David Petraeus: "Impossible to overstate" significance of Soleimani strike Washington — Former CIA Director David Petraeus said Sunday it's "impossible to overstate" the importance of the U.S. drone strike early Friday that killed Qassem Soleimani, Iran's top military commander, calling it "bigger" than the death of Osama bin Laden. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/genera...ificance-of-soleimani-strike-face-the-nation/
Obama is a traitor. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wo...-the-worlds-leading-terrorist-mastermind.html Obama's Iran deal has just granted an amnesty to the world's leading terrorist mastermind
Iran miscalculated. Their interaction with Barrack Obama convinced them that they could play hardball with the US in Iraq, Syria and Lebanon. They simply hadn't encountered anyone who would significantly resist them since Ronald Reagan. After all... Trump had previously just fired some cruise missiles in Syria. Iran calculated that it could probably effect an overrun of the US embassy in Baghdad. It was a tactical mistake. Now they know. Everyone is saying Iran will now "breakout" and build nuclear weapons. The administration is saying clearly that Iran will not be allowed to develop nuclear weapons. Iran is not North Korea. What is implied is that Iran's nuclear capabilities will be attacked if they are perceived to be progressing towards being operational. So even if Iran does not retaliate over Soliemani they can still expect a visit from the USAF at some point in the future.
In addition, the U.S has stopped Israel many times under both republican and democrat administrations from taking out Iran's nuclear sites. I mean we have had to do some serious intervention to dial the Israeli's back. If Iran thinks they can count on the President of the U.S. these days to dial things back if they misbehave with Israel- including through their proxies- then that would be another wrong move on their part.
Israel would be smart to stay well out of what is an American problem, unless Tehran starts firing largish missiles from Iran or Syria into Israel. Also Israel is a long long way from Iran and they don't have the kind of tanker networks we have and fighter cover for those tankers. The IAF is awesome but it isn't really designed to extend power quite that far. Israel will probably treat any rocket attacks from Gaza and Southern Lebanon as a local problem. But they have been hammering Iranian positions in Syria for quite awhile so Iran might already view them as a direct protagonist. I would personally like to see everyone chill a little. Let Tehran ponder their position a bit. The theocracy is still firmly in charge in Iran and Trump has said explicitly that we are not seeking regime change unless we continue to be attacked. The mullahs know they would end up in exile in France (or dead) in a regime change situation. Maybe they would prefer to continue to be in charge. Much of their current rhetoric is for domestic consumption. Let them hiss and spit for awhile and we'll see if they want to keep killing Americans.
There are risks related to their proxies too, hamas, hezbollah, shia militias, whatever. Some of those clowns are looking for a clash big enough to change the mix in the entire mid-east. Iran will be working through them to do some damage to the U.S but the Iranians don't necessarily want their proxies to do something so barbaric that the Iranian homeland pays the price or so ugly that you can't put the genie back in the bottle. Unfortunately, a lot of the players don't have a fine-tuning knob on them- Trump included. I do think that the Americans will accept a dance where there is cyber stuff and some grids taken down and general mayhem like that, and the bomb a refinery or two and so on. I mean you gotta give em a way out with their own people. But I don't know what the way out is if they think they are going to take a lot of American casualties, which certainly is probably their intent. Things will get worse right off with Trump in charge. I know what would happen if the dems were in charge. The Russians would offer to broker a deal and they would show up in droves and set up more defense measures for the Iranians. Then the Russians would declare that an attack on Iran would be an attack on them if they are in the country. You know as when Obama got in trouble with Syria and red lines etc. Then Obama caved in by letting the Russians "broker a deal." ie. occupy and set up military bases and pretty much assure that Assad would not be overthrown. And yes, Israel would do well to behave themselves, but Iran would also do well to not poke them right now too. So that is all for the good if both are smart enough to take advantage of it.
I see you two love birds are having a moment here. The big problem is that Iran has gained strength with trump in office and you two are mistaken a sensational act for substantive act. The killing of Soleimani did not weaken Iran. Nothing trump has done has weakened Iran. What weakened Iran was their compliance with stopping their nuclear program.
You think so? NOT. Before this solemenie thing took center stage, Iran was having their biggest and most serious uprisings since the shah was overthrown. And their economy is in the shitter from all the sanctions. Oh I see. "nothing trump has done has weakened Iran." Yup, I read that right in the post above so it must be true.
Agree.. mostly. The grid disruption thing would be treated very seriously. It can kill people. The next thing we will see is Vlady providing advanced air defense systems to Tehran probably in exchange for crude. Or maybe they already have them, I don't know. All Iran has to do at the moment is not attack us. Simple.
Please. North Korea is a shit hole, Russian life expectancy is 57, Iran has a 15% unemployment rate during good years. What has trump done that has decreased Iranian threats to the US and it’s interests. Oh wait, Iran has just attacked a US base in Iraq so I guess we can conclude trump has increased threats to the US. Now the ball is in tough guy Trump’s court. Let’s see what his fat mouth gets us now.