• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

U.S. Sizing Up Iran?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I do hope ol' Blighty doesn't get involved.
We're still paying off the last 'adventures abroad'.
 
A wee war to bolster the government with a wave of popular feeling?
 
“The United States is deploying the USS Abraham Lincoln Carrier Strike Group and a bomber task force to the Middle East in response to a "number of troubling and escalatory indications and warnings" from Iran, US national security adviser John Bolton said Sunday.

A US official with direct knowledge of the situation told CNN the threats were against both US maritime and land-based forces in the region. The deployments are aimed specifically at deterring any Iranian military actions, the official added.

In a written statement released by the White House, Bolton said the US was deploying the USS Abraham Lincoln Carrier Strike Group and a bomber task force to the US Central Command region in the Middle East "to send a clear and unmistakable message to the Iranian regime that any attack on United States interests or on those of our allies will be met with unrelenting force." “

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/05/05/politics/iran-carrier-bomber-task-force/index.html

maximus otter
 
Last edited:
It's worth pointing out that Bolton - another Vietnam dodger who talks up a really good war - was advocating pre-emptive strikes against North Korea very shortly before he entered the White House, and in direct contrast to Trump, who was already claiming he'd saved millions of lives by not entering into a war that any other administration would have.

There's no doubt that Iran is moody as hell, but without some indication as to why this is so pressing now, I can't help feeling that Bolton, cheated of one war, is gagging for another. My own feeling is that the Trump administration is massively overfreighted with hedgehogs and with nowhere enough foxes to balance things out - and Bolton is an irredeembale hedgehog. (It's no coincidence that people like McCain, who have directly experienced what hedgehog thinking results in, tend to become foxes - and no coincidence that hedgehogs hate them for it.)

I remember watching Bolton years ago - as US ambassador the the UN under George Bush (a recess appointee - because no-one else liked him) - referring to Americans as a 'warlike' people. There's no doubt that Americans can be brave, generous and steadfast in adversity - but 'warlike' is a different matter, and it sticks in my craw when someone who has never seen combat attributes the necessaries to himself by default.
 
Last edited:
Some commentary on the Revolutionary Guard by Yassamine Mather, an Iranian dissident who fought against both the Shah and the Mullahs.

Last week if you tried to access the Instagram accounts that are supposed to belong to top figures of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, you would have seen the message: “Sorry, this page is not available”. This was only a day after Donald Trump labelled the IRGC a “foreign terrorist organisation” and a day before both Instagram and Facebook banned some British far-right groups and individuals.

When the social media outlets were asked about the ban on Iranian groups, the reply was clear: “We work with appropriate government authorities to ensure we meet our legal obligations, including those relating to the recent designation of the IRGC.”

The list of banned pages included those of IRGC commander Mohammad Ali Jafari, major-general Qasem Soleimani (who only a couple of years ago was praised by some in the US media for his role in fighting Islamic State), Iran’s former foreign minister Ali Akbar Velayati, as well as the English-language version of the supreme leader’s official website on Instagram. The last three were later reinstated because, as always with White House directives right now, chaos and incompetence lead the way.

Although most Iranian users would not be able to access Facebook and Twitter in any case, both sites are officially banned. However, Instagram is available and it is by far the most popular social media outlet in Iran, with some 24 million users. Many of these have reacted strongly, even though the Revolutionary Guards are not a popular force in Iran. This is not just because of their repressive character, but more importantly because the group’s leaders and their immediate relatives are beneficiaries of neoliberal capitalism and amongst Iran’s rich elites. They own 20%-30% of Iran’s ‘privatised’ capital, and they are hated as employers and exploiters of the working class. However, in the last few weeks lower-ranking members of the guards have been praised by Iranian Instagram users for their involvement in flood relief across the country.

And the Instagram ban has - in Iran, as elsewhere - started a debate about the independence of social media and the west’s claims of upholding freedom of expression. Rightwing pro-censorship forces celebrated the ban with the hard-line paper Javan renaming Instagram “Insta-Trump”. But ‘reformist’ bloggers took a different attitude. Information minister Mohammad-Javad Azari Jahromi used his own Instagram account to post a Game of thrones quote criticising Instagram’s decision: “When you tear out a man’s tongue, you aren’t proving him a liar. You’re only telling the world that you fear what he might say.”...

https://weeklyworker.co.uk/worker/1248/silencing-the-right-will-be-followed-by-silencing-/
 
Some more articles by Yassamine which are relevant to the debate.

Forty years ago Iranian women rebelled against the Islamic government. We should not only remember their struggle: we should uphold the original aims of International Women’s Day, says Yassamine Mather
Friday March 8 is International Women’s Day, which this year coincides with the 40th anniversary of the first major protest by Iranian women against the Islamic regime in 1979.
https://weeklyworker.co.uk/worker/1241/womens-rights-and-class-struggle/


Resistance grows in Iran
Both Trump’s threats and the regime’s neoliberal policies are being forcefully opposed by the working class, reports Yassamine Mather
https://weeklyworker.co.uk/worker/1229/resistance-grows-in-iran/


Like father, like son
Reza Pahlavi’s idiotic comments show that there should be no nostalgia for the shah’s regime, writes Yassamine Mather
Donald Trump’s alternative plans for regime change in Iran are so awful, it is difficult to say who is advising him. Can it be that there is an Islamic Republic spy in the White House?
https://weeklyworker.co.uk/worker/1232/like-father-like-son/
 
Apropos of the thread's theme, I recall a BBC R4 documentary from at least 10 years ago (it might have been 'Correspondents Look Ahead'?) where a journalist opined that the US was sizing up Syria, Libya and Venezuela for future régime change (and lots of lovely oil). I think he placed Iran as an outsider but possible. He also mentioned west African nations in strategic positions; Nigeria was namechecked.
 
Persian Gulf of Tonkin?

I see a grainy black and white image of unknown people in an unknown boat doing something undetermined to an unknown vessel.

It may well transpire to be all that it is claimed to be, but faith is in somewhat short supply in these areas, you understand.
 
Yithian said:
Persian Gulf of Tonkin?

I see a grainy black and white image of unknown people in an unknown boat doing something undetermined to an unknown vessel.

It may well transpire to be all that it is claimed to be, but faith is in somewhat short supply in these areas, you understand.
Click to expand...
I thought exactly the same thing about this.
 
Yithian said:
Persian Gulf of Tonkin?

I see a grainy black and white image of unknown people in an unknown boat doing something undetermined to an unknown vessel.

It may well transpire to be all that it is claimed to be, but faith is in somewhat short supply in these areas, you understand.
Click to expand...

Yup. I'm not particularly against the use of force, if and when absolutely necessary, and subject to the exhaustion of all other alternatives - but everytime any politician of any persuasion now mentions anything along the lines of 'irrefutable proof' I recall my schoolboy self deploying a stroked chin and a long, drawn out 'Jimmy Hill'.

(Actually, wouldn't it be great if that became an accepted political/diplomatic response in parliament and at the UN and such like. And maybe we could organise a Million 'Jimmy Hill' March. Hold on, I think I've just invented a movement. Step aside Anonymous, it's time to Jimmy Hill the fuck out of this lot.)
 
Spookdaddy said:
Yup. I'm not particularly against the use of force, if and when absolutely necessary, and subject to the exhaustion of all other alternatives - but everytime any politician of any persuasion now mentions anything along the lines of 'irrefutable proof' I recall my schoolboy self deploying a stroked chin and a long, drawn out 'Jimmy Hill'.

(Actually, wouldn't it be great if that became an accepted political/diplomatic response in parliament and at the UN and such like. And maybe we could organise a Million 'Jimmy Hill' March. Hold on, I think I've just invented a movement. Step aside Anonymous, it's time to Jimmy Hill the fuck out of this lot.)
Click to expand...
Du30MhRW4AA55uf.jpg:large
 
XBergMann said:
Liberty wasn't a false flag event it was Israeli aggression against the USA
Click to expand...

"Israel apologized for the attack, saying that the USS Liberty had been attacked in error after being mistaken for an Egyptian ship. Both the Israeli and U.S. governments conducted inquiries and issued reports that concluded the attack was a mistake due to Israeli confusion about the ship's identity."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Liberty_incident

Let us also not forget that the attack occurred right in the middle of the Six-Day War, when Israel was fighting for its very survival.

maximus otter
 
The plot thickens.

Tanker owner seems to dispute U.S. account of Gulf of Oman attack

The Japanese owner of the Kokuka Courageous, one of two oil tankers targeted near the Strait of Hormuz, said Friday that sailors on board saw "flying objects" just before it was hit, suggesting the vessel wasn't damaged by mines.


That account contradicts what the U.S. military said as it released a video Friday it said shows Iranian forces removing an unexploded limpet mine from one of the two ships that were hit.

The Japanese tanker was attacked twice Thursday, damaging the vessel and forcing all 21 crew members to evacuate.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/oil-ta...ount-of-gulf-of-oman-attack-today-2019-06-14/
 
maximus otter said:
Both the Israeli and U.S. governments conducted inquiries and issued reports that concluded the attack was a mistake due to Israeli confusion about the ship's identity."
Click to expand...

Funny, that.

Seriously, no anti-semite, anti-zionist or anti-Israeli here, but I'm almost completely convinced that the attacks on U.S.S. Liberty were deliberate and premeditated.

Government enquiries have a habit of concluding what the government enquiring wants them to conclude.

Not least because the government and bodies under its direct control are not merely the main source of intelligence, but also the only authority on what sources of information actually exist.
 
I've just watched the supposed "proof" video.

I can't even tell that (a) it is in the Gulf of Oman or (b) that it was filmed this year.

The black and white part wouldn't look out-of-place on some old documentary on the Talking Pictures TV channel.


Two words. Flag and False. Not necessarily in that order.
 
The obvious aggressor is America, or maybe Israel; trying to curry favour.

Why would Iran attack shipping there, particularly in there own back yard.

Where were the ships coming from and going to ?

And Yes, the crew of one ship reported a 'projectile' hitting the ship.

Why would an Iranian vessel be involved in removing a mine from the tanker ? Easy, so they could trace it back to it's manufacturer. And someone had to remove it. No port is going to let a chemical tanker into port with a magnetic mine clamped to it's hull.

Trump is spoiling for a war,

Hopefully if he manages to start one, New York will be the first place the Iranians take out in retaliation.

The US has got away with hit and run wars for far too long.

I have no wish to see anyone killed, from any country. But maybe it is time the pain was more evenly distributed.

Of course, I expect this post to disappear faster than a politicians promise.

INT21
 
INT21 said:
The obvious aggressor is America, or maybe Israel; trying to curry favour.

Why would Iran attack shipping there, particularly in there own back yard.

Where were the ships coming from and going to ?

And Yes, the crew of one ship reported a 'projectile' hitting the ship.

Why would an Iranian vessel be involved in removing a mine from the tanker ? Easy, so they could trace it back to it's manufacturer. And someone had to remove it. No port is going to let a chemical tanker into port with a magnetic mine clamped to it's hull.

Trump is spoiling for a war,

Hopefully if he manages to start one, New York will be the first place the Iranians take out in retaliation.

The US has got away with hit and run wars for far too long.

I have no wish to see anyone killed, from any country. But maybe it is time the pain was more evenly distributed.

Of course, I expect this post to disappear faster than a politicians promise.

INT21
Click to expand...

I don't think Trump is actually looking for a war in spite of his bellicose Tweets. Trump got the Japanese PM to go to Iran as an intermediary. be really crazy of the Iranians to attack ships in that context.

However the NeoCons like Bolton and Pompeo do want war, they are more likely to be behind this.

I don't want to see war in the Gulf and I don't want to see attacks on New York.
 
ramonmercado said:
I don't think Trump is actually looking for a war in spite of his bellicose Tweets. Trump got the Japanese PM to go to Iran as an intermediary. be really crazy of the Iranians to attack ships in that context.

However the NeoCons like Bolton and Pompeo do want war, they are more likely to be behind this.

I don't want to see war in the Gulf and I don't want to see attacks on New York.
Click to expand...

I don't want to see war in the Gulf and I don't want to see attacks on New York.
Click to expand...

You won't..One is scared and the other one is glad of it....And it would be a sad day if war is caused by some pompous big mouth billionaire in the White House.
 
Ramonmercado,

Like you, I do not wish for any more wars to break out anywhere. But I do think that any country that starts a war should be left with wounds to lick, even if they come out on top. Otherwise what is to make them think twice before starting another one ?

The USA has never been hurt in any of its wars as it is geographically isolated from the rest of the world. Yes, thousands of their troops gave their lives in conflicts; but the home, where all the families live, was never hit.

That is an important point worth remembering.

The only other likely country would be Saudi Arabia. Iran's historical enemy.

But Saudi Arabia is too close. Just over the water. It would get badly hurt in any war that resulted.

And Russia and China are allied to Iran. Does Donald really wish to upset his two closest buddies, Vlad and Xi ?

No doubt we will eventually find out who did it.

Don't forget the other two ships that were attacked whilst still in port.

INT21.
 
INT21 said:
Ramonmercado,

Like you, I do not wish for any more wars to break out anywhere. But I do think that any country that starts a war should be left with wounds to lick, even if they come out on top. Otherwise what is to make them think twice before starting another one ?

The USA has never been hurt in any of its wars as it is geographically isolated from the rest of the world. Yes, thousands of their troops gave their lives in conflicts; but the home, where all the families live, was never hit.

That is an important point worth remembering.

The only other likely country would be Saudi Arabia. Iran's historical enemy.

But Saudi Arabia is too close. Just over the water. It would get badly hurt in any war that resulted.

And Russia and China are allied to Iran. Does donald really wish to upset his two closest buddies, Vlad and Xi ?

No doubt we will eventually find out who did it.

Don't forget the other two ships that were attacked whilst still in port.

INT21.
Click to expand...

The USA has never been hurt in any of its wars as it is geographically isolated from the rest of the world.
Click to expand...

Never been hurt huh! Why don't you tell that to the loved ones of the thousands of loved ones who have lost husbands, sons and daughters who were killed in those wars! Seems you have a grudge against the US...Well, why don't the next time one of those countries gets their ass in a sling let them fend for themselves! Let's see how that goes....At least the US has the guts to honor something we cherish and that's "freedom"...fighting to let others live free is apparently something you don't cherish very much.

I served almost 7 years in the military and thankfully never had to shoot any one.....Nothing gets my gaul worst than some one who has no frigging idea about what these men and women go through in the military....Then cry out in a public forum that the US has never been hurt! Like hell we haven't!
 
Enough, already! ... :roll:​

How about some constructive discussion on whether the purported evidence adds up?

For example ... Has anyone checked to see if the boat in the purported mine-removal imagery matches any known Iranian patrol craft? The Iranian naval forces operate a number of such vessels.
 
INT21 said:
The obvious aggressor is America...

Trump is spoiling for a war...
Click to expand...

This would be the same President Trump rebuked by Congress for withdrawing troops from Syria and Afghanistan?

The same President Trump engaged in political discussions with the Taliban in Afghanistan, after stating that America will not fight “endless wars”?

After seeing the cost in blood and treasure of wars in minor, backward Islamic states, you think that President Trump is now trying to provoke a war with the eighth largest army in the world?

Why? Oil? The USA is virtually, if not now completely, self-sufficient in oil.

To prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power? Israel will take dare of that, as it has before.

maximus otter
 
US: "it was mines, we have video of them being removed from the tankers"
Tanker: "we saw things flying through the air"
US: "and missiles too! We just didn't say that, because reasons".

Also,
US: "it was mines, we have video of them being removed from the tankers"
but no one on the tanker noticed a ship pull up to the tanker close enough to touch it, attach mines, go away, then come back later and remove mines that didn't explode.
 
Have done preliminary digging.

These are just thoughts from me and others I've read. I have no case to build or theory to support as of yet.

I invite answers.

1) The video shows ten men crowded on board a small vessel. They are standing right behind the man removing a supposedly live 'mine'. This is 'keystone cops' stuff. Do they all end up with puffed out hair and soot on their faces if it explodes?

2) Those ten men are working in broad daylight, wearing life-jackets designed to increase visibility.

3) Why is the 'limpet mine' attached to the tanker at such a high level above the waterline?

4) The footage has been degraded to remove the contrast. Infrared cameras are usually rather good at picking out sharp human figures from cool ocean and metal. A quick look at images of men and vessels at sea will show that in this case the contrast and, consequently, the 'depth' of the image has been reduced. It has also been zoomed to an unhelpful degree.

5) These contextual data that almost always accompanies such footage from U.S. military aircraft has been removed: time co-ordinates, speed, angle etc.

This last one might be in order to conceal classified information.
 
Yithian,

..3) Why is the 'limpet mine' attached to the tanker at such a high level above the waterline? ..

Exactly what I wondered the moment I saw the image of the tanker's side.

Minimalists,

..I served almost 7 years in the military and thankfully never had to shoot any one.....Nothing gets my gaul worst than some one who has no frigging idea about what these men and women go through in the military....Then cry out in a public forum that the US has never been hurt! Like hell we haven't! ..

I don't think you actually understood what was written. In fact you flew off the handle at the first hint of criticism, as many of your countrymen (and women) do.

Let's take your paragraph apart.

Seven years in the military. I do believe we have had this discussion already. Maybe on a different forum under different user names (I recognnise your avatar) when I mentioned that I also had served in the Army for seven years. So please don't give me the spiel abut not knowing anything about the military.

You really aught to check your facts before hitting the keyboard in anger.

I was, as most will have understood, talking about the attacks on the lower 48 States during World War Two.

As far as I am aware, there were none. There was an incident where a picnic party found a Japanese balloon bomb, and caused it to go off. This resulted in six dead.

To the best of my knowledge, these were the only people killed in the lower 48 during WWII; please correct me if I'm wrong. No one is disputing the sacrifices made by American military personnel. We did lose a few ourselves, as did all the Allied nations.

My point is that your country did not suffer the loss of a vast majority of it's infrastructure due to enemy action. All the folks there were able to carry on their normal everyday lives.
and after the war was over, they did not have to go through a major rebuild of their industry. Nor did they have to live on rations as we did until the early fifties.

I'm glad for that as I have relations in the States, and parcels from them helped us through those times.

So, 50 to 55 Million civilians killed in Europe, six in the US. You see the disparity.

The thing is, if a country continually manages to avoid it's people (civilians) and it's infrastructure being destroyed then it does not know what it is like to be on the wrong end of the stick. And the civilians of today are not as attuned to the grief as are those who spent five years being continually bombed and shelled as those who did. We had to observe strict black out procedures due to the thread of bombers at night.

So they are more likely to support hawkish tactics.

So, To sum up.

I also served the same length of time in the military as you did; and I also never had to shoot at anyone, though I was shot at a couple of time in Aden.

A large part of my country, and even more of mainland Europe was destroyed, None of yours was.

I lost my grandfather in WWI, and two uncles and an aunt in WWII. So my family paid it's dues.

I have no objection to anyone disagreeing with me on anything, but please check the facts first.

INT21.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top