Iran’s threat to avenge Fakhrizadeh: Don’t hold your breath

[Dariush the Great]

Iran’s threat to avenge Fakhrizadeh: Don’t hold your breath | CGS

cgs-bd.com

On July 20, 1988, Iran’s then supreme leader, Ayatollah Khomeini said in an unusual statement that he agreed to ending the war with Iraq, initiated by the former Baathist regime in Baghdad eight years earlier.
Until that day, Khomeini rejected all regional and international efforts to end the war. He had vowed to continue fighting against Saddam Hussain until “the last drop of my blood” — which I assume meant the last drop of Iranian soldiers. “Even if the Security Council orders, we will not make peace. Even if the whole world gathers, we will not make peace [with Saddam],” Khomeini said in 1982. Six years later, though, and with his country increasingly on the defensive with hundreds of thousands of soldiers dead, tired army and depleted military gear because of the lack of spare parts, Khomeini, claiming he was acting upon the recommendations of his top aides, decided to stop the war.



He must have been so reluctant to take that decision he compared it, in his letter to the Iranian people, to taking “a poison pill.” Since then, his successors have been taking the pill once in a while. Gulping the bitter pill has become so much an Iranian regime thing that few believe that Tehran will retaliate for the killing of its top nuclear scientist last month despite all the daily rhetoric and threats of revenge. At the end of the day, I think the top echelon of the regime will just take another one of those poison pills and move on. Business as usual.
Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, who was killed by a team of assassins outside Tehran on November 27, is not the first top scientist to be assassinated supposedly by Israel as Iranian officials seem to confirm. Since 2007, six other leading scientists working on Iran’s secret nuclear programme have been killed. After each of those assassinations, Iran vowed revenge. But it was mostly another poison pill.



Israel has been engaged in a war of intelligence, assassination and target bombing with Iran for years. However, the Israelis have intensified their campaign in recent years as Iran has become dangerously too close for comfort after the start of the Syrian civil war. Iran, obviously supporting President Bashar Al Assad’s military efforts, has sent weapons, senior military advisers and thousands of paid-for militias to fight against the Syrian opposition, which almost overthrew Al Assad’s regime early in the war. Iran has also been using its heavy presence and bases in Syria to deliver weapons and cash to its Lebanese ally, Hezbollah.

Israel has been looking warily to the growing Iranian presence in Syria. The free movement of weapons had to stop. In January 2013, Israeli planes reportedly struck a Syrian convoy transporting Iranian weapons to Hezbollah. In the past seven years, Israel has reportedly carried out at least 35 attacks like that one in Syria against Iranian targets. The latest was just late last month, on November 26, when an air strike killed at least 19 pro-Iran militia fighters in eastern Syria, according to news agencies at the time. Obviously, Iran has yet to retaliate, despite the aggressive rhetoric and usual threat of ‘painful response’. There apparently is a decision not to strike back — the poison pill again. But why?
Iranian leaders know very well that a military response against Israel will not be a walk in the park. Far from it, it will lead to an all-out war that may involve Israel’s closest ally, the United States, which will definitely not sit on the sidelines watching Israel attacked, especially the current hawkish administration. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said last week that a military option to neutralise Iran’s nuclear programme was still on the table. A war, instigated by an Iranian attack on Israel, will immediately be fought in Iran. With the US military and its state of the art arsenal stationed in many countries surrounding Iran such as Iraq, Qatar, Afghanistan and Azerbaijan as well as in the Persian Gulf waters, it will expectedly deal a devastating blow to Iran’s outdated defence systems. This is a fight Iran cannot afford.
Secondly, Iran seems to be betting on the upcoming Joe Biden administration to revive the nuclear deal Tehran signed with the West in 2015 but was abandoned unilaterally by the Trump administration. By attacking Israel, a Biden administration will also be compelled to stand by its ally — and that will of course mean the end of the nuclear deal and any hope Iran has of lifting the sanctions.
Even a targeted response to the assassination of Fakhrizadeh, such as a bombing by Iranian agents or its proxy arms, such as Hezbollah and Iraq’s Hashd militias, against an Israeli target will unleash a severe US response. It could also lead to renewing international sanctions against Tehran as it will be seen as a state sponsored terrorism.
Iran, thus, doesn’t seem to have many options here. And just like those last days of the war with Iraq, Iranian leaders may have to opt again to taking the bitter pill, hoping for sunnier days to come when Biden takes the reins in the White House.

 

[Arian]

Iran’s threat to avenge Fakhrizadeh: Don’t hold your breath | CGS

cgs-bd.com

On July 20, 1988, Iran’s then supreme leader, Ayatollah Khomeini said in an unusual statement that he agreed to ending the war with Iraq, initiated by the former Baathist regime in Baghdad eight years earlier.
Until that day, Khomeini rejected all regional and international efforts to end the war. He had vowed to continue fighting against Saddam Hussain until “the last drop of my blood” — which I assume meant the last drop of Iranian soldiers. “Even if the Security Council orders, we will not make peace. Even if the whole world gathers, we will not make peace [with Saddam],” Khomeini said in 1982. Six years later, though, and with his country increasingly on the defensive with hundreds of thousands of soldiers dead, tired army and depleted military gear because of the lack of spare parts, Khomeini, claiming he was acting upon the recommendations of his top aides, decided to stop the war.



He must have been so reluctant to take that decision he compared it, in his letter to the Iranian people, to taking “a poison pill.” Since then, his successors have been taking the pill once in a while. Gulping the bitter pill has become so much an Iranian regime thing that few believe that Tehran will retaliate for the killing of its top nuclear scientist last month despite all the daily rhetoric and threats of revenge. At the end of the day, I think the top echelon of the regime will just take another one of those poison pills and move on. Business as usual.
Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, who was killed by a team of assassins outside Tehran on November 27, is not the first top scientist to be assassinated supposedly by Israel as Iranian officials seem to confirm. Since 2007, six other leading scientists working on Iran’s secret nuclear programme have been killed. After each of those assassinations, Iran vowed revenge. But it was mostly another poison pill.



Israel has been engaged in a war of intelligence, assassination and target bombing with Iran for years. However, the Israelis have intensified their campaign in recent years as Iran has become dangerously too close for comfort after the start of the Syrian civil war. Iran, obviously supporting President Bashar Al Assad’s military efforts, has sent weapons, senior military advisers and thousands of paid-for militias to fight against the Syrian opposition, which almost overthrew Al Assad’s regime early in the war. Iran has also been using its heavy presence and bases in Syria to deliver weapons and cash to its Lebanese ally, Hezbollah.

Israel has been looking warily to the growing Iranian presence in Syria. The free movement of weapons had to stop. In January 2013, Israeli planes reportedly struck a Syrian convoy transporting Iranian weapons to Hezbollah. In the past seven years, Israel has reportedly carried out at least 35 attacks like that one in Syria against Iranian targets. The latest was just late last month, on November 26, when an air strike killed at least 19 pro-Iran militia fighters in eastern Syria, according to news agencies at the time. Obviously, Iran has yet to retaliate, despite the aggressive rhetoric and usual threat of ‘painful response’. There apparently is a decision not to strike back — the poison pill again. But why?
Iranian leaders know very well that a military response against Israel will not be a walk in the park. Far from it, it will lead to an all-out war that may involve Israel’s closest ally, the United States, which will definitely not sit on the sidelines watching Israel attacked, especially the current hawkish administration. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said last week that a military option to neutralise Iran’s nuclear programme was still on the table. A war, instigated by an Iranian attack on Israel, will immediately be fought in Iran. With the US military and its state of the art arsenal stationed in many countries surrounding Iran such as Iraq, Qatar, Afghanistan and Azerbaijan as well as in the Arabian Gulf waters, it will expectedly deal a devastating blow to Iran’s outdated defence systems. This is a fight Iran cannot afford.
Secondly, Iran seems to be betting on the upcoming Joe Biden administration to revive the nuclear deal Tehran signed with the West in 2015 but was abandoned unilaterally by the Trump administration. By attacking Israel, a Biden administration will also be compelled to stand by its ally — and that will of course mean the end of the nuclear deal and any hope Iran has of lifting the sanctions.
Even a targeted response to the assassination of Fakhrizadeh, such as a bombing by Iranian agents or its proxy arms, such as Hezbollah and Iraq’s Hashd militias, against an Israeli target will unleash a severe US response. It could also lead to renewing international sanctions against Tehran as it will be seen as a state sponsored terrorism.
Iran, thus, doesn’t seem to have many options here. And just like those last days of the war with Iraq, Iranian leaders may have to opt again to taking the bitter pill, hoping for sunnier days to come when Biden takes the reins in the White House.

ریدی با این مقاله گذاشتنت. واقعاً یه دور خوندی ببینی چی گذاشتی؟
آب های خلیج عربی؟ جدی؟

مایی که ایرانی هستیم که نباید هر کس شعری رو بذاریم اینجا​

 

[Muhammed45]

On July 20, 1988, Iran’s then supreme leader, Ayatollah Khomeini said in an unusual statement that he agreed to ending the war with Iraq, initiated by the former Baathist regime in Baghdad eight years earlier.
Until that day, Khomeini rejected all regional and international efforts to end the war

Oh my, the international effort. Haha, western monkeys at that time tried to force Iran into accepting ceasefire with Saddam while Ba'ath Army was occupying parts of the country having boots on Iranian lands. The leader chose to accept UN Resolution when both countries were inside their borders.

He must have been so reluctant to take that decision he compared it, in his letter to the Iranian people, to taking “a poison pill.” Since then, his successors have been taking the pill once in a while. Gulping the bitter pill has become so much an Iranian regime thing that few believe that Tehran will retaliate for the killing of its top nuclear scientist last month despite all the daily rhetoric and threats of revenge. At the end of the day, I think the top echelon of the regime will just take another one of those poison pills and move on. Business as usual

Waiting for the exact moment is frustrating the dimwited Writer of this very article.
In the whole article the guy is counting on American Army in case if Iran decides to wipe Israel Off the map. It maybe true to some extent but the problem is not with our leadership. The weak economy that Rouhani has presented to the country which makes the country most volnurable to US president's sudden ph@rt and a Direct result of JCPOA puts our leader in the Seat of a careful driver.

Problem is Rouhani's government same as Rafsanjani's massages of weakness that forced the leader into accepting 'no revenge against Saddam'. We are in a similar situation, the Writer is right in that case. But the problem is not our leadership's decisions but the ones that are making the country vunerable to Western ph@rts.

 

[Dariush the Great]

Oh my, the international effort. Haha, western monkeys at that time tried to force Iran into accepting ceasefire with Saddam while Ba'ath Army was occupying parts of the country having boots on Iranian lands. The leader chose to accept UN Resolution when both countries were inside their borders.

Iraqi army was kicked out by Iran in 1982 bro. We decided to continue for 6 years more. Iran was on the offensive for 6 years. Most of the fighting from 1982 onwards occured on Iraqi soil.

 

[Muhammed45]

Iraqi army was kicked out by Iran in 1982 bro. We decided to continue for 6 years more. Iran was on the offensive for 6 years. Most of the fighting from 1982 onwards occured on Iraqi soil.

Surely you had heard راه قدس از کربلا می‌گذرد.
We have and had an ideology, and i don't try to Deny it. One day our front line was Khuzestan, now its in Syria. The front line has changed but the goal remains the same. And no, most of the time Iraq was much much superior to us during the 8 years war.

وقتی یکی میزنه تو دهنت، برنگردی بزنی مطمئن باش اونایی که اطرافت هستن میگن این کونیه. هر کی رسید یکی بزنه. شرمنده این کلمه رو استفاده میکنم، ولی خب نیاز بود. صدام یکی زد یکی هم باید می‌خورد حالا این خوردن حتی اگر باعث می‌شد 6 سال بجنگیم. یادت رفته ما مرد جنگیم؟

 

[Dariush the Great]

Surely you had heard راه قدس از کربلا می‌گذرد.
We have and had an ideology, and i don't try to Deny it. One day our front line was Khuzestan, now its in Syria. The front line has changed but the goal remains the same. And no, most of the time Iraq was much much superior to us during the 8 years war.

وقتی یکی میزنه تو دهنت، برنگردی بزنی مطمئن باش اونایی که اطرافت هستن میگن این کونیه. هر کی رسید یکی بزنه. شرمنده این کلمه رو استفاده میکنم، ولی خب نیاز بود. صدام یکی زد یکی هم باید می‌خورد حالا این خوردن حتی اگر باعث می‌شد 6 سال بجنگیم. یادت رفته ما مرد جنگیم؟

Omidvaram ke too dahane in sahyunista ham bezanim dadash.

 

[aryobarzan]

Iran’s threat to avenge Fakhrizadeh: Don’t hold your breath | CGS

cgs-bd.com

On July 20, 1988, Iran’s then supreme leader, Ayatollah Khomeini said in an unusual statement that he agreed to ending the war with Iraq, initiated by the former Baathist regime in Baghdad eight years earlier.
Until that day, Khomeini rejected all regional and international efforts to end the war. He had vowed to continue fighting against Saddam Hussain until “the last drop of my blood” — which I assume meant the last drop of Iranian soldiers. “Even if the Security Council orders, we will not make peace. Even if the whole world gathers, we will not make peace [with Saddam],” Khomeini said in 1982. Six years later, though, and with his country increasingly on the defensive with hundreds of thousands of soldiers dead, tired army and depleted military gear because of the lack of spare parts, Khomeini, claiming he was acting upon the recommendations of his top aides, decided to stop the war.



He must have been so reluctant to take that decision he compared it, in his letter to the Iranian people, to taking “a poison pill.” Since then, his successors have been taking the pill once in a while. Gulping the bitter pill has become so much an Iranian regime thing that few believe that Tehran will retaliate for the killing of its top nuclear scientist last month despite all the daily rhetoric and threats of revenge. At the end of the day, I think the top echelon of the regime will just take another one of those poison pills and move on. Business as usual.
Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, who was killed by a team of assassins outside Tehran on November 27, is not the first top scientist to be assassinated supposedly by Israel as Iranian officials seem to confirm. Since 2007, six other leading scientists working on Iran’s secret nuclear programme have been killed. After each of those assassinations, Iran vowed revenge. But it was mostly another poison pill.



Israel has been engaged in a war of intelligence, assassination and target bombing with Iran for years. However, the Israelis have intensified their campaign in recent years as Iran has become dangerously too close for comfort after the start of the Syrian civil war. Iran, obviously supporting President Bashar Al Assad’s military efforts, has sent weapons, senior military advisers and thousands of paid-for militias to fight against the Syrian opposition, which almost overthrew Al Assad’s regime early in the war. Iran has also been using its heavy presence and bases in Syria to deliver weapons and cash to its Lebanese ally, Hezbollah.

Israel has been looking warily to the growing Iranian presence in Syria. The free movement of weapons had to stop. In January 2013, Israeli planes reportedly struck a Syrian convoy transporting Iranian weapons to Hezbollah. In the past seven years, Israel has reportedly carried out at least 35 attacks like that one in Syria against Iranian targets. The latest was just late last month, on November 26, when an air strike killed at least 19 pro-Iran militia fighters in eastern Syria, according to news agencies at the time. Obviously, Iran has yet to retaliate, despite the aggressive rhetoric and usual threat of ‘painful response’. There apparently is a decision not to strike back — the poison pill again. But why?
Iranian leaders know very well that a military response against Israel will not be a walk in the park. Far from it, it will lead to an all-out war that may involve Israel’s closest ally, the United States, which will definitely not sit on the sidelines watching Israel attacked, especially the current hawkish administration. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said last week that a military option to neutralise Iran’s nuclear programme was still on the table. A war, instigated by an Iranian attack on Israel, will immediately be fought in Iran. With the US military and its state of the art arsenal stationed in many countries surrounding Iran such as Iraq, Qatar, Afghanistan and Azerbaijan as well as in the Arabian Gulf waters, it will expectedly deal a devastating blow to Iran’s outdated defence systems. This is a fight Iran cannot afford.
Secondly, Iran seems to be betting on the upcoming Joe Biden administration to revive the nuclear deal Tehran signed with the West in 2015 but was abandoned unilaterally by the Trump administration. By attacking Israel, a Biden administration will also be compelled to stand by its ally — and that will of course mean the end of the nuclear deal and any hope Iran has of lifting the sanctions.
Even a targeted response to the assassination of Fakhrizadeh, such as a bombing by Iranian agents or its proxy arms, such as Hezbollah and Iraq’s Hashd militias, against an Israeli target will unleash a severe US response. It could also lead to renewing international sanctions against Tehran as it will be seen as a state sponsored terrorism.
Iran, thus, doesn’t seem to have many options here. And just like those last days of the war with Iraq, Iranian leaders may have to opt again to taking the bitter pill, hoping for sunnier days to come when Biden takes the reins in the White House.

You just republished a Saudi propaganda article....I assume you made a mistake...please remove ASAP.

 

[I S I]

Iran is just all big talk no walk.

 

[Cthulhu]

این آرین راست میگه ریدی با این مقاله ای که گذاشتی ابهای خلیج عربی حالا تو از بی عملی شیخ های جمهوری اسلامی ناراحتی باید بگردی هر مقاله ای که موافق دیدگاهته که هر جاکشی نوشته رو بیای اینجا همینجوری پیست کنی که فقط بتوپه به شیخ ها، منطق تمام خائن های لجن که تو خارج ایران جمعن هم همینه این اسمت رو از داریوش بزرگ بردار بزار الخلیفه الکبیر العربستان

 

[WudangMaster]

ریدی با این مقاله گذاشتنت. واقعاً یه دور خوندی ببینی چی گذاشتی؟
آب های خلیج عربی؟ جدی؟

مایی که ایرانی هستیم که نباید هر کس شعری رو بذاریم اینجا​

I have seen articles posted by others in this forum and the older IMF that had that incorrect name. Typically a disclaimer would be in place at the top of the post warning to readers about it, but the use of the incorrect name by itself was not a reason to not post it.
Of course there is a difference when the occasional insect would come in a thread and post the incorrect name in all caps just to get a flame war going and that is another matter entirely.
Another thing I have seen other members in the past do is to change the incorrect name when copying/pasting the article while also mention in parenthesis that the original form of the article used the incorrect name.

 

[Dariush the Great]

Ajab gheshghereghi ra andakhtan in bisavada inja. hala yek korre sagi shekar khorde esme eshteba ro entekhab karde vali chiz ha ke neveshte shode hamash doroste. bechasbin be moshgel.. donbale rusari fati nagardin.

I have seen articles posted by others in this forum and the older IMF that had that incorrect name. Typically a disclaimer would be in place at the top of the post warning to readers about it, but the use of the incorrect name by itself was not a reason to not post it.
Of course there is a difference when the occasional insect would come in a thread and post the incorrect name in all caps just to get a flame war going and that is another matter entirely.
Another thing I have seen other members in the past do is to change the incorrect name when copying/pasting the article while also mention in parenthesis that the original form of the article used the incorrect name.

Why would anyone even get offended by a fake name ? Also, why would anyone prioritize jumping up and down on a stupid fake name over our reputation, standing and might in the international arena.

 

[Cherub786]

Whoever (America or Israel) took out Fakhrizadeh was smart. He was the brains behind their nuclear weapons program. Without him their plans have been significantly dashed or delayed at the very best. Iran is more hurt by this than by the elimination of the war criminal Soleimani

 

[aryobarzan]

Whoever (America or Israel) took out Fakhrizadeh was smart. He was the brains behind their nuclear weapons program. Without him their plans have been significantly dashed or delayed at the very best. Iran is more hurt by this than by the elimination of the war criminal Soleimani

Wow..Iranians should hire you as "the"source of information and insight....I think the cold has affected your brain function if you had any to begin with!

 

[Cherub786]

Wow..Iranians should hire you as "the"source of information and insight....I think the cold has affected your brain function if you had any to begin with!

Why are you in Canada?

 

[aryobarzan]

Why are you in Canada?

What do you think genius!