Politics Super Thread - keep it all in here

[Ponyo]

Mann...I'm not taking any sides here as you see. My general point was war isn't good.

Politics aside, innocent people suffer on all sides and that's a cruel fate to adjust to


Understood and there is no argument that war is good. But if the US embassy (full of civilians) is attacked and set alight as it was on Wednesday, can you imagine any scenario where there wouldnt be retaliation for that?

Stop trying to goad me. It's an army barrack not an embassy. And there was no danger of there being a breach, at all. It was secured by US & Iraqi forces within minutes. The US officially pulled out of Iraq not long ago if you remember, they are there under mandate from the Iraqi government to train and supervise Iraqi troops, not to drone local and foreign government officials unilaterally. You're an intelligent guy but you're being very shortsighted and partisan here. The US has wanted this war since the 1979 Iranian revolution when the western backed Shah fell and the Ayatollah rose to power. Look a bit deeper.

"can you imagine any scenario where there wouldnt be retaliation for that?"

Off the top of my head yes I can. China exercised great restraint in this situation:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_bombing_of_the_Chinese_embassy_in_Belgrade

 

[twentyforty]

Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon is the US face of a global trend. A lot of politicians are realising that Nationalistic policies will get them elected. US, Britain, Eastern Europe etc.

Trumps deluded ramblings are often in response to criticism or policy advice that are based on global benefits. This is exactly what his supporter base expects, their immediate local concerns to take priority.

His opponents need to stop playing the man and play the ball.

I would like to see national debt figures for the last 3 presidents for reference. Even the guardian was saying the election will be tight as even those that detest the man cannot dismiss the economic benefits he has delivered so far.

Ok that's sound logic. Now can you point to a Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon rambling which has had a negative affect on either you or the country in which you live?

 

[twentyforty]

Geez, regardless of anyone's leaning, one President acted for all his constituents, whilst the other dog whistles and attacks children or others that don't agree with him on Twitter, there is no comparison to be made.

Plus the first Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon economic policy change of any significance came into affect on January 1 2018, when the previous government's policies were already achieving the same gains that he wants to claim. It also caused further acceleration of the National debt, but hey, everyone with open eyes knew that was going to happen.


What a load of crap. I keep telling you to get off the ABC and CNN.

You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

Geez, regardless of anyone's leaning, one President acted for all his constituents, whilst the other dog whistles and attacks children or others that don't agree with him on Twitter, there is no comparison to be made.

Plus the first Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon economic policy change of any significance came into affect on January 1 2018, when the previous government's policies were already achieving the same gains that he wants to claim. It also caused further acceleration of the National debt, but hey, everyone with open eyes knew that was going to happen.


What a load of crap. I keep telling you to get off the ABC and CNN.

You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.


Yeah FG, get off CNN. They’re the ones telling you Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon attacks people who are critical of him, even children. That’s obviously something you can’t read yourself when you look at his Twitter feed.

The best part of it is, that more often than not I get that sort of stuff from the night time far right night shows on SKY news here on Foxtel where it is glorified in a 'he really put that child in her place' attitude.

I enjoyed reading the last few pages after having a rest and the breaking down of individual points, along with the hilarity of it. Imagine having to nit pick on a few points when there are literally hundreds, if not thousands to chose from.

As opposed to when Obama was in power and you would have been tuning in to The View to see what he was up to?

Honest question Ck, and i’m asking you in as genuine a manner as possible. Cos I’m intrigued.

How do you feel when he goes off script and he rambles about flushing toilets 15 times, needing ID to buy groceries, windmills causing cancer etc. These aren’t things you believe too are they?


Why are you getting yourself in a tither about what Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon rambles on about?

A tither? I was quite calm and genuinely curious. Given the way you’ve dodged me though, I’m not expecting you to see any merit in what I’m asking. Unsurprisingly.

Apologies, I’ve been busy. I was also confused by your assertions and deliberate misinterpretation of my posts.
My question to you was sincere and a clumsy attempt at asking you “how are Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon’s ramblings , as you put it, having a negative affect on your life?” I’m assuming you are a US citizen?

 

[GNR4LIFE]

Geez, regardless of anyone's leaning, one President acted for all his constituents, whilst the other dog whistles and attacks children or others that don't agree with him on Twitter, there is no comparison to be made.

Plus the first Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon economic policy change of any significance came into affect on January 1 2018, when the previous government's policies were already achieving the same gains that he wants to claim. It also caused further acceleration of the National debt, but hey, everyone with open eyes knew that was going to happen.


What a load of crap. I keep telling you to get off the ABC and CNN.

You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

Geez, regardless of anyone's leaning, one President acted for all his constituents, whilst the other dog whistles and attacks children or others that don't agree with him on Twitter, there is no comparison to be made.

Plus the first Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon economic policy change of any significance came into affect on January 1 2018, when the previous government's policies were already achieving the same gains that he wants to claim. It also caused further acceleration of the National debt, but hey, everyone with open eyes knew that was going to happen.


What a load of crap. I keep telling you to get off the ABC and CNN.

You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.


Yeah FG, get off CNN. They’re the ones telling you Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon attacks people who are critical of him, even children. That’s obviously something you can’t read yourself when you look at his Twitter feed.

The best part of it is, that more often than not I get that sort of stuff from the night time far right night shows on SKY news here on Foxtel where it is glorified in a 'he really put that child in her place' attitude.

I enjoyed reading the last few pages after having a rest and the breaking down of individual points, along with the hilarity of it. Imagine having to nit pick on a few points when there are literally hundreds, if not thousands to chose from.

As opposed to when Obama was in power and you would have been tuning in to The View to see what he was up to?

Honest question Ck, and i’m asking you in as genuine a manner as possible. Cos I’m intrigued.

How do you feel when he goes off script and he rambles about flushing toilets 15 times, needing ID to buy groceries, windmills causing cancer etc. These aren’t things you believe too are they?


Why are you getting yourself in a tither about what Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon rambles on about?

A tither? I was quite calm and genuinely curious. Given the way you’ve dodged me though, I’m not expecting you to see any merit in what I’m asking. Unsurprisingly.


Apologies, I’ve been busy. I was also confused by your assertions and deliberate misinterpretation of my posts.
My question to you was sincere and a clumsy attempt at asking you “how are Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon’s ramblings , as you put it, having a negative affect on your life?” I’m assuming you are a US citizen?

Believe it or not, I see the funny side of it sometimes. It’s really knocked the US down a peg or two having a leader who other world leaders openly mock at NATO

 

[Tiger5150]

Mann...I'm not taking any sides here as you see. My general point was war isn't good.

Politics aside, innocent people suffer on all sides and that's a cruel fate to adjust to


Understood and there is no argument that war is good. But if the US embassy (full of civilians) is attacked and set alight as it was on Wednesday, can you imagine any scenario where there wouldnt be retaliation for that?

Stop trying to goad me. It's an army barrack not an embassy. And there was no danger of there being a breach, at all. It was secured by US & Iraqi forces within minutes. The US officially pulled out of Iraq not long ago if you remember, they are there under mandate from the Iraqi government to train and supervise Iraqi troops, not to drone local and foreign government officials unilaterally. You're an intelligent guy but you're being very shortsighted and partisan here. The US has wanted this war since the 1979 Iranian revolution when the western backed Shah fell and the Ayatollah rose to power. Look a bit deeper.

"can you imagine any scenario where there wouldnt be retaliation for that?"

Off the top of my head yes I can. China exercised great restraint in this situation:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_bombing_of_the_Chinese_embassy_in_Belgrade

Are you serious? It was the US Embassy in Baghdad. Judging by the photos there was more than a danger of a breach.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2020/01/02/us-embassy-baghdad-attack-damage-fort-bragg-deployment/2793781001/

https://www.militarytimes.com/flashpoints/2020/01/02/photos-reveal-damage-to-us-embassy-in-baghdad-following-attack-by-supporters-of-iran-backed-militia/

Im not trying to goad you at all. i am just not sure of what the motivation would be to deny that the airstrike was clearly provoked?

 

[Ponyo]

Yes, yes, yes, you're right Glenn

 

[Tiger5150]

Yes, yes, yes, you're right Glenn

Mate, I'm just having a discussion on a politics forum. There is nothing personal. I respect your right to have a different opinion to mine but as I said I'm curious as your rationale that this attack wasnt provoked.

 

[TillLindemann]

Mann...I'm not taking any sides here as you see. My general point was war isn't good.

Politics aside, innocent people suffer on all sides and that's a cruel fate to adjust to


Understood and there is no argument that war is good. But if the US embassy (full of civilians) is attacked and set alight as it was on Wednesday, can you imagine any scenario where there wouldnt be retaliation for that?

Stop trying to goad me. It's an army barrack not an embassy. And there was no danger of there being a breach, at all. It was secured by US & Iraqi forces within minutes. The US officially pulled out of Iraq not long ago if you remember, they are there under mandate from the Iraqi government to train and supervise Iraqi troops, not to drone local and foreign government officials unilaterally. You're an intelligent guy but you're being very shortsighted and partisan here. The US has wanted this war since the 1979 Iranian revolution when the western backed Shah fell and the Ayatollah rose to power. Look a bit deeper.

"can you imagine any scenario where there wouldnt be retaliation for that?"

Off the top of my head yes I can. China exercised great restraint in this situation:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_bombing_of_the_Chinese_embassy_in_Belgrade

Are you serious? It was the US Embassy in Baghdad. Judging by the photos there was more than a danger of a breach.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2020/01/02/us-embassy-baghdad-attack-damage-fort-bragg-deployment/2793781001/

https://www.militarytimes.com/flashpoints/2020/01/02/photos-reveal-damage-to-us-embassy-in-baghdad-following-attack-by-supporters-of-iran-backed-militia/

Im not trying to goad you at all. i am just not sure of what the motivation would be to deny that the airstrike was clearly provoked?

What happened at the embassy was a protest against a prior US bombing attack. Which in turn was in response to a rocket attack. Which in turn was in response to .....

man, the 2003 invasion of Iraq was dumb.

 

[swag_tiger]

The hashtag WWIII has started up.

 

[Tiger5150]

Mann...I'm not taking any sides here as you see. My general point was war isn't good.

Politics aside, innocent people suffer on all sides and that's a cruel fate to adjust to


Understood and there is no argument that war is good. But if the US embassy (full of civilians) is attacked and set alight as it was on Wednesday, can you imagine any scenario where there wouldnt be retaliation for that?

Stop trying to goad me. It's an army barrack not an embassy. And there was no danger of there being a breach, at all. It was secured by US & Iraqi forces within minutes. The US officially pulled out of Iraq not long ago if you remember, they are there under mandate from the Iraqi government to train and supervise Iraqi troops, not to drone local and foreign government officials unilaterally. You're an intelligent guy but you're being very shortsighted and partisan here. The US has wanted this war since the 1979 Iranian revolution when the western backed Shah fell and the Ayatollah rose to power. Look a bit deeper.

"can you imagine any scenario where there wouldnt be retaliation for that?"

Off the top of my head yes I can. China exercised great restraint in this situation:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_bombing_of_the_Chinese_embassy_in_Belgrade

Are you serious? It was the US Embassy in Baghdad. Judging by the photos there was more than a danger of a breach.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2020/01/02/us-embassy-baghdad-attack-damage-fort-bragg-deployment/2793781001/

https://www.militarytimes.com/flashpoints/2020/01/02/photos-reveal-damage-to-us-embassy-in-baghdad-following-attack-by-supporters-of-iran-backed-militia/

Im not trying to goad you at all. i am just not sure of what the motivation would be to deny that the airstrike was clearly provoked?

What happened at the embassy was a protest against a prior US bombing attack. Which in turn was in response to a rocket attack. Which in turn was in response to .....

man, ***the 2003 invasion of Iraq was dumb***.

Totally agree with that.

The bombing that was the supposed cause for the embassy attack was an attack on Militia on Syria and therefore a part of the ongoing conflict there.

Whislt I have no doubt they claim this was the motivation behind the embassy attack, I think there is a massive difference in an attack on a militia as part of an ongoing conflict and a third party (Iranian) attacking an Embassy.

I think Iran are just trying to provoke the US

 

[Ponyo]

You're looking for validation from me not for a discussion. You've got a track record on this political thread Glenn - I know your leanings already. But to answer your question - No, I don't think the embassy (barrack) incident warranted the assassination of the two appointed government officials. According to you it was worth it and a forgone conclusion but I'm not willing to make that call yet. When the Iranians/Shi'a community around the world are done their 3 day mourning they'll want their revenge, you know? What's the end game? Bomb & kill some more?

 

[Ponyo]

Crazy thing is, is that he fought with American troops in Afghanistan, fighting the Taliban, and again in Iraq fighting against ISIS with the Americans. If you don't understand the geopolitical and religious nature/history of the conflict then it's hard to talk about it, especially when people want to talk about Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon, Obama, Hillary - L/R it's ridiculous.



 

[Tiger5150]

You're looking for validation from me not for a discussion. You've got a track record on this political thread Glenn - I know your leanings already. But to answer your question - No, I don't think the embassy (barrack) incident warranted the assassination of the two appointed government officials. According to you it was worth it and a forgone conclusion but I'm not willing to make that call yet. When the Iranians/Shi'a community around the world are done their 3 day mourning they'll want their revenge, you know? What's the end game? Bomb & kill some more?

Look Ponyo, you have me wrong but lets not discuss with each other any more. I was after a discussion because I was genuinely curious.

You make a lot of assumptions about me and I have posted here about 5 times, hardly a track record and I am sure you do not know my leanings.

I dont think anything warrants the killing of anyone. I merely think it is not reasonable to think that the US will not retaliate when an embassy is attacked and set alight and of course the Iranians know this. This is preciselt why they attacked an embassy and not a military compound

 

[Ponyo]

My apolagise @Glenn5150 - I was a bit full on, you're right. These wargames are dangerous
I don't have a horse in the race, I just want people to realise the severity of the situation
Needless killings without an end game. Sad

Edit: I must have confused you with someone else. Happy to discuss more developments

 

[TillLindemann]

Mann...I'm not taking any sides here as you see. My general point was war isn't good.

Politics aside, innocent people suffer on all sides and that's a cruel fate to adjust to


Understood and there is no argument that war is good. But if the US embassy (full of civilians) is attacked and set alight as it was on Wednesday, can you imagine any scenario where there wouldnt be retaliation for that?

Stop trying to goad me. It's an army barrack not an embassy. And there was no danger of there being a breach, at all. It was secured by US & Iraqi forces within minutes. The US officially pulled out of Iraq not long ago if you remember, they are there under mandate from the Iraqi government to train and supervise Iraqi troops, not to drone local and foreign government officials unilaterally. You're an intelligent guy but you're being very shortsighted and partisan here. The US has wanted this war since the 1979 Iranian revolution when the western backed Shah fell and the Ayatollah rose to power. Look a bit deeper.

"can you imagine any scenario where there wouldnt be retaliation for that?"

Off the top of my head yes I can. China exercised great restraint in this situation:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_bombing_of_the_Chinese_embassy_in_Belgrade

Are you serious? It was the US Embassy in Baghdad. Judging by the photos there was more than a danger of a breach.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2020/01/02/us-embassy-baghdad-attack-damage-fort-bragg-deployment/2793781001/

https://www.militarytimes.com/flashpoints/2020/01/02/photos-reveal-damage-to-us-embassy-in-baghdad-following-attack-by-supporters-of-iran-backed-militia/

Im not trying to goad you at all. i am just not sure of what the motivation would be to deny that the airstrike was clearly provoked?

What happened at the embassy was a protest against a prior US bombing attack. Which in turn was in response to a rocket attack. Which in turn was in response to .....

man, ***the 2003 invasion of Iraq was dumb***.

Totally agree with that.

The bombing that was the supposed cause for the embassy attack was an attack on Militia on Syria and therefore a part of the ongoing conflict there.

Whislt I have no doubt they claim this was the motivation behind the embassy attack, I think there is a massive difference in an attack on a militia as part of an ongoing conflict and a third party (Iranian) attacking an Embassy.

I think Iran are just trying to provoke the US

It was a crowd of thousands. Even the Iraqi government was furious about the air strike that led to the embassy protest.

It's worth pointing out, too, that those Iranian militia have been fighting against ISIS for years.

 

[jadtiger]

Mann...I'm not taking any sides here as you see. My general point was war isn't good.

Politics aside, innocent people suffer on all sides and that's a cruel fate to adjust to


Understood and there is no argument that war is good. But if the US embassy (full of civilians) is attacked and set alight as it was on Wednesday, can you imagine any scenario where there wouldnt be retaliation for that?

Stop trying to goad me. It's an army barrack not an embassy. And there was no danger of there being a breach, at all. It was secured by US & Iraqi forces within minutes. The US officially pulled out of Iraq not long ago if you remember, they are there under mandate from the Iraqi government to train and supervise Iraqi troops, not to drone local and foreign government officials unilaterally. You're an intelligent guy but you're being very shortsighted and partisan here. The US has wanted this war since the 1979 Iranian revolution when the western backed Shah fell and the Ayatollah rose to power. Look a bit deeper.

"can you imagine any scenario where there wouldnt be retaliation for that?"

Off the top of my head yes I can. China exercised great restraint in this situation:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_bombing_of_the_Chinese_embassy_in_Belgrade

Are you serious? It was the US Embassy in Baghdad. Judging by the photos there was more than a danger of a breach.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2020/01/02/us-embassy-baghdad-attack-damage-fort-bragg-deployment/2793781001/

https://www.militarytimes.com/flashpoints/2020/01/02/photos-reveal-damage-to-us-embassy-in-baghdad-following-attack-by-supporters-of-iran-backed-militia/

Im not trying to goad you at all. i am just not sure of what the motivation would be to deny that the airstrike was clearly provoked?

What happened at the embassy was a protest against a prior US bombing attack. Which in turn was in response to a rocket attack. Which in turn was in response to .....

man, ***the 2003 invasion of Iraq was dumb***.

Totally agree with that.

The bombing that was the supposed cause for the embassy attack was an attack on Militia on Syria and therefore a part of the ongoing conflict there.

Whislt I have no doubt they claim this was the motivation behind the embassy attack, I think there is a massive difference in an attack on a militia as part of an ongoing conflict and a third party (Iranian) attacking an Embassy.

I think Iran are just trying to provoke the US

It was a crowd of thousands. Even the Iraqi government was furious about the air strike that led to the embassy protest.

It's worth pointing out, too, that those Iranian militia have been fighting against ISIS for years.

So had the Kurds but it didnt take long for Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon to cast them aside when it suited him.Hardly a man i would consider to be a reliable ally

 

[Tim Sheens]

Mann...I'm not taking any sides here as you see. My general point was war isn't good.

Politics aside, innocent people suffer on all sides and that's a cruel fate to adjust to

Sadly, it is all political, with this last attack no different. So no point for you, me or @Glenn5150 to be arguing about semantics, when even the location of an embassy is a strategic move.

https://www.facebook.com/908009612563863/posts/3323561441008656/

 

[Tim Sheens]

Mann...I'm not taking any sides here as you see. My general point was war isn't good.

Politics aside, innocent people suffer on all sides and that's a cruel fate to adjust to


Understood and there is no argument that war is good. But if the US embassy (full of civilians) is attacked and set alight as it was on Wednesday, can you imagine any scenario where there wouldnt be retaliation for that?

Stop trying to goad me. It's an army barrack not an embassy. And there was no danger of there being a breach, at all. It was secured by US & Iraqi forces within minutes. The US officially pulled out of Iraq not long ago if you remember, they are there under mandate from the Iraqi government to train and supervise Iraqi troops, not to drone local and foreign government officials unilaterally. You're an intelligent guy but you're being very shortsighted and partisan here. The US has wanted this war since the 1979 Iranian revolution when the western backed Shah fell and the Ayatollah rose to power. Look a bit deeper.

"can you imagine any scenario where there wouldnt be retaliation for that?"

Off the top of my head yes I can. China exercised great restraint in this situation:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_bombing_of_the_Chinese_embassy_in_Belgrade

Are you serious? It was the US Embassy in Baghdad. Judging by the photos there was more than a danger of a breach.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2020/01/02/us-embassy-baghdad-attack-damage-fort-bragg-deployment/2793781001/

https://www.militarytimes.com/flashpoints/2020/01/02/photos-reveal-damage-to-us-embassy-in-baghdad-following-attack-by-supporters-of-iran-backed-militia/

Im not trying to goad you at all. i am just not sure of what the motivation would be to deny that the airstrike was clearly provoked?

What happened at the embassy was a protest against a prior US bombing attack. Which in turn was in response to a rocket attack. Which in turn was in response to .....

man, ***the 2003 invasion of Iraq was dumb***.

Totally agree with that.

The bombing that was the supposed cause for the embassy attack was an attack on Militia on Syria and therefore a part of the ongoing conflict there.

Whislt I have no doubt they claim this was the motivation behind the embassy attack, I think there is a massive difference in an attack on a militia as part of an ongoing conflict and a third party (Iranian) attacking an Embassy.

I think Iran are just trying to provoke the US

It was a crowd of thousands. Even the Iraqi government was furious about the air strike that led to the embassy protest.

It's worth pointing out, too, that those Iranian militia have been fighting against ISIS for years.

So had the Kurds but it didnt take long for Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon to cast them aside when it suited him.Hardly a man i would consider to be a reliable ally

"But don't worry, we have left enough troops to protect OUR oilfields" or words to that effect. And that is not meant as a personal attack on Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon, just the another example of how wrong the entire attitude is.

 

[Ponyo]

Mann...I'm not taking any sides here as you see. My general point was war isn't good.

Politics aside, innocent people suffer on all sides and that's a cruel fate to adjust to


Understood and there is no argument that war is good. But if the US embassy (full of civilians) is attacked and set alight as it was on Wednesday, can you imagine any scenario where there wouldnt be retaliation for that?

Stop trying to goad me. It's an army barrack not an embassy. And there was no danger of there being a breach, at all. It was secured by US & Iraqi forces within minutes. The US officially pulled out of Iraq not long ago if you remember, they are there under mandate from the Iraqi government to train and supervise Iraqi troops, not to drone local and foreign government officials unilaterally. You're an intelligent guy but you're being very shortsighted and partisan here. The US has wanted this war since the 1979 Iranian revolution when the western backed Shah fell and the Ayatollah rose to power. Look a bit deeper.

"can you imagine any scenario where there wouldnt be retaliation for that?"

Off the top of my head yes I can. China exercised great restraint in this situation:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_bombing_of_the_Chinese_embassy_in_Belgrade

Are you serious? It was the US Embassy in Baghdad. Judging by the photos there was more than a danger of a breach.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2020/01/02/us-embassy-baghdad-attack-damage-fort-bragg-deployment/2793781001/

https://www.militarytimes.com/flashpoints/2020/01/02/photos-reveal-damage-to-us-embassy-in-baghdad-following-attack-by-supporters-of-iran-backed-militia/

Im not trying to goad you at all. i am just not sure of what the motivation would be to deny that the airstrike was clearly provoked?

What happened at the embassy was a protest against a prior US bombing attack. Which in turn was in response to a rocket attack. Which in turn was in response to .....

man, ***the 2003 invasion of Iraq was dumb***.

Totally agree with that.

The bombing that was the supposed cause for the embassy attack was an attack on Militia on Syria and therefore a part of the ongoing conflict there.

Whislt I have no doubt they claim this was the motivation behind the embassy attack, I think there is a massive difference in an attack on a militia as part of an ongoing conflict and a third party (Iranian) attacking an Embassy.

I think Iran are just trying to provoke the US

It was a crowd of thousands. Even the Iraqi government was furious about the air strike that led to the embassy protest.

It's worth pointing out, too, that those Iranian militia have been fighting against ISIS for years.

So had the Kurds but it didnt take long for Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon to cast them aside when it suited him.Hardly a man i would consider to be a reliable ally

"But don't worry, we have left enough troops to protect OUR oilfields" or words to that effect. And that is not meant as a personal attack on Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon, just the another example of how wrong the entire attitude is.


 

[sheer64]

Mann...I'm not taking any sides here as you see. My general point was war isn't good.

Politics aside, innocent people suffer on all sides and that's a cruel fate to adjust to


Understood and there is no argument that war is good. But if the US embassy (full of civilians) is attacked and set alight as it was on Wednesday, can you imagine any scenario where there wouldnt be retaliation for that?

Stop trying to goad me. It's an army barrack not an embassy. And there was no danger of there being a breach, at all. It was secured by US & Iraqi forces within minutes. The US officially pulled out of Iraq not long ago if you remember, they are there under mandate from the Iraqi government to train and supervise Iraqi troops, not to drone local and foreign government officials unilaterally. You're an intelligent guy but you're being very shortsighted and partisan here. The US has wanted this war since the 1979 Iranian revolution when the western backed Shah fell and the Ayatollah rose to power. Look a bit deeper.

"can you imagine any scenario where there wouldnt be retaliation for that?"

Off the top of my head yes I can. China exercised great restraint in this situation:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_bombing_of_the_Chinese_embassy_in_Belgrade

Are you serious? It was the US Embassy in Baghdad. Judging by the photos there was more than a danger of a breach.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2020/01/02/us-embassy-baghdad-attack-damage-fort-bragg-deployment/2793781001/

https://www.militarytimes.com/flashpoints/2020/01/02/photos-reveal-damage-to-us-embassy-in-baghdad-following-attack-by-supporters-of-iran-backed-militia/

Im not trying to goad you at all. i am just not sure of what the motivation would be to deny that the airstrike was clearly provoked?

What happened at the embassy was a protest against a prior US bombing attack. Which in turn was in response to a rocket attack. Which in turn was in response to .....

man, ***the 2003 invasion of Iraq was dumb***.

Totally agree with that.

The bombing that was the supposed cause for the embassy attack was an attack on Militia on Syria and therefore a part of the ongoing conflict there.

Whislt I have no doubt they claim this was the motivation behind the embassy attack, I think there is a massive difference in an attack on a militia as part of an ongoing conflict and a third party (Iranian) attacking an Embassy.

I think Iran are just trying to provoke the US

It was a crowd of thousands. Even the Iraqi government was furious about the air strike that led to the embassy protest.

It's worth pointing out, too, that those Iranian militia have been fighting against ISIS for years.

So had the Kurds but it didnt take long for Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon to cast them aside when it suited him.Hardly a man i would consider to be a reliable ally

"But don't worry, we have left enough troops to protect OUR oilfields" or words to that effect. And that is not meant as a personal attack on Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon, just the another example of how wrong the entire attitude is.


What i would love to know is which US politicians own shares in the arms companies. Might paint the real picture.