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

Exclusive: Nigel Farage calls on Labour to rule out pacts with Green Party​


Nigel Farage has called on the Labour Party to pledge a “red line” ruling out any electoral alliances with the Greens after their conference vote branding Zionism as racism.

Writing exclusively for the JC, the Reform UK leader called the policy adopted last week “antisemitic dogma” placing Zack Polanski’s party “beyond the pale of civilised politics”.


You heard the Jew cries out in pain as he bombs you.

it can be said:

The ""white" nationalist" cries out in pain as the ""white" nationalist" bombs you.

""White" nationalist" maga and Britain First are besties with zionism.

This is the same tactic used to divide the Democrats in 2024 and before. And the Likud Republicans and Likud Conservatives/Likud ReformUK are behind it.

There would be no war with Iran, if the voters on the left in the US were less purist on these issues and voted for Harris to prevent a Farage similar trump in the white house that started the war with Iran along with pal bibi.

Nigel Farage seen here/trump seen here:

Dtt-Lol-PXQAA87-MJ.png
 
Last edited:


VLCCs still sailing thru the strait. Attacking cargo ships does nothing for energy prices. Iran needs to get serious.
 
After mid terms he’ll be a lame duck.

Funding for his ICE goons will be removed.

People will then come out and protest.

Some of his minions will jump ship to secure positions in private sector whilst their profile and influence is high.
If you think this guy respects rules of America he will find anyway he can to sow havoc here and abroad to just to give pretense that he’s winning you think it’s over and he’s a lame duck president that might have been once upon a time but he still has fanatics in government and his maga followers that will do what he says
 
If you think this guy respects rules of America he will find anyway he can to sow havoc here and abroad to just to give pretense that he’s winning you think it’s over and he’s a lame duck president that might have been once upon a time but he still has fanatics in government and his maga followers that will do what he says

He will keep barking no doubt.

But few will act on it.

His power of patronage will disappear.

And with that his power to intimidate people will also go.

He will have to put up with so much shit when he’s out of power - he will wish he dies early.

He hates being booed and made fun of - there will be an army of online trolls trolling him.
 
That’s why Iran keeps Pakistan at arms length.

Iran wants full sovereignty from Zio-US-Wahabi axis of evil.

Whereas Pakistan cannot afford full sovereignty.

Which makes them incompatible bedfellows.

Iran can only have close relationships with countries that are not at the mercy of the axis of evil. E.g. Russia, China, India, NK and Brazil.

Which is why I am puzzled when PDF Pakistanis complain about Iran hugging India.

I am sure Iran would love to hug Pakistan but Pakistan dare not allow it.

Hence it’s better for these two countries to maintain a low key cordial relationship.

This is the problem with Iran's strategy, and why it is completely alienated at the world stage.

Iran does not want to play with the international rules based world order developed by the US/West, which is why it is sanctioned and not part of the international banking system.

Iran is blessed with natural resources, but has to adopt different ways to get over this impediment. Hence, it is highly dependent on China; which is part of the international rules based world order, and who's economy is intrinsically tied to the US.

Iran cannot afford to lose China's partnership, but China can lose Iran as a trading partner.

Now coming to Pakistan, Pakistan has historically very close ties to Saudi Arabia. Iran is a neighbor, and Pakistan will make sure it does not antagonize Iran in the current war. Pakistan has been very transparent that the security of the KSA is very important to it, while also supporting peace and normalization of the Iranian economy/state.

About the Houthis, yes, they have a right to do whatever they want against the KSA-backed PLF, or KSA. Pakistan has said it is simply providing defensive support to the KSA, nothing more, nothing less. It is not directly involved in operations inside Yemen.

Iran activated the Houthi card to take over the Bab-al-Mandab, to relieve pressure from the SoH, as well as to pressurize the KSA and the European nations that get their supplies from there.

I do think Iran will be going too far if it involves itself directly in the KSA by launching missile strikes into the KSA. Because as far as I know, the US bases in the KSA are not being used to strike Iran right now. Iran will provide support to the Houthis, but it is a non-state actor which eventually has a limited force (in comparison to various countries).

In short, I think Iran has opened too many fronts, and it is very isolated on the world stage; because it likes to believe it sees things as "black and white" (full sovereignty), but thinks Pakistan does not. That's a very incorrect way to look at things; the reality is, Iran does not know how to manage world relations; whereas Pakistan does.
 
Rather ominous statement - is Qatar going to get more formally involved this time?

None of these Arab countries can get involved directly because they cannot throw more kinetic power than Israel or U.S. and have many venerable industries.

There citizens basically don’t work and get subsidized from the state as the PGCC import slave labor from East Asia to do all their work.

None of these energy kingdom’s citizens are used to any difficulty that a prolong war could have on their society.
 
Probably hiding it in civilian areas.
A common fallacy. Defensive equipment MUST be deployed in civilian areas, whether you are Iran, KSA, Israel, Ukraine, Pakistan, India because one needs to protect civilians as best as one can.

You will recall that India sent drones into Lahore and Rawalpindi last year. We need to deploy with intent to shoot them down because such uncivilised enemies do not care about hitting civilians.

I would argue for a case of "human shielding" only in a scenario where an offensive weapon or a bomb factory is hidden amidst civilians, a common taliban tactic.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top