DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus White House reviews military plans against Iran: New York Times

We did so well in Iraq and Afghanistan. Iran's military is much larger and much more powerful than either one of those. The Muslim world isn't afraid of us and obviously know how to mobilize to cause the greatest impact. History has taught you nothing.

Pentagon says Iran’s Revolutionary Guards responsible for oil tanker attacks

American military officials said Friday that Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) is directly responsible for attacks on tankers off the United Arab Emirates earlier this month.

The officials said the attacks were part of a “campaign” by the Iranian regime that prompted the U.S. to deploy additional troops to the Middle East.

https://www.foxnews.com/world/pentagon-iran-revolutionary-guard-oil-tanker-attacks

Bush's statements, in chronological order, were:

"Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons."

United Nations address, September 12, 2002

"Iraq has stockpiled biological and chemical weapons, and is rebuilding the facilities used to make more of those weapons."

"We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have."

Radio address, October 5, 2002

"The Iraqi regime . . . possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. It is seeking nuclear weapons."

"We know that the regime has produced thousands of tons of chemical agents, including mustard gas, sarin nerve gas, VX nerve gas."

"We've also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas. We're concerned that Iraq is exploring ways of using these UAVS for missions targeting the United States."

"The evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program. Saddam Hussein has held numerous meetings with Iraqi nuclear scientists, a group he calls his "nuclear mujahideen" -- his nuclear holy warriors. Satellite photographs reveal that Iraq is rebuilding facilities at sites that have been part of its nuclear program in the past. Iraq has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes and other equipment needed for gas centrifuges, which are used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons."

Cincinnati, Ohio speech, October 7, 2002

"Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent."

State of the Union Address, January 28, 2003

"Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised."

Address to the nation, March 17, 2003

http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/06/06/findlaw.analysis.dean.wmd/

If history should have taught us anything it is that we shouldn't be so quick to buy every line of BS our government tells us. Some have learned that lesson. Some have not.

So you guys continue to defend our enemies while they blow holes in ships and spread terrorism?

Why am I not surprised.

Like they say in the New Congress. Perhaps we should sit around and do nothing.

Hey, let's start another war based on lies. That'll help!

Since when was it the job of our troops to defend Saudi oil tankers? They have their own military don't they?

So now the CIA, along with the Pentagon are lying about Iran?

Proof?

When you ramp up the military it's you who have to have the proof to do it. Not those that question it that have anything to prove.

So you would just love to rubber stamp Iraq 2.0 huh?

When the CIA, Pentagon and others have proof that Iran is preparing an attack on Americans and our interests, yes, we should believe them.
When we have pictures of them loading Cruise Missiles onto their small boats, we should take that seriously.
When they are found to have planted explosives on oil tankers, we should also take that seriously.

They proved it to the President and Congressional Intel committees so America is acting on it.

But when they have proof that Trump is a traitorous POS backroom dealing with Putin, we should call them liars... gotcha.

Mmmmm, hmmmm. Sounds like what people were saying leading up to the Iraq war.

I smell cover up, war drums, and hypocrisy in the air to the right.

It's like people see a movie for the second time and pretend they don't know how it will end.

Skeptical U.S. Allies Resist Trump’s New Claims of Threats From Iran

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/14/world/middleeast/trump-iran-threats.html

People need to be highly skeptical when it comes to our intelligence communities talking about evidence to justify war.

Y’all blindly went along with Iraq, and look how that turned out.

Ahh, but looky what mean old Trump has gone and done...

TEHRAN, Iran – Iranian media are reporting that the country's foreign minister has arrived in Baghdad to meet his Iraqi counterpart and other officials.

The official IRNA news agency reported Saturday that Mohammad Javad Zarif will meet with Iraqi Foreign Minister Mohamed Alhakim, Iraqi President Barham Salih, and Prime Minister Mohammed al-Halbousi during his two-day visit.

Iraq's Foreign Ministry spokesman says Zarif will discuss the situation in the region and ways of finding common ground.

On Friday, Zarif was in Pakistan and met officials there as tensions have ratcheted up in the Mideast. The White House earlier this month sent an aircraft carrier and B-52 bombers to the region in response to a still-unexplained threat from Iran. The U.S. plans to send 1,500 additional troops to the Middle East amid heightened tensions.

https://www.foxnews.com/world/iranian-fm-arrives-in-baghdad-to-meet-with-iraq-officials

Looks like someone is now willing to talk.

So Trump's idea is to send troops and they would rather seek peace. Thanks for your contribution.

Yep, NOW they may be seeking peace.

Mmmmm hmmmm. They had a nuclear deal with us proving they wanted peace. Until trump broke it.

Bro, that was Obama Peace... can't have that in the Trump era.

So is Iran talking to Iraq and Pakistan to build peace... or to build allies against their one common enemy?

I'd still like some detail on the "threat" that they made. Does Iran even have the military capabilities to launch an attack on the US?

Iran is Talking.
North Korea is Talking.
China is Talking.
NATO is Talking.

This is where negotiations are born.

You must have missed it.

China quit talking.

North Korea is no longer talking and started missile testing again.

Iran is talking, but not to us.

NATO agreed to do what they had already agreed to do years ago.

Now Trump, he's talking.

This is why I always lost at RISK.

Hyok-chol isn't talking anymore.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/m...summit-failures

Lets see - seems Trump's bosom buddies are those dictators that simply sweep away (execute) any problems or issues they don't like. Putin, NK, Saudis ... and no doubt they are all very fine people.

PUBLISHED WED, MAY 29 2019

Huawei could play a role in the ongoing trade negotiations between the U.S. and Beijing, but the Chinese tech giant has to stop working with Iran, Vice President Mike Pence’s chief of staff, Marc Short, says.
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/29/huawei-c...marc-short.html

China still talking.

-------------------------------------------------------------
13 April 2019

North Korean leader Kim Jong-un has said he would take part in a third summit with Donald Trump - but only if the US brought the "right attitude".
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-47917900

Kim still talking.

----------------------------------------------------------

NATO Nations and America continue to talk as Trump Picks New Top NATO Commander.
https://www.defenseone.com/politics/2019/03/trump-picks-new-top-nato-commander/155596/

NATO still talking.
---------------------------------------------------------

May 30, 2019

Pompeo's Trip To Switzerland Could Signal The U.S. Is Working To Talk With Iran
https://www.npr.org/2019/05/30/728053482...-talk-with-iran

Iran may soon be talking.

-----------------------------------------------------------

So, are you spewing Fake News again or just grandstanding?

Kim isn't talking. Even your link said that.

Somebody "could" play a role. Means currently not talking.

"Could signal" means currently not talking.

Somehow you think the entire planet will kneel at Trump's feet. So does he. That's why so many refuse to talk to him.

Oil prices jump more than 3% on tanker attacks in the Gulf of Oman

-Tankers the Front Altair and the Kokuka Courageous have sustained significant fire damage and its crews have been evacuated, according to shipping agents.

-U.S. Naval ships in the area are “rendering assistance” after forces in the region received two separate distress calls, according to U.S. officials.

-The cause of the fire remains unclear, but has sparked fears of attack and comes just weeks after alleged ship sabotage in the region.

In an area responsible for the shipment of one-third of the world’s seaborne oil, fears are rife that a miscalculation or further provocation could lead to all-out conflict. Still, both Iran and the U.S. insist that they do not want war or escalation.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/13/oil-jump...lf-of-oman.html

Maybe Trump will use this to create another fake emergency and sell another $8 billion to Saudi against the wishes of Congress and the Senate? Yay.

I wonder if he'll sell them more weapons every time they kill an American journalist?

Distrusting Both Iran and U.S., Europe Urges ‘Maximum Restraint’

BRUSSELS — Speaking of the attacks this week on fuel tankers in the Gulf of Oman, President Trump said flatly on Friday that “Iran did do it.” European governments may also think that Iran is probably to blame, but their distrust of the Trump administration and its hawkish policy toward Tehran have led them to measure their words, and call for de-escalation and “maximum restraint.”

Mindful of Washington’s exaggerations and outright misrepresentations of intelligence leading up to the Iraq war, European leaders are asking the Trump administration for hard evidence. The last thing they want is to be asked to support another American war in the Middle East that would be highly unpopular with voters.

Europeans are no fans of the Iranian government or its policies in the Middle East, but they are concerned by what they see as the Trump administration’s policy of “maximum pressure” on Iran — thus their use of maximum restraint. Many critics believe Mr. Trump is succeeding only in creating maximum pressure among hard-line factions in Iran to respond with carefully calibrated attacks that send a message, like those against tankers in a vital passageway for global oil supplies.

Germany wants a careful investigation of the attacks, insisting that “a spiral of escalation must be avoided.” The European Union, in the words of the spokeswoman Maja Kocijancic, has “said repeatedly that the region doesn’t need further escalation, it doesn’t need further destabilization, it doesn’t need further tension.”

Ms. Kocijancic said that European foreign ministers would discuss Iran and other issues at a regular meeting on Monday.

In the absence of hard intelligence, with American agencies notably quiet, European governments — with the possible exception of Britain — are wary about blaming Iran. They are reluctant to accept the White House’s claims at face value, and do not want to provide Washington with any pretext for war.

Europeans are publicly unhappy with Mr. Trump’s decision to withdraw the United States from the 2015 nuclear deal and to reimpose harsh economic sanctions on Iran, including shutting down most of its oil exports. They have continued to support the deal and are trying to ensure that Iran stays within its limits, to avoid tougher sanctions or an act that Israel or the United States would see as justification for war.

More broadly, they are troubled by “the sheer unpredictability of American policy toward Iran,” said Ian Lesser, a former American official who now runs the Brussels headquarters of the German Marshall Fund. “These events are against a backdrop of longstanding anxiety about U.S. policy toward Iran and its aims. When pressed, Europeans are mostly on the same page with Washington about Iran’s behavior. But the difference is over policy, and there is a basic lack of confidence in the discourse with Washington.”

These kinds of attacks are what Europeans predicted when Mr. Trump pulled out of the Iran deal, said Ellie Geranmayeh, an Iran expert with the European Council on Foreign Affairs. “Most European governments are surprised how long Iran has played the strategic patience card, especially after the increase in American sanctions in November,” she said.

Assuming Iran is behind these attacks, which is not yet certain, she said, “Europe sees this as a calculated, managed and fairly rational response to continual and increased U.S. sanctions pressure. We’ll keep seeing cycles of this escalation, designed to make everyone in the region nervous.” What worries Europeans, she said, is “the likelihood of missteps, miscalculations.”

The Iranians, having lived with American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan for years, think they understand “the red buttons,” Ms. Geranmayeh said. “But they also need to send signals that the oil embargo is unacceptable, and they need to make Trump realize this, so you do it through rising oil prices and getting his base nervous about another Mideast war in the run-up to the election. But Iranians could get it wrong.”

Nathalie Tocci, a senior adviser to the European foreign policy chief, Federica Mogherini, said, “Before we blame someone, we need credible evidence.” Iranians are deeply rational actors, she said. And for Iran to have attacked a Japanese ship when the Japanese prime minister was in Tehran “is not an especially rational thing to do.”

Ms. Tocci also said that Washington’s policy was having the predictable effect of weakening moderates in Iran and strengthening the hand of hard-liners. As the United States escalates, she said, “the people we work with in Iran are becoming weaker by the day, so we can’t expect retaliatory measures not to take place.”

What Europe does not want is Iran breaking the limits of the nuclear deal, which could force Europeans to reimpose their own sanctions.

The Pentagon, United States Central Command and American intelligence agencies all predicted attacks on shipping — sparing American targets and causing no loss of life — as a response to increased American pressure, said Kori Schake, a former Pentagon official who is now deputy director of the International Institute for Strategic Studies. Iran followed a similar policy in the 1980s, in the context of the Iran-Iraq war, when Washington backed Iraq and United States and British warships escorted tankers through dangerous waters.

“There’s a lot of suspicion in Europe about American motives,” said François Heisbourg, a French defense analyst. “The maritime milieu is especially susceptible to manipulation — remember the Gulf of Tonkin,” a dubious report of naval hostilities that President Lyndon B. Johnson used to escalate the war in Vietnam. And then, he said, are the bitter memories of the Iraq war, which was based on faulty intelligence and badly split Europe.

Those suspicions only deepened Friday, when Japanese shipping executives insisted that their tanker was hit not by a mine, as American officials had implied, but by a “flying object.”

Mr. Heisbourg said there are several potential beneficiaries from the attacks, among them Washington hard-liners like the national security adviser, John R. Bolton; “wild ones in Saudi Arabia or in the Emirates or the Revolutionary Guards in Iran”; or anyone who wants higher oil prices.

But what worries many is that Tehran might misjudge Mr. Trump’s stated unwillingness to go to war. “This may lead Iran to miscalculate,” Mr. Heisbourg said. “It may well be that they attacked the tankers because they don’t think America will retaliate.”

That leaves Europeans wondering where the Americans are pushing them.

“As the stakes rise, public opinion will become more important,,” Mr. Heisbourg said, “And European public opinion won’t be favorable to doing anything militarily with Mr. Trump.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/14/world/europe/tanker-europe-strait-of-hormuz.html

Well Trumpians this is what acting like an ass 24/7 gets you! Our allies don't believe this administration and 60% of americans doubt them too!

I'm not sure if this isn't just Trump wanting a war before the 2020 election myself, so I can't blame anyone who doubts the administration.

Oil tanker captain disputes part of US account of attack

The captain of one of the oil tankers attacked in the Gulf of Oman on Thursday disputed part of the United States' account of the attack on Friday.

“Our crew said that the ship was attacked by a flying object,” said Yutaka Katada, the president of ship operator Kokuka Sangyo.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Thursday blamed Iran for the attacks in the Gulf of Oman on the Kokuka Courageous and the Norwegian-owned MT Front Altair.

The U.S. military released a video later Thursday that it says shows Iran's Revolutionary Guard removing a mine from a targeted oil tanker.

Katada, citing accounts from the ship’s crew, said: “I do not think there was a time bomb or an object attached to the side of the ship," according to The New York Times.

Iran on Friday pushed back on U.S. claims about Tehran's role in the attacks, calling the accusation “the simplest and the most convenient way for Pompeo and other U.S. officials.”

The attack comes weeks after alleged sabotage attacks against four oil tankers off the coast of the United Arab Emirates. The United States similarly blamed those attacks on Iran, pointing to limpet mines that officials said were Iranian.

Iran also denied involvement in those attacks.

President Trump's critics have accused the administration of escalating tension with Iran itself. In addition to withdrawing from the Iran nuclear deal, the administration has ramped up sanctions and designated the Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization.

https://thehill.com/policy/defense/448535-oil-tanker-captain-disputes-part-of-us-account-of-attack

Of course Dems would believe Iran over America. And who care what Europeans think. They are a bunch of women.

Things are heating up with Iran.

I guess them coming back to retrieve their unexploded mine isn't enough evidence for some folks that they are involved.

So? Let the country of the ships attacked deal with Iran. Not our problem.

As usual the anti-Americans here got Irans back...what else is new

As usual the Faux new ‘patriots’ are warmongering. Can’t wait to drop bombs on another country. Can’t wait to spend more of our taxes on military spending and body bags for our soldiers. Bloodlust is a red state way of life.

im still trying to figure out when the maga hatters ever expected us to trust trump on virtually anything he says?

he couldn't even tell the truth about the location of our naval fleet when he first started popping off at the mouth to NK, made us look utterly weak on Russia in Helsinki, and a whole list of other nonsense he's been apart of.

i dont trust iran. the sad part? i dont trust them just as much as i dont trust trump and pompeo.

so i guess i gotta go with the japanese tanker owner who said:

Trump administration providing ‘false’ information about Gulf of Oman attack, says Japanese tanker owner

https://news.yahoo.com/trump-administration-providing-false-information-124247066.html

sad.

You had GWB's back on Iraq. We have a bunch of dead and disabled soldiers and there weren't tons of WMD's as was stated.

How did buying the governments line of BS work for you then?

Some people never learn that we need to question everything before we decide we're willing to send our troops off to foreign soil to die.

Then you'll claim that you're the people who support our troops. If you really do, maybe it's time you act like it.

Whos talking to you ...Mohammed lol