Iran Did Do It..............says Trump

InTheShadows · 22-06-2019 2:24pm

archer22 wrote: »

The 'democracy' that America claims to exporting is some sack of sh1t alright.

A form of 'democracy' where you need to bomb and burn foreign men women and children in their homes to win the next f**king election.

Why don't American's stick to what they do best..f**king shooting each other, and leave the rest of the world in peace.

So by your "logic" Trump calling off the bombing means he doesn't want to win the 2020 election?

Cheerful Spring2 · 22-06-2019 2:26pm

Jimmy Garlic wrote: »

The Saudi crown Prince is desperately looking for a distraction but is the house of Saud bonkers enough to start the war. The US and Israel are banking on it.

Saudi Defence minister and John Bolton have gone to Israel for talks, this aint over yet.

Expect something new to kick this off soon. Iranian enrichment is a big deal and oerlooked here. Israel will pushing for a strike soon.

Sonny noggs · 22-06-2019 2:26pm

Jimmy Garlic wrote: »

Might be in responce to US and Israeli sponsored head hackers targeting Shias in the region , don't you think?

Do you have proof which came first?

Gatling · 22-06-2019 2:27pm

Jimmy Garlic wrote: »

The Saudi crown Prince is desperately looking for a distraction but is the house of Saud bonkers enough to start the war. The US and Israel are banking on it.

Considering Saudi have been repeatedly hit with Iranian weapons the last 2 year's , I'm sure they would be happy to have Saudi missiles strike Tehran.

But again I don't see a war ,

Gatling · 22-06-2019 2:29pm

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Saudi Defence minister and John Bolton have gone to Israel for talks, this aint over yet.

Expect something new to kick this off soon. Iranian enrichment is a big deal and oerlooked here. Israel will pushing for a strike soon.

Another end of the world , nuclear Armageddon you have being predicting for several years .

Cheerful Spring2 · 22-06-2019 2:31pm

Gatling wrote: »

Another end of the world , nuclear Armageddon you have being predicting for several years .

Never predicted this, but i did predict a war against Iran would come eventually.

Jimmy Garlic · 22-06-2019 2:35pm

Gatling wrote: »

Considering Saudi have been repeatedly hit with Iranian weapons the last 2 year's , I'm sure they would be happy to have Saudi missiles strike Tehran.

But again I don't see a war ,

Yeah, repeatedly hit in the country that they invaded, Yemen.

InTheShadows · 22-06-2019 2:36pm

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

You have limited understanding of Iranian capabilities.The saudis and UAE have been engaged in a war with sandal wearing Houtis for years and there not winning and they are using American military equipment.

If you think this will be like Iraq you going to be wrong. Iran has some of best missile systems in the world. They have hundreds of cruise missiles and antiship missiles ie missiles that take out aircraft carriers and destroyers- it not empty threats they are making. Their anti-air defence is sophicated and they have knocks off of s300 and s400. This will not be a free ride across Iran. You forgetting they have spies and a world class cyber network spread across the world. It very likely the action will not be contained to just Iran. Cities in UAE and Saudi Arabia and Israel will be targetted. I also expect bombings in the United States- Iranian sleeper cells ordered to carry out attacks.

I have no doubt the Iranians have sleeper cells in major American cities tbh.

I have to laugh at anyone comparing this to Iraq. Iraq was a basket case with an embarrassing army akin to our own after years of sanctions. One of the reasons this is coming to a head now is if the Iranians let the present situation continue they will be in the same boat as Saddam found himself in in a few short years. In effect they have nothing to lose.

An attack on Iran now would make the Vietnam war look like the cake walk in comparison. I think one of the main reasons Trump had second thoughts last minute about the bombings is the fact i wouldn't put it past the Iranians to use dirty bombs and chemical attacks on US interests world wide if this conflict escalated.

This is coming to a head now because

Gatling · 22-06-2019 2:39pm

Jimmy Garlic wrote: »

Yeah, repeatedly hit in the country that they invaded, Yemen.

Were they not invited by the Yemeni government ,

Attacks have hit Saudi Arabia several times ,not bad for a country thats starving but some how so called rebels find advanced weaponry that were never in yemen in the first place

Cheerful Spring2 · 22-06-2019 2:43pm

InTheShadows wrote: »

I have no doubt the Iranians have sleeper cells in major American cities tbh.

I have to laugh at anyone comparing this to Iraq. Iraq was a basket case with an embarrassing army akin to our own after years of sanctions. One of the reasons this is coming to a head now is if the Iranians let the present situation continue they will be in the same boat as Saddam found himself in in a few short years. In effect they have nothing to lose.

An attack on Iran now would make the Vietnam war look like the cake walk in comparison. I think one of the main reasons Trump had second thoughts last minute about the bombings is the fact i wouldn't put it past the Iranians to use dirty bombs and chemical attacks on US interests world wide if this conflict escalated.

This is coming to a head now because

Its unlikely Iran would use chemical weapons. They had weapons like this when they fought the 8 year war against Saddam army and refused to use them. They are not as fanatical as some people make them out to be. It be an asymmetical war fought on many fronts.

It be a conventional and guerrilla war campaign waged by the Iranians. If the Iranians used nuclear dirty bombs and chemical weapons, it be bad news for the country. US and Israel have developed mini explosive nukes and last thing you want is them used against your people and cities.

I agree on sleeper cell part. It highly likely Iran has sympathisers and agents in the United States and they will carry out low level bombings.

Jimmy Garlic · 22-06-2019 2:44pm

Gatling wrote: »

Were they not invited by the Yemeni government ,

Attacks have hit Saudi Arabia several times ,not bad for a country thats starving but some how so called rebels find advanced weaponry that were never in yemen in the first place

The Yemeni so called government is a sham and a farce, Saudi stooges. Good on the Houthis for getting the weapons to hit back at Saudi Arabia and their sock puppets that call themselves the Yemeni government.

InTheShadows · 22-06-2019 2:55pm

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Its unlikely Iran would use chemical weapons. They had weapons like this when they fought the 8 year war against Saddam army and refused to use them. They are not as fanatical as some people make them out to be. It be an asymmetical war fought on many fronts.

It be a conventional and guerrilla war campaign waged by the Iranians. If the Iranians used nuclear dirty bombs and chemical weapons, it be bad news for the country. US and Israel have developed mini explosive nukes and last thing you want is them used against your people and cities.

I agree on sleeper cell part. It highly likely Iran has sympathisers and agents in the United States and they will carry out low level bombings.

If the Iranians are losing or look likely to lose they will use dirty or chemical bombs mark my words and not just on American interests in the region but in the United States itself.

Gatling · 22-06-2019 2:56pm

People are watching too many dodgy movies

Franz Von Peppercorn II · 22-06-2019 2:57pm

Gatling wrote: »

There is not going to be a war ,

We might get a few loud bangs an iran losses some of its military infrastructure .
Nothing more

Even if that’s all that happens it’s a war.

theguzman · 22-06-2019 3:01pm

InTheShadows wrote: »

If the Iranians are losing or look likely to lose they will use dirty or chemical bombs mark my words and not just on American interests in the region but in the United States itself.

Iran won't lose unless America uses Nuclear on them, even then the Ayatollahs have no problems to sacrifce millions. Iran should be left alone because if America puts boots on the ground it will turn into their their costliest war ever as Iran geographically is a fort and if America does launch an Invasion then Russia and China will both back Iran and the Russian S400 will take down any US Aircraft, Iran is unwinnable for the US unless they strike first with several Nuclear Weapons and the death toll will be incalculable, Putin and Xi will not allow Tehran be conquered, Trump himself is surely looking for someway to avoid war and at the same time save face and look like he is winning, he knows if he puts boots on the ground on Iran he is toast come Nov 2020.

ArchXStanton · 22-06-2019 3:05pm

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

You seem to believe the US has the right to invade any country, overthrow any democracy, or regime that acts against their interests and install any puppet regime they choose. You choose the US side every time.

Wtf does Cornflakes mean.

He gets his jollies from it and then tells blatant lies to suit his own narrative

Cheerful Spring2 · 22-06-2019 3:06pm

Gatling wrote: »

People are watching too many dodgy movies

You ignoring events of last few days. Trump claims he was literally only minutes away from ordering a military strike against Iran. It no longer fantasy to talk about a potential war with Iran. We got very close to it on thurday evening.

It only going to take another incident or two to start it now. Iran seemingly has no interest in talking with Trump about a new deal, so right now i see no way out, and war is more likely outcome.

Trump pulled back for this incident, but next time, he likely have to give the go ahead.

And nobody sure who carrying out these attacks against the Oil Tankers.,this is the weirder angle. If its false flag attacks, then we are in deep trouble. If Iran doing it then they can pull back and cool the situation down and not do this anymore.

ArchXStanton · 22-06-2019 3:08pm

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

You have been saying that for years and you are wrong. Events have overtaken your analysis

If you believe Trump and officials he ordered a strike on mutiple targets across Iran and changed his mind when the plan was in flow and ready to go down. His reversed course because he believes 150 lives for one drone shot down was not enough to start a war.

You overlooking something here the war nearly started and only going to take another incident to kick it off. Trump boxed himself in now and he have to go ahead next time or he look very weak.

Do you think the Iranians are not going to fight back if they are hit, be real?

That imminent attack was all bluff, Trump knows damn well they were in Iranian airspace and knows the Iranians have the evidence to prove it, it wouldn't look good for them on the world stage, typical of that orange goon to add a humanitarian PR spin to it about 150 lives as if they gave a fcuk before

theguzman · 22-06-2019 3:09pm

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

You ignoring events of last few days. Trump claims he was literally only minutes away from ordering a military strike against Iran. It no longer fantasy to talk about a potential war with Iran. We got very close to it on thurday evening.

It only going to take another incident or two to start it now. Iran seemingly has no interest in talking with Trump about a new deal, so right now i see no way out, and war is more likely outcome.

Trump pulled back for this incident, but next time, he likely have to give the go ahead.

And nobody sure who carrying out these attacks against the Oil Tankers.,this is the weirder angle. If its false flag attacks, then we are in deep trouble. If Iran doing it then they can pull back and cool the situation down and not do this anymore.

Bolton is responsible, most likely Mossad doing his bidding. Anyone who still believes the truth of 9/11 is quite frankly just an idiot at this stage.

Cheerful Spring2 · 22-06-2019 3:18pm

ArchXStanton wrote: »

That imminent attack was all bluff, Trump knows damn well they were in Iranian airspace and knows the Iranians have the evidence to prove it, it wouldn't look good for them on the world stage, typical of that orange goon to add a humanitarian PR spin to it about 150 lives as if they gave a fcuk before

Officials said the strike was not a bluff Trump and his cabinet agreed to carry it out and Trump at final stages called it off.

The worrying thing is we know his inner circle wanted to do it. Pompeo, Bolton, Gina Haspel ( head of CIA) wanted a strike.

Yep i don't buy the drone was just over water, i too believe it entered Iranian airspace to take pictures.

Still i have feeling Trump realised 150 lives for the unmanned drone was messy and he was about to have a war with Iran over this. He also realised his supporters are not keen on it and may harm his election hopes.

What shocked me was FOX news turned on him for this indecision and if Trump watching that, he going to rethink his position next time. Trump has now boxed himself into a corner and looking weak next time is a problem for him. Lets hope there no more incidents, but i expect it not over yet.

ArchXStanton · 22-06-2019 3:22pm

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Officials said the strike was not a bluff Trump and his cabinet agreed to carry it out and Trump at final stages called it off.

The worrying thing is we know his inner circle wanted to do it. Pompeo, Bolton, Gina Haspel ( head of CIA) wanted a strike.

Yep i don't buy the drone was just over water, i too believe it entered Iranian airspace to take pictures.

Still i have feeling Trump realised 150 lives for the unmanned drone was messy and he was about to have a war with Iran over this. He also realised his supporters are not keen on it and may harm his election hopes.

What shocked me was FOX news turned on him for this indecision and if Trump watching that, he going to rethink his position next time. Trump has now boxed himself into a corner and looking weak next time is a problem for him. Lets hope there no more incidents, but i expect it not over yet.

I'm pretty sure if it fell in international waters the US would have been on it like a hot snot instead of the Iranians picking up the debris, judging by the sequence of events the last while the US seems to have deliberately set itself on a collision course with Iran

InTheShadows · 22-06-2019 3:25pm

theguzman wrote: »

Iran won't lose unless America uses Nuclear on them, even then the Ayatollahs have no problems to sacrifce millions. Iran should be left alone because if America puts boots on the ground it will turn into their their costliest war ever as Iran geographically is a fort and if America does launch an Invasion then Russia and China will both back Iran and the Russian S400 will take down any US Aircraft, Iran is unwinnable for the US unless they strike first with several Nuclear Weapons and the death toll will be incalculable, Putin and Xi will not allow Tehran be conquered, Trump himself is surely looking for someway to avoid war and at the same time save face and look like he is winning, he knows if he puts boots on the ground on Iran he is toast come Nov 2020.

Boots on the ground mean 4 more years.

Cheerful Spring2 · 22-06-2019 3:30pm

ArchXStanton wrote: »

I'm pretty sure if it fell in international waters the US would have been on it like a hot snot instead of the Iranians picking up the debris, judging by the sequence of events the last while the US seems to have deliberately set itself on a collision course with Iran

I agree, the question is was Trump naive to think the Iranians would not fire a missile at US drones? If he truly was that naive and does not want a war, actions like this will not happen again?

By all accounts a US recon plane was also near by and was targetted by the Iranians, but they decided not to fire at it. Iranians made a wise choice there. No American lives lost, is only reason Trump was able to call it off, but his cabinet are all in for starting a new war and this very dangerous.

Outlaw Pete · 22-06-2019 3:31pm

Iran executes ex-defence ministry employee over US spy charge

Iran has reportedly executed one of its former ministry of defence employees suspected of spying for the US.

Jalal Hajizavar was a contract employee for the aerospace organisation, according to reports on Saturday.

He left his post nine years ago and was convicted by a military court after an investigation which discovered documents and spying equipment at his home, according to the IRIB news agency.

It claims he was executed at the Rajai Shahr prison in Karaj, west of Tehran.

.

bessboroughboy · 22-06-2019 3:36pm

specky4eyes wrote: »

The fucking idiot of the united states has said that Iran did attack 2 oil tankers in the gulf of Oman, the idiot would want to take a step back and consider the consequences of going to war with Iran, Iran is not Iraq in 2003 after 13 years of sanctions against Saddam, the only way Usrael can beat Iran is by using nukes.

I have followed various wars and reasons for wars since the late 80's, looked into all I could find, and in every case a false narrative was put forward by the USA in it's want of war, just like today.

The US (best military in the world:rolleyes:) would be best looking at the fact it hasn't won a war since WW2, even then the Russians actually did the bulk of killing and dying.

I hope Russia stand in the way again and bring them to task or total destruction, the only solution.

YES INDEED!

Well lookie here siree, at this fine and dandy map I got me right here
That speck right there is, as sure as apple pie, a weapon of mass destruction
That ain't no barn or photoshop job, no siree, that sure is an evil, non-western, non- white, weapon of mass destruction

But sir, isn't stupidity also a weapon of mass destruction?
Move along soldier

Franz Von Peppercorn II · 22-06-2019 3:49pm

InTheShadows wrote: »

Boots on the ground mean 4 more years.

No. Trump is toast if he goes to war. His base (his actual base not the general republican base) is anti war.

He was reminded of this when he watched Tucker Carlson last week.

archer22 · 22-06-2019 3:58pm

Everybody has overlooked another aspect of this...the Shia's in Iraq.

They have close ties to Iran and a lot of them will almost certainly open a second front to help the Iranians.

There have already been some rocket attacks on American bases in Iraq...and American personnel withdrawn.

Its very likely an attack on Iran will restart the American/Iraq war as well.

Cheerful Spring2 · 22-06-2019 4:06pm

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

No. Trump is toast if he goes to war. His base (his actual base not the general republican base) is anti war.

He was reminded of this when he watched Tucker Carlson last week.

The problem is his inner circle trusted advisors wanted a war against Iran. Trump is in difficult position.

I watched some clips of Fox News to see the reaction and hannity and fox and friends were warmongering after his decision to call off the strikes. Trump is getting hit harder from all sides about his indecision about the strikes.Fair play to Tucker seems to be the only reasonable personality on there right now saying Trump decision was correct, but will Tucker opinion be enough to stop Trump changing his mind?

Trump could change his mind by next week if all we know, and order a strike. Trump unpredictable and can go either way, but thankfully he backed off this time.

Fiery mutant · 22-06-2019 4:39pm

It's very hard to read this thread. The amount of bollix spoken is unbelievable.

Strangle enough, the only people mentioning war, are the apparently anti-war brigade.

Franz Von Peppercorn II · 22-06-2019 5:17pm

Fiery mutant wrote: »

It's very hard to read this thread. The amount of bollix spoken is unbelievable.

Strangle enough, the only people mentioning war, are the apparently anti-war brigade.

You just mentioned war. And by calling us an anti war brigade you admit that there’s a war (or potential war) to be anti.

Odhinn · 22-06-2019 5:22pm

Fiery mutant wrote: »

It's very hard to read this thread. The amount of bollix spoken is unbelievable.

Strangle enough, the only people mentioning war, are the apparently anti-war brigade.

.....such as......?

Ardillaun · 22-06-2019 5:59pm

Manic Moran wrote: »

After the Iranian Navy got fairly much removed from the Gulf in the 1988 by the US Navy, there seemed to have been no particular repercussions. Except for the tanker war stopping.

That's not to say Iran couldn't make life very miserable for the US in Iraq or Afghanistan. Or perhaps better to say more miserable, nobody thinks they're not involved.

It's interesting to note that the various official briefings are drawing a distinction between the IRGC and the Iranian Army. It's often "IRGC missile" and "IRGC Boat" instead of a simple "Iranian". I submit that this is not accidental and is part of a strategy to limit expansion.

Given American efforts to collapse their economy, which the world has meekly gone along with, the Iranian regime has no choice but to raise tension and see if Trump is bluffing again. He may be looking for minor modifications to JCPOA as he did with Canada on NAFTA so he can bray about a win. They know he doesn’t want a war and they need concessions on sanctions. If the US does bomb Iran one scenario could be a prolonged series of attacks on US interests across the world - not what the Trump base or Wall St. would like to see.

Atoms for Peace · 22-06-2019 6:23pm

A war with Iran whould be absolutely insane. The result could be a broad sectarian war between shia and Sunni islam.

Hedgelayer · 22-06-2019 6:33pm

Atoms for Peace wrote: »

A war with Iran whould be absolutely insane. The result could be a broad sectarian war between shia and Sunni islam.

A lot of people are unaware of the differences and hostility between Shia and Sunni Islam.
I often mentioned it here and people seem to be clueless about it.

The Sunni's are way more hostile than the Shias, most of the terrorists are Sunni's

Shia Islam has its fault's but they're more tolerant than the Sunni's.

Look at Saudi Arabia no Christian churches, Jewish temple's or Buddihst center's, as for Iran there's plenty of diversity of religion.
Although Shia Islam is the most prominent.

They understand the part of the Koran which allows people of the abrahamic book to worship the abrahamic God...

As for Saudi it's all wahabism...but yet the Shias are tarred with a hotter brush..

And no way would the Iranian Shias work with the Sunni terrorist's... they hate each other...

The Late Late Show · 22-06-2019 7:12pm

ArchXStanton wrote: »

Let's see we have a country with a long history of false flags and lies to start wars, invade, kill thousands, WMDs, gulf of Tonkin etc etc. and now we're expected to believe this horsesh!te, yep I'd say its very relevant considering the many lives that could be lost, US propaganda is not as effective as it used to be... With good reason

Modern America is a mess and hasn't learned a thing from its dodgy wars like Vietnam and Iraq. The 2018-2019 version of the American government is one of the very worst ever with idiots like John Bolton and Mike Pompeo in it who are not very different to those Gilead guys in The Handmaid's Tale.

bunderoon · 22-06-2019 7:28pm

The Late Late Show wrote: »

Modern America is a mess and hasn't learned a thing from its dodgy wars like Vietnam and Iraq. The 2018-2019 version of the American government is one of the very worst ever with idiots like John Bolton and Mike Pompeo in it who are not very different to those Gilead guys in The Handmaid's Tale.

The US has learnt. The thing is, is that it doesnt care. The US is an important tool for the real string pullers. Why bother to have the string pullers people die in combat when you can get the US's people to - and they wouldnt even know it.

1o059k7ewrqj3n · 22-06-2019 7:29pm

The Late Late Show wrote: »

Modern America is a mess and hasn't learned a thing from its dodgy wars like Vietnam and Iraq. The 2018-2019 version of the American government is one of the very worst ever with idiots like John Bolton and Mike Pompeo in it who are not very different to those Gilead guys in The Handmaid's Tale.

Do you have a quota to fill in every post that you must mention Gilead?

smurfjed · 22-06-2019 7:44pm

Look at Saudi Arabia no Christian churches, Jewish temple's or Buddihst center's

Are there Saudi citizens who follow these religions and need a place or worship ?

Franz Von Peppercorn II · 22-06-2019 8:35pm

smurfjed wrote: »

Are there Saudi citizens who follow these religions and need a place or worship ?

There must be Christians in Saudi. Ex pats if nothing else.

Are you popping in here to defend Saudi Arabia?

Gatling · 22-06-2019 9:17pm

smurfjed wrote: »

Are there Saudi citizens who follow these religions and need a place or worship ?

It's not tolerated as far as I'm aware there is no other religious places of worship any where in Saudi ,

If there is it's likely behind walls of sovereign Embassys

Odhinn · 22-06-2019 9:52pm

smurfjed wrote: »

Are there Saudi citizens who follow these religions and need a place or worship ?

Unsure. I'm fairly sure there are that the shia population are treated like shite however.

kildare lad · 22-06-2019 9:54pm

Hedgelayer wrote: »

A lot of people are unaware of the differences and hostility between Shia and Sunni Islam.
I often mentioned it here and people seem to be clueless about it.

The Sunni's are way more hostile than the Shias, most of the terrorists are Sunni's

Shia Islam has its fault's but they're more tolerant than the Sunni's.

Look at Saudi Arabia no Christian churches, Jewish temple's or Buddihst center's, as for Iran there's plenty of diversity of religion.
Although Shia Islam is the most prominent.

They understand the part of the Koran which allows people of the abrahamic book to worship the abrahamic God...

As for Saudi it's all wahabism...but yet the Shias are tarred with a hotter brush..

And no way would the Iranian Shias work with the Sunni terrorist's... they hate each other...

14 out of the 17 hijackers who flew into the world trade centre were Saudis and it was funded by bin Laden who was also a saudi . Yet america in their infinite wisdom decided to invade Iraq. America can go and bomb and invade countries , kill thousands of people in the name of " freedom " and why people in these countries fight back theyre called terrorists

Gatling · 22-06-2019 10:26pm

kildare lad wrote: »

14 out of the 17 hijackers who flew into the world trade centre were Saudis and it was funded by bin Laden who was also a saudi . Yet america in their infinite wisdom decided to invade Iraq

They invaded Afghanistan to remove alqueda and the Taliban first , Iraq was bush jr.trying to out do daddy ,

I believe we had terrorism before America bombed Iraq and eventually invaded Iraq ,

I don't believe anyone on boards supported the 2nd Iraq war ,
But I've regularly come across posts where people point to Afghanistan and look what America did in Afghanistan and America destabilised Afghanistan which was a ****ahole when the Russians decided communism was to be installed on the people of Afghanistan ,
A very forward country at the time , university education was standard , women dressed Western styles ,a huge amount of the worlds fruit and nuts were grown and produced in Afghanistan,

But some how its all Americas fault ,

housetypeb · 22-06-2019 10:33pm

Gatling wrote: »

Where else have they invaded

Grenada.

1o059k7ewrqj3n · 22-06-2019 10:40pm

Gatling wrote: »

But I've regularly come across posts where people point to Afghanistan and look what America did in Afghanistan and America destabilised Afghanistan which was a ****ahole when the Russians decided communism was to be installed on the people of Afghanistan ,
A very forward country at the time , university education was standard , women dressed Western styles ,a huge amount of the worlds fruit and nuts were grown and produced in Afghanistan,

But some how its all Americas fault ,

I have trouble reading your post, are you saying it was the USSR's fault that a moderate and secular Afghanistan which promoted education and women's rights failed? The USSR is guilty of many, many things but it was the US, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan which supported the Mujhadeen and eventually the Taliban.

Franz Von Peppercorn II · 22-06-2019 10:45pm

Steyr 556 wrote: »

I have trouble reading your post, are you saying it was the USSR's fault that a moderate and secular Afghanistan which promoted education and women's rights failed? The USSR is guilty of many, many things but it was the US, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan which supported the Mujhadeen and eventually the Taliban.

Yes. The Soviets had no right to invade but it was the US support for Afghanistan’s Islamists that started the rise in Islamist theology. I believe Rambo helped them out at the time.

Gatling · 22-06-2019 11:08pm

Steyr 556 wrote: »

I have trouble reading your post, are you saying it was the USSR's fault that a moderate and secular Afghanistan which promoted education and women's rights failed? The USSR is guilty of many, many things but

If you don't know what your talking about maybe consider stopping .
Case and point in the opening lines of your post

Gatling · 22-06-2019 11:10pm

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

Yes. The Soviets had no right to invade but it was the US support for Afghanistan

Yeah the support for Afghanis to defend themselves against over whelming russian fire power and chemical weapons deployed against unarmed civilians .

But wait it's America's fault .......

Jimmy Garlic · 22-06-2019 11:17pm

Gatling wrote: »

Yeah the support for Afghanis to defend themselves against over whelming russian fire power and chemical weapons deployed against unarmed civilians .

But wait it's America's fault .......

Ah yes the Mujahadeen, great bunch of lads. The photo of Brzezinski shaking Osama Bin Laden's hand when the US was supplying him with weapons and cash is heartwarming.

1o059k7ewrqj3n · 23-06-2019 12:05am

Gatling wrote: »

If you don't know what your talking about maybe consider stopping .
Case and point in the opening lines of your post

I'm genuinely embarrassed for you. Read some books.

Iran Did Do It..............says Trump

Comments