Kragar Posted January 11, 2020 Share Posted January 11, 2020 29 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said: So you dislike him for doing exactly what the US would and has also supported in the past? Hard to answer for stuff before I was born, back when a number of countries were empire-building. I never claimed the US was innocent, but when was the last time the US seized territory in an attempt to make it permanent? 34 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said: I'm sorry only an American would make that claim. If we can't agree that China is the worst (Tibet, Hong Kong, the Uighurs, their own people, etc.), there's not much to talk about. Since Putin appears to be pining for the old days, are we going to lump in Soviet activity as Russian in this discussion? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Strome Posted January 11, 2020 Share Posted January 11, 2020 35 minutes ago, SabreFan1 said: I'd like to continue this discussion, but Deb did her job and chased another person off of the board. I'm going to take a long (if not permanent) break. I'm confused?? 14 minutes ago, Kragar said: Hard to answer for stuff before I was born, back when a number of countries were empire-building. I never claimed the US was innocent, but when was the last time the US seized territory in an attempt to make it permanent? If we can't agree that China is the worst (Tibet, Hong Kong, the Uighurs, their own people, etc.), there's not much to talk about. Since Putin appears to be pining for the old days, are we going to lump in Soviet activity as Russian in this discussion? 1) when were you born? The US supported annexing in Eastern Europe not all that long ago. @CBH1926 can probably help you with that. 2) I was referring to Russia. Since 1945 the Americans have killed far more innocent people then than the Russians/Soviets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted January 11, 2020 Share Posted January 11, 2020 16 hours ago, Ryan Strome said: @Jimmy McGill Those stupid, ignorant bloody Yankees!! they often are, RS. But I went for an amazing ski this morning and now I don't care, life's too short to worry about what new idiocy America will come up with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Strome Posted January 11, 2020 Share Posted January 11, 2020 1 hour ago, Jimmy McGill said: they often are, RS. But I went for an amazing ski this morning and now I don't care, life's too short to worry about what new idiocy America will come up with. This is what I try to tell people. They're almost as brainwashed as north koreans and don't even know it. Where did you go? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted January 11, 2020 Share Posted January 11, 2020 24 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said: This is what I try to tell people. They're almost as brainwashed as north koreans and don't even know it. Where did you go? we mostly go local to Cypress Mtn on the nordic side. Its got the most vertical climbing routes for nordic in North America I'm told. Its always good for my head. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xereau Posted January 11, 2020 Share Posted January 11, 2020 The guy led deathsquads around Iran for a long time. Most recently over a thousand women were executed for not wearing veils. Good damned riddance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted January 11, 2020 Share Posted January 11, 2020 1 minute ago, xereau said: The guy led deathsquads around Iran for a long time. Most recently over a thousand women were executed for not wearing veils. Good damned riddance. no one would argue that. What I would argue is taking the guy out by assassination and the spill over from that, vs capturing him and making him stand trial. In this case it produced a trigger happy idiot that took out a passenger plane. The US shares responsibility for heightening the tensions leading to that act. What makes it even more disgusting is it was done for politics, not because he's the p.o.s. you describe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuckin_futz Posted January 11, 2020 Author Share Posted January 11, 2020 US to Iraq: Kick out our military and we will seize your central bank accounts Sat 11 Jan 2020 20:59:52 GMT US puts the petrodollar at risk The US warned Iraq that if it kicks American forces out of the country, it would lock the country out of its central bank accounts held at the New York Fed. Iraq uses the account to settle sales of oil and other international transfers. Iraq's elected legislature voted last week to expel US troops who were invited to the country to fight ISIS in 2014. The Prime Minister moved forward with those plans this week in a call with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. The threat may spark a shift away from US dollar use and pricing in the international oil trade. It could also cause other countries to reconsider keeping money or other financial assets in the United States. From the WSJ: An adviser to the prime minister, Abd al-Hassanein al-Hanein, said that while the threat of sanctions was a concern, he did not expect the U.S. to go through with it. "If the U.S. does that, it will lose Iraq forever," he said. In its most-recent disclosures from end-2018, Iraq's central bank said it held $3 billion in overnight deposits at the NY Fed. https://www.forexlive.com/news/!/us-to-iraq-kick-out-our-military-and-we-will-seize-your-central-bank-account-20200111 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted January 12, 2020 Share Posted January 12, 2020 54 minutes ago, xereau said: The guy led deathsquads around Iran for a long time. Most recently over a thousand women were executed for not wearing veils. Good damned riddance. Do you have a source for this? I wasn't able to find anything about it. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kragar Posted January 12, 2020 Share Posted January 12, 2020 4 hours ago, Ryan Strome said: I'm confused?? 1) when were you born? The US supported annexing in Eastern Europe not all that long ago. @CBH1926 can probably help you with that. 2) I was referring to Russia. Since 1945 the Americans have killed far more innocent people then than the Russians/Soviets. I'd be interested to learn more about #1, but you will need to dig deeper than US negotiations over Ukraine. The US itself is not annexing anything by force that I am aware of. As for #2, did I claim otherwise? My issue has been expansion. Despite the wars the US has been involved in, it has been quite a while since expansion has been a part of the strategy. If you want to dispute whether the US is worse than Russia, fine, especially since the difference is slimmer than with China. I suspect however that there are plenty of people outside of the US who like us better than the Russians and Chinese. Afghans (at least those not supporting the Taliban), South Koreans, Japanese (yes, despite WWII, as issues with Russia and China run deeper), Israel, to name a few. Not all of course... no one can make the claim that the whole country loves another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CBH1926 Posted January 12, 2020 Share Posted January 12, 2020 (edited) 7 hours ago, SabreFan1 said: Russia can generate EMP's that scramble electronics on naval ships that aren't properly shielded. Since Russia decided to turn that into a fun sport, the US has put the proper shielding in all of the newest naval ships and retrofitted most of the old ones. Again, as far as the carriers are concerned, they aren't meant for Russia because an attack on Russia would end the world. Giving Russia credit on stuff isn't an issue. Facts are facts, pro or anti Russia whether anyone likes them or not. Personally I don't dislike Russia, I'm just not a big Putin fan. 5 hours ago, Ryan Strome said: I highly doubt all ships are retro fitted...prove it. This just happened like 2 years ago. Carriers are not that important, I stand by that. 10 hours ago, Ryan Strome said: And certainly Russian jets could be shot down however sunk US carriers would lose far more jets. Also Russia has shown they have the capability of completing shutting down US naval ships which all but make the carriers obsolete. Both the US and Canada were sitting ducks and the Russians even flew fighter jets over head to show their ability to destroy those sitting ducks. I understand as Americans you guys don't want to give Russia credit but you're only fooling yourselves. Few years ago story started circulating on media about Donald Cook incident. I saw this story on Sputnik, Vesti, RT and Politika. Two Su 24 planes flew over destroyer Cook and using latest EW killed propulsion, Aegis system as well as all the weapon systems. After that they simulated attack on the ship, something similar happened later with Kamov helicopter. Two dozen sailors resigned and many sought psychological help, because they were terrified of this new Russian weapon. After seeing the images, it’s clear that Suhoy had “clean wings” Khibiny is ECM type of weapon that Russians have been using, the problem is it’s only on SU 30,34 and 35 aircraft. Su 24 has never been equipped with this system, not now not in 2014 or 2016. Also Khibiny is used for radio direction finding, it has no ability to “kill” ships radar system. Finally no single plane that exists today can generate enough power to shut off an entire ship. They only way to generate that kind of EW is to set of nuclear device near the target. Kremlin propaganda at its finest, which later was swallowed by Daily Mail, Fox and other western outlets. Edited January 12, 2020 by CBH1926 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Light Racicot Posted January 12, 2020 Share Posted January 12, 2020 (edited) 2 hours ago, xereau said: The guy led deathsquads around Iran for a long time. Most recently over a thousand women were executed for not wearing veils. Good damned riddance. In any case this doesn't seem to matter one iota to the US, who recently fought alongside Soleimani in order to defeat ISIS. Among other reasons this is why Trump ordering the assassination of Soleimani was a really stupid idea. Zero thought was put into taking this action, zero thought was put into how to deal with it's potential consequences, and zero thought was put into how the rest of the world would assess this. Edited January 12, 2020 by Red Light Racicot 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted January 12, 2020 Share Posted January 12, 2020 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted January 13, 2020 Share Posted January 13, 2020 More lies by the Trump administration exposed: https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/trump-authorized-soleimanis-killing-7-months-ago-with-conditions/ar-BBYTF1J?li=AAggNb9 Quote President Donald Trump authorized the killing of Iranian Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani seven months ago if Iran's increased aggression resulted in the death of an American, according to five current and former senior administration officials. The presidential directive in June came with the condition that Trump would have final sign-off on any specific operation to kill Soleimani, officials said. That decision explains why assassinating Soleimani was on the menu of options that the military presented to Trump two weeks ago for responding to an attack by Iranian proxies in Iraq, in which a U.S. contractor was killed and four U.S. service members were wounded, the officials said. The timing, however, could undermine the Trump administration's stated justification for ordering the U.S. drone strike that killed Soleimani in Baghdad on Jan. 3. Officials have said Soleimani, the leader of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps' elite Quds Force, was planning imminent attacks on Americans and had to be stopped. "There have been a number of options presented to the president over the course of time," a senior administration official said, adding that it was "some time ago" that the president's aides put assassinating Soleimani on the list of potential responses to Iranian aggression. After Iran shot down a U.S. drone in June, John Bolton, Trump's national security adviser at the time, urged Trump to retaliate by signing off on an operation to kill Soleimani, officials said. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo also wanted Trump to authorize the assassination, officials said. But Trump rejected the idea, saying he'd take that step only if Iran crossed his red line: killing an American. The president's message was "that's only on the table if they hit Americans," according to a person briefed on the discussion. Neither the White House nor the National Security Council responded to requests for comment. Bolton and the State Department also did not respond to requests for comment. U.S. intelligence officials have closely tracked Soleimani's movements for years. When Trump came into office, Pompeo, who was Trump's first CIA director, urged the president to consider taking a more aggressive approach to Soleimani after showing him new intelligence on what a second senior administration official described as "very serious threats that didn't come to fruition." The idea of killing Soleimani came up in discussions in 2017 that Trump's national security adviser at the time, retired Army Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster, was having with other administration officials about the president's broader national security strategy, officials said. But it was just one of a host of possible elements of Trump's "maximum pressure" campaign against Iran and "was not something that was thought of as a first move," said a former senior administration official involved in the discussions. The idea did become more serious after McMaster was replaced in April 2018 by Bolton, a longtime Iran hawk and advocate for regime change in Tehran. Bolton left the White House in September — he said he resigned, while Trump said he fired him — following policy disagreements on Iran and other issues. The administration of President George W. Bush designated the Quds Force a foreign terrorist organization in 2007. Four years later, the Obama administration announced new sanctions on Soleimani and three other senior Quds Force officials in connection with an alleged plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the United States. But in April, Bolton helped prod Trump to designate the entire Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps a foreign terrorist organization. White House officials at the time refused to say whether that meant the United States would target Revolutionary Guard leaders as it does the leadership of other terrorist groups, such as the Islamic State militant group and al Qaeda. Iran retaliated by designating the U.S. military a terrorist organization. The actions underscored the rising tension between the United States and Iran in the three years since Trump took office. Since Trump withdrew the United States from the Iran nuclear deal in 2018 — and his administration tightened its squeeze on Iran's economy with punishing economic sanctions — Iran has attacked U.S. military assets in Iraq with increasing aggressiveness and frequency. Iran has launched more than a dozen separate rocket attacks on bases housing Americans since October. The U.S. military blamed Kataib Hezbollah, an Iraqi militia that is part of the Popular Mobilization Forces but is backed by Iran. U.S. military and intelligence officials say the group takes direction from Iran, specifically the Quds Force. A U.S. military official in Iraq said the rockets Iran has launched at U.S. forces have become more sophisticated over time. Most attacks in October and November used 107mm rockets, which have a shorter range and less explosive power. But an attack on Ain al Asad air base in Anbar Province on Dec. 3 included 122mm rockets, with more firepower and the ability to be fired from a greater distance. They are generally launched from more sophisticated improvised rail systems, leading the U.S. military to believe the attackers were receiving new equipment and training from Iran. The largest attack was on Dec. 27, when Kataib Hezbollah launched more than 30 rockets at an Iraqi base in Kirkuk, killing a U.S. contractor and wounding four U.S. service members. The base, known as K-1 Air Base, belongs to the Iraqi military but frequently hosts forces that are part of the U.S.-led coalition assigned to Operation Inherent Resolve, the fight against ISIS. On Dec. 27, the coalition was preparing for a counter-ISIS operation, so more Americans were on the base than usual. After the attack, the United States launched airstrikes against five Kataib Hezbollah locations, three in Iraq and two in Syria, targeting ammunition and weapon supplies, as well as command and control sites. Trump signed off on the operation to kill Soleimani after Iranian-backed militia members responded to the U.S. strikes by storming the U.S. Embassy compound in Baghdad. Defense Secretary Mark Esper presented a series of response options to the president two weeks ago, including killing Soleimani. Esper presented the pros and cons of such an operation but made it clear that he was in favor of taking out Soleimani, officials said. At a meeting later, military leaders laid out the estimated number of casualties associated with each option, showing the president that killing Soleimani at Imam Khomeini International Airport late at night would involve fewer possible casualties than the other options. The strike marked a break from past administrations, which have never publicly claimed responsibility for killing senior figures from the Iranian regime or its proxies. During the height of the U.S. war in Iraq in 2006, for example, when Iranian-armed and -trained militias were planting lethal roadside bombs targeting U.S. troops, Bush administration officials debated how to confront Soleimani and his operatives in Iraq, according to four former U.S. officials. U.S. troops captured Revolutionary Guard operatives but never tried to kill Soleimani or launch attacks inside Iranian territory, former officials said. At one point, the U.S. commander in Iraq, Army Gen. George Casey, raised the possibility of designating Soleimani and his Quds Force officers as enemy combatants in Iraq, according to Eric Edelman, a former diplomat who held senior posts at the Defense Department and the White House. But in the end, the idea was ruled out as U.S. commanders and officials did not want to open up a new front in Iraq when U.S. forces were preoccupied with the fight against al Qaeda in Iraq, Edelman said. "There were a lot of us who thought he should be taken out. But at the end of the day, they decided not to do that," Edelman said. There was concern about "the danger of escalation and the danger of having a conflict with Iran while we already had our hands full in Iraq," he said. Iran responded to the assassination of Soleimani by striking bases housing U.S. forces in Iraq, and after no Americans were killed, Trump appeared to back off further military conflict. Instead, he announced new sanctions against Iran on Friday. This pretty much blows the "imminent attack" narrative out of the water....to say nothing of Bone Spurs' "four US embassies" fantasy.... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuckin_futz Posted January 17, 2020 Author Share Posted January 17, 2020 The news of 11 US troops injured in the Iranian missile attack on Jan 8 is getting wider circulation now Fri 17 Jan 2020 02:32:04 GMT The post is here from earlier: Reports of at least 11 US soldiers injured in the Iranian missile attack last week CNN is now picking this up. --- You'll recall that US officials said after the attack (16 missiles fired at US interests in Iraq from Iran) that there had been no US casualties. US President Trump tweeted "All is well". Can only assume he was briefed with incorrect intelligence. The idea the Commander-in-Chief glossed over troops with what appear to be traumatic brain injury to support the stock market is a sickening alternative. https://www.forexlive.com/news/!/the-news-of-11-us-troops-injured-in-the-iranian-missile-attack-on-jan-8-is-getting-20200117 **************************** US military confirm several US service members injured by Iranian missile attacks on January 8 Fri 17 Jan 2020 02:57:23 GMT I posted on this several hours ago here: Reports of at least 11 US soldiers injured in the Iranian missile attack last week And further as it was picked up in media following: The news of 11 US troops injured in the Iranian missile attack on Jan 8 is getting wider circulation now A major financial news wire, Reuters is now picking it up. Voice of America on it now also. *********************** Appears to have reached a new low in depravity. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldoescobar Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 Trump and Bibi = MIGA!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_Zepp Posted January 21, 2020 Share Posted January 21, 2020 On 1/11/2020 at 3:14 PM, xereau said: The guy led deathsquads around Iran for a long time. Most recently over a thousand women were executed for not wearing veils. Good damned riddance. https://babylonbee.com/news/left-admits-theyre-just-not-used-to-killing-people-who-might-fight-back Progressives Admit They're Just Not Used To Killing People Who Might Fight Back January 14th, 2020 56.6kShares 43.7kSHARE 5.9kSHARE SHARE U.S.—Many have been criticizing the left for their apparent unwillingness to say that killing terrorists is a good thing. Many suspected they just hated America or were being funded by George Soros or something. But the truth has finally come out. At long last, the left has admitted their real problem with the strike on Soleimani: they much prefer killing human beings that have no way to defend themselves and can't possibly strike back. "Blowing up terrorists limb from limb is icky and they might get mad at you," said Rogaine Jillipers, verified internet activist. "But tearing human beings limb from limb when they're in the womb and can't fight back? Now we're talking." "They'll never retaliate, they'll never say anything at all." In response to the declaration from the left, many preborn babies have begun arming themselves, causing millions of progressives to back off from their hard pro-abortion stance. (while satire, it seems damn close to the truth.......) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bishopshodan Posted January 21, 2020 Share Posted January 21, 2020 3 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said: (while satire, it seems damn close to the truth.......) Welcome back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_Zepp Posted January 21, 2020 Share Posted January 21, 2020 15 minutes ago, bishopshodan said: Welcome back. Seems the balance in the force needed it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bishopshodan Posted January 21, 2020 Share Posted January 21, 2020 8 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said: Seems the balance in the force needed it... Cool You already trotted abortion. Can we do the fallacy of racism tomorrow and work our way to religion by the end of the week? I'm just teasing you, get at it Jedi. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now