Iranian Foreign & Resistance Front Strategy & Operations

[Tehrani021]

That is Trump - on whom Ive already posted.

the post I quoted seemed to imply a present situation and from Us military. I dont see anything to that context.

For e.g
Iran based on Trump’s threats gave a decently balanced response
https://www.rferl.org/a/irgc-chief-...mericans-who-killed-top-general/30847245.html

Sorry but Iran has learnt to assess the US as a whole not from president to president. The fact a previous President has said this and has a chance to get back into power will no doubt have an impact on how Iran decides to protect itself.

 

[Oscar]

Sorry but Iran has learnt to assess the US as a whole not from president to president. The fact a previous President has said this and has a chance to get back into power will no doubt have an impact on how Iran decides to protect itself.

And Iran ABSOLUTELY SHOULD do this - but there is no evidence to support willful civilian targeting by the US to which suggestions of death threats should be made by an Individual supposedly living in France against US Civilians. Non combatants.

 

[Tehrani021]

And Iran ABSOLUTELY SHOULD do this - but there is no evidence to support willful civilian targeting by the US to which suggestions of death threats should be made by an Individual supposedly living in France against US Civilians. Non combatants.

The current officials dont need to say it, their past actions show that civilians do get targeted by any means necessary, and on top of the fact that we have had presidents running their mouth like Trump. It's all formulated into the risk assessment for Iran.

 

[Oscar]

Why are you excluding some US government officials and including others? Why also are to excluding precedence of US crimes against civilians?

Which officials have I excluded who are from US military and state department who have made these threats?

Iranian politicians regularly make death threats to US - some even wear IRGC uniforms to do so in it. But other than random leadership the official foreign ministry and state of Iran do not espouse killing of civilians as some glorious purpose.. or are you suggesting otherwise?

I have not excluded anything either - I am mentioning official efforts to avoid civilian deaths against what has been an appalling adhering to that practice due to the devastating nature of modern weapons.

After all - Iran lost nearly 500k during the Iran-Iraq war with many being civilians... that's more Iranians than EVER killed by the US.. so why did you send assistance to Iraq recently during their civil war?

 

[VCheng]

And Iran ABSOLUTELY SHOULD do this - but there is no evidence to support willful civilian targeting by the US to which suggestions of death threats should be made by an Individual supposedly living in France against US Civilians. Non combatants.

Recall that prior to the atrocity at the tomb in Iran recently, USA shared information about the attack in an effort to prevent any tragedy from occurring with Iran. There is room on both sides for doing better by each other rather than letting emotions rum amok on either or both sides. It is up to people like us here to communicate not only amongst ourselves here, but also with anybody and everybody to let sanity and rationality take over rather than blind anger.

I hope @tsunset and other Iranians get what I am trying to say. Without going into any sectarianism, please know that I personally have a very soft spot in my heart for a certain sect, but I also must treat all sects and beliefs, even the ones I do not agree or believe with, equally. No more bloodshed. Enough.

 

[Tehrani021]

After all - Iran lost nearly 500k during the Iran-Iraq war with many being civilians... that's more Iranians than EVER killed by the US.. so why did you send assistance to Iraq recently during their civil war?

Well Iran actually helped the US defeat Saddam because of that very reason. Now that Saddam and baathists have left, Iran again sees Iraq as part of its sphere of influence, which is something that has been the case historically and in terms of sectarian lines.

 

[tsunset]

Which officials have I excluded who are from US military and state department who have made these threats?

Iranian politicians regularly make death threats to US - some even wear IRGC uniforms to do so in it. But other than random leadership the official foreign ministry and state of Iran do not espouse killing of civilians as some glorious purpose.. or are you suggesting otherwise?

I have not excluded anything either - I am mentioning official efforts to avoid civilian deaths against what has been an appalling adhering to that practice due to the devastating nature of modern weapons.

After all - Iran lost nearly 500k during the Iran-Iraq war with many being civilians... that's more Iranians than EVER killed by the US.. so why did you send assistance to Iraq recently during their civil war?

By a Saddam being supplied weapons WMDs by the US, shutting down airliner """by mistake""" and engaging in direct war with Iran

US threats Iran of total war at a weekly basis

The roots of the devil ultimately resides in the United States, when they tried to rescue their hostages, they brought up AC-130s planning to use them above Tehran and also killed a random man in a truck, ANY ATTACK THEY WILL AIM FOR CIVILIANS THEY DO NOT CARE OF NON-WHITE LIVES, therefore appropriate responses should happen, they cannot continue killing people and waging war all around the world without facing a massive backlash without any respect, for their lives once in the history

 

[tsunset]

Then the hypocrisy of "We like Iran it has a great history ruined by the regime" typical US cowardice

They would treat us like they do with Palestinians if they could

Why the US has the right to call everyone killing their soldiers as "terrorists"? No one can deny that in their mind, white lives matter 100x more than anything else

Why the US has the right to call for bombing soldiers inside Iran, but if anyone advocate for the same retaliation, he is dubbed as a genocidal terrorists?

Responding to foreign threats of total war is a response to a threat, not a threat

Why does the US kill civilians all around the world by proxy, finances cannibalism in Ukraine/Syria and extremist groups and support genocide of civilians but then calls everyone questionning their narrative and telling them how it would feel if this happened to US citizens as "terrorists"?

 

[VCheng]

The roots of the devil ultimately resides in the United States, when they tried to rescue their hostages, they brought up AC-130s planning to use them above Tehran and also killed a random man in a truck, ANY ATTACK THEY WILL AIM FOR CIVILIANS THEY DO NOT CARE OF NON-WHITE LIVES, therefore appropriate responses should happen, they cannot continue killing people and waging war all around the world without facing a massive backlash without any respect, for their lives once in the history

Not to go off topic, but who stopped the massacre of Muslims in Serbia?

 

[Oscar]

The current officials dont need to say it, their past actions show that civilians do get targeted by any means necessary, and on top of the fact that we have had presidents running their mouth like Trump. It's all formulated into the risk assessment for Iran.

Based on what evidence? For e.g. in Vietnam we know effects of carpet bombing - agent orange - In Iraq massive civillian casualties due to targets picked. But, then that also happened in WW2 - happening in Ukraine - and also happened during Iran-Iraq war.

So it doesn't seem to be any pattern other than randomizing it. Bush can be termed a war criminal for his selection of targets during 2003 Iraq war - but then the number of deaths by ISIS has been severe and also by Iran's ally in Syria.. so what correlation can we ignore there and not here?

 

[Oscar]

Then the hypocrisy of "We like Iran it has a great history ruined by the regime" typical US cowardice

They would treat us like they do with Palestinians if they could

Why the US has the right to call everyone killing their soldiers as "terrorists"? No one can deny that in their mind, white lives matter 100x more than anything else

Why the US has the right to call for bombing soldiers inside Iran, but if anyone advocate for the same retaliation, he is dubbed as a genocidal terrorists?

Responding to foreign threats of total war is a response to a threat, not a threat

Why does the US kill civilians all around the world by proxy, finances cannibalism in Ukraine/Syria and extremist groups and support genocide of civilians but then calls everyone questionning their narrative and telling them how it would feel if this happened to US citizens as "terrorists"?

Incoherent frothing at the mouth but no substance - the same can be applied for Iranian proxies, GCC proxies, Russians and so on and so forth.

Why does Iran call Jundullah terrorists? what right does it have?

Im only showing you the same tangents you are shooting.

The simple ask is - where is the explicit declaration by Biden saying he will massacre Iranian civilians which you are calling for when it comes to American civilians.

American history - Iranian history - the millions killed by the Persian Empire thousands of years ago - is just emotional Bruhaha to bring in and nothing more.

America has serious faults - its beholden to its military industrial complex - it has men who espouse ideals of war criminals no less. It is controlled by an Israeli lobby, they practically run foreign policy at times (and kudos to them for knowing exactly how to).

BUT, that doesn't represent all of America and just like Abu Ghuraib - justice is provided eventually.
Compare that to Russia - compare that to any state - I don't see this massive "right vs wrong" especially when the idea is kill women and children for some fictional Iranian women and children killed.

If anything, America has killed more German women and children than the totality of anyone in Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq and yet today they are close allies.

 

[Oscar]

Well Iran actually helped the US defeat Saddam because of that very reason. Now that Saddam and baathists have left, Iran again sees Iraq as part of its sphere of influence, which is something that has been the case historically and in terms of sectarian lines.

Absolutely - the point being is that there are national interests at play - the US has the bigger stick and therefore is able to force it (by hook or by crook) just as Iran tries it, Pakistan tries it, India does, Israel does and the Saudis do. Each of the nations is good at this practice at some level or not and performs accordingly. Americans are actually pretty bad at it which is why after they've done everything right in trying to be coercive they end up with military options - but many at times they don't.

It is a dirty game, there are no real principles - after all our prophet clearly said "do not harm the old, the women and children.. do not rip down trees" yet both Iran and Pakistan have to pursue nuclear weapons for their security even though nuclear weapons leave nothing untouched.

One can call it a jewish invention - go into history - blame zionists and so on. But at the end, if you're outsmarted by someone - who knows how to control the world. Is it better to keep fighting the same game or figure out how they were able to control everything and maybe try to go against that approach.

Threats to civillians - anger is all understandable - but frankly does NOTHING to change how the current order is entrenched. There is entire US veterans group that writes against Israel - against what was done in Iraq and how the elite control interests.. but at the same time they continue to love their land and country just like you do yours.

Save for the civillians who on most side are just looking to get their bread and butter - raise their children and live.

if people want to attack US troops - fine - go join the military or whatever and test your luck.
But suggesting civilian attacks based on emotions and "evidence" that doesn't hold up is just wrong. After all, isnt that what Israel is doing?

 

[jauk]

Which officials have I excluded who are from US military and state department who have made these threats?

<CLIP!>

The ones you excluded who are not “from the US military and State Department who have made these threats”.

 

[Immortals]

@jauk @Hack-Hook

Curious what you guys are thinking will happen in next 48 hours by US response. And will Iran respond against US or go back to a shadow war?

I don’t see the foreign legions magically stopping attacks on US assets. Which means the war enters a new phase where attacks continue on Iran and Iran axis groups similar to what is going on against Houthis.

 

[jauk]

@jauk @Hack-Hook

Curious what you guys are thinking will happen in next 48 hours by US response. And will Iran respond against US or go back to a shadow war?

I don’t see the foreign legions magically stopping attacks on US assets. Which means the war enters a new phase where attacks continue on Iran and Iran axis groups similar to what is going on against Houthis.

Logic would dictate nothing of significance. However, we're not dealing with a logical opponent. Biden is in electoral trouble--especially with Trump knocking on the door. Iran also has a nuclear ace in sleeve. Response could go either way. To make it short, like you, can't tell.

If the US does cross Iranian red lines (whatever they are these days) Iran playing the nuclear card will become more probable (note I used 'probable' not 'assured'.). I've always thought of Iran's strategy as a big, fast, heavily shielded train moving forward. Oblivious to attacks on it as long as it doesn't get derailed. Painful to watch as impatient couch QBs-- but if it works....