IRAN: Trump's war?
POSTED BY: SIGNYM
UPDATED: Sunday, September 6, 2026 16:14
VIEWED: 23215
PAGE 15 of 42
Compared to Bronk O'Bama, Trump's handling of Iran is magnificent.
a) O'Bama lifted the sanctions that were effectively isolating and strangling Iran.
b) O'Bama sent a ship with $150 Billion in cash loaded on pallets to them.
c} O'Bama sent weak-ass Ketchup-heiress gigolo John Kerry to negotiate for him.
d) O'Bama tried to keep the details of his disastrous Iran deal a secret.
In contrast to all of the above, Trump has been transparent about his strategy. He put the sanctions back on Iran. He hasn't given them one damn penny. And he's made it clear that although he doesn't want armed conflict, he's willing to do just that if necessary. That's what a President should do... be a strong leader. What O'Bama did was typical libtard limp-wristed appeasement.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Trump pulled those numbers out of his fat ass. Obama Didn’t Give Iran ‘150 Billion in Cash’. For one, it was Iran's money that the USA was trying to steal from Iran. And for another, it was $50 billion in electronic depots, not $150 billion cash. And for a third, it wasn't even money electronically deposited in the US Treasury. The US had been threatening revenge against banks (both foreign and domestic) if they gave Iran's money back to Iran. Some of Iran's money had been stolen by the Shah of Iran, America's puppet Iranian dictator, from his own nation by depositing it in foreign banks. Some of the money had been stolen by the US government when it didn't deliver equipment that had already been paid for by Iran, back when the Shah of Iran was alive. Too, too bad for the Shah that he didn't get to spend what he stole before he died of cancer, but that was only because the Shah's diagnosis of chronic lymphocytic leukemia would not be revealed to him until 1978. Medical reports given to the Shah were falsified and altered in order to state that the Shah was in good health to conceal his cancer from him.
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
b) O'Bama sent a ship with $150 Billion in cash loaded on pallets to them.
In contrast to all of the above, Trump has been transparent about his strategy. He put the sanctions back on Iran. He hasn't given them one damn penny. And he's made it clear that although he doesn't want armed conflict, he's willing to do just that if necessary. That's what a President should do... be a strong leader. What O'Bama did was typical libtard limp-wristed appeasement.
www.factcheck.org/2019/03/obama-didnt-give-iran-150-billion-in-cash/
www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2018/apr/27/donald-trump/d
onald-trump-iran-150-billion-and-18-billion-c/
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I believe that was a plane, not ship.
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
Compared to Bronk O'Bama, Trump's handling of Iran is magnificent.
a) O'Bama lifted the sanctions that were effectively isolating and strangling Iran.
b) O'Bama sent a ship with $150 Billion in cash loaded on pallets to them.
Quote:Secretary Swiftboat Ketchup - how could Iran keep from giggling at him?
c} O'Bama sent weak-ass Ketchup-heiress gigolo John Kerry to negotiate for him.
Quote:
d) O'Bama tried to keep the details of his disastrous Iran deal a secret.
In contrast to all of the above, Trump has been transparent about his strategy. He put the sanctions back on Iran. He hasn't given them one damn penny. And he's made it clear that although he doesn't want armed conflict, he's willing to do just that if necessary. That's what a President should do... be a strong leader. What O'Bama did was typical libtard limp-wristed appeasement.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
An amendment requiring President Donald Trump to get congressional approval before launching military strikes against Iran needed 60 votes. The measure is a top priority and serious issue for Democrats who pressed GOP leaders to schedule the vote.
At 5:00 a.m. Friday, with the moon still beaming over Washington, the Capitol buzzed with activity.
Democrats got 50 votes for their amendment, but it needed 60 to pass. Forty Republicans voted no. Ten had already flown home for the 4th of July Holiday.
www.cnn.com/2019/06/28/politics/iran-amendment-senate-republicans/inde
x.html
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Iranian leaders shun Trump's ‘chalice of poison’
There’s a painful remembrance in Iran about how broken it felt in 1988, when pressured to end the Iran-Iraq war. This time, is President Donald Trump’s “maximum pressure” campaign against Iran enough to make the Islamic Republic cry uncle?
Probably not, to judge by the Iran-Iraq war, the most significant climb-down that Tehran has conceded since the 1979 Islamic Revolution.
It was the spring of 1988, and after eight years of ferocious fighting, Iranian troops had reversed Iraq’s invasion and pushed deep into Iraqi territory. Saddam Hussein – supported by the U.S., Soviet Union, and European nations – unleashed one of the war’s heaviest chemical weapon attacks and threatened to gas Iranian cities if Iran did not agree to a cease-fire.
The Iranian military had lost some 60% of its hardware and could barely find new recruits, and the nation’s economy had shriveled. When the United States inadvertently shot down an Iranian airliner over the Persian Gulf, killing all 290 passengers, Tehran took it as a sign that the Americans were willing to do anything to defeat the Islamic Republic.
Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini finally gave in, shocking Iranians as he said, “I drink this chalice of poison.” The human toll had been unprecedented in modern conflict, with 1 million dead and wounded on both sides, in a war that hadn’t even changed the border, just soaked it in blood.
“The television was showing our soldiers and he kept hitting himself with his fists saying ‘aah,’” Mr. Khomeini’s eldest son later recalled of his father’s reaction. “After accepting the cease-fire, he could no longer walk. ... He never again spoke in public.”
Legacy of language
Ever since, in Iran, “drinking from the chalice of poison” has been a metaphor for caving in under pressure – the sort of pressure that Tehran feels today from the Trump administration.
Iranian officials are loath to be seen surrendering under such conditions; they vow to resist U.S. demands; and they swear, as Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei recently declared – that “as long as the U.S. is what it is today, dialogue will be poison, and with this administration the poison will be even twice as deadly.”
More at www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2019/0628/Iranian-leaders-shun-cha
lice-of-poison
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
HOUSE SAYS TRUMP CAN’T GO TO WAR WITH IRAN UNLESS CONGRESS APPROVES
Democrats in the House of Representatives on Friday passed an amendment that would sharply restrict President Donald Trump’s ability to attack Iran without congressional authorization, attaching the language to an annual must-pass defense bill.
The measure, which was sponsored by California Democrat Ro Khanna and Florida Republican Matthew Gaetz, would prohibit the Pentagon from spending money on any military action against Iran unless Congress has declared war or passed a resolution authorizing the administration to use force. The bill contains an exception for emergency situations in which U.S. armed forces are under attack.
The measure is likely to face resistance from Senate Republicans, who are expected to fight to strip it out when the House and Senate versions of the bill are reconciled. A similar measure introduced by Democratic Sens. Tom Udall of New Mexico and Virginia’s Tim Kaine and Republicans Mike Lee of Utah and Rand Paul of Kentucky failed to pass the Senate last month despite garnering 50 votes in favor and only 40 against. Due to parliamentary maneuvering by Senate Leader Mitch McConnell, it needed 60 votes to pass.
https://theintercept.com/2019/07/12/trump-iran-vote-congress/
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Here is an exceptionally good article about the attack on the Saudi's main crude stabilization facility, I especially appreciated the detailed photos. You will have to go the article itself to get higher resolution.
Saturday's attack on the Saudi oil and gas processing station in Abqaiq hit its stabilization facility:
Quote:
The stabilization process is a form of partial distillation which sweetens "sour" crude oil (removes the hydrogen sulfide) and reduces vapor pressure, thereby making the crude oil safe for shipment in tankers. Stabilizers maximize production of valuable hydrocarbon liquids, while making the liquids safe for storage and transport, as well as reduce the atmospheric emissions of volatile hydrocarbons. Stabilizer plants are used to reduce the volatility of stored crude oil and condensate.
Soon after the attack U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo went into full 'blame Iran' mode:
Secretary Pompeo @SecPompeo - 21:59 UTC · Sep 14, 2019
Tehran is behind nearly 100 attacks on Saudi Arabia while Rouhani and Zarif pretend to engage in diplomacy. Amid all the calls for de-escalation, Iran has now launched an unprecedented attack on the world’s energy supply. There is no evidence the attacks came from Yemen.
We call on all nations to publicly and unequivocally condemn Iran’s attacks. The United States will work with our partners and allies to ensure that energy markets remain well supplied and Iran is held accountable for its aggression
Abqaiq lies at the heart of the Saudi oil infrastructure. It processes more than half of the Saudi oil output.
bigger
The U.S. government published two detailed pictures of the attack's result.
bigger
bigger
The pictures show some 17 points of impact. There are cars visible in the second more detailed picture that demonstrate the gigantic size of the place. The targets were carefully selected. At least 11 of those were egg shaped tanks with a diameter of some 30 meter (100 foot). These are likely tanks for pressurized (liquidized) gas that receive the condensate vapor from the stabilization process. They all have now quite neat holes in their upper shells.
The piping to and from the egg shaped tanks shows that these were configured in groups with double redundancy. Two tanks beside each other share one piping system. Two of such twin tanks are next to each other with lines to their processing train. There are a total of three such groups. Damage to any one tank or group would not stop the production process. The products would be routed to another similar tank or group. But with all tanks of this one special type taken out the production chain is now interrupted.
Two processing areas were hit and show fire damage. At least the control equipment of both was likely completely destroyed:
Consultancy Rapidan Energy Group said images of the Abqaiq facility after the attack showed about five of its stabilization towers appeared to have been destroyed, and would take months to rebuild - something that could curtail output for a prolonged period.
“However Saudi Aramco keeps some redundancy in the system to maintain production during maintenance,” Rapidan added, meaning operations could return to pre-attack levels sooner.
The targeting for this attack was done with detailed knowledge of the process and its dependencies.
The north arrow in those pictures points to the left. The visible shadows confirm the direction. The holes in the tanks are on the western side. They were attacked from the west.
The hits were extremely precise. The Yemeni armed forces claimed it attacked the facility with 10 drones (or cruise missiles). But the hits on these targets look like neither. A total of 17 hits with such precise targeting lets me assume that these were some kind of drones or missiles with man-in-the-loop control. They mayNOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
So, given the number of "false flags" the USA has initiated or taken advantage of, when things like this happen I have to ask cui bono?
Probably not the Saudis, because altho oil prices have jumped, they can't take advantage of that. But any other oil-producing nation would, especially if they produced EXPENSIVE oil. That would be fracked oil (USA) and tar sands (Canada). But would also include UAE, Kuwait, Bahrain, Russia, Venezuela, Brazil and Iran.
Of course "Bibi" Netanyahu would benefit, as do war hawks in the USA. It seems like every time peace threatens to break out anywhere, "something" happens. (Trump was to meet with Rouhani at the UN)
Do the Houthis benefit? Probably, but it's hard to see how, since they were winning ayway (The Saudi's main partner UAE has diverged from Saudi strategy and is now fighting Saudi-backed forces) and rather than driving KSA to the bargaining table it may simply cause further reaction. OTOH if it looked like Iran was about to make peace without taking Yemen into account, the Houthis might have wanted to derail any potential peace process.Apparently I'm not the only one wondering about this
Quote:
Questions, Not Answers, Surround U.S. Push To War With Iran
Authored by Tom Luongo [NOT TYLER DURDEN],
When President Trump fired National Security Adviser John Bolton last week rational people the world over cheered.
When there was news that Trump would meet on the sidelines of the U.N. General Assembly in a few weeks there were sighs of relief.
When Benjamin Netanyahu goes to Moscow to get Vladimir Putin’s blessing to continue airstrikes in Syria was told no, the world said, “Finally! Enough is enough.”
The problem is that there were also very powerful people who were not happy about these things.
Moreover, there are a lot of nervous people out there worried that Tuesday’s election in Israel will not go the way they want it.
A lot of people have invested a lot of time and money in ensuring Netanyahu stays in power. And I don’t just mean Bibi himself, who will likely go to jail on corruption charges if he doesn’t win.
I mean a lot of people in the U.S., Saudi Arabia, the U.K. and in Europe, all of the places where anti-Russian, anti-Iranian and pro-Israeli sentiments abound.
And this brings up the main question I always have in the wake of one of these major escalations of tensions with the country currently catching the Twin Eyes of Sauron in D.C. and Tel Aviv.
Why do they always seem to occur right after moments of de-escalation and there’s the threat of peace breaking out somewhere?
Why is it that every time President Trump tries to push the U.S. and the world away from war within a few days there’s an incident which pushes us right back to the brink of it?
Trump visits Kim Jong-un in North Korea, making history, there are attacks on UAE oil tankers. Trump refuses to attack Iran over them shooting down a Global Hawk drone in Iranian airspace escorted by a fully-crewed Poseiden P-8.
Britain seizes the Grace 1 oil tanker. Israel attacks Shi’ite Militia targets outside of Baghdad.
Go back to President Trump first, and biggest, geopolitical blunder. The Syrian Army wins a major battle and is on the verge of victory, and a chemical weapons attack happens deep in Al-Qaeda controlled territory blamed on the SAA.
Trump then launches 57 tomahawks at the Al-Shairat airbase.
Trump declares we’re pulling out of Syria, Israel openly bombs targets deep in Syria. His staff, including John Bolton, freak out and walk it back.
The Houthis send a couple of drones at an Aramco facility far beyond their known capabilities and the UAE pulls out of the Saudi coalition in Yemen.
Moscow has had its fill of Netanyahu. He’s openly mocking Trump at international forums, first offering to sell the U.S. Russia’s hypersonic missiles at the G-20 and then offering to sell S-400 missile defense systems to the Saudis to protect their people from outside actors.
All with tongue firmly implantedNOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Here is an exceptionally good article about the attack on the Saudi's main crude stabilization facility, I especially appreciated the detailed photos. You will have to go the article itself to get higher resolution.
Saturday's attack on the Saudi oil and gas processing station in Abqaiq hit its stabilization facility:
Quote:
The stabilization process is a form of partial distillation which sweetens "sour" crude oil (removes the hydrogen sulfide) and reduces vapor pressure, thereby making the crude oil safe for shipment in tankers. Stabilizers maximize production of valuable hydrocarbon liquids, while making the liquids safe for storage and transport, as well as reduce the atmospheric emissions of volatile hydrocarbons. Stabilizer plants are used to reduce the volatility of stored crude oil and condensate.
Soon after the attack U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo went into full 'blame Iran' mode:
Secretary Pompeo @SecPompeo - 21:59 UTC · Sep 14, 2019
Tehran is behind nearly 100 attacks on Saudi Arabia while Rouhani and Zarif pretend to engage in diplomacy. Amid all the calls for de-escalation, Iran has now launched an unprecedented attack on the world’s energy supply. There is no evidence the attacks came from Yemen.
We call on all nations to publicly and unequivocally condemn Iran’s attacks. The United States will work with our partners and allies to ensure that energy markets remain well supplied and Iran is held accountable for its aggression
Abqaiq lies at the heart of the Saudi oil infrastructure. It processes more than half of the Saudi oil output.
bigger
The U.S. government published two detailed pictures of the attack's result.
bigger
bigger
The pictures show some 17 points of impact. There are cars visible in the second more detailed picture that demonstrate the gigantic size of the place. The targets were carefully selected. At least 11 of those were egg shaped tanks with a diameter of some 30 meter (100 foot). These are likely tanks for pressurized (liquidized) gas that receive the condensate vapor from the stabilization process. They all have now quite neat holes in their upper shells.
The piping to and from the egg shaped tanks shows that these were configured in groups with double redundancy. Two tanks beside each other share one piping system. Two of such twin tanks are next to each other with lines to their processing train. There are a total of three such groups. Damage to any one tank or group would not stop the production process. The products would be routed to another similar tank or group. But with all tanks of this one special type taken out the production chain is now interrupted.
Two processing areas were hit and show fire damage. At least the control equipment of both was likely completely destroyed:
Consultancy Rapidan Energy Group said images of the Abqaiq facility after the attack showed about five of its stabilization towers appeared to have been destroyed, and would take months to rebuild - something that could curtail output for a prolonged period.
“However Saudi Aramco keeps some redundancy in the system to maintain production during maintenance,” Rapidan added, meaning operations could return to pre-attack levels sooner.
The targeting for this attack was done with detailed knowledge of the process and its dependencies.
The north arrow in those pictures points to the left. The visible shadows confirm the direction. The holes in the tanks are on the western side. They were attacked from the west.
The hits were extremely precise. The Yemeni armed forces claimed it attacked the facility with 10 drones (or cruise missiles). But the hits on these targets look like neither. A total of 17 hits with such precise targeting lets me assume that these were some kind of drones or missileNOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
PNAC?
Javanka?
that there's what ya call "techno speech" lil buckaroo....let's you know that the OP has just a wealth of knowledge about the subject..therefore, take his word as gospel for whatever might follow
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME