U.S. prods Iran for talks to ease Gulf tensions; Tehran dismisses sanctions threat

[tonbridgebrit]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

Let's start with your post having little to do with my post, or even with your previous one. Nothing much to support the assertions made earlier, no points raised in response have been addressed. Just another rant, then.

 

I've no idea whether the Western concept of democracy is what everyone around the World is into. Parts of it, for sure. The whole package, maybe less enthusiasm in evidence.

 

It's interesting that you seem to be able to differentiate between Iran's leadership and Iranians in general in one part of your post, and then ignore the differentiation on another. So "the leadership would not be open" to democratization processes, but somehow Iran could not agree to terms (which terms these are, isn't too clear).

 

What on earth is your point ??

Do you really reckon that it's a good idea to declare war on Iran, and go and bomb and invade them ??

We know, because of the invasion of Iraq back in 2003, that bombing and fighting the Middle East countries does not actuaaly work. It's wrong, it will be a disaster.

[tonbridgebrit]

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/iran-says-sanctions-supreme-leader-063236445.html

Okay, from the above article, Britain is NOT going to fight this war against Iran. Quote from the article, Jeremy Hunt, the foreign secretary, told the Commons on Tuesday: "The US is our closest ally, we talk to them the whole time, we consider any requests that they say carefully, but I cannot envisage any situation where they request or we agree to any moves to go to war.

So, British soldiers will not be invading Iran. That's good news.

[Morch]

17 minutes ago, tonbridgebrit said:

What on earth is your point ??

Do you really reckon that it's a good idea to declare war on Iran, and go and bomb and invade them ??

We know, because of the invasion of Iraq back in 2003, that bombing and fighting the Middle East countries does not actuaaly work. It's wrong, it will be a disaster.

 

Why don't you read the OP, and the topic. Focus on the post I was replying to - and then try again.

 

Do you really see anywhere, in this post or others, where I have said anything about war with Iran being a "good idea"? Or for that matter, an invasion?

 

Try harder.

 

 

[billd766]

18 hours ago, bristolboy said:

I think if you read Pompeo's 12 points it gives you a pretty clear idea of how they want Iran changed. And if you have any doubts as to who the Trump administration is in cahoots with - or at least one of the other parties - there's this:  

Report: US, Israel sign secret pact to tackle Iran nuclear and missile threat

 

Israel and the United States have secretly signed a far-reaching joint memorandum of understanding providing for full cooperation to deal with Iran’s nuclear drive, its missile programs and its other threatening activities, an Israeli TV report said.

 

The document was signed on December 12 at the White House, culminating intensive talks between representatives of the major Israeli and American intelligence and defense hierarchies, headed by the US and Israeli national security advisers, H. R. McMaster and Meir Ben-Shabbat, respectively, the Channel 10 report said Thursday.

 

Citing both American and Israeli officials, the report said the document is designed to translate into “steps on the ground” the positions set out by US President Donald Trump in his October 13 speech on Iran, in which he decertified the Iran nuclear deal.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/report-us-israel-sign-secret-pact-to-tackle-iran-nuclear-and-missile-threat/

Not so much of a secret pact now, is it.

 

The Israeli tail wagging the USA dog once again.

[Morch]

4 minutes ago, billd766 said:

Not so much of a secret pact now, is it.

 

The Israeli tail wagging the USA dog once again.

 

How do you figure?

[bristolboy]

4 minutes ago, billd766 said:

Not so much of a secret pact now, is it.

 

The Israeli tail wagging the USA dog once again.

Not just Israel. Saudi Arabia and the UAE are also leading that pooch to oscillate.

[billd766]

8 hours ago, bristolboy said:

Well, they don't have to bring war to the literal USA do they? But if the US brings its forces to bear on them, then those forces are a target. Also, the US has soldiers in Iraq. And it has ships in the Persian Gulf. The Gulf is not a safe place for aircraft carriers to be.

The us forces are not only in Iraq but in many other places around the Gulf as well.

 

This report is from 2nd May 2012.

 

Massive troop presence

According to new CENTCOM figures given to Al Jazeera on April 30, there are about 125,000 US troops in close proximity to Iran: 90,000 soldiers in/around Afghanistan on Operation Enduring Freedom; some 20,000 soldiers deployed ashore elsewhere in the Near East region; and a variable 15-20,000 afloat on naval vessels. 

US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta has said the US would have 40,000 troops in the Gulf following the withdrawal from Iraq. But the exact number, location and mission of these forces beyond Afghanistan is virtually impossible to determine.

 

https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/interactive/2012/04/2012417131242767298.html

[bristolboy]

10 minutes ago, billd766 said:

The us forces are not only in Iraq but in many other places around the Gulf as well.

 

This report is from 2nd May 2012.

 

Massive troop presence

According to new CENTCOM figures given to Al Jazeera on April 30, there are about 125,000 US troops in close proximity to Iran: 90,000 soldiers in/around Afghanistan on Operation Enduring Freedom; some 20,000 soldiers deployed ashore elsewhere in the Near East region; and a variable 15-20,000 afloat on naval vessels. 

US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta has said the US would have 40,000 troops in the Gulf following the withdrawal from Iraq. But the exact number, location and mission of these forces beyond Afghanistan is virtually impossible to determine.

 

https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/interactive/2012/04/2012417131242767298.html

That 90,000 figure for Afghanistan sounds way too high.

About 14,000 U.S. troops are deployed in Afghanistan.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/2-u-s-service-members-killed-afghanistan-military-says-n1021811

[billd766]

55 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

That 90,000 figure for Afghanistan sounds way too high.

About 14,000 U.S. troops are deployed in Afghanistan.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/2-u-s-service-members-killed-afghanistan-military-says-n1021811

I agree with you. It was a report from 2012 thus 7 years old, but it was mainly to show the countries surrounding Iran where the US has/had bases.

[Morch]

4 hours ago, billd766 said:

I agree with you. It was a report from 2012 thus 7 years old, but it was mainly to show the countries surrounding Iran where the US has/had bases.

 

Well, "surrounding Iran" makes it sound like that was planned. I think many of these bases don't have much to do with Iran, but relate to other issues. With regard to the Gulf etc. seems like some of Iran's neighbors like having an insurance policy in the form of USA military presence. Serves interests of both sides.

[bristolboy]

4 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Well, "surrounding Iran" makes it sound like that was planned. I think many of these bases don't have much to do with Iran, but relate to other issues. With regard to the Gulf etc. seems like some of Iran's neighbors like having an insurance policy in the form of USA military presence. Serves interests of both sides.

Having those bases in their territory is merely for defensive purposes?

[billd766]

11 hours ago, bristolboy said:

Having those bases in their territory is merely for defensive purposes?

But defence against who?

 

The Iranians who have never attacked any of the Gulf states yet.

[Morch]

3 minutes ago, billd766 said:

But defence against who?

 

The Iranians who have never attacked any of the Gulf states yet.

 

Obviously, Gulf states do not feel as assured as yourself.

Those not completely blinkered, will acknowledge Iran isn't necessarily the best of neighbors when it comes to meddling in other countries. They'll also reference the religious and ethnic divide. Or Iran's past conduct during wartime. Or Iran's support for various Shia groups in the region.

[bristolboy]

9 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Obviously, Gulf states do not feel as assured as yourself.

Those not completely blinkered, will acknowledge Iran isn't necessarily the best of neighbors when it comes to meddling in other countries. They'll also reference the religious and ethnic divide. Or Iran's past conduct during wartime. Or Iran's support for various Shia groups in the region.

Of course this is the typical one-sided comment we've come to expect from you. What this comment ignores, as usual, is context for Iranian actions. The fact is thatcertain Sunni states are brutally meddling in the affairs of their neighbors.. Yemen, Syria, Bahrain and Egypt are cases in point. The fact is that Iran played a crucial role in defeating Isis in Iraq and in Syria. And it is an important counterweight to the meddling of those Sunni States.