Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
ExpandMyMind

US apparently readying for Iran attack

296 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

DarkHunter
28 minutes ago, Setton said:

Well... yeah. But how is that any different to any other country? The US gives weapons to the Saudis, which they use on the Houthis. Are the US just as guilty of causing any attacks then? 

The ships and the embassy are the only examples of Iran taking steps to escalate. And it's more likely the embassy was some low level fanatic with a rocket launcher than anyone acting on Iran’s orders. 

The ships are interesting. 

The difference is largely in how connected Iran is with the Houthis.  While the Houthis do act on their own at times they also take orders from Iran at other times.  The attack done on the oil pipeline was over 500 miles away from the Saudi Yemen border and according to Saudi Arabia, which can be debated if they are being honest or not, the ballistic missile fired earlier this week was heading towards Mecca.  Neither attack directly helps the Houthis push Saudi Arabia out of Yemen or help them take land held by their opponents.  It could be argued that the Houthis are trying to take the fight to Saudi Arabia but the timing of the attacks are odd.  Shortly after sanctions are put on Iranian oil the Houthis launch an attack on Saudi oil if I remember correctly for the first time and when an American carrier battle group moves into the Persian gulf the Houthis fire a ballistic missile at a city of little to no military or economic benefit but massively important culturally and religiously.  There has also been reports that the US intercepted commands from Iran to Hezbollah and other proxy groups to attack American soldiers and American interests but it can be debated if the commands were real or faked as part of the information war going on.

The embassy attack was more then likely a fringe group or some random small militia but it shows how dangerous everything is.  All it takes for a war to break out is some small proxy group to misinterpret an order or decide to take the initiative and be a bit to successful.  Iran has used proxy groups for a long time to avoid direct confrontation with regional and global powers while advancing their geopolitical interests.  That strategy has worked decently well for Iran but it does leave them vulnerable now to being blamed for the proxy groups if they act even if not ordered by Iran.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Setton
8 hours ago, pallidin said:

Since you're being an obviously immature and aggressive troll, I shall now smite you with the U-M "ignore" feature.

 

Someone had his sense of humour removed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener

Hmmm.... sooooooooo... to summarise. 

It is alleged that a rocket was fired into the Green Zone a few days ago. There have been zero details about the rocket; nothing about its size, payload, or direction of launch. Nothing at all. 

It is alleged that four oil tankers where sabotaged near the port of Fujairah in the gulf of Oman. There have been zero details on what this sabotage actually consisted of. Explosions ? Ramming ? Mines ? teaching the Ships Parrot to swear in Persian ? No details AT ALL. 

Question: did EITHER of these incidents actually happen ? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
10 hours ago, DarkHunter said:

They dont need Iran's encouragement but the drones and almost certainly the ballistics missile were supplied by Iran, as for the four oil tankers the damage seems to be consistent with Iranian weapon systems sent to the Houthis but it hasnt been determined yet if they were behind it or Iran.  Iran knows that giving these weapon systems to the Houthis will result in escalated attacks.

Hmmm.... seeing as we don't know ANYTHING about the damage to the oil tankers, (a curious - indeed suspicious - fact in and of itself) it seems premature to start analysing the alleged damage as "consistent with Iranian weapon systems". 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DarkHunter
37 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Hmmm.... seeing as we don't know ANYTHING about the damage to the oil tankers, (a curious - indeed suspicious - fact in and of itself) it seems premature to start analysing the alleged damage as "consistent with Iranian weapon systems". 

Your information is rather outdated as a good bit of information and pictures of the damage done to the oil tankers has been out for the past few days.

"A U.S. assessment determined it is "highly likely" that Iran was behind the attacks on four tankerslast weekend, according to three U.S. officials familiar with the findings."

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/u-s-officials-highly-likely-iran-carried-out-tanker-attacks-n1007141

"A confidential assessment issued this week by the Norwegian Shipowners’ Mutual War Risks Insurance Association (DNK) concluded that the attack was likely to have been carried out by a surface vessel operating close by that despatched underwater drones carrying 30-50 kg (65-110 lb) of high-grade explosives to detonate on impact.

...

- A high likelihood that the IRGC had previously supplied its allies, the Houthi militia fighting a Saudi-backed government in Yemen, with explosive-laden surface drone boats capable of homing in on GPS navigational positions for accuracy.

- The similarity of shrapnel found on the Norwegian tanker to shrapnel from drone boats used off Yemen by Houthis, even though the craft previously used by the Houthis were surface boats rather than the underwater drones likely to have been deployed in Fujairah."

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-iran-oil-tankers-exclusive/exclusive-insurer-says-irans-guards-likely-to-have-organized-tanker-attacks-idUSKCN1SN1P7

While the US findings can be debated if accurate or not the insurer's findings are a bit harder to argue against.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
44 minutes ago, DarkHunter said:

Your information is rather outdated as a good bit of information and pictures of the damage done to the oil tankers has been out for the past few days.

"A U.S. assessment determined it is "highly likely" that Iran was behind the attacks on four tankerslast weekend, according to three U.S. officials familiar with the findings."

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/u-s-officials-highly-likely-iran-carried-out-tanker-attacks-n1007141

"A confidential assessment issued this week by the Norwegian Shipowners’ Mutual War Risks Insurance Association (DNK) concluded that the attack was likely to have been carried out by a surface vessel operating close by that despatched underwater drones carrying 30-50 kg (65-110 lb) of high-grade explosives to detonate on impact.

...

- A high likelihood that the IRGC had previously supplied its allies, the Houthi militia fighting a Saudi-backed government in Yemen, with explosive-laden surface drone boats capable of homing in on GPS navigational positions for accuracy.

- The similarity of shrapnel found on the Norwegian tanker to shrapnel from drone boats used off Yemen by Houthis, even though the craft previously used by the Houthis were surface boats rather than the underwater drones likely to have been deployed in Fujairah."

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-iran-oil-tankers-exclusive/exclusive-insurer-says-irans-guards-likely-to-have-organized-tanker-attacks-idUSKCN1SN1P7

While the US findings can be debated if accurate or not the insurer's findings are a bit harder to argue against.

Oooooh.. now that IS interesting. 

It's rather speculative, but nevertheless interesting. Curious that neither the US government, nor Saudi Arabia, nor the Norwegian government, nor the UAE government, have issued any substantive statement about this. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
On 5/20/2019 at 7:04 PM, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

 

The three of them I wouldn't trust as far as I could throw them.   Bolton's the worst. He is dangerous.

Yes, Bolton is upfront with his support of our ally in the region but he ISN'T president, is he?  No one has anointed him with the power to wage war.  Trump isn't going to war with Iran because Bolton, - or Netanyahu FTM - desire it.  Bottom line is that no matter the provocation or number of U.S. casualties, you will believe it was a FF.  Be honest.  You won't KNOW and neither can the rest of us.  That is the worst indication of the damage the 5th column and the Left has inflicted on our national discourse today.  Half or more of the nation doesn't have anyone to turn to for trustworthy info about our world.  :( 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pallidin
14 minutes ago, and then said:

Yes, Bolton is upfront with his support of our ally in the region but he ISN'T president, is he?  No one has anointed him with the power to wage war.  Trump isn't going to war with Iran because Bolton, - or Netanyahu FTM - desire it.  Bottom line is that no matter the provocation or number of U.S. casualties, you will believe it was a FF.  Be honest.  You won't KNOW and neither can the rest of us.  That is the worst indication of the damage the 5th column and the Left has inflicted on our national discourse today.  Half or more of the nation doesn't have anyone to turn to for trustworthy info about our world.  :( 

Indeed, one of the more serious issues regarding "proxy terrorists" is that they act in "secret cells" making it hard to define exactly who the host country is.

But the cells are getting their money and weapons from somewhere, and Iran is a known supplier of weapons and money's to proxy Islamic terrorist groups.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pallidin

The current regime of Iran is brutal. Sharia law is brutal.

And unlike North Korea, Iran's regime is theologically intense with regards to spreading radical Islam and destroying anyone or any nation which does not convert to radical Islam, particularly in the Middle East, Europe, and some small parts of China and Russia, as well as various other areas around the world.

The goal of Iran is to force-convert as much of the world as possible (beginning in the Middle East and Europe) to complete submission to Allah and Sharia law... that's their PUBLIC statement.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Earl.Of.Trumps
4 hours ago, pallidin said:

The goal of Iran is to force-convert as much of the world as possible (beginning in the Middle East and Europe) to complete submission to Allah and Sharia law... that's their PUBLIC statement.

I'm not sure you have this right, Pallidin.  You have a link?  You're making Iran sound a little like ISIS, 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pallidin
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

I'm not sure you have this right, Pallidin.  You have a link?  You're making Iran sound a little like ISIS, 

Here's but one link...

https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/islam-governing-under-sharia

Also, here...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/04/08/asia/brunei-indonesia-malaysia-islam-intl/index.html

Edited by pallidin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
susieice
pallidin

And here as well...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.timesofisrael.com/iran-replaces-head-of-hardline-irgc-force-weeks-after-terror-blacklisting/amp/

"Brig. Gen. Hossein Salami was made commander of the IRGC, replacing Maj. Gen. Mohammed Ali Jafari, who has headed the military force since 2007, according to Iranian media reports.

Salami has frequently vowed to destroy Israel and “break America.” Iran was “planning to break America, Israel, and their partners and allies. Our ground forces should cleanse the planet from the filth of their existence,” Salami said in February. The previous month, he vowed to wipe Israel off the “global political map,” and to unleash an “inferno” on the Jewish state."

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pallidin

Source: https://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/284611/new-strategy-to-counter-iran

ISIS versus Iran

To skeptics of a stronger counter-Iran policy, even the comparison between ISIS and Iran is illegitimate. Iran is a sovereign state pursuing legitimate self-interest, while ISIS is a terrorist organization, they argue, and further, it is only ISIS that carries out terror attacks against the West. But the lines between state and terrorist organization are not so clear. ISIS has ruled over and administered territory in a de facto statelet stretching across Iraq and Syria, while Iran has conducted much of its foreign policy through a network of paramilitary and terrorists groups with global reach. And Iran, like ISIS, makes its eternal enmity to America fully known. Chants of “Death to America” are a staple of the regime’s rallies. IRGC operatives inside the U.S. were prepared in 2013 to bomb a crowded Washington, D.C., restaurant in order to kill the Saudi ambassador. Iran was also linked to the deaths of 500 American service members in Iraq. Most recently, Iran has launched a wave of assassinations across Europe and several of its terrorist plots have been disrupted, including one in France a few months ago targeting an opposition rally attended by a number of former U.S. officials.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pallidin
Posted (edited)

...

 

Edited by pallidin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Phaeton80

 

"Patrick Clawson of the influential neo-con Washington Institute for Near East Policy openly suggests that the US should provoke Iran into taking the first shot."

 

 

Nothing new under the sun..

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Smoke aLot
On 5/21/2019 at 12:00 AM, and then said:

Yes, I'm sure that you consider him a paragon of virtue and civility.

Based on modern Iran's military history he might be just that.

On 5/21/2019 at 12:00 AM, and then said:

Bottom line is he KNOWS better than to attack U.S. troops and that's all to the good.  

I agree with that but with one difference, he doesn't want to attack USA jet the same warmongers who pushed other US interventions (out of which many were based on false information) want us to believe that Iran is a threat. I was very satisfied to see that Iraq is also aware of this and their politicians will soon deliver strong message (as i wrote in UM already almost two years ago). This also shows that aggression doesn't pay off even if you are most powerful army in history. OK, it did pay off to Monsanto and other companies, alto for relatively short time (see order 81).

This relatively calm situation and Saudi calls to 'discuss Iranian aggression' do concern me a bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
1 hour ago, Sir Smoke aLot said:

Based on modern Iran's military history he might be just that

If I pay, train and equip someone to kill your son or daughter, am I innocent of their deaths?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Smoke aLot
1 hour ago, and then said:

If I pay, train and equip someone to kill your son or daughter, am I innocent of their deaths?

Proof or it's just bad analogy. More likely, based on official statements and all sorts of organizations... It seems that CIA and Mossad are the ones who are paying all sorts of scumbags then blame it on third party.

For example :

As comically presented by this guy on his show just recently :

I hope you can share some proof so i can look into it. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jon the frog

A couple of skiff with rpg against an armada with total air domination... yeah Iran will attack. wtf...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tatetopa

Did Iran do something recently that would require this buildup of power by the US?  

Or is it once again a distraction from problems at home?   It would not be the first time a government  harnessed the unity of patriotism against a foreign enemy to distract from other problems.  Being a tough guy and hero in war is always good cred for a government with other struggles.

Also, it sets some great groundwork to sell more arms to the Saudis to balance out the Iranian threat.   Were 15 of the 19 hijackers involved in 9/11 Iranian or Saudi?  They were Saudi.  These guys are not our friends, none of them. 

We are the elephant that they want to enrage and goad into battle to trample their enemies.  No matter who wins, it is never good for the elephant.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DarkHunter
1 hour ago, Tatetopa said:

Did Iran do something recently that would require this buildup of power by the US?  

Or is it once again a distraction from problems at home?   It would not be the first time a government  harnessed the unity of patriotism against a foreign enemy to distract from other problems.  Being a tough guy and hero in war is always good cred for a government with other struggles.

Also, it sets some great groundwork to sell more arms to the Saudis to balance out the Iranian threat.   Were 15 of the 19 hijackers involved in 9/11 Iranian or Saudi?  They were Saudi.  These guys are not our friends, none of them. 

We are the elephant that they want to enrage and goad into battle to trample their enemies.  No matter who wins, it is never good for the elephant.

There was the 4 oil tankers that were attacked, about a week ago, it has been suspected Iran was behind it but until recently no one outright blamed Iran till now with the Pentagon saying it was Iran.

Also I heard an interesting rumor about Iran, I dont know how much if any of it is true or not and I havent heard anything on it from major news sources yet, but it seems IRGC brigadier general Ali Nasiri defected to the US around the end of April and that he brought a lot of top secret and classified information with him about Iran's nuclear program and other plans of the IRGC.

https://noqreport.com/2019/05/06/brig-gen-ali-nasiri-allegedly-defected-iranian-military-plans-now-major-u-s-firepower-way-coincidence/

https://www.jewishpress.com/news/us-news/us-owned-mid-east-source-senior-revolutionary-guard-commander-defected-to-west/2019/04/23/

https://freebeacon.com/national-security/report-senior-irgc-commander-flees-iran-with-secret-intel/amp/

Strangely none of the main stream media seems to be talking about but stuff on the left and right that are less mainstream seem to have reported on it but like I said I have no idea if the information is accurate or not.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Smoke aLot
3 hours ago, Tatetopa said:

Did Iran do something recently that would require this buildup of power by the US?

There is something like Iranian threat, promoted for decades but only now did it get so much pace. I was just watching one report about the subject and it was first time that i hear someone say ''alleged Iranian threat''. I was totally surprised to hear normal reporting.

So far there are no proofs of that but it seems to me that what happened in those recent incidents, mentioned by @DarkHunter above, were simply manufactured incidents (by Saudis most likely) and it shows their lack of imagination. I mean if you want to start war then make a better excuse.

Interesting event was missile, rocket or whatever which fell relatively close to US embassy building in Iraq, day or two after US announced that it will evacuate most of it's staff from the building.

Imagine, if Iran (as accused by US government and friends) was going to hurt US interests and assets in the region why would they wait for the building to be evacuated?

3 hours ago, Tatetopa said:

Also, it sets some great groundwork to sell more arms to the Saudis to balance out the Iranian threat.   Were 15 of the 19 hijackers involved in 9/11 Iranian or Saudi?  They were Saudi.  These guys are not our friends, none of them. 

Hmm, Trump mentioned some ''old law'' which allows him to sell arms to Saudis even without congress support. Maybe it can happen only if risk to ally or something is great? I am not sure but might bet that profits were behind this whole increased mess with Iran. 

And Saudis, man they are disgusting regime, embodiment of false propaganda against Islam as if they were installed to rule just to make Islam look bad with all their exports of Wahabi.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
On 5/21/2019 at 2:54 PM, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

Flat out blaming Iran for the acts of the proxies is somewhat akin to blaming Saudi Arabia for 911.  Iran does not want war but they cannot always control the actions of the Houthi rebels

I don't think your analogy works well.  Saudi citizens acted on their own religious craziness and funding to commit 911.  Hamas, Hizballah and the Houthis aren't Iranian in any sense.  They're just hired guns who are supplied with cash, weapons, training and intel.  They do the bidding of the money-men.  This is quite clear, Earl.  Is it possible that someone went rogue?  Anything is possible but it isn't likely they jeopardize their main source of funding and weapons, is it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
13 hours ago, Sir Smoke aLot said:

Proof or it's just bad analogy.

You don't deign to accept U.S. or Israeli statements.  Do you expect Iran to admit it?  Believe as you wish but remember that everyone has that same option.  Iran's military will be gutted if they attack us - proxies or not.  Bring the pain, baby...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.