Jump to content

US drone strike takes out top Iranian general


Better call Saul

Recommended Posts

Can't see Iran doing anything right away and even then it'll be Hezbollah or one of their other affiliates who will attack American interests.

 

The retaliation might well take months before it's taken, in the meantime Iran will ramp up tensions in the Gulf with the most obvious option of putting shipping at risk of attack, but they will do nothing against an American owned ship, Iran ain't that stupid as to attack America directly, it'll be much more subtle and probably couldn't be laid directly at Iran's door.

 

Iran won't give America the excuse to attack Iran itself, therefore the Iranians will not escalate this, well not openly and not right now, they'll take their time and choose their target with care, just like it's been the case for decades.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 650
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Jambo-Jimbo

    72

  • Sharpie

    42

  • Space Mackerel

    38

  • ri Alban

    38

6 minutes ago, jack D and coke said:

Really? Honestly you’ve got to laugh :lol: 

He gave them Intel on the Taliban and Al Qaeda. And organised Iraq forces against Isis. But America spat the dummy because he strategised Assad's win in Syria by getting Russia involved with air strikes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Dannie Boy said:


In these sort of instances you make and take decisions on what the outcome could be based on the actions you take. In this particular instance the action they’ve taken is to take out a man who has in one way or another dogged the Americans over the past twenty years or so. I guess the outcome they are gambling on is only a small (can’t think of an adjective to express myself properly here) retaliation. 

 

 

That's how I think about the morality of actions too but Justin Z quite correctly corrected me with another method of thinking. Not one I agree with but a legitimate one nonetheless. 

 

I don't think I can remotely agree with what they've done in this instance though. Unless more information comes out that isn't in the public domain currently...such as he was involved in an imminent threat to US safety.

Edited by Taffin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Dannie Boy said:


In these sort of instances you make and take decisions on what the outcome could be based on the actions you take. In this particular instance the action they’ve taken is to take out a man who has in one way or another dogged the Americans over the past twenty years or so. I guess the outcome they are gambling on is only a small (can’t think of an adjective to express myself properly here) retaliation. 

They've killed the second most powerful man in Iran. This will not end well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Orange man bad

Orange man bad

Orange man bad

Orange man bad

Orange man bad

Orange man bad

Orange man bad

Orange man bad

Orange man bad

Orange man bad

Orange man bad

Orange man bad

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, i8hibsh said:

Orange man bad

Orange man bad

Orange man bad

Orange man bad

Orange man bad

Orange man bad

Orange man bad

Orange man bad

Orange man bad

Orange man bad

Orange man bad

Orange man bad

As opposed to the black men, eh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not happy about this. I made a New Year's Resolution to get myself fit this year and there's no way I'm going to achieve that if WW3 takes place. Bar stewards. The least they could do is agree to have it in autumn - that might give me enough time to achieve my goal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ri Alban said:

They've killed the second most powerful man in Iran. This will not end well.

 

Preventing loss of face is one of the greatest motivators for humans. I suspect however that Iran will be aiming to take out an individual in retaliation rather than being satisfied with a few strikes at US military personnel or civilian targets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, redjambo said:

 

Preventing loss of face is one of the greatest motivators for humans. I suspect however that Iran will be aiming to take out an individual in retaliation rather than being satisfied with a few strikes at US military personnel or civilian targets.

Trump!?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ri Alban said:

Trump!?

 

That would be the ideal target for them but not the most easily attainable. The thing is that whoever they choose, war with the US will follow very shortly afterwards. Which shows why the US drone strike was not the cleverest of actions. If they wanted to take Soleimani out then they could have done it through some Iraqi faction and disavowed involvement - less reliable but with fewer repercussions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

doctor jambo
15 minutes ago, redjambo said:

 

That would be the ideal target for them but not the most easily attainable. The thing is that whoever they choose, war with the US will follow very shortly afterwards. Which shows why the US drone strike was not the cleverest of actions. If they wanted to take Soleimani out then they could have done it through some Iraqi faction and disavowed involvement - less reliable but with fewer repercussions.

They should have merely asked Israel to do it.

That way nothing would change in the middle east

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, doctor jambo said:

They should have merely asked Israel to do it.

That way nothing would change in the middle east

 

You cynic. ;)

 

I can only imagine that it panned out the way it did because the intel they received that Soleimani was in Iraq was obtained at very short notice. The only way to be sure of taking him out was by remote drone and they didn't have time to reflect properly on the repercussions. With enough planning they could have had an Iraqi faction armed with suitable RPGs situated near the airport or on the route from the airport to the city. It was only a matter of time before someone important came through that airport, whether Soleimani or someone else, where that firepower would have proved useful. In saying that, however, leaving such firepower in the hands of an Iraqi faction would always be risky unless you had some kind of insurance that they wouldn't use it for non-intended purposes.

 

Alternatively, the US could be angling for war and an open drone strike was planned all along. Take your pick.

 

Edited by redjambo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, redjambo said:

I'm not happy about this. I made a New Year's Resolution to get myself fit this year and there's no way I'm going to achieve that if WW3 takes place. Bar stewards. The least they could do is agree to have it in autumn - that might give me enough time to achieve my goal.


Good news Red, your military call up will help you get fit :thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

doctor jambo
16 minutes ago, redjambo said:

 

You cynic. ;)

 

I can only imagine that it panned out the way it did because the intel they received that Soleimani was in Iraq was obtained at very short notice. The only way to be sure of taking him out was by remote drone and they didn't have time to reflect properly on the repercussions. With enough planning they could have had an Iraqi faction armed with suitable RPGs situated near the airport or on the route from the airport to the city. It was only a matter of time before someone important came through that airport, whether Soleimani or someone else, where that firepower would have proved useful. In saying that, however, leaving such firepower in the hands of an Iraqi faction would always be risky unless you had some kind of insurance that they wouldn't use it for non-intended purposes.

 

Alternatively, the US could be angling for war and an open drone strike was planned all along. Take your pick.

 

I guess they wanted to make sure,

the Iranian dude was , after all, for an awful lot of pain, death and misery in the middle east.

replacing him with someone as competent will be difficult.

replacing him with an absolute blood thirsty banger will be easy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, indianajones said:

World war three will never happen. 

 

 

1 hour ago, Jeff said:

 

We won't ever know if it does

 

To quote a certain Prof. Einstein:

"I know not with what weapons World War 3 will be fought, but I know that World War 4 will be fought with sticks and stones"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, RobboM said:


Good news Red, your military call up will help you get fit :thumbsup:

 

:D Only if they'll be calling up oldies though. I'm not too far from my free bus pass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, redjambo said:

 

:D Only if they'll be calling up oldies though. I'm not too far from my free bus pass.

New line of thinking by the government. Oldies are expendable 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, trotter said:

 

 

To quote a certain Prof. Einstein:

"I know not with what weapons World War 3 will be fought, but I know that World War 4 will be fought with sticks and stones"

 

Spot on

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, mutley said:

New line of thinking by the government. Oldies are expendable 

 

We'll show 'em what's what.

 

CS3UG5M6FBC3RG7VSUL4JK5GUU.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, redjambo said:

 

:D Only if they'll be calling up oldies though. I'm not too far from my free bus pass.


Two words for you Red ..... "Bone Spurs" 😂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, RobboM said:


Two words for you Red ..... "Bone Spurs" 😂

 

How much do they cost?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Tazio said:

But not by the Iranian government though. 
I can’t really think of a precedent for this sort of behaviour. A country just sending a drone into another country and blatantly killing such a senior figure. Hey but it’s ok as it was a terrorist they killed, or more correctly someone they declared a terrorist. 
And now it will be time for our PM to payback for all the loyalty and support he got during the election. Meanwhile any sensible government will keep their head down and not get involved. 

 

One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. The Iranians certainly don't consider the dead man to have been a terrorist.

 

This drone strike could be a game changer.  Iran is not at war with the USA, yet the American's killed a senior Iranian official in a third country.  The Iranians will not give a knee-jerk reaction; I expect that they will bide their time. But when they do retaliate, it will be unexpected and massive and it will be disguised.  They'll say "It wisnae me," to deflect a tit-for-tat counter attack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trump always the Statesman and Presidential tells Lindsey Graham during their golf game he is ordering an air strike against an Irani general, but does not tell Congress or anyone else. It seems the Republicans think of this action as that of a strong leader, one who I seem to recall  exchanges of love letters with a murdering dictator who is developing weapons that can reach the United States.And yet people on here praise Trump as the President who has not spilled blood. I repeat a point I often make, I remember the newsreels of the forties with thousands upon thousands of Germans cheering Adolf Hitler, but also remember post WW2 it was quite difficult to find a German who had ever supported Hitler. Is Trump heading for the same lenderary status.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Maple Leaf said:

 

One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. The Iranians certainly don't consider the dead man to have been a terrorist.

 

This drone strike could be a game changer.  Iran is not at war with the USA, yet the American's killed a senior Iranian official in a third country.  The Iranians will not give a knee-jerk reaction; I expect that they will bide their time. But when they do retaliate, it will be unexpected and massive and it will be disguised.  They'll say "It wisnae me," to deflect a tit-for-tat counter attack.

 

A 9/11 esque retaliation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

alwaysthereinspirit
17 minutes ago, Maple Leaf said:

 

One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. The Iranians certainly don't consider the dead man to have been a terrorist.

 

This drone strike could be a game changer.  Iran is not at war with the USA, yet the American's killed a senior Iranian official in a third country.  The Iranians will not give a knee-jerk reaction; I expect that they will bide their time. But when they do retaliate, it will be unexpected and massive and it will be disguised.  They'll say "It wisnae me," to deflect a tit-for-tat counter attack.

I would imagine Bin Laden was seen by some as a non terrorist. But whatever floats YOUR boat I guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, alwaysthereinspirit said:

I would imagine Bin Laden was seen by some as a non terrorist. But whatever floats YOUR boat I guess.

 

That's my point.  Bin Laden was viewed as a hero by many, especially among people who consider the USA to be The Great Satan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Jeff said:

 

A 9/11 esque retaliation?

 

I doubt if it will be on that scale.  That was a one-of. 

 

But a massive suicide bomb in a crowded location, or a downed airliner are possibilities.  And the people responsible will not be clear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

jack D and coke
6 minutes ago, Maple Leaf said:

 

That's my point.  Bin Laden was viewed as a hero by many, especially among people who consider the USA to be The Great Satan.

Yeah I’d heard of people in places like Egypt where let’s be honest we possibly consider that one of the ME countries that’s probably a good bit less radge and they were practically celebrating 9/11. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Maple Leaf said:

 

One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. The Iranians certainly don't consider the dead man to have been a terrorist.

 

This drone strike could be a game changer.  Iran is not at war with the USA, yet the American's killed a senior Iranian official in a third country.  The Iranians will not give a knee-jerk reaction; I expect that they will bide their time. But when they do retaliate, it will be unexpected and massive and it will be disguised.  They'll say "It wisnae me," to deflect a tit-for-tat counter attack.

 

Exactly as I see it, and pretty much the same which has happened for the last few decades.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have Iran not been fighting or funding a deniable proxy war against the US for ages? 

 

Also, it's usually the Revolutionary Guard you hear about, was this bloke in charge of them too? 

 

Anyone know how Saudi Arabia is positioned on this?

 

Fairly sure a football forum is the appropriate place for me to ask these questions 😁

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perth to Paisley

Slight aside _ I notice  that the strike was via a drone.

 

Thinking that weapons like Trident have had their day.

Going forward I can see cyber and the like being the 'weapon of choice'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In general, what is the UK's relationship with Iran? 

 

Not as strained as the US's I guess? I really hope we don't get dragged in under the orders of Trump. I can picture Boris rolling over and getting his belly rubbed though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, jack D and coke said:

Yeah I’d heard of people in places like Egypt where let’s be honest we possibly consider that one of the ME countries that’s probably a good bit less radge and they were practically celebrating 9/11. 
 

 

They actually were one of the radge nations for a bit after they got rid of old Farouk. Their first action was to try to nationalise the Suez Canal which led to a massive infusion of British military. This was later supposedly solved by an Agreement ending the hostility in 1954.. They breached that and were invaded by French, Israeli and British forces in 1956. Got pretty well whopped. They later got a bit stroppie again and the Israelis kicked ass, they have been reasonably quiet and not too anxious it seems to get involved since. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

4 hours ago, Cruyff said:

This is going to lead to war between America and Iran. Which wouldn’t be something like the Iraq one, Iran has a powerful military, this will be more like WW3 If ground forces become involved. 

 

Trump came into the Whitehouse with no Iran Crisis. Ripped up the Nuclear Deal, started mouthing off, began sanctions on Iran and it has lead to this point. He has created this situation out of a relative peace.

 

47 minutes ago, Smack said:

Have Iran not been fighting or funding a deniable proxy war against the US for ages? 

 

Also, it's usually the Revolutionary Guard you hear about, was this bloke in charge of them too? 

 

Anyone know how Saudi Arabia is positioned on this?

 

Fairly sure a football forum is the appropriate place for me to ask these questions 😁

 

 

 

Iran been at war with America in Iraq since 2003.

 

Killed a load of British soldiers too.

 

But Iran is pretty calm and in control mostly. Is Trump actually the weaker here? 

Edited by Mikey1874
Link to comment
Share on other sites

International Law is dead.

Anybody can kill anybody anywhere at any time with or without knowledge of the nation in which it happens or permission to enter airspace and there are no comebacks.

Drone strikes are now the norm.

Even ground-based incursions by special forces are now completely off the leash.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, The Frenchman Returns said:

All US citizens warned to leave Iraq immediately


Should they not have told them before they bombed them !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Irufushi said:


Should they not have told them before they bombed them !

 

Would have given the game away that the bombing was imminent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, redjambo said:

 

Would have given the game away that the bombing was imminent.


I did think that but talk about screwing your own citizens over. Wouldn’t dance being an American citizen in Iran right now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems to me terrorism has become more the staple since ww2 of countries attacking each other. My earliest memories were Palestine immediately after the war, it insigated a formation of the Palestine Police. Egypt, Kenya, and other nations have used a form over the years and now it has become quite sophisticated, and certainly succesful in its ability to reduce morale and a feeling of security. The world is certainly a sad place now. It is actually quite difficult for me to have any confidence or belief in the truth, honesty , or actual objectives of any of the world leaders, it is sad, but I guess the younger people learn to live with what they have only known.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Irufushi said:


I did think that but talk about screwing your own citizens over. Wouldn’t dance being an American citizen in Iran right now. 

 

Frankly, it could be dangerous to be any Westerner there at the moment. Traditionally the Iranians themselves have been welcoming to foreigners, despite their bad relationship with the US, but with all the emotions going on there at the moment, I personally would keep a low profile.

 

Current Foreign Office advice for Brits: https://www.gov.uk/foreign-travel-advice/iran

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Cade said:

Iran have been at war with the USA (and the UK) pretty much since the Shah was backed by the western powers, deposing the democratically elected government in 1953 and allowing the Shah to rule as an absolute monarch.

 

People really need to learn history.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d'état

 

 

Actually quite the opposite of what you say. The Shah was placed in power but the UK and the USA with the CIA orchestrating the coup. The Shah then ruled the country as his own private property until he was overthrown. This was the point that we were then told continually that Iran was a rogue state. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Popular Now

    • lou
      10
    • alicante jambo
      71
×
×
  • Create New...