US, UK, France and Germany condemns Iran's increasing nuclear enrichment production.
Sending more troops now to the occupied territories and oil fields. They have been told to get out and just send more.
They have been going to Syria and Iraq to fight ISIS for 10 years, on the invitation of Iraq whom they are strategic partners with.
Why post such BS ..
I don't get it. What is BS about what they posted?
Regardless whether you like him or not, President Assad is still the ruler of Syria and has support by a substantial amount of the population under his government's control. The armed forces of Russia and Iran were invited into the country by him. The Americans on the other hand have no reason to be in Syria and they were never invited in by the government If the current Syrian government asks them to leave, then they should leave.
I don't expect someone like you who spends all of their time worshipping the US to understand
And 80-% of the Iraqi parliament last week voted that they want them out and what do they do, send more troops. Democracy and all that, no wonder they and their allies are losing respect and influence across the world at an unprecedented pace.
Anyway, looks like the oil majors are rerouting now, what a debacle this is turning into.
If the Iraqi government ask them to leave, they will leave.
It's a strike against the gulf oil States, like Saudi Arabia., the UAE and, Egypt and then the West and wider global economy. Israel is so far down the list that any damage to it will mostly be via damage to the above.
The oil majors, when that phrase is used to refer to the big oil companies we all know, control about 5% of the market.
The houthis and Iran are going to keep forcing this one, where they will stop no one knows, military action will at least slow them down and let them know that their is a cost to their game. Economic sanctions must be restored and Iran treated as the belligerent imperial power that it is.
A smaller cost than letting them do as they wish, that would turn the world upside in a bloody mess, they still might achieve that.
80% did you randomly pick that figure
https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/iraq-seeks-quick-exit-us-forces-no-deadline-set-pm-says-2024-01-10/
What about Syria ?
Assad is an autocrat who has never faced a normal democratic election, so we have no idea about his "support" by the population. He did however have the tipping balance of support of over half the military (helped by his brother who ran it) and the state security apparatuses, which helped him grip onto some sort of dominion. Syria as we know it no longer exists, it's fractured territory.
A large swath of that territory was taken over by ISIS. Russia, the US, and many other countries have been fighting ISIS in Syria (and Iraq) since around 2014. They all have their own interests as well as combating ISIS.
if this whole region goes up in flames, it will suit Israel. i think Netty & his fascist buddies in Govt. are itching to have a cut at Iran, but would rather the USA was in on the act. "fighting for democracy" and all that ...
only time will tell if the Americans & Brits can restrain themselves, if they still remember the mistakes they made by invading Iraq, the WMD etc. or will the war mongers/arm industrialists get their way once again.
They were invited by the Kurdish authorities
In 2020, the parliament voted in favour of a framework of US troops leaving.
The reality is that the Iraqi leadership want the US to stay there, for now, so while they talk about that framework for optics, privately they are keeping the door open (keywords: for now)
Someone is trying to push an agenda
You were talking about yourself, aren't you?
Or Childrens' rights in Gaza or Womens rights in Gaza or Human rights in Gaza.
Oil products are generally transported unrefined as they are less volatile and less dangerous. They would typically be refined close to the market.
As I understand it, tanker transport of refined petroleum is usually limited to short distances.
I see. So if I try to understand why the USA attacks country X, I'm supporting terrorism by doing so?
That's a curious point of view.
Mostly when a difficult situation arises, the first step is to analyse the situation to see what the problem is, how it arose, and then look for a solution. Of course given your user name I can imagine that you might feel that difficult situations are best resolved by the use of the gun, but we're not all like that. Most of us prefer peaceful conflict resolution - but you seem to think that's "supporting terrorism". A most curious pov.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't it Saddam Hussein who attacked Iran? With the connivance of the West, btw, who then turned on him when he went into Kuwait.
You obvious missed the word "if" in my post.
However it seems that the owners of the ship didn't know where it was going - Rotterdam or Gavle your link says. Or maybe somewhere else ...
That's true, and as a result most shipping continues to use the waterway.
It's likely that this is Iran showcasing its technical abilities. Like a sort of warning "Don't mess with us".
And very specifically - a threat to anyone deciding to make an air attack on them in the future.
No
Well the Israelis have already flown to Iran and America has very likely been flying over the country for decades unobstructed
Another ship was attacked, they better cop on really quickly before the US anilates them altogether
I think it was, TBF. In the midst of the chaos after the Iranian revolution, Iraq felt that that would a good time to change the balance of power in the region - before Iran got itself back on its feet so to speak. Iraq attacked first.
Yes, actually.
The Iran–Iraq War was an armed conflict between Iran and Iraq that lasted from September 1980 to August 1988. Active hostilities began with the Iraqi invasion of Iran and lasted for eight years
During the conflict, Iraq received an abundance of financial, political, and logistical aid from the United States, the United Kingdom, the Soviet Union, France, Italy, Yugoslavia, and the overwhelming majority of Arab countries.
The help the US gave was only enough support to prevent an Iran victory both sides got there biggest support from the Soviets,
Absolutely correct.
However given Iran's continuing technical development, large, well-educated population and oil wealth, it is merely a matter of time before they develop similar defensive and offensive abilities to Israel.
They have an aerospace industry, including drones, and of course rockets; and they are likely in the process of producing nuclear weapons. So sooner or later they will be in the position to respond to Israeli attacks on them via guided missiles, unless the US manages to install a regime friendly to themselves and Israel. But if they don't manage to do that I feel that Israel will shortly become a paper tiger (remember them?) which would be an enormous blow to Uncle Sam. (One of many on the horizon).
If I was israeli, rather than the scenario above - I would be trying to come to a mutually-beneficial arrangement with the Palestinians rather than murdering them in their thousands. Unfortunately they seem to show the same degree of ability to compromise as our unionist population in Ulster. Such a shame.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://www.boards.ie/applications/dashboard/design/images/banned.png)
