Iran - Israel/US War: Israel-US declare war on Iran, Iran responds

[ShapurII]

It will collapse because US’ traditional client states are no longer buying its debt.

The damage Iran has done to US’ Arab poodles ensures they are even less able to prop up US’ economy.

US is massively reliant on its poodles for:

1. Buying debt
2. Recycling money into its ponzi stock market
3. Buying useless weapons at extortionate prices

Thanks to the damage Iran has done - there’ll be a lot less of that.

On top of that countries like Japan and Canada are no longer actively propping up US debt.

And the U.K. is nearly bankrupt.

There is no indication that the US client states are no longer buying its debt. The whole Western bloc and all of the US allies rely on US financial institutions for even basic banking operations. Even the US enemies rely on the US financial institutions.

The US controls the IMF, the World Bank, the SWIFT, only to name a few. There is no inter-banking system that can replace the US funded institutions like the SWIFT. Both China and Russia have been trying to do that in the last 3-4 years with almost no success.

Trust me, the Arabs will continue to prop up the US economy. Arabs financed most of this US war on Iran and will continue to do so in the future. Arab Sheikhs are corrupt to the core and most of these Arab states exist in their present forms because the US is keeping their current rulers in power.

Canada is waiting out Trump. As for Japan, I have never seen a country more obedient and submissive towards the US.

 

[Eşbah]

Irans geography makes it quite unique as well, full of mountains. Pakistan has mountains some of the biggest in the world. But not utilised for the same reasons.

Iran, Turkey and Afghanistan are very hard to conquer in theory. I would argue that Iran has more advantages. However, who needs a foreign power to attack one's country when the own leadership is so moronic? This applies in varying degrees to Iran, Turkey and Pakistan.

 

[Aziqbal]

Wow

 

[Meengla]

I don't think Trump is the only problem in the US. The republican party is full of war hawks and fascists. I would personally take Trump over psychopaths like Mike Pompeo any day.

If Trump shows that his way of dealing with Iran works, expect the next US administrations to do the same and pound Iran at will. As an evidence for this, I remind you that even after Biden took the office, the US never returned to its obligations in the JCPOA because Trump had already proved that you could violate a deal with Iran and get away with it.

I disagree. The influence of a President's personal biases is way too strong and now with decreasing 'checks and balances'. Look up how many US Presidents Netanyahu had approached--going all the way back to Bill Clinton--for this war on Iran. Even G.W. Bush, despite he rage after 9/11, had denied Netanyahu to attack Iran.
Trump, for whatever reasons, is either ideologically too Zionists or his personally compromised by the Epstein Files. And both are personal factors--not long term US interests.
So I repeat: There will never be another President after Trump who'd launch a war on Iran like this one. Never.

PS. Biden too was personally a Zionist. These old--very old--bigots live in an era long gone in America. But he did think about reviving JCPOA initially in his term but didn't have the courage--or the stamina--to face the AIPAC which Obama did face.

 

[tsunset]

To be fair the “gentleman” you are speaking to is also on the spectrum I definitely disagree with the other guy but seeing that this is guy is just as bad is kind of laughable that you replied to this guy.
Have the ability to call out both sides and no way you haven’t seen his many troll posts

I'm not trolling, i'm being realistic and lucid

They struck Tehran and all Iran's cities and Iran shouldn't hit Las Vegas and Miami?

They call the traitors inside Iran "Freedom Fighters" and heroes and we're supposed to call theirs traitors?

Unfortunately many people here still follows the white supremacist logic in which they are superior to everyone else on earth

 

[AZ_HighCountry]

Iran, Turkey and Afghanistan are very hard to conquer in theory. I would argue that Iran has more advantages. However, who needs a foreign power to attack one's country when the own leadership is so moronic? This applies in varying degrees to Iran, Turkey and Pakistan.

Not hard to see how a land invasion would have significant challenges.

 

[RocketLaw]

already post here?

 

[ShapurII]

I disagree. The influence of a President's personal biases is way too strong and now with decreasing 'checks and balances'. Look up how many US Presidents Netanyahu had approached--going all the way back to Bill Clinton--for this war on Iran. Even G.W. Bush, despite he rage after 9/11, had denied Netanyahu to attack Iran.
Trump, for whatever reasons, is either ideologically too Zionists or his personally compromised by the Epstein Files. And both are personal factors--not long term US interests.
So I repeat: There will never be another President after Trump who'd launch a war on Iran like this one. Never.

PS. Biden too was personally a Zionist. These old--very old--bigots live in an era long gone in America. But he did think about reviving JCPOA initially in his term but didn't have the courage--or the stamina--to face the AIPAC which Obama did face.

George Bush would've done the same in a blink after the series of events following the assassination of Gen. Soleimani and the fall of Syria. Iran slowly lost its deterrence and the January protests convinced Trump that Netanyahu was right. There were three turning points: 1. Assassination of General Soleimani, 2. Fall of Syria, 3. Mahsa Amini and subsequent protests. These factors convinced the US that regime change was finally possible.

Biden did not even try to revive the JCPOA. He didn't provoke Iran militarily but he did follow Trump's policies regarding the "maximum pressure campaign".

 

[Meengla]

Not hard to see how a land invasion would have significant challenges.

It seems like only the eternal cannon-fodders the Russians are into massive land invasions.

 

[AZ_HighCountry]

George Bush would've done the same in a blink after the series of events following the assassination of Gen. Soleimani and the fall of Syria. Iran slowly lost its deterrence and the January protests convinced Trump that Netanyahu was right. There were three turning points: 1. Assassination of General Soleimani, 2. Fall of Syria, 3. Mahsa Amini and subsequent protests. These factors convinced the US that regime change was finally possible.

Biden did not even try to revive the JCPOA. It didn't provoke Iran militarily but it did follow Trump's policies regarding the "maximum pressure campaign".

Regarding Bush 43; at the time, you had the war hawks John McCain and John Bolton pushing for strikes on Iran. For reasons unbeknownst to me, Maverick has a serious hard-on for Iran. Bolton simply wanted an expanded war. Bush resisted.

Along comes the first Trump term. Bolton again pushed for war with Iran. Outside of the removal of Soleimani and withdrawing from Obama's "deal", Iran was pretty much left alone.

 

[Meengla]

already post here?

Thanks for the video. Good to hear straight from the horse's mouth!

 

[KAL-EL]

And this isn't about trolling, it's about individuals who are hyper nationalistic that like to talk a big game. And that isn't just specific to the individual. In question.

Well if I guess you scroll past his posts and that describes the “gentleman” you agreed with but that’s all no big if you say you haven’t read his posts which are full of wannabe MAGA macho stereotypes about his ultimate lord Orangeman it’s cool
I still like your name ttyl

Point taken and understood.

 

[ShapurII]

Regarding Bush 43; at the time, you had the war hawks John McCain and John Bolton pushing for strikes on Iran. For reasons unbeknownst to me, Maverick has a serious hard-on for Iran. Bolton simply wanted an expanded war. Bush resisted.

Along comes the first Trump term. Bolton again pushed for war with Iran. Outside of the removal of Soleimani and withdrawing from Obama's "deal", Iran was pretty much left alone.

Yes, I remember both McCain and Bolton. It was a different time and Iran surprised Bush many times. The US did prepare to launch an invasion of Iran but the simulations proved that a land invasion of Iran would be futile and the US won't be able to even land on our southern coasts without heavy casualties. Even Ahmadinejad said on TV that the US sent Iran a letter to prepare for war in 6 months.

Iran unveiled Shahab-3, its first solid-fueled missile, its first multi-stage missile, and its enrichment capabilities with efficient centrifuges during the Bush administration. It will be an understatement to say how that surprised the Americans at the time. They thought of Iran as this backward nation with no technology. Also, oil prices were already at $110 per barrel and Europe imported nearly a million barrels of oil per day from Iran. Adjusted for inflation, a barrel of oil was already traded at $188 after the Iraq war. Minimum salary in Iran was $380 per month and people were satisfied with the economy of Iran at the time. Support for the regime in Iran was very strong at the time. Syria was also a huge factor, and it had top-notch air defense before the Syrian civil war.

Fast forward to today, minimum wage in Iran is barely $110 per month. Sometimes when our currency fluctuates, minimum salary falls below $80 per month. Nearly everyone is dissatisfied with the economy. Europe doesn't import a drop of Iranian oil anymore (an important factor) and a barrel of oil cost about $65 before the Ramadhan war. Also, the fall of Syria has enabled Israel to launch pre-emptive strikes on Iran. So, as you can see, completely different circumstances.

 

[RocketLaw]

 

[Watandar]

Why is this signing in Geneva ?? All the mediation and negotiation legwork was done by Pakistan, with Turkey Qatar and few others assisting. The signing ceremony should be in Islamabad or Istanbul.