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 -
RoofGardener

Was Trump correct over Iran ?

82 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

DarkHunter
2 hours ago, Black Red Devil said:

Why would Russia need to involve Iran in talks with Turkey over Syria? Nobody cares or even considers Hezbolah's role as an influence and the State of Iran has nothing to do with the conflict between Turkey and Kurds in Syria.

For every major decision that has occured in Syria, whether it involved Iran or not, the Iranians were always present for the discussions in Sochi.  Now with the Turkish invasion of northern Syria, which is a major decision, Iran wasnt even invited to attend.  This shows not only Iran starting to lose I influence in Syria but that Russia no longer feels they need to be on the same page as Iran or care about their strategic concerns in Syria.

2 hours ago, Black Red Devil said:

What you seem to be missing in your analysis is the deep financial influence and interests involved in the region.  In fact many political experts believe (and I do to) the reason for the Syrian conflict has always been about overthrowing Assad because of his refusal to allow pipelines to travel through Syria.

In brief, Russian Gazprom provides most of the natural gas (80%) that goes to the richest regional consumer in the world (after the US), Europe.  Natural gas is the future and the pipelines go via the Ukraine and or Georgia which is the reason Putin has a strong grip on both these countries.  This allows Putin to influence countries relying on Russian natural gas and this didn't sit well with the Europeans who wanted alternative gas supplies.  Cometh the pipeline suggestions from Iran and Qatar.  The Qatar pipeline was no good because Putin couldn't exert influence but the one from Iran had his blessings.  But without Assad's approval nothing was going to happen which wasn't a problem for Putin because, as mentioned, Russia was already supplying 80% to Europe so the status quo sat well with him.  At worse, the pipeline from Iran would still allow him to keep influence over the Europeans.

Therefore when you suggest Russia isn't very interested in what happens to Iran I'm afraid you're missing the point because the alternative to Iran's pipeline into Europe, as an alternative to Gazprom's, is the one from Qatar (backed by the US).

All of that is just conspiracy nonsense with no real backing behind it what so ever.  Who are these political experts who believe the entire Syrian civil war was over pipelines cause the only ones I seen promoting that have been conspiracists.  The whole pipeline angle has been disproven years ago as none of the suggested pipelines never even made it past the conception stage.

Also I never said Russia isnt interested in what happens in Iran I said Russia isnt going to be interested in Iran becoming a nuclear power, meaning Russia would prefer for Iran not to develop nuclear weapons.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
3 minutes ago, DarkHunter said:

This shows not only Iran starting to lose I influence in Syria but that Russia no longer feels they need to be on the same page as Iran or care about their strategic concerns in Syria.

Agreed... and another indicator of your accuracy is this:

https://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3791203/posts 

https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/russia-deactivates-s-400-system-in-syrian-city-after-s-300-installation-report/ 

https://www.debka.com/russia-deactivates-its-s-400-batteries-at-the-khmeimim-air-base-and-all-syria/ 

Seems uncle Vlad has quietly begun deactivating his world killing, vaunted S400s in Syria.  Maye that's part of the reason the Iranians have been using so many body bags recently?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Black Red Devil
35 minutes ago, and then said:

Ever heard of the Leviathan field?  

Isn't that where Israel is stealing from Palestinian Reserves?

Also, are there enough fields to supply Europe?  No

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Black Red Devil
1 hour ago, DarkHunter said:

For every major decision that has occured in Syria, whether it involved Iran or not, the Iranians were always present for the discussions in Sochi.  Now with the Turkish invasion of northern Syria, which is a major decision, Iran wasnt even invited to attend.  This shows not only Iran starting to lose I influence in Syria but that Russia no longer feels they need to be on the same page as Iran or care about their strategic concerns in Syria.

Total rubbish and just your simple opinion based on an assumption.

1 hour ago, DarkHunter said:

All of that is just conspiracy nonsense with no real backing behind it what so ever.  Who are these political experts who believe the entire Syrian civil war was over pipelines cause the only ones I seen promoting that have been conspiracists.  The whole pipeline angle has been disproven years ago as none of the suggested pipelines never even made it past the conception stage.

Also I never said Russia isnt interested in what happens in Iran I said Russia isnt going to be interested in Iran becoming a nuclear power, meaning Russia would prefer for Iran not to develop nuclear weapons.

Believe what you want.  Anyway you're the one who brought up Syria.  The point I was making was that Putin wouldn't stand idle while an important strategic partner in the region was attacked and an attack is very likely to occur if Iran keeps developing it's nuclear program which it seems intent in doing, forced by Trump's reckless decision.  This doesn't necessarily mean a direct conflict between the US and Russia but, as Putin warned months ago, it could devastate the region and I'm pretty confident Russia would play it's part in supporting Iran.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
1 hour ago, Black Red Devil said:

Isn't that where Israel is stealing from Palestinian Reserves?

Also, are there enough fields to supply Europe?  No

Probably not... but that's okay, with all the $ those European cowards will save by bending over for Vlad, they'll be able to buy their heat at a bargain.  Just like your kind from the Chinese someday.  It's not like you'd have the guts to stand for freedom, is it?  Nah, not bloody likely.  Enjoy the chains, if not the respect of your children ;) 

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Setton
1 hour ago, and then said:

Probably not... but that's okay, with all the $ those European cowards will save by bending over for Vlad, they'll be able to buy their heat at a bargain.  Just like your kind from the Chinese someday.  It's not like you'd have the guts to stand for freedom, is it? 

I'm sorry, who just ran away from Syria? 

Quote

Nah, not bloody likely.  Enjoy the chains, if not the respect of your children ;) 

Because your country's children are clearly oh so happy with the decisions you have made. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Black Red Devil
2 hours ago, and then said:

Probably not... but that's okay, with all the $ those European cowards will save by bending over for Vlad, they'll be able to buy their heat at a bargain.  Just like your kind from the Chinese someday.  It's not like you'd have the guts to stand for freedom, is it?  Nah, not bloody likely.  Enjoy the chains, if not the respect of your children ;) 

No chains here buddy, we're totally Liberal and totally free although I have to admit we do have a bunch of d...heads at the helm at the moment.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
7 hours ago, Black Red Devil said:

No chains here buddy, we're totally Liberal and totally free although I have to admit we do have a bunch of d...heads at the helm at the moment.

Oh, I wasn't speaking about today.  It's your future you'll need to look to once your old uncle totters off and isn't doing anything to keep the bad guys from having their way with you.  But no worries.  I'm sure you'll convince yourself you just LOVE those new chains.  After all, the evil U.S. won't be in charge of anything any longer and that's GOT to be progress, yeah?  ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Captain Risky
13 hours ago, and then said:

Probably not... but that's okay, with all the $ those European cowards will save by bending over for Vlad, they'll be able to buy their heat at a bargain.  Just like your kind from the Chinese someday.  It's not like you'd have the guts to stand for freedom, is it?  Nah, not bloody likely.  Enjoy the chains, if not the respect of your children ;) 

Ha... Trump has turned into the contortionist not Europe. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Black Red Devil
3 hours ago, and then said:

Oh, I wasn't speaking about today.  It's your future you'll need to look to once your old uncle totters off and isn't doing anything to keep the bad guys from having their way with you.  But no worries.  I'm sure you'll convince yourself you just LOVE those new chains.  After all, the evil U.S. won't be in charge of anything any longer and that's GOT to be progress, yeah?  ;)

You see, your progress is about arming yourselves to your teeth and fighting wars against people with opposing opinions, my progress is living in peace and harmony within our world and accepting their differences.  If there would be less XI's, Putin's, Trump's Netanyahu's, MBS's, Right Wing warmongers and extremists in the world there would be no bad guys.  You keep on getting it wrong, I don't dislike the 'evil' US, just those individuals on the political spectrum you like. 

Also, don't worry about us, our soldiers distinguish ourselves in every war you guys drag us into.  Good luck to those that think invading us would be a walk in the park.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tatetopa
3 hours ago, and then said:

Oh, I wasn't speaking about today.  It's your future you'll need to look to once your old uncle totters off and isn't doing anything to keep the bad guys from having their way with you.  But no worries.  I'm sure you'll convince yourself you just LOVE those new chains.  After all, the evil U.S. won't be in charge of anything any longer and that's GOT to be progress, yeah? 

And what happens to all of us US citizens when we are paralyzed by the resistance and insurrection you talk about so frequently?  Who is going to come over here and clean up the pockets of resistance and  pick up the pieces?  It damsure won't be anybody that cares about our freedom, self determination, or the Constitution.

As you say, meanwhile the rest of the world will just have to get along without us.  That is not exactly progress. Sort of like Europe and the Middle East did after the Roman Empire imploded from within and barbarians finished them off.  It took them several hundred years, but eventually they managed.

The leg up that might shorten the process next time is that the technology level is comparable world wide, and Europe is the root of much of American culture, not the other way round.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
crookedspiral
22 hours ago, and then said:

Agreed... and another indicator of your accuracy is this:

https://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3791203/posts 

https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/russia-deactivates-s-400-system-in-syrian-city-after-s-300-installation-report/ 

https://www.debka.com/russia-deactivates-its-s-400-batteries-at-the-khmeimim-air-base-and-all-syria/ 

Seems uncle Vlad has quietly begun deactivating his world killing, vaunted S400s in Syria.  Maye that's part of the reason the Iranians have been using so many body bags recently?

Your sources are dubious, at best.

Edited by crookedspiral
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RabidMongoose
On 11/8/2019 at 2:33 PM, RoofGardener said:

Well well well. There was much trenchant criticism of President Trump in these Fora for pulling out of the agreement with Iran over nuclear material. 

But it appears that the Iranians WHERE up to no good, and are continuing to get up to no good. An IAEA inspector was refused access to an Iranian nuclear facility, and was then detained and her passport confiscated. Why on earth  would Iran do this unless it had something to hide ? 

There is also the issue of 'missing' nuclear fuel ? 

"....The board of governors also discussed the "detection of potentially undeclared nuclear material" in Iran. Iran has reportedly failed to co-operate with an investigation into how traces of uranium were found at a site in the Turquzabad area of Tehran, where Israel said there was a "secret atomic warehouse".

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-50329647

 Perhaps President Trumps instincts - that the Iranians where cheating .. had some basis after all ? :)  

Of course they were cheating.

We have had sanctions on them for 40 years mainly because they annexed the Anglo-Persian oil company cheating Western Investors out of their money. We went in, setup their oil industry, then they stole it all, and told our investors to get out.

They are afraid of the UK/USA going in to kick butt so have been trying to build nuclear weapons in secret for some time now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
22 hours ago, Captain Risky said:

Ha... Trump has turned into the contortionist not Europe. 

That right, skippy?  I don't notice the U.S. being driven into the poor house by sanctions from the vaunted, oh so wise European community. :tu:

Edited by and then
  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

Of course they were cheating.

We have had sanctions on them for 40 years mainly because they annexed the Anglo-Persian oil company cheating Western Investors out of their money. We went in, setup their oil industry, then they stole it all, and told our investors to get out.

They are afraid of the UK/USA going in to kick butt so have been trying to build nuclear weapons in secret for some time now.

To be fair the UK did massively screw Iran over in the deal.  

Under the initial D'Arcy oil concession made in 1901 what ultimately became the APOC essentially got exclusive rights to develop all oil fields in Iran for 60 years and Iran only received 16% of the profits. 

In 1933 the terms of the concession were modified, the new agreement reduced the initial size of exclusive development from most of Iran to just 260,000 square kilometers but the APOC got to pick that 260,000 square miles and since they have already done extensive prospecting all through Iran they picked the best land possible leaving areas with little to no accessible oil, Iran got promised a minimal payment of atleast $750,000 a year, and the D'Arcy concession got extended for 32 more years.  Right before APOC was nationalized by Iran the UK offered Iran at minimum $4 million in annual payments and promises to hire and train more Iranian for jobs in APOC.

There were other problems like APOC reneging on promises to build schools and more infrastructure in Iran, the fact that APOC liked to create a lot of subsidiaries in Iran to try to obscure how much profit they were making, horrible working conditions for the Iranian workers such as no vacation time no sick leave no disability compensation having to live in shanty towns with no electricity or running water, and not letting Iran have any voice in the company.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
29 minutes ago, DarkHunter said:

To be fair the UK did massively screw Iran over in the deal. 

It must have been tough to get over that whole "Colonial" impulse as the modern age came to bear.  America treated them not much better but I think it was less about their natural resources and more about geopolitical considerations, not that the end result was better.  Either way, THAT was the reality that existed at that time.  Looking back and judging countries today for behaving as they did THEN is nearly pointless because that can never change it and where Iran is today isn't ABOUT that past.  It is ALL ABOUT FUNDAMENTALIST ISLAM'S THREAT. 

There are many #@&!!*^'s here who will scoff at that and I respect them less than a pile of dogshit I have to step over.  

Share this post


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

It must have been tough to get over that whole "Colonial" impulse as the modern age came to bear.  America treated them not much better but I think it was less about their natural resources and more about geopolitical considerations, not that the end result was better.  Either way, THAT was the reality that existed at that time.  Looking back and judging countries today for behaving as they did THEN is nearly pointless because that can never change it and where Iran is today isn't ABOUT that past.  It is ALL ABOUT FUNDAMENTALIST ISLAM'S THREAT. 

There are many #@&!!*^'s here who will scoff at that and I respect them less than a pile of dogshit I have to step over.  

Actually America treated Iran surprisingly well, America tried to mediate between Iran and the UK and orginally sided with Iran.  Why they sided with Iran did have to do with resources, America didnt particularly like how the UK had exclusive access to develop the Iranian oil fields and wanted in on that also.  America only switched to backing the UK after the Iranian prime minister started to turn towards the USSR which America was never going to accept.  Iran only turned to the USSR though cause the UK did a blockade of Iran and America wasnt helping largely cause the UK threatened to pull support from Korea if America didnt start backing the UK in the disputes over the oil.  

Even if you look at views from that era most agree that what the UK did to Iran was unfair and excessive.  While where Iran is today is a massive problem and should of been dealt with decades ago, actually it never should of became a problem in the first place but Carter messed that up, it's still useful to know how it came about.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
5 minutes ago, DarkHunter said:

, actually it never should of became a problem in the first place but Carter messed that up, it's still useful to know how it came about.

Apparently it isn't useful enough because too many want to gloss over what the REAL threat is today in their hysterical quest for some child-like pursuit of "fairness".  Fundy Islam will bring about nuclear war at some point.  Of that, I have no doubt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DarkHunter
1 minute ago, and then said:

Apparently it isn't useful enough because too many want to gloss over what the REAL threat is today in their hysterical quest for some child-like pursuit of "fairness".  Fundy Islam will bring about nuclear war at some point.  Of that, I have no doubt.

People in the west are comfortable and want to feel good about themselves in general and pushing for some concept of fairness makes them feel good and like they are doing something while not having to pay any price on their comfortable life style.  

Admitting their is a problem, identifying the problem, and then fixing the problem is hard, painful, and difficult and until the west starts to feel some discomfort, which by that point it will be too late to act, a lot will just continue on ignoring the problem so they can keep feeling good and comfortable.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

Admitting their is a problem, identifying the problem, and then fixing the problem is hard, painful, and difficult and until the west starts to feel some discomfort, which by that point it will be too late to act, a lot will just continue on ignoring the problem so they can keep feeling good and comfortable.

I agree and imagine their surprise and chagrin when the world blows up in their faces and brings the ultimate "discomfort"...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DingoLingo
On 11/8/2019 at 10:57 PM, joc said:

he decimated ISIS but he did not start that war.  

I really wish people would understand what decimated means.. 

what you have effectively stated is he killed 1 in 10 ISIS members 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DingoLingo
On 11/9/2019 at 6:52 AM, Setton said:

Until someone can produce evidence to the contrary (which no one has), we must assume so. 

come on Setton.. we know what republicans are like when it comes to evidence.. the work with real evidence *Bush* *Cough* Iraq *cough* weapons of mass distruction *cough*

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

To be fair the UK did massively screw Iran over in the deal.  

Under the initial D'Arcy oil concession made in 1901 what ultimately became the APOC essentially got exclusive rights to develop all oil fields in Iran for 60 years and Iran only received 16% of the profits. 

In 1933 the terms of the concession were modified, the new agreement reduced the initial size of exclusive development from most of Iran to just 260,000 square kilometers but the APOC got to pick that 260,000 square miles and since they have already done extensive prospecting all through Iran they picked the best land possible leaving areas with little to no accessible oil, Iran got promised a minimal payment of atleast $750,000 a year, and the D'Arcy concession got extended for 32 more years.  Right before APOC was nationalized by Iran the UK offered Iran at minimum $4 million in annual payments and promises to hire and train more Iranian for jobs in APOC.

There were other problems like APOC reneging on promises to build schools and more infrastructure in Iran, the fact that APOC liked to create a lot of subsidiaries in Iran to try to obscure how much profit they were making, horrible working conditions for the Iranian workers such as no vacation time no sick leave no disability compensation having to live in shanty towns with no electricity or running water, and not letting Iran have any voice in the company.

Indeed, though Iran benefited immensely from the Oil revenues at the time, despite the seemingly 'unfair' allocation of those revenues between Iran and Britain.

It is also worth noting that the Islamic Revolution had nothing to do with oil. The oilfields had been nationalised under the Shah some 25 years previously. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
joc
On 11/9/2019 at 4:04 PM, Tatetopa said:

And what happens to all of us US citizens when we are paralyzed by the resistance and insurrection you talk about so frequently?  Who is going to come over here and clean up the pockets of resistance and  pick up the pieces?  It damsure won't be anybody that cares about our freedom, self determination, or the Constitution.

As you say, meanwhile the rest of the world will just have to get along without us.  That is not exactly progress. Sort of like Europe and the Middle East did after the Roman Empire imploded from within and barbarians finished them off.  It took them several hundred years, but eventually they managed.

The leg up that might shorten the process next time is that the technology level is comparable world wide, and Europe is the root of much of American culture, not the other way round.

Do you not understand that Russia is setting itself up to take over the entire world?

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tatetopa
5 hours ago, joc said:

Do you not understand that Russia is setting itself up to take over the entire world?

Yes I do, and China as well.  So, even though I applaud Trump's desire to get us out of  foreign wars and entanglements, it will leave a vacuum for somebody else to fill.  Truly, this is one thing that I think is vastly superior  in President Trump to Hillary Clinton, the desire to stop being the world's military police.  

So how do we do both?  How do we  Stop getting into wars but keep Russia and China from dominating world politics and economy?

  • Thanks 1

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.