Iran

Peskiv? Btw, Peskiv is Ukrainian variant of surname Peskov - surname of Putin's press secretary.
Yep spell checker aka spear chucker. My bad
So you are paid by Reuters and you are Ukrainian?
:) yeah, like that works ....
No, you made mistake typical for native English speaker.
Not really. More a hit ‘send’ rather than review and send.
So @scalieback is a name of an international collective paid by Reuters.
We’ve had this discussion many times and you often say I’m paid by either the U.K. govt or Reuters. As you know, if I was a U.K. employee on here to act in such a capacity I wouldn’t be able to call people ‘site toilets’ which I do on occasion.

As for Reuters, they are my preferred news agency for a number of reasons, not least because you got upset by them after they quoted Bellingcat on MH17.
 
Iran's Rouhani warns Trump about 'mother of all wars'
Must be something about the rhetoric in the region. In Iraq it was ‘the mother of all battles’. In Iran it will be ‘the mother of all wars’ if it actually happens. Trump shouldn’t also ‘play with the lions tail’. Apparently peace will be ‘the mother of all peace’:
Addressing a gathering of Iranian diplomats, Rouhani said: “Mr Trump, don’t play with the lion’s tail, this would only lead to regret,” the state new agency IRNA reported.

“America should know that peace with Iran is the mother of all peace, and war with Iran is the mother of all wars,” Rouhani said, leaving open the possibility of peace between the two countries which have been at odds since the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

“You are not in a position to incite the Iranian nation against Iran’s security and interests,” Rouhani said, in an apparent reference to reported efforts by Washington to destabilize Iran’s Islamic government.
A not so ‘veiled threat’ on the straights of Hormuz:
“Anyone who understands the rudiments of politics doesn’t say ‘we will stop Iran’s oil exports’...we have been the guarantor of the regional waterway’s security throughout history,” Rouhani said, cited by the semi-official ISNA news agency.
They also say the US govt is trying to persuade the military to invade Iran:
“The enemy’s behavior is unpredictable,” military chief of staff General Mohammad Baqeri said, the semi-official Tasnim news agency reported.

“Although the current American government does not seem to speak of a military threat, according to precise information it has been trying to persuade the U.S. military to launch a military invasion (of Iran),” Baqeri said.
 
U.S. launches campaign to erode support for Iran's leaders
Alleged info ops campaign being conducted by the Trump administration against Iran and the Iranian leadership:
A review of the State Department’s Farsi-language Twitter account and its ShareAmerica website - which describes itself as a platform to spark debate on democracy and other issues - shows a number of posts critical of Tehran over the last month.

Iran is the subject of four of the top five items on the website’s “Countering Violent Extremism” section. They include headlines such as “This Iranian airline helps spread violence and terror.”

In social media posts and speeches, Pompeo himself also appeals directly to Iranians, the Iranian diaspora and a global audience.
Pompeo’s direct appeal:
On June 21, Pompeo tweeted out graphics headlined: “Protests in Iran are growing,” “Iranian people deserve respect for their human rights,” and “Iran’s revolutionary guard gets rich while Iranian families struggle.” The tweets were translated into Farsi and posted on the ShareAmerica website.
He’s due to give a speech yesterday (Sunday) in the US to say that they’re pushing Iran to make hard choices. It’s not about regime change but to change their behaviours:
On Sunday, Pompeo will give a speech titled “Supporting Iranian Voices” in California and meet Iranian Americans, many of whom fled the Islamic Revolution that toppled Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi.

“Let me be clear, we are not seeking regime change. We are seeking changes in the Iranian government’s behavior,” a State Department official said in response to questions from Reuters.

“We know we are driving Iran to make some hard choices. Either they can change their ways or find it increasingly difficult to engage in their malign activities,” said the official, speaking on condition of anonymity. “And we believe we are offering a very positive vision for what we could achieve and what the Iranian people could have.”
Incomplete and distorted information is also apparently part of the campaign:
Some of the information the administration has disseminated is incomplete or distorted, the current and former officials said.

In a May 21 speech in Washington, Pompeo said Iranian leaders refused to spend on their people funds freed by the nuclear weapons deal, using it instead for proxy wars and corruption.
Also pushing on the Iraqi militias sponsored by Iran and exaggerating a closeness between Iran, the Taliban and AQ by calling them ‘co-conspirators’:
“We understand, however, that some of the undisciplined PMF are especially close to Iran, responsive to Iran’s directives, and have a history of criminal activity and terrorism,” the official said. “Those groups are as problematic for the Iraqi state as they are for us.”

Experts said the administration also is exaggerating the closeness of the relationship between Iran and Afghanistan’s Taliban militants and al Qaeda by calling them co-conspirators.
Two possible aimed for outcomes, one leading to Iran curtailing their nuclear programme and regional ambitions. The other being an implosion of the Iranian administration:
Karim Sadjadpour, an Iran expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace think tank, said the strategy to economically strangle Iran and stoke public discontent with the leadership aimed to produce one of two outcomes.

“Outcome one is capitulation, forcing Iran to further curtail not only its nuclear program but also its regional ambitions,” Sadjadpour said. “Outcome two is the implosion of the Islamic Republic.”
 
Pompeo assails Iran's leaders, compares them to 'mafia'
Pompeo’s speech as mentioned above. Other than that already reported, he likens Iran’s govt to the mafia, says Rouhani etc. are just front men for the Ayatollh and that they embezzle their country’s money for themselves:
....dismissed Iranian President Hassan Rouhani and Foreign Minister Javad Zarif, who negotiated a nuclear deal with the United States and five other countries, as “merely polished front men for the ayatollahs’ international con artistry.”
They resemble the mafia:
Iran “is run by something that resembles the mafia more than a government,” Pompeo said, citing what he called Iranian leaders’ vast wealth and corruption.
Countries importing Iranian oil close to zero by 04.11.2018:
The United States will work with countries that import Iranian oil “to get imports as close to zero as possible” by Nov. 4, Pompeo said.
Says Iranian leadership has benefitted by embezzlement and other ‘ill gotten gains’:
Pompeo said senior Iranian leaders had benefited from embezzlement, sweetheart deals and other ill-gotten gains.

Iran’s ayatollahs, he said, were “hypocritical holy men” who “seem more concerned with riches than religion.”
E2A: Iran says Pompeo's remarks interference in state matters: Tasnim
Iran’s response:
“Pompeo’s speech on Sunday was a clear interference in Iran’s state matters...such policies will unite Iranians who will overcome plots against their country,” Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Bahram Qasemi said.
 
Last edited:
There is continuing fall-out from the US reneging on the treaty with Iran. 'The United States is not trustworthy': Iran rejects meeting with Trump | CBC News

On Monday Trump said he was willing to meet with Rouhani.
On Monday, he declared during a news conference at the White House that he would be willing to meet Rouhani "any time" without preconditions to discuss how to improve relations.

"I ended the Iran deal. It was a ridiculous deal," said Trump. "I do believe that they will probably end up wanting to meet and I'm ready to meet any time that they want to."
On Tuesday Iran replied that they saw no point in meeting with Trump as the US does not keep to their word.
"Based on our bad experiences in negotiations with America and based on U.S. officials' violation of their commitments, it is natural that we see no value in his proposal," Kamal Kharrazi was quoted as saying by the semi-official Fars news agency.
They also said they would have had no problems negotiating with the US if the US had not pulled out of the treaty.
"If Trump had not withdrawn from the nuclear deal and not imposed [new] sanctions on Iran, there would be no problem with negotiations with America," he told state news agency IRNA.
Iran also said the US is not trustworthy.
"The United States is not trustworthy. How can we trust this country when it withdraws unilaterally from the nuclear deal?" Abdolreza Rahmani Fazli was quoted as saying by the semi-official Fars news agency.
They will not negotiate with the US unless the US returns to the treaty.
"Respecting the Iranian nation's rights, reducing hostilities and returning to the nuclear deal are steps that can be taken to pave the bumpy road of talks between Iran and America," Hamid Aboutalebi tweeted on Tuesday.
Iran made vague statements regarding not wanting to create trouble in global waterways, but will not give up the right to export oil.
Rouhani said during a meeting with Britain's ambassador on Tuesday that after what he called the "illegal" U.S. withdrawal from the nuclear deal, "the ball is in Europe's court now."

He added, "The Islamic Republic has never sought tension in the region and does not want any trouble in global waterways, but it will not easily give up on its rights to export oil."

Rouhani on Tuesday again suggested Iran could cause major disruptions in the Gulf region by attempting to block key shipping lanes, saying "Iran has never sought tensions in the region and does not want there to be any problem for the world's waterways, but it will never let go of its right to export oil," the semi-official Mehr news agency reported.
From the context the might possibly refer to taking retaliatory measures against other oil exporters in the Persian Gulf if the US uses force to try to prevent the export of oil from Iran to markets such as India or China.

Alternatively it might be intended to create some jitters in oil markets to boost prices and thus focus global attention on the threat that the loss of Iranian oil exports would pose to oil prices and thus the global economy, already under threat from US protectionist policies.

So far though the major effect of US policy has been to push the moderates in Iran together with the hardliners who were opposed to the deal in the first place.
Trump's move to force Iran into fresh negotiations has for now reunited Iranian hardliners who opposed the nuclear deal and moderates like Rouhani who championed it to end the Islamic Republic's economically crippling standoff with Western powers.

Ali Motahari, the deputy speaker of Iran's parliament who is seen as part of Iran's moderate camp, said that to negotiate with Trump now "would be a humiliation."
 
The head of Iran, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said on Monday that there will neither be a war with the US nor will Iran negotiate with the US.
Iran's supreme leader says no war or talks with U.S. | CBC News
In remarks carried by state television, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said "along with sanctions, Americans have recently raised two more options, war and talks… War will not happen and we will not enter talks."
He further said that the US is seeking to harm Iran and that Iran will not negotiate with a bully.
"Negotiations with the U.S. would definitely harm us and they are forbidden," Khamenei said, adding that the Americans had proven they could not be trusted. "Negotiation with the bullying and very eager government of the U.S. means giving it an instrument through which it can add to its hostility," he said.
He also said that Iran will resist the economic sanctions, but blamed many of Iran's economic problems on government mismanagement.
"More than the sanctions, economic mismanagement [by the government] is putting pressure on ordinary Iranians… I do not call it betrayal but a huge mistake in management," state TV quoted Khamenei as saying.

"With better management and more efficient planning we can resist the sanctions and overcome them," Khamenei said, in an apparent effort to deflect public anger over the deteriorating economy toward Rouhani's government.
A number of people have been arrested on serious charges, including a number of officials. From the story context it is possible this is related to currency or gold smuggling.
Iranian officials have blamed "enemies" for the fall of the currency and a rapid rise in the price of gold coins, and more than 60 people, including several officials, have been arrested on charges that carry the death penalty.

"The corrupt people [officials] should be punished firmly," Khamenei said on Monday.
In unrelated news, Iran apparently has started building a production line for a new short range missile with evades radar. It is known as the Fateh-e Mobin (Bright Conqueror). There were no other confirmed details about the missile.
Also on Monday, Iran said it launched a production line for a radar-evading, short-range missile. Defence Minister Gen. Amir Hatami told state TV the surface-to-surface missile, dubbed Fateh-e Mobin, or Bright Conqueror, was effective in all weather conditions.
 
More defiance from Iran in the face of US threats.
Iran says U.S. 'action group' will fail to overthrow Iranian state | CBC News

The US has appointed the head of an "action group" to manage US efforts to put the squeeze on Iran.
U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Thursday named senior policy adviser Brian Hook as special representative for Iran in charge of the Iran Action Group to co-ordinate Trump's pressure campaign against the Islamic Republic following Washington's withdrawal from an international nuclear deal with Tehran.
Today apparently happens to be the 65th anniversary of the US overthrow of the democratically elected government of Iran and its replacement by Reza Pahlavi. The Iranian foreign minister used that opportunity to draw a comparison between that US action then to American actions today.
Zarif tweeted: "65 years ago today, the US overthrew the popularly elected democratic government of Dr. Mossadegh, restoring the dictatorship & subjugating Iranians for the next 25 years. Now an 'Action Group' dreams of doing the same through pressure, misinformation & demagoguery. Never again."
The parliamentary speaker added his own comments on the coup anniversary and said it showed how the Americans could not be trusted.
Iranian Parliament Speaker Ali Larijani said the coup was the best historical lesson that Americans cannot be trusted.

"How dare you talk about the freedom of the Iranian nation with your dark record of the Aug. 19 coup, and the appointment of a puppet totalitarian regime," Larijani was quoted as saying by state news agency IRNA, referring to the shah's rule.
Overall it looks like routine announcements for a 65th anniversary event.
 
The Iranians demonstrated to the world that they could not even abide by the centuries old almost worldwide immunity of diplomatic missions. For them to talk of ‘trust’ therfore is blatant hypocrisy.

They appear to wish to flex their ‘muscles again.
Iran takes control of major oil shipping route warning US: You DON'T belong here

Their bombastic rhetoric that preceded their mining of the Hormuz straits in 1988, resulted in Operation Praying Mantis, a one day skirmish, and the loss to the Iranians of one frigate one gunboat and six speedboats with a second frigate badly damaged and spared from being sunk by the US.

They have short memories.
 
The Iranians demonstrated to the world that they could not even abide by the centuries old almost worldwide immunity of diplomatic missions. For them to talk of ‘trust’ therfore is blatant hypocrisy.
Capture of US embassy happened decades ago. Are there more fresh examples of this sort?
Btw, Washington staged coup in Iran, supported dictatorship of Shah of Iran, threatened to stage Iraqi style war against the country. Is Washington trustworthly in this context from your point of view?
They appear to wish to flex their ‘muscles again.
Iran takes control of major oil shipping route warning US: You DON'T belong here

Their bombastic rhetoric that preceded their mining of the Hormuz straits in 1988, resulted in Operation Praying Mantis, a one day skirmish, and the loss to the Iranians of one frigate one gunboat and six speedboats with a second frigate badly damaged and spared from being sunk by the US.

They have short memories.
Heavy sanctions were imposed against Iran by Washington. Has Iran right to impose sanctions against US allies? No? But why?
Btw, restrictions of oil export from the Gulf is not something new. During the war between Iran and Iraq both sides attacked tankers with oil.
 
Capture of US embassy happened decades ago. Are there more fresh examples of this sort?
Really??? You need more examples like this to show it was totally unacceptable not only to the US but the worldwide community???

Btw, Washington staged coup in Iran, supported dictatorship of Shah of Iran, threatened to stage Iraqi style war against the country.
Oh really? When was this coup carried out in Iran by the US?

Yes the US supported the Shah, who was at the time the legitimate leader of Iran, and a trusted ally. And... they even allowed him to buy Iran advanced US weapons, ones incidentally that Iran still totally depends upon till this day.

Threatened to wage a war...your are joking Segie...?? Iran threatens to eradicate the US and various enemies on a daily basis. If you threaten is it unusual not to receive a response?

Heavy sanctions were imposed against Iran by Washington. Has Iran right to impose sanctions against US allies?
Yes, and it has, however, since Iran receives more than it sends this is not always a productive method of flexing one’s muscles. As indeed Russia itself has discovered to its cost after it’s annexation of Crimea.

Btw, restrictions of oil export from the Gulf is not something new. During the war between Iran and Iraq both sides attacked tankers with oil.
Indeed both Iraq and Iran have carried out hostile acts in the Gulf of Hormuz... and both have paid heavily for those acts. In addition Iran’s present military excursions in Syria against Israel reaped their own painful lesson in May this year when Israel made its largest wave of airstrikes in Syria since the 1973 war, striking around 50 Iranian military bases, supply depots, and intelligence sites as well as Syrian regime air defence batteries.

Just as Syria’s use of chemical weapons reaped a whirlwind for them and not even Russia’s vaunted missile umbrella and presence prevented that despite Putin’s hollow boasts!!!

It appears that not only Iran has a short memory, or fails to learn from painful lessons.
 
Last edited:
Really??? You need more examples like this to show it was totally unacceptable not only to the US but the worldwide community???
Indeed it was absolutely unacceptable but in our imperfect world there is a lot of unacceptable things. Do you think that Iraqi war was something acceptable? And is Washington trusworthly in this context? As for Vienna convention on diplomatic relations then
Iran–United States relations - Wikipedia
In 2007, US forces raided the Iranian Consulate General located in Erbil, Iraq and arrested five staff members... American forces landed their helicopters around the building, broke through the consulate’s gate, disarmed the guards, confiscated documents, arrested five staff members, and left for an undisclosed location.
Only
On November 9, American forces released two Iranian diplomats after 305 days,[160] as well as seven other Iranian citizens.
Would you be so kind to comment this incident? No? No comments?
Oh really? When was this coup carried out in Iran by the US?
1953 Iranian coup d'état - Wikipedia
The 1953 Iranian coup d'état, known in Iran as the 28 Mordad coup d'état (Persian: کودتای ۲۸ مرداد‎), was the overthrow of the democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh in favour of strengthening the monarchical rule of Mohammad Reza Pahlavi on 19 August 1953, orchestrated by the United Kingdom (under the name "Operation Boot") and the United States (under the name TPAJAX Project[5] or "Operation Ajax"),[6][7][8][9]and the first United States covert action to overthrow a foreign government during peacetime
Yes the US supported the Shah, who was at the time the legitimate leader of Iran, and a trusted ally. And... they even allowed him to buy Iran advanced US weapons, ones incidentally that Iran still totally depends upon till this day.
In fact the Shah was Washington's puppet and was allowed to buy expensive shooting toys.
Threatened to wage a war...your are joking Segie...?? Iran threatens to eradicate the US and various enemies on a daily basis. If you threaten is it unusual not to receive a response?
After the end of the Iraqi war, Washington issued direct threats toward Iran. Of course because of WMD, because of Iranian nuclear program.
Indeed both Iraq and Iran have carried out hostile acts in the Gulf of Hormuz... and both have paid heavily for those acts.
As I understand Iran is ready to repeat such actions and is ready to pay.
In addition Iran’s present military excursions in Syria against Israel reaped their own painful lesson in May this year when Israel made its largest wave of airstrikes in Syria since the 1973 war, striking around 50 Iranian military bases, supply depots, and intelligence sites as well as Syrian regime air defence batteries.
And... what is your point?
So Iran is not allowed to use its armed forces to defend its national interests but by contrast Israel has this right.
I believe that Iran has the same rights as Israel, as the USA, has it?
Just as alleged Syria’s use of chemical weapons reaped a whirlwind for them and not even Russia’s vaunted missile umbrella and presence prevented that despite Putin’s hollow boasts!!!
Use was alleged but punishment was real. It is how our imperfect world looks.
It appears that not only Iran has a short memory, or fails to learn from painful lessons.
Many countries had own lessons. One country was given a lesson in Vietnam, for example. I believe that Iran will defend itself.
 
Last edited:
So Iran is not allowed to use its armed forces to defend its national interests but by contrast Israel has this right.
I believe that Iran has the same rights as Israel, as the USA, has it?
So Iran’s attacks on Israel through proxy forces supplied through Syria is self defence?

Sorry Sergei the rest of your points don’t seem worth responding to.
 
So Iran’s attacks on Israel through proxy forces supplied through Syria is self defence?
I would like to recall (again) missile attacks of Israel by Saddam forces during the Iraqi war.
The logic was simple - I'm unable to retaliate by hitting of US mainland - so I hit US ally - Israel.
Iran could follow this logic. I don't approve it but it could be done in selfdefense.
Sorry Sergei the rest of your points don’t seem worth responding to.
You are free to comment or not to comment anything.
But personally I found the whole your post as worth to be commented.
 
Last edited:
Iran parliament censures Rouhani in sign pragmatists losing sway
Rouhani appears to have been censured. Their Parliament have rejected his explanations for the current economic hardship after he was ‘grilled’ on live tv. He’s blamed the IS sanctions, albeit I doubt he could explain he doesn’t control the entire budget with Khamenei and the IRGC and their endeavours beingboutside his control:
Iran’s parliament voted on Tuesday to reject President Hassan Rouhani’s explanations for economic hardship after a dramatic grilling on live TV, a sign his pragmatic faction is losing sway to hardline rivals as new U.S. sanctions begin to bite.

The vote in parliament came two days after lawmakers sacked the minister of economy and finance and weeks after they sacked the labor minister, blaming them for the collapse of the rial currency and surging inflation.
Not sure whether it will now go before the judiciary or whether the parliamentarians need another debate before this happening:
There were conflicting reports about what would follow from the vote: several Iranian news agencies said Rouhani’s case would now be referred to the judiciary, although the spokesman for the parliamentary leadership, Behrouz Nemati, said lawmakers must hold further discussion before that would take place.
As usual with the current regime, it’s dealing with the (relative) pragmatists and the hardliners. Rouhani has no control of the military inside or outside Iran:
The action in parliament is a further sign of how the Trump administration’s decision to re-impose sanctions could affect Iran’s leadership and its relationship with the outside world, potentially for decades to come.

Iran’s rulers have been divided between a pragmatic faction that aims for better international relations, and hardliners who are wary of reforms. Trump’s decision to abandon the nuclear deal was opposed by U.S. allies in Europe, who argued that he undermined Rouhani and strengthened the hands of the hardliners.
Khamenei remains the ultimate authority and has been since ‘89 and Khomeini’s death. Weakening the likes of Rouhani can effect Khamenei’s (79) replacement:
While Rouhani and his cabinet run Iran’s day-to-day affairs, ultimate authority lies with the Supreme Leader, 79-year-old Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, in power since 1989. Weakening the pragmatists now could affect the choice of Khamenei’s successor.
It’s likely the internal power plays will carry on in the background. He appears initially to be safe, but the judiciary could determine he broke the law and impeach him:
For now, Rouhani’s own position appears safe. The judiciary could determine that he broke the law and parliament has the power to impeach him, but experts on Iranian politics say power struggles are more likely to play out indirectly.

“The parliament’s move is politically motivated and indicates that tensions would increase in the Islamic Republic in coming months,” Saeed Laylaz, an Iranian economist, told Reuters by telephone from Tehran.

“Iranian political factions have always used international issues to pursue their domestic gains,” he added.
Two Ministers sacked, a third voted to be impeached:
After the sacking of the two ministers this month, Tasnim news agency reported that 70 lawmakers had signed a motion to impeach a third: the Minister of Industry, Mines and Business.

Rouhani has bowed to pressure and fired the head of the central bank. A deputy central bank governor was arrested by the judiciary on corruption charges in a crackdown that also saw foreign exchange dealers rounded up.
The five questions he was asked about were not agreed by Parliament on four. Only the answer on banks was agreed. The others on unemployment, slow economic growth, the fall of the rial and cross-border smuggling; weren’t. Obviously he blames ‘the US plot’ for the country’s ills:
The lawmakers asked Rouhani on Tuesday about five subjects: unemployment, slow economic growth, the fall of the rial, cross-border smuggling, and the lack of access by Iranian banks to global financial services. The parliament found only Rouhani’s answer about banks satisfactory.

“I want to assure the Iranian nation that we will not allow the U.S. plot against the Islamic Republic to succeed,” Rouhani told parliament. “We will not let this bunch of anti-Iranians in the White House be able to plot against us.”
He says the protests tempted Trump to withdraw from the 2015 deal. He says the many of the Iranian people have lost faith in the future of the Islamic Republic and are in doubt of its power:
Rouhani said such anti-government protests had encouraged Trump to try to provoke more unrest by harming Iran’s economy.

“The protests tempted Trump to withdraw from the nuclear deal,” he said, asking lawmakers to support his cabinet and not add to anti-government sentiment.

Although the economic problems were critical, Rouhani said: “More important than that is that many people have lost their faith in the future of the Islamic Republic and are in doubt about its power.”
E2A: Exclusive: France restricts travel by diplomats to Iran
Alleged foiled bomb plot and Iranian hardening of their attitude to France (and allies) has led to them (France) to restrict travel to Iran by diplomats:
France has told its diplomats and foreign ministry officials to postpone indefinitely all non-essential travel to Iran, citing a foiled bomb plot and a hardening of Tehran’s attitude towards France, according to an internal memo seen by Reuters.
Unusual as France have been quite pro Iran on the 2015 deal. Defer until further notice any except urgent business to Iran for diplomats
“The behavior of the Iranian authorities suggests a hardening of their position vis-a-vis our country, as well as some of our allies,” Maurice Gourdault-Montagne, the ministry’s secretary general wrote in the notice dated Aug. 20.

“Given the known security risks ... all departmental officers, whether from headquarters or (overseas) posts, are required to defer until further notice, except for urgent work, any travel plans in Iran,” Gourdault-Montagne added.
 
Last edited:
I would like to recall (again) missile attacks of Israel by Saddam forces during the Iraqi war.
The logic was simple - I'm unable to retaliate by hitting of US mainland - so I hit US ally - Israel.
Iran could follow this logic. I don't approve it but it could be done in selfdefense.
It’s currently a proxy war in Syria. They’re happy that they can fire on Israel (a bit harder now they’re 85km away) from Syrian territory. Would they launch (they have the capability) from Iran? That would be an escalation that would lead to Israeli strikes directly on Iran and not just IRGC and proxies in Syria. I doubt either will escalate to that level, at least in the near future.

Same re a direct attack on the US if they had the capability. Not yet as that really would be a casus belli. Same re their attacks on US/coalition troops in Syria. If they wanted to go ‘full on’ they would just lose more troops and materiel and they know this, albeit they will continue the occasional attacks.

Saddam’s attempts were to drag Israel into the wars hoping to garner support. They obviously failed.
 
It’s currently a proxy war in Syria. They’re happy that they can fire on Israel (a bit harder now they’re 85km away) from Syrian territory. Would they launch (they have the capability) from Iran?
Iran probably has capability to hit Israel from its territory. But distance is too big to cause serious damage (using conventional warheads). Now indeed, Iran is in strategically profitable position. Any direct US attack against Iran could be retaliated in many ways, including strikes against Israel.
For this reason, unlikely Washington will unleash a war against Iran, at least in the near future.
That would be an escalation that would lead to Israeli strikes directly on Iran and not just IRGC and proxies in Syria. I doubt either will escalate to that level, at least in the near future.
Without nuclear warheads (that Israel will use only in extreme situation) Israeli strikes would not be too effective and taking into account modern Russian made AD systems the strikes would be not 100% safe.
Same re a direct attack on the US if they had the capability.
Kim showed that such a capabilty is respected by Washington. Would any POTUS meet with Kim if N.Korea would not have nuclear weapons and powerful missiles? No, of course. Washington by its policy hints to follow Kim's example.
 
Iran probably has capability to hit Israel from its territory. But distance is too big to cause serious damage (using conventional warheads). Now indeed, Iran is in strategically profitable position.
As I said, both parties are ‘happy’ with their little ‘proxy war’. A direct attack on Israel will lead to retaliation
Any direct US attack against Iran could be retaliated in many ways, including strikes against Israel.
Of course, to try and drag Israel into the conflict.
For this reason, unlikely Washington will unleash a war against Iran, at least in the near future.
It’s ‘highly unlikely’ that would be the reason not to attack Iran.
Without nuclear warheads (that Israel will use only in extreme situation) Israeli strikes would not be too effective and taking into account modern Russian made AD systems the strikes would be not 100% safe.
Yeah, sure..... Those Russian SAM systems only seem to have had an effect by lobbing loads of metal in the sky. A single F16 isn’t exactly much to crow about and Israel has already exercised against S-300s.
Kim showed that such a capabilty is respected by Washington. Would any POTUS meet with Kim if N.Korea would not have nuclear weapons and powerful missiles? No, of course. Washington by its policy hints to follow Kim's example.
What? Iran doesn’t (yet) have nukes and they are having a few internal problems. Maybe they will negotiate again for a ‘better deal’. Maybe they won’t. Who blinks first?

One POTUS decided to meet Tubby III. Another POTUS (in fact all preceding), decided not to. That’s the problem with democracies. They have different policies every few years. You should try it.
 
Iran says it has arrested 'tens of spies' in state bodies
Looks like there’s another round up of dual nationals in Iran. Their arrests have apparently increased since Khamenei said western agents had infiltrated Iranian decision making bodies:
“I have repeatedly asked people to inform us if they know any dual national. The intelligence ministry’s anti-espionage unit has successfully identified and arrested tens of spies in different governmental bodies,” Alavi was quoted as saying by the semi-official news agency ISNA on Tuesday.

The arrest of dual nationals has increased since Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said there had been “infiltration” of Western agents in Iranian decision-making bodies.
Mahmoud Alavi Iranian Intelligence Minister, hasn’t said when the arrests took place or who the spies were allegedly working for, but indicated that many arrested were dual nationals. Iran doesn’t recognise dual nationality:
Iran does not recognize dual nationality and does not routinely announce arrests or charges of dual nationals, whose rights to consular assistance are enshrined in the U.N. Vienna Convention.
They’ve also arrested an (alleged) IS member and ‘disbanded’ a terrorist cell in t’north of Iran. 18 people apparently killed in the IS attacks on Parliament and Khomeini’s mausoleum.

He also said their intelligence ministry had foiled several bombing plots, not made public at the time:
Alavi also said that security forces arrested this month a member of the Islamic State militant group in southern Iran, and had disbanded a “terrorist cell” in the country’s north.

He said the intelligence ministry had foiled several bombing plots in metro stations and universities, but did not make any of this public at the time.

Under Islamic State’s ultra-hardline Sunni Muslim ideology, Shi’ites - the majority in Iran - are considered apostates. Last year, Islamic State militants carried out attacks on the parliament in Tehran and the mausoleum of the founder of Iran’s 1979 Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. At least 18 people were killed in the attacks.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top