Yet another war, this time with Iran

[laughing dog]

That proves my point - there is a choice.

Sometime there is none. Why did Israel attack Gaza? I don't think they did it for fun. Why did US attack Iran? Because they could. That was partly for oil and partly for fun.

Both were choices.

Why do you think anyone wanted to bleed a third world country like Russia?

Because even if they may be a third-world country, they have 4,309 atom bombs and missiles to send them anywhere in the world.

What does that have to do with bleeding Russia? If anything it is a reason not to bleed Russia.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Here's a good podcast documentary on the Iranian revolution by The Rest is History

Revolution in Iran: Fall of the Shah (Part 1)

Why did the Iranian Revolution erupt in 1979? What was the nature of the relationship between President Carter and the ostentatious Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi? And, who was the Ayatollah Ruhollah…

pca.st

The short story is that in the shah's Iran Imam's were also legal and administrative functionaries. Especially out in the country where people were illiterate. When the shah tried liberal reforms, that was good for the people, but weakened the power of the imams, that's when they suddenly started caring about the shah's corruption, human rights abuses and unwise management of govornment funds.

The shah's greatest flaw was that of incompetence. He was a weak ruler. He inherited power from his father. But had none of his fathers talents. He failed to correctly identify what and who kept him in power. His rule was nothing but a string of bad decisions

Yeah, other than the hegemony, we are running into the same problems here.

 

[TV and credit cards]

.

That proves my point - there is a choice.

Sometime there is none. Why did Israel attack Gaza? I don't think they did it for fun. Why did US attack Iran? Because they could. That was partly for oil and partly for fun.

Both were choices.

Why do you think anyone wanted to bleed a third world country like Russia?

Because even if they may be a third-world country, they have 4,309 atom bombs and missiles to send them anywhere in the world.

What does that have to do with bleeding Russia? If anything it is a reason not to bleed Russia.

So causing political and economic instability in a country with over four thousand nukes isn't Plan A?

 

[SLD]

The supposed done deal that tRump has claimed is total victory. Doesn’t look like shit’s been agreed to. Trump is just lying his ass off to try and keep the markets pacified. It won’t work for too much longer.



Here’s John Bolton’s take:

“He is somebody who has spent his whole life making deals with people. He thinks everybody wants to make a deal on just about anything. That’s not what these people are into,” Bolton said.
“And they can see that Trump is so palpably desperate to have a deal that he can declare to be a victory and that lowers prices of gasoline, and they’re playing him on that. They’re stretching him out. They’re buying time. All of that works in their advantage.”

Sums it up.

 

[aupmanyav]

What does that have to do with bleeding Russia? If anything it is a reason not to bleed Russia.

Bleeding Russia would impact its ability to act against USA. But the problem is complex. Russia is not alone. China may help it when it comes to a crunch. Secondly there is a limit to how much USA can bleed Russia. If the bleeding does beyond limits, then Russia can act on its own. They have enough muscle.

 

[aupmanyav]

So causing political and economic instability in a country with over four thousand nukes isn't Plan A?

Causing political and economic instability in Russia to remove Putin or someone else with the same mentality who in time replaces him is coveted US dream. But the dream involves risks, not just for the two countries but for the whole world.

 

[laughing dog]

What does that have to do with bleeding Russia? If anything it is a reason not to bleed Russia.

Bleeding Russia would impact its ability to act against USA. But the problem is complex. Russia is not alone. China may help it when it comes to a crunch. Secondly there is a limit to how much USA can bleed Russia. If the bleeding does beyond limits, then Russia can act on its own. They have enough muscle.

So this “bleeding” is pointless. And yet you claim NATO wasted time, energy, and resources on a pointless task. Got it.

 

[aupmanyav]

So this “bleeding” is pointless. And yet you claim NATO wasted time, energy, and resources on a pointless task. Got it.

Yeah, the 'bleeding' is pointless, harmful and against the US law (Tariffs), against Russia, Iran, China, etc. See how Ukraine is suffering, see how UAE, Qatar, Kuwait are suffering because of US/NATO joining the wars. see how the whole world is economically affected. It is madness. Has it made any difference to the targeted regimes?

 

[Patooka]

What does that have to do with bleeding Russia? If anything it is a reason not to bleed Russia.

Bleeding Russia would impact its ability to act against USA. But the problem is complex. Russia is not alone. China may help it when it comes to a crunch. Secondly there is a limit to how much USA can bleed Russia. If the bleeding does beyond limits, then Russia can act on its own. They have enough muscle.

If Russia had enough muscle they wouldn't be asking North Korea for soldiers. And you might want to look up China's history with Russia FYI. Not even Moscow Bob is praising China, which is telling.

 

[DrZoidberg]

What does that have to do with bleeding Russia? If anything it is a reason not to bleed Russia.

Bleeding Russia would impact its ability to act against USA. But the problem is complex. Russia is not alone. China may help it when it comes to a crunch. Secondly there is a limit to how much USA can bleed Russia. If the bleeding does beyond limits, then Russia can act on its own. They have enough muscle.

If Russia had enough muscle they wouldn't be asking North Korea for soldiers. And you might want to look up China's history with Russia FYI. Not even Moscow Bob is praising China, which is telling.

The animosity between China and Russia is rarely understood in the west. Basically, during the "century of humiliation" Russia was the worst offender. Huge regions of traditional Chinese homeland ended up in Russia. In the Russian revolution Russia didn't give it back. After the Chinese revolution China expected the USSR to finally give it back. But they didn't. When the USSR disolved they still didn't give it back. They still aren't. This is the source of much of the friction today.

China hates Russia more than any other country. If given the opportunity China would fuck it up for Russia. They've ended up on the same side a lot since both Russia and China are dictatorships with human rights abuses. But that's friends of convenience.

It's funny how Chinese designs on territory to the north and west are seen as agressive Chinese imperial expansions. It's really not. It's rather attempts to rectify previous Russian imperial aggression. One could argue that so much time has flowed that it's time for China to get over it. But they're not.

Russias relative weaknses vs China is very bad news for Russia. China has felt so humiliated by Russia for so long, you can count on them taking full opportunity of this situation

 

[SLD]

Wait. I thought the war was over. I thought there was a deal.

Iran and U.S. trade new strikes as Trump dismisses pressure to end war

A U.S. official said that American forces in Kuwait were the suspected target of an Iranian missile attack on Thursday, the second military clash in days.

www.nbcnews.com

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

There is little worse than a person who thinks he is in control, but isn't remotely in control. He is the guy in the room bragging of his authority while everyone else rolls their eyes.

He is now steamrolling the planet into a fuel shortage... for nothing. He isn't going to get what he wants. The best he can do is less than what Obama was able to manage to get. The Iranian Theocracy will gladly watch the Earth burn. Trump has no leverage.

And he keeps saying 'They want to make a deal, we'll get a deal, or we'll go back to striking them.' Over and over, as if anyone believes it. Says the US will oversee the Strait of Hormuz, but has failed in doing so. We won the battle bigly... but are losing the war by even more. And the pragmatism required to end this nonsense is lacking for both parties.

 

[TV and credit cards]

There is little worse than a person who thinks he is in control, but isn't remotely in control. He is the guy in the room bragging of his authority while everyone else rolls their eyes.

He is now steamrolling the planet into a fuel shortage... for nothing. He isn't going to get what he wants. The best he can do is less than what Obama was able to manage to get. The Iranian Theocracy will gladly watch the Earth burn. Trump has no leverage.

And he keeps saying 'They want to make a deal, we'll get a deal, or we'll go back to striking them.' Over and over, as if anyone believes it. Says the US will oversee the Strait of Hormuz, but has failed in doing so. We won the battle bigly... but are losing the war by even more. And the pragmatism required to end this nonsense is lacking for both parties.

My bold - It burdens Europe and sustains Russia. That's not nothing.
But yeah, in that he made the comment about the US suffering higher gas prices for the sake of setting Iran right, he kinda put his chips in the pot on that one. In the eyes of the Fox News Nation, if Iran comes out the other side of this with an intact theocracy and enriched uranium, that's a loss. And it looks like it's going to be just that, with a theocratic government even more hardened against the US.

 

[aupmanyav]

If Russia had enough muscle they wouldn't be asking North Korea for soldiers. And you might want to look up China's history with Russia FYI. Not even Moscow Bob is praising China, which is telling.

OK, add N. Korea with its missiles, bombs and soldiers to help Russia in a crunch. You have put them also under sanctions. Are they having any affect on the regime? History, relations keep on changing according to needs. Saudis and Kuwait have asked US not to use their air-space.

China hates Russia more than any other country. If given the opportunity China would fuck it up for Russia. They've ended up on the same side a lot since both Russia and China are dictatorships with human rights abuses. But that's friends of convenience.

I do not know. In any case, they need Russia if US goes against them; otherwise they will be left lone, just with N. Korea. Political imperative.

 

[Harry Bosch]

That proves my point - there is a choice.

Sometime there is none. Why did Israel attack Gaza? I don't think they did it for fun. Why did US attack Iran? Because they could. That was partly for oil and partly for fun.

Partly for fun? I'm not sure what news you have access to, but I assume that you heard of the Hamas attack of October 7?

 

[Harry Bosch]

What does that have to do with bleeding Russia? If anything it is a reason not to bleed Russia.

Bleeding Russia would impact its ability to act against USA. But the problem is complex. Russia is not alone. China may help it when it comes to a crunch. Secondly there is a limit to how much USA can bleed Russia. If the bleeding does beyond limits, then Russia can act on its own. They have enough muscle.

Sorry amigo, but this just isn't true. Most of the west does not want to weaken Russia. Sure we want to weaken Russia as long as they are at war with Europe. But just look at a map. A stronger Russia would be an incredible resource trading partner, a hedge against China, and would better safeguard their nukes. The west desperately wants to trade with Russia. But stopping the war that they caused is issue number one.

 

[aupmanyav]

And the pragmatism required to end this nonsense is lacking for both parties.

No. Iran regime does not mind it. They may bomb UAE, Qatar, ships, etc., ask Houtis to block Bab al-Mandel. That would further limit oil supply in the world and countries not involved in the war will suffer.

 

[aupmanyav]

.. but I assume that you heard of the Hamas attack of October 7?

Israel was capable enough to take revenge with a little help in armament. For Trump, it was greed and fun.

 

[Harry Bosch]

.. but I assume that you heard of the Hamas attack of October 7?

Israel was capable enough to take revenge with a little help in armament. For Trump, it was greed and fun.

Well, any chance that you are conflating the Israel/US attack on Iran with the Israel invasion of Gaza after October 7? I don't think that it was fun, but I do think that Trump's attack on Iran will go down as the worst foreign policy blunder by an American President in our history. I don't think that there is a close a second. I do understand Israel attacking Iran and trying to get US help. They tried the same with Bush, Biden, and Obama. But presidents were too savvy for that.

 

[aupmanyav]

A stronger Russia would be an incredible resource trading partner, a hedge against China, and would better safeguard their nukes. The west desperately wants to trade with Russia. But stopping the war that they caused is issue number one.

But Europe aligned with US and are a part of NATO. How can they have good relations with Russia? Did Europe not help in destabilization in Ukraine?
Fun, "we did it in Yugoslavia, we will do it again in Ukraine". Who suffered? The Ukrainians.