clint van damme
Well-Known Member
Not one person has mentioned Obama, Bish or Clinton.
Not sure why you've brought them up.
If you look at other threads where they're mentioned they generally get slated.
Iran has been attacking and seizing oil tankers, it has taken down drones, attacked Saudi oil plants, launched rocket attacks on US forces, and organised the storming of the US embassy. The US retaliated. Surprised?
Soleimani was a monster behind the murder and rape of thousands, and most in the region are rejoicing.
Don't like Trump, not one bit, but let's not pretend Obama wouldn't have responded in a similar way. In fact, Trump has been notably more isolationist and less hawkish than Obama, Bush and Clinton ever were.
Not one person has mentioned Obama, Bish or Clinton.
Not sure why you've brought them up.
If you look at other threads where they're mentioned they generally get slated.
You can call Trump a lot of things, not many of them nice, but war-monger isn't one of them. It was a reaction that many leading Democrats were calling for, and they're now queueing up to condemn him. The hypocrisy is tiresome.
I agree. Trump may be a large slice of c**t but he's definitely not some war mongering maniac. It's embarrassing how some people just trot out the same lines over and over again.
Trump bad man. Trump bad man.
Fair enough, but equally I don't recall them being labelled raving lunatics when they ordered the assasination of islamist targets in the past.
You can call Trump a lot of things, not many of them nice, but war-monger isn't one of them. It was a reaction that many leading Democrats were calling for, and they're now queueing up to condemn him. The hypocrisy is tiresome.
There might be a reaction of coursr, time will tell, but I don't think there'll be a major escalation. I'm often wrong, hopefully not this time.
The guy is demonstrably unstable and possibly mentally ill and is basically in charge of world security.
The childish attitudes and complete lack of understanding of geopolitics in this thread is frightening
The meme is orange man bad.
The guy is demonstrably unstable and possibly mentally ill and is basically in charge of world security.
The childish attitudes and complete lack of understanding of geopolitics in this thread is frightening
I agree I think the predictions of WW3 are probably a little bit premature.
But I also think that if the West is trying to disentangle itself from the on going sunni/Shia conflict then this wasn't a very smart move and once again we will be aligning ourselves with ISIS's main sponsors.
Then again,.maybe his bravado might work.
Tbf a lot depends on what comes out of the impeachment.He doesn't need to do this to get re-elected. The opposition is so weak and he's actually a decent president.
4 more years!!
Yeah...you...by saving a few quid in 1 fill-up lolI’m filling up the car ready for when petrol hits £2 a litre.
There’s always someone making money from war and conflict.
Tbf a lot depends on what comes out of the impeachment.
Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk
Exactly, very much above the lawIf it was any other country the USA would be calling it international terrorism. Trump is truly unhinged and a huge danger to the stability of the world in general.
They have nothing on him from what I can tell, it's just a he said this situation, it was laughed out of Congress weeks ago as the case was so poor, the star 'witness' heard it 4th hand.
From the moment he was elected, they've tried to remove him, they know that Trump would win an election hands down if it was held tomorrow, which is why they'll wait so long to proceed, try and screw him mid re election campaign. It's one big smear campaign as the west continue to reject left wing politics.
The funny thing is it's just accepted now that the US is allowed to sit troops all over the world without reprisal. What on earth are they actually doing in Iraq now?
Mike Pence now trying to link Iran and Solieman with the 9/11 attacks.
So they've invaded Iraq and Afghanistan because of 9/11 and are now in danger of conflict with Iran but are still have their strings pulled and are best mates with the country where the majority of the attackers came from. How can people fall for this shit?
Only if it's the "sky blue army" in which case you will be expected to die for the cause!
Mike Pence now trying to link Iran and Solieman with the 9/11 attacks.
So they've invaded Iraq and Afghanistan because of 9/11 and are now in danger of conflict with Iran but are still have their strings pulled and are best mates with the country where the majority of the attackers came from. How can people fall for this shit?
Fair enough, but equally I don't recall them being labelled raving lunatics when they ordered the assasination of islamist targets in the past.
You can call Trump a lot of things, not many of them nice, but war-monger isn't one of them. It was a reaction that many leading Democrats were calling for, and they're now queueing up to condemn him. The hypocrisy is tiresome.
There might be a reaction of coursr, time will tell, but I don't think there'll be a major escalation. I'm often wrong, hopefully not this time.
In truth...the idea of going to war to win elections is a thing of the very distant past. There is no way the US wants a war with Iran. The prolonged mess resulting from the last two such major incursions...Afghanistan & Iraq - neither of whom I suspect were ranked anywhere near where Iran are at the start of those respective 'wars'.
So let us not be too naive. The US embassy in Iraq was attacked without anyone even attempting to stop it. Those attacking thus emboldened went back for more...only backing off in the face of US forces firing tear gas.
Their people on the ground probably got info about the Iranians orchestrating things, &/or their future intent.
Surely it is clear that the US is trying to protect fuel supply for itself & it's allies? Without it's allies having a good power-base the threat of major war increases surely?
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Maybe if the CIA hadn’t gone initiating a coup several decades previous we wouldn’t even have the Ayatollah...
At the behest of the oil companies (I think I'm right to say BP were heavily involved).
These profit at all cost decisions resonate for decades with major consequences for everyone.
Yup it was-really worked out well. Petraeus argued for allying with Al Qaeda a few years ago...
Trump has claimed the action in Iran is because a US contractor was killed. What action did he take when the Saudi's executed a US journalist?Whatever the Saudis tell them
...but they did, and we have what we have, and we have not too much military might do anything about anything very much ourselves in other parts of the world.So why is it helping one of its allies commit war atrocities in Yemen? In fact, why does it count as an ally the biggest exporter of Islamic extremism in the region?
Iran was sticking to the terms of Obama’s deal. It then was met with a concerted effort to destabilise its economy amidst other blatant attempts to provoke it into retaliation. Maybe if the CIA hadn’t gone initiating a coup several decades previous we wouldn’t even have the Ayatollah...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?