Exclusive: Supreme Leader's military adviser says Iran's response will be 'against military sites'

[DoubleYouSee]

Extrem drone war in Syria against US troops and bases there looks good.

Do you have any source!?

 

[Ich]

Do you have any source!?

Yes, my brain. It says "Extrem drone war in Syria against US troops and bases there looks good."

(Edit: hmm, maybe my awful english. but i cant say "would look good" cause it not only "would look" but it "looks good". hahaha kinda philosophical space )

 

[GWXP]

The killing of Iran’s top general was a ‘wake-up call’ to Tehran, Saudi prince says

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/16/qas...as-a-wake-up-call-to-tehran-prince-turki.html

The U.S. airstrike that killed Iran’s top commander showed Tehran that it can’t get away with its provocations, but won’t stop the country from continuing with its agenda, a former chief of Saudi intelligence told CNBC.

“The taking out of (Qasem) Soleimani definitely has been an important step to check at least some of the ambitions of Iran after its very provocative actions in the past year,” Saudi Arabian Prince Turki Al-Faisal told CNBC’s Hadley Gamble.

“The attacks on the oil tankers, culminating in the attack on the Aramco facilities, and there was no response,” he said. “This was a sort of a wake-up call to the Iranian government and the Iranian leadership that they can’t get away with it.”

Tehran has denied involvement in both incidents.

However, Al-Faisal said the death of Soleimani would not halt Iran’s “agenda.

“It definitely was a very important step,” he said. “Whether it would stop further activities by Iran to use the methods that Soleimani was very clever in using — I don’t think so.”

That’s because the Iranian leadership has an “agenda and a project,” he said. “That project is to be the dominant representative, if you like, of all of Islam in the world.”

Tehran has used “surrogates” such as Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Houthis in Yemen to advance its project, he said.

“That is going to continue,” he predicted. “Maybe less efficiently than when Soleimani was alive, but inevitably, equally terroristic and, in my view, evil in its intent.”

 

[Black Stone]

And that doesn't have anything to do with what was being discussed.

Yes it does.

The architect of expanding IRGC's international operations was Mostafa Chamran as I told you. The IRGC's influence in Lebanon and Palestine exists thanks to him. And yes, he was expendable. The only reason that there's a lot of media hype about it is to rally support behind the IRGC against the Americans throughout the region.

Again, you said it like he was a nobody, shame really, I can see that there were masses of Iranian people mourning his death. If he was a nobody and totally dispensable, the Iranian public surely put up a good show to the world and in support of the Iranian regime.

I think the Iranian public is more clear and brave than the Iranian regime, they know when one of their nation's son has died for the country and certainly a hero in their eyes.

Iraqi sources tell that the American part of the Ain Al-Assad base has been literally obliterated. CNN reports show only debris, dust and ashes. And you had a 6 hour prior notice to reduce casualties. Your radars in the region were all active and directed at Iran, yet you couldn't intercept even one incoming missile.

I guess Iraqi source is the most accurate in your view. If the base was completely obliterated we should expect deaths and this is a major thing for the Americans if true and will be reported to the public, or are you saying the base were completely empty when it was hit and all American personnel were going on a camping trip?.

It's not about what you see or don't see. It's about facts. Maybe a simple Googling would help you learn a thing or two before you comment on something?
https://www.arabnews.com/node/1610106/middle-east
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jan/09/saudi-arabia-urges-de-escalation-of-midde-east-crisis
And many other links that you can find on your own.

There is no need for that. All the begging you mentioned whether is true or not doesn't play much in the grand of things. The thing that is very clear is bases dotted at the door steps of Iran, quite embarrassing for Iran if you ask me. The others are begging Iran and yet hosts US bases, ironic if you ask me.

This is where the attack on Ain Al-Assad becomes relevant. The precision of our hits was pretty impressive as admitted by Western analysts. And none of our missiles were intercepted by you. So, that kind of answers both of your concerns.

Hitting aircraft carrier is not the same as hitting a empty building. You should compare it with hitting the airliner, that was precision indeed, not sure about the identification though. Its a worry if you have Iranian fighters flying around your own airspace should a war do break out. nobody wants to get hit by their own countryman.

If you're going to stoop so low to take advantage of an unfortunate incident which caused 170 civilian deaths, I should remind you that thousands of your soldiers went back home crippled. Some of them lost their manhood and many of them committed suicide because of war traumas. Most of that happened thanks to the IDEs in Iraq that we were responsible for. Not to mention that the security of your military establishments is so ridiculous that allows things like the Beirut barracks bombings to happen.

I am afraid you are jumping to conclusion about stooping too low, the comparison between soldiers you have mentioned is irrelevant and disrespectful to the US soldiers and the lives lost on the airliner. US soldiers signed up for war, the passengers did not sign up to get shot down by Iran.

Again, the belligerents say it all. Iraq versus Iran ended as a strategic victory for Iran and a tactical stalemate for both sides. Iraq widely used chemical weapons against the Iranians, both civilians and soldiers, and had the direct support of the Soviet Union, the US, the UK, France, Western/Eastern Germany, Italy, Belgium, Austria, all Arab countries except Syria, Lebanon and Algeria, etc. Iran on the other hand was in the state of chaos after a revolution that marked a turning point for the region and the world. The US got directly involved to prevent Iraq from losing the war on numerous occasions. Particularly, after Iran destroyed 80% of the Iraqi Navy, the US helped Iraq continue to export oil.

US coalition invasion of Iraq in 2003 involved more than 50 countries supporting the US coalition, including European powers, Arab countries and Iraq's neighboring countries and it has been an ongoing situation. Although it was a tactical victory, it has been a strategic failure and you're now getting the boot in Iraq.

This does not change the fact that you struggled against a neighbor and I have mentioned earlier, the Europeans are weak when it comes to war. The US was the sole power when it comes to the removal of Saddam.

The US is not getting the boot from Iraq, we are still there, we will remain there and there is nothing Iraq or Iran can do about it.

I'm surprised that you can't use your native language properly. A 'scratch' is not several meters deep.

Thanks for the personal attack, I love it when members attack me personally instead against my points.

Maybe you should re-read what I mean by "scratch" in the overall context.

I can give you another example, Let's say I bomb your house and kill one of your family member and you are very angry and you say you would give me a "severe revenge" and in the end you bombed my garden fence. I would call that a "scratch" not the so called "severe revenge" as highly touted by you.

Will you be giving personal attack again?.

You took out one person whom was replaced hours later immediately. Your hegemony was pissed on, two of your bases were flattened and you don't even dare to admit that your soldiers were killed because you're afraid of being dragged into a war, you chickened out and took back your threats, your allies soiled their pants, and you are now getting kicked out of one of the world's leading oil producer countries which happen to host your largest embassy in the world. Yeah, it's quite obvious that Iran got the better deal.

Yes, that one person was a hero in Iran and was the leader of the Quds, he was obviously highly respected and decorated general. I am struggling to see why you cannot understand this and talk like he was a nobody. The US took him out like it was a walk in the park. Credits needs to be given that the US has the capability to take out such a high profile general.

The word "flatten" again, destroying some empty buildings with zero casualties doesn't mean anything, the buildings will get rebuilt with a makeover and it will be business as usual.

You keep saying we are going to get kicked out, currently we are still there and nobody has the capability to do it.

It was settled. The cause of the incident has been announced and the victims will receive compensation. That's pretty much it. Case Closed.

It is a good thing that Iran owns up to it and take responsibility. What I really want to know is, perhaps your view, why did the Iranians take so long to own up to it? Surely, you will know that you hit the airliner within a day the most. Do you know how much the victims will get? The Canadian prime minister doesn't look impressed.

--- REMARK: I am leaving defence.pk again. My presence here was only temporary and it is now over. So, I'm afraid I won't be able to read and respond to your next comment. Sorry for that. Fare well. ----

Not a problem was nice discussing with you.