Worse than that, David Niven, ‘the shittest James Bond ever’
Iran
- Thread starter J.C.Decaux
- Start date
Worse than that, David Niven, ‘the shittest James Bond ever’
TheHoodedClaw
acknowledging ur soup leg
Looks like Medsar, the second tanker, is underway again with AIS switched back on. Summat definitely happened with her though.
not-bono-ever
meh
this could be the making of Johnson if he employs his (deeply hidden) smarts and makes steps to resolve UK/ Iran tensions.
he wont through
he wont through
TheHoodedClaw
acknowledging ur soup leg
I have relatives on the Navy vessels in the area
They'll be fine. Hopefully all that will happen is that their deployments are longer than expected because the convoy system through the Straits gets re-instated for a while.
elbows
Well-Known Member
kebabking
Not a Girly Swot, but I like them....
Long been known about I'm afraid - too much bread, not enough butter.
The more I think about this, the more I see taking the Iranian tanker as piracy.
It was very probably supplying oil against EU sanctions, but who can say any country or political group has the right to force their version of right and wrong on countries that aren't signatories to their laws, and use military force to do it?
Iran might well claim exactly the same thing about any ship heading to Israel or any number of other countries, so their version of law, and their right to seize ships they see as violating their interests, is equally valid (and equally wrong).
A380
How do I change this 'custom title' thing then?
Yes, because the EU is equivalent legally, morally and ethically to the Iranian Republican guard - who seem to be trying to push the rest of their country into war with America and us.
If this is what you come up with after more thinking I really worry about what you would do with some off the cuff remarks.
Iran are clearly dangerous as they put their country slap bang in the middle of a load of US military bases.
History is not really against them as:
The UK and US removed their democratically elected government
The US stuck a mass murdering dictator into power
The US didn't like the results of the mess they created
The US broke the agreement that kept the peace.
I'm not even slightly happy with dictatorships, especially ones that go around killing people, but they have a lot less fault in this epic fuck up than the US, EU, and UK have.
As for the EU, they allow arms to be sold to mass murdering states so they are hardly short of blood on their hands.
The question remains - Why does one power (or group of powers) have the right to take non-violent ships by force just because they decide it isn't piracy, but the injured party has no such right to retaliate in kind?
Hunt the cunt says
But he seems to have forgotten British troops did exactly the same thing, and did it first.
Why is one legal, but the other not when the same reason (excuse) was used by both?
Easy answer - Because one has a lot more guns and that makes it legal.
But he seems to have forgotten British troops did exactly the same thing, and did it first.
Why is one legal, but the other not when the same reason (excuse) was used by both?
Easy answer - Because one has a lot more guns and that makes it legal.
A380
How do I change this 'custom title' thing then?
Where else do you think law comes from?
Last edited:
Does that make it right?
A380
How do I change this 'custom title' thing then?
What’s that got to do with anything?
elbows
Well-Known Member
I've not seen any evidence that this is simply the Republican guards taking matters into their own hands, as opposed to it being a policy of the Iranian regime as a whole.
not-bono-ever
meh
patriots have been around for a long while, but under the saudi flag IIRC- not that this means they were ever truly saudi - didnt a few go wrong a few years ago and spectacularly trashed bits of SA ? a public display of welcoming further US boots into SA is a dangerous domestic game for the royal cabal to play
elbows
Well-Known Member
Might have been this you were thinking of?
Iran-Allied Houthis Expose Holes in Saudi Arabia’s Missile Defense
not-bono-ever
meh
thinking back to gulf war 1- the great satan spent billions bringing players onside for the looming invasion - including effectively brown paper bagging Syria, Iran and Egypt to get support or at least, to ensure no outright shows of no support. the cash was air dumped across the whole region during the buildup. fuck, they even had the Afghan Muja on board . the current US admin looks to have no paid for mates left in the region apart from israel - and they are playing a smarter longer game. this background really doesnt bode well for anyone
not-bono-ever
meh
thats the puppy. i think they had had some ropey history everywhere - knocking out allied aircraft IIRC.
ferrelhadley
There is no love between us anymore.
If someone with your obvious expertise sees no evidence the Iraqi Republican Guard have reformed and are now working for Iran, I think we can all take it as a given.
elbows
Well-Known Member
lol. Yes I used the wrong R word because the person I was responding to did the same, and I didnt pick up on it.
I wish I was an Iran expert. I only know a little bit, but I often feel the need to post because some people have odd views about Irans capabilities, that sometimes lead to the impression that war is a more readily available and desirable option for the USA etc than is actually the case.
Last edited:
elbows
Well-Known Member
Also at this rate my often-repeated comments about reasons why war with Iran is way less likely than some think are going to become out of date, potentially overridden by events. And I've no idea how well I will see that coming, if thats the direction things take.
I mean Iran is doing the sorts of things that 'we' would absolutely have loved regimes we wanted to go to war with to do, acts that we can condemn and then use as justification for our actions, largely avoiding the sorts of propaganda nightmares we saw with Iraq, where the pretext was unconvincing. As I've stated before, the fact this hasnt already lead to war tells us something about the complex realities. But I could get lazy and complacent and try to push this point too far, and then look like a fool when the missiles start hitting Iranian targets.
I see there is already some talk in the media about how this might change the equation in regards EU & UK attitudes towards the nuclear deal. Things like whether Johnson will make a major change to UK Iranian policy, eg get on-board with the new (and unclear) US stance and abandon the EU attempts to keep the nuclear deal alive.
I mean Iran is doing the sorts of things that 'we' would absolutely have loved regimes we wanted to go to war with to do, acts that we can condemn and then use as justification for our actions, largely avoiding the sorts of propaganda nightmares we saw with Iraq, where the pretext was unconvincing. As I've stated before, the fact this hasnt already lead to war tells us something about the complex realities. But I could get lazy and complacent and try to push this point too far, and then look like a fool when the missiles start hitting Iranian targets.
I see there is already some talk in the media about how this might change the equation in regards EU & UK attitudes towards the nuclear deal. Things like whether Johnson will make a major change to UK Iranian policy, eg get on-board with the new (and unclear) US stance and abandon the EU attempts to keep the nuclear deal alive.
I dislike Iran's government but they're causing a lot less harm than a US attack will. Iran is far stronger militarily than Iraq was, but still nothing compared to what the US can field, but a war won't end with a win for anyone, more another Iraq style fuck up with terrorism, death, injury, and misery on the menu for years to come.
One fly in the ointment is the notable Chinese investment in Iran's oil industry, something that the US is going to have to consider if they're stupid enough to start a war.
Another thing likely to be a serious concern, if true, are reports of Iranian sleeper cells in the US that are prepared to attack the US on its home soil, probably soft military or civilian targets. If these reports are accurate, it'll take a US started war home to the US, the first time that's happened for a very long time.
One fly in the ointment is the notable Chinese investment in Iran's oil industry, something that the US is going to have to consider if they're stupid enough to start a war.
Another thing likely to be a serious concern, if true, are reports of Iranian sleeper cells in the US that are prepared to attack the US on its home soil, probably soft military or civilian targets. If these reports are accurate, it'll take a US started war home to the US, the first time that's happened for a very long time.
kebabking
Not a Girly Swot, but I like them....
I think several of the variables that will determine what happens aren't really to do with what actually happens in Iran and the Gulf - Trump, unlike Obama and Bush, isn't able to cope with diplomatic opposition to his veiws from Europe and is likely to retaliate in trade/defence terms, so European countries that are heavily dependent on US defense infrastructure will have to weigh their actions carefully given how likely French and German opposition is likely to be.
The UK has another driver - seizing the Iranian tanker off Gib was in support of EU sanctions, and British tankers have been effected in retaliation, yet EU support in the shape of big grey ships in the Gulf have been conspicuous by their absence, while US support has been immediately on hand.
It's a grim pot...
ferrelhadley
There is no love between us anymore.
Always good to hear from experts.
Except this is a list of recipients of US aid for Fiscal Year 2017
Afghanistan 5,730.48
Iraq 3,711.99
Israel 3,191.07
Jordan 1,489.50
Egypt 1,475.61 (from wiki)
Where did you get the idea that Israel is the only country that the US gives aid to, can you show me a source?
Also correct me if I am wrong here, but many states in the region have significant Shia populations and Iran is seen as a huge threat by those states? Is there not a bit of ethnic (they are Persian) and religious (they are apostates and polytheists according to some more enthusiastic Sunnis ) friction that is in play here?
And off course the Afghan militias turning up when Saudi called can hardly be called a triumph of US diplomacy?
Similar threads
