Attacks on US bases in Iraq and Syria have continued through the weekend after the US launched airstrikes in eastern Syria early Friday.
Lebanon’s Al Mayadeen reported that a group calling itself the Islamic Resistance in Iraq said it “successfully” targeted the US’s al-Shadadi base in northeast Syria’s al-Hasakah province on Sunday.
The British-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights also reported a drone attack on the al-Shadadi base, saying explosions were heard in the area and smoke columns rose from the base. Al Mayadeen also reported an overnight attack on a US base in Syria’s eastern Deir Ezzor province.
The Sunday attacks have not yet been confirmed by the US military. US officials have confirmed to The Associated Press that a US base in eastern Syria came under attack on Friday after the US launched airstrikes in the area. US officials also confirmed a drone was fired at the Ain al-Assad airbase in western Iraq, which houses US troops and was shot down.
White House National Security Council spokesman John Kirby said Friday that one purpose of the US airstrikes in eastern Syria was to “deter” further attacks on US forces in the region, which has clearly failed.
The US said its airstrikes in eastern Syria targeted “facilities” used by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and affiliated groups, referring to Shia militias that operate in the region. The US has not attributed the rocket and drone attacks on US bases to a specific group but is blaming them on Iran, although there’s no evidence Tehran is directing the attacks.
The Islamic Resistance in Iraq, which has taken credit for several attacks, is a little-known group that’s said to be an umbrella organization that includes Shia militias, but it’s not clear which ones. The Shia militias that operate in the region are generally aligned with Iran, but they are also known to act independently.
A US official recently told CNN that how willing those groups are to act independently is a “persistent intelligence gap” for the US. Regardless, there are signs the US might take the fight directly to Iran if the attacks persist.
The New York Times reported that one message the US was trying to send with its airstrikes on Friday was that “if the attacks on American forces by Iranian proxies escalate, it will force the United States into the kind of overt military confrontation with Iran that both nations have avoided since the Iranian revolution in 1979.”
Before the US launched the airstrikes in Syria, the Pentagon said at least 21 troops were injured in the attacks on US bases in Syria and Iraq that started in response to US support for Israel’s onslaught on Gaza.
The Western elites tell us that these wars are complex. In fact they are obscenely simple, simply stated war is a racket that is extremely profitable to the western elites. These wars use WMD’s, ethnic cleansing and genocide to achieve the western elites profit goals, while at the same time propaganda accuses the targeted country of war crimes, which is pure hypocrisy.
Large numbers of dead civilians are required prior to mass resource thefts. This oil and other resources flow in one direction – away from the bombed countries and into the western elites who undertake the bombing and mass murder of civilian populations.
All US resource wars are based on lies by the US elite, these liars are never prosecuted for the murder of millions and they get richer and more powerful the more they lie and take us to war. Many of the US elite liars who made these wars happen also made a lot of money, which of course is why they took us to war in the first place.
These Western elites, led by the US insiders, have made Ten trillion dollars on the deaths of ten million civilians in which 10 countries were bombed since 9/11. This is one million dollars for each dead civilian. All of these wars have been profitable to the insiders that sell weapons, steal resources, install puppet leadership and make confiscatory bank loan deals to take even more resources, industry, other country assets.
I cannot think of anything to add… You entirely nailed it. Thank you for expressing so concisely, what needs to be said.
The Islamic nations have the economic advantage. They can blow up the international financial system by blocking the Strait of Hormuz, cutting off 20% of the world’s oil supply. They do not have to fire a single shot.
Probably why they’re desperate to have everybody buy electric cars.
That’s more about Musk recouping financial losses from an admirable pet project of buying Twitter and turning it into a much more obvious flaming pile of garbage than it was.
True.
But what do they do 24 hours later after the Strait has been un-blocked and their ability to block it turned into rubble and scrap metal?
Russia would simply not allow that to happen.
“The real deal will be to bring down the Wall Street-engineered $618 trillion derivative structure, as confirmed for years by analysts at Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan, as well as independent Persian Gulf energy traders.” – Pepe Escobar
“Russia would simply not allow that to happen.”
Nor would China and nor would much of the rest of the world. And that would be true even if the US were able to do what Knapp suggests without effectively shutting down the world oil economy more completely and for a longer time than a mere blockage of the Strait, which it is not.
Around 40% of China oil consumption is imported from the Middle East. Tell me why China would be a fan of blocking the straits?
If US and Israel start a war against Iran, the oil from Persian Gulf will be blocked the same day. It can be done easily by anyone who is capable of sinking a tanker in Strait of Hormuz.
I didn’t say that China would support blocking the strait.
Russia has spent the last 20 months proving itself powerless to “allow” or not “allow” pretty much anything.
Yeah, you’re right. I don’t understand why Russia hasn’t prevailed against a NATO sponsored army in Ukraine. Puzzling…
Iran can instantly drop dozens of mines in the ship lanes and shut it down for weeks, or months if they fire upon ships trying to clear it.
Mines and ships are one means of “area denial”. Land-based antiship missiles, not necessarily coastally placed, and a greater threat. I think the IRI could easily sink commercial traffic at range, from well inland.
First not all the mines have to be neutralized just the one on a selected routes and second the forces firing on the minesweepers will be attack quickly. A few days, yes, weeks no.
Not that easy Tom…!
What did I say about “easy?”
Your 24-hr turnaround is considered easy…!
Speed and difficulty are not the same thing. It would not be “easy.” The Iranians have reasonably good air defense and anti-ship capabilities. There would likely be some US losses, and they might be significant.
The battle for Tarawa took only three days, but it was the exact opposite of “easy.”
The only reason this battle would be “fast” is that it wouldn’t involve the necessity to seize and control territory. It would just involve shattering specific vulnerable capabilities in a limited area.
That’s a stretch. 24 hours? You sound like Trump.
Well, if mines are used, actually getting the Strait safely back open may take longer.
But destroying the Iranian capability to close the Strait to ship traffic or threaten that traffic won’t take long at all, and the airstrikes will probably be carried out by land-based aircraft rather than putting carriers and such at risk.
I would imagine that Iran would be aware of what the response would be if they close the strait and would empty the cupboard. Nothing will be over in 24 hours.
US occupied Afghanistan for 20 yeas and did not do a damn thing and now US is capable of opening the closed Strait of Hormuz in 24 hours…! Laughable…!
It may not be 24 hours but it will be short.
Like the short version of Gaza invasion by Israel… 3 weeks and counting?!
They don’t even have to blow anything up. Just stop pumping for a month. Iran nearly brought the west to its knees in 1979; Saudia Arabia and the gulf states did so in 1973.
MBS could ignore the fist bump, cut production by 50%.
It would be much easier to block the Bab-el-Mandeb, a strategic link between the Mediterranean and Indian Ocean at the bottom of the Red Sea.
Until true americans do something physically significant about these warmongers that had hijacked your country, eventually you’ll all be dragged along into a nuclear war as collateral damage and statistics, while they hide in their bunkers.
SecDef Rumsfeld began a policy of little American bases all over the world, which he called “Lily Pads” ready and waiting for fast US deployment of forces into them.
The downside of this idea is that such bases are vulnerabilities unless and until large forces are deployed into them. Some are so precarious in their location that even large forces cannot cover them from practical geopolitics, as for example the loss of the northern route of bases into Afghanistan at the height of that war.
The tiny remnant bases of US forces in Syria and Iraq are vulnerabilities. They are exposed in location, vulnerable unless massively reinforced, and even then exposed to serious losses. They are forward locations, not safe rear areas. Every military deployment needs safe rear areas behind the exposed forward combat locations, but the Lily Pad idea does not provide that.
Mark, it is really the time US evacuate all of its bases in foreign countries starting in middle east…!
Some articles suggest that there is another “Red-Line.” If they kill one US Soldier, the US would start a full scale war. Neocons are waiting with bated breath. Tick-tock, Tick-tock. My watch is electronic, but you know what I mean.
October 28, 2019: “We’re keeping the oil, $45 million a month,” President Trump told a gathering in Chicago.
Pillaging is a technical term for theft during wartime that is illegal under international law, and prohibited by the Fourth Geneva Convention.
USA pillaged Syria’s oil, from the Koniko gas fields in Deir Ezzor, a perfect example of Washington dogmatic belief that it’s built on the “international-rules-based order” and a moral force for good in the world.
Unfortunately for us, it probably costs more than that each month to maintain our presence in Syria. A losers deal.
The US bases in Syria are illegal as the US presence in Syria was not at the request of the Gov’t of Syria and thereby constitute an occupation… illegal under any guise. The US base(s) in Iraq are also illegal. The Gov’t of Iraq requested the US to leave the bases previously established in Iraq during the illegal war started by the US in the invasion of Iraq in 2003 which the US has refused to do….illegal occupation by any other name.
Illegal under what law? Syrian law? In international law (e.g. the Fourth Geneva Convention and 1907 Hague Regulations, there are a number of rules applying to what an occupier must do or may not do, but occupation as such is not banned.
He’s referring to the illegal invasions not supported by UN. The US is also looting Iraqi and Syrian oil.
There are lots of invasions not supported by the UN — the Russian invasion of Ukraine comes to mind. Does no support from the UN make an invasion or occupation “illegal?” That’s not a trick or leading question. I actually don’t know.
Yes, according to several international agreements to include the UN charter, invasions must be approved. The only exception is for “hot pursuit” of cross border attackers.
Russia had a duty to protect the inhabitants of the areas that voted to become a part of Russia again. The referendum was closely watched and was deemed fair. We al know the UN is toothless. We make sure of that.
Odd how Russia ignored that supposed duty for eight years, until peace had largely broken out, before suddenly turning its proxy war into direct war.
I suppose 8 years of shelling of the Donbas was “peace had largely broken out”. The UN was aware. We were aware. Very aware. Twice Putin rebuffed the Oblasts in the Donbas wanting to rejoin Russia. Only after Kiev/Azov amasses troops for push into the Oblasts did Putin allow the referendum. I would venture that the proxy war began in 2014.
On 17th April 2014 the Ukrainian government signed up to a Statement in Geneva which called for negotiations between the Ukrainian authorities and the representatives of Ukraine’s regions to find a settlement to the conflict. Those negotiations never happened because the Ukrainian authorities chose to launch their misnamed “Anti-Terrorist Operation” instead. These were war crimes and mass murder…….
Later, when the Ukrainian authorities launched their military offensive on 30th June 2014, a ceasefire was in place and negotiations were underway. Poroshenko broke off the negotiations, unilaterally ended the ceasefire, and chose war instead. These were war crimes and mass murder…….
At the time of Ukraine’s second offensive launched in January 2015 Ukraine had committed itself to a peace process which the Russians had brokered in Minsk in September 2014. That envisaged negotiations with the leaders of the Donbass which again never took place as Poroshenko and the Ukrainians resolved to launch their second offensive instead. These were war crimes and mass murder………
The responsibility for the war Ukraine chose to fight is Poroshenko’s, even though he now admits Ukraine has lost, Poroshenko et al must go before the ICC and answer for their many many crimes against humanity.
Yes, there was eight years of shelling the Donbas — by Ukrainian troops and by separatists backed by Russian troops.
But the death toll had gone down to low double digits per year. The war was effectively over, but without the outcome the Russian regime desired.
Who started “massing” troops first is an interesting question.
WOW just wow turning truth on its head. Who started massing troops? really?
The people of the Donbass were protecting their homes and family from NATO slaughter.
The people who were on the Donbass border did not live there. They were West Ukrainian Nazi’s, Azov. right sector Nazi’s, Banderite’s and NATO mercs. The people on the Donbass border murdering the people of the Donbass were the Nazi’s that overthrew the government in a violent coup. The Nazi’s needed to ethnicly cleanse 6 million people of the Donbass so that they could hold the balance of power and the ballot box.
In early 2014 i watched all the video’s from the Donbass frontline, Givi and Motorola, true heroes of the Donbass, NATO assassinated them.
Its completely despicable to suggest otherwise. Its a complete distortion to suggest the Donbass (the victims) were the aggressors. Thats just more despicable fascistic nonsense,
“The people of the Donbass were protecting their homes and family from NATO and separatist slaughter.”
Fixed, no charge.
You know the Donbass voted 96% to join Russia? To argue they were being attacked by themselves is just silly. Do you read what you type?
For 8 years Moscow declined their requests. You are just being silly.
Thomas, you know better than that. The Minsk agreements were never honored. The Americans NEVER supported the agreements, and the Europeans did what they had to do, following orders from Washington.
As ordered they pretended to negotiate knowing full well it was no more than pretense, the US abstained from the start, they knew what that meant. The hegemon decides all else is façade.
“The Americans NEVER supported the agreements, and the Europeans did what they had to do, following orders from Washington”
There were four signatory parties to the Minsk Agreements: The Russian Federation, Ukraine, the Donetsk separatists, and the Luhansk separatists. “The Americans” and “the Europeans” had precisely zero obligations under, or say in, those agreements.
You are right, however, that the agreements were never honored — by any party to them.
My understanding is that France and Germany certified, witnessed the agreements legality, that there was no coercion or whatever, the UN APPROVED AND RECOGNIZED THE CONTRACT. It was fair and reasonable by all accounts.
In the end Minsk shows us what characterless scumbags our politicians are. The only people who never intend to honor the agreement were the Ukrainian Nazis Obama/Biden/Nuland put in office. The Asov people and the Americans. I wonder how the Ukrainians now like the results of their action. Seeing what they really accomplished, and what could have been if they had implemented the Minsk agreements?
Minsk Agreements failed because Americans wanted a war and because France, Germany and Kiev regime (which was installed by US, France and Germany) were subordinated to US. US hoped, once Russia is involved in Ukrainian civil war, they can force EU to stop all economic cooperation with Russia and Russia will get in a deep economic and political crisis which eventually should end up in regime change in Moscow. Then Russia must abandon Crimea and Kiev regime would give Sebastopol military base to US navy. It was a good looking plan but everything went wrong because Russia is much stronger than American strategists thought.
I am convinced the same people who own and control US government own and control the big Western democracies, and the EU, and NATO. It can’t be coincidence that all of them, at the same time, elect such total incompetent and criminal leadership and have such a coordinated MSM. To top it off is the criminality, the silence concerning war crimes like the genocide all of us know of and the silence in all 4 capitals, all the damage they do to their own countries, insanity alone can’t explain it, it is simply too organized. I have the USA, UK, France, and Germany and Israel in mind. Who are the people benefiting from such catastrophic policies? Who pays the people in the parliaments to keep silent? The CIA and MI6 are experienced in destabilizing societies and regime change, people like Sullivan, Nuland, Blinken, and Biden.
Just too much to execute. France and Germany were not willing partners as you said, they were subordinates. The Minsk agreement would have served them, just not the USA and the Asov NAZIS.
WOW just wow: how ignorant and unhinged you are. It wasn’t ignored and it wasn’t peaceful and its a NATO proxy war and its not war its a SMO. So not a word of that is accurate. Complete ignorance to the point of unhinged from reality.
So all Russia’s attempts at a peaceful solution for 8 years, what you call ignored, were refused. Minsk 1 & 2 were lies to rearm Nazi’s and continue the ethnic cleansing of the Donbass. The parties to the agreement even admitted it was a lie.
Weeks before the Russian invasion NATO had 200,000 – 300,000 heavily armed forces on the border with the Donbass and had increased shelling 100 fold. NATO spent 8 years preparing for their war against Russia.
Russia went in to protect the ethnic Russians from mass murder.
Russia went in because Russia’s rulers deemed going in to be important. Whether they were justified in doing so is an entirely different question. But they certainly didn’t go to the UN and ask permission first, which is what this line of discussion was about.
I wonder how a security council vote to approve a Russian incursion would have turned out.
Using the Hague definition of aggression as the supreme international crime and that the UN demands protection for people from mass murder. ethnic cleansing and genocide to argue anything else is ignorant and unhinged.
The Russians operated entirely within international law and the UN charter.
The US, Ukraine and Israel are the aggressors and are rogue nations within international law and the UN charter.
btw the Minsk accords were approved by the UN. It is in fact the aggressors that are operating outside UN mandates and international law. You know the supreme international criminals according to the Hague.
Yes. RTP. Responsibility to Protect.
It is stunning how little people actually know about events in Ukraine. And its stunning how they portray themselves as all knowing.
Glad to see you’re finally engaging in some introspection.
I’m a little surprised to see such a response from. you
Any particular reason why?
I like the more hipster ‘R2P’ name.
Yeah, it was important to Russia’s leaders to stop the genocide of Russians in the Donbas.
It’s odd how antiwar.com has, for years, published essays and links that verify all you’re saying, Dr. Doom – yet not everyone here seems to have noticed ?
My “Polish neighbor” loves it when I say, Russia is bad and stupid. How bad and stupid? Bad because they created racist, blood thirsty, Russophobes and stupid because they haven’t surrendered to them already. Repeat as needed, like a lullaby, helps him go to sleep. (Sarcasm)
What are you smoking dude?
Peace? Very funny, Thomas. You have an interesting view of peace.
Russians are patient people, they were counting on common sense Ukrainians, that was the first mistake, then they counted on common sense people in Washington, another mistake. Now they don’t want to make that mistake again. That is very understandable
Now they know they are dealing with Idiots in DC and Kiev.
“…a duty to protect the inhabitants…”
Or a…responsibility to protect…as it were. If Russia were a Western country, it would have access to R2P doctrine. But, nope. Because reasons ?
If we start from the hypothesis of Nuremberg that labels the crime of aggression as the ‘supreme international crime’ then its quite obvious what is and isn’t illegal.
Its not the invasion and occupation that is in itself illegal, its the act of aggression that makes it illegal.
The pro-neo-Nazi “experts” always are pointing their finger at Russia, accusing Russia of aggression against Ukraine. This accusation is completely false because Donbass republics were recognized by Russia as independent states before Russian military intervention. Those two Donbass republics were de facto independent states from the times of neo-Nazi coup in Kiev. After the unconstitutional change of power in Kiev, they had right for the independence and Russia had the right to recognize their independence and have with them a military alliance which Russia did. The referendum for their integration into Russian Federation happened a half year later. So, all this talk about “Russian aggression” is a lie. Particular ridiculous is to compare Russian intervention in Ukraine with US intervention in Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan. Donbass and Novorossia are historical Russian lands populated by Russian speaking people. Their separation from Russia was illegal because it happened without any referendum. Bolshevik power itself was illegal. Bolsheviks got to power in Petrograd by overthrowing Constituent Assembly which at the time was the only legal power in Russia.
Russuis is a UN member and signatory … states don’t get to “independently” call themselves into existence and then claim right of protection. As far as the UN is concerned, the Donbas area is part of Ukraine still.
The Kiev Neo-Nazi Government was trying to ethnically cleanse the Donbas region of Russians by shelling them for seven years. The toothless UN did nothing about that.
Yes. Of course, from a different viewpoint, it was a central govt of a recognized nation state trying to reestablish control over a rebel territory.
But I gather your point. And I do actually believe in any people’s right to self determination and independence as described so well in the American DoI by Jefferson. What I was responding to was the previous poster’s reply that Russia can’t be accused of aggression against Ukraine because the Donbas was independent. For what it’s worth (and it may not be much), per UN regs, the Donbas (and, heck, Crimea too) is part of Ukraine still and thus Russia is indeed aggressing.
Well, except that Ukraine never registered its borders with the UN. It had one, and only one, international agreement regarding its borders. And that agreement was with the Russian Federation.
BS, Russia started that war. Igor Girkin is on record stating so.
In your dreams, Don. In your dreams.
The Ukrainian Nazis and the Americans provoked the war. Before that, the regime change started a civil war against the Russian speaking Ukrainians, treating them like third class citizens. That civil war caused the death of some 14 000 people, the Minsk agreements, which were never implemented as agreed on, were to end the civil war.
It would help you if you had at least a minimum of context knowledge. Wars don’t start in a vacuum, even if you want to believe it.
The basic rule is that an invasion is illegal if not supported by the UNSC. But a major exception is that self defense is still legal. What constitutes self defense? A tricky question. With considerable grey areas (for example, when a state “permits” its territory to be used by non state actors to launch attacks on other states, the other states have a right of self defense, but their actions must be proportionate to the threat posed). Then there are further refinements (or excuses, if you like). Defense of another country is one such additional exception. The USA and its allies have also maintained, for some decades now, that there is an additional “responsibility to protect” civilian populations from genocide or massive human rights violations perpetrated by their own government, even if that means invasion.
So, while “aggressive war” is indeed against international law, and individuals have been punished for pursuing it as a war crime, its exact definition is not easy to state. And, of course, powerful countries, particularly but not solely the USA, are pretty much immune from penalty for violating that rule.
Who made the U.N. the arbiter of whether or not an occcupation is legal or moral? Just because something is or isn’t written down in International law doesn’t determine whether an occcupation is legal or moral. Are the invasions and occupation of U.S. territory by hordes from Central America and invaders and occupiers of European land by peoples from African coutries ok under the U.N? Not being facetous just saying how ridulous using those standards woud be. Besides, the U.N. is so political that a few countries can decide what is or isn’t ‘legal’.
IF the UN is the arbiter, it’s because the nations involved agreed to the UN’s rules when they joined the UN.
My question was WHETHER the UN, or any other institution of international law, is the arbiter.
Most occupiers cite the UN Charter, etc., to justify their actions. Very few actually ask the UN for permission before undertaking the action, though.
I can appreciate that, just don’t think the U.N. has any teeth in its decisions. Iraq is a prime example. The U.S. was going into Iraq regardless of whether or not the U.N. approved.
Russia did the same and you don’t have an issue with that.
I would rather not see any country invaded. Much different circumstances between the two.
As an occupier, there are laws governing the responsibilities of the occupier. If you believe occupation is not banned, may I then occupy your home? By force, if need be?
Me not knowing whether something is banned by a particular institution is not even remotely the same thing as me liking that thing or or being OK with it.
Huh?
I did not say I “believe occupation is not banned.” I said I didn’t know and asked whether it was or not.
International law stopped being a thing as soon as Uncle Sam decided to rule the planet via a military greater than the sum of most if not all of what the other countries have.
All these references to law and international norms are pure and simple bullshit. Might makes right. Period.
True.
Succinct and accurate
Apply that when you come here supporting the Russian invasion, occupation, and annexation of Ukraine.
Both the Syrian and Iraqi invasions were wars of aggression which are illegal under international law.
Immoral under jus ad bellum.
Illegal lol. Laws are created by the masters to keep their slaves meek and subservient.
Illegal war! HAHAHA!
This can only get worse. Just like with northern Israel and the Golan, these bases are indefensible against a mass rocket attack by Hezbollah. The USA and Israel are fast losing support from the rest of the world. It’s only a matter of time…
They’re just waiting now for our next “Pearl Harbor” opportunity to kick off World War III and Armageddon.
Bet your bottom dollar the US government will do its very best to make sure ‘Pearl Harbor II’ isn’t prevented.
Pretty sure the oct 7th attack is the event…sure looks like it.
What oct. 10 attack are you referring?
Mistyped that. Oct 7th. Isreals pearl harbor, their 9/11. Now they have their own dresden too.
Oct 7th happened to Israel—-not US.
So you are justifying the murder of civilian men, women and children? How is your mentality any different from the Hamas attackers on Oct 7?
I’m honestly confused by your comments, partly due to it being a disjointed discussion.
I don’t support any killings, hamas or the Zionists.
I am disgusted with the genocide being perpetrated against Palestinians, right now. Disgusted with the excuses, the acceptance and the calls for complete ethnic cleansing.
But what if the perpetrators are NOT “Iranian Proxies”? It’s not as if ONLY “Iranian Proxies” hate us; in the middle east, EVERYONE hates us, including, sunnis, shias, alawites, the druze, Iranians, Syrians, Iraqis, Palestinians, Kurds, Turks, Libyans, Yemenis, Egyptians, Arabs and probably even the camels. We are pseudo-“friends” with some of the area rulers (at least those we pay off); everyone else hates us. And; with good reason.
And who is responsible for all that…?! You guessed right, Uncle Sam…!
The brutal actions by Israel in Gaza and the West Bank are creating enmity throughout the Arab world, and the non-Arab world.
The Israelis hate us too… Don’t kid yourself.
Yeah, until they want more aid.
oh they hate us all the way to to the bank
That is what happens when you don’t obey the laws of humanity and Allah
WE HAVE NO BUSINESS BEING THERE!
To paraphrase a great ’80s movie : “One thing that didn’t officially happen was a bomb didn’t officially explode at 1430 hours, unofficially destroying part of a US Army base unofficially in Syria. Several men were unofficially wounded, plus others whose identities are not officially known at this time. The fire department responded, which we believe to be unofficial at this present moment.”
Take the fight to Iran? Attack the first great civilization?
Let’s drift back in time ten years or so;
A fifteen year-old Iranian boy landed the most advanced US spy drone using his lap-top computer. It was a beautifully sculptured delta wing job that, aw shucks, looked like it cost a million bucks.
Thus began Iranian reverse engineering and university apprentice design school for the fifteen year-old whiz kid. He has turned out to be a super star.
Iran has tens of thousands of intelligent design hypersonic missiles able to enter chosen Israeli windows at full speed, within six minutes from launch. That gives Iranian people quite awhile to get the hell out of Dodge and activate decentralized hyper missiles in case Israelis are stupid enough to counter attack an empty downtown.
The background sound inside of an Iranian coastal defense airplane was laughter as the flight crew photographed a clearly visible lurking Israeli submerged spy sub.
Iranians are modern. Atom bombs are yesterday’s technology. Iran has air snd sea defense missiles plus thousands of loaded missiles able to fly in chosen one’s windows.
Ceasefire. Negotiate secular democracy.
Not happening mostly do to Israels national ego.
” tens of thousands of intelligent design hypersonic missiles” Where did you come up with that number?
Perhaps the attacks on the US bases will deter the US from making any more attacks.
Perhaps, but don’t bet the grocery money.
Just the opposite I fear.
The drive towards war and the endless austerity measures are growing increasingly incompatible with the thin veneer of parliamentary democracy that was established by the new ruling classes in Eastern Europe after the restoration of capitalism in the 1990s. The admission last year by former Romanian Social Democratic President Ion Iliescu that his administration participated in the CIA torture program, and that it was done without blinking an eye in order to secure the country’s admission to NATO, should serve as a stark warning to the working class as to the criminal character of these ruling oligarchies.
A stark warning to Europe is that never in history has a military buildup occurred that has not ended in war. As Thomas Hardy once said “You can do anything with bayonets except sit on them.”
Russian General [Leonid Ivashov]: ‘We Are At War’, February 22, 2014). Russia was well aware that they were going to be attacked by NATO and they prepared their defenses, including improving their first strike ability (hypersonic missiles), Kill or be Killed.
I believe Russia began preparing long before 22 Feb 2014. In 1991, Russia peeked inside the door to the Western Alliance, wanted to become a member, and was received by having that door slammed in the face. There is no way we will allow a multipolar world. There has to be one hegemon, the U.S. Then came the Clinton administration. A f*ucking nightmare.
2014 is the date that NATO declared war with overthrowing the government in Ukraine.
The quoted Russian General understood the events of 22nd Feb 2014 to be war, all Russians knew it was war.
Why didn’t Russia invade back then……In Ukraine Russia is fighting for the Russian world which includes the Ukraine.
With hundreds of thousands in the streets on Iraq protesting the Gaza massacre I can see how attacks are increasing. People were blocking tankers headed to Israel supporting countries this week, and the government was watching and not intervening.
I hope the protests all over spread and turn into a stage 4 cancer for Israel.
Well that may be your hope, but it is not going to happen. Israel will survive this war and the hate between the two sides will increase because of it.
And when the balloon finally goe3s up the damage and horror will increase dramatically. I do not think the world will remain silent for long. The killing is too blatant.Sooner rather then later the violators will be punished.
“US Officials say…”complete BS.”
My response to the threats to Iran in the absence of any proof, as usual, the Iranian response to the US occupation of Syrian territory should be:
When the British invaded America and set up illegal forts in the revolutionary war local forces kept attacking them.
In that case it was also NOT Iran! Sarcasm, but as valid as anything coming out of John Kirby’s mouth!
Biden and Netanyahu in support with the cabal of warmongers are moving heaven and hell to start the next WW. all for more LEBENSRAUM and global US HEGEMONY.
They have reached the Goebbel/Hitler point.
://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sportpalast_speech
US in Ukraine has declared war on Russia, they funded neo Nazi’s in Kiev to overthrow a freely elected government and then went about blaming Russia for the destabilisation. As we know from past experience, Washington will pursue its strategy relentlessly while shrugging off public opinion, international law or the condemnation of adversaries and allies alike.
The pattern, of course, is unmistakable. It begins with sanctimonious finger-wagging, economic sanctions and incendiary rhetoric, and quickly escalates into stealth bombings, drone attacks, unlawful detention and torture, massive destruction of civilian infrastructure, millions of fleeing refugees, decimated towns and cities, death squads, wholesale human carnage, vast environmental devastation, and the steady slide into failed state anarchy; all of which is accompanied by the repetition of state propaganda spewed from every corporate bullhorn in the western media.
After all isnt this how it happened in Iraq, Libya, Afganistan, Syria etc etc etc
A very probable picture of our future.
They thought the igniting a war in Ukraine would be a great success in their anti-Russian strategy but it happened to be a great geopolitical failure.
What a misfortune for any country that has oil under their dirt. Every day it gets closer, going faster than a roller coaster, world war 3 will surely come our way. Hey, hey. . .