The recent problem in Iraq and Iran


Torch light
+1 / -1
#1
There is an apparent cause and a real true cause:

The apparent cause: The USA allies with the Wicked Zionists of Tel Aviv, who consider Iran their enemy.. therefore, the USA, provoked by Tel Aviv, works to destroy Iran and its rulers and its power (as it did to Iraq for the same reason)

The true cause: Because of the worship of Hussein on account of the enthusiasm and exaggeration in the love of the family of Prophet Mohammed, especially the worship of Imam Hussein son of Ali.

Therefore, God has set the Wicked Zionists of Tel Aviv and their allies the USA on Iraq and Iran, as had He set the king of Babylon Nebuchodonosor on the Children of Israel in the past when they fell in the idolatry and the enthusiasm about their imams and religious figures.

This will only be a temporary situation, until the people of Iran and Iraq grasp their wisdom and refrain from such enthusiasm about the family of the Prophet and until they glorify God alone without associate or peer or patron .. at that time, the circumstances and conditions will be to their side and they will be victorious.
http://www.quran-ayat.com/hour/an_ho...Way_of_Success
quran-ayat.com/hour/an_hour_with_ghosts.htm#Monotheism_Is_the_Way_of_S uccess
Last edited by Torch light; Jan 6th, 2020 at 04:37 PM..
 
NZDoug
+1 / -1
#2
America’s hatred of Iran is starts with its attempt to control its own oil production, exports and earnings. It goes back to 1953, when Mossadegh was overthrown because he wanted domestic sovereignty over Anglo-Persian oil. The CIA-MI6 coup replaced him with the pliant Shah, who imposed a police state to prevent Iranian independence from U.S. policy. The only physical places free from the police were the mosques. That made the Islamic Republic the path of least resistance to overthrowing the Shah and re-asserting Iranian sovereignty.
The United States came to terms with OPEC oil independence by 1974, but the antagonism toward Iran extends to demographic and religious considerations. Iranian support its Shi’ite population an those of Iraq and other countries – emphasizing support for the poor and for quasi-socialist policies instead of neoliberalism – has made it the main religious rival to Saudi Arabia’s Sunni sectarianism and its role as America’s Wahabi foreign legion.
America opposed General Suleimani above all because he was fighting against ISIS and other U.S.-backed terrorists in their attempt to break up Syria and replace Assad’s regime with a set of U.S.-compliant local leaders – the old British “divide and conquer” ploy. On occasion, Suleimani had cooperated with U.S. troops in fighting ISIS groups that got “out of line” meaning the U.S. party line. But every indication is that he was in Iraq to work with that government seeking to regain control of the oil fields that President Trump has bragged so loudly about grabbing.
Already in early 2018, President Trump asked Iraq to reimburse America for the cost of “saving its democracy” by bombing the remainder of Saddam’s economy. The reimbursement was to take the form of Iraqi Oil. More recently, in 2019, President Trump asked, why not simply grab Iraqi oil. The giant oil field has become the prize of the Bush-Cheney post 9-11 Oil War. “‘It was a very run-of-the-mill, low-key, meeting in general,” a source who was in the room told Axios.’ And then right at the end, Trump says something to the effect of, he gets a little smirk on his face and he says, ‘So what are we going to do about the oil?’”[1]
Trump’s idea that America should “get something” out of its military expenditure in destroying the Iraqi and Syrian economies simply reflects U.S. policy.
In late October, 2019, The New York Times reported that: “In recent days, Mr. Trump has settled on Syria’s oil reserves as a new rationale for appearing to reverse course and deploy hundreds of additional troops to the war-ravaged country. He has declared that the United States has “secured” oil fields in the country’s chaotic northeast and suggested that the seizure of the country’s main natural resource justifies America further extending its military presence there. ‘We have taken it and secured it,’ Mr. Trump said of Syria’s oil during remarks at the White House on Sunday, after announcing the killing of the Islamic State leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.”[2] A CIA official reminded the journalist that taking Iraq’s oil was a Trump campaign pledge.
That explains the invasion of Iraq for oil in 2003, and again this year, as President Trump has said: “Why don’t we simply take their oil?” It also explains the Obama-Hillary attack on Libya – not only for its oil, but for its investing its foreign reserves in gold instead of recycling its oil surplus revenue to the U.S. Treasury – and of course, for promoting a secular socialist state.
It explains why U.S. neocons feared Suleimani’s plan to help Iraq assert control of its oil and withstand the terrorist attacks supported by U.S. and Saudi’s on Iraq. That is what made his assassination an immediate drive.
American politicians have discredited themselves by starting off their condemnation of Trump by saying, as Elizabeth Warren did, how “bad” a person Suleimani was, how he had killed U.S. troops by masterminding the Iraqi defense of roadside bombing and other policies trying to repel the U.S. invasion to grab its oil. She was simply parroting the U.S. media’s depiction of Suleimani as a monster, diverting attention from the policy issue that explains why he was assassinated now.
The counter-strategy to U.S. oil, and dollar and global-warming diplomacy
This strategy will continue, until foreign countries reject it. If Europe and other regions fail to do so, they will suffer the consequences of this U.S. strategy in the form of a rising U.S.-sponsored war via terrorism, the flow of refugees, and accelerated global warming and extreme weather.
Russia, China and its allies already have been leading the way to dedollarization as a means to contain the balance-of-payments buttress of U.S. global military policy. But everyone now is speculating over what Iran’s response should be.
The pretense – or more accurately, the diversion – by the U.S. news media over the weekend has been to depict the United States as being under imminent attack. Mayor de Blasio has positioned policemen at conspicuous key intersections to let us know how imminent Iranian terrorism is – as if it were Iran, not Saudi Arabia that mounted 9/11, and as if Iran in fact has taken any forceful action against the United States. The media and talking heads on television have saturated the air waves with warnings of Islamic terrorism. Television anchors are suggesting just where the attacks are most likely to occur.
The message is that the assassination of General Soleimani was to protect us. As Donald Trump and various military spokesmen have said, he had killed Americans – and now they must be planning an enormous attack that will injure and kill many more innocent Americans. That stance has become America’s posture in the world: weak and threatened, requiring a strong defense – in the form of a strong offense.
But what is Iran’s actual interest? If it is indeed to undercut U.S. dollar and oil strategy, the first policy must be to get U.S. military forces out of the Near East, including U.S. occupation of its oil fields. It turns out that President Trump’s rash act has acted as a catalyst, bringing about just the opposite of what he wanted. On January 5 the Iraqi parliament met to insist that the United States leave. General Suleimani was an invited guest, not an Iranian invader. It is U.S. troops that are in Iraq in violation of international law. If they leave, Trump and the neocons lose control of oil – and also of their ability to interfere with Iranian-Iraqi-Syrian-Lebanese mutual defense.
Beyond Iraq looms Saudi Arabia. It has become the Great Satan, the supporter of Wahabi extremism, the terrorist legion of U.S. mercenary armies fighting to maintain control of Near Eastern oil and foreign exchange reserves, the cause of the great exodus of refugees to Turkey, Europe and wherever else it can flee from the arms and money provided by the U.S. backers of Isis, Al Qaeda in Iraq and their allied Saudi Wahabi legions.
The logical ideal, in principle, would be to destroy Saudi power. That power lies in its oil fields. They already have fallen under attack by modest Yemeni bombs. If U.S. neocons seriously threaten Iran, its response would be the wholesale bombing and destruction of Saudi oil fields, along with those of Kuwait and allied Near Eastern oil sheikhdoms. It would end the Saudi support for Wahabi terrorists, as well as for the U.S. dollar.
more
https://www.unz.com/mhudson/america-...the-near-east/
 
taxslave
+1
#3
The real cause of the problem is muslim pedophile goat humpers.
 
NZDoug
+1
#4
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslave View Post

The real cause of the problem is muslim pedophile goat humpers.

This is one of the real causes.
........................
Iran Air Flight 655
Date3 July 1988

SummaryShot down by a missile fired from USS Vincennes
SiteStrait of Hormuz, near Qeshm Island, Iran
Aircraft
Aircraft typeAirbus A300B2-203
OperatorIran Air
RegistrationEP-IBU
Flight originMehrabad International Airport
Tehran, Iran
StopoverBandar Abbas International Airport
Bandar Abbas, Iran
DestinationDubai International Airport
Dubai, United Arab Emirates
Passengers274
Crew16
Fatalities290
Survivors0

Iran–Iraq War
Iran Air Flight 655 was a scheduled passenger flight from Tehran to Dubai via Bandar Abbas, that was shot down on 3 July 1988 by an SM-2MR surface-to-air missile fired from USS Vincennes, a guided missile cruiser of the United States Navy. The aircraft, an Airbus A300, was destroyed and all 290 people on board, including 66 children, were killed.[1] The jet was hit while flying over Iran's territorial waters in the Persian Gulf, along the flight's usual route, shortly after departing Bandar Abbas International Airport, the flight's stopover location. Vincennes had entered Iranian territory after one of its helicopters drew warning fire from Iranian speedboats operating within Iranian territorial limits.[2][3]
The reason for the shootdown has been disputed between the governments of the two countries. According to the United States government, the crew of USS Vincennes had incorrectly identified the Airbus as an attacking F-14 Tomcat, a U.S.-made jet fighter that had been part of the Iranian Air Force inventory since the 1970s. While the F-14s had been supplied to Iran in an air-to-air configuration,[4][5] the crew of the guided missile cruiser had been briefed that the Iranian F-14s were equipped with air-to-ground ordnance.[6] Vincennes had made ten attempts to contact the aircraft on both military and civilian radio frequencies, but had received no response.[7] The International Civil Aviation Organization said that the flight crew should have been monitoring the civilian frequency.[8]
According to the Iranian government, the cruiser negligently shot down the aircraft, which was transmitting IFF squawks in Mode III, a signal that identified it as a civilian aircraft, and not Mode II as used by Iranian military aircraft.[9][10] The event generated a great deal of criticism of the United States. Some analysts blamed the captain of Vincennes, William C. Rogers III, for overly-aggressive behavior in a tense and dangerous environment.[7][11] In the days immediately following the incident, US President Ronald Reagan issued a written diplomatic note to the Iranian government, expressing deep regret.[12] The International Civil Aviation Organization faulted the US for the tragedy, noting, among other things, that, "American warships in the gulf had no equipment that allowed them to monitor civilian air traffic control radio frequencies, and thus no means of hearing the many radio transmissions between Iran Air Flight 655 and air traffic controllers that would have identified the aircraft to the Vincennes's crew.
more
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655
 
pgs
+3
#5
Quote: Originally Posted by NZDoug View Post

This is one of the real causes.
........................
Iran Air Flight 655
Date3 July 1988

SummaryShot down by a missile fired from USS Vincennes
SiteStrait of Hormuz, near Qeshm Island, Iran
Aircraft
Aircraft typeAirbus A300B2-203
OperatorIran Air
RegistrationEP-IBU
Flight originMehrabad International Airport
Tehran, Iran
StopoverBandar Abbas International Airport
Bandar Abbas, Iran
DestinationDubai International Airport
Dubai, United Arab Emirates
Passengers274
Crew16
Fatalities290
Survivors0

Iran–Iraq War
Iran Air Flight 655 was a scheduled passenger flight from Tehran to Dubai via Bandar Abbas, that was shot down on 3 July 1988 by an SM-2MR surface-to-air missile fired from USS Vincennes, a guided missile cruiser of the United States Navy. The aircraft, an Airbus A300, was destroyed and all 290 people on board, including 66 children, were killed.[1] The jet was hit while flying over Iran's territorial waters in the Persian Gulf, along the flight's usual route, shortly after departing Bandar Abbas International Airport, the flight's stopover location. Vincennes had entered Iranian territory after one of its helicopters drew warning fire from Iranian speedboats operating within Iranian territorial limits.[2][3]
The reason for the shootdown has been disputed between the governments of the two countries. According to the United States government, the crew of USS Vincennes had incorrectly identified the Airbus as an attacking F-14 Tomcat, a U.S.-made jet fighter that had been part of the Iranian Air Force inventory since the 1970s. While the F-14s had been supplied to Iran in an air-to-air configuration,[4][5] the crew of the guided missile cruiser had been briefed that the Iranian F-14s were equipped with air-to-ground ordnance.[6] Vincennes had made ten attempts to contact the aircraft on both military and civilian radio frequencies, but had received no response.[7] The International Civil Aviation Organization said that the flight crew should have been monitoring the civilian frequency.[8]
According to the Iranian government, the cruiser negligently shot down the aircraft, which was transmitting IFF squawks in Mode III, a signal that identified it as a civilian aircraft, and not Mode II as used by Iranian military aircraft.[9][10] The event generated a great deal of criticism of the United States. Some analysts blamed the captain of Vincennes, William C. Rogers III, for overly-aggressive behavior in a tense and dangerous environment.[7][11] In the days immediately following the incident, US President Ronald Reagan issued a written diplomatic note to the Iranian government, expressing deep regret.[12] The International Civil Aviation Organization faulted the US for the tragedy, noting, among other things, that, "American warships in the gulf had no equipment that allowed them to monitor civilian air traffic control radio frequencies, and thus no means of hearing the many radio transmissions between Iran Air Flight 655 and air traffic controllers that would have identified the aircraft to the Vincennes's crew.
more
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655

Big wop , what did those goat lovers do on 9/11 . Cry me a river .
 
B00Mer
+1
#6
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslave View Post

The real cause of the problem is muslim pedophile goat humpers.



Hey taxslave, signup here... RantsBBS.com
 
NZDoug
+1
#7
Quote: Originally Posted by pgs View Post

Big wop , what did those goat lovers do on 9/11 . Cry me a river .

Good point!
I think the goat lovers were feeling ripped off by "Operation Ajax".
The 1953 Iranian coup d'état, known in Iran as the 28 Mordad coup d'état (Persian: کودتای ۲۸ مرداد‎), was the overthrow of the democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh in favour of strengthening the monarchical rule of Mohammad Reza Pahlavi on 19 August 1953,[5] orchestrated by the United States (under the name TPAJAX Project[6] or "Operation Ajax") and the United Kingdom (under the name "Operation Boot").[7][8][9][10] It was the first covert action of the United States to overthrow a foreign government during peacetime.[11]
Mosaddegh had sought to audit the documents of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC), a British corporation (now part of BP) and to limit the company's control over Iranian oil reserves.[12] Upon the refusal of the AIOC to co-operate with the Iranian government, the parliament (Majlis) voted to nationalize Iran's oil industry and to expel foreign corporate representatives from the country.[13][14][15] After this vote, Britain instigated a worldwide boycott of Iranian oil to pressure Iran economically.[16] Initially, Britain mobilized its military to seize control of the British-built Abadan oil refinery, then the world's largest, but Prime Minister Clement Attlee opted instead to tighten the economic boycott[17] while using Iranian agents to undermine Mosaddegh's government.[18]:3 Judging Mosaddegh to be unreliable and fearing a Communist takeover in Iran, UK prime minister Winston Churchill and the Eisenhower administration decided to overthrow Iran's government, though the preceding Truman administration had opposed a coup, fearing the precedent that Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) involvement would set.[18]:3 British intelligence officials' conclusions and the UK government's solicitations were instrumental in initiating and planning the coup, despite the fact that the U.S. government in 1952 had been considering unilateral action (without UK support) to assist the Mosaddegh government.[19][20][21]
Following the coup in 1953, a government under General Fazlollah Zahedi was formed which allowed Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, the last Shah of Iran (Persian for an Iranian king),[22] to rule more firmly as monarch. He relied heavily on United States support to hold on to power.[13][14][15][23] According to the CIA's declassified documents and records, some of the most feared mobsters in Tehran were hired by the CIA to stage pro-Shah riots on 19 August.[24] Other CIA-paid men were brought into Tehran in buses and trucks, and took over the streets of the city.[25] Between 200[3] and 300[4] people were killed because of the conflict. Mosaddegh was arrested, tried and convicted of treason by the Shah's military court. On 21 December 1953, he was sentenced to three years in jail, then placed under house arrest for the remainder of his life.[26][27][28] Other Mosaddegh supporters were imprisoned, and several received the death penalty.[15] After the coup, the Shah continued his rule as monarch for the next 26 years[14][15] until he was overthrown in the Iranian Revolution in 1979.[14][15][18]
In August 2013, sixty years afterward, the U.S. government formally acknowledged the U.S. role in the coup by releasing a bulk of previously classified government documents that show it was in charge of both the planning and the execution of the coup, including the bribing of Iranian politicians, security and army high-ranking officials, as well as pro-coup propaganda.[29][30][31] The CIA is quoted acknowledging the coup was carried out "under CIA direction" and "as an act of U.S. foreign policy, conceived and approved at the highest levels of government.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_I..._coup_d%27état
Speaking of Cry me a river, here's some good Aussie tunes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lcd3z1RPFqs
 
Walter
#8
Quote: Originally Posted by NZDoug View Post

America’s hatred of Iran is starts with its attempt to control its own oil production, exports and earnings. It goes back to 1953, when Mossadegh was overthrown because he wanted domestic sovereignty over Anglo-Persian oil. The CIA-MI6 coup replaced him with the pliant Shah, who imposed a police state to prevent Iranian independence from U.S. policy. The only physical places free from the police were the mosques. That made the Islamic Republic the path of least resistance to overthrowing the Shah and re-asserting Iranian sovereignty.
The United States came to terms with OPEC oil independence by 1974, but the antagonism toward Iran extends to demographic and religious considerations. Iranian support its Shi’ite population an those of Iraq and other countries – emphasizing support for the poor and for quasi-socialist policies instead of neoliberalism – has made it the main religious rival to Saudi Arabia’s Sunni sectarianism and its role as America’s Wahabi foreign legion.
America opposed General Suleimani above all because he was fighting against ISIS and other U.S.-backed terrorists in their attempt to break up Syria and replace Assad’s regime with a set of U.S.-compliant local leaders – the old British “divide and conquer” ploy. On occasion, Suleimani had cooperated with U.S. troops in fighting ISIS groups that got “out of line” meaning the U.S. party line. But every indication is that he was in Iraq to work with that government seeking to regain control of the oil fields that President Trump has bragged so loudly about grabbing.
Already in early 2018, President Trump asked Iraq to reimburse America for the cost of “saving its democracy” by bombing the remainder of Saddam’s economy. The reimbursement was to take the form of Iraqi Oil. More recently, in 2019, President Trump asked, why not simply grab Iraqi oil. The giant oil field has become the prize of the Bush-Cheney post 9-11 Oil War. “‘It was a very run-of-the-mill, low-key, meeting in general,” a source who was in the room told Axios.’ And then right at the end, Trump says something to the effect of, he gets a little smirk on his face and he says, ‘So what are we going to do about the oil?’”[1]
Trump’s idea that America should “get something” out of its military expenditure in destroying the Iraqi and Syrian economies simply reflects U.S. policy.
In late October, 2019, The New York Times reported that: “In recent days, Mr. Trump has settled on Syria’s oil reserves as a new rationale for appearing to reverse course and deploy hundreds of additional troops to the war-ravaged country. He has declared that the United States has “secured” oil fields in the country’s chaotic northeast and suggested that the seizure of the country’s main natural resource justifies America further extending its military presence there. ‘We have taken it and secured it,’ Mr. Trump said of Syria’s oil during remarks at the White House on Sunday, after announcing the killing of the Islamic State leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.”[2] A CIA official reminded the journalist that taking Iraq’s oil was a Trump campaign pledge.
That explains the invasion of Iraq for oil in 2003, and again this year, as President Trump has said: “Why don’t we simply take their oil?” It also explains the Obama-Hillary attack on Libya – not only for its oil, but for its investing its foreign reserves in gold instead of recycling its oil surplus revenue to the U.S. Treasury – and of course, for promoting a secular socialist state.
It explains why U.S. neocons feared Suleimani’s plan to help Iraq assert control of its oil and withstand the terrorist attacks supported by U.S. and Saudi’s on Iraq. That is what made his assassination an immediate drive.
American politicians have discredited themselves by starting off their condemnation of Trump by saying, as Elizabeth Warren did, how “bad” a person Suleimani was, how he had killed U.S. troops by masterminding the Iraqi defense of roadside bombing and other policies trying to repel the U.S. invasion to grab its oil. She was simply parroting the U.S. media’s depiction of Suleimani as a monster, diverting attention from the policy issue that explains why he was assassinated now.
The counter-strategy to U.S. oil, and dollar and global-warming diplomacy
This strategy will continue, until foreign countries reject it. If Europe and other regions fail to do so, they will suffer the consequences of this U.S. strategy in the form of a rising U.S.-sponsored war via terrorism, the flow of refugees, and accelerated global warming and extreme weather.
Russia, China and its allies already have been leading the way to dedollarization as a means to contain the balance-of-payments buttress of U.S. global military policy. But everyone now is speculating over what Iran’s response should be.
The pretense – or more accurately, the diversion – by the U.S. news media over the weekend has been to depict the United States as being under imminent attack. Mayor de Blasio has positioned policemen at conspicuous key intersections to let us know how imminent Iranian terrorism is – as if it were Iran, not Saudi Arabia that mounted 9/11, and as if Iran in fact has taken any forceful action against the United States. The media and talking heads on television have saturated the air waves with warnings of Islamic terrorism. Television anchors are suggesting just where the attacks are most likely to occur.
The message is that the assassination of General Soleimani was to protect us. As Donald Trump and various military spokesmen have said, he had killed Americans – and now they must be planning an enormous attack that will injure and kill many more innocent Americans. That stance has become America’s posture in the world: weak and threatened, requiring a strong defense – in the form of a strong offense.
But what is Iran’s actual interest? If it is indeed to undercut U.S. dollar and oil strategy, the first policy must be to get U.S. military forces out of the Near East, including U.S. occupation of its oil fields. It turns out that President Trump’s rash act has acted as a catalyst, bringing about just the opposite of what he wanted. On January 5 the Iraqi parliament met to insist that the United States leave. General Suleimani was an invited guest, not an Iranian invader. It is U.S. troops that are in Iraq in violation of international law. If they leave, Trump and the neocons lose control of oil – and also of their ability to interfere with Iranian-Iraqi-Syrian-Lebanese mutual defense.
Beyond Iraq looms Saudi Arabia. It has become the Great Satan, the supporter of Wahabi extremism, the terrorist legion of U.S. mercenary armies fighting to maintain control of Near Eastern oil and foreign exchange reserves, the cause of the great exodus of refugees to Turkey, Europe and wherever else it can flee from the arms and money provided by the U.S. backers of Isis, Al Qaeda in Iraq and their allied Saudi Wahabi legions.
The logical ideal, in principle, would be to destroy Saudi power. That power lies in its oil fields. They already have fallen under attack by modest Yemeni bombs. If U.S. neocons seriously threaten Iran, its response would be the wholesale bombing and destruction of Saudi oil fields, along with those of Kuwait and allied Near Eastern oil sheikhdoms. It would end the Saudi support for Wahabi terrorists, as well as for the U.S. dollar.
more
https://www.unz.com/mhudson/america-...the-near-east/

Prog shit.
 
NZDoug
+1
#9
Quote: Originally Posted by Walter View Post

Prog shit.

Good point
...................
IRAN Iraq War 19080 - 1988.

US supports Iraq, just before invading them.
Supplies Israel with Tomcat bits to give to Iran to fight Iraq.
Thats what friends are for.
......
Get it?
>>>>>>>>>>
Its deep, I know.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
The Iran–Iraq War began on 22 September 1980, when Iraq invaded Iran, and it ended on 20 August 1988, when Iran accepted the UN-brokered ceasefire. Iraq wanted to replace Iran as the dominant Persian Gulf state, and was worried the 1979 Iranian Revolution would lead Iraq's Shi'ite majority to rebel against the Ba'athist government. The war also followed a long history of border disputes, and Iraq planned to annex the oil-rich Khuzestan Province and the east bank of the Arvand Rud (Shatt al-Arab).
Although Iraq hoped to take advantage of Iran's post-revolutionary chaos, it made limited progress and was quickly repelled; Iran regained virtually all lost territory by June 1982. For the next six years, Iran was on the offensive[66] until near the end of the war.[61] There were a number of proxy forces—most notably the People's Mujahedin of Iran siding with Iraq and the Iraqi Kurdish militias of the KDP and PUK siding with Iran. The United States, Britain, the Soviet Union, France, and most Arab countries provided political and logistic support for Iraq, while Iran was largely isolated.
After eight years, war-weariness, economic problems, decreased morale, repeated Iranian military failures, recent Iraqi successes, Iraqi use of weapons of mass destruction, lack of international sympathy, and increased U.S.–Iran military tension all led to a ceasefire brokered by the United Nations.
The conflict has been compared to World War I in terms of the tactics used, including large-scale trench warfare with barbed wire stretched across fortified defensive lines, manned machine gun posts, bayonet charges, Iranian human wave attacks, extensive use of chemical weapons by Iraq, and, later, deliberate attacks on civilian targets. A special feature of the war can be seen in the Iranian cult of the martyr which had been developed in the years before the revolution. The discourses on martyrdom formulated in the Iranian Shiite context led to the tactics of "human wave attacks" and thus had a lasting impact on the dynamics of the war.[67]
An estimated 500,000 Iraqi and Iranian soldiers died, in addition to a smaller number of civilians. The end of the war resulted in neither reparations nor border changes.
more
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran–Iraq_War
Last edited by NZDoug; Jan 7th, 2020 at 04:06 AM..Reason: forgot the "T" in the so duh...
 
B00Mer
#10
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBGPw_LBiRA
 
Torch light
#11
My prediction:

I think, and God is the All-Knowing.. I don't know the Unknown .. God knows the Unknown fore-future.. Anything I know is only that which God acquaints me with.. If I say the correct words, it is the favor of God; if I say the wrong words, it is only my mistake.

So I expect:
If the Wicked Zionists of Tel Aviv together with the USA .. attack Iran and in fact they may do much harm to Iran .. it will be followed by the end of the USA and of the Wicked Zionists of Tel Aviv.

In other words, the Zionists provoke the USA against Iran, then the USA may attack Iran and may harm it and its people....

it maybe that God will set these ungodly and disobedient people on the Iranian Muslim people (on account of the enthusiasm of the Iranian and the Iraqi about the religious figures and their tombs)

Then afterwards, the end will come of both the USA and the Wicked Zionists of Tel Aviv.. because their task will end and they will expire.

In other words: God may use the wrongdoers of America and Tel Aviv to punish the Iranian Muslims .. then afterwards, God will take revenge on the wrongdoers themselves: the USA and Tel Aviv.

God is the All-Knowing.
 
DaSleeper
+4
#12  Top Rated Post
 
Torch light
#13
TWO:

Tel Aviv will drag the USA to the abyss.. and although we now see America standing, but the fall of the USA is impending, which will be very quick and none can stop it like the running downhill.

The factor which will bring about such deterioration of America is the bias to the side of Tel Aviv, which is an obvious wrongdoing and transgression.
 
Torch light
#14
THREE:

Although I don't like any harm be done to the Iran (and Iraq) Muslim people.. but there is an important point:

This may be a preparation for the coming of the Mahdi who will be against the tomb worship and against the idolatry .. in fact his essential mission is to abolish the idolatry and tomb worship.
http://forums.canadiancontent.net/sh...d.php?t=165875

Hence, the tomb worshiper will oppose the Mahdi.. therefore, this may be in preparation for the Mahdi.. because when the Mahdi comes, he will eradicate the Zionists, while these tomb worshipers will oppose him.. therefore, God Himself may abolish the tomb worshipers and their idolatry, by setting the pork eaters and adulterers on them.
 
DaSleeper
+2
#15
 
taxslave
+2
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by Torch light View Post

TWO:
Tel Aviv will drag the USA to the abyss.. and although we now see America standing, but the fall of the USA is impending, which will be very quick and none can stop it like the running downhill.
The factor which will bring about such deterioration of America is the bias to the side of Tel Aviv, which is an obvious wrongdoing and transgression.

Tel Aviv is the only bright spot in a region filled with terrorists
 
B00Mer
+2
#17


Just Bomb Iran into the stone age..

Oh forgot, they are already in the stone age
 
B00Mer
+2
#18
 
B00Mer
+1
#19


Seeing Ayatollah Ali Khamenei crying like a little BITCH at his boyfriends funeral.. PRICELESS.!!!
 
taxslave
+2
#20
He is only crying at the number of goats it will cost him to get Trump offed.
 
spilledthebeer
+1
#21
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslave View Post

The real cause of the problem is muslim pedophile goat humpers.




TRUE DAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Muslim nutbars have made their choices!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


In the 1940`s -they stood against Britain and stood FOR HITLER............................


without bothering to consider that Hitler despised non whites!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


In the 1960`s Muslims stood with Communists.....................................


and despised Yankees and Jews!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


And now -Iranian nuclear nutbars stand with dictator Putin and with Red China...............................


and are TOO DUMB to figure out where their choices are leading them!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Go back to your goats!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


It is all you terrorist mujahideen wanna- bees are fit for!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!
 
NZDoug
#22
Millions protest US presence in Iraq.
https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-mi...rch-in-baghdad
Of course, Iran did it.
 
Gilgamesh
+1
#23
Quote: Originally Posted by Torch light View Post

There is an apparent cause and a real true cause:

The apparent cause: The USA allies with the Wicked Zionists of Tel Aviv, who consider Iran their enemy.. therefore, the USA, provoked by Tel Aviv, works to destroy Iran and its rulers and its power (as it did to Iraq for the same reason)

The true cause: Because of the worship of Hussein on account of the enthusiasm and exaggeration in the love of the family of Prophet Mohammed, especially the worship of Imam Hussein son of Ali.

Therefore, God has set the Wicked Zionists of Tel Aviv and their allies the USA on Iraq and Iran, as had He set the king of Babylon Nebuchodonosor on the Children of Israel in the past when they fell in the idolatry and the enthusiasm about their imams and religious figures.

This will only be a temporary situation, until the people of Iran and Iraq grasp their wisdom and refrain from such enthusiasm about the family of the Prophet and until they glorify God alone without associate or peer or patron .. at that time, the circumstances and conditions will be to their side and they will be victorious.
http://www.quran-ayat.com/hour/an_ho...Way_of_Success
quran-ayat.com/hour/an_hour_with_ghosts.htm#Monotheism_Is_the_Way_of_S uccess

Sorry to see your mental illness has returned.

We have to wonder if your parents had any children?
 
Gilgamesh
+1
#24
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslave View Post

Tel Aviv is the only bright spot in a region filled with terrorists

The torchlight seems very dim, as usual. Pity.
 
spilledthebeer
#25
Quote: Originally Posted by NZDoug View Post

Millions protest US presence in Iraq.
https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-mi...rch-in-baghdad
Of course, Iran did it.




OH YES Nut Zone Doug!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


IT IS CLEAR that the Muslims TERRORISTS are outraged that either Israel or United States.....................


should continue to exist!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Itbis CLEAR that we may all have peace and prosperity if only the Muslim TERRORISTS





are given EVERYTHING THEIR VILE BLACK HEARTS desire!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


IT IS THE WILL OF ALL MIGHTY GOD - THAT MUSLIMS BE DISAPPOINTED IN MANY THINGS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
spilledthebeer
+1
#26
Quote: Originally Posted by NZDoug View Post

Millions protest US presence in Iraq.
https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-mi...rch-in-baghdad
Of course, Iran did it.






YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


There are a LOT OF YANKEES WHO WANT THE TROOPS TO COME HOME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


That way there will be no Yankees near target zones when the world gets TRULY SICK OF ISLAM


AND CARPET BOMBS THE PLACE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


And then any Muslim survivors CAN KILL EACH OTHER OFF............................


WITHOUT ANY YANKEES being involved!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


In related news -what sort of collateral damage would occur if a cruise missile was directed at your house?????????????


You have said it is out in the country ............................


how far away is your nearest neighbour????????????????????????
 

Similar Threads

9
The recent US/Iran conflict !?
by Torch light | Sep 25th, 2019
0
4
US Iraq ambassador to discuss Iraq with Iran
by unclepercy | Nov 29th, 2005