[News] Top Iranian military commander killed by air strikes

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Not a fan of the 'orange muppet' - far from it. But to regard the so-called ('so-called'?) rogue states, some of whom tacitly, or even actively, support IS and other purveyors of extreme conservative Islam, as less of a threat beats me.
Sorry, Trump is horrid, but I know which lot I'd rather have in charge and running my life!

Agree.

Mind you.....just because a kick in the bollocks is easier to deal with than a machine gun volley to the chest doesn't mean we should tolerate kicks in the bollocks for perpetuity. Hopefully, soon, there will be other options available.

 

[Hastings gull]

Nothing barbaric about killing a terrorist. Even one in uniform. Unless of course he's on your side, in which case he's a freedom fighter as they say. But if you want to be objective, Trump hasn't started a war, neither conventional or otherwise because the latter by-proxy one has been running since 1979. No change there then. And Trump's administration has caused the death of far fewer in that region than his predecessors and several of our Prime Ministers too. Not that's anything to celebrate, just pointing out. Even so, that's dwarfed by those killed by Iran and Iraq's conflicts which runs into millions. Agree Iran being a law unto itself though, has been since Shah. You'll recall that Iraq was too until the coalition busted Saddams' regime.

It's impossible to bring peace to that part of the world. Stability perhaps, as there has been - albeit fleetingly - in the past. Therefore I genuinely don't think today's news is as bad as western press and Iran are would like you to believe. Simply because there's always a war in some guise, in some part, going on in that part of the world which every regional country's involved in in some way. Today's assassination is just another day in the life of that - it hasn't 'shattered' any existing peace has it? Because there's never been peace. It's merely turned up the media (and our) attention to what's going on there. That's all.

Regardless, I don't think you can argue the case for no action in case of retaliation. The threat is ever-present. Iran is always plotting some sort attack so it makes no difference whether the Americans killed him or not. Damned if you do. Damned if you don't. The middle east is that in a nutshell. The idiocy of the situation really. You'll never be able to say with any certainty the next attack was because of this. Simply because there's always a next attack regardless.

Probably best to avoid common sense on here . .

 

[knocky1]

Yes, the lesser of two levels, but as with yourself, I would rather align myself with the US, warts and all, as opposed to a nasty dictatorship extolling religious extremism.

Probably best to avoid common sense on here . .

You obviously do.

 

[Shropshire Seagull]

May be in poor taste - apologies but we only need to tweak our imagination ever-so slightly to see the Orange Oaf as a replacement in this scene ....

Qasem Soleimani is the fella in the chair ...

 

[Wellesley]

You obviously do.

Just for clarity, are you saying that you would rather align yourself with the oppressive regime of Iran than The United States and you think that that is common sense?

 

[Hastings gull]

Just for clarity, are you saying that you would rather align yourself with the oppressive regime of Iran than The United States and you think that that is common sense?

Yes, that would seem to be his opinion. God help us.

 

[knocky1]

Just for clarity, are you saying that you would rather align yourself with the oppressive regime of Iran than The United States and you think that that is common sense?

I am saying that I disagree with HastingGulls statement that it is common sense to support an unstable President authorising the killing of Soleimani when not at war with Iran and with no plan for the outcome.

As said by others on this post it is not a binary choice and particularly in this region.

 

[Lyndhurst 14]

NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio has said they are ramping up security in New York. I saw a bigger NYPD presence this morning on the way to work – including the Chief Wiggum lardarse lookalikes munching away on their donuts.

 

[Hastings gull]

I am saying that I disagree with HastingGulls statement that it is common sense to support an unstable President authorising the killing of Soleimani when not at war with Iran and with no plan for the outcome.

As said by others on this post it is not a binary choice and particularly in this region.

Had you really bothered to read what I wrote, I stated that aligning oneself with the US is the lesser of two evils at present which is hardly a ringing endorsement. But if one has to choose, then I would usually choose a democracy to a dictatorship, warts and all. Of course there is no declared war, but do you really think that the regime in Iran is bothered about such niceties? If so, you are really naïve.

 

[vegster]

NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio has said they are ramping up security in New York. I saw a bigger NYPD presence this morning on the way to work – including the Chief Wiggum lardarse lookalikes munching away on their donuts.

The Iranians would never bother to target somewhere like the US, the locals are killing each other far more efficiently and in greater numbers than any external terrorism could achieve.

 

[Lyndhurst 14]

The Iranians would never bother to target somewhere like the US, the locals are killing each other far more efficiently and in greater numbers than any external terrorism could achieve.

I think the donuts are doing that

 

[hart's shirt]

United Arab Emirates would be first on their list

At the risk of appearing slightly selfish, I'd rather that didn't happen.

 

[knocky1]

Not a fan of the 'orange muppet' - far from it. But to regard the so-called ('so-called'?) rogue states, some of whom tacitly, or even actively, support IS and other purveyors of extreme conservative Islam, as less of a threat beats me.
Sorry, Trump is horrid, but I know which lot I'd rather have in charge and running my life!

Yes, the lesser of two levels, but as with yourself, I would rather align myself with the US, warts and all, as opposed to a nasty dictatorship extolling religious extremism.

Had you really bothered to read what I wrote, I stated that aligning oneself with the US is the lesser of two evils at present which is hardly a ringing endorsement. But if one has to choose, then I would usually choose a democracy to a dictatorship, warts and all. Of course there is no declared war, but do you really think that the regime in Iran is bothered about such niceties? If so, you are really naïve.

Kill, kill, kill. I do not align myself to today’s murder.

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

It would be naive to confuse the actions of the Trump presidency with the interests of the United States. The United States has strategic interests. Trump appears to only have his own interests.

 

[cloud]

The thing to look out for is Russia's reaction.

Given Russia's new relationship with Saudi Arabia, it'll be interesting to see how Russia responds to this incident.

 

[Wardy's twin]

Probably not so what would be your third choice. or whatever?

Britain and USA are hated by Iran because we spent the first 80 years of the 20th Century trying to steal their oil. We didn't do it very well, backed a weak and two faced character (Shah) and weren't very good at dealing effectively with the opposition (Khomeini) so with such a poor track record it might be better if we tried to stay out of it this time.

If it comes down to a two horse race then I would back the West but I personally think we should steer away from Trump as he is shown that he doesn't respect his 'allies' e.g. treatment of the Kurds and his threat to dump UK bred , ISIS terrorists in our country.

 

[Bry Nylon]

No winners here, except the bloke in Tehran who sells American flags and matches.

 

[warmleyseagull]

No winners here, except the bloke in Tehran who sells American flags and matches.

UJ was tindered too.

 

[BadFish]

No winners here, except the bloke in Tehran who sells American flags and matches.

...... and the American arms industry.
.......Trumps electoral campaign.

 

[BadFish]

Britain and USA are hated by Iran because we spent the first 80 years of the 20th Century trying to steal their oil. We didn't do it very well, backed a weak and two faced character (Shah) and weren't very good at dealing effectively with the opposition (Khomeini) so with such a poor track record it might be better if we tried to stay out of it this time.

If it comes down to a two horse race then I would back the West but I personally think we should steer away from Trump as he is shown that he doesn't respect his 'allies' e.g. treatment of the Kurds and his threat to dump UK bred , ISIS terrorists in our country.

By the 'West' we do of course mean the US, Saudi Arabia, UAE and Israel.

As you suggest, the middle east situation is far to complex to be condensed down to a binary two horse race. Although this rhetoric is very helpful for getting public opinion on board.

You are spot on in advocating the 'stay out of it' option IMHO. I hope governments around the world do the same. Maybe we should call it the 'Collation of the Unwilling"

The whole thing is a terrifying way to start a new decade. I suppose they are dashing any hope we might have had for a better world early doors. "Don't get your hopes up people".