and go. As can the US , both sides have some control over what happens
spat
.950 JDJ
That's not remotely what the Budapest memorandum said.
Ukraine agreed to give up their nuclear weapons in exchange for guarantees from Russia and the west to actively defend them.
How on earth you think they are obligated to remain a quasi satellite state of Russia forever is beyond me.
The Soviet union ended. Ukraine was as independent as Russia. They owed nothing to anyone.
If we'd actually honored *our* commitment from the Budapest agreement we would have rolled tanks into Ukraine to defend them from the Russians as soon as that invasion started.
They gave up nuclear weapons that would have completely prevented the Russian invasion in exchange for guarantees that we would defend them. Bet they really regret that now.
Imagine how much better off Ukraine would be today if they're never agreed to that. They got double crossed by everyone.
holdover
.475 A&M Magnum
Thats because it was not the Budapest memorandum.
spat
.950 JDJ
They part where you said "they control the shipping lanes" and then turn around and then do a 180 and that's not what you said.
spat
.950 JDJ
What was it then ?
And what did Ukraine get in exchange for surrendering their sovereignty ?
holdover
.475 A&M Magnum
Security assurances to Russia were written into thier constitution. Russia made it perfectly clear that NATO forces would not be tolerated in Ukriane . James Baker stated not one inch eastward
in 2014, Ukraine’s parliament voted to abandon its non-aligned status. [1] vowing to turn over the Russian naval bases to NATO
On 23 December 2014, the Ukrainian parliament voted to end Ukraine's non-aligned status, a step harshly condemned by Russia.[86][109] The new law stated that Ukraine's previous non-aligned status "proved to be ineffective in guaranteeing Ukraine's security and protecting the country from external aggression and pressure" and also aimed to deepen Ukrainian cooperation with NATO "to achieve the criteria which are required for membership in the alliance."[110]
On 29 December 2014, Poroshenko vowed to hold a referendum on joining NATO.[111]
On 8 June 2017, the Ukrainian parliament passed a law making integration with NATO a foreign policy priority.[116] In July 2017, Poroshenko announced that he would seek the opening of negotiations on a MAP with NATO.[117] In that same month, President Poroshenko began proposing a "patronage system" that tied individual Ukrainian regions to various European States
Yes, Ukraine initially declared its intention to be a neutral, non-nuclear, and non-bloc state as it achieved independence from the Soviet Union. This concept was first outlined in the 1990 Declaration of State Sovereignty and later reiterated by Ukrainian leadership during the lead-up to the December 1991 independence referendum.
The original vision for Ukrainian neutrality involved several key facets:
Shift in Policy: After the Russian annexation of Crimea and the invasion of the Donbas in 2014, Ukraine’s parliament voted to abandon its non-aligned status. [1]
2010 Non-Aligned Status: Under President Viktor Yanukovych, Ukraine passed legislation officially codifying this "non-aligned status," explicitly forbidding Ukraine from joining military or political alliances.
Declaration of State Sovereignty of Ukraine, passed on July 1, 1990, which declares that the country has the “intention of becoming a permanently neutral state that does not participate in military blocs and adheres to three nuclear free principles…” (Declaration of State Sovereignty 1990: Art. IX). Furthermore, the Ukrainian Constitution, which bases itself on the Declaration of Independence of August 24, 1991, contains these basic principles of non-coalition and future neutrality.
IX. FOREIGN AND HOMELAND SECURITY
The Ukrainian SSR shall have the right to its own Armed Forces.
The Ukrainian SSR shall have its own internal troops and state security bodies, subordinated to the Verkhovna Rada of the Ukrainian SSR.
The Ukrainian SSR shall determine the procedure for performing military service by citizens of the Republic.
Citizens of the Ukrainian SSR shall serve active military obligation, generally, within the territory of the Republic and shall not be employed for military purposes beyond its limits without consent of the Verkhovna Rada of the Ukrainian SSR.
The Ukrainian SSR ceremoniously proclaims its intention to become a permanently neutral state in the future, which will be out of military blocks and will be committed to three non-nuclear principles: not to accept, not to produce and not to acquire the nuclear weapon.
zakon.rada.gov.ua
in 2014, Ukraine’s parliament voted to abandon its non-aligned status. [1] vowing to turn over the Russian naval bases to NATO
On 23 December 2014, the Ukrainian parliament voted to end Ukraine's non-aligned status, a step harshly condemned by Russia.[86][109] The new law stated that Ukraine's previous non-aligned status "proved to be ineffective in guaranteeing Ukraine's security and protecting the country from external aggression and pressure" and also aimed to deepen Ukrainian cooperation with NATO "to achieve the criteria which are required for membership in the alliance."[110]
On 29 December 2014, Poroshenko vowed to hold a referendum on joining NATO.[111]
On 8 June 2017, the Ukrainian parliament passed a law making integration with NATO a foreign policy priority.[116] In July 2017, Poroshenko announced that he would seek the opening of negotiations on a MAP with NATO.[117] In that same month, President Poroshenko began proposing a "patronage system" that tied individual Ukrainian regions to various European States
Yes, Ukraine initially declared its intention to be a neutral, non-nuclear, and non-bloc state as it achieved independence from the Soviet Union. This concept was first outlined in the 1990 Declaration of State Sovereignty and later reiterated by Ukrainian leadership during the lead-up to the December 1991 independence referendum.
The original vision for Ukrainian neutrality involved several key facets:
- The 1990 Declaration: Adopted by the Ukrainian parliament in July 1990, it explicitly stated Ukraine’s intent to become "a permanently neutral state that does not participate in military blocs". [1]
- Nuclear Disarmament: As part of this neutral and non-bloc framework, Ukraine agreed to relinquish the world's third-largest nuclear arsenal (inherited from the Soviet Union). This was formalized in the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, where Ukraine joined the Non-Proliferation Treaty as a non-nuclear state in exchange for security assurances from Russia, the US, and the UK. [1, 2]
- Evolution of Policy: Ukraine maintained a "non-block" status for years, but this policy fundamentally changed after Russia's annexation of Crimea and aggression in the Donbas region in 2014. Recognizing that neutrality had not prevented territorial violations, the Ukrainian parliament voted to amend the constitution, establishing membership in the European Union and NATO as core state objectives. [1, 2, 3, 4]
Shift in Policy: After the Russian annexation of Crimea and the invasion of the Donbas in 2014, Ukraine’s parliament voted to abandon its non-aligned status. [1]
2010 Non-Aligned Status: Under President Viktor Yanukovych, Ukraine passed legislation officially codifying this "non-aligned status," explicitly forbidding Ukraine from joining military or political alliances.
Declaration of State Sovereignty of Ukraine, passed on July 1, 1990, which declares that the country has the “intention of becoming a permanently neutral state that does not participate in military blocs and adheres to three nuclear free principles…” (Declaration of State Sovereignty 1990: Art. IX). Furthermore, the Ukrainian Constitution, which bases itself on the Declaration of Independence of August 24, 1991, contains these basic principles of non-coalition and future neutrality.
Declaration of State Sovereignty of Ukraine
IX. FOREIGN AND HOMELAND SECURITY
The Ukrainian SSR shall have the right to its own Armed Forces.
The Ukrainian SSR shall have its own internal troops and state security bodies, subordinated to the Verkhovna Rada of the Ukrainian SSR.
The Ukrainian SSR shall determine the procedure for performing military service by citizens of the Republic.
Citizens of the Ukrainian SSR shall serve active military obligation, generally, within the territory of the Republic and shall not be employed for military purposes beyond its limits without consent of the Verkhovna Rada of the Ukrainian SSR.
The Ukrainian SSR ceremoniously proclaims its intention to become a permanently neutral state in the future, which will be out of military blocks and will be committed to three non-nuclear principles: not to accept, not to produce and not to acquire the nuclear weapon.
Declaration of State Sovereignty of Ukraine
Declaration; 600 on July 16, 1990 № 55-XII
zakon.rada.gov.ua
Last edited:
holdover
.475 A&M Magnum
Well it was a poor choice of words on my part,