Started with Iraq. The intention was to finish it off in Iran. This has been on the table of discussion for a long time now.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

---

"What do I know of cultured ways, the gilt, the craft and the lie? I, who was born in a naked land and bred in the open sky. The subtle tongue, the sophist guile, they fail when the broadswords sing; Rush in and die, dogs - I was a man before I was a king."

Of course loyal Trumpettes have themselves convinced the Buffoon in Chief has the nation's best interest at heart, instead of his.

I'm legitimately interested in what your IQ is.

It can't be above 95.

Iran can't go to war with the US and it's ridiculous to think that us ending a murderer that killed over 600 US Soldiers and injured thousands more would start a war. He was in Baghdad illegally. Iraq hates Iran.

I'm legitimately interested in anyone's IQ who thinks Trump has the interests of the USA foremost in his mind. Or that he has any knowledge of the history of the region beyond what the conspiracy theorists tell him.

Or responds to a silly meme.

But you have the IQ to determine if golf is a sport or not, so good on you.

---

If something can corrupt you, you're corrupted already.
- Bob Marley


 

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.

Possible. But Saudi Arabia nationalised its oil fields around the same time. Maybe Iran and Saudi would follow similar paths. Maybe they would be at peace with each other for that reason.

---

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.

ISIS got a lot of money from somewhere... They came right up to the Saudi border and didn't challenge it.  Probably a coincidence...

---

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

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.

Possible. But Saudi Arabia nationalised its oil fields around the same time. Maybe Iran and Saudi would follow similar paths. Maybe they would be at peace with each other for that reason.

---

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.

ISIS got a lot of money from somewhere... They came right up to the Saudi border and didn't challenge it.  Probably a coincidence...

Bruh?  1400 years of hatred between religious sects "maybe they would have been @ peace if not for the muricans".

#bebetter

---

Possible. But Saudi Arabia nationalised its oil fields around the same time. Maybe Iran and Saudi would follow similar paths. Maybe they would be at peace with each other for that reason.

---

ISIS got a lot of money from somewhere... They came right up to the Saudi border and didn't challenge it.  Probably a coincidence...

Bruh?  1400 years of hatred between religious sects "maybe they would have been @ peace if not for the muricans".

#bebetter

Bruh! They were not at war for all of that 1400 years.
Iran was actually mostly a Sunni country for most of that time.  It was the Safavids that forced everyone in Persia to switch from Sunni to Shia.
More to the point, Iran and Saudi were at peace between 1945 and 1979.

---

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

Iran drew first blood.

---

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.

Possible. But Saudi Arabia nationalised its oil fields around the same time. Maybe Iran and Saudi would follow similar paths. Maybe they would be at peace with each other for that reason.

---

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.

ISIS got a lot of money from somewhere... They came right up to the Saudi border and didn't challenge it.  Probably a coincidence...

So pointing fingers at the Saudis was just you making things up. Figures.

ISIS got it's money from oil wells it captured in Iraq and from ransoming hostages.

They didn't cross the Saudi border because they didn't want to face the country with the third largest military budget in the world.

---

Bruh?  1400 years of hatred between religious sects "maybe they would have been @ peace if not for the muricans".

#bebetter

Bruh! They were not at war for all of that 1400 years.
Iran was actually mostly a Sunni country for most of that time.  It was the Safavids that forced everyone in Persia to switch from Sunni to Shia.
More to the point, Iran and Saudi were at peace between 1945 and 1979.

So 79 not 53 was the inciting incident.  Got it.  Next time just admit that I'm right and save the time

---

Bruh?  1400 years of hatred between religious sects "maybe they would have been @ peace if not for the muricans".

#bebetter

Bruh! They were not at war for all of that 1400 years.
Iran was actually mostly a Sunni country for most of that time.  It was the Safavids that forced everyone in Persia to switch from Sunni to Shia.
More to the point, Iran and Saudi were at peace between 1945 and 1979.

Just because two countries maintained peace for 35 years doesn't mean the region itself hasn't been chronically at war for 1400 years.

---

Bruh! They were not at war for all of that 1400 years.
Iran was actually mostly a Sunni country for most of that time.  It was the Safavids that forced everyone in Persia to switch from Sunni to Shia.
More to the point, Iran and Saudi were at peace between 1945 and 1979.

So 79 not 53 was the inciting incident.  Got it.  Next time just admit that I'm right and save the time

Between 53 and 79, The Iranians were at peace with the United States and with the Saudis.
That's good!
However, the Iranians were also living in fear of one of the most brutal secret police units in the world, many of the cities besides the capital were still basically in a middle ages level of technology. US foreign aid ignored this corruption so long as the shah continued to disfavor the Soviets.
That's bad!

Also no one here ever says it anyone else is right. Are you new here?

---

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

So 79 not 53 was the inciting incident.  Got it.  Next time just admit that I'm right and save the time

Between 53 and 79, The Iranians were at peace with the United States and with the Saudis.
That's good!
However, the Iranians were also living in fear of one of the most brutal secret police units in the world, many of the cities besides the capital were still basically in a middle ages level of technology. US foreign aid ignored this corruption so long as the shah continued to disfavor the Soviets.
That's bad!

Also no one here ever says it anyone else is right.  Are you new here?

Again, the iranian revolution made it worse for the people of Iran not better.  The current administration is more concerned with war against the infidels and regional hegemony then they are boosting the domestic economy.

---

Between 53 and 79, The Iranians were at peace with the United States and with the Saudis.
That's good!
However, the Iranians were also living in fear of one of the most brutal secret police units in the world, many of the cities besides the capital were still basically in a middle ages level of technology. US foreign aid ignored this corruption so long as the shah continued to disfavor the Soviets.
That's bad!

Also no one here ever says it anyone else is right.  Are you new here?

Again, the iranian revolution made it worse for the people of Iran not better.  The current administration is more concerned with war against the infidels and regional hegemony then they are boosting the domestic economy.

All true.
Back when we had bases on their territory, and when we were selling them weapons, and when we were buying their oil, we might have had some influence to encourage them to do little things to make their country more modern and their people better provided for.
Now we have no influence at all.
Whatever we say they should do they should do, they will do the opposite.
Really all we can do is sit back and hope. Maybe they'll get some positive influence from the Russians or the Turks. Relatively speaking of course. Both of those countries have problems, but both of them have a lot less problems than Iran.
My point is they won't be getting any positive influence from us.

---

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

Again, the iranian revolution made it worse for the people of Iran not better.  The current administration is more concerned with war against the infidels and regional hegemony then they are boosting the domestic economy.

All true.
Back when we had bases on their territory, and when we were selling them weapons, and when we were buying their oil, we might have had some influence to encourage them to do little things to make their country more modern and their people better provided for.
Now we have no influence at all.
Whatever we say they should do they should do, they will do the opposite.
Really all we can do is sit back and hope. Maybe they'll get some positive influence from the Russians or the Turks. Relatively speaking of course. Both of those countries have problems, but both of them have a lot less problems than Iran.
My point is they won't be getting any positive influence from us.

They are feeling our influence right now.

You need to quit arguing out of both sides of your mouth if you expect anyone to take you seriously.

---

All true.
Back when we had bases on their territory, and when we were selling them weapons, and when we were buying their oil, we might have had some influence to encourage them to do little things to make their country more modern and their people better provided for.
Now we have no influence at all.
Whatever we say they should do they should do, they will do the opposite.
Really all we can do is sit back and hope. Maybe they'll get some positive influence from the Russians or the Turks. Relatively speaking of course. Both of those countries have problems, but both of them have a lot less problems than Iran.
My point is they won't be getting any positive influence from us.

They are feeling our influence right now.

You need to quit arguing out of both sides of your mouth if you expect anyone to take you seriously.

You are clearly unappreciative of the intense Wikipedia research he's put into this over the last few hours.

---

Again, the iranian revolution made it worse for the people of Iran not better.  The current administration is more concerned with war against the infidels and regional hegemony then they are boosting the domestic economy.

All true.
Back when we had bases on their territory, and when we were selling them weapons, and when we were buying their oil, we might have had some influence to encourage them to do little things to make their country more modern and their people better provided for.
Now we have no influence at all.
Whatever we say they should do they should do, they will do the opposite.
Really all we can do is sit back and hope. Maybe they'll get some positive influence from the Russians or the Turks. Relatively speaking of course. Both of those countries have problems, but both of them have a lot less problems than Iran.
My point is they won't be getting any positive influence from us.

Play 8th century games win 8th century economies.  They have no incentive to improve their citizenry because In involuntary societies leaders dont answer to their citizenry.  They represent a fundamentalist ideology hostile to the west since its inception.  There's only so much our engagement can mitigate that, and in some cases it enrages it.

---

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?

So simple even ivy leaguers should be able to understand.

---

Of course loyal Trumpettes have themselves convinced the Buffoon in Chief has the nation's best interest at heart, instead of his.

Its amazing.  He's hijacked the Democrat primary process and is turning it into a campaign commercial.  contrary to the best efforts of our media elite most Americans actually care more about this country than some backwater 8th century throwback.

---

The Iraqi Parliament has voted to remove all foreign troops from their country.

---

The Iraqi Parliament has voted to remove all foreign troops from their country.

Non-binding resolution

---

The Iraqi Parliament has voted to remove all foreign troops from their country.

Non-binding resolution

It seems to apply equally to the US and to Iran.  Hard to know what this means for us or for them.

---

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

The Iraqi Parliament has voted to remove all foreign troops from their country.

They voted to start planning for that to happen.

No telling how long before that becomes something feasible.

Right now their military can't even keep ISIS at bay without foreign help much less defend themselves from another country.

It was mostly just Shiite backlash for attacking fellow Shiites. They said most of the Sunnis and Kurds didn't even bother to show up for the vote so there is no telling how binding this resolution actually is.

---