Iran Erupts: Crowds Burn US Flags and Swear to Ayatollah

Postvieww · Sunday at 4:40 PM

Lukaris said:
Many Iranians are anti Hamas and ambivalent towards Israel. Whatever is done in the current warfare should take extreme care towards Iranian civilians and minimize any lurch towards common cause.

You are correct in that there are many innocent Civilians in Iran, but they are not in control. What many on this forum do not understand or completely ignore is that there can be no meaningful agreement made with an evil Islamic regime. Islam is looking for the return of their last prophet which cannot happen according to their faith until the last drop of Jewish blood is shed. There is no negotiation or agreement that can solve that problem.

Richard T · Sunday at 4:52 PM

Hans Blaster said:
First attack, yeah that seems to be the case, but in the last week two nuclear weapons states have been directly attacked (and one invaded) in response to earlier attacks by themselves: Russia and Israel. Both of which have been attacked by the countries they attacked first (Ukraine and Iran). No nuclear response.

Yes, good points though I would say Israel was attacked first by proxies. The nuclear option and deterrence is less clear if one state has nukes and the other does not.

Belk · Sunday at 5:02 PM

Postvieww said:
Well now that is interesting. Your plan for stopping Iran from attaining those weapons is exactly what? Depending on the powerless UN, or making an unenforceable agreement they would never honor? Or maybe sending a pretty please message? You say you are against them having a nuke but your posts only show you are solidly against Trump.

My plan? Tell me Postview, when you were criticizing Biden was it suddenly your responsibility to fix everything you criticized? No? Then how about you stop trying to assign such responsibilities to me. It is not like there is no shortage of other options and this path Trump has chosen is not somehow assured to work. Also kindly spare me the "you only hate Trump!" song and dance. It is getting old and worn out. Your powers of mind reading are not up to the task.

Postvieww · Sunday at 5:03 PM

BCP1928 said:
I know that the distinction is not well defined and has been a contentious one between more than one President and Congress. However, the War Powers Act requires the President to consult with Congress "in every possible instance" before fielding combat forces.

Not true! The act requires the President notify within 48 hours and he did that. The war powers act is being misrepresented by many to get just one more dig at Trump.

Postvieww · Sunday at 5:06 PM

Belk said:
. Also kindly spare me the "you only hate Trump!" song and dance.

If the shoe fits.

Postvieww · Sunday at 5:08 PM

Belk said:
Tell me Postview, when you were criticizing Biden was it suddenly your responsibility to fix everything you criticized?

I did my part! I voted Trump.

Belk · Sunday at 5:09 PM

Postvieww said:
Do you not the difference between a declaration of war and a targeted military operation?

By all means, Postvieww, explain to me in great detail how this is an act of self defense and therefore not a violation of international law?

Belk · Sunday at 5:10 PM

Postvieww said:
If the shoe fits.

As I said, you mind reading powers are not up to the task.

Belk · Sunday at 5:11 PM

Postvieww said:
I did my part! I voted Trump.

I'll take that as a "No".

CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN · Sunday at 5:19 PM

Valletta said:
Iran’s anti-West protests exploded again on Friday as thousands of demonstrators set US and Israeli flags ablaze in Tehran, chanting “Death to America” and “Death to Israel.”
The massive outpouring followed Friday prayers, with crowds lining Tehran’s streets, brandishing Hezbollah flags and portraits of slain commanders hit in recent Israeli missile strikes. One banner read, “I will sacrifice my life for my leader,” reflecting the fervor uniting the demonstrators behind Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Iran Erupts: Crowds Burn US Flags and Swear to Ayatollah

Chaos erupts in Iran as thousands chant “Death to America” and torch flags amid rising tensions with Israel and the West.

themusicessentials.com

I hope this left no doubt as to Iran's intentions toward America.

How do you expect them to act, after The United States bomb their country. If Iran did that to the United States. The president would declare war. On their country.

Valletta · Sunday at 5:34 PM

CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN said:
How do you expect them to act, after The United States bomb their country. If Iran did that to the United States. The president would declare war. On their country.

That was before their nuclear facilities were bombed. I think the "Death to America" chants could well have been the final straw for Trump.

Hans Blaster · Sunday at 6:23 PM

Richard T said:
Yes, good points though I would say Israel was attacked first by proxies. The nuclear option and deterrence is less clear if one state has nukes and the other does not.

Israel's entire premise for starting this war with Iran was their nuclear program. Since the Hamas attack in 2023, Israel has exchanged fire with Iran at least once, but did not use "nuclear weapons" as a reason. They (and Iran) also chose to limit their escalation in those instances. (And whether through direct means or via proxies, Iran has felt no restraint in attacking a state with nukes.)

Postvieww · Sunday at 7:07 PM

Belk said:
By all means, Postvieww, explain to me in great detail how this is an act of self defense and therefore not a violation of international law?

This was preemptive. Should Trump have sought permission from the UN or Russia or maybe China? No nation seeks permission to defend their own interests. If you have an example please share it. Again and again I will state Iran is headed by an EVIL Islamic death cult which has no civilized intention. The hard reality is there is only one way to deal with that and that is through force.?

BCP1928 · Sunday at 7:21 PM

Postvieww said:
You are correct in that there are many innocent Civilians in Iran, but they are not in control. What many on this forum do not understand or completely ignore is that there can be no meaningful agreement made with an evil Islamic regime. Islam is looking for the return of their last prophet which cannot happen according to their faith until the last drop of Jewish blood is shed. There is no negotiation or agreement that can solve that problem.

That is not a Muslim belief. For Sunni Muslims, Mohammed was the last of the Prophets and none other is expected to appear. There is no fighting between Jews and Muslims foretold until the end times when the AntiChrist appears and Jesus returns to do battle with him and then conduct the final judgement. Iranians are Shiites who have a slightly different story, expecting the 12th Imam to appear to fight the AntiChrist, with Jesus then returning to "judge both the quick and the dead."

Belk · Sunday at 7:46 PM

Postvieww said:
This was preemptive. Should Trump have sought permission from the UN or Russia or maybe China? No nation seeks permission to defend their own interests. If you have an example please share it. Again and again I will state Iran is headed by an EVIL Islamic death cult which has no civilized intention. The hard reality is there is only one way to deal with that and that is through force.?

Oh, I must of missed the "but they are the bad guys!" exemption to international law.

BCP1928 · Sunday at 7:57 PM

Postvieww said:
Not true! The act requires the President notify within 48 hours and he did that. The war powers act is being misrepresented by many to get just one more dig at Trump.

It also requires prior notification and consultation.

ThatRobGuy · Sunday at 8:03 PM

Belk said:
Oh, I must of missed the "but they are the bad guys!" exemption to international law.

Well, the US isn't subject to the ICC and wasn't a signatory to the Rome Statute...

So "what the ICC thinks" is of no consequence to US foreign policy decisions.

Not saying that Trump made the right decision here...in fact, I think it was a bad move to give them two weeks, and then go into strike mode 2 days later.

That being said, the entire concept of "international law" is borderline farcical.

It's basically nothing more than:
"A bunch of countries who underspend on their own defense, and assume the US and UK will step up to the plate if they ever get hit, wagging their fingers at US policy decisions from a place of faux authority"

Valletta · Sunday at 8:05 PM

BCP1928 said:
It also requires prior notification and consultation.

Over 700 Iranian nationals released into US during Biden administration despite terrorism concerns

Border Patrol under President Biden arrested 1,504 Iranian nationals from 2021-2024, releasing 729 into the U.S. Now, DHS is warning of heightened threats following military strikes ordered by President Trump.

www.foxnews.com

This is what we should be focusing upon.

BCP1928 · Sunday at 8:07 PM

ThatRobGuy said:
Well, the US isn't subject to the ICC and wasn't a signatory to the Rome Statute...

So "what the ICC thinks" is of no consequence to US foreign policy decisions.

Not saying that Trump made the right decision here...in fact, I think it was a bad move to give them two weeks, and then go into strike mode 2 days later.

That being said, the entire concept of "international law" is borderline farcical.

It's basically nothing more than:
"A bunch of countries who underspend on their own defense, and assume the US and UK will step up to the plate if they ever get hit, wagging their fingers at US policy decisions from a place of faux authority"

Of course. Maybe to them Iran is just a troublesome country that shouldn't have nukes.

Gene2memE · Sunday at 8:12 PM

Valletta said:
The Japanese almost did not surrender, the Council was tied and they had to bring in the emperor to break the tie. The atomic bomb caused the Soviet Union to attack the Japanese. Japan, as their last hope, had been trying to get the Soviets to join them against the United States. Those two closely related events caused the surrender. In this case if Iran used atomic bombs against Israel their idea was to obliterate Israel so there could be no retaliation.

This is one of the all time readings of history.

The Soviet Union made it clear at the 1943 Tehran [irony] conference it would launch offensive actions against Japan once Germany had been defeated. It re-iterated this commitment in February 1945 at Yalta and firmly committed to an invasion of Manchuria in July 1945 at the Potsdam conference.

The Soviet Union assembled 90 divisions across three different groups facing Manchuria.

Four armies totalling 1.6 million men and almost 100,000 vehicles don't just appear overnight. Red Army troops had been steadily assembling since the start of March 1945.

The overall invasion commander signalled at the start of August 1945 (before the atomic bombing) that he was ready to proceed. The diplomatic paperwork for a formal declaration of war had been ready since late July.

The atomic bombing did not cause the Soviet Union to attack Japan. At most, the bombing accelerated the invasion timetable by a matter of two to six days.

The original invasion had been planned for either August 4th or 5th, then there were a series of deferrals, mostly because it was taking longer than expected to assemble some of the engineering units in the East. Eventually, the commander changed the order of which front would attack first, with the attack in the sparsely populated and sparsely defended West occurring about 2 days before the attack in the East.

Iran Erupts: Crowds Burn US Flags and Swear to Ayatollah

Believer

Well-Known Member

Senior Member

Believer

Believer

Believer

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

My dad died 1/12/2023. I'm still devastated.

Well-Known Member

Hood was a loser.

Believer

Well-Known Member

Senior Member

Well-Known Member

Part of the IT crowd

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Similar threads