• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

[W:104:1192]Iran state TV: Tehran fires at Iraqi base housing US troops

Re: [W:104]Iran state TV: Tehran fires at Iraqi base housing US troops

It is only "aggression" if the world started on 1/1/2020.

Anyone with half a brain knows who Qassem Soleimeni was and what he was responsible for... to evaluate this as if it started with the strike on Soleimani would be willful ignorance of the worst sort.
This is not about Soleleimini. This is foreign policy. It is about what is in America's best interest.

If this leads to war, it will be very hard to argue it was worth it. Luckily, it looks like things might ratchet down. But the political ramifications will take awhile to become apparent.
 
Re: [W:104]Iran state TV: Tehran fires at Iraqi base housing US troops

Trump didn't seem to take into account that the Iranians would actually retaliate before he ordered the attack on Soleimani.

BTW, why would "Russian propaganda" have to paint anything. Was Wilson's arming of terrorists who murdered Soviet soldiers somehow different from Soleimani's arming of terrorists who murdered American soldiers?

Propaganda mostly always has a role to play. But in substance, yes, I think a case can be made that Wilson was not all that much different in that respect.
 
Re: [W:104]Iran state TV: Tehran fires at Iraqi base housing US troops

Maybe not.

737s are having issues, and the Ukraine isn't known for top of the line maintenance.

I think it's just one of those spooky coincidences that happen.
 
Re: [W:104]Iran state TV: Tehran fires at Iraqi base housing US troops

Look who cares about gays, women and protesters now!

Again. Sorry I can’t produce the appropriate level of jingoism for you.
Well said. Great word! :thumbs:
 
Re: [W:104]Iran state TV: Tehran fires at Iraqi base housing US troops

Completely disagree, the US lost more respect across the world tonight. Trump said earlier this week that “ any retaliation “ would be met with a response. Iran retaliated regardless if they killed anyone. The fact they had the balls to lob missiles in your US troops general direction is a huge **** you.
The CIA put out a report earlier this year that the US was losing its influence globally and this is another example of it.
US assassinates a major leader in Iran, gets condemned for it by pretty much the entire G7 and Russia, then Iran throws a few missiles your way in Iraq and the President tweets ( not speaks) “ it’s all good”.

You Americans are living in a fantasy world if you think any of this is good for you.

No. What happened is:

The Iranians killed an American contractor (what was he, an electrician? a cook?) and in response, we killed the freaking second most important person in the entire Islamic Republic of Iran, a personal friend of the Supreme Leader, and actually being groomed to replace the Supreme Leader at some point (that's kind of the equivalent of a vice-president in a democracy or a prince in a monarchy).

Then, pressured by their internal politics and outraged citizenry, they lob some 15 missiles, 5 of which fail, at an IRAQI installation, and the other 10 land in some sand and don't manage to kill ANYBODY in that general area... not even injure anybody... and AFTER it's verified that their "attack" was a dud, they go ahead and call it PROPORTIONATE and CONCLUDED (in their words) and add that they don't want escalation or war...

Where are you from? Canada? How would you feel if, say, Julie Payette, your Governor General, got killed? Or, Chief Justice Richard Wagner who is the next in order of precedence after Prime Minister Justin Trudeau?

How would your country respond to a foreign power assassinating your second in command? By exploding some ordnance on top of some empty buildings owned by a different neighboring country, or some sand in a neighboring country? Would you feel, as a citizen of your country, that the "retaliation" was sufficient? Imagine that for some reason there is an escalation of hostilities between Mexico and Canada. Mexico then kills Julie Payette or Richard Wagner... you then, in "response", and despite Mexico having several thousand soldiers and diplomats a few miles from your border at easy reach for your weapons, you just send some bombs to an American installation where some Mexicans were guests, not managing to kill or maim a single Mexican, and not a single host either. Great! And then, after being informed of the meager results of your "attack" you send a message to Mexico, saying, "that's it, we concluded our retaliation, we don't want any escalation or war, so if you guys don't do anything else, we're cool."

If that's your standard for how humiliated the United States got today, sorry, but I stand by what I said to the other poster: it's wishful thinking.
 
Re: [W:104]Iran state TV: Tehran fires at Iraqi base housing US troops

Look who cares about gays, women and protesters now!

I always have, look who throws them under the bus because you get a smile from the Ayatollah. :roll:

Again. Sorry I can’t produce the appropriate level of jingoism for you.

You take the side of a murderous terror regime that hangs gays, executes women for being raped, imprisons and tortures women for dancing, and murders hundreds of protesters for the crime of protesting for fear of looking too pro-American.

There is really not much more I could say to insult you that would be worse than what you have done to yourself tonight.
 
Re: [W:104]Iran state TV: Tehran fires at Iraqi base housing US troops

That red line was supposed to cause an attack on 52 Iran targets. I guess that was another idle threat — like his “fire and fury” threat against North Korea.

If this way Obama, Trump would be calling him weak.


10 seconds ago, liberals were pulling their hair out because they thought the Iran counterstrikes were the beginning of a war. Now that they see the strikes weren't meant to hit anything, they go to goading Trump for not retaliating.


Sometimes you just have to shake your head at the idiocy.
 
Re: [W:104]Iran state TV: Tehran fires at Iraqi base housing US troops

Why would they see it as a victory? Honestly curious how losing the top terror organizer in the region, the guy manipulating pretty much every conflict in the region, is a win. They all, in one form or another, depended on Soleimani.. and now he is dead, and Iran's "response" was to make some sand craters and ask the US not to hurt them.



I'm still not seeing the logic in your argument. Iran can lob missiles, sure... anyone can lob missiles. That isn't a show of strength, and if they all missed then that looks bad, and if they all missed on purpose then that makes them look weak.

Imagine the Islamic militants who are dying for their backward, blood thirsty cult and how they process Iranian leaders doing everything in their power to not risk their own necks against the "Great Satan".



Nope, we called the Iranian bluff, and took out their terror mastermind in the process. The real delusion is thinking that Iran came out on the winning side. :roll:


The logic in my argument is that in the run up to the Iraq war so pretty much 1995 to 2002 Iraq did everything possible to avoid open conflict with the US. Now we see Iran literally do the opposite. Doesn’t matter the outcome of the attack it’s the fact they feel confident enough to do it knowing that the US doesn’t want anything to do with a conventional War in Iran.

The US has lost face internationally over the drone killing and the Iranian regime has gained support in its own country with its robust response as well as gaining sympathy from abroad.
 
Re: [W:104]Iran state TV: Tehran fires at Iraqi base housing US troops

I always have, look who throws them under the bus because you get a smile from the Ayatollah. :roll:



You take the side of a murderous terror regime that hangs gays, executes women for being raped, imprisons and tortures women for dancing, and murders hundreds of protesters for the crime of protesting for fear of looking too pro-American.

There is really not much more I could say to insult you that would be worse than what you have done to yourself tonight.

[emoji849]

It must be exhausting to see everything in black and white.
 
Re: [W:104]Iran state TV: Tehran fires at Iraqi base housing US troops

No. What happened is:

The Iranians killed an American contractor (what was he, an electrician? a cook?) and in response, we killed the freaking second most important person in the entire Islamic Republic of Iran, a personal friend of the Supreme Leader, and actually being groomed to replace the Supreme Leader at some point (that's kind of the equivalent of a vice-president in a democracy or a prince in a monarchy).

Then, pressured by their internal politics and outraged citizenry, they lob some 15 missiles, 5 of which fail, at an IRAQI installation, and the other 10 land in some sand and don't manage to kill ANYBODY in that general area... not even injure anybody... and AFTER it's verified that their "attack" was a dud, they go ahead and call it PROPORTIONATE and CONCLUDED (in their words) and add that they don't want escalation or war...

Where are you from? Canada? How would you feel if, say, Julie Payette, your Governor General, got killed? Or, Chief Justice Richard Wagner who is the next in order of precedence after Prime Minister Justin Trudeau?

How would your country respond to a foreign power assassinating your second in command? By exploding some ordnance on top of some empty buildings owned by a different neighboring country, or some sand in a neighboring country? Would you feel, as a citizen of your country, that the "retaliation" was sufficient? Imagine that for some reason there is an escalation of hostilities between Mexico and Canada. Mexico then kills Julie Payette or Richard Wagner... you then, in "response", and despite Mexico having several thousand soldiers and diplomats a few miles from your border at easy reach for your weapons, you just send some bombs to an American installation where some Mexicans were guests, not managing to kill or maim a single Mexican, and not a single host either. Great! And then, after being informed of the meager results of your "attack" you send a message to Mexico, saying, "that's it, we concluded our retaliation, we don't want any escalation or war, so if you guys don't do anything else, we're cool."

If that's your standard for how humiliated the United States got today, sorry, but I stand by what I said to the other poster: it's wishful thinking.


I’ll stop you there. The North Koreans and Saudis have killed US contractors and the US did nothing. It was a massive overreaction from the US.
 
Re: [W:104]Iran state TV: Tehran fires at Iraqi base housing US troops

This is not about Soleleimini. This is foreign policy. It is about what is in America's best interest.

If this leads to war, it will be very hard to argue it was worth it. Luckily, it looks like things might ratchet down. But the political ramifications will take awhile to become apparent.

Well, no, it is about Soleimani, or at least the US involvement was specifically about Soleimani. As I have been saying, the Iranians will not retaliate because they know they can't win, they operated for decades on this feeling of invincibility because, no matter what they did, they were never held accountable. Soleimani's death was finally holding them accountable, and Iran blinked tonight. Everyone knows it, even if they are so consumed by TDS that they can't admit the reality of it.

So where does Iran go from here? They can't be implicated in another attack on the US without drawing US attention again... something they clearly don't want. Moreover, their ability to plan and execute such plans have been severely impacted by the death of Soleimani, anyway.

As I said, there isn't much Iran can do to retaliate for Soleimani and they are just proving it.

One of two things happened tonight: Either they intentionally targets the sand for fear of retaliation, showing their weakness... or they saw how ineffectual their missile inventory really is and realized that they are not prepared for war. Either way, this is bad for Iran.
 
Re: [W:104]Iran state TV: Tehran fires at Iraqi base housing US troops

10 seconds ago, liberals were pulling their hair out because they thought the Iran counterstrikes were the beginning of a war. Now that they see the strikes weren't meant to hit anything, they go to goading Trump for not retaliating.


Sometimes you just have to shake your head at the idiocy.

It is really dizzying when your position is anything but Trump.

Trump could literally come out tomorrow and says he supports Canadians. Democrats would want to boycott Canadians from coming in the U.S
 
Re: [W:104]Iran state TV: Tehran fires at Iraqi base housing US troops

[emoji849]

It must be exhausting to see everything in black and white.

I see you for who you are.
 
Re: [W:104]Iran state TV: Tehran fires at Iraqi base housing US troops

It’s now on Bloomberg.


Boeing 737 Passenger Jet Crashes in Iran Due to Technical Issue - Bloomberg

I don’t know what to make of this.

Coincidence??

Ukrainian jet, so nothing to do with us. And then, there was an earthquake in Iran that damaged one of their nuclear reactors, today as well.

What a day for Iran! They bury their idol and second in command (and a stampede kills 50 faithful), try to attack us and don't manage to hurt anybody, a plane falls on their heads, and an earthquake damages one of their nuclear reactors...

Rather than coincidence, I'd say, Karma...
 
Last edited:
Re: [W:104]Iran state TV: Tehran fires at Iraqi base housing US troops

The fact that Trump can't come out to speak to the citizenry, show's he's flummoxed. Which might be a good thing. Maybe it will all sink in, and he'll get religion.

No that’s not that what it shows. That is nothing more then one of the many possible reasons. And nothing more then your opinion. Which as much as tds has overtaken you in the last year or so is a very biased opinion no one should put much weight behind.
 
Re: [W:104]Iran state TV: Tehran fires at Iraqi base housing US troops

I’ll stop you there. The North Koreans and Saudis have killed US contractors and the US did nothing. It was a massive overreaction from the US.

I don't doubt that it was an overreaction by the USA, I'm just saying to you what the facts of the matter are. We can also say that the "retaliation" by Iran was a massive... underreaction. And you still construe that as a victory for Iran??? Wow!

And they call it proportionate... You know, the only proportionate thing would be for them to kill Mike Pence.

I am NOT a Trump supporter, and I made it clear here, over and over.

But today was a good day for the United States, no doubt.

Most likely, and unfortunately, Trump will get an electoral bump from this.
 
Re: [W:104]Iran state TV: Tehran fires at Iraqi base housing US troops

I fully agree. It's going to be interesting seeing Trump's morning response. My gut feeling is, he is going to talk a good game but not act substantively. But I'm sure Iran is going to redouble their covert & proxy terrorism.

The lesson of the last couple of weeks is that Iran will now be held responsible for their covert/proxy actions. If you are right, we may quickly find ourselves back here again.
 
Re: [W:104]Iran state TV: Tehran fires at Iraqi base housing US troops

You have counter-evidence?

Why would he have to counter evidence. You didn’t provide any in the first place.
 
Re: [W:104]Iran state TV: Tehran fires at Iraqi base housing US troops

Impeachment & war. Trump's legacy ...

Maybe he’ll avoid the war. We still don’t know the reason for the Soleimani killing.
 
Re: [W:104]Iran state TV: Tehran fires at Iraqi base housing US troops

The lesson of the last couple of weeks is that Iran will now be held responsible for their covert/proxy actions. If you are right, we may quickly find ourselves back here again.
Very possibly.
 
Re: [W:104]Iran state TV: Tehran fires at Iraqi base housing US troops

The lesson of the last couple of weeks is that Iran will now be held responsible for their covert/proxy actions. If you are right, we may quickly find ourselves back here again.

Or not, because maybe they won't even engage in these proxy attrition attacks for a while. The Bloomberg News analysis I posted a link to before, proposed that with Trump's talk of no more neverending wars, pulling out of Syria, etc., the Iranians thought they could continue to expand their influence in the region and could continue pin-prick attacks on America's interests, without risking much of a retaliation.

The recent events showed to them that they miscalculated...

Look, Khamenei mocks Trump and says, after the attack that killed the American contractor, "you can't do anything about it." Next, he's publicly sobbing during the funeral of his cherished friend and second in command, killed by Trump.

The restraint they showed in their either failed or mock "retaliation" today, shows that they are clearly spooked, and afraid that a frontal attack with American casualties would bring a huge American retaliation, which they know they can't defeat or survive. So they do a timid, face-saving retaliation, and immediately say "that's it, we don't want escalation."

It is not excluded that at least for a few months, Iran will actually pause any attempt to directly hurt the United States.

Khamenei himself must be thinking, "uhoh, they have the will to engage in decapitation strikes... next if I overplay my hand, they may come after me." A tomahawk missile barrage raining down on Khamenei's palace is not a very pleasant thought.

I think that chances are that the Iranians are scared and don't know what to do... the sanctions are crippling their economy, they just lost their second in command, they had been facing internal turmoil, and now they can't even dare to actually inflict damage to the United States lest they will suffer decapitation strikes.
 
Last edited:
Re: [W:104]Iran state TV: Tehran fires at Iraqi base housing US troops

Yes. Black. And you are white.

I see you as an Ayatollah sympathizer because that is what you are. I see a man willing to throw in with a murderous regime for fear of appearing too pro-American... because that is who you have proven yourself to be.
 
Re: [W:104]Iran state TV: Tehran fires at Iraqi base housing US troops

You mean the details like assassinating a member of the Iranian government? That's a bit different than retaliating against the militias. Increasing the attacks on those militias would have sent a message just as well; this set an entirely different precedent. Using the intelligence the US had about the attacks Soleimani was planning to prevent them might have been another approach. Trump took it to an entirely different level.
A member of the Iranian government that had direct ties to the deaths of close to 1000 US service members.

The fact that you can't even get yourself to say that out loud is rather sad. But I get it. It would weaken your attack of Trump. Obviously politics is more important to you then America.
 
Re: [W:104]Iran state TV: Tehran fires at Iraqi base housing US troops

A retaliation would mean they fired missiles and, ya know, actually hurt people. Only Iranian loyalists and the American left can be so delusional to see this as a win for Iran. They lost their terrorist mastermind and 14 missiles.. the US didn't lose anything.

Don't think for a minute that Iran's opposition in the region hasn't taken note of their inability to follow through on a threat. They are weak, and getting weaker.

And they accidentally shot down a Ukrainian airliner in the process, which won't help them internationally... AND they got hit by an earthquake...

So all round a bad day for the Iranian regime.
Allah has spoken.
 
Back
Top Bottom