Two oil tankers struck in suspected attacks in Gulf of Oman

1. Yes, she told him the Kuwaiti/Iraqi border dispute was an internal matter on which the US had no position. To you and me this means the US would be honest broker between its' two allies, to Saddam this means they didn't mind if he invaded. That's the different mindset of those who are democrats and those who are tyrants. Don't try to blow this up into some conspiracy.

2. No they weren't, the US and the West delivered Iraq tech with multiple uses and they used it to make WMDs, the West had zero interest in wanting Iraq armed with such firepower, they just didn't want the Iranians winning.

 

Craig Murray gives some more information on the disconnect between what the US regime is reporting and reality.

It may well be that if that 'Iran' boat was there on that morning it was as was suggested rescuing people as that was the vote they did pick them up from. He is speaking about this through the prism of the disappearance of Western Democracy (- to the extent we ever had it)

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2019/06/the-broader-view-reveals-the-ugliest-of-prospects/

 

Well... in the face of undeniable evidence contrary to your initial claim - you didn't go into a seething fit of denial - I will give you that much.

That said, your argument is just horrible. First off - this was not a civil war - that is another piece of spin/propaganda. This was an armed insurgency - complete with tens of thousands of foreign Jihadists. Aside from the fact that arming insurgents in a sovereign nation is illegal - the people we armed were friggen extremist Islamist nut jobs.

The comparison to WW2 is nuts - this was not a world war. Assad was zero threat to the US and he was making war against another nation. The comparison is preposterous nonsense on steroids -- and you know it.

This was "Evil" - pure and simple. We were not on the side of Good - and there was no valid reason to be on the side of evil. If there was some valid reason - why not tell the citizens - surely they would agree ?

The fact of the matter is that the people of Syria - those that are not Islamist extremist nut jobs - wanted to keep their freedoms - which is why they were fighting against the rebel Jihadists. Syria is a "Secular" nation = not a Sharia Theocracy.

They do not stone adulterers and kill apostates. They do not throw gays of buildings - Like El Saud.
Women do not need permission from a man to be educated .. Like your beloved El Saud.
There is drinking alcohol and dancing in bars... unlike El Saud
Women wear skits and proper bathing suits .. unlike El Saud
There is Christian Churches and freedom of Religion - unlike El Saud .. Assad has Christian Generals in his army.
In the land of Saud - there are Sharia police everywhere monitoring behavior - it is an Orwellian Totalitarian Police state. Not Syria.

The Jihadists want to take those freedoms away. They hate the dreaded "Secularism" .. they hate individual liberty. They are pure evil - raping and killing Christians and anyone else who is not of their nut job extremist belief.. true lunatics.

We were on the side of Evil - not the side of Freedom. There was nothing Good about what we did and the people we armed.

Since when is supporting mass genocide and other horrible justifiable on the basis of "some leader is a bad guy. This was not WW2 - Assad has done nothing to the US. What leader in the ME isn't just as bad if not worse than Assad - few and far between. The El Saud for example is much worse and these are our good buddies.

Aside from this action being pure Evil - These clowns run around claiming to be fighting terrorism - when in fact they are supporting it. They gave these nutters surface to air missiles - perfect for taking out civilian airliners.

Virginia Senator Thanks Syrian President Bashar Al Assad for Saving the Lives of Christians
Open Letter of U.S. Senator Richard H. Black to President Bashar al-Assad Acknowledges US Support to Terrorists

https://www.globalresearch.ca/virgi...ad-for-saving-the-lives-of-christians/5384338

Now perhaps these kind of atrocities do not bother you - fair enough . Does it not bother you that the Gov't has been lying their faces off and that everything they have been telling you is falsehoods and propaganda ? Does it not bother you that we nave no fair and free Media - that they have been complicit in these lies and the cover up ?

You seem to dislike Totalitarianism - How do you think these Totalitarian regimes managed to become what they were - are you not aware that controlling the media was a primary step in the process ?

This is not the "greater good" .. this is Evil and people covering up Evil - and people with way more power than organizations are supposed to have in this nation.

But hey- perhaps these folks have our best interests at heart - as you seem to desperately want to believe. All I say is that you better hope so because they have a whole lot of power and the safeguards that were put in place by the founders to prevent Tyranny have largely been removed.

Don't expect it to look like Stalin's Soviet Union or Adolf's Germany - why would it ? All I know is that power corrupts and more power corrupts more. What history also tells is is that at some point most Gov'ts go bad .. who is to say what will happen in the future .. could be some extremist leftist movement or a rightist movement. Can you guarantee that in the next 100 or 1000 years our Gov't won't go bad ?

I will tell you one thing - the first step in Gov't going bad is to remove the safeguards that prevent Gov't from going bad - and I don't like it - regardless of how happy and swell things are today.

 

Collateral Damage = intentional killing of innocents. It is a nonsense word used to cover up intentional atrocity. Sure there are cases when this can not be avoided but, lets not sugar coat these things by using words that mask the nastiness of the deed.

 

Probably more accurately, Kissinger did not want the war to end. To be more exact:

Anyway, look up the Iran Contra affair and the timelines when arms to Iran jumped significantly. Also Israel expressed desires for the Iraq/Iran war to continue indefinitely which lead to Israel being the go-between in that scandal

 

Nothing surprises me of claims of high up politicians and/or military people acting inappropriately withing the US system.
Regardless, I'd prefer fighting alongside them as Australians have than looking sideways at any other large military or dealing with a US pollie.
I feel the intent of justice is more genuine and its a personal view.

 

Any language evolves over time of course, and in this day of the hoax known as the Global War Of Terror, it is appropriate and accurate that what you describe is now known as Collateral Murder.

 

Horse manure.

 

Alexa, Craig Murray is hardly an objective source. He completely misunderstands the event. The limpet mine that the Iranians retrieved was above the waterline - like all the others that were used.
The Iranians are not trying to sink the tankers - that would be too risky a provocation. They were all placed above the waterline because they only wanted to damage the ships as a warning.
That was enough to raise oil prices across the board and arouse anxiety around the World. The crew were not wearing protective gear because they did not expect the mine not to explode.
Thery had to remove it quickly before the US Navy got hold of the mine. If the US got ahold of the mine they could prove it was Iranian (not that the America haters would have believed that
either). The risk of removing the mine was smaller than of leaving it there. As this forum proves, even though they were caught red-handed removing the mine, people would still deny it was
the Iranian because of their hatred of the US.

 

On June 19th, German Chancellor Angela Merkel - no friend of the USA - stated that there was "strong evidence" that Iran was responsible for the attack on the two tankers in the Gulf
of Oman. Merkel said she wanted the conflict to be resolved peacefully and stated that Germany would tell all sides and especially Iran "that the situation should not escalate." With their
shooting down of a US drone it appears Iran isn't listening to the Germans.

 

I'm not saying that the "other" are saints or better ... it's all about the US blaming others for evil issues that the US itself is doing! That's a disgusting hypocrisy ... but it's compounded by the fact that US arrogance follows, either where it's not evil when the US does it ... or it does not matter if the US does it ... or even With lies and fake news one tries to talk nicely about the own evil US actions as in the case of Vietnam or Iraq 2003.

And it is also dfarum that you do not have to go through every trash of the United States as in the case of Iran .... and fortunately, the United States compared to Iraq in 2003 also very alone!
Apart from Israel and Saudi Arabia, both of whom hate the mullahs at least as much as the US, there are no allies this time!
And then again the US arrogance ... because all those who have said no to the USA, are of course idiots and now evil!

 

Really? Does the UK or anyone of Commonwealth follow the US into Iran? No!

 

Hey, take it easy. Australia has been beside the US in every war since 1915 I believe. We've always considered our independent position and decided to join you. But that doesn't tie us to the US. Every conflict has to be considered and internal politics sorted. So a little early to say yet how Oz will decide. We were with you in Syria recently re: ISIS. Besides, nations in that area should put their hands up to join well before others imo. SA, Israel, Turkey, etc

 

Ehm ... Of course, colleteral damalges are unfortunately something that happens again and again in the war ... but if the US declares the colleteral damage of others as evil and beckons their own colletaral damage as "**** hppens", then you make a fool of yourself!

A sinsible person should actually recognize this difference and this arrogance in the US ...

 

But this wasn't the case here at all ... all a CIA fairy tale and false flag issue!

No, only preventing wasted time

So Ben Franklin is right too and the Bush Jr. Administration wrong?

Yep ... mabye this explains in part the Polish paranoia, but it makes blind to the current situation where is no threat from this and the other side!

Never before had a performance been a Pole in Washington like Duda's so embarrassing. By the way, you know that Poland is no longer fulfilling its 2% by now ... I mean the same 2% of the GDP which Poland as well as Germany should contractually invest in defense only from 2024 ... but where Trump is so outrageous and says " now "?
Currently only 1.85%! We do not say anything about that ... also because Duda is so stupid and wants to waste 2 billion Polish tax money on this ridiculous "Camp Trump", eh?

And this is your evidence ... because they have done this before in the 1980's? ROFL... you have made bunch of False flag issue sin the 1980's too ... may I can say that this is the proof you have done false falg again?

 

Seriously? Iraq is today more peaceful as before? I get a laugh attack! Did you get anything about how many million Iraqis dies since 2003 ...
They are for sure happy to be liberated from Saddam and to have exchanged the liberty to being killed en mass due to the fact that thr US has messed up the their country till today! How many terror attacks on markets and in the streets were again under Saddam given, eh?

The Iranians have learned out of it. Even for sure are many or even the majority not really happy with the situation under the Mullahs ... but if they can chose between the current situation or being thron by the US in a mess of civil war ... argiue what they will chose, eh?

I can remember how thy for example shown the mountain of paper shreddered and then put together like a puzzle and showing intersting documents. Point is for example that this counter coup was betrayed to the Mullahs in time from some Iranian officers!

 

No, this is a matter of degree. We've all seen videos of US missiles approaching their targets, you can see the target getting larger at the cross hairs with the telemetry and then the video stops, ever seen the video of any Russian missile? I don't think they have cameras or even provide telemetry. Often this US missile video shows the target as recognizably military, its a fighter jet on the tarmac, a tank in maneuvers, what we are told is some military structure. I don't expect we'd be shown the video of a missile as it approached a busy market or some mosque during noon prayer.

I remember reading about the katyushkas used in the Donbass by the insurgents, numerous and quite powerful, but terribly inaccurate, they'd be launching dozens of these rockets at urban areas and the destruction would be quite random, this is in the modern arsenal of the Russian forces. Those Russian "barrell bombs" and the "cluster bombs" dropped by their helicopters over towns in Syria... These are weapons with very imprecise targeting which tend to have widespread impact.

It is frequently reported how civilians die from US drone attacks, I believe there is actually a lawsuit making its way through federal courts, brought by the wife of a cabbie killed when a drone struck his taxi while he was driving some jihadist leader. The story goes the jihadist got the cab at (I think it was) the Turkish border, military intelligence knew the jihadist's location and identified him as he boarded the taxi, the vehicle was tracked for dozens of miles from a high altitude and at some point hit with a rocket -but the cabbie was innocent!

 

Obama wanted to topple Assad and then try to install a peaceful and friendly regime in his place but the first step is topple Assad. It is a laudable aim but he chickened out at the pass. This is for the greater good and sometimes for that you have strange bedfellows, if you're looking for allies who are squeaky clean you will never find them.

 

Wow! Snappy comeback! Explain?

 

Yes, Kissinger didn't want the Iranians to win, who did? The eventual stalemate was probably the best result for everyone. Iran/Contra was not to have Iran win the war it was to free the hostages, it was idiocy but it didn't mean the US had switched sides.

 

When is the US going into Iran? To guarantee the passage of international maritime traffic through those waters, well everyone is helping out, when I served with Task Force 150 there was everyone was pitching in, from our Aussie cousins to the Chinese.

 

1. Come on, he was another Castro in the making, we see it time and again during the Cold War.

2. You mean you have no comeback?

3. Not essentially but in this case Bismarck was right.

4. REALLY? After all Mr Putin has been up to with his little green men in the Ukraine? After all his dirty trick in the Baltic states? After murdering his political opponents in the UK with nerve agent? REALLY?

Having an American tripwire force in Poland makes perfect sense and sends a strong message to the Kremlin.

 

Yep sure is, no Saddam starting crazy wars, the insurgency on its' knees, Iraq's oil wealth spent on its' people and not crazy WMD programmes, freer than every before (over twice as free as Iran according to some polls, in Saddam's Iraq a woman could not leave the country without a male relative and even then everyone had to bribe their way out and leave a huge deposit to ensure they returned) and more prosperous.

Fewer people died on the liberation than Saddam's wars, there were no terrorist attacks in Saddam's Iraq because it was tyranny. I'm sure many in Iran would welcome a similar liberation but no way Trump would go for that.
Yes, the Iranians pieced together the CIA records from the Embassy but none showed any such attempt at what you allege, do you really think Jimmy Carter would be for that?

 

Strange Bedfellows indeed ! So strange that the State department, Pentagon, Intelligence agencies and the Media had to engage in large scale propaganda to hide the nature of their activities from the American people.

Perhaps you are not much of a student of History but, that the Washington power brokers would even attempt such a cover up speaks volumes with respect to how much control these brokers can exert. That there was so much complicity in the cover up is both amazing and disturbing.

The willingness of the masses to accept mass atrocities and violations of liberty on the basis of some "greater good" is characteristic of totalitarian communism and authoritarian regimes in general. This justification was used by Pol Pot, Mao, Stalin, Hitler - just to name just a few.

The list of books written on this topic is numerous. What is interesting is the ability of propaganda to get the general public to remove the safeguards put in place by the founders to protect them against tyranny. Such arguments are now regularly used increase Gov't power. This justification of law is known as "Utilitarianism" - justification for law on the basis of "what will increase happiness for the collective".

The idea that replacing Assad with the likes of Al Qaeda and ISIS is some "greater good" is laughable not laudable. This is Orwellian doublespeak - evil masquerading as "Good". The people of Syria certainly don't think this is good - and least of all the Christians and other groups - which is why they fight against the Islamist extremists - even though they are not fond of Assad. Assad is by far the lesser of two evils. The idea that Obama was on the side of the "greater good" is a lie and a false narrative.

Not sure about you but I find it disturbing and deeply anti Anti American to support the atrocity committed in Syria. This action goes against the core principles on which this nation was founded. It is also disturbing that "Russia" were the "good guys" in this conflict - and that we were on the side of pure evil.

 

Wrong on four accounts.

Kissinger (along with Israel) did not want the war to end.

And I did not say that the Iran/Contra was to have Iran win! I stated that it was part of the desire for the war to continue

The Iran/Contra arm sales to Iran started before the hostages were even taken

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran–Contra_affair

I didn't actually say that the US switched sides - I said that the US provided info to Iran when it was seen that Iraq was on the verge of winning. Along with that info, the US increased the arms sale to Iran significantly in 1986, two years before the end of the war, and was part of the Iran/Contra scandal.

The US is a rogue country whose foreign Policy is eternal conflict in the Middle East