What's new

Will US & Saudi Arabia go to war with Iran?

Madplayer

Senior Test Player
Joined
Aug 30, 2012
Runs
28,686
Post of the Week
1
Amid rising tension with Iran, non-emergency staff evacuates U.S. Embassy in Iraq

The State Department on Wednesday ordered the evacuation of non-emergency staff from the U.S. Embassy in Iraq, a move that comes as the U.S. government has alluded to risks of an attack by the Islamic Republic or its proxies in the region.

The Wednesday order follows a travel advisory posted on the embassy’s website Sunday urging American citizens not to travel to Iraq and to remain vigilant. The department said in light of the heightened tensions, non-emergency staff at both the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad and the U.S. Consulate in Erbil would be evacuated, adding that the government’s ability to provide emergency services to U.S. citizens there is “extremely limited.”

The State Department has also temporarily suspended normal visa services at both locations, Wednesday's announcement said.

Tensions with Tehran have heightened in recent weeks, with the U.S. adding additional sanctions targeting Iran in the wake of Iranian President Hassan Rouhani's announcement that his nation would end its compliance with portions of a 2015 nuclear agreement unless the deal's other signatories renegotiate. The U.S., which helped negotiate the deal under President Barack Obama, withdrew from it last year under President Donald Trump.

Friction between the U.S. and Iran also increased earlier this year with the Trump administration's decision to identify the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, a branch of the Iranian military, as a terrorist organization.

Over the past week, the Pentagon has deployed a series of military assets to the Persian Gulf region, including an aircraft carrier, a bomber group and other warships, citing an unspecified “credible threat” from Iran to U.S. interests. And Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has twice diverted foreign travel to address what the administration has identified as a growing crisis, making a surprise visit to Baghdad last week and meeting in Brussels with European leaders on Monday to brief them on what he called threats and concerns emanating from Tehran.

The U.S. has blamed Iranian militants for a series of attacks over the weekend on oil tankers near an important waterway in the Persian Gulf, accusations Tehran denied. And Iran-backed Houthi militants took credit Tuesday for drone attacks on a major Saudi Arabian pipeline in the region.

The uptick in tension has been met with concern and skepticism by some U.S. allies. The Associated Press reported that British Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt expressed concern on behalf of his nation that a conflict could erupt “with an escalation that is unintended really on either side.” And British Maj. Gen. Chris Ghika, deputy commander of the U.S.-led coalition forces in Iraq and Syria, said Tuesday there was “no increased threat from Iranian-backed forces” to U.S. or other coalition forces in the region.

The Pentagon later disputed Ghika's assessment via a statement from U.S. Central Command.

And in another sign of the severity of the rising tensions, The New York Times reported that White House officials were briefed last week on an updated war plan for potential conflict with Iran that included the deployment of up to 120,000 U.S. troops. Trump denied the report Tuesday, but said he would "absolutely" deploy American forces to Iran and that if he did, he'd send "a hell of a lot more troops than that."

The escalations have been reminiscent to some of the runup to the Iraq War leading to warnings about engaging in another conflict in the Middle East, though Pompeo said Tuesday following a meeting with his Russian counterpart that "we fundamentally do not seek a war with Iran."

He later added that "we’ve also made clear to the Iranians that if American interests are attacked we will most certainly respond in an appropriate fashion."

Source: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.po...2019/05/15/us-embassy-iraq-evacuation-1324931
 
The US state department has ordered the departure of "non-emergency employees" from Iraq, amid rising tensions between the US and Iraq's neighbour Iran.

Staff at the embassy in Baghdad and the consulate in Irbil must leave as soon as possible on commercial transport.

Meanwhile, the German and Dutch armies have suspended training Iraqi soldiers.

The US military said on Tuesday that the threat level in the Middle East had been raised in response to intelligence about Iran-backed forces in the region.

It contradicted a British general who had said there was "no increased threat".

Chris Ghika, deputy commander of the global coalition against the Islamic State group, had told reporters that measures in place to protect US forces and their allies from Iran-backed militias in Iraq and Syria were "completely satisfactory".

Why is the US evacuating staff?
A state department spokesman said: "Ensuring the safety of US government personnel and citizens is our highest priority and we are confident in the Iraqi security services' [ability] to protect us.

"But this threat is serious and we want to reduce the risk of harm."

The US military's Central Command also talked of "identified credible threats available to intelligence from US and allies" when it publicly disputed Gen Ghika's comments in a Pentagon briefing on Tuesday.

Central Command, in co-ordination with the global coalition's Operation Inherent Resolve (OIR), had "increased the force posture level for all service members assigned to OIR in Iraq and Syria", spokesman Capt Bill Urban said.

"As a result OIR is now at a high level of alert as we continue to closely monitor credible and possibly imminent threats to US forces in Iraq," he added.

The UK Ministry of Defence stressed that Gen Ghika's "sole focus" was the enduring defeat of IS, and that he had made clear there were a range of threats to forces in the region that required very robust protection measures.

Germany's defence ministry said on Wednesday that the German army had suspended its training programmes in Iraq.

A spokesman said the ministry had received indications of potential attacks supported by Iran, but that there was no specific threat to the 160 German troops involved in the training operation.

The Dutch defence ministry said Dutch soldiers had also suspended their training mission due to an unspecified threat, local media reported.

Do we know anything about the alleged threat?
Not yet. But Reuters news agency cited Iraqi security sources as saying that during a visit to Iraq earlier this month US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told Iraqi commanders that intelligence showed Iran-backed paramilitary fighters were positioning rockets near bases housing US troops.

"The message from the Americans was clear. They wanted guarantees that Iraq would stop those groups threatening US interests," one of the sources was quoted as saying. "They said if the US were attacked on Iraqi soil, it would take action to defend itself without co-ordinating with Baghdad."

Iraq's Prime Minister, Adel Abdul Mahdi, said on Tuesday that its security forces had not observed "movements that constitute a threat to any side".

Paramilitary groups trained, armed and advised by Iran have played an important role in the battle against IS in Iraq. They were formally incorporated into the Iraqi security forces last year, but continue to operate semi-independently.

Spokesmen for two of the groups told Reuters that the talk of threats to US forces was "psychological warfare" by Washington.

The US does not have a diplomatic presence in Iran. The Swiss embassy represents US interests in the country.

Why have US-Iran tensions escalated?
It was also reported on Tuesday that US investigators believed Iran or groups it supported had used explosives to damage four tankers off the coast of the United Arab Emirates on Sunday. Large holes were found in the hulls of the tankers, but no evidence has been released showing a link to Iran.

Saudi Arabia meanwhile said that drone attacks on two oil pumping stations by Yemen's Houthi rebel movement, which is supported by Iran, had forced it to temporarily shut the main East-West Pipeline.

Earlier this month, the US sent an aircraft carrier and B-52 bombers to the Gulf.

There were repeated warnings from Washington justifying the military build-up, based on what Mr Pompeo described as an "escalation" in activities by Iran.

It came after the US ended exemptions from sanctions for importers of Iranian oil.

President Donald Trump reinstated the sanctions last year after abandoning a landmark nuclear deal between Iran and six world powers.

Iran has vowed to overcome the measures, but its economy is sliding towards a deep recession and the value of its currency has plummeted.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-48279203
 
Feel absolutely no sympathy for Iran after their constant snideness at us since the entire Yadav and then recent event. I used to defend them a lot, but oh well.
 
I dont think the Arab nations want war with Iran, they would be ruined. Cities such as Dubai, Abu Dhabi, Manama or even Doha rely on foriengers to vist/work. Any Iranian missiles landing in the Arab nations would be a disaster for them.

We then have the Zionist state of Israel which could be very damaged by the missiles. The cowardly entity couldn't even take on Hezbollah who rained down thousands of missilles on them.

Of course America will come to their friends rescue and bomb to the point of destruction if this happens but then the war will esclate.

I would say there will be no war but the war criminals surrounding the fascist Trump could mean this is now a real possibility
 
Feel absolutely no sympathy for Iran after their constant snideness at us since the entire Yadav and then recent event. I used to defend them a lot, but oh well.
Whatever the reasons are of this break in relationship between Pak and Iran, remember one thing, the fall of Iran would mean the possible fall of Pakistan.
 
Whatever the reasons are of this break in relationship between Pak and Iran, remember one thing, the fall of Iran would mean the possible fall of Pakistan.

How did you arrive at that conclusion? With nukes we aren't falling anywhere.

At best we are rid of an Indian lackey harboring and sending in Indian spies to kill our people. At worst we have another unstable neighbor like Afghanistan and a massive headache to deal with.
 
We should pray there is no war, but there is an opportunity for Pakistan here to be an invaluable ally again
 
We should pray there is no war, but there is an opportunity for Pakistan here to be an invaluable ally again

With who? US or Iran?

If push comes to shove - I would rather take this opportunity to improve our relations with the US and not let them further drift towards India.
 
With who? US or Iran?

If push comes to shove - I would rather take this opportunity to improve our relations with the US and not let them further drift towards India.

Obviously with the more powerful party. US alliance with India will strengthen regardless. The best way to sabotage that is to have bjp in power
 
Last edited:
Obviously with the more powerful party. US alliance with India will strengthen regardless. The best way to sabotage that is to have bjp in power

Thats a very naive assessment. A massive 20% of Pakistan's muslim population is Shia. Siding with US in a US-Iran war would give the narrative of Jihad to Shia Insurgents and make them unstoppable. The same narrative was given to insurgents when Pakistan sided with US in Afghanistan. Pakistan is still paying the price of that. Its always more stable when domestic factors dictate foreign policy. Not the other way around.
 
Correct me if I am wrong, a lot of Pakistanis hate Iran for being close to India, and I have read online comments saying Pakistan should join USA and Saudi in attacking Iran.

Now Iran is no angel, but Pakistan itself maintains extremely close ties with Saudi, who are vocally anti - Iran.
Pakistan was also close to USA during Musharrafs time when USA was very anti-iran as well.

And Saudi Arabia also rarely pressures India on behalf of Pakistan

Now if Pakistan can act best friends with Iran's enemies, why is it so bad for them to have good relations with India?
 
expect balochistan to suffer waves of refugees from iran when the war starts.
now would be a good time to seal the pak iran border.
 
Thats a very naive assessment. A massive 20% of Pakistan's muslim population is Shia. Siding with US in a US-Iran war would give the narrative of Jihad to Shia Insurgents and make them unstoppable. The same narrative was given to insurgents when Pakistan sided with US in Afghanistan. Pakistan is still paying the price of that. Its always more stable when domestic factors dictate foreign policy. Not the other way around.

Oh I never said it’s easy, but when the pieces fall in to place, it will still be an opportunity to exploit. Put it this way: some of Shia Islam’s holiest sites are in Iraq. Yet there was no massive unrest in Iran when Iraq slid in the abyss of civil war.
If war comes (and I fervently hope it doesn’t) Pakistan can certainly offer access that Iraq might be unable to.
 
Oh I never said it’s easy, but when the pieces fall in to place, it will still be an opportunity to exploit. Put it this way: some of Shia Islam’s holiest sites are in Iraq. Yet there was no massive unrest in Iran when Iraq slid in the abyss of civil war.
If war comes (and I fervently hope it doesn’t) Pakistan can certainly offer access that Iraq might be unable to.

I am sure you are wise enough to know that Iraq's status among Shias isnt even 10% of Iran's. Iran is the seat of Shia Islam.
 
Correct me if I am wrong, a lot of Pakistanis hate Iran for being close to India, and I have read online comments saying Pakistan should join USA and Saudi in attacking Iran.

Now Iran is no angel, but Pakistan itself maintains extremely close ties with Saudi, who are vocally anti - Iran.
Pakistan was also close to USA during Musharrafs time when USA was very anti-iran as well.

And Saudi Arabia also rarely pressures India on behalf of Pakistan

Now if Pakistan can act best friends with Iran's enemies, why is it so bad for them to have good relations with India?

What are you on about? Pakistan has never hosted anti-Iran spies from Saudi Arabia like Iran did with Yadav nor has Pakistan ever internationally blamed Iran nor attacked Iran diplomitcally on behalf of Saudis like Iran does behalf of India whenever there are tensions.
 
I am sure you are wise enough to know that Iraq's status among Shias isnt even 10% of Iran's. Iran is the seat of Shia Islam.

Yes but a little bit of history and geography will tell you that almost all of Shia Islam’s most religious sites are in Iraq.
 
Yes but a little bit of history and geography will tell you that almost all of Shia Islam’s most religious sites are in Iraq.

I know that. Lets get one thing straight. You are saying that Pakistan siding with US against Iran will not get a strong reaction from Shias in Pakistan. I strongly doubt that.
 
I know that. Lets get one thing straight. You are saying that Pakistan siding with US against Iran will not get a strong reaction from Shias in Pakistan. I strongly doubt that.

Nope. I simply stated that it’s an opportunity for Pakistan to provide a helping hand and stay in everyone’s good books. For sure there will be some discontent at home, but a wise strategy would be to find ways to mitigate, since benefits might outweigh risks.
 
Thats a very naive assessment. A massive 20% of Pakistan's muslim population is Shia. Siding with US in a US-Iran war would give the narrative of Jihad to Shia Insurgents and make them unstoppable. The same narrative was given to insurgents when Pakistan sided with US in Afghanistan. Pakistan is still paying the price of that. Its always more stable when domestic factors dictate foreign policy. Not the other way around.

More like 15% and many have been recruited as foot soldiers in Iran's regional belligerence which has also wreaked havoc in Pakistan.
 
I know that. Lets get one thing straight. You are saying that Pakistan siding with US against Iran will not get a strong reaction from Shias in Pakistan. I strongly doubt that.
Pakistani Shia are looked down upon on Iran. Pakistanis authorities will have to exploit this animosi4ty and also appeal to their loyalties to the state. The state never has and never will accept this dual loyalty from any other group on Pakistan and this should be no exception.

Ever since the revolution, Iran has always been on the opposite side of many conflicts involving Pakistan and Its about time they get a taste of their own medicine.
 
Last edited:
Lol at some of the armchair generals on here wishing that Iran gets attacked by the US. If such a thing does happen the chaos won’t just be restricted within Iranian borders. Pakistan will suffer greatly too. It will be Iraq all over again and the entire region will be set back years.
 
Lol at some of the armchair generals on here wishing that Iran gets attacked by the US. If such a thing does happen the chaos won’t just be restricted within Iranian borders. Pakistan will suffer greatly too. It will be Iraq all over again and the entire region will be set back years.

Which armchair critic is wishing that here?
 
Saudi Arabia expects 'excellent relations' with Biden administration

LONDON/DUBAI (Reuters) - Saudi Arabia’s foreign minister said on Saturday the kingdom was optimistic that it would have “excellent relations” with the new U.S. administration of President Joe Biden and that it would continue to talk with Washington regarding the Iran nuclear deal.

“I am optimistic. Saudi Arabia has built solid, historical relations where it worked with different administrations. We will continue to do that as well with President Biden,” Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud said in an interview with Arabiya TV.

Biden pledged on the election campaign trail to reassess ties with Saudi Arabia, a state he described as a “pariah” in 2019. Biden has said he will take a firmer stand on Saudi’s human rights record and the devastating Yemen war.

Prince Faisal said that Riyadh will continue to consult with Washington with regards to the Iran nuclear deal. The United States pulled out in 2018 of the 2015 deal between major powers and Iran, under which Iran restrained its nuclear program in return for relief from economic sanctions.

“I believe basically the consultations will be around reaching a solid and strong agreement that takes into account Iran’s failure to comply. ..with strong monitoring factors to ensure the implementation of the agreement,” Prince Faisal said.

Biden has said that if Tehran resumed strict compliance with the agreement Washington would too.

Saudi Arabia and its Gulf allies including the United Arab Emirates, concerned about Iran’s ballistic missiles and regional network of proxies, supported Trump’s maximum pressure campaign on Tehran and welcomed his decision to quit the nuclear deal and reimpose sanctions on Iran.

They have said that this time around they should be included in any potential negotiations between the Biden administration and Iran on a new nuclear deal, to ensure it addresses Iran’s missile capabilities and “malign activity”.

The minister reiterated the kingdom’s stance that having a peace agreement with Israel is conditional on implementing the Arab Peace Initiative.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...tions-with-biden-administration-idUSKBN29S0CP
 
The Arab countries will never attack Iran directly but will try to egg on America and Israel to weaken Iran.

When the Americans killed Soleimani the Gulf Arabs panicked because they knew if Iran fully retaliated it would be against them. Iran for its part despite the weakness of its response became the first country to attack US bases directly and get away with it.

If the Arabs do directly attack Iran a well directed Iranian missile to the UAE could theoretically send the UAE's 'progress' of the last 30 years be obliterated and western tourists and ex-pats will flee the region. Similarly Saudis NEOM project will be in jeopardy.

So IMO there will be no direct war with Iran involving the Arabs...they will continue the proxy wars which they have lost badly and run to America to employ more sanctions.
 
Iran's spy chief says Tehran could seek nuclear arms if 'cornered' by West

DUBAI (Reuters) - Iran’s intelligence minister said persistent Western pressure could push Tehran to fight back like a “cornered cat” and seek nuclear weapons, which the Islamic Republic has for years insisted it has no intention of ever developing.

The remarks made in a television interview are a rare suggestion that Iran might have an interest in nuclear weapons, which Western nations have accused Iran of pursuing.

Iranian officials have repeatedly dismissed this charge, citing a fatwa or religious decree issued in the early 2000s by the Islamic Republic’s top authority, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, that bans the development or use of nuclear arms.

The United States and the other Western powers which originally signed up to a 2015 nuclear deal with Iran appear to be at an impasse over which side should return to the accord first, making it unlikely U.S. sanctions that have crippled its economy can be quickly removed.

“The Supreme Leader has explicitly said in his fatwa that nuclear weapons are against sharia law and the Islamic Republic sees them as religiously forbidden and does not pursue them,” the minister, Mahmoud Alavi, told state TV.

“But a cornered cat may behave differently from when the cat is free. And if they (Western states) push Iran in that direction, then it’s no longer Iran’s fault,” Alavi said in the interview broadcast late on Monday.

Details from the interview were published by Iranian news websites on Tuesday.

Iran has insisted its nuclear programme is to generate power and for other peaceful purposes. But U.S. intelligence agencies and the United Nations nuclear watchdog believe Iran once had a nuclear weapons programme that it halted.

U.S. President Joe Biden’s administration is exploring ways to restore the 2015 nuclear deal that Iran signed with major world powers but that was abandoned in 2018 by former President Donald Trump, who restored sanctions. Iran retaliated by breaching the terms of the accord in a step-by-step response.

Biden has said that, if Tehran returned to strict compliance with the pact, Washington would follow suit, using that as a springboard to a broader agreement that might restrict Iran’s missile development and its regional activities.

Tehran has insisted that Washington must first ease sanctions before it resumes compliance. It has ruled out any negotiations on wider security issues.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...uclear-arms-if-cornered-by-west-idUSKBN2A91OX
 
France, Germany, UK: condemn Iran's production of uranium metal

PARIS (Reuters) - The ‘E3’ group of leading European powers - France, Germany and the United Kingdom - on Friday condemned Iran’s decision to produce uranium metal, which they said was in breach of commitments made by Iran to the international community.

The United Nations’ nuclear watchdog had said earlier this week that Iran had followed through on its plan to make uranium metal, after Tehran had alarmed Western nations with its intent to produce the material with which the core of nuclear weapons can be made.

“We strongly urge Iran to halt these activities without delay and not to take any new non-compliant steps on its nuclear programme. In escalating its non-compliance, Iran is undermining the opportunity for renewed diplomacy to fully realise the objectives of the JCPoA,” said the E3 in a statement.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ans-production-of-uranium-metal-idUSKBN2AC1CZ
 
Back
Top