IRGC-ASF launches missile strikes against anti-Iran terrorists in Pakistan, Iraq and Syria - Pakistan responds

[That_Guy]

That's a contradiction. I think PA knows more than you whether IRGC would retaliated or not. Past situations have shown the risk is very high of retaliation hence why IRGC wasn't targeted.

No past situation has indicated as such, and the one I can recall with the US is highly suspect in and of itself, as Iran gave prior warning to Iraq KNOWING they'd tell the US.

It's also not a contradiction. It would be an escalation from the army's pov. In my opinion, the situation was already at a boiling point. Considering Iran's reluctance to attack the IDF whenever they kill IRGC operatives, I believe Iran would itself choose not to escalate further, even if Pakistan killed IRGC agents.

 

[UndercoverJIX]

IRGC is an effective group at ensuring the national security of Iran and those who are being killed by the non-believers. Stop getting emotional, my child, Iran doesn't want to fight Pakistan.

Iran can not fight Pakistan, Iran is only good for proxy and spreading terrorism.
Iran is a killer of muslims, reality is all around, and not a savior.

 

[Tehrani021]

I think, its time you need to sit down and analyze this whole episode. You need to understand What Iran lost and what Iran achieved?. Iran only lost the trust and its credibility. The missile spree in the region, showed Iran as irresponsible nation, the one which do not care for international norms, regulations and sovereign borders. Iran also displayed that it want to become regional hegemony and regional bully. Its attempt to show of strength, actually back fired when Pakistan did airstrike as a retaliation.

Now coming to main excuse of terrorism that Iran made. We have seen in Pakistan that airstrikes / missile strikes only aggravates and spreads the terrorist network. If you need to stop terrorism, you need to go for the root cause of the problem. By bombing them, they will only go more violent and vengeful. That group vowed after iranian strike that they will hit iran even more harder the next time and avenge their families. I think same kind of statement the other group in Iran said after Pak's retaliation. So bombing just one hideout NEVER ends terrorism. You need to understand that strike was NEVER meant to end terrorism in Iran. It was meant for a geopolitical statement. It was meant to display Iran's strength to Israel / US and using its neighbors as a tool. The strategy backfired. It was Iran's net loss. Now countries in Iran's neighborhood will not trust Iran, It will take a very very long time to go back to the pre-strike level of coordination / relationship.

As the members have shown here with various tweets that the missiles targetted Mossad and terrorist groups getting a free ride in certain nations. For Iran to ignore that would be a bigger betrayal of its own national security. May I remind you that taking out terrorists is incumbent on a sovereign state so I dont know what international norm says otherwise. Not a norm Iran will ever be a part of, no matter how much you desire it.

The root cause has been weaponisation from Afghanistan via Pakistan, and there has to be a military situation to contain this at the very least. Iran does not care how other nations perceived it as long as national security is top priority.

 

[Bilal]

This thread has turned into a catharsis exercise for our brothers. It’s ok.

 

[Tehrani021]

No past situation has indicated as such, and the one I can recall with the US is highly suspect in and of itself, as Iran gave prior warning to Iran KNOWING they'd tell the US.

It's also not a contradiction. It would be an escalation from the army's pov. In my opinion, the situation was already at a boiling point. Considering Iran's reluctance to attack the IDF whenever they kill IRGC operatives, I believe Iran would itself choose not to escalate further, even if Pakistan killed IRGC agents.

Iran did fire ballistic missiles at US bases in retaliation for Soleimani, and it is international protocol to give another state warning of an incoming strike. US did the same in the tanker war against us, it's how Iran and US engage with each other. I dont engage in tinfoilhattery. There was a military response with 100 "concussions". End of.

It is a contradiction since you said that Iran wouldn't respond but cited that PA believed Iran would. IRGC operatives killed by IDF in Syria and Iraq would have to be responded to from Syria and Iraq because that is the theatre of war, which is difficult for Iran to do unfortunately. With the Soleimani incident Iran was not in a proxy war with US at the time, which caused Iran to act decisively from Iranian soil. Same thing would have happened in the event of Pakistan killing an IRGC operative inside Iran, Iran would have seen this as an act not in a state of war so would have responded.

 

[UndercoverJIX]

This thread has turned into a catharsis exercise for our brothers. It’s ok.

Brainwashed lot, we have lot of experience with this kind.

 

[Tehrani021]

Iran can not fight Pakistan, Iran is only good for proxy and spreading terrorism.
Iran is a killer of muslims, reality is all around, and not a savior.

I didn't know fighting the kuffar is terrorism, you have shown your true colours. If you think daesh and al qaeda are Muslims then that's fine. You're wrong, but that's fine. Wake me up when there comes a better saviour.

 

[Bilal]

Brainwashed lot, we have lot of experience with this kind.

Don’t. Things will calm by themselves. Let them heal. Let us heal.

 

[UndercoverJIX]

I didn't know fighting the kuffar is terrorism, you have shown your true colours. If you think daesh and al qaeda are Muslims then that's fine. You're wrong, but that's fine. Wake me up when there comes a better saviour.

Iran actions are only causing deaths of muslims in muslims countries, exactly the same way al qaida and daesh did, no difference, Jihad is not to use Muslims as canon fodders through proxies and get them killed.

Jihad is to save Muslims from kuffars and deter kuffars from killing Muslims.

Jihad to save Muslim / human lives, but Iran actions are doing exactly opposite.

 

[Bilal]

Iran actions are only causing deaths of muslims in muslims countries, exactly the same way al qaida and daesh did, no difference, Jihad is not to use Muslims as canon fodders through proxies and get them killed.

Jihad is to save Muslims from kuffars and deter kuffars from killing Muslims.

Jihad to save Muslim / human lives, but Iran actions are doing exactly opposite.

Do you think it will lead to any conclusion? Leave it. It will only cause more emotions and no conclusion and useless circular debates. Whatever had to happen has happened, now leave it. Allow the catharsis.

 

[That_Guy]

Iran did fire ballistic missiles at US bases in retaliation for Soleimani, and it is international protocol to give another state warning of an incoming strike. US did the same in the tanker war against us, it's how Iran and US engage with each other. I dont engage in tinfoilhattery. There was a military response with 100 "concussions". End of.

Iran's latest strikes prove you wrong, as no warning was given.

It is a contradiction since you said that Iran wouldn't respond but cited that PA believed Iran would. IRGC operatives killed by IDF in Syria and Iraq would have to be responded to from Syria and Iraq because that is the theatre of war, which is difficult for Iran to do unfortunately. With the Soleimani incident Iran was not in a proxy war with US at the time, which caused Iran to act decisively from Iranian soil. Same thing would have happened in the event of Pakistan killing an IRGC operative inside Iran, Iran would have seen this as an act not in a state of war so would have responded.

My comment made it clear that I was talking from the army's pov, and I separated my own pov from it quite clearly.

It's not my fault that you failed to comprehend it clearly.

Iran has been in a proxy war with the US for decades, what are you talking about?

Also, not responding because the attacks occurred in Syria? Iran CONTROLS Syria, and has a large contingent of IRGC personnel stationed in various bases there. The IDF has killed so many Iranian personnel, yet Iran has not responded even once directly.

You're literally just coping right now. Seriously.

 

[Tehrani021]

Iran actions are only causing deaths of muslims in muslims countries, exactly the same way al qaida and daesh did, no difference, Jihad is not to use Muslims as canon fodders through proxies and get them killed.

Jihad is to save Muslims from kuffars and deter kuffars from killing Muslims.

Jihad to save Muslim / human lives, but Iran actions are doing exactly opposite.

Oh so killing Al qaeda and ISIS is "killing Muslims". Yeah, no that's not how it works. You fight until the injustice stops, thats how you deal with khawarij groups in Islam. Muslims can fight other Muslims who are causing mischief until they stop, it is enshrined in the Quran.

Stopping these groups killing people or to make Israel think twice before invading Lebanon is not a detterance?

You think by inaction and doing deals, while Palestinians still get killed by Israel is the solution and better jihad? You think Jihad is funding terror groups to uprise against governments like they did in the Timber Sycamore program, alongside the Kuffar? Ajeeb!

 

[Tehrani021]

Iran's latest strikes prove you wrong, as no warning was given.


My comment made it clear that I was talking from the army's pov, and I separated my own pov from it quite clearly.

It's not my fault that you failed to comprehend it clearly.

Iran has been in a proxy war with the US for decades, what are you talking about?

Also, not responding because the attacks occurred in Syria? Iran CONTROLS Syria, and has a large contingent of IRGC personnel stationed in various bases there. The IDF has killed so many Iranian personnel, yet Iran has not responded even once directly.

You're literally just coping right now. Seriously.

How does it prove me wrong? IRGC wasn't attacked by PA?! Talk about reading comprehension.

The army believed there would be a response, but you think there wouldn't have been. I see that as a contradiction.

Iran proxies had not attacked US army since 2009, and the US killed its fair share of Shia in Iraq. To say the state of affairs between Iran and US in 2020 Iraq was the same as Iran and Israel in Syria just shows how dishonest and inaccurate your analysis is. You'll twist the reality so your argument holds.

Iran has some advisors in Syria and not a large contingent as you falsely claim. Iran controls Syria? Are the US, Isis, Kurds and the Russians a joke to you. I can't take this level of trolling seriously. This is the way Iran has chosen to engage Israel in Syria, which is why Israel doesnt directly attack IRGC inside Iran no matter what Netanyahoo likes to say. Israel knows Iran will retaliate.

 

[Ali_Baba]

I do want to be in the room when the Iranian and Indian Foreign Ministers and their NSA advisors next meet. There was a lot of activity between them just before this attack.

It will be an awkward conversation as of course for Iran, as they will ask why did Pakistan hit us back, "you assured us they won't".

India learnt something, and boy did Iran learn a lesson it won't forget in a hurry ....

It is quite obvious, now that the desk has settled that India put Iran up to this action. India wanted a precedent to be set, so that they could use it for Modi's election campaign, and now

Iran given up the most sacred redline they had to the indians, ie do not attack Iran or else, just so that modi's election could be guaranteed..

I do feel a little sorry for the iranian establishment for having been duped by india for nothing in return. Very embarassing for Iran. Iran was a guinea pig for India ... People will now look at that red line that once existed for Iran and not think it is that high a line to cross if Pakistan can do it and get away with it .....

Interesting experiment for India. Strategic failure of biblical proportions for Iran ...

 

[UndercoverJIX]

Oh so killing Al qaeda and ISIS is "killing Muslims". Yeah, no that's not how it works. You fight until the injustice stops, thats how you deal with khawarij groups in Islam. Muslims can fight other Muslims who are causing mischief until they stop, it is enshrined in the Quran.

Stopping these groups killing people or to make Israel think twice before invading Lebanon is not a detterance?

You think by inaction and doing deals, while Palestinians still get killed by Israel is the solution and better jihad? You think Jihad is funding terror groups to uprise against governments like they did in the Timber Sycamore program, alongside the Kuffar? Ajeeb!

answer the simple questions, no running around, please

Against How many non Muslim countries Iran went to open/direct war????

Why Iran's all conflicts are with Muslim countries??