Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Iran Finally Admits That It Shot Down the Ukrainian Airliner

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • pamak
    replied
    Originally posted by Cambronnne View Post



    If we are going to blame the US for what the Iranians did all because we killed Solemani, then we don't get to stop at that incident simply because the US did it.
    The question becomes how far do we go back?
    The Iranians have been attacking US troops for years (1980s) why shouldn't we be considering that? This is all "Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc" reasoning anyway and illogical.
    Or maybe we should look at the incident itself and recognize that the Iranians weren't having to deal with anything from the US when they shot down the airplane. They were in complete control and are solely responsible for those deaths.

    Had the US done anything in Iranian airspace, I think the Iranians would be better positioned to heap some blame on the US. But we didn't.
    It is stunnung to see people try to exonerate those who were in complete control of the situation and blame the US simply because trump is president.
    Nope! When we go far back in the past, we see that the US casualties come from proxies who cooperated with Iran and I gave declassified documents showing how the US was more than capable of taking revenge by helping third parties like Saddam use WMDs against Iran.

    But in any case, how is anything of what you say related to my quote which you address?

    My quote is counterargument to the point that the second gulf war did not require an occupation. It has nothing to do with the current situation or with events in the 1980s. And I explained why the US mission in the second gulf war required an occupation without making any moral judgment about the necessity or not to attack Iraq after 9/11
    Last edited by pamak; 15 Jan 20, 18:05.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cambronnne
    replied
    Originally posted by Snowygerry View Post

    Salamis.

    This is a military history board after all


    Damn Greeks.
    I agree. it is all their fault.

    Leave a comment:


  • Snowygerry
    replied
    Originally posted by Cambronnne View Post
    The question becomes how far do we go back?
    Salamis.

    This is a military history board after all

    Leave a comment:


  • Cambronnne
    replied
    Originally posted by pamak View Post

    During the first Gulf War, the US was to trying to completely disarm Iraq from the WMDs it possessed. The objective was about liberating Kuwait. Thus, the first gulf war did not require an occupation of Iraq while the second war's objective required such occupation.

    And you could not have a strong dictator of any kind a few weeks after destroying i his army. The majority of the Shia and the Kurds would have done the same thing they tried to do many times in the past - revolt. This happened also after the first gulf war, but Saddam survived it because he still possessed a big part of his army.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_uprising_in_Karbala

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_uprisings_in_Iraq


    In other words, the second war could not end up with leaving behind a strong dictator without having US forces supporting him from local revolts. ISIS was the result of the insurgency during the occupation when the most extreme parts of Sunni insurgency were fused with AQ in Iraq and morphed eventually to ISIS.


    If we are going to blame the US for what the Iranians did all because we killed Solemani, then we don't get to stop at that incident simply because the US did it.
    The question becomes how far do we go back?
    The Iranians have been attacking US troops for years (1980s) why shouldn't we be considering that? This is all "Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc" reasoning anyway and illogical.
    Or maybe we should look at the incident itself and recognize that the Iranians weren't having to deal with anything from the US when they shot down the airplane. They were in complete control and are solely responsible for those deaths.

    Had the US done anything in Iranian airspace, I think the Iranians would be better positioned to heap some blame on the US. But we didn't.
    It is stunnung to see people try to exonerate those who were in complete control of the situation and blame the US simply because trump is president.

    Leave a comment:


  • ljadw
    replied
    Originally posted by pamak View Post

    During the first Gulf War, the US was to trying to completely disarm Iraq from the WMDs it possessed. The objective was about liberating Kuwait. Thus, the first gulf war did not require an occupation of Iraq while the second war's objective required such occupation.

    And you could not have a strong dictator of any kind a few weeks after destroying i his army. The majority of the Shia and the Kurds would have done the same thing they tried to do many times in the past - revolt. This happened also after the first gulf war, but Saddam survived it because he still possessed a big part of his army.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_uprising_in_Karbala

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_uprisings_in_Iraq


    In other words, the second war could not end up with leaving behind a strong dictator without having US forces supporting him from local revolts. ISIS was the result of the insurgency during the occupation when the most extreme parts of Sunni insurgency were fused with AQ in Iraq and morphed eventually to ISIS.
    There was no occupation needed after the second war : the objective of the second war was to eliminate Iraq as a threat for the survival of the USA .
    Not the war, but the attempt by the liberals to Americanize Iraq is responsible for the raise of ISIS . And, as most ISIS killers were Iraqi, the Iraqi population is responsible for the ISIS atrocities : without the support of the Iraqi population, ISIS could not survive .
    And the insurrection was not confined to the Sunni, Shia also attacked US soldiers : the Mahdi Army .
    And there was no ISIS in 2003 .
    Last edited by ljadw; 15 Jan 20, 06:12.

    Leave a comment:


  • ljadw
    replied
    Originally posted by DingBat View Post

    Searching for a single point of blame is something you only do when trying to score points in some argument. Root cause analysis shows it’s extremely rare for any single event to have a single root cause. Catastrophic events are almost always due to a series of contributing factors.

    Is the US responsible for the destruction of the airplane? Hell, no. The Iranian missile battery is responsible.

    Did the killing of Solemani contribute to the shoot down? Probably.
    The airplane was shot because it was there . If it was not there, it would not have been destroyed .All the rest is to try to blame the US for the fact that Iran destroyed the aircraft .

    Leave a comment:


  • pamak
    replied
    Originally posted by ljadw View Post
    The first gulf war did not cause the rise of ISIS, thus wht should the second gulf war cause the rise of ISIS ?
    It was perfectly possible in 2003 to leave Iraq after a few weeks and to let behind a strong Iraq ruled by a dictator .
    What the neocons and the liberals refused to admit ( and still refuse to accept ) is that a strong Iraq can only exist if it is ruled by a dictator : there is no place for democracy in Muslim countries and you can not exprt democracy made in US to the ME .
    I doubt that the ruling classes in the US ever will accept this reality ,which is that there are no universal norms, no universal political system and that the attempts to export democracy abroad the US will result in failure .
    During the first Gulf War, the US was to trying to completely disarm Iraq from the WMDs it possessed. The objective was about liberating Kuwait. Thus, the first gulf war did not require an occupation of Iraq while the second war's objective required such occupation.

    And you could not have a strong dictator of any kind a few weeks after destroying i his army. The majority of the Shia and the Kurds would have done the same thing they tried to do many times in the past - revolt. This happened also after the first gulf war, but Saddam survived it because he still possessed a big part of his army.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_uprising_in_Karbala

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_uprisings_in_Iraq


    In other words, the second war could not end up with leaving behind a strong dictator without having US forces supporting him from local revolts. ISIS was the result of the insurgency during the occupation when the most extreme parts of Sunni insurgency were fused with AQ in Iraq and morphed eventually to ISIS.
    Last edited by pamak; 15 Jan 20, 04:55.

    Leave a comment:


  • ljadw
    replied
    The first gulf war did not cause the rise of ISIS, thus wht should the second gulf war cause the rise of ISIS ?
    It was perfectly possible in 2003 to leave Iraq after a few weeks and to let behind a strong Iraq ruled by a dictator .
    What the neocons and the liberals refused to admit ( and still refuse to accept ) is that a strong Iraq can only exist if it is ruled by a dictator : there is no place for democracy in Muslim countries and you can not exprt democracy made in US to the ME .
    I doubt that the ruling classes in the US ever will accept this reality ,which is that there are no universal norms, no universal political system and that the attempts to export democracy abroad the US will result in failure .

    Leave a comment:


  • Schmart
    replied
    Originally posted by ljadw View Post
    The Obama administration has deliberatedly aided ISIS by attacking the opponents of ISIS in Libya ( Gadaffi ) and Syria ( Assad )
    Saddam Hussein was a major enemy of ISIS/Islamic extremists as well. So perhaps the 2003 US invasion was the cause of the rise of ISIS?

    Lesson learned to improve global security and promote democracy: leave repressive dictators in power as long as possible

    Leave a comment:


  • DingBat
    replied
    Originally posted by marktwain View Post

    No, he isn't.
    You May have noticed that I have been posting that I BELIEVE THE Assassination of Solemani was justifiable, as far as I can tell.
    No matter what opinion one holds of the 2003 invasion, the USA is down to 5,000 garrisoned troops. Solemani should have stayed home...
    BTW, do you believe the Catholic church should grant bishop Jon Arason sainthood?
    Searching for a single point of blame is something you only do when trying to score points in some argument. Root cause analysis shows it’s extremely rare for any single event to have a single root cause. Catastrophic events are almost always due to a series of contributing factors.

    Is the US responsible for the destruction of the airplane? Hell, no. The Iranian missile battery is responsible.

    Did the killing of Solemani contribute to the shoot down? Probably.

    Leave a comment:


  • marktwain
    replied
    Originally posted by Nichols View Post

    Serious question Reg, do you think Trump is at fault for Iran shooting down a Ukrainian airliner?
    No, he isn't.
    You May have noticed that I have been posting that I BELIEVE THE Assassination of Solemani was justifiable, as far as I can tell.
    No matter what opinion one holds of the 2003 invasion, the USA is down to 5,000 garrisoned troops. Solemani should have stayed home...
    BTW, do you believe the Catholic church should grant bishop Jon Arason sainthood?

    Leave a comment:


  • ljadw
    replied
    Originally posted by marktwain View Post

    \good - we need someone to decipher how Barack Obama, the vicious warmaker who unleashed over 1,800 drone strikes in the Middle East; is the same POTUS who protected paid and enhanced all his 'Fellow Muslims.."

    Drone strikes against whom ? Against the enemies of ISIS.

    Leave a comment:


  • ljadw
    replied
    The Obama administration has deliberatedly aided ISIS by attacking the opponents of ISIS in Libya ( Gadaffi ) and Syria ( Assad )

    Leave a comment:


  • Nichols
    replied
    Originally posted by marktwain View Post

    Jn turned to Sveinn and said: Veit ga, Sveinki! ("That I know, little Sveinn!") Ever since veit ga, Sveinki has been a part of the Icelandic treasury of sayings, in this case meaning that something totally obvious has been stated.[6]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C3%B3n_Arason
    Serious question Reg, do you think Trump is at fault for Iran shooting down a Ukrainian airliner?

    Leave a comment:


  • marktwain
    replied
    Originally posted by Nichols View Post

    No matter what the left claims, it wasn't Trump's fault that some junior officer working a SAM site pulled the trigger. The blame goes completely to Iran.
    Jn turned to Sveinn and said: Veit ga, Sveinki! ("That I know, little Sveinn!") Ever since veit ga, Sveinki has been a part of the Icelandic treasury of sayings, in this case meaning that something totally obvious has been stated.[6]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C3%B3n_Arason
    Last edited by marktwain; 12 Jan 20, 19:44.

    Leave a comment:

Latest Topics

Collapse

Working...
X