Iranian boats attempted to seize British tanker

Discussion in 'Middle East' started by Bluesguy, Jul 10, 2019.

  1. Sobo

    Sobo Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2017
    Messages:
    10,309
    Likes Received:
    1,946
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Buying oil worth 60 billion is something.

    I think trump must go, no matter what. He becomes more and more a threat. I hope they find a solution for that. Be it election, courts or whatever.

    The Deutsche Bank was for decades Trumps house bank. MAybe they can see into his mafia past
     
  2. notme

    notme Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    42,019
    Likes Received:
    5,395
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Bullcrap. The Iranian government didn't need Tudeh's influence to govern. They had enough votes to do whatever without their opinion. lol

    I can't prove a negative.

    The Tudeh party did not rule Iran. Period. There was no coalition with that party. Nothing at all.
     
  3. JessCurious

    JessCurious Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2019
    Messages:
    453
    Likes Received:
    291
    Trophy Points:
    63
    A very decietful answer since no one said that the Tudeh Party ruled Iran, only that they had influence on the course of events - which of course a party not in power can still have. Find a quote to support your
    arquement that Tudeh had no influence, I posted several that said they did. You have not substaniated any of your claims.
     
  4. Concord

    Concord Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2013
    Messages:
    3,856
    Likes Received:
    876
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Mossadegh's popularity was waning as the British embargo dealt a massive blow to Iran's economy. Tudeh was looking more and more likely as a political ally for him, threatening the containment strategy being used by the Americans.
     
  5. aenigma

    aenigma Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2015
    Messages:
    950
    Likes Received:
    305
    Trophy Points:
    63
    so you admit they stole a iranian tanker without cause ? wel serves them right then
    if anything that just shows the arrogance they think they can get away with anything then cry to mommy(us) when the other guy punches back
     
    Giftedone likes this.
  6. pjohns

    pjohns Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2009
    Messages:
    6,916
    Likes Received:
    658
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Iran just recently seized a British ship.

    I would be very happy if Britain were to give Iran the bloody nose--militarily--that it fully deserves.
     
  7. notme

    notme Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    42,019
    Likes Received:
    5,395
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Omar yelling things, and so she has influence. It does not change anything in the White House.
     
  8. notme

    notme Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    42,019
    Likes Received:
    5,395
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Again Mossadegh did not need Tudeh to govern.
     
  9. aenigma

    aenigma Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2015
    Messages:
    950
    Likes Received:
    305
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Iran seized it after the UK did the exact Same move a few weeks ago. They Got it coming.
     
  10. Concord

    Concord Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2013
    Messages:
    3,856
    Likes Received:
    876
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I don't know if that's true or not.
     
  11. pjohns

    pjohns Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2009
    Messages:
    6,916
    Likes Received:
    658
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    This is the Tit-For-Tat Theory.

    The simple fact is that Iran has been baiting the entire West for quite awhile now.

    It is badly hurting, due to the sanctions imposed by the US; so it wishes to make life difficult for the Europeans, in the desperate hope that the latter will place pressure upon the former, to lift those sanctions.

    But Iran has been a very bad actor--not only attempting to develop a nuclear weapon (and then blackmail the rest of the world, if the latter wishes it to give it up); but also promoting terrorism throughout the world.

    Iran fully deserves to be taken down a notch or two.
     
  12. EarthSky

    EarthSky Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2018
    Messages:
    2,148
    Likes Received:
    1,139
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    There is no evidence that his popularity among the people was waning - he was wildly popular with the possible exception of the elites who benefited from foreign control of oil reserves and British and American corporate interests.

    "Operation Ajax has long been a bogeyman for conservatives in Iran — but also for liberals. The coup fanned the flames of anti-Western sentiment, which reached a crescendo in 1979 with the U.S. hostage crisis, the final overthrow of the shah, and the creation of the Islamic Republic to counter the “Great Satan.”

    The coup alienated liberals in Iran as well. Mossadegh is widely considered to be the closest thing Iran has ever had to a democratic leader. He openly championed democratic values and hoped to establish a democracy in Iran. The elected parliament selected him as prime minister, a position he used to reduce the power of the shah, thus bringing Iran closer in line with the political traditions that had developed in Europe. But any further democratic development was stymied on Aug. 19."

    Kashani was central to US coup planning:

    Beyond final proof of CIA involvement, there’s another very interesting takeaway in the documents, said Abbas Milani, a professor of Iranian studies at Stanford University: New details on the true political leanings of Ayatollah Abol-Ghasem Kashani, a cleric and leading political figure in the 1950s.

    In the Islamic Republic, clerics are always the good guys. Kashani has long been seen as one of the heroes of nationalism during that period. As recently as January of this year, Iran’s supreme leader praised Kashani’s role in the nationalization of oil.

    Kashani’s eventual split from Mossadegh is widely known. Religious leaders in the country feared the growing power of the communist Tudeh Party, and believed that Mossadegh was too weak to save the country from the socialist threat.

    But the newly released documents show that Kashani wasn’t just opposed to Mossadegh — he was also in close communication with the Americans throughout the period leading up to the coup, and he actually appears to have requested financial assistance from the United States, though there is no record of him receiving any money. His request was not previously known.

    On the make-or-break day of Aug. 19, “Kashani was critical,” said Milani. “On that day Kashani’s forces were out in full force to defeat Mossadegh.”

    https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/06/2...ases-details-of-iranian-coup-iran-tehran-oil/

    From E Britannica:

    "A continuing struggle for control of the Iranian government developed between Mosaddegh and the shah. In August 1953, when the shah attempted to dismiss the premier, mobs of Mosaddegh followers took to the streets and forced the shah to leave the country. Within a few days, however, Mosaddegh’s opponents overthrew his regime and restored the shah to power in a coup orchestrated by the U.S. and Great Britain. Mosaddegh was sentenced to three years’ imprisonment for treason and, after he had served his sentence, was kept under house arrestfor the rest of his life. Iran retained nominal sovereignty over its oil facilities, but, under an agreement reached in 1954, it split revenues 50–50 with an international consortium that controlled production and marketing."
     
    Last edited: Jul 23, 2019
  13. EarthSky

    EarthSky Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2018
    Messages:
    2,148
    Likes Received:
    1,139
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    There is absolutely no truth to any of this other than Iran's economy is in disastrous shape due to illegal and undeclared economic warfare waged on that country by the US.

    Iran has never attacked any of it's neighbors unlike the US or Israel and as a signatory to the non-proliferation treaty has the right to develop a domestic nuclear energy program. It has never been proven that Iran was ever trying to develop a nuclear weapon nor has it been promoting terrorism around the world. In fact, it has been one of the major combatants against ISIS in Syria and Iraq.

    The JPCOA was a joint international agreement to which Iran was in full compliance with and which the Trump administration chose to unilaterally renege upon. The entire scope of US policy towards Iran has been to undermine that country with economic warfare in order to provoke a real shooting war - which we are on the cusp of. the US has been poking and poking just hoping to provoke a war and now it is close to getting what it wanted all along and US puppet states like Britain are going along for the ride just as they did in 2003 in yet another unjustified, unprovoked and ultimately disastrous war in the ME. Here we are again with the same people playing the same idiot, warmongering roles in yet another bloodthirsty and power-hungry US push for full-spectrum global dominance.

    The current situation is all the doing of a blood-thirsty and maniacal vision of neo-conservatives in the US power establishment to push the Middle East into more war, violence and death for the profit of US allies such as SA and Israel and US military contractors and munition manufacturing industry which rakes in billions on the blood and death of innocents in foreign lands which it calls "shithole" countries.
     
  14. Concord

    Concord Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2013
    Messages:
    3,856
    Likes Received:
    876
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It certainly was waning, and yes I'd agree that opposition to him was stronger among elite circles.

    Well, elite circles are important political actors, and his fall from grace among this class was an important component of his political isolation, that was part of why the coup succeeded.

    I think it's foolish for leftist or anti-imperial movements to pretend that they have no moral culpability for the reaction of imperial powers to their actions. Venezuela is an example of well-meaning and respectable leaders, like Chavez, making enemies that they couldn't afford to make, and failing as a result of that fact, to the detriment of their people.

    We're responsible for how our enemies interpret and react to our words and deeds.

    I think that American and especially British actions during the early Cold War period were foolishly short-sighted and even downright evil, but people like Mossadegh and Chavez do have responsibility for the consequences of their actions. Failure of strategy is a moral failure.
     
  15. Concord

    Concord Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2013
    Messages:
    3,856
    Likes Received:
    876
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Iranians and Americans both worked alongside extremist Shia militias in Iraq to fight Sunni extremists. The Iranians, like the Americans, are imperialistic.
     
  16. pjohns

    pjohns Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2009
    Messages:
    6,916
    Likes Received:
    658
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Well, how about its proxies (such as Hamas and Hezbollah--which it can no longer fund, due to American sanctions, which are strangling Iran's economy)?

    And it is certainly involved in Syria.

    Iran is already enriching uranium--a key element in a nuclear bomb--at a much greater pace than it had agreed to do.

    The ADL says it well:

    "Iran's nuclear program is clearly intended to develop a nuclear weapons capability. For 18 years, it was kept secret, even though international assistance would have been available to a civilian program. In 2002, Iran's covert program was exposed. Since then, the IAEA has repeatedly said that it cannot consider Iran's nuclear program as entirely civilian. On November 8, 2011 the IAEA released a report stating there is 'credible' evidence that 'Iran has carried out activities relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device.' Numerous reports since then have underscored Iran’s continuing refusal to address the IAEA’s evidence, which showed 'strong indicators of possible nuclear weapon development.'"

    I am not quite sure if you are really so enormously uninformed, or if you just want to score a few cheap points against the US.

    The fact is that just over a month ago, President Trump first ordered military strikes on Iran, following the downing of an American drone--and then abruptly called them off.

    Whether the 180 turnabout was due to the fact that a presidential election is coming up in a little over a year (and it really would not be, politically, a good thing to be embroiled in a war then); or whether it was due to the fact that Donald Trump is just viscerally unhappy with being at war--I really cannot say.

    But to act as if the man is a warmonger is truly jaw-dropping!
     
  17. EarthSky

    EarthSky Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2018
    Messages:
    2,148
    Likes Received:
    1,139
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    He was actually wildly popular among the masses despite his well-known eccentricities.

    While I certainly concede that Chavez made mistakes, largely in allowing cronyism and corruption in the oil industry and hedging all his bets on one commodity, the enemies Chavez made are largely the same enemies that decry any move to collectivism, land reform, health care and education for the people - you know - national interests that do not serve the corporate western power base and the reactionary, convulsive hatred of leftist movements all over Latin America and the world which American corporate interests band together under the label of Socialism or Communism and ruthlessly try to destroy by any means possible no matter how many innocent civilians are murdered and impoverished in the name of "freedom" and "democracy."

    So you are saying that if our enemies impose sanctions that kill hundreds of thousands of innocent women and children or attack us with death squads, covert CIA coups and outright military invasion that we are responsible for choosing a form of government that they don't like?

    This despite the fact that you acknowledge that American and British actions were foolish, short-sighted and even evil?

    All governments should be culpable for their actions and Venezuela certainly has made mistakes but does that justify the all the US aggression over the decades in Latin America?
     
  18. EarthSky

    EarthSky Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2018
    Messages:
    2,148
    Likes Received:
    1,139
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Agreed. Americans and Iranians had common interest in destroying ISIS in Iraq.

    So why the disconnect now? Why did the US and it's allies support Sunni extremists in Syria in an effort for yet another regime change for a government it did not like.

    And why are we on the brink of yet another useless and necessary war of regime change in the ME when we know there are common interests and that Iran is open to working together and even diplomatic breakthroughs such as the JCPOA which they were compliant to?

    Does it not seem there is something else going on in the fevered and insane minds huddled in the WH and Pentagon......?
     
  19. EarthSky

    EarthSky Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2018
    Messages:
    2,148
    Likes Received:
    1,139
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    That's because it was invited into Syria by the government there to fight foreign terrorists and militias as was Russia. American sanctions are killing women and children just as they did in Iraq to the tune of 500,000 innocent victims - and that is a lowball figure.



    Why should Iran be held to an agreement that the US has already reneged upon? Enriching Uranium to 5% is no where near what you would need for a bomb but good for you knowing that uranium is a key element for a nuclear bomb.

    Lol, you are seriously quoting the Anti-Defamation League as an unbiased opinion on Iran's nuclear program? And your link is from 2011 a period far before the period of the JCPOA.

    Here try digesting some real facts about the origin of Iran's domestic nuclear program and the IAEA:

    https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/focus/iran

    "U.S. President Donald J. Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Iran nuclear agreement and reimpose sanctions jeopardizes the landmark arms control agreement, under which Iran dismantled much of its nuclear program and international inspectors gained extensive access to monitor its compliance. The agreement, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), has been on the rocks since Trump’s election, and the resulting climate of uncertainty spooked many large firms from doing business in Iran, thus diminishing the economic incentives that drew Iran to the agreement in the first place. While Iranian President Hassan Rouhani and the agreement’s European signatories will now look to salvage it, it is uncertain whether they can overcome sanctions pressure from the United States."

    https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/impact-iran-nuclear-agreement


    ف


    Probably you think I am uniformed because you are unable to wade through all the propaganda and patriotic, warmongering claptrap the corporate and right-wing media is feeding you and so are living in the fantasy-land world of illusion needed to justify America's constant wars of regime change and aggression against weaker nations. I am trying to feed you information so that one day you might see the world as it really is and can be part of changing the disastrous course neo-conservative warmongers are leading your nation down.

    I don't hold out much hope though.

    That you don't understand the disastrous history and current road to ruin the people your idiot, incompetent buffoon of a president has surrounded himself with such as Eliot Abrams, Pompeo and John Bolton are leading your country and the world down is both disturbing and quite sad.

    From the moment your moron of a great leader unilaterally tore up an international agreement on regulating Iran's nuclear program you have been on your way to war. But this is not going to be like the last country you illegally attacked. This is far more dangerous.

    You are already waging an undeclared and illegal economic war against the people of Iran. The actual shooting war your government is so desperate to start is just around the corner......much like Vietnam, you may not like the result of your foolishness though.........
     
  20. pjohns

    pjohns Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2009
    Messages:
    6,916
    Likes Received:
    658
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It was truly difficult for me to digest this as a single sentence.

    More to the point, it is quite difficult for me to believe that you (apparently) consider it to be a slander--and not an objective statement of fact--to say that the regime of Hugo Chavez (which is backed by Cuba and Russia) is part and parcel to "Socialism or Communism."

    I think the official term for that is litotes.

    In other words, massive understatement (even if not actually expressed in the negative)...
     
    Last edited: Jul 25, 2019
  21. pjohns

    pjohns Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2009
    Messages:
    6,916
    Likes Received:
    658
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    So, let me get this straight:

    Hamas, Hezbollah, and Russia were "invited into Syria" by the government of Bashar al-Assad; so that makes it okay.

    Got it...

    As for the "innocent victims" in Syria, the fact remains that it is sometimes necessary to visit upon innocents the pain caused by punishing the guilty. For example, when a felon is sentenced to prison--perhaps for many years (or even life)--the burden of not having him at home is visited upon his wife and children. But that is no excuse for inaction by the state.



    You might have an argument here--except that Iran claimed that it would continue to honor the JCPOA, as long as France does so.

    But it is a step in that direction.

    And Iran has already said that it will increase that enrichment, unless Europe successfully pressures the US to remove its sanctions.

    Well, it is certainly no more biased than a quote from IAEA.org.

    Like I just said...
     
    Last edited: Jul 25, 2019
  22. notme

    notme Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    42,019
    Likes Received:
    5,395
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It is as it is. Entering a country with your army otherwise without being invited, is just invading a country illegally. That makes those soldiers a legal target for anybody.
     
    EarthSky likes this.
  23. Concord

    Concord Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2013
    Messages:
    3,856
    Likes Received:
    876
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    He certainly was before the embargo took it's toll. His position weakened subsequently.

    I'm extremely left-leaning, but one of my major separations from socialists (not saying I know you to be one) is that I completely disagree with their way of looking at history. It's not clear to me that American foreign policy primarily hinges on state capture by powerful interest groups. I don't think we went into Iraq for oil, I don't think that we went after Chavez in defense of the Venezuelan oligarchy or American corporate interests. I have a tendency to look at geopolitics as 99% a naked power struggle between states.

    The Americans are willing, admittedly tentatively, to work with socialist or left-leaning governments. I think that Chavez domestic policy was 90% good, but his foreign policy was an absolute disaster. A country like Venezuela or Cuba cannot afford to get on the bad side of the United States, period. Russia can get away with it, at great cost. China can get away with it, at great cost. Germany can get away with it, at great cost. Venezuela, Cuba, Mexico, and Canada cannot (along with a huge number of other countries.)

    Yes, absolutely.

    Especially because of that fact.

    I'm not trying to "justify" anything. I will always be an enemy of American imperialism, but I'm just a loser. Chavez took on a huge responsibility, and failed his people. So did Fidel Castro.

    The Americans made efforts, even if half-hearted, to build a coalition of Syrians that at the very least could act moderate. They failed, and as a result they withdrew their support from everybody except for the Kurds.

    But the disconnect is obvious. The Americans are worried about Iranian (and even Russian) influence in Syria. This is partially because of our extremely ill-constructed alliances with Israel and the KSA, and partially because the Iranians are a powerful state with the backbone to stand up to us, one of only three.

    I think it's because Bolton is an honest-to-God imperialist, and because Trump is an easily manipulated buffoon. And also because Trump seized on the JCPOA as a point of contention with Obama's presidency, part of what got him elected.

    I don't know what you mean by "something else."
     
  24. Concord

    Concord Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2013
    Messages:
    3,856
    Likes Received:
    876
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    lolzoroni, to think that Hamas would fight alongside Assad...

    Iran/Hezbollah and Hamas had a working relationship until the Syrian Civil War.
     
  25. Zorro

    Zorro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    76,435
    Likes Received:
    51,251
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We are willing help them help themselves.

    Sam LaGrone reported, "American forces are willing to provide allies with intelligence on potential maritime threats in the Middle East, but countries will need to bring their own escorts, defense officials told USNI News on Wednesday.

    "Operation Sentinel is the emerging U.S. Central Command plan to keep merchant traffic in the Middle East moving and safe amidst the ongoing disputes between Washington and Europe and Iran, Secretary of Defense Mark Esper told reporters on Wednesday."

    President Trump knows a little history. The sinking of the USS Maine led to the Spanish-American War, our first world war.

    The sinking of the RMS Lusitania with 128 Americans contributed to our entry into World War I two years later.

    The bombing of battleships in Pearl Harbor forced us into World War II.

    And of course LBJ's false claim that the Vietcong attacked the destroyer Turner Joy in the Gulf of Tonkin got us into Vietnam.

    President Trump wishes to avoid such a provocation.

    LaGrone reported, "CENTCOM is working through a planning process with unspecified partners and allies to outline a construct for Operation Sentinel – not to be confused with the ongoing NATO mission in Afghanistan, Operation Freedom’s Sentinel – by the end of the month.

    "While plans are still being developed, the idea that CENTCOM will collect and distribute information related to the Middle East threat picture from the Bab el-Mandeb entrance into the Gulf of Aden, through the Arabian Sea, up into the Gulf of Oman and through the Strait of Hormuz into the Persian Gulf.

    "While the U.S. will share the information with members of the group, American Navy ships will not be escorting international maritime shipping, two defense officials told USNI News on Wednesday."

    https://donsurber.blogspot.com/2019/07/trump-goes-to-not-war.html#more
     
    Last edited: Jul 25, 2019

Share This Page