Another war in the Middle East?

[Bundokji]

100%. And in connection to this topic, many appear either to have Iranian connections (Valerie Jarrett, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page) and/or Muslim Brotherhood connections (John Brennan).

I think when MBS said "They want to use the democratic system to rule countries and build shadow caliphates everywhere. Then they would transform into a real Muslim empire."... this is the sort of thing he was talking about.

It's for this reason that I believe the current events in Iran and the developments in the Crossfire Hurricane saga are likely to be in some way intertwined. Moves and countermoves etc.

Iran has ambitions to export its Islamic revolution outside its borders, but the difference is, they are operating within their sphere of influence, which is the Middle East region. On the other hand, the US is 10,000 miles away hence their involvement is more questionable based on the facts of geography.

As we both seem to agree that the US decision making and foreign policy has more to it than what immediately meets the eye, it can be useful to contemplate how the military industrial complex (among other things), being a profitable business in a capitalist country, is a major cause of US military misadventures in the Middle East, causing deaths and the further rise of extremism.

Referring to one of Trump's recent tweets can be relevant:

The United States just spent Two Trillion Dollars on Military Equipment. We are the biggest and by far the BEST in the World! If Iran attacks an American Base, or any American, we will be sending some of that brand new beautiful equipment their way...and without hesitation!

It makes one wonder how Trump is different from his predecessors.

[SethRich]

Greetings Bundokji,

Iran has ambitions to export its Islamic revolution outside its borders, but the difference is, they are operating within their sphere of influence, which is the Middle East region. On the other hand, the US is 10,000 miles away hence their involvement is more questionable based on the facts of geography.

If you're thinking in terms of physical nation states, yes, but not if you're thinking in terms of infiltration by the Muslim Brotherhood.

It is my perspective that after WWII, the world learned that territorial expansion is the not the most effective means of expansion - rather, it is through infiltration and subversion. JFK knew it too...

It makes one wonder how Trump is different from his predecessors.

To me, this is similar to the Fire and Fury language (remember NK?) although, I suspect this is more of a genuine threat, in contrast to Trump and Kim's little kabuki theatre act. (Dotard, lol)

As per my initial foray into this topic, there have been five significant actions take place throughout his term, and I guess in the context of our discussion you could add a sixth... the proposed listing of Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organisation. These six things, prior to any actual conflict, have helped him to "win the war" before it really began.





None of us knowing precisely what he's going to do, when and why. After all, if we knew, so would his enemy. But as with the other examples, I think we'll find in retrospect, that it was the work of a stable genius.

[Bundokji]

Greetings Bundokji,

Iran has ambitions to export its Islamic revolution outside its borders, but the difference is, they are operating within their sphere of influence, which is the Middle East region. On the other hand, the US is 10,000 miles away hence their involvement is more questionable based on the facts of geography.

If you're thinking in terms of physical nation states, yes, but not if you're thinking in terms of infiltration by the Muslim Brotherhood.

It makes one wonder how Trump is different from his predecessors.

To me, this is similar to the Fire and Fury language (remember NK?) although, I suspect this is more of a genuine threat, in contrast to Trump and Kim's little kabuki theatre act. (Dotard, lol)

As per my initial foray into this topic, there have been five significant actions take place throughout his term, and I guess in the context of our discussion you could add a sixth... the proposed listing of Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organisation. These six things, prior to any actual conflict, have helped him to "win the war" before it really began.

The listing of Muslim brotherhood as a terrorist organization by Saudi and its allies has more to do with rivalry between two camps in the region:

1- Saudi, Egypt and UAE
2- Qatar and Turkey

During the Arab Spring, the Muslim brotherhood won the elections in Egypt, and the US during the Obama administration allowed this to unfold. Turkey, after being rejected by the EU is trying to spread its influence south and revive the Ottoman empire through forming alliances with the Muslim brotherhood. Iran has nothing to do with that.

Ideologically, there is no connection between Iran and the Muslim brotherhood, the former being a shia and the later being sunni.

Turkey on the other hand is a major US ally and Nato member.

Iran has been waging war against sunni terrorism in Syria, Iraq and Yemen.

[fwiw]

None of us knowing precisely what he's going to do, when and why. After all, if we knew, so would his enemy. But as with the other examples, I think we'll find in retrospect, that it was the work of a stable genius.

“I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose any voters”
-- Donald Trump

Screenshot_2020-01-06-21-18-19-1.png (152.93 KiB) Viewed 3957 times

[Bundokji]

From a previous post:

Qasem Soliemani's funeral is for five days of which the last will be on Tuesday in Tehran. Millions have gathered mourning him so far even before reaching the capital, and the last day will be something for the world to watch.

15 minutes ago:

Soleimani: Stampede kills mourners at commander's burial

Source: BBC

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-51015795

[fwiw]

Iraqi PM reveals Soleimani was on peace mission when assassinated, exploding Trump’s lie of ‘imminent attacks’

https://thegrayzone.com/2020/01/06/sole ... t-attacks/

The Trump administration claimed Iranian general Qasem Soleimani was planning “imminent attacks” on US interests when it assassinated him. That lie was just destroyed, but not before countless corporate media outlets transmitted it to the public.
By Max Blumenthal

...

At a January 3 State Department briefing, where reporters finally got the chance to demand evidence for the claim of an “imminent” threat, one US official erupted in anger.

“Jesus, do we have to explain why we do these things?” he barked at the press.

[SethRich]

Greetings,



Meanwhile, one might be left wondering whether much is being bombed at all...

[Bundokji]

Greetings,



Meanwhile, one might be left wondering whether much is being bombed at all...

The Iranian foreign minister in his interview with CNN yesterday declared that Iran will respond proportionately. Also Trump declared that he will make a statement later today. Its better to hit your enemy when they are less prepared. Its good if the US believes that this is the extent of the response whether this is true or not.

This would give Iranians time to plan their next move. Their withdrawal from the nuclear deal might open the door for more serious negotiations. If all of this leads to lifting the sanctions, then Soliemani's blood would not have been wasted from Iranian perspective.

[fwiw]

Statement from Iraqi PM:

“I received a phone call from @realDonaldTrump when the embassy protests ended thanking the government efforts and asked Iraq to play the mediator's role between US and Iran” Iraqi PM said.

“But at the same time American helicopters and drones were flying without the approval of Iraq, and we refused the request of bringing more soldiers to US embassy and bases” iraqi PM said.

“I was supposed to meet Soleimani at the morning the day he was killed, he came to deliver me a message from Iran responding to the message we delivered from Saudi to Iran” Iraqi PM said.

Here is a summary:




The takeaway is that, as way too often, the opposite of what Trump said is true, this time in all sorts of twisted ways. Soleimani was on a mission brokering peace of which Trump himself was part. So this is how he managed to take him down. Trump managed to make Soleimani trust that he was not after him, using a false prospect of peace, lies, misdirection and murder.

[fwiw]

Screenshot_2020-01-12_15-36-24.png (45.15 KiB) Viewed 3868 times

Same thing with Raytheon

[fwiw]

So apparently Google decided to take down the entirety of Press TV's Youtube channel:




Recently, Press TV has published this article:

Iraq’s Sadr urges million-man march against US military presence
https://www.presstv.com/Detail/2020/01/ ... sence-Sadr

Not surprised the Americans don't like them

What it shows clearly is that Californian big tech is deep in cahoots with warmongers

[fwiw]

Trump reportedly told associates he killed Qassem Soleimani because he was under pressure from GOP senators before his impeachment trial
https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-c ... 020-1?IR=T

Emphasis mine

President Donald Trump told associates that he assassinated Iran's top military leader last week in part to appease Republican senators who'll play a crucial role in his Senate impeachment trial, The Wall Street Journal reported on Thursday.

In a lengthy piece detailing how the president's top advisers coalesced behind the strike on Iranian Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani, The Journal reported that Trump had told associates he felt pressured to satisfy senators who were pushing for stronger US action against Soleimani and who will run defense for him on impeachment.

One of Trump's most outspoken supporters, GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham, appears to be the only congressional lawmaker Trump briefed about his plan to assassinate Soleimani in the days leading up to the strike.

"I was briefed about the potential operation when I was down in Florida," Graham told Fox News. "I appreciate being brought into the orbit."

This would explain why Lockheed Martin's and Raytheon's stocks started shooting up a couple of days before the assassination, on the chart I provided earlier.

Trump said on Thursday that he approved the strike on Soleimani because the general was plotting to bomb the US Embassy in Iraq.

But the administration hasn't released any evidence to support the claim that Iran was planning such an attack on the embassy, or any other imminent attack.

During an interview with Fox News on Thursday night, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said that the Trump administration didn't know "precisely when" or "precisely where" an attack would have targeted.

Democratic lawmakers — and a few Republicans — were infuriated by a classified briefing they received from the Trump administration on Wednesday concerning the US strike that killed Soleimani and a top Iraqi militant leader.

The lawmakers said they weren't provided any evidence of an imminent and specific threat posed by Soleimani — evidence of which is required to legally launch an attack without congressional authorization.

Republican Sen. Mike Lee called the briefing, which Pompeo helped lead, "probably the worst briefing, at least on a military issue, I've seen in nine years I've been here."

There you have your impeachable offense. But Trump is never ever going to get impeached for starting wars illegally. Rather, he is celebrated in all the mainstream media he used to scold for doing so.


https://media.giphy.com/media/xUNd9IMyw ... /giphy.gif

[Bundokji]

Iran raid left '34 US troops with traumatic brain injuries'

The Pentagon has said that 34 US troops were diagnosed with traumatic brain injuries (TBI) following an Iranian attack on their base in Iraq.

Seventeen troops are still under medical observation, a spokesman said.

President Donald Trump had said no Americans were injured in the 8 January strike, which came in retaliation for the US killing of an Iranian general.

Mr Trump had cited the supposed lack of injuries in his decision not to strike back against Iran.

But last week, the Pentagon said 11 service members had been treated for concussion symptoms from the attack.

Asked about the apparent discrepancy this week at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, Mr Trump said: "I heard that they had headaches, and a couple of other things, but I would say, and I can report, it's not very serious."

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-51243888

[Bundokji]

Rockets hit US embassy in Baghdad amid protests

At least three rockets struck the US embassy in the Iraqi capital, Baghdad, on Sunday.

One rocket hit the embassy cafeteria while two others landed a short distance away, a source told AFP.

At least three people were injured, security sources told Reuters. This would be the first time in years that staff have been hurt in such attacks.

No group has claimed responsibility but the US has blamed Iran-backed military factions in Iraq in the past.

Iraqi Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi condemned the attack, stating that the continuation of such acts could "drag Iraq into becoming a battlefield".

The US State Department said: "We call on the Government of Iraq to fulfil its obligations to protect our diplomatic facilities."

Recent attacks have targeted the embassy or Iraqi military bases where American troops are deployed.

Source: BBC

[fwiw]

Arsonist "firefighter".

[Bundokji]

Iran's Revolutionary Guards ‘successfully launch military satellite’

Iran's Islamic Revolution Guard Corps (IRGC) says it has successfully launched a military satellite into orbit for the first time.

The satellite, named Nur (Light), reached an orbit of 425km (264 miles) after being carried by a three-stage Qased launcher, a statement said.

The success of the launch has not been verified independently.

But US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said Iran had violated a UN resolution and needed "to be held accountable".

He spoke shortly after President Donald Trump tweeted that he had instructed the US Navy to "shoot down and destroy any and all Iranian gunboats if they harass our ships at sea".

Mr Trump appeared to be referring to an incident in the Gulf a week ago, in which the US said 11 IRGC Navy vessels repeatedly conducted "harassing" approaches of six US Navy and Coast Guard ships.

Iran accused the US of giving a "Hollywood version of events" and said the US Navy had blocked the path of an Iranian ship earlier this month.

A spokesman for the Iranian armed forces criticised Mr Trump's tweet, saying that "instead of bullying others" the US should focus on "saving the contingent of their [armed] forces that has been infected with coronavirus".

The countries came close to war in January, when the US killed a top IRGC general in a drone strike in Iraq. Iran responded by launching ballistic missiles at Iraqi military bases hosting US forces.

What did Iran say about the satellite launch?

The IRGC said it took place in the remote Central Desert on Wednesday.

Footage broadcast by state TV showed the Qased carrier inscribed with a verse from the Koran that Muslims often recite when going on a journey: "Glory be to Him, who has subjected this to us, and we ourselves were not equal to it."

IRGC's commander-in-chief, Maj-Gen Hossein Salami, said the force had taken "a major step in promoting the scope of [its] strategic information capabilities".

"Today, we are looking at the Earth from the sky, and it is the beginning of the formation of a world power," he was quoted by Fars news agency as saying.

IRGC Aerospace Force commander Brig-Gen Amir-Ali Hajizadeh said the Qased "used a compound of liquid and solid propellants" and declared: "Only superpowers have such capability".

Iranian Telecommunications Minister Mohammad Javad Azari Jahromi congratulated the IRGC on the "great national achievement" and stressed that the Aerospace Force's space programme was defensive.

"Part of Iran's peaceful [space] programme is civilian which is pursued by the government, while another part is for peaceful defence purposes and naturally carried out by the armed forces," he tweeted.

In February, Iran failed to put into orbit the Zafar communications satellite.

There were two other failed satellite launches last year, as well as a mysterious explosion that destroyed a satellite launch vehicle.
Why is the US concerned?

The Trump administration has warned that the technology used to launch satellites could help Iran develop intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs).

It has asserted that such launches therefore violate a UN Security Council resolution, which calls upon on Iran not to "undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles designed to be capable of delivering nuclear weapons".

Iran has denied violating the resolution and insisted that its space programme is entirely peaceful and that it has no intention to develop nuclear weapons.

The same resolution endorsed a 2015 nuclear deal between Iran and world powers that President Trump abandoned two years ago. He said it was flawed and demanded it be replaced with one that halted the Iranian ballistic missile programme.
How did it react on Wednesday?

Secretary of State Pompeo said every nation had "an obligation to go to the United Nations and evaluate whether this missile launch was consistent with that Security Council resolution".

"I don't think it remotely is. And I need I think Iran needs to be held accountable for what they've done," he told reporters in Washington. "They've now had a military organisation that the United States has designated a terrorist [organization] attempt to launch a satellite."

Mr Pompeo also said President Trump's order to fire on Iranian gunboats harassing US ships made it clear that the navy should take whatever action was needed to defend American lives and assets.

Senior US military officials called it an important warning and a "very useful thing", but did not indicate that it was a change of military policy on Iran.

[Charbel]

This video is excellent although most indoctrinated Westerners will struggle with it.

[Bundokji]

Israel's fight with Iran knows no coronavirus crisis

Analysis: With war-torn Syria further weakened by the epidemic, Tehran scrambling to reassert regional power and Moscow struggling to justify its investment in Assad, Jerusalem sees now is the time for decisive action

As far as the Syrian front goes, Israel's coronavirus crisis is a thing of the past.

The series of attacks in Syria attributed to Israel during April seems like a planned policy, and is no longer merely a presumed response to Iranian initiative.

It seems it was a planned action, most likely meant to root out any Iranian weeds trying to entrench themselves on Syrian soil via the deployment of pro-Iranian militias on the Golan, resuming Hezbollah operations on the plateau, reinforcing its headquarters and munitions warehouses.
Beginning in February, foreign sources reported that Israeli military activity had all but ceased, attributing this to the coronavirus crisis that peaked in Israel around Passover.
But since the war Israel is conducting all across the Middle East is far more intricate than mere aerial bombardments, it makes sense the scope of its activities - including reports of mysterious explosions - is apparently far more intense than has been reported by the foreign media.

Iranians are also trying to return to the pre-coronavirus routine in Syria. If at the end of March the Revolutionary Guard transport jets were flying medical equipment from China to Tehran, in early April those same aircraft started landing in Damascus as well, carrying military equipment in their cargo holds.
Coincidentally or not, the first foreign report of fresh Israeli airstrikes in Damascus also first appeared in early April. Since then, Syria's seaports in Latakia and Banias have also been reopened, bringing fuel and equipment of various kinds from Iran.

The Iranian machine is back on its feet in Syria - albeit mostly limping - after it suffered three deadly blows: the deadly coronavirus crisis with its economic and social consequences, the continued U.S. sanctions, and - above all - the oil price crisis.

The Syrian regime is also returning to the game much more scarred than before. Not only is the economic crisis in Syria escalating, but there also seems to be no light at the end of the tunnel due to the lack of an exit plan.

The coronavirus crisis has hit Syria no less than other countries in the region - only in the war-torn country, there is no one to collect data or tend to the sick. Syrians stand in line for bread and not for coronavirus testing.

Israel could not renew its attributed activity in Syria without Russia's tacit consent. In the fifth year of their sojourn in Syria, as the sun slowly set on the coronavirus epidemic, the Russians have found themselves in a state of deep frustration.

All their expectations of benefiting - especially financially - from their investment in Syria have thus far failed to pan out.

In fact, in order to maintain Bashar Assad's rule over Syria, they are now required not only to invest huge amounts of money that they do not have, not only on the military but also on the humanitarian-economic-health crisis that does not seem to have a foreseeable finish line.

The Iranians are the allies of the Russians for the purpose of fighting on Syrian soil but are ultimately an obstacle and competitor in Russian plans for control over Syria and its resources.

Therefore it is currently easier for the Russians to simply ignore the attacks attributed to Israel by its Iranian rival.

The Americans have also upped their game in a possible military confrontation with Iran, as the harassment of the U.S. Navy in the Persian Gulf has led to a clear directive from President Donald Trump: Attack all Iranian vessels.

The Iranians for their part blame the United States not only for their economic crisis but also for curbing their ability to obtain medical equipment to deal with the coronavirus outbreak that has ravaged the country.

And so the tensions in the Gulf are rising and will continue to do so as June approaches when the International Atomic Energy Agency will release its report on Iranian violations of enriched uranium storage.

It is safe to assume there is coordination or understanding between Israel and the United States regarding the pressure put on Iran.
Past experience shows that as tensions rise in the Gulf, so do tensions between Israel and Iran on the Syrian front.

The circumstances present Israel with the opportunity to weaken Iran's foothold in Syria. This is a strategic opportunity, for even if Iran does seek to respond, it will only create grounds for Israel to conduct a decisive military operation against it across the northern border.

https://www.ynetnews.com/article/SJRA2w6tL

[Charbel]

The listing of Muslim brotherhood as a terrorist organization by Saudi and its allies has more to do with rivalry between two camps in the region:

1- Saudi, Egypt and UAE
2- Qatar and Turkey

During the Arab Spring, the Muslim brotherhood won the elections in Egypt, and the US during the Obama administration allowed this to unfold. Turkey, after being rejected by the EU is trying to spread its influence south and revive the Ottoman empire through forming alliances with the Muslim brotherhood. Iran has nothing to do with that.

Ideologically, there is no connection between Iran and the Muslim brotherhood, the former being a shia and the later being sunni.

Turkey on the other hand is a major US ally and Nato member.

Iran has been waging [defensive] war against Sunni [Salafi ideology] terrorism in Syria, Iraq and Yemen.

Well explained. Muslim Brotherhood historically is M16 and CIA; just as Taliban & Al Qaeda were US poxies. Seth Rich obviously don't know much about the violence & death his country is supporting in the Middle-East. Seth Rich sounds like one of those Left-Wing Libertarian SJWs that wants hijack Buddhism to export Colour Revolution around the religious (dharma) world.

[Presto Kensho]

I am unhappy that PressTV, Iran's English language international news channel, is unavailable (banned) on Youtube and Roku.

Why are we not allowed to hear Iran's side on any given conflict, even if we disagree with it?

PressTV might be a state-run media company, but so are Voice of America and PBS in the United States.

Americans complain about China's censorship, while big tech companies are allowed to censor here at home:

In April 2019, Press TV reported that Google blocked their access (along with HispanTV) “without prior notice, citing “violation of policies,” and that they received a message saying “your Google Account was disabled and can’t be restored because it was used in a way that violates Google’s policies.” Although their YouTube channels remain open, no new content can be published. Press TV claimed that Google “has refused to offer an explanation for shutting down the accounts,” and that they have not violated any of Google’s listed policies.[37]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_TV_controversies

Why is it okay for alt-right Youtube channels to spread hate, but not okay for PressTV to report the news from an Iranian perspective?