So, Iraq... (Update: US kills Iranian military leader Soleimani) - Page 12 - Politics and Society -- Two Plus Two Poker Forums

Suleimani was, in fact, an enemy combatant, in a war zone, engaged on war operations against the United States. And the left position, I'd have thought, is that extreme-right theocratic sectarian empire-building mass-murdering warlords like Suleimani, who lay waste whole countries like Syria for their own amusement and carry out terrorism as far afield as Argentina, should be destroyed where the opportunity presents itself.

This is not true in the slightest.

He was there visiting Iraqis at the request of the Iraqis who are allied with both the US and Iran.

Quote

01-05-2020 , 03:53 PM

#277

tame_deuces

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 18,064

Quote:

Originally Posted by markksman

[...]Nobody was upset with troops living Syria. It was 100% in the manner it was done. It was the same reckless abandon devoid of any planning or strategy exhibited in this assassination. [...]

Yes, pretty much this. This administration is a train-wreck on all things foreign policy. It ended a very cost-effective anti-insurgency operation at a moment's notice, and left allies to be killed. And don't think that states that could normally support the US did not pay attention to that. It sent a very strong message, the US is not be trusted and you can no longer rely on the US understanding its foreign policy actions.

The only card Trump holds is that he is unstable and unpredictable, which probably to an extent lessens odds of direct aggression. But you don't exactly need to be learned scholar of history to know that these are rarely good strengths in the long run, especially when there is no competence or willingness to listen to competence involved.

Add to that an almost completely inability to speak or admit truths if they are uncomfortable, and you got a volatile mix. Mostly stupid, but also dangerous.

Quote

01-05-2020 , 03:59 PM

#278

Huskalator

adept

Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 776

Quote:

Originally Posted by markksman

Iran has taken almost total control of shaping Iraq going forward and the United States is not only being removed from the strategy table, they are being kicked out entirely.

.

Literally none of these things will happen.

Quote

01-05-2020 , 04:04 PM

#279

markksman

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 20,921

Also from the rumor mill: Iran will apparently negotiate with the US if Trump is put on trial in Iran. I am cool with that. I want to prevent a war. I think we should leave it up to the American people if Trump should stand trial in Iran.

Also apparently 80 million dollar bounty on Trump’s head. Pretty cool for a person to hav3 a bounty that rivals their network.

ALSO immigration is detaining and questioning American citizens who have Iranian heritage.

All about downing the brown. Trump ignites the racism all his supporters and defenders share.

Quote

01-05-2020 , 04:10 PM

#280

Huskalator

adept

Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 776

Oh ok

Quote

01-05-2020 , 04:28 PM

#281

markksman

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 20,921

Lol you dumb ****ing trump supporters / defenders.

Quote

01-05-2020 , 04:48 PM

#282

tame_deuces

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 18,064

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huskalator

Literally none of these things will happen.

It could. Trump's actions have strengthened pro-Iran politicians in Iraq to push towards removal of US troops and now the pressure are on moderates too, who probably want to avoid being caught in the middle if a US-Iran conflict, regardless if it is an asymmetrical one.

That the price of the Iraq war could potentially be a super-constellation under the influence of the Iranian clergy was warned of already prior to the Iraq war, and Trump's actions could be a driving force towards that.

Of course, there are all "could" and "ifs" rooted in knowledge about demographics and politics. Which means the current White House administration likely neither know about them nor considered them.

Quote

01-05-2020 , 04:55 PM

#283

the pleasure

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 6,223

i thought i read reports iraq told us he would be there on a meeting and US okayd it.
is this correct?

Quote

01-05-2020 , 05:05 PM

#284

itshotinvegas

banned

Join Date: Jul 2019 Posts: 7,899

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slighted

You are in here pushing Pompeo propaganda driving a narrative that there is no evidence backing, but you’re “always skeptical” of narratives?

My source is the dude said it out of his mouth in public and multiple people have been tweeting his quote.

It's odd, cause I have no idea what narrative Pompeo is pushing.

Quote

01-05-2020 , 05:18 PM

#285

itshotinvegas

banned

Join Date: Jul 2019 Posts: 7,899

Quote:

Originally Posted by well named

Maybe I'll find something later, but I'm curious to read some analysis of what this means with regard to potential escalation of the situation. I'm assuming it's rather expected (or even that it's commonly believed they were already ignoring some restrictions?), but I'm pretty ignorant. If anyone has any good links I'd appreciate it.

The situations are mutually exclusive. They may try to conflate the two for PR purposes, but the nuclear deal is not driving Iranian activities in the region. I've posted one source that explained Iran's doctrine.

Here is another:

Quote:

The lack of international reaction to Iran’s adventurism resulted from a mixture of crisis fatigue, competing priority issues, a decline in direct US involvement in the region and Russian obstructionism in the UNSC. But Iran’s willingness to undertake an assertive foreign policy to exploit fissures in the international community did deflect pressure from Tehran, allowing the Quds Force to create facts on the ground. This foreign policy has been directed by the Supreme Leader but dominated by two actors: Major-General Soleimani, who engaged directly with Iraqi, Russian and Syrian leaders, and Iran’s Foreign Minister Zarif, who focused on communicating with the broader international community. In their engagement with foreign officials, and despite differences in style and personality, they displayed common qualities:

Both represent Iran’s incoming generation of leaders: assertive, pragmatic and committed to the revolution’s principles. They are unwilling to compromise on Iran’s claimed role as a regional hegemon, and are committed to the sustenance of the Axis of Resistance against Israel and the need for the US to leave the region.

Each has relied on powerful patrons, whom they are likely to influence. Soleimani’s ties to the Supreme Leader are as well known as Zarif’s relationship with President Hassan Rouhani. Soleimani is likely to survive under future hardline supreme leaders, but Zarif’s position may not survive the end of Rouhani’s term in 2021.

Their stature is in part due to their longevity. Soleimani has led the Quds Force since 1998 and had considerable experience with Afghan and Kurdish issues before taking command. Zarif became foreign minister in 2013, before which he had periodic interaction with US officials and long service at the UN.
Their status has been elevated by significant US foreign-policy decisions: Soleimani’s operational world burgeoned after the US-led invasion of Iraq; for Zarif, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action nuclear deal provided unprecedented engagement with China, Russia, the US and major European leaders.

Each has been the target of Western outreach. Zarif used the discussions to build a working relationship with the US secretary of state and other leaders. Soleimani rejects direct contact, but periodically, if only briefly and through intermediaries, has engaged with the US. These engagements may have allowed each an understanding of Western negotiating style to a degree not shared by their Western intermediaries regarding Iran.
Each exploited the West’s willingness to negotiate at times of weakness or geopolitical necessity. Examples include Soleimani’s indirect outreach before the US invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, and his willingness to authorise discussions following the US crackdown on Iranian forces in Iraq. Zarif’s engagement during pre-invasion discussions, support for nuclear talks as sanctions pressure reached its height, and engagement of the Geneva process on Syria when Assad was at his weakest, were similar.
Each is adept at using the media and social media. Zarif routinely engages Western press and social media, while Soleimani appears on social media and makes widely reported anti-Western speeches.

....

Iran’s interventions have validated an external military doctrine emphasising hybrid-war techniques and cooperation with state and sub-state actors. Iran has been able to threaten international energy and shipping arteries in the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz, and to some extent the Red Sea and Bab al-Mandeb. A large number of Iranian military personnel have fought difficult and multi-year conflicts in which they may believe they not only achieved strategic objectives but did so at the expense of Arab regional powers, Israel and the US. This confidence will likely guide Tehran’s view as to how it will manage future conflicts.

The conflicts in Syria and Yemen are far from over, but as they do wind down, Iran will be faced with a series of challenges. Iran’s clients are well positioned to protect its interests, and the international community has yet to develop a strategy capable of dismantling Tehran’s militias. However, Iran will also be challenged to produce the resources required to sustain post-conflict reconstruction. Failure to do so could easily erode Iran’s influence at the expense of external powers. Tehran’s execution of its military doctrine has won it unprecedented regional influence during periods of equally unprecedented conflict. Whether this doctrine can deliver substantive returns in times of peace, as it did in Lebanon, will be tested in Syria and elsewhere.

----

Iran’s networks of influence have become its way of war. It rests on a developed doctrine, and a sophisticated capability within the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Quds Force, for conducting remote warfare through third parties in foreign jurisdictions. This has high strategic value for Iran. It enables Iran to raise costs for its adversaries at low cost to itself. It is flexible, low risk and sustainable but allows Iran to maintain a remote, defensive cordon and to project military and cultural influence deep into target countries. It has deep roots in the ideology and war-fighting experiences of the Iranian regime. But its development has been accelerated, its effectiveness enhanced and its resilience deepened by extensive deployments in varying configuration across theatres of conflict in the Middle East, in particular Syria and Iraq.

https://www.iiss.org/publications/st...rategic-intent

The proxy attack on the embassy was yet another attempt to get the US out of the region. The reason they want the US out of the region has nothing to do with the Nuclear deal, and all about being the controlling influence.

Last edited by itshotinvegas; 01-05-2020 at 05:28 PM. Reason: BTW, that's a UK based think tank, and it's from 11/19

Quote

01-05-2020 , 05:18 PM

#286

MrWookie

Don't Call Me Meredith

Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 94,159

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huskalator

Literally none of these things will happen.

Which side of this debate were you on in 2003?

Quote

01-05-2020 , 05:33 PM

#287

juan valdez

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 5,686

Some interesting takes and some activist dogshit, I'll let you decide which is which

thread

Quote

01-05-2020 , 05:41 PM

#288

daca

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 10,507

it absolutely absurd how hawkish so many americans are. it blows up in their face every time and how they never seem to learn

if you supported the iraq war then how can you even think your opinion is worth anything? show some humility and stay quiet

there is genuinely no reason iran and the us should even be in conflict. it’s a creation of insane, and incredibly counterproductive, american policies

Quote

01-05-2020 , 05:51 PM

#289

itshotinvegas

banned

Join Date: Jul 2019 Posts: 7,899

Quote:

Originally Posted by coordi

Not surprising that this tweet thread from a neutral European source was completely ignored.

This is actual politics boyz.

For sure.

Quote

01-05-2020 , 06:55 PM

#290

daca

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 10,507

Quote:

Originally Posted by coordi

Not surprising that this tweet thread from a neutral European source was completely ignored.

This is actual politics boyz.

i think some of that is pretty dumb. like the guy traveled through baghdad airport on a plane from beirut or damascus and was picked up by some high profile guys. it can’t have been that hard locate him. and the us making him a martyr is obviously going to help recruitment, not hurt it

but the weirdest thing is how the thread doesn’t really answer the first question it asks. the reason iran is escalating the conflict is that the us is seen as trying to destroy the country with crippling sanctions

politico.eu is for some reason far more hawkish than the general european media btw. the rest of the continent mostly thinks the us is absolutely insane on this issue

Quote

01-05-2020 , 07:06 PM

#291

aflametotheground

old hand

Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 1,851

I think its masculine identity thats driving this, its part of the right wing soup.

Quote

01-05-2020 , 07:29 PM

#292

well named

poorly undertitled

Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 78,078

Quote:

Originally Posted by itshotinvegas

The situations are mutually exclusive. They may try to conflate the two for PR purposes, but the nuclear deal is not driving Iranian activities in the region.

Thanks for the links. I've been busy but I intend to look at this more when I have a chance.

Quote

01-05-2020 , 07:57 PM

#293

Victor

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 75,039

Quote:

Originally Posted by markksman

The same rightists who applauded pulling 300 troops out of Syria to “send them home” are cheering thousands more troops now on their way to Iraq, which by the way wants ALL of our troops to leave.

Nobody was upset with troops leaving Syria. It was 100% in the manner it was done. It was the same reckless abandon devoid of any planning or strategy exhibited in this assassination.

So yeah people can logically and reasonably oppose the way troops were removed from Syria and the way they are being sent to Iraq. You righties on the other hand can’t justify your positions other than coming from non stop suckling of every action of a mushbrained president.

its much simpler. the left doesnt want ppl to die. leaving Syria caused a ton of Rojavans to die and let loose a bunch of ISIS to go back to terrorizing the region. bombing the top military guys of Iran and Iraq (and bunch of other ppl. no one has talked about the death toll but USA killed a lot of innocent ppl in this attack) will cause a lot more death going forward.

ppl like Chiddy and redbuck and itshot get absolutely giddy over the USA killing innocent foreigners, esp if they are of brown persuasion. doesnt matter if they are on our side in some way. these guys will celebrate their deaths ecstatically.

Quote

01-05-2020 , 08:23 PM

#294

CheckCheckFold

old hand

Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 1,577

I just read this (History starts with "1953")
https://www.pri.org/stories/2020-01-...tions-timeline

"1953: The coup*

US and British intelligence agencies orchestrate a coup, overthrowing democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh"

From reading the history of Iran US relations, the US is clearly the ******* bad guy. So sick.

How could any Iranian not be fuming?

Quote

01-05-2020 , 08:43 PM

#295

Victor

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 75,039

Quote:

Originally Posted by 57 On Red

Technically that could be done, but it's arguably better to keep Khamenei in fear of it than to actually do it.

I'm not going to forget 1989 in a hurry, when my late friend Clarissa's home was abruptly invaded by armed police, to protect her and her young son, because Khamenei's predecessor Khomeini had just pronounced a bizarre death sentence on Clarissa's ex-husband Salman Rushdie. The mad mullahs of Tehran and their fascist sidekicks can just take whatever's coming to them as far as I'm concerned.

so basically the exact same thing that happened to millions of people in Iraq and Afghanistan by the USA military. but I guess bc it was a pretty girl that you had a crush on, you are OK with another campaign that kills 100s of thousands as revenge. totally disgusting.

oh I just read that we are detaining USA citizens with Iranian family and ancestors who are entered the country. all well and good bc you want to have relations with poor Clarissa.

Quote

01-05-2020 , 08:45 PM

#296

itshotinvegas

banned

Join Date: Jul 2019 Posts: 7,899

Quote:

Originally Posted by Victor

ppl like Chiddy and redbuck and itshot get absolutely giddy over the USA killing innocent foreigners, esp if they are of brown persuasion. doesnt matter if they are on our side in some way. these guys will celebrate their deaths ecstatically.

You've never been right about me. Like, ever. You walk into these contradictions all the time. You don't want people to die, but you wring your hands incessantly when the US kills a mass murderer? Just unreal.

Last edited by itshotinvegas; 01-05-2020 at 08:50 PM.

Quote

01-05-2020 , 08:52 PM

#297

Victor

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 75,039

I mean, even the Trump supporters think that this course of action will result in more death.

Quote

01-05-2020 , 09:13 PM

#298

itshotinvegas

banned

Join Date: Jul 2019 Posts: 7,899

Why? What do you all think the motivation for the embassy assault was?

Quote

01-05-2020 , 10:06 PM

#299

D-Beat

banned

Join Date: Mar 2018 Posts: 3,009

Quote:

Originally Posted by itshotinvegas

Killed the mass murderer, why? For vengeance? Must be because Iran isn't slowing down because of this. It won't deter any actions.

So, we have to conclude that Trump doesn't really care about the murders, either. Even if we're to be charitable to Trump, we would still just conclude that the assassination was just failed posturing.