PotWR- US/Israel v. Iran

Discussion in 'The War Room' started by HomerThompson, Jan 2, 2018.

?

Will we go to war with Iran this year?

  1. Yes

    10.2%
  2. No

    89.8%
  1. InternetHero

    InternetHero Titanium Belt

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2006
    Messages:
    35,058
    Likes Received:
    3,660
    Location:
    Tiger Mountain
    Homer is looking like the ultimate riverboat gambler.

    I thought he was bluffing, but Homer started with two pair, and that hand is starting to look like a full house.

    One more card and he wins the War Room.
     
    Pupi, luckyshot and HomerThompson like this.
  2. Fawlty

    Fawlty radical centrist

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2015
    Messages:
    20,952
    Likes Received:
    37,301
    Location:
    The CK Creamery
    Pupi, kickboxjh and HomerThompson like this.
  3. sniper

    sniper Sergei Kharitonov

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2005
    Messages:
    6,073
    Likes Received:
    15,453
  4. kickboxjh

    kickboxjh Green Belt

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2010
    Messages:
    1,126
    Likes Received:
    1,424
    C'mon guys war is good, we're going to seen as liberators by the Iranian prople. Regime change always works and is definitely in America's interests. Israel is our cloest ally. Never forget the holocaust. We need to help secure their northern border.
     
    HomerThompson likes this.
  5. ocfightfan

    ocfightfan Gold Belt

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2006
    Messages:
    18,933
    Likes Received:
    6,502
    Location:
    The Mean Streets of West Linn
    They are already at war.
     
  6. VivaRevolution

    VivaRevolution Whoopin' Belt

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2016
    Messages:
    17,781
    Likes Received:
    16,369
    Pravda: Iran nuclear deal dilemma: Six steps to World War Three
    By
    VT Senior Editors
    -
    May 7, 2018
    4
    2734
    [​IMG]

    Emmanuel Macron warned of the possible beginning of World War Three should the United States withdraw from the nuclear deal with Iran. Let us imagine how events may develop if Donald Trump torpedoes this agreement on May 12.


    The UN Security Council has been developing the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, commonly known as Iran’s nuclear program, for more than a decade. The plan says that Tehran should refuse from attempts to either build or possess nuclear weapons. In return, the international community undertakes to gradually lift international and national sanctions from Iran in trade, technology, finance and energy. However, President Donald Trump considers the “nuclear deal” with Iran insane and threatens to withdraw from it unilaterally.

    Trump has a personal aversion to Iran
    “The elimination of the symbolic nuclear agreement with Iran from 2015 would open a Pandora’s box – this could mean war,” Macron told the German newspaper Der Spiegel. European leaders used to reject the position of the United States on the subject. These days, however, they are ready to consider a few aspects that the deal does not embrace, such as, for example, the development of ballistic missiles – a weapon designed to deliver nuclear bombs to their targets.

    Dmitry Abzalov, President of the Center for Strategic Communications, told Pravda.Ru that Donald Trump would most likely torpedo the Iran deal on Saturday. “Trump has an aversion to Iran, and Mueller’s investigation brings to light a few of those close to him. Secondly, Israel’s Netanyahu actively supports Donald Trump. The two politicians will try to take advantage of the Iranian issue to switch public attention to questions of foreign, rather than domestic policies,” the expert told Pravda.Ru.

    As for the Europeans, they have economic interests in Iran, Abzalov believes. It goes about colossal investments in the Iranian fuel and energy complex and the joint German-French project to supply Airbus aircraft to Iran. “Torpedoing the Iran nuclear deal would strike a serious blow on European businesses that will fear secondary sanctions on the dollar market. USA’s unilateral withdrawal from the Iran deal will lead to higher tensions in the region,” Dmitry Abzalov told Pravda.Ru.

    Six steps to WWIII: Trump torpedos Iran deal
    Let us assume that Donald Trump will not extend the deal. This is the first step. Step two – Tehran will immediately resume uranium enrichment works. This was announced by the chief of Iran’s Atomic Organisation Ali Akbar Salehi and Iranian President Hassan Rouhani himself. Step three – Washington will reinstate the sanctions, while Russia and China fail to pass resolutions condemning Washington through the UN Security Council because of the silence of the Europeans. Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia and Turkey say that they also launch uranium enrichment operations to protect their people from the insanity of the Iranian regime.

    Most likely, Israel has had nuclear weapons for a long time already. As a result, we will see four nuclear powers in the Middle East in a few years, where ISIS* is still struggling to survive. North Korea will be willing to revisit its nuclear ambition as well, and the principle of non-proliferation of nuclear weapons will go down in history forever.

    The United States may prefer to start bombing Iranian nuclear facilities immediately after receiving a signal about the resumption of uranium enrichment works (step four). However, Iran keeps those objects hidden in mountains, and even a massive attack on the Islamic Republic will not be able to break Iran’s nuclear potential. The appearance of the bomb will be delayed, but the reaction to the attack will follow immediately.

    Step five – Iran will block the Strait of Hormuz – a transport corridor for almost one-third of global oil trade. Oil prices will skyrocket. Step six – Hezbollah will strike Israel, and the conflict will start snowballing with Syria and possibly, Lebanon and Palestine joining in. Iran can also help the Houthis in their struggle against Saudi Arabia, and the war on the Arabian Peninsula will erupt with a vengeance, which, in fact, will lead to the grand finale as Emmanuel Macron described it.

    The US will benefit from such a development: USA’s shale oil and LNG will not be too expensive for Europe against the background of high world prices on oil. A new war in the Middle East will bring new loans and orders for the US defence industry. This would contribute to the growth of the American industry and create jobs, jobs, jobs, as Trump promised.

    Preparations for a war with Tehran are in full swing: an American court ordered Iran to pay billion-dollar compensations to victims of 9/11 attacks; Benjamin Netanyahu promulgated intelligence materials to prove that Tehran had retained its military nuclear program after the conclusion of the nuclear deal. The ayatollah regime in Iran may collapse, unless, of course, Iran shows consolidated resistance.

    Can Iran count on support from Russia and China? The two countries will most likely refuse to join international sanctions against Iran. However, such a humble move will not save Iran in the dollar-pegged global economy. Moscow may thus lose a landmark ally in the region. This could be another long-term goal of the United States and Israel


    https://www.veteranstoday.com/2018/...ar-deal-dilemma-six-steps-to-world-war-three/
     
    Pupi, HomerThompson and Fawlty like this.
  7. Seaside

    Seaside Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2017
    Messages:
    6,101
    Likes Received:
    4,174
    Location:
    3rd world
    you really want world war III you are obsessed with it.
     
  8. Fawlty

    Fawlty radical centrist

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2015
    Messages:
    20,952
    Likes Received:
    37,301
    Location:
    The CK Creamery
    This is a reasonable, pessimistic but level-headed look at what could happen. It doesn't have to happen this way (and it likely won't), but it's hard to imagine that the non-proliferation principle will survive. It's the most dangerous thing the United States has done since the Cuban Missile crisis. Every road from the dissolution of the Iran deal is covered in landmines. It's just possible that diplomacy can still work, but the chain reaction he is describing is not quite as contingent and unlikely as these sorts of prophecies usually are. He could even be underestimating the danger.
     
  9. Fawlty

    Fawlty radical centrist

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2015
    Messages:
    20,952
    Likes Received:
    37,301
    Location:
    The CK Creamery
    Do you recognize the extreme danger that scuttling this deal can very easily lead to SA and Turkey arming up with nukes? And that we can easily be drawn into a war with Iran that everybody agrees is a lot more destabilizing and perilous than the war with Iraq was (which proved to be almost catastrophically destabilizing)? VivaR is certainly obsessive, but the sky might actually be falling here.
     
  10. Seaside

    Seaside Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2017
    Messages:
    6,101
    Likes Received:
    4,174
    Location:
    3rd world
    In my opinion only thing that makes WWIII is if china fights the US/NATO or if Russia fights US/NATO.

    My prediction and guess is that once Iran is regime changed depending how the US handles it they could in fact get a moderate pro western government but most likely scenario is Iran becomes a russian allied secular state which I think would benefit russia more than currently being allied with the equvailent of saudi arabia. I think Iran is to Russia what Saudi arabia is to the US.. Iran does not have the type of islam, the demographics etc that would see its population waging war for jihad for decades etc. Iran problem is it ruling government but they are fighting losing battle because iranians are less religious then when the religious government took over in the 1980s.

    I dont think the saudis will get nukes or want to so long as Iran is defeated but they do say they will if Iran gets nukes or gets stronger. Taking out Iran i think would stop that. Turkey with Erdogan is wild card and i could see them pursuing it. Ideally the US would work to stop that. Even if the fighting somehow became all arab and middle eastern countries against Israel and the west yeah that could be WW3 but i dont think that would be end of world scenario unless russia or china got involved. The US would destroy them all i think if they took the gloves off which they would in such scenario. I am most worried about pakistan and india since i have always liked india history and people.


    I think most likely iran get regime changed and kurdistan is created officially with parts of syria, iraq and western iran. Israel takes out hezbollah and probably push palestinians into jordan and takes some larger area around golan heights since syria be fractured. Assad has to go and a new syria is partioned created. I think Saudi and egypt etc will keep the peace they have with Israelis and US. We never know what future will look like but I dont think ww3 end of world scenario will happen.


    Also given how most of the arab world worships the saudis and egypt i really doubt they will fight the US. They all want Iran threat taken out. After that who knows. I personally hope the US has some plans to denuke pakistan and north korea.
     
    Fawlty likes this.
  11. Fawlty

    Fawlty radical centrist

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2015
    Messages:
    20,952
    Likes Received:
    37,301
    Location:
    The CK Creamery
    Your best-case scenario here involves a war that is a lot bigger than the Iraq War. I recognize that the sort of picture you're painting is just as likely as any other, but I see it as one of the better ones. The only better scenario I can think of is that Iran doesn't go for the bomb, and that Israel stays on her chain, somehow. The worse scenarios get very grim very quickly- they involve nukes being dropped, or at least nukes being acquired.
     
  12. Seaside

    Seaside Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2017
    Messages:
    6,101
    Likes Received:
    4,174
    Location:
    3rd world
    there are some benefits for Russia and china if Iran is regime changed. Russia gets to rebuild the new secular iran as iranians some will be thankful to US but most would probably prefer to deal with EU and russia since those parties have been more helpful to Iranians even when most iranians did not like their elected government while the US has been destabilizing. Russia also would have strong case against US in world stage because people would know that the US cannot be trusted on it word. meaning Russia can rebuild the soviet sphere of stability and expand Eurasian union and include Iran in it along with all other soviet states except ukraine and baltics but ukraine may eventually join since they not likely to join EU anytime soon or UK will fracture along lingustic lines. China would be in better position. Kurdistan would likely get created, Israel would be safer from taking out its biggest threats and maybe more territory. The US would have harmed its image globally in terms of diplomacy but given how powerful the US is you guys will still have strong power and ability i think to bounce back.
    Basically the biggest winners would be china and russia i think and israel if it means they can defeat hezbollah and get the whole west bank. the world become more multipolar which i think is inevitable. That why i dont see the Iran thing as end of world scenario. It has potential to really benefit China and Russia and even India. I think for the foreseeable future though the US will have latin america on lock.
     
  13. Fawlty

    Fawlty radical centrist

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2015
    Messages:
    20,952
    Likes Received:
    37,301
    Location:
    The CK Creamery
    I think in general, you're way too confident that you can predict what will happen. Like way, way, way too confident.
     
    moreorless87 likes this.
  14. Seaside

    Seaside Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2017
    Messages:
    6,101
    Likes Received:
    4,174
    Location:
    3rd world
    no more than anyone else in here. honestly anything can happen. I make threads before insulting people who are not in power or who are who are so confident they know the future. None of us do. That just what i think will happen and dont think it is that unreasonable. Would you not agree china and russia would have ways to gain from the US proving it is not reliable partner?
     
  15. Fawlty

    Fawlty radical centrist

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2015
    Messages:
    20,952
    Likes Received:
    37,301
    Location:
    The CK Creamery
    Generally I think China and Russia would benefit from the US being a reliable partner. If we're not, it might benefit them relative to us, or it might hurt them. It's really complicated man.
     
  16. Seaside

    Seaside Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2017
    Messages:
    6,101
    Likes Received:
    4,174
    Location:
    3rd world
    I think anything is possible. that is why i find it funny to people who are so convinced their way is only right way and that they ´know´the future. In 15 years half the world could be dead and whatever you dreamed could not be possible could be happening. yeah it is complicated the world is.
     
  17. VivaRevolution

    VivaRevolution Whoopin' Belt

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2016
    Messages:
    17,781
    Likes Received:
    16,369
    Blocking the straights of hormuz is a economic nuke on the world.

    If the US goes to war with Iran, this will happen.

    Nukes are a huge deal. Oil prices skyrocketing could kill just as many people as nukes. 1/3rd of the worlds oil travels through the straights of hormuz.
     
    Fawlty likes this.
  18. Anung Un Rama

    Anung Un Rama The Right Hand of Doom Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2009
    Messages:
    61,592
    Likes Received:
    45,086
    Location:
    22 Acacia Avenue


    edit: this is a great discussion. its not really 2+ hours; its only about 90'.
     
    Last edited: May 14, 2018
    VivaRevolution and HomerThompson like this.
  19. HomerThompson

    HomerThompson President of the War Room Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2005
    Messages:
    37,375
    Likes Received:
    55,079
    Location:
    Terror Lake
  20. VivaRevolution

    VivaRevolution Whoopin' Belt

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2016
    Messages:
    17,781
    Likes Received:
    16,369
    The Russian-Israeli-Iranian conundrum in Syria
    Moscow is playing a clever game of diplomacy and managing to maintain ties with all the major players
    By M.K. BHADRAKUMARMAY 15, 2018 12:09 PM (UTC+8)
    [​IMG]
    Russian President Vladimir Putin with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the Kremlin in Moscow on May 9, 2018. Photo: AFP/Sergei Ilnitsky

    More often than not in life, there is a simple explanation. But speculation has a habit of taking flight because of its seductive appeal.

    The visit by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to Moscow on May 9 and his meeting with President Vladimir Putin has fueled rumors that the two struck a Faustian deal allowing Tel Aviv a free hand to destroy Iran’s Quds Force and Iran-backed militia deployed to Syria.

    The dailyReport

    Must-reads from across Asia - directly to your inbox
    Such speculation arose due to two reasons. One, immediately after Netanyahu’s return to Tel Aviv, Israel launched its biggest air strike on enemy targets anywhere in the world since the 1973 Yom Kippur War when 30 Israeli jets attacked bases in Syria on May 10. And, like in the Sherlock Holmes story where the dog didn’t bark, Moscow refrained from reacting.

    Two, Russian media reported the following day that Moscow would not transfer the advanced S-300 missile defense system to Syria after all. Now, doesn’t that imply that Putin had a rethink after the talks with Netanyahu on May 9?

    But, consider the following. Moscow was aware that the Israeli attack on May 10 was provoked by a missile attack on the Golan Heights from Syrian territory and that it was in retaliation for the Israeli attack on Syrian bases on April 8, which killed seven Iranian personnel.

    Simply put, Moscow passively watched dozens of missiles rain back and forth on April 8 and May 10 and had no reason to apportion blame to either side. Its silence was deafening.

    Syria’s air defense system
    Quite wisely so, because Russia does not want to get entangled in what should strictly remain a Syrian-Iranian brawl with Israel. Period. On the other hand, the Russian Defense Ministry carefully monitored that about half of the 60-odd missiles fired by the Israeli jets were shot down on May 10, which of course meant two things.

    One, the Syrian air defense system is once again proving its mettle – according to the Russian Defense Ministry, the Syrians shot down more than 70 of the 130 missiles fired by the US, UK and France during the April 14 air strike.

    Two, stemming from the above, Moscow assesses that any major upgrade of the Syrian air defense system can be put on hold for the present.

    Moscow is on record as saying that if an emergency situation arises, Russia will be in a position to transfer S-300 missiles and launch pads to Syria in short notice in about a month’s time. Theoretically, such a situation arises if Syria again faces the threat of a Western attack. But there are no signs of such a thing happening in the near-term.

    Unsurprisingly, the Kremlin came down hard on speculation that its decision not to transfer S-300 missiles to Syria was at the behest of Netanyahu. Presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov flagged on May 11 that Moscow’s decision predated Netanyahu’s visit. And TASS gave a detailed explanation that there never was a concrete decision in the first instance to supply Syria with the S-300s and, therefore, the question of scrapping any decision simply does not arise.

    Evidently, at the root of all this wild media speculation is an unseemly haste to give a spin that Putin is “pro-Israeli.” But it is really a clumsy attempt. The point is, the Russians are not one-dimensional men.

    Russian diplomacy has a great tradition of juggling many balls in the air. Russia manages its friendly relations concurrently with China and Vietnam, Turkey and Greece (and Cyprus), Iran and Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Egypt, Iran and Jordan and so on – and in a conceivable future, probably India and Pakistan as well.

    Simply put, what Iran can give Moscow, Israel cannot – and vice versa. Moscow wants good relations with both Iran and Israel, because they serve different purposes in Russian foreign policy. Having said that, Russia does not subscribe to what Iran calls the “resistance front” in Syria.

    But then, Russia also appreciates that Iran and Hezbollah’s presence in Syria is at the invitation of Damascus and is critically important in the fight against the extremist groups. Quite obviously, Russia refuses to share the Israeli perceptions of Hezbollah as a terrorist group. If anything, the results of the May 6 election in Lebanon would only reinforce the Russian belief that Hezbollah is a legitimate political force to be reckoned with.

    The many contradictions
    Clearly, in these complex circumstances, it is unrealistic to expect Russia to be party to any Israeli agenda to vanquish the Iranian and Hezbollah presence on Syrian territory. On the other hand, Russia will also not oppose Israel or Syria’s need to safeguard their respective security interests and/or act in self-defense.

    Thus, while Russia criticized Israel for its April 8 missile attacks on Syria, which triggered the present action-reaction syndrome, by calling it a dangerous move, it refused to get excited about either the retaliatory missile attack on Israel from Syria on May 10 or the swift Israeli counter-attack on Syria soon after.

    But the contradiction goes beyond this. The point is, Russia also has a congruence of interests with Damascus and Tehran in preserving the unity of Syria and in strengthening its national sovereignty. Russia, therefore, cannot condone external parties attempting to balkanize Syria or to impede Damascus’ drive to regain control of the entire country.

    It follows logically that Russia will help the Syrian armed forces to develop the capability to stabilize the situation within that country. Quite obviously, Russia believes that it is Syria’s sovereign prerogative to develop the power of deterrence – just like Israel or Lebanon in the region.

    What cannot be overlooked is that even without Russia’s S-300 missiles, Syrian air defense capabilities will continue to be upgraded with outside help, including Iranian help. Perhaps, this is already happening and Moscow must be aware of it too while making the considered assessment that at present there is no requirement to dispatch S-300 missiles to Syria. After all, nothing concerning the military balance in Syria escapes Russia’s notice.Suffice to say, the Kremlin readout of the conversation between Putin and Netanyahu in Moscow on May 9 takes the breath away. One cannot recall Putin speaking with such effusive warmth at a personal level with a foreign leader in recent times – not even with Iranian leader Hassan Rouhani or Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad, who are Moscow’s key allies. This is Russian diplomacy at its best in very trying times


    http://www.atimes.com/article/the-russian-israeli-iranian-conundrum-in-syria/
     

Share This Page