What's new

Top Iran commander Soleimani killed in US strike on Baghdad; Iran issues arrest warrant for Trump

Two rockets hit near US embassy in Baghdad’s Green Zone

Two Katyusha rockets hit late Wednesday near the US embassy in the Iraqi capital’s heavily fortified Green Zone which houses government buildings and foreign missions, but caused no casualties, the Iraqi military said.

Sirens immediately rang out at the American compound in the area hosting both diplomats and troops, according to military sources.

The attack came nearly 24 hours after Tehran launched ballistic missiles at Iraqi bases housing American and other coalition forces, which did not cause casualties.

The strikes were in retaliation for a US drone strike that killed top Iranian general Qasem Soleimani and Iraqi commander Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis last week.

Al-Muhandis had been the deputy head of the Hashed al-Shaabi, a web of armed groups incorporated into the Iraqi state but which also have close ties to Tehran.

The United States had accused Hashed groups of being behind a string of rocket attacks on the US embassy in Baghdad and bases hosting American troops across the country.

On Wednesday, the Hashed’s hardline factions vowed they, too, would take revenge for the US raid.

Paramilitary chief Qais al-Khazali - blacklisted as a “terrorist” by the US - said Iraq’s response to the US “will be no less than the size of the Iranian response.”

Harakat al-Nujaba, a hardline Hashed faction, vowed to avenge al-Muhandis.

“To American soldiers: Do not close your eyes. Revenge for the martyr Muhandis is coming at the hands of Iraqis - until the last soldier among you leaves,” it said.

https://english.alarabiya.net/en/Ne...explosions-heard-in-Baghdad-s-Green-Zone.html
 
A more appropriate Iranian response would’ve been a giant military parade. We all no how sensitive DJT is about military parades.
 
outstanding insight :14:

lets hope i too become president of america too someday then, lol.

The way things are going in US and the way you have given your insight you might have a pretty good shot at it. Try.
 
Iran has the capability to ruin Israel as well as the global economy in any war.

This is why Trump changed his tune today, from we will destroy cultural sites to it's over.

This is a big moral victory for Iran and other nations around the world.

A national government sent missiles flying into 2 US bases and the US has decided to stand down.

Now its time for the Yanks to go back to their own country and leave the region.

I do not know why are you doing so much bhangra over this cowardly response from Iran. Those bases were like 20 miles away from Iran. You are acting as if Iran fired missiles on US soil.

The US killed their general and in response, Iran wasted 20 missiles.

The missile attacks were nothing but drama to appease the right wing in Iran. Had they seriously wanted to avenge the death of their general, they would not have informed Iraq beforehand about the attacks. The US troops had several hours to evacuate. The way I see it Iran chickened out. No single American was killed in these attacks, yet they lied about killing 80 american soldiers.

No way can the death of 80 soldiers be kept secret in the US. Their families would have come out by now. The US would have started carpet bombing Iran. It is clear as daylight that Iran did not have the balls to kill a single American and starting the war with history's greatest military. Hence, Trump's tone changed today because Iran backed out from confrontation.
 
You sound like one of those pretending to be journalist at FOX news channel who do not understand dynamics and consequences while also ignoring other aspect of war with Iran.

Everyone know the capability of US but there are other factors that matters and equipment alone does not win war, hence Vietnam.

But equipments do destroy enemies. For example, after the US-Iraq war, one country is still the superpower of the world while the other is completely demolished. Who would you call the loser in that war?
 
This was not a cowardly response from Iran. Desis (especially some communities among them) are trapped in a unique interpretation of courage which makes them stupid. Courage is the ability to withstand pressure and do the right thing no matter how difficult. Giving in to public anger and going for an all out war was the easy and the cowardly option. Saving Iran from war despite calls for it is bravery.
 
I do not know why are you doing so much bhangra over this cowardly response from Iran. Those bases were like 20 miles away from Iran. You are acting as if Iran fired missiles on US soil.

The US killed their general and in response, Iran wasted 20 missiles.

The missile attacks were nothing but drama to appease the right wing in Iran. Had they seriously wanted to avenge the death of their general, they would not have informed Iraq beforehand about the attacks. The US troops had several hours to evacuate. The way I see it Iran chickened out. No single American was killed in these attacks, yet they lied about killing 80 american soldiers.

No way can the death of 80 soldiers be kept secret in the US. Their families would have come out by now. The US would have started carpet bombing Iran. It is clear as daylight that Iran did not have the balls to kill a single American and starting the war with history's greatest military. Hence, Trump's tone changed today because Iran backed out from confrontation.

This is a very silly reply and shows you have no clue about the geopolitical environment and how things at this level work. Why would Iran risk losing Iraq as an ally by not informing them. You need to look at the bigger picture here which you are clearly missing.
 
This is a very silly reply and shows you have no clue about the geopolitical environment and how things at this level work. Why would Iran risk losing Iraq as an ally by not informing them. You need to look at the bigger picture here which you are clearly missing.

You are missing the point. Informing Iraq meant informing the US. Iran talks big but it knows that it can't survive a war with the US. Hence, sanity prevailed and they did not do anything foolish to make things worse. The way I see it Iran chickened out. If you reverse the roles and had Iran killed an American general, I can guarantee you that you would have seen several Iranian soldiers killed in response. There would be no drama of fake missile strikes.
 
Come on! It was a surgical strike with proper missiles flying in the sky and other parties were acknowledging it right after the incident. Did you want to see a useless war between Iran and the USA so that the whole Gulf region would suffer from endless human suffering?

I expected a reply like this.

No I don't want war or sufferings.

But what I want or don't want is immaterial.

What happens is independent of what I think.

Iran has been rational in it's approach (of not hitting the targets) no doubt.

But if this is all they are gonna do to "avenge" the death of their leader after making such a hue and cry (where they miss a target and then claim 80 deaths for domestic consumption), then it's a pretty lame attempt and frankly looks like they weren't as hurt as they showed themselves to be.

Again, they might be smart and focus on hurting USA in other ways than outright confrontation but the way they were making noises, one would expect them to do more lol.

By missing targets, claiming 80 dead and declaring that they delivered a "tight" slap to USA and a perfectly "proportional response" (LMAOOO)...it seems like they weren't that keen on going through with their threats either.

Nothing wrong with not wanting escalation but why bark so much if this is all they gonna do lol?

But again....it's a life and death situation for them and from that perspective...maybe they reacted first and then came to their senses later.

Regardless it makes Trump look a hero and I am tired of seeing FOOLS of this world made to look heroes.
 
Last edited:
You are missing the point. Informing Iraq meant informing the US. Iran talks big but it knows that it can't survive a war with the US. Hence, sanity prevailed and they did not do anything foolish to make things worse. The way I see it Iran chickened out. If you reverse the roles and had Iran killed an American general, I can guarantee you that you would have seen several Iranian soldiers killed in response. There would be no drama of fake missile strikes.

I think your missing the point bro. Iran never intended to kill any soldiers or civilian.
Nor has Iran claimed killing 80 soldiers that's all Twitter reports.

What Iran has done is a made a statement that if you will attack us we will not sit hand on hand we will attack you.

That's why trump made a U-turn and now talking about peace prior to that trump was talking about bombing cultural sites

It's America that has chickened out not Iran
 
You are missing the point. Informing Iraq meant informing the US. Iran talks big but it knows that it can't survive a war with the US. Hence, sanity prevailed and they did not do anything foolish to make things worse. The way I see it Iran chickened out. If you reverse the roles and had Iran killed an American general, I can guarantee you that you would have seen several Iranian soldiers killed in response. There would be no drama of fake missile strikes.

But then it might be equally correct to say that Trump chickened out after claiming that any retaliation by Iran would see him striking 52 targets etc.

Iran took a calculated risk in making a symbolic strike which pretty much put the ball in trump's court to make the hard decision of doubling down on his aggressive rhetoric or deescalating since there were no US casualties. Despite there being no casualties it is still a sort of victory for Iran that it attacked US facilities and the US did not respond with force (such restraint from the US in general and someone like Trump in particular, despite everything, is not a small thing). We know now that there were back channel communications from Iran following the attacks to defuse the situation but the fact that the US didn't respond with force will still help Iran with its rhetoric about having beaten the US. It might not be recompense enough for the killing of Soleimani but Iran will happily take it and go back to its campaign of chipping away at US forces in the region through its proxies.
 
But then it might be equally correct to say that Trump chickened out after claiming that any retaliation by Iran would see him striking 52 targets etc.

Iran took a calculated risk in making a symbolic strike which pretty much put the ball in trump's court to make the hard decision of doubling down on his aggressive rhetoric or deescalating since there were no US casualties. Despite there being no casualties it is still a sort of victory for Iran that it attacked US facilities and the US did not respond with force (such restraint from the US in general and someone like Trump in particular, despite everything, is not a small thing). We know now that there were back channel communications from Iran following the attacks to defuse the situation but the fact that the US didn't respond with force will still help Iran with its rhetoric about having beaten the US. It might not be recompense enough for the killing of Soleimani but Iran will happily take it and go back to its campaign of chipping away at US forces in the region through its proxies.

Yes, it is a victory for Iran, that US assassinated its top general and they made symbolic strikes that made Trump show the white flag.
 
The US says it is "ready to engage without preconditions in serious negotiations" with Iran following the countries' exchange of hostilities.

In a letter to the UN, the US justified its decision to kill top Iran Gen Qasem Soleimani as an act of self-defence.

Iran has retaliated by firing missiles at air bases housing US forces in Iraq causing no casualties. It also told the UN it was an act of self-defence.

Gen Soleimani was widely held as being Iran's second most senior official.

As head of the Revolutionary Guards' elite Quds Force, he was and architect of Iranian policy in the region.

Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei described the missile attacks as a "slap in the face" for the US and called for an end to the American presence in the Middle East.

The US strike on Soleimani also killed members of Iran-backed Iraqi militias, who have also vowed revenge.

However, US Vice-President Mike Pence told CBS News that "intelligence" indicated that Iran had asked its allied militias not to attack US targets.

The US House of Representatives has scheduled a vote for Thursday on limiting President Donald Trump's ability to wage war against Iran without specific approval from Congress.

What do the letters say?
In a letter to the UN Security Council, US Ambassador to the UN Kelly Craft said the US was ready to negotiate "with the goal of preventing further endangerment of international peace and security or escalation by the Iranian regime".

The killing of Soleimani was justified, the letter argued, under Article 51 of the UN Charter, which requires states to "immediately report" to the Security Council any measures taken in exercising the right of self-defence.

The US would take additional action "as necessary" in the Middle East to protect its personnel and interests, the letter added.

Iran also cited Article 51 as justification for its attack on US bases.

Iran's UN Ambassador Majid Takht Ravanchi wrote that Tehran "does not seek escalation or war" after exercising its right to self-defence by taking a "measured and proportionate military response targeting an American air base in Iraq".

"The operation was precise and targeted military objectives thus leaving no collateral damage to civilians and civilian assets in the area," he wrote.

What did Mr Trump say about the Iranian strikes?
US President Donald Trump has previously threatened military action against Iran if it were to target US personnel and bases, but he did not announce any military action, saying Iran's attack had caused no casualties.

"No Americans were harmed in last night's attack by the Iranian regime," he said.

"Iran appears to be standing down, which is a good thing for all parties concerned," he added.

The US House of Representatives is expected to vote on Thursday on a resolution to force Mr Trump to halt further military action against Iran unless Congress gives it the all-clear.

"Members of Congress have serious, urgent concerns about the administration's decision to engage in hostilities against Iran and about its lack of strategy moving forward," Nancy Pelosi, speaker of the House, said in a statement.

What happened in the missile attacks?
A total of 16 missiles were launched from at least three sites in Iran, Defence Secretary Mark Esper said.

At least 11 of them struck the air base in Al Asad, west of Baghdad, and at least one more hit the Irbil base, he said.

Several other missiles landed at some distance from the targets.

The attacks happened at about 02:00 local time on Wednesday (22:30 GMT on Tuesday).

US Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Mark Milley said he believed early warning systems had prevented casualties.

"[What] I believe, based on what I saw and what I know, is that they were intended to cause structural damage, destroy vehicles and equipment and aircraft, and to kill personnel," he said.

The attacks came just hours after the burial of Soleimani, who controlled Iran's proxy forces across the Middle East.

It was the most direct assault by Iran on the US since the seizing of the US embassy in Tehran in 1979.

How did we get here?

The assassination of Soleimani took place on 3 January.

The general was regarded as a terrorist by the US government, which says he was responsible for the deaths of hundreds of American troops and was plotting "imminent" attacks.

Iran vowed "severe revenge" for his death. Mr Trump, meanwhile, warned the US would respond in the event of retaliation "perhaps in a disproportionate manner".

Millions of Iranians turned out for the commander's funeral, with mourners chanting "death to America" and "death to Trump".

Why huge crowds turned out for Soleimani's funeral
Voices from Iran: 'Qasem Soleimani did not deserve such a fate'
A stampede at the burial in Soleimani's hometown Kerman killed 50 people and injured 200 more on Tuesday.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-51043559
 
Cannot believe i am seeing this, where the US especially under Trump ****** themselves after receiving threats of a swift, ruthless response from Iran. Americans especially those who believed in their super power status should hang their heads in shame and humiliation.
 
The Iranian missile strike on American facilities in Iraq was a calibrated event intended to cause minimal casualties, give the Iranians a face-saving measure and provide an opportunity for both sides to step back from the brink of war, according to senior U.S. officials in Washington and the Middle East.

White House officials were bracing as early as Tuesday morning for Iran to respond to the U.S. killing last week of Qasem Soleimani, the head of Iran’s elite Quds Force.

U.S. officials said they knew by Tuesday afternoon that the Iranians intended to strike at American targets in Iraq, although it was not immediately clear exactly which they would choose.

The early warning came from intelligence sources as well as from communications from Iraq that conveyed Iran’s intentions to launch the strike, officials said.

Iran state TV airs video claiming to show missiles being launched at bases in Iraq
Video aired by Iranian state TV reportedly showed the launch of multiple ballistic missiles from an undisclosed location in Iran on Jan. 8. (IRINN)
“We knew, and the Iraqis told us, that this was coming many hours in advance,” said a senior administration official, who like others spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive intelligence and diplomatic communications.

“We had intelligence reports several hours in advance that the Iranians were seeking to strike the bases,” the official said.

But others downplayed claims that the Iraqis had such a consequential role. A senior defense official, also speaking on the condition of anonymity, said that if the Iraqis provided warning, it certainly wasn’t hours in advance.

At the Pentagon, the most senior levels of military leadership gathered in a room in anticipation of the Iranian missiles, and soon learned they were coming.

“It was literally like right before” the Iranians launched their missiles, one senior defense official said. Defense Secretary Mark T. Esper had convened the meeting with Gen. Mark A. Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, along with senior civilian leaders of the Defense Department. Esper was pulled out of the meeting when military officials received notification that strikes were underway.

AD

“There was a lot of concern,” the senior defense official said. “It was anxious, wanting to get updates.” Early reports did not mention any U.S. casualties, “so there was some optimism after the initial rounds.”

The advance warning gave military commanders time to get U.S. troops into safe, fortified positions at the bases.

According to military officials, troops at bases in Iraq were ordered into bunkers, donned protective gear and were told to “shelter in place.”

The troops remained in their protected positions for hours, including after the strike. One official said at least some left al-Asad air base in western Iraq before the attack. That base was targeted, along with a facility in Irbil, in northern Iraq.

“It’s not luck that no one got killed,” a second senior defense official said. “Luck always plays a role. But military commanders on the ground made good judgment and had good response.”

AD

In an address from the White House on Wednesday morning, President Trump credited an “early warning system” for helping prevent loss of life. A defense official later said the president was referring to the radar network the military has searching for potential enemy missiles.

At least two sources of intelligence gave the United States time to prepare.

First, there were indications before the launch that Iran was preparing to strike at targets in Iraq, officials said. It was not clear whether that information came from a person or some technical means, such as intercepted communications. A defense official said the U.S. military had “clear indications” of a strike prior to launch from information “internal to [the] U.S. government.” Military officials had assessed that Iran would attempt some kind of retaliation at the end of the official mourning period for Soleimani.

The Pentagon “fully expected a retaliation from Iran,” the senior defense official said. “What that was was the issue,” the official said. “But we fully expected some sort of reaction.”

A second source of warning came from what one official described as technical means. The U.S. military has satellites that can detect a missile shortly after it is launched. U.S. officials alerted allies to the launches shortly after they occurred, according to one Western official.

Iran launched 16 ballistic missiles, including 11 that landed at al-Asad air base and one in Irbil, Esper told reporters at the Pentagon. The missile in Irbil landed in an empty area between the facility and the U.S. Consulate, according to residents who live nearby. It was not clear what happened to the four other missiles.

As a precaution after the strike that killed Soleimani, U.S. military officials deployed a brigade of about 4,500 soldiers from the 82nd Airborne Division at Fort Bragg, N.C., to the Middle East and also shuffled some forces within the region.

Commanders on the ground, overseen by Marine Gen. Kenneth F. McKenzie, head of the U.S. Central Command, also moved some service members off small bases in the region and scattered equipment and people on installations to make them harder to hit.

“Let’s get people out of less defensible areas and put them in more easily defended or better-
defended areas,” the senior defense official said, describing the thinking after the Soleimani strike. “But at the same time, let’s not overly mass our personnel as a single target.”

U.S. officials began alerting reporters to the possibility of Iranian strikes beginning at 4 p.m. Tuesday, an hour before they occurred. Vice President Pence was scheduled to conduct a television interview that evening but canceled earlier in the day.

In Iran, the regime had positioned itself for a public messaging campaign. Late Tuesday afternoon, Iran transmitted a letter to the U.N. Security Council with a legal basis for military retaliation, but it was not made public, said a diplomat familiar with the document.

Military officials were not sure, once the missiles were launched, which locations Iran had targeted.

It was hard to tell at the Pentagon which bases were under attack “until actual impact on two specific bases,” a senior U.S. military official said. “The attack spread out for more than an hour. . . . It was more than an hour from the first attack to the last attack.”

“This was not a ‘boom’ and all of this hit at once,” the senior defense official said. “This was launch, launch, launch.”

Once the bases were taking incoming fire, there was constant communication among the White House, Central Command and two other combatant commands: Northern Command and Strategic Command, the second senior defense official said. They were called in because of their expertise in monitoring and tracking ballistic missile threats.

After the missiles hit, U.S. military officials began to assess the damage.

Pentagon officials called several partner nations and allies right after the Iranian attack, part of a concerted effort to communicate with them in the wake of the Soleimani strike. While some of them questioned what the U.S. strategy is with Iran after Soleimani was killed, they were supportive and grateful for information Tuesday night, the senior defense official said.

By 7:30 p.m. Tuesday, officials at the White House had briefed Trump and were “able to pretty clearly say we don’t think any Americans are going to be killed,” the senior administration official said. “We knew that no Americans were hurt, either.”

But U.S. officials were not certain there were no fatalities until Wednesday, after service members assessed the wreckage and roll calls were taken. Esper said the missiles hit tents and a helicopter but did not cause major damage.

The lack of casualties gave administration officials more confidence that the Iranians had intended to make a public show of force largely to save face at home, the senior administration official said. The official added that a consensus is building that Iran could have done more damage.

But not all military officials were certain of Iran’s intentions. Milley, the Joint Chiefs chairman, told reporters that he assessed Iran had intended to cause material destruction and kill Americans but that an intelligence estimate had not been completed.

“I believe based on what I saw and what I know is that they were intended to cause structural damage, destroy vehicles and equipment and aircraft and to kill personnel,” Milley said. “That’s my own personal assessment.”

Asked what he made of Iran’s intentions, the second senior military official said, “You’d have to ask Iran.”

Esper and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo arrived at the White House around 7 p.m. Tuesday. About an hour later, Trump began calling lawmakers, including allies such as Sens. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) and James M. Inhofe (R-Okla.). Trump told them that no Americans had been killed in the missile attacks and that a path to negotiations with Iran had now opened, the senior administration official said.

“The president doesn’t want a war, but he doesn’t want to tolerate provocation against American interests,” Graham said in an interview with The Washington Post.

Graham said he hoped that Iran’s attack was “a show of force for domestic purposes.”

“They want a show of force,” he said, “but they want this to end, because they are scared of the president. I hope that is true.”

Matt Pottinger, the deputy national security adviser, told aides in a Roosevelt Room meeting Tuesday afternoon that it would take at least two months to understand whether the U.S. strategy was working.

“Our initial reaction has been, this was a domestic effort from the Iranians to save face, not to go to war, so we have proceeded in that vein,” said another senior administration official with knowledge of the analysis.

Esper and Milley returned to the Pentagon about 9 p.m.

Trump had told senior military officials Tuesday evening that he wanted a path to ease tensions, which had been escalating since the strike on Soleimani, the senior administration official said. A way out appeared when Trump’s military advisers told him there was reason to believe the missile strikes were not designed to kill Americans, the official said.

Even with the advance notice, U.S. military officials were still scrambling after the attack to assess the damage and determine Iran’s intentions. U.S. forces in the region remained on high alert after the strikes, but no significant troop movements have been made in Syria or elsewhere, according to military officials.

The second senior defense official acknowledged that officials on Tuesday night intended to limit information released to the public until the extent of the damage and how Trump might respond became clearer.

“We all understood that if the Iranians were to respond next, we owned the shot clock after,” the official said. “So, you need to be very thoughtful, very deliberate.”

The Pentagon and State Department sent staffers to the White House early Wednesday to write Trump’s speech. He made some last-minute additions, including the decision to start his remarks by declaring, “As long as I am president of the United States, Iran will never be allowed to have a nuclear weapon.”

“Iran appears to be standing down, which is a good thing for all parties concerned and a very good thing for the world,” Trump said.

A third senior administration official said there was a sigh of relief when Trump agreed to read from prepared remarks and not take questions. Some aides were concerned that Trump might deviate from the precise remarks and misspeak if he made extemporaneous remarks to reporters, the official said.

Some officials acknowledged that Iran was likely to continue attacks via proxies and other means. But there was a growing sense among administration officials that killing Soleimani had sobered Iran up to Trump’s willingness to act. “We actually believe this will be de-escalation,” the senior administration official said. “We’re obviously going to be on alert for proxies with one-off attacks. But we think this worked.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...297b4c-3235-11ea-a053-dc6d944ba776_story.html
 
I think your missing the point bro. Iran never intended to kill any soldiers or civilian.
Nor has Iran claimed killing 80 soldiers that's all Twitter reports.

What Iran has done is a made a statement that if you will attack us we will not sit hand on hand we will attack you.

That's why trump made a U-turn and now talking about peace prior to that trump was talking about bombing cultural sites

It's America that has chickened out not Iran

I disagree.

America took out their top (and revered) general without repercussions. That's nuts considering what other nations (including America) would have done in Iran's position.

If the response is getting a few missiles sent into an empty field then that easily reaffirms America's strength. It essentially means they can do as they please.

Obviously this is a good end to the situation but America will definitely gain confidence from this in the coming years.

The biggest loser in this is Iraq. Complete disrespect by both countries towards them.
 
I disagree.

America took out their top (and revered) general without repercussions. That's nuts considering what other nations (including America) would have done in Iran's position.

If the response is getting a few missiles sent into an empty field then that easily reaffirms America's strength. It essentially means they can do as they please.

Obviously this is a good end to the situation but America will definitely gain confidence from this in the coming years.

The biggest loser in this is Iraq. Complete disrespect by both countries towards them.

Attack on the US base in iraq was a response to Trump threatening to attack Iranian cultural sites after Iran had threaten to attack 50+ US bases in the middle East

Attacking the US base isn't the revenge for the assassination of their leader
That is yet to come.

If you follow the events from start to beginning it will start to make sense to you.
 
Iran missile attack: Did Tehran intentionally avoid US casualties?

In the early hours of 8 January, Iran launched attacks on Iraqi bases housing US forces in retaliation for a US drone strike in Baghdad last Friday that killed a top Iranian general, Qasem Soleimani.

But despite furious warnings from Tehran that the US would pay a significant price for that killing - no-one was hurt by the retaliatory attack, according to US President Donald Trump.

So did Iran intentionally avoid causing casualties?

What did Iran and the US say?
A statement from Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) said "tens of surface-to-surface missiles" were launched early on Wednesday "to crush the occupied air base of terrorist and aggressor army of the US in Al Asad", the hub for American military operations in western Iraq.

Iran's Tasnim news agency, which is close to the IRGC, reported that Fateh-313 and Qiam missiles were used in the attack , and that US forces failed to intercept them because they were equipped with cluster warheads. The warheads also caused "tens of explosions" at Al Asad, it said.

The US defence department said Iran launched more than a dozen ballistic missiles that targeted at least two Iraqi military bases - Al Asad and Irbil, in the semi-autonomous Kurdistan Region.

Mr Trump said US forces suffered no casualties as a result of the Iranian missile attacks, and that the bases sustained "only minimal damage". In a televised statement, he credited "the precautions taken, the dispersal of forces, and an early warning system that worked very well", and declared: "Iran appears to be standing down."

However, the US's top military officer, Army General Mark Milley, said he believed the attack was meant to be deadly.

He said his "personal assessment" was that Iran "intended to cause structural damage, destroy vehicles and equipment and aircraft, and to kill personnel".

What did the missiles actually hit?
Iraq's military, which also reported no casualties, said the country was hit by 22 missiles between 01:45 and 02:15 on Wednesday (22:45-23:15 GMT on Tuesday). It said 17 missiles were fired towards Al Asad air base.

Satellite photographs taken by the commercial company Planet Labs for the Middlebury Institute of International Studies showed what appeared to be at least five destroyed structures at Al Asad. David Schmerler, an analyst at the Middlebury Institute, told NPR: "Some of the locations struck look like the missiles hit dead centre."

But it was clear that some of the weapons did not hit the bases. Two of the missiles aimed at Al Asad fell in the Hitan area, west of the town of Hit, and did not explode, according to the Iraqi military.

Photos of the remnants of one of those missiles, including three large parts of its fuselage, subsequently emerged on social media.

The Iraqi military said Iran fired five missiles towards Irbil air base, in the northern Kurdistan region. It did not say how many hit the base, but state TV reported that two missiles landed in the village of Sidan, 16km (10 miles) north-west of the city of Irbil, and that a third missile came down in the Bardah Rashsh area, about 47km north-west of Irbil.

Journalists meanwhile photographed security forces retrieving debris from what they believed was the crater caused by the missile that hit Bardah Rashsh.

Did Iran try to avoid US casualties?
US and European government sources told Reuters news agency that they believed the Iranians had deliberately sought to minimise casualties and avoid hitting US facilities in order to prevent the crisis escalating out of control while still signalling their resolve.

CNN journalist Jake Tapper quoted a Pentagon official as saying that Iran "deliberately chose targets that would not result in loss of life".

The Washington Post reported that US officials said they knew by Tuesday afternoon that Iran intended to attack American targets in Iraq, although it was unclear which ones.

An early warning came from intelligence sources as well as communications from Iraq that conveyed Iran's intentions to launch the strike, the paper said.

David Martin, Pentagon correspondent for the BBC's US partner CBS, said a defence official told him the US was warned of the attack "multiple hours" before, giving plenty of time for troops to take shelter in bunkers.

The source said this warning came from a combination of satellites and signals and communications intercepts - the same systems that watch for North Korean tests.

But Mr Martin said he had not found anybody, including one very senior officer, who knew anything about a heads-up from the Iraqi prime minister. This official did not agree with speculation that Iran was aiming to miss.

"Our movements saved American lives," the official told him.

BBC defence correspondent Jonathan Marcus said: "Whether this was by design, or just due to shortcomings with the manufacture and accuracy of their missiles, as yet remains unclear. However, launching long range missiles against US bases is a risky way of making a point."

He added: "Looking at the initial civilian satellite pictures of the impacts of the Iranian missiles at Al Asad air base, they appear to have destroyed several structures, so the lack of casualties could be as much by luck rather than design."
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-51042156
 
But equipments do destroy enemies. For example, after the US-Iraq war, one country is still the superpower of the world while the other is completely demolished. Who would you call the loser in that war?

Everyone who has lost a son, father, brother, sister, mother, uncle, and aunt.

And everyone who has lost a limb and had their life changed over a war that was started on false pretense.

You are failing to understand how war works.
 
Is that why Saudi Arabia continually beg Israel and US to bomb Iran to oblivion ? Or waste billions attempting to isolate and counter Iran in the Middle East by funding various dictatorial regimes and Salafist militants ? A little bit of history knowledge would remind you how they backed Saddam's invasion of Iran in the 80s. They know their useless army would be trounced if they attempted to do so themselves.

Yes Iran talk of exporting revolution, but Saudi Arabia are the biggest exporters of terrorism on the planet and have destroyed any semblance of moderate Islam in the Muslim World, having funded an ideology that has spawned the outgrowth of countless militant groups all over the Middle East and South Asia. Their current King was one of the biggest financiers of terrorism back when he was Governor of Riyadh.

They have on their hands the blood of tens of thousands, including ISIS in Iraq where Gen Sulemani played an instrumental role in stopping their advance. Lay off the Fox News.

If their objective was to dismantle the house of saud than you make a perfectly valid point. The current Iranian regime sees Sunni Muslims also as their main enemy. They won't hesitate to butcher innocent Saudis and other Arabs if they had the power. I wish you spoke a little Farsi or even talked to Lebanese Muslims and asked them about Iran and Hezbollah.
 
If their objective was to dismantle the house of saud than you make a perfectly valid point. The current Iranian regime sees Sunni Muslims also as their main enemy. They won't hesitate to butcher innocent Saudis and other Arabs if they had the power. I wish you spoke a little Farsi or even talked to Lebanese Muslims and asked them about Iran and Hezbollah.

This is not true. Please read the statement from the ayatollah himself.
http://www.sunnishiaunity.org/en/ayatullah-sistanis-statement/
 
If their objective was to dismantle the house of saud than you make a perfectly valid point. The current Iranian regime sees Sunni Muslims also as their main enemy. They won't hesitate to butcher innocent Saudis and other Arabs if they had the power. I wish you spoke a little Farsi or even talked to Lebanese Muslims and asked them about Iran and Hezbollah.

Why did Iran come to the aid of the Kurds of Northern Iraq who last time I checked are predominantly Sunni ?
 
History will remember that Iran made Trump their B

Where are the tough talking red neck supporters of this guy now?
 
History will remember that Iran made Trump their B

Where are the tough talking red neck supporters of this guy now?

Lol you are really taking it too seriously bro, this is nothing compared to what Cuba did to states.
 
The US House of Representatives is set to vote on a resolution that aims to limit President Donald Trump's ability to make war on Iran.

The largely symbolic measure seeks to mandate congressional approval for any conflict with Iran, except in cases of an imminent attack against the US.

It is expected to pass the Democratic-held House, but faces tougher prospects in the Republican-controlled Senate.

Neither the US nor Iran have declared plans for further military action.

Iran this week fired missiles at Iraqi bases housing American forces, injuring no-one, after the US last week killed a senior Iranian commander in a Baghdad drone strike.

Thursday's measure directs the president to "terminate the use of United States Armed Forces" against Iran unless granted congressional authorisation.
It offers an exception when necessary to "defend against an imminent armed attack".

Even if the measure clears Congress, it would not reach the president's desk for a potential veto because it is a concurrent resolution and lacks the force of law.

The measure cites the 1973 War Powers Act, which granted Congress the ability to check the president's power to commit the US to armed conflict.

But the legal questions remain unresolved over whether Congress can use a concurrent resolution to bind the president.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said on Thursday she did not believe Mr Trump had made the US safer after last week's drone strike that killed Iranian commander Qasem Soleimani.

Mr Trump, a Republican, meanwhile tweeted that he hoped "all House Republicans will vote against Crazy Nancy Pelosi's War Powers Resolution".

He also made a new claim about the intelligence behind the air raid, telling reporters at the White House later that the Iranians were "looking to blow up our embassy" in Iraq.

The war powers resolution gathered momentum after a congressional briefing on Wednesday by administration officials seeking to justify the attack.

Following the briefing by the secretary of state, defence secretary and CIA director, two Republicans senators broke ranks.

Mike Lee of Utah and Rand Paul of Kentucky said they might back a similar resolution in the Senate seeking to limit the president's war powers.

Their potential defection raises the chances for the measure in the upper chamber, where Republicans hold a 53-47 majority.

Mr Lee told reporters it was "the worst briefing I've seen at least on a military issue in the nine years I've served".

Lee said the administration officials had warned them against even debating the president's authority to strike Iran, describing such an approach as "un-American" and "insane".

But most Republicans lawmakers stood by the president.

Doug Collins of Georgia claimed Democrats were "in love with terrorists" and grieving more for Soleimani than for US service personnel killed by the Iranian commander.

"They mourn Soleimani more than they mourn our Gold Star families who are the ones who suffered under Soleimani," he told Fox News.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-51053200
 
Last edited:
History will remember that Iran made Trump their B

Where are the tough talking red neck supporters of this guy now?

How exactly? I think this whole episode has become an embarrassment for Iran. US killed one of their most important generals. Iran responded by (intentionally) misfiring a few missiles and may have shot down an airliner by accident. Lol.
 
I do not know why are you doing so much bhangra over this cowardly response from Iran. Those bases were like 20 miles away from Iran. You are acting as if Iran fired missiles on US soil.

The US killed their general and in response, Iran wasted 20 missiles.

The missile attacks were nothing but drama to appease the right wing in Iran. Had they seriously wanted to avenge the death of their general, they would not have informed Iraq beforehand about the attacks. The US troops had several hours to evacuate. The way I see it Iran chickened out. No single American was killed in these attacks, yet they lied about killing 80 american soldiers.

No way can the death of 80 soldiers be kept secret in the US. Their families would have come out by now. The US would have started carpet bombing Iran. It is clear as daylight that Iran did not have the balls to kill a single American and starting the war with history's greatest military. Hence, Trump's tone changed today because Iran backed out from confrontation.

Why on earth should Iran risk destruction trying to win an unwinnable short-term military battle when its winning the long game politically in the region anyway ? Iran at every turn in nearly every theatre of conflict where it is directly competing for influence with the US and its puppet Arab allies has defied its enemies.

Iraq - Iran has seen its long time enemy Saddam Hussein eliminated, and the Shia majority come to power.

Yemen - Iran has created a Vietnam for Saudi Arabia. The Houthis are still entrenched in the North and have successfully attacked mainland Saudi Arabia including even their oil facilities. Meanwhile the Saudi-UAE alliance has fractured in the South.

Syria - despite the best efforts of the Saudis, they've failed to oust Assad from power and the rebels have lost large amounts of territory.

Palestinian Authority - Hamas remain entrenched in the Gaza Strip even after three wars with Israel.

Lebanon - Hezbollah remain entrenched despite the best efforts of the Saudis to undermine them.

Even America's allies in the region are fracturing, with the Saudis falling out with Qatar, and Turkey is now pursuing its own interests in Syria having openly defied America over the Kurds. That's what happens when you have a manchild in office with no strategic abilities whatsoever in Trump, and a spoilt, power crazed brat who's never worked a day in his life in Mohammad bin Salman (how glorious to see this man humiliated after all the nauseating press he received in the West).

And key to these events was General Solemani himself, who was murdered in a fit of frustration. If the Americans and Saudis weren't driven by a demented obsession to destroy Iran, they would realise in Obama's words that the best way forward for the Mid East is for Iran and Saudi Arabia to learn to "share the neighbourhood".
 
How exactly? I think this whole episode has become an embarrassment for Iran. US killed one of their most important generals. Iran responded by (intentionally) misfiring a few missiles and may have shot down an airliner by accident. Lol.

The general will be replaced by someone else. Trump talked tough and threatened Iran with brutal consequences in case they retaliated and Iran did by daring to fire missiles on American bases and Trump cowed down and talked about peace as a result.
 
The general will be replaced by someone else. Trump talked tough and threatened Iran with brutal consequences in case they retaliated and Iran did by daring to fire missiles on American bases and Trump cowed down and talked about peace as a result.

Intentionally misfiring missiles. Either they are grossly incompetent or dishonest.
 
The general will be replaced by someone else. Trump talked tough and threatened Iran with brutal consequences in case they retaliated and Iran did by daring to fire missiles on American bases and Trump cowed down and talked about peace as a result.

Not only talk tough but he also took out their second in command.
 
The general will be replaced by someone else. Trump talked tough and threatened Iran with brutal consequences in case they retaliated and Iran did by daring to fire missiles on American bases and Trump cowed down and talked about peace as a result.

I hope you are trolling cause Iran and only Iran has come out of this as losers.

Try to understand their loss and the impact of that. Its as if the USA would target and kill Gen Bajwa.
 
In the context of promise of "severe revenge" what has happened since then -for a dispassionate observer clearly shows how Iran muddled its response.

1. First Iran gets their No. 2 taken out along with at least one another important figure in Muhandis.

2. More than 35 Iranians get killed in a stampede during the funeral procession of Soleimani.

3. Iran now it appears - accidentally shot a commercial airliner within its own airspace -which among all the people killed - most of them were Iranian.

This whole "severe revenge" as far as the human cost is concerned resulted in zero American casualties so far but took out several Iranian, Canadian, Ukranian, British, Swede, Afghan and German lives.

I know I may be sounding naive but I really do hope this absolutely tragic mistake by Iran puts an end to this cycle of taking "severe revenge" as in all likelihood whatever form this is going to take it appears more Iranian lives are in danger.

On a side note given the fact that Iran did fire missiles into Iraq aimed at attacking US bases - how irresponsible of them not to clear their own airspace - I mean that is just one question along the train of hundreds which are to be asked of the Iranian top brass in the aftermath of this truly heartbreaking aviation tragedy.
 
I hope you are trolling cause Iran and only Iran has come out of this as losers.

Try to understand their loss and the impact of that. Its as if the USA would target and kill Gen Bajwa.

The main goal with killing Soleimani was to put pressure on Iran and force them to negotiate a new nuclear deal that suits the US, Saudi Arabia and Israel. The fact that a US election is coming up, Trump probably wants to strike a new deal with Iran before the election campaign, which will boost his approval ratings even further.

If Iran doesn’t come to the negotiating table, I don’t see how this is a win for the US and a loss for Iran.

At best, this is a Pyrrhic victory for the US.
Iran just rolled back uranium deal commitments. The US and its regional allies have more to lose than to gain if Iran simply refuses to negotiate a new deal and continues enriching uranium.
 
Last edited:
I don’t really see how killing the Head of the Quds really makes much difference. He just gets replaced with another Head of the Quds (which happened the very next day), and killing this guy would just see him too being replaced.

The only long term solution to this situation is through diplomacy.
 
The main goal with killing Soleimani was to put pressure on Iran and force them to negotiate a new nuclear deal that suits the US, Saudi Arabia and Israel. The fact that a US election is coming up, Trump probably wants to strike a new deal with Iran before the election campaign, which will boost his approval ratings even further.

If Iran doesn’t come to the negotiating table, I don’t see how this is a win for the US and a loss for Iran.

At best, this is a Pyrrhic victory for the US.
Iran just rolled back uranium deal commitments. The US and its regional allies have more to lose than to gain if Iran simply refuses to negotiate a new deal and continues enriching uranium.

Well thats your opinion. Fact is Irans economy is dead and America attacked and killed their 2nd man in command. In 2020 such attacks rarely happen.

In return Iran is in tatters all fronts.
 
Well thats your opinion. Fact is Irans economy is dead and America attacked and killed their 2nd man in command. In 2020 such attacks rarely happen.

In return Iran is in tatters all fronts.

In return Iran attacked US bases, see the video and you will see American soldiers running with heavy damage to the buildings. Iran struck back, the Americans stopped their terrorism. A lesson for all other nations to fight back against bullies and cowards. :)
 
Not only talk tough but he also took out their second in command.

Why are Aussie troops in Iraq? lol

When did an Iraqi hurt any Aussie before you troops landed there? Shouldn't they be in Australia helping to put out the fires? Strange country imo.
 
Trump got scared from the Iranian threat to target their US bases in the Middle East. History will remember that it was Trump who chickened out from his initial threats.
 
It's laughable that people are calling the US and Trump cowards.

History will remember that Trump assassinated the second most powerful person in Iran, Major General Qassem Soleimani. That was his goal, which he achieved. It was never his intention to go to war with Iran unless it was unavoidable. In retaliation, Iran wasted 22 missiles, lost 50 people due to stampede during the General's funeral, and possibly shot down a passenger plane by mistake. In other words, Iran was an absolute clown in this whole situation.
 
It's laughable that people are calling the US and Trump cowards.

History will remember that Trump assassinated the second most powerful person in Iran, Major General Qassem Soleimani. That was his goal, which he achieved. It was never his intention to go to war with Iran unless it was unavoidable. In retaliation, Iran wasted 22 missiles, lost 50 people due to stampede during the General's funeral, and possibly shot down a passenger plane by mistake. In other words, Iran was an absolute clown in this whole situation.

Trump made strong threats if Iran responded. Attacking cultural sites, 52 targets etc. Iran responded with missiles and Trump did not respond in return.

Who got killed is not relevant. The relevant issue is Iran is the first country to attack US bases with missiles, US did nothing in response. Iran will continue to use proxy until all yanks are back in Texas, don't think this is over.
 
Trump made strong threats if Iran responded. Attacking cultural sites, 52 targets etc. Iran responded with missiles and Trump did not respond in return.

Who got killed is not relevant. The relevant issue is Iran is the first country to attack US bases with missiles, US did nothing in response. Iran will continue to use proxy until all yanks are back in Texas, don't think this is over.

Iran responded by misfiring missiles. Fixed.

And no, Iran is not the first country to attack the US using missiles.

Simply put, US made Iran its little B. The shine has finally worn off Iran.
 
Last edited:
US will not do anything till their people are killed or if it benefits any of their corporate houses, they have gotten smarter and more automated.

US has already destroyed Iran’s economy , more sanctions on the way and killed their most famous general in recent years, not sure why people are trying to twist this, it reminds me of how when top cricket teams defeat bottom ones by 100 runs instead of 200 , we hear how they fought well, nothing of that sort even happened here, just showing up for the match is getting them kudos from their fans.

Iran though did the smart thing , there is absolutely no way they could had taken on States, so respect to them for not doing anything stupid except maybe shooting a passenger plane.
 
Iran responded by misfiring missiles. Fixed.

And no, Iran is not the first country to attack the US using missiles.

Simply put, US made Iran its little B. The shine has finally worn off Iran.

Lets debate before simply put lol.

Iran fired missiles to the area they wanted to hit. There was no intent to kill anyone, unlike the terrorists Yanks.

Which country has hit US bases with missiles?
 
I think the Iranian response was an exceptionally bold one and beyond the immature reactions displayed by casual observers it has widely aknowledged by the international community as a bold and rational step.

Consider how the Iranians are often demonized in the international press and being irrational warmongers they have displayed incredible tact and ultimately America has lost the PR battle in this case.

Further, the Iranians have the majority if the middle east under their control. Yemen, Iraq, Lebanon and Syria are all under considerable Iranian influence whilst Qatar is hugely sympathetic to them. Via Hezbollah and Hamas they have considerable support in Palestine and further afield Turkey is also quite sympathetic. Stepping out even further and a ressurgent Russia is also supportive. Iran has caused considerable damage to the intentions of the Americans and Saudis. Ultimately the regime has military not lost much beyond the death of the general whilst gaining almost all of the middle east.

Finally, despite the threats of Trump, the Iranians struck back at the Americans. In my short lifespan this is the first time this has happened that American interests have been hit this way. Those totalling up the damage like its a cricket score fail to understand the context of prior events and also fail to understand the enormous symbolism of the fact that Iran directly attacked American interests and America did not reply. In fact, the American allys in the region who constantly advocate the destruction of Iran also called for quick deescalation( including Israelis!)due to the threat of Iranian retaliation.
 
Lets debate before simply put lol.

Iran fired missiles to the area they wanted to hit. There was no intent to kill anyone, unlike the terrorists Yanks.

Which country has hit US bases with missiles?

No country has. Ever.

In pure numerical terms this response was minor but a huge precedent has been set by Iran here.

Similarly to when Russia bulldozed its way through ukraine and Georgia and the Americans did nothing.

Massive massive symbolic events have taken place that display US military threat ( whilst still the most potent) is not enough to stop countries from defending their own interests.

Russia has knocked them back in Ukraine/Georgia. Despite the billions spent and troops lost in the Middle East Iran has knocked them back there.

What saddens me is Britains role in all of this. I really believe that we can play a hugely important diplomatic role in mediation of these crises instead of always jumping in with the Americans!
 
No country has. Ever.

In pure numerical terms this response was minor but a huge precedent has been set by Iran here.

Similarly to when Russia bulldozed its way through ukraine and Georgia and the Americans did nothing.

Massive massive symbolic events have taken place that display US military threat ( whilst still the most potent) is not enough to stop countries from defending their own interests.

Russia has knocked them back in Ukraine/Georgia. Despite the billions spent and troops lost in the Middle East Iran has knocked them back there.

What saddens me is Britains role in all of this. I really believe that we can play a hugely important diplomatic role in mediation of these crises instead of always jumping in with the Americans!

You of course get it. :) US will think thrice before attempting such a stunt against Iran. What the Yanks realised is Iran has little to lose, the public are behind the government and it's no Libya or Iraq where they can terrorise with little consequences. Any outright war would have destroyed the world economy, people in the UK would lose jobs with oil prices reaching $300+ a barrel.

If Corbyn was in power, UK could bring Iran together. The Iranians are not anti west which is often believed. After 911 they joined the war of terror giving vital info to the US. Now the UK has once again showed itself to be a poodle of the US. UK should be a neutral nation after it's history but I guess Zionists have power of the UK governments which cannot be stopped atm.
 
Didn’t the UK urge deescalation? I didn’t see us particularly supporting the Americans on this one.
 
Didn’t the UK urge deescalation? I didn’t see us particularly supporting the Americans on this one.

Only after suggesting it was right to murder someone against International law. It should have been condemned due to this simple fact.

The UK is no longer a superpower, it must stay neutral which is what the public want.
 
Washington DC (CNN Business)Instagram and its parent company Facebook are removing posts that voice support for slain Iranian commander Qassem Soleimani to comply with US sanctions, a Facebook spokesperson said in a statement to CNN Business Friday.

The Iranian government has called for nationwide legal action against Instagram in protest, even creating a portal on a government website for the app's users to submit examples of posts the company removed, Iranian state media reported.

Instagram is one of the few western social media platforms that is not blocked in Iran. Facebook and Twitter are blocked but some Iranians access those sites using VPNs.

In a tweet, Iran's government spokesperson, Ali Rabiei, called Instagram's actions "undemocratic."

Instagram shut down Soleimani's own account on the platform last April after the US government designated the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) a foreign terrorist organization. Soleimani was an IRGC commander.

"We operate under US sanctions laws, including those related to the US government's designation of the IRGC and its leadership," a Facebook spokesperson said in a statement.

Iranian soccer player Alireza Jahanbakhsh, who has a verified Instagram account, posted a photo of Soleimani after his death. Jahanbakhsh said Instagram had removed that post.

Details of the takedowns were reported earlier by Coda Story.

As part of its compliance with US law, the Facebook spokesperson said the company removes accounts run by or on behalf of sanctioned people and organizations.

It also removes posts that commend the actions of sanctioned parties and individuals and seek to help further their actions, the spokesperson said, adding that Facebook has an appeals process if users feel their posts were removed in error.

CNN Business has reached out to Twitter and Google for comment to ask how they handle content related to people sanctioned by the US government.

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/01/10/tech/instagram-iran-soleimani-posts/index.html
 
This is a classic lose - lose scenario for everybody. For Iran, US and ofcourse Pakistan and India given the destabilization in neighbourhood with potential surge in oil prices. This is not a video game and nothing to rave about.
 
140 Iranian were killed as compared to ZERO casualties on the American side. All this came with harsher sanctions and international community turning against them. Yet, experts here have been telling us how Iran won this round of confrontation
 
140 Iranian were killed as compared to ZERO casualties on the American side. All this came with harsher sanctions and international community turning against them. Yet, experts here have been telling us how Iran won this round of confrontation

There was a casualty
 
140 Iranian were killed as compared to ZERO casualties on the American side. All this came with harsher sanctions and international community turning against them. Yet, experts here have been telling us how Iran won this round of confrontation

Beside republicans, no one has supported it.

Even most of the Arab countries were surprised and were against it and escalation.

Sanctions are placed by US and just because the powerful can do it doesn’t make it right and productive.

Long term solution is and will be dialogue and agreement which was destroyed because it had Obama’s (not a fan of his either) signature.

Plenty of media have reported in US and other countries, Trump was forced to kill due to pressure put in by few GOP to divert the attention from impeachment.

Repeating the optics does not make one expert.
 
I give you that. Still Iran did not accomplish anything. The US achieved their goal by killing Soleimani.

Iran would really love to divert the attention from this plane crash. Protests have erupted in Iran because of this plane crash

They may do something again.
 
Beside republicans, no one has supported it.

Even most of the Arab countries were surprised and were against it and escalation.

Sanctions are placed by US and just because the powerful can do it doesn’t make it right and productive.

Long term solution is and will be dialogue and agreement which was destroyed because it had Obama’s (not a fan of his either) signature.

Plenty of media have reported in US and other countries, Trump was forced to kill due to pressure put in by few GOP to divert the attention from impeachment.

Repeating the optics does not make one expert.

The US achieved its objectives. They never wanted to start a war unless Iran did something stupid in retaliation. The US does not care about what the rest of the world says. The POTUS will do whatever is best for the country unlike the democrats who gave billions to Iran which could have been spent on the people of the United States of America.
 
Iran would really love to divert the attention from this plane crash. Protests have erupted in Iran because of this plane crash

They may do something again.

They may go back to proxy war but Iran has lost all credibility when it comes to the might and competence of their military. They have been reduced to one of many states who talk big with no action.
 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr"><a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/IranPlaneCrash?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#IranPlaneCrash</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/IranProtests?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#IranProtests</a> <br>Protestors screaming for Khamenei to resign.<br>Chants, "All these years of crimes, Death to the Supreme Leader." <a href="https://t.co/uL9DM6Xu75">pic.twitter.com/uL9DM6Xu75</a></p>— Farnaz Fassihi (@farnazfassihi) <a href="https://twitter.com/farnazfassihi/status/1216014780152139778?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 11, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
The US achieved its objectives. They never wanted to start a war unless Iran did something stupid in retaliation. The US does not care about what the rest of the world says. The POTUS will do whatever is best for the country unlike the democrats who gave billions to Iran which could have been spent on the people of the United States of America.

What?

POTUS does not care about anyone else but himself and election.

That money did not belong to Iran, it was Iran's money.

You sound like you have just watched FOX news.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
What?

POTUS does not care about anyone else but himself and election.

That money did not belong to Iran, it was Iran's money.

You sound like you have just watched FOX news.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/21/politics/trump-twitter-iran-fact-check/index.html

Facts First: This is roughly true. As part of a settlement, Obama transferred $1.7 billion in cash to Iran in 2016. The administration also used the money to pressure Iran to release several American prisoners.

The Obama administration maintained that the payments were made as a reimbursement to Iran for military equipment that the country had purchased from the US in the late 1970s but the US never delivered on.

The entire $1.7 billion, given in two separate payments of $400 million and $1.3 billion, was provided in cash. The timing of the first payment corresponded with Iran's release of the American prisoners, which occurred the same day.

Obama also released Iranian assets worth $150 billion which were previously frozen. In return, Iran's gift was Soleimani who was creating problems for the US.

Obama's failed foreign policies have hurt America the most. Trump is setting things right one by one and has been a far better president than Obama. This is coming from someone who did not support Trump at the time of election.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/21/politics/trump-twitter-iran-fact-check/index.html

Obama also released Iranian assets worth $150 billion which were previously frozen. In return, Iran's gift was Soleimani who was creating problems for the US.

Obama's failed foreign policies have hurt America the most. Trump is setting things right one by one and has been a far better president than Obama. This is coming from someone who did not support Trump at the time of election.

You are missing the main point. US should never have been in Iraq and rightly they are being targeted.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You are missing the main point. US should never have been in Iraq and rightly they are being targeted.

Similarly, Iran had no business poking its nose in Iraq. Iran has been creating militia in several countries and Solemani was the mastermind behind it. The US did the whole world a big favor by eliminating him.
 
Similarly, Iran had no business poking its nose in Iraq. Iran has been creating militia in several countries and Solemani was the mastermind behind it. The US did the whole world a big favor by eliminating him.

Do you have world map at home? Iran is next to Iraq, most Iraqis are Shias. It's in their interest to protect their people and borders.

Why is the US in Iraq, care to explain?
 
Do you have world map at home? Iran is next to Iraq, most Iraqis are Shias. It's in their interest to protect their people and borders.

Why is the US in Iraq, care to explain?

What kind of lame excuse is that? Iran and Iraq are two different countries. It does not matter if the majority of the population in both countries are Shias. Don't they have international borders? Why is Iran creating militias in Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq. Why is Iran letting Indian spy enter Pakistan? Why is Iran attacking Saudi oil fields? Care to explain?
 
What kind of lame excuse is that? Iran and Iraq are two different countries. It does not matter if the majority of the population in both countries are Shias. Don't they have international borders? Why is Iran creating militias in Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq. Why is Iran letting Indian spy enter Pakistan? Why is Iran attacking Saudi oil fields? Care to explain?

You haven't answered my simple question. Answer it and then MY answers to yours will make sense.

Why is the US in Iraq and has been since 2003? Or you have no clue ? lol
 
Iranian people protesting against Khomeini now, big blow to the ego of many of its citizens as well after knowing this but I hope they don’t give into it.
 
TIKRIT, Iraq (Reuters) - Four people were wounded on Sunday in an attack on Balad air base in northern Iraq which houses U.S. personnel.

The Iraqi military said in a statement that eight Katyusha rockets had been fired at the base, about 80 km (50 miles) north of the capital Baghdad, and that the four wounded included two officers.

Military sources identified the wounded as Iraqi soldiers. They said seven mortar bombs had hit the base’s runway.

There was no word of any U.S. casualties among the U.S. forces at the base.

The Iraqi military statement did not say who was behind the attack and made no mention of heightened tensions between the United States and Iran, which last Wednesday fired missiles at two military bases in Iraq which house U.S. forces.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...d-four-wounded-military-sources-idUSKBN1ZB0I0
 
Iran raid left '34 US troops with traumatic brain injuries'

The Pentagon has said that 34 US troops were diagnosed with traumatic brain injuries (TBI) following an Iranian attack on their base in Iraq.

Seventeen troops are still under medical observation, a spokesman said.

President Donald Trump had said no Americans were injured in the 8 January strike, which came in retaliation for the US killing of an Iranian general.

Mr Trump had cited the supposed lack of injuries in his decision not to strike back against Iran.

But last week, the Pentagon said 11 service members had been treated for concussion symptoms from the attack.

Asked about the apparent discrepancy this week at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, Mr Trump said: "I heard that they had headaches, and a couple of other things, but I would say, and I can report, it's not very serious."

"I don't consider them very serious injuries relative to other injuries I have seen," he said when asked about possible TBIs.

The Pentagon has said no Americans were killed in the Iranian missile strike on the Ain al-Asad base, with most sheltering in bunkers as missiles rained down.

On Friday, Pentagon spokesman Jonathan Hoffman told reporters that eight of the affected soldiers have been sent back to the US for further treatment, while another nine are being treated in Germany.

Sixteen troops were treated in Iraq and one in Kuwait before all 17 were returned to active duty, officials say.

Mr Hoffman added that the US Defence Secretary Mark Esper was not immediately aware of the injuries in the days after the attack.

Iraq & Afghanistan Veterans of America, a non-profit organisation, slammed the Trump administration for taking so long to reveal the extent of casualties.

"This is a big deal," its founder Paul Rieckhoff tweeted. "The American people must be able to trust the government to share information about our sons and daughters in harms way. Nothing is more serious and sacred."

TBIs are common in warzones, according to the US military.

The most common cause of a TBI for deployed soldiers is an explosive blast, writes the US Defense and Veterans Brain Injury Center.

They are classified as mild, moderate, severe or penetrating. A mild TBI is also known as a concussion, and can be caused by a blast's "atmospheric over-pressure followed by under-pressure or vacuum".

The air vacuum is capable of penetrating solid objects, making it possible for soldiers to avoid blunt force trauma but still receive an invisible brain injury.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-51243888
 
34 US troops diagnosed with concussion.

Concussions are no joke, we've seen its effects in sports.

Yet Trump says "I heard they had headaches." He is incapable of empathy with other human beings. He wouldn't recognise a concussion because there's not much of a brain left after years of Fox and Friends, Diet Coke and fast food.
 
Iran probably has access to a lot more damaging missile technology than brain concussion loud bangs. Germ warfare would be the easiest to spread undetected until it's too late. This is what happens when winning a poll becomes more important than the end result.
 
There were videos of American troops running for their lives.

USA were hit back for the first time and sat down. A good lesson to the rest, hit them hard. Americans cant take their troops being hurt or killed.
 
The number of US troops suffering from traumatic brain injuries (TBI) after an Iranian attack on a US base in Iraq in January has risen to 109, according to US officials.

The figure is a significant increase from the 64 injured service members previously reported by the Pentagon.

President Donald Trump initially said no Americans were injured in the raid.

The attack on 8 January came amid tensions over the US killing of an Iranian general.

Nearly 70% of the injured service members have returned to their duties, the Pentagon added in its statement.

The rising number of reported cases results from the mild form of injury which means symptoms take time to manifest, the Pentagon said in a press conference in January.

US Republican lawmaker Joni Ernst called for more answers on Monday.

Media captionInside the US base attacked by Iranian missiles
"It's vital we have a plan to treat these injured service members.

"I've called on the Pentagon to ensure the safety and care of our deployed forces who may be exposed to blast injuries in Iraq," he tweeted.

Last month President Trump downplayed the significance of traumatic brain injuries when asked about the impact of the attack.

"I heard that they had headaches, and a couple of other things, but I would say, and I can report, it's not very serious," he said.

When asked about possible TBIs he said: "I don't consider them very serious injuries relative to other injuries I have seen."

What are traumatic brain injuries?
TBIs are common in warzones, according to the US military.

The most common cause of a TBI for deployed soldiers is an explosive blast, writes the US Defense and Veterans Brain Injury Center.

They are classified as mild, moderate, severe or penetrating. A mild TBI is also known as a concussion, and can be caused by a blast's "atmospheric over-pressure followed by under-pressure or vacuum".

The air vacuum is capable of penetrating solid objects, making it possible for soldiers to avoid blunt force trauma but still receive an invisible brain injury.

More than 400,000 troops have been diagnosed with TBI's since 2000, according to the US government.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-51453829
 
If Iran had worked on its health department rather than useless war weapons, maybe they could have contained coronavirus
 
Iran issues arrest warrant for Trump, asks Interpol to help

Iran has issued an arrest warrant and asked Interpol for help in detaining US President Donald Trump and dozens of others it believes carried out the drone strike that killed a top Iranian general in Baghdad.

Tehran prosecutor Ali Alqasimehr said on Monday that Trump and more than 30 others whom Iran accuses of involvement in the January 3 strike that killed General Qassem Soleimani face "murder and terrorism charges", the semi-official ISNA news agency reported.

Alqasimehr did not identify anyone else sought other than Trump, but stressed Iran would continue to pursue his prosecution even after his presidency ends.

Interpol, based in Lyon, France, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Alqasimehr also was quoted as saying that Iran requested a "red notice" be put out for Trump and the others, which represents the highest level arrest request issued by Interpol.

Local authorities end up making the arrests on behalf of the country that request it. The notices cannot force countries to arrest or extradite suspects, but can put government leaders on the spot and limit suspects' travel.

After receiving a request, Interpol meets by committee and discusses whether or not to share the information with its member states. Interpol has no requirement for making any of the notices public, though some do get published on its website.

It is unlikely Interpol would grant Iran's request as its guideline for notices forbids it from "undertaking any intervention or activities of a political" nature.

The US killed General Soleimani, who oversaw the Revolutionary Guard's expeditionary Quds Force, and others in the January strike near Baghdad International Airport.

The assasination came after months of incidents raising tensions between the two countries and ultimately saw Iran retaliate with a ballistic missile strike targeting American troops in Iraq.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020...rant-trump-asks-interpol-200629104710662.html
 
Saudi, U.S. officials call for extending UN arms embargo on Iran

RIYADH (Reuters) - Saudi and U.S. officials on Monday urged the international community to extend a U.N. arms embargo on Iran, saying that letting the ban expire would allow Tehran to further arm its proxies and destabilise the region.

The 13-year-old arms curbs on Iran are due to expire in October under the terms of Tehran’s 2015 nuclear deal with world powers. Russia and China have signalled they oppose extending the embargo. Both wield vetoes on the U.N. Security Council, which will decide the matter.

“Despite the embargo, Iran seeks to provide weapons to terrorist groups, so what will happen if the embargo is lifted? Iran will become more ferocious and aggressive,” Saudi minister of state for foreign affairs Adel al-Jubeir told a joint news conference with U.S. Iran envoy Brian Hook in Riyadh.

Jubeir said a shipment of Iranian weapons bound for Yemen’s Iran-aligned Houthi movement was seized as recently as Sunday. A Saudi-led coalition has been battling the Houthis in Yemen for five years.

The conference venue displayed weapons, including drones and missiles, that Saudi authorities said were used in cross-border Houthi attacks on Saudi cities and that were supplied to the group by Tehran.

“We urge the international community to extend the embargo on selling arms to Iran and on Iran’s ability to sell arms to the world,” Jubeir said.

Iran denies arming groups in the Middle East, including the Houthis, and blames regional tensions on the United States and its allies in the region.

Hook said lifting the ban would “only embolden” Tehran, drive greater instability and trigger a regional arms race.

“This is not an outcome that the U.N. Security Council can accept. The council’s mandate is clear: to maintain international peace and security,” Hook added.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...tending-un-arms-embargo-on-iran-idUSKBN2401QS
 
U.N. expert deems U.S. drone strike on Iran's Soleimani an 'unlawful' killing

GENEVA (Reuters) - The January U.S. drone strike in Iraq that killed top Iranian general Qassem Soleimani and nine other people represented a violation of international law, a U.N. human rights investigator said on Monday.

The United States has failed to provide sufficient evidence of an ongoing or imminent attack against its interests to justify the strike on Soleimani’s convoy as it left Baghdad airport, said Agnes Callamard, U.N. special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions.

The attack violated the U.N. Charter, Callamard wrote in a report calling for accountability for targeted killings by armed drones and for greater regulation of the weapons.

“The world is at a critical time, and possible tipping point, when it comes to the use of drones. ... The Security Council is missing in action; the international community, willingly or not, stands largely silent,” Callamard, an independent investigator, told Reuters.

Callamard is due on Thursday to present her findings to the Human Rights Council, giving member states a chance to debate what action to pursue. The United States is not a member of the forum, having quit two years ago.

Soleimani, leader of the Revolutionary Guards’ Quds Force, was a pivotal figure in orchestrating Iran’s campaign to drive U.S. forces out of Iraq, and built up Iran’s network of proxy armies across the Middle East. Washington had accused Soleimani of masterminding attacks by Iranian-aligned militias on U.S. forces in the region.

“Major General Soleimani was in charge of Iran military strategy, and actions, in Syria and Iraq. But absent an actual imminent threat to life, the course of action taken by the U.S. was unlawful,” Callamard wrote in the report.

The Jan. 3 drone strike was the first known incident in which a nation invoked self-defence as a justification for an attack against a state actor in the territory of a third country, Callamard added.

Iran retaliated with a rocket attack on an Iraqi air base where U.S. forces were stationed. Hours later, Iranian forces on high alert mistakenly shot down a Ukrainian passenger airliner taking off from Tehran.

Iran has issued an arrest warrant for U.S. President Donald Trump and 35 others over Soleimani’s killing and has asked Interpol for help, Tehran prosecutor Ali Alqasimehr said on June 29, according to the semi-official Fars news agency.

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-u...s-soleimani-an-unlawful-killing-idUKKBN2472TI
 
Iran has executed a former defence ministry employee convicted of spying on behalf of the US's Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the country's judiciary said.

Judiciary spokesman Gholamhossein Esmaili said on Tuesday that Reza Asgari, who had worked in the aerospace department of the ministry and retired in 2016, had been executed last week.

"In the last years of his service, he joined the CIA. He sold information about our missiles ... to the CIA and took money from them," Esmaili said. "He was identified, tried and sentenced to death."

Esmaili added that the death sentence for Mahmoud Mousavi-Majd, another Iranian accused of spying for US and Israeli intelligence, is among those still to be carried out.

Majd was accused of spying on Iran's armed forces and helping the US to locate Qassem Soleimani, the top Iranian general assassinated in a US drone strike in Baghdad.

Iran retaliated with ballistic missiles aimed at US troops stationed in Iraq, but US President Donald Trump opted against responding militarily.

In June 2019, Iran had announced the hanging of alleged spy, Jalal Haji Zavar, in a prison near Tehran.

Authorities said Haji Zavar, also a former staffer of the defence ministry, had admitted in court that he was paid to spy for the CIA, adding that they confiscated espionage equipment from his residence.

Haji Zavar's wife was reportedly sentenced to 15 years in prison for her role in the espionage.

Iran in February handed down a similar sentence for Amir Rahimpour, another man convicted of spying for the US and conspiring to sell information on Iran's nuclear programme.

Last year, the country announced it had captured 17 spies it said were working for the CIA.

Protesters to be executed

In another development on Tuesday, Esmaili announced that Iran's Supreme Court has confirmed the death sentences of three Iranians accused of taking part in protests in November last year.

The three suspects were violent ringleaders, he said, and had set fire to a number of buildings and transport facilities.

Esmaili said the men had recorded their actions on their phones and the evidence had been considered by the court. The verdicts could still be revised, he added.

Iran was rocked by days of unrest following a rise in petrol prices in November 2019. The protests were violently suppressed by security forces, with many people killed and hundreds arrested.

Iran's government referred to the demonstrators as paid mercenaries of its arch enemies - the US, Israel and Saudi Arabia - and claimed the protesters' aim was to weaken or even bring down the government.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020...istry-staffer-linked-cia-200714101556222.html
 
Iran still ranting and raving like lunatics over Soleimani‘s death.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Deputy Commander of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC): "Hard revenge for the blood of the martyr Qasem Soleimani and the martyr Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis and their martyred comrades is coming and on the way."</p>— Evan Kohlmann (@IntelTweet) <a href="https://twitter.com/IntelTweet/status/1343784456704958465?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 29, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

“An icon of pride for world muslims” - really?

TEHRAN (FNA)- Iranian President Hassan Rouhani said Martyr Lieutenant General Qassem Soleimani was a hero for the Iranian nation and all freedom-seeking people in the world, adding that he was a source of pride for the entire Islamic Ummah.

https://www.farsnews.ir/en/news/139...ani-Nainal-Champin-Icn-f-Pride-fr-Wrld-Mslims
 
Still waiting on Iran to avenge the death of Solemani.

*****crickets*****
 
Back
Top