I know a guy who served in Iraq in combat arms. Several years ago he told me of how his unit continuously recovered weapons clearly marked as Iranian and how he has actually scoped Quds forces personnel at a distance. He said they were always a threat and never far away from any conflict. The fact of the matter is American front line troops have always been aware of Iranian involvement in the war.

---

They estimate 1 in 6 (17%) of all us casualties in Iraq were attributed to this guy & the Quds force. The Obama administration designated him as a terrorist.

The Rose McGowan left should be ashamed of itself.

---

I'd hate to be steaming in the Persian Gulf right now. No port calls, modified ZEBRA, MOPP level 0, gun mount watches, GQ drills... I don't miss it.

---

They estimate 1 in 6 (17%) of all us casualties in Iraq were attributed to this guy & the Quds force.  The Obama administration designated him as a terrorist.  

The Rose McGowan left should be ashamed of itself.

Question: why were they in Iraq again?

---

This will no doubt strengthen the hand of the hard liners in Iran, and possibly unite the people of Iran against the United States.  This at a time when Iranians have been in the streets protesting against their government.  This will end those protests.

Or not:

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/...-soleimani

---

They estimate 1 in 6 (17%) of all us casualties in Iraq were attributed to this guy & the Quds force.  The Obama administration designated him as a terrorist.  

The Rose McGowan left should be ashamed of itself.

Question: why were they in Iraq again?

Apparently your Irish news media has failed to give you the facts.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANNNNNNNNNNNNDDDDD.........
We're not finished yet...........

Airstrike kills 5 members of Iran-backed militia, Iraq official says
An airstrike Friday hit two cars carrying members of an Iran-backed militia north of Iraq's capital, Baghdad, killing five members, an Iraqi official told The Associated Press.

https://www.foxnews.com/world/iraq-airst...osIeQ1C9vM

---

Instead of a sign that says "Do Not Disturb" I need one that says "Already Disturbed Proceed With Caution."

This will no doubt strengthen the hand of the hard liners in Iran, and possibly unite the people of Iran against the United States.  This at a time when Iranians have been in the streets protesting against their government.  This will end those protests.

Or not:

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/...-soleimani

---

Question: why were they in Iraq again?

Apparently your Irish news media has failed to give you the facts.

According to yourself your own news networks are "fakes news", so why do you fervently believe them regarding countries they would naturally be biased against?

---

"Provokes war"... lol

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

Like I said, he neglected to mention the things Iran had done.

It's like making a point of how bad the allies were in WWII because they "murdered" millions of Germans with no reference to what the Germans initially did.

And that is exactly why his tweet has no credence.

It's designed to mislead the ignorant not point out the truth

I mean it's pretty clear Germany was the aggressor in the whole world wars thing. They started it

I think the point of his post is that we had no history with Iran/Persia until 1953, and we did something super bad to them.  We started it.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Supreme Leader Khamenei:

@khamenei_ir Jan 1
Khamenei.ir Retweeted Donald J. Trump
That guy has tweeted that we see Iran responsible for the events in Baghdad & we will respond to Iran.
1st: You can’t do anything.
2nd: If you were logical —which you’re not— you’d see that your crimes in Iraq, Afghanistan… have made nations hate you.

~
If Trump was smart he would agree with Khamenei that we should not have gone to Iraq or Afghanistan. Then he should end both those stupid wars.

---

It's like making a point of how bad the allies were in WWII because they "murdered" millions of Germans with no reference to what the Germans initially did.

And that is exactly why his tweet has no credence.

It's designed to mislead the ignorant not point out the truth

I mean it's pretty clear Germany was the aggressor in the whole world wars thing. They started it

I think the point of his post is that we had no history with Iran/Persia until 1953, and we did something super bad to them.  We started it.

You are blaming this on something that happened 70 years ago? If that were a logical reason, why isn't Africa or Asia attacking Europe?

They are the aggressors now and they are not using 1953 as a pretense for their actions.

---

I mean it's pretty clear Germany was the aggressor in the whole world wars thing. They started it

I think the point of his post is that we had no history with Iran/Persia until 1953, and we did something super bad to them.  We started it.

You are blaming this on something that happened 70 years ago? If that were a logical reason, why isn't Africa or Asia attacking Europe?

They are the aggressors now and they are not using 1953 as a pretense for their actions

It's true that the Islamic Republic doesn't teach their kids much about 1953.  The mullahs didn't love either Mossadeq or the Shah.  They don't want to make Mossadeq a martyr when they teach history.
But, maybe it's just me emphasizing America too much, I don't think the mullahs end up teaching their children that America is Satan without us interfering in 1953, and without us giving "our" shah a free hand to punish the mullahs for so long.
When you go back to the 50s, you see that a lot of countries besides Iran have reason to hate us.  Vietnam, Guatemala, Haiti, Cuba, South Africa, Angola, Chile... but they mostly realized that it was best to let the past be in the past. I mean Cuba still has beef with us but not nearly as bad as Iran. Iran could let it go too.  But unfortunately we can't make them let it go.  No amount of force would ever work.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

You are blaming this on something that happened 70 years ago? If that were a logical reason, why isn't Africa or Asia attacking Europe?

They are the aggressors now and they are not using 1953 as a pretense for their actions

It's true that the Islamic Republic doesn't teach their kids much about 1953.  The mullahs didn't love either Mossadeq or the Shah.  They don't want to make Mossadeq a martyr when they teach history.
But, maybe it's just me emphasizing America too much, I don't think the mullahs end up teaching their children that America is Satan without us interfering in 1953, and without us giving "our" shah a free hand to punish the mullahs for so long.
When you go back to the 50s, you see that a lot of countries besides Iran have reason to hate us.  Vietnam, Guatemala, Haiti, Cuba, South Africa, Angola, Chile... but they mostly realized that it was best to let the past be in the past. I mean Cuba still has beef with us but not nearly as bad as Iran. Iran could let it go too.  But unfortunately we can't make them let it go.  No amount of force would ever work.

Africa and Asia have more reasons to hate Europe than any of the countries you mentioned towards us ,especially Iran, yet none are actively attacking Europe. Why is that?

The reason is because those countries including Iran are long over things that happened in 1953. Iran has a completely different government now that has no affiliation to the government before or after 1953. Heck, you can say the coup in 1953 helped the current government gain power.

Iran's sole purpose is to destabilize the middle east in order to expand their power and maintain a repressive regime over their own people.

It's only your conspiracy theory that tries to justify Iran taking actions not only to kill us but also other people in the region who have no affiliation with the coup of 1953.

---

It's true that the Islamic Republic doesn't teach their kids much about 1953.  The mullahs didn't love either Mossadeq or the Shah.  They don't want to make Mossadeq a martyr when they teach history.
But, maybe it's just me emphasizing America too much, I don't think the mullahs end up teaching their children that America is Satan without us interfering in 1953, and without us giving "our" shah a free hand to punish the mullahs for so long.
When you go back to the 50s, you see that a lot of countries besides Iran have reason to hate us.  Vietnam, Guatemala, Haiti, Cuba, South Africa, Angola, Chile... but they mostly realized that it was best to let the past be in the past. I mean Cuba still has beef with us but not nearly as bad as Iran. Iran could let it go too.  But unfortunately we can't make them let it go.  No amount of force would ever work.

Africa and Asia have more reasons to hate Europe than any of the countries you mentioned towards us ,especially Iran, yet none are actively attacking Europe. Why is that?

The reason is because those countries including Iran are long over things that happened in 1953. Iran has a completely different government now that has no affiliation to the government before or after 1953. Heck, you can say the coup in 1953 helped the current government gain power.

Iran's sole purpose is to destabilize the middle east in order to expand their power and maintain a repressive regime over their own people.

It's only your conspiracy theory that tries to justify Iran taking actions not only to kill us but also other people in the region who have no affiliation with the coup of 1953.

I'm not justifying their actions.  I'm saying that we did cause some of this trouble.  We should definitely defend our guys, we should definitely kill dudes that kill our dudes.  We should definitely stay in Baghdad if the Iraqis will let us, but we should remember this history and be careful in terms of meddling in Iran's government.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

It's true that the Islamic Republic doesn't teach their kids much about 1953.  The mullahs didn't love either Mossadeq or the Shah.  They don't want to make Mossadeq a martyr when they teach history.
But, maybe it's just me emphasizing America too much, I don't think the mullahs end up teaching their children that America is Satan without us interfering in 1953, and without us giving "our" shah a free hand to punish the mullahs for so long.
When you go back to the 50s, you see that a lot of countries besides Iran have reason to hate us.  Vietnam, Guatemala, Haiti, Cuba, South Africa, Angola, Chile... but they mostly realized that it was best to let the past be in the past. I mean Cuba still has beef with us but not nearly as bad as Iran. Iran could let it go too.  But unfortunately we can't make them let it go.  No amount of force would ever work.

Africa and Asia have more reasons to hate Europe than any of the countries you mentioned towards us ,especially Iran, yet none are actively attacking Europe. Why is that?

The reason is because those countries including Iran are long over things that happened in 1953. Iran has a completely different government now that has no affiliation to the government before or after 1953. Heck, you can say the coup in 1953 helped the current government gain power.

Iran's sole purpose is to destabilize the middle east in order to expand their power and maintain a repressive regime over their own people.

It's only your conspiracy theory that tries to justify Iran taking actions not only to kill us but also other people in the region who have no affiliation with the coup of 1953.

How can you say with a straight face that Irans sole purpose is to destabilize the middle east while America peddles guns to,  creates splinter groups while also fighting against people trying to take down ISIS, while also being buddies with Saudi Arabia in the process? It take a large amount of cognitive dissonance to ignore Amercias role in the destabilization of the middle east over the past 20 years

---

Africa and Asia have more reasons to hate Europe than any of the countries you mentioned towards us ,especially Iran, yet none are actively attacking Europe. Why is that?

The reason is because those countries including Iran are long over things that happened in 1953. Iran has a completely different government now that has no affiliation to the government before or after 1953. Heck, you can say the coup in 1953 helped the current government gain power.

Iran's sole purpose is to destabilize the middle east in order to expand their power and maintain a repressive regime over their own people.

It's only your conspiracy theory that tries to justify Iran taking actions not only to kill us but also other people in the region who have no affiliation with the coup of 1953.

How can you say with a straight face that Irans sole purpose is to destabilize the middle east while America peddles guns to,  creates splinter groups while also fighting against people trying to take down ISIS, while also being buddies with Saudi Arabia in the process? It take a large amount of cognitive dissonance to ignore Amercias role in the destabilization of the middle east over the past 20 years

Because one has nothing to do with others.

We sell guns because there are a whole lot of people in the middle east that don't want to be controlled by organizations like ISIS and Iran who want to turn the whole region into a theocratic Islamic state and enforce brutal sharia law on its subjects. Why wouldn't we work with the Saudis? Iran has always hated them for being Sunni and has even attacked them recently.

Besides, the vast majority of the weapons in the middle east, especially those owned by the Islamic extremest, have Russian origins which are supplied through Syria and Iran.

There are no good bedfellows in the middle east. You have to find someone willing to work with you over there, and although the have a bad humanitarian record, it pales in comparison to most other countries in the region including Iran.

---

How can you say with a straight face that Irans sole purpose is to destabilize the middle east while America peddles guns to,  creates splinter groups while also fighting against people trying to take down ISIS, while also being buddies with Saudi Arabia in the process? It take a large amount of cognitive dissonance to ignore Amercias role in the destabilization of the middle east over the past 20 years

Because one has nothing to do with others.

We sell guns because there are a whole lot of people in the middle east that don't want to be controlled by organizations like ISIS and Iran who want to turn the whole region into a theocratic Islamic state and enforce brutal sharia law on its subjects. Why wouldn't we work with the Saudis? Iran has always hated them for being Sunni and has even attacked them recently.

Besides, the vast majority of the weapons in the middle east, especially those owned by the Islamic extremest, have Russian origins which are supplied through Syria and Iran.

There are no good bedfellows in the middle east. You have to find someone willing to work with you over there, and although the have a bad humanitarian record, it pales in comparison to most other countries in the region including Iran.

You sold guns to and helped train groups which destabilized the region. its quite literally part of the US MO. 

The Saudi's fund terror groups and have human rights atrocities, Amercia just doesn't care as long as they have oil and help their cause.  America isn't there for humanitarian reasons no matter how much you want to delude yourself

---

Africa and Asia have more reasons to hate Europe than any of the countries you mentioned towards us ,especially Iran, yet none are actively attacking Europe. Why is that?

The reason is because those countries including Iran are long over things that happened in 1953. Iran has a completely different government now that has no affiliation to the government before or after 1953. Heck, you can say the coup in 1953 helped the current government gain power.

Iran's sole purpose is to destabilize the middle east in order to expand their power and maintain a repressive regime over their own people.

It's only your conspiracy theory that tries to justify Iran taking actions not only to kill us but also other people in the region who have no affiliation with the coup of 1953.

I'm not justifying their actions.  I'm saying that we did cause some of this trouble.  We should definitely defend our guys, we should definitely kill dudes that kill our dudes.  We should definitely stay in Baghdad if the Iraqis will let us, but we should remember this history and be careful in terms of meddling in Iran's government.

What?  We should have "meddled" in 79 when this group took our embassy hostage and let more of them meet these 72 virgins.  

Also.   No 53 and the socialist leadership would have turned the country into Venezuela.  The coup of 79 was far worse for the Iranian people than the 53 coup but you and your progressive pals feel the need to constantly remind us of our failed attempts to save these people from bad leadership while they kill innocent protestors, American troops, and hang guys from cranes.

---

Because one has nothing to do with others.

We sell guns because there are a whole lot of people in the middle east that don't want to be controlled by organizations like ISIS and Iran who want to turn the whole region into a theocratic Islamic state and enforce brutal sharia law on its subjects. Why wouldn't we work with the Saudis? Iran has always hated them for being Sunni and has even attacked them recently.

Besides, the vast majority of the weapons in the middle east, especially those owned by the Islamic extremest, have Russian origins which are supplied through Syria and Iran.

There are no good bedfellows in the middle east. You have to find someone willing to work with you over there, and although the have a bad humanitarian record, it pales in comparison to most other countries in the region including Iran.

You sold guns to and helped train groups which destabilized the region. its quite literally part of the US MO. 

The Saudi's fund terror groups and have human rights atrocities, Amercia just doesn't care as long as they have oil and help their cause.  America isn't there for humanitarian reasons no matter how much you want to delude yourself

Sorry but the Russians are supplying the arms that are in the terrorist groups.

The Saudis are funding groups? Which ones? What is known for sure is Iran is funding the most active terrorist groups in the region.

The US supplies almost all of its oil now. We no longer need the middle east for oil. We are there putting our lives on the line to protect people which is much more than what the Irish can say. The Irish have never done anything to help anyone else out.

The Irish took an active military part during the British Empire's rape of Africa and subjection of India for 120 years, so don't preach to us about what is humanitarian. The same empire that split the middle east up in such away to cause civil wars and a legacy of unrest. We are just late in the game still cleaning up you mess.

If it weren't for our humanitarian efforts, you would be speaking German right now. Hell, we took half your people when they were starving to death.

Ireland doesn't do anything humanitarian for the rest of the world. At least we have the fortitude to make the attempt to help someone else out. Heck, it's our military that protects your weak country. Maybe you would understand what being a humanitarian entails if we left you and the rest of Europe to fend on your own. Without us, you humanitarian Europeans would be trying to annihilate each other every 20 years just like you have for 2000 years.

---

Iran shoots down drone we don’t respond

Iran sabotages oil tankers we don’t respond

Iran attacks oil fields we don’t respond

Iran attack our embassy we respond

And we’re the instigator? Come on man I know the US foreign policy is all over the place historically but in what world is Iran not the aggressor here?

---