Iran, We Got to Do Something? by Larry C Johnson

Larry Johnson-5x7

Like a Japanese Kabuki dance Washington is in the grasp of War theater. Many pundits and members of Congress are filling the airwaves and offering up quotes demanding action. Demanding retaliation. We have to stand up to Iran. Only one little problem, the intel on the attack on the Saudi oil installations remains sketchy and hidden.

If the missiles were fired from Iranian territory then our intel collection certainly captured the launch or tracked the origin of the drones or missiles used in the attack. So where is it? I have heard from reliable sources that the info is being kept behind a highly classified wall and only those with access to this particular compartmented info can see it.

I only see four possibilities:

  1. The missiles/drones were launched from Iran.
  2. The missiles/drones were launched from Yemen.
  3. The missiles/drones were launched from a maritime platform in the Persian Gulf
  4. The missiles/drones were landed from a country that borders Saudi Arabia, such as Iraq.

Hmmm. I do not believe that if we had solid proof the attack came from Iranian territory that the United States would keep that info behind a Top Secret wall. I also doubt that we would try to hide the fact that the missiles/drones came from Yemen.

What if the missiles/drones came out of Iraq? That is something we would try to keep quiet. Having to admit that our "ally" (Iraq) was the origin of the attack brings with it a whole host of foreign policy problems. 


Meanwhile, with scant evidence before the public the drumbeat of hitting Iran remains strong. If this were not so damn dangerous I would be amused by the irony that Trump, who was portrayed by critics as deranged madman who will launch us into a war, is the one trying to exercise caution and restraint.

 

Colonel Lang's earlier piece warned the President that war with Iran will ensure he is only a one term President. He knows what he is talking about. Unless we are committed to a full war with Iran and defeating the Islamic Republic on the battlefield (set aside a trillion dollars and send 500,000 troops for that effort) we should not launch any kind of air strike–e.g., fixed wing, drones or cruise missiles. The amount of force we would deliver would not cripple Iran's capabilities.

This much is certain.   Iran has the weaponry to strike decisively against Saudi Arabia and other Gulf allies of the Saudis and could severely damage Saudi Arabia's ability to pump oil and purify water. Taking out the Saudi water supply would be more deadly and damaging than anything Iran could do to the Saudi oil infrastructure. 

Then what? The political pressure in the United States to really hit back at Iran would escalate. Are you ready to pay that price? A military strike on Iran also raises the specter of the war spinning out of control and dragging in other countries. It is highly likely that oil exports from the Persian Gulf would be shutdown. That would likely touch off a global economic collapse.

We need to step back and try to define what it is that we are trying to do. Regime change in Iran? Destroy their nuclear program? Weaken Iran's influence in the Middle East? I do not see how U.S.or Saudi airstrikes on a limited number of sensitive Iranian targets would advance any U.S. interest or objective. I am open to your suggestions and analysis.

I have said nothing about cyberwarfare. I have heard some pundits suggest we should hit Iran on that front. Ok. Answer me this–whose economic system is more vulnerable to a cyber attack? The U.S. or Iran? I believe the U.S. has more to lose in such an encounter. Our economic sanctions on Iran have not made them more dependent on computer networks.

And how will Russia, China, Japan, Western Europe and India react. All but Russia rely on oil coming out of the Persian Gulf. What is the worst case for oil disruption? A responsible planner must take that into account in order to ensure the President understands the potential and long lasting ramifications of any "feel" good military strike.

Ever since the Korean War the United States public has been sold the lie that we can fight foreign wars and not have to make any sacrifices or incur any costs at home. What did our 1991 war to oust Iraq from Kuwait accomplish? We got the Iraqis back across the border and then became bogged down in trying to police Iraq for the next decade. How about the 2003 invasion of Iraq? We got rid of Saddam, ignited the ISIS threat and installed Iraqi Shias, who are beholden to Iran, in positions of power. And now we wonder how Iranian influence was able to spread throughout the region. We did that, not the mullahs.

And Afghanistan? I used to wonder how the Brits and the French fought the Hundred Years War. No longer. We seem hell bent on trying to match that record of futile conflict.

Can we defeat Iran and take out the mullahs? Sure, but at what cost? The cost would be enormous and I do not believe the American public are ready to pay the price.

This entry was posted in Iran, Iraq, Larry Johnson, Saudi Arabia. Bookmark the permalink.

104 Responses to Iran, We Got to Do Something? by Larry C Johnson

  1. turcopolier says:

    Iraq? I remain unconvinced that the attack was made by other than Houthi (Ansarallah) Yemeni forces.

  2. James O'Neill says:

    Do not underestimate the capacity of the Iranians to wreak enormous damage on US bases in the region. It is also of note in my view that Iran has recently signed a series of major economic deals with Russia and China. Both of the latter countries have already warned Trump from attacking Iran, after the Iranians shot down the US drone. On the other hand, it would be unwise to underestimate the capacity of the Americans to make the wrong decision.

  3. Bill H says:

    All of this reminds me of the response from Russia, I think it was their Foreign Minister, “If we had invaded Ukraine, you would not have to be asking if we did it.” Yemen says they did it, and I have seen no evidence to the contrary.

  4. Johnb says:

    Would the following be an invitation too good to miss for a ‘Party Pooper’ ?
    Saudi Arabia has unveiled epic plans to celebrate the country’s upcoming 89th National Day, annually marked on Sept. 23. Celebrations will run on for days and feature packed entertainment schedules, concerts, firework shows, and several other exciting events that are set to be held across the kingdom.
    To add to the festive vibes, the country has announced a four-day holiday to further enjoy the occasion.

  5. Christian J Chuba says:

    Pompeo claimed the attack came from Iran within hours before he could possibly have known that. He is spewing propaganda because the faithful sock puppets in the Media will repeat it. Perhaps he is also so arrogant that he believes his suspicions are as good as facts.
    Katie Pavich, ‘Pompeo confirms: The Attack on Saudi Oil Fields Was an Act of War From Iran”, really, how about ‘claims’.
    Weeks from now if we conclude that the Yemenis did it but with Iranian designed weapons it will be too late, another plank has been laid in the Iran is Nazi Germany narrative. That is the entire point. I watched Neil Cavuto interview Tulsi Gabbard, he seethed w/rage and his eyes narrowed into tiny dots when she informed him that the Saudis have harmed the U.S. more than Iran; narrative sacred text, cannot be challenged, ever.
    I know I’m not saying or discovering anything new. Just hate it enough to mention again, Iran = Nazi Germany means we can commit war crimes against against them when we feel like it and it is good. The most devout Christians, in the highest levels of govt are leading the charge. Bolton said that all of the WH staff (would assume that includes Pence/Pompeo) wanted to bomb Iran and it was Carlson who talked Trump out of it.

  6. charly says:

    What about 5. Launched from inside Saudi Arabia by Yemen. I don’t think it is that difficult in the Empty Quarter to move much closer to the targets. Maybe it is even possible to ly the cruise-missiles in on their own power, refuel them and than relaunch them at the target

  7. Erwin says:

    It was pretty interesting watching Pompeo totally change his tune during that odd Q&A in Saudi Arabia. Personally, I think embarrassment would be the best way to describe it. We’ll probably never know exactly how much of the blame lies with the failure of the actual air defense systems themselves, and how much lies with the negligence of the Saudis. Boy would it be interesting to be a fly on the wall during those meetings.

  8. turcopolier says:

    yeah right
    you are determined to mis-state what I write and then comment on the mis-statement. I do not tolerate people who are merely combative. I have decided to ban you.

  9. Fred says:

    “The most devout Christians…” any secular humanists involved? Maybe an atheist or two?

  10. BABAK MAKKINEJAD says:

    Could the Houthis launched their attack from Oman?

  11. turcopolier says:

    babak
    Why would the sultan allow that?

  12. Eric Newhill says:

    Larry,
    I think that the drones may have been launched from a different (and closer to the target) site than the missiles; which is just a nuance because the attack was obviously well coordinated and that means the same actors were responsible.
    Operatives who launched the attack could easily be from one country, yet physically located in another when launching the ordnance.
    IMO, the question is not so much where the drones and missiles came from, but who supplied the components?, who built the things? and for what purpose?. That will have to be analyzed, of course, and it may well point back to Iran. So the next real question is, if Iran was involved at some level, does that level of involvement require a response? And what kind of response?
    So far Trump is indicating that the response, regardless of level of involvement, should not be war. Let the Democrats and other swamp dwellers make the call for war. It will be just another nail in their 2020 coffin.

  13. BABAK MAKKINEJAD says:

    Because Saudi Arabia is a threat to Oman if Houthis are defeated.

  14. turcopolier says:

    babak
    Why? Because they are Ibadhis?

  15. BABAK MAKKINEJAD says:

    That too but more of the usual game among states, kings, and potentates.
    How would the Kingdom of Ibadhis benefit from the increase in power and prestige of the Kingdom of Salafis?
    The 4 men who attacked that military parade in Ahwaz were initially Shia and were seduced by the Jihadists.
    How much easier it would be to seduce the Ibadhis?

  16. glupi says:

    Much depends on the response, as this Saudi drama already has a spill-over effect.
    An Ukranian boasted that the Ukranian patriots can easily take down Russia’s Kaliningrad air defense systems and wreak havoc there.
    With the new Ukranian president seen by some as too peaceful and ready to capitulate before Russia, some hot heads just may try and the victim may feel justified to follow the US example

  17. turcopolier says:

    Eric Newhill
    If some country to which the US supplies the kind of support that you describe uses it, is the US responsible? You are conveniently ignoring the fact that SA/UAE are at war with Ansarallh/Loyalist Yemeni forces. The Saudi/UAE side has been bombing the p–s out of the Yemeni population for years. Civilian death are estimated by the UN at 91,000. Why would the Yemeni side not use whatever weapons are available to them against SA?

  18. The main issue here, if to imagine that the United States decides to proceed with attack on Iran, is the fact that everyone knows that the opinion on this strike will be formed within first 24-48 hours. If this attack sees a large number of US missiles shot down, and the probability of this is very high, forget any aircraft, let alone something like F-35 shot down, we will have on our hands a massive political crisis within the United States. I will abstain from describing Iranian retaliation on KSA with it anemic (yes, let’s settle on this term–anemic) air defense. Consequences will be massive. As an additional point: Tehran does have a viable air defense. It is not a system such as that of Yugoslavia in 1999, let alone Iraqi ancient one. This one is capable of doing some damage even in a highly dense EW environment.

  19. ex PFC Chuck says:

    Or could they have launched the attack from within Saudi territory?

  20. I think embarrassment would be the best way to describe it

    The whole failure of both PAC-2 and PAC-3 which were on duty and oil processing facility had a complete radar coverage with a good percent of redundancy over it has been already discussed professionally in Russia, for sure. It is a whopping failure, even when allowances are made for traditional Saudi ineptness. Hence, today this statement, which, of course was laughed at.
    https://breakingdefense.com/2019/09/target-kaliningrad-eucom-puts-putin-on-notice/
    It is pure self-medicating. Russian MO and even PM already responded to this delirium but it is not worth even discussing it. What we may expect is Saudis deciding to buy S-300 PMU2 and S-400. Prince called Putin the same day of attacks.

  21. John Merryman. says:

    In some countries and at some points in time, failure on the battlefield meant execution. Maybe Trump should make the ones pushing for war promise that if they are wrong, they would accept a firing squad and put it in writing. I bet that would quiet the peanut gallery.

  22. Flavius says:

    “So far Trump is indicating that the response, regardless of level of involvement, should not be war. Let the Democrats and other swamp dwellers make the call for war. It will be just another nail in their 2020 coffin.”
    Precisely. But finding like thinking appointments amidst the establishment swamp dwellers who can distinguish US interests from Saudi interests, or Israeli interests, has been Trump’s abiding problem from the beginning.
    I fail to understand how an Act of War, so called by Pompeo, against Saudi Arabia is in any sense an act of war against the US and it is incompetent of Pompeo to plant that implication in the public domain, perhaps even criminal. That we sell the Saudis their weapons no more binds us to their defense than Iran is bound to the Houthi Yemeni by facilitating their weaponry. Selling weapons may be sensible and in one’s interests, or stupid and against one’s interests, but it does not make the buyer of those weapons one’s ally.
    If it is in our interests to keep the Straights of Hormuz open, it is easily accomplished by discontinuing the immoral policy of attempting to choke the economic life out of Iran. With 20 years of rubble in the rear view mirror, only a fat comfortable swamp dwelling neo-con would be so obtuse as not to recognize there would be blowback and unintended consequences from that project.

  23. prawnik says:

    Absolutely. Houthis have been regularly ambushing patrols inside Saudi territory.

  24. prawnik says:

    Bread. Circuses.

  25. prawnik says:

    I don’t think Pompeo cares. He wants a stick to beat Iran with, not Yemen, so blaming the Yemenis for fighting back simply will not do.

  26. prawnik says:

    I see the Yemenis as being like the Jews of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising – if Iran arms them to better resist the fate that the Saudi have prepared, then Iran deserves congratulations for doing so.

  27. Eric Newhill says:

    Sir,
    I understand what you’re saying and, btw, my outlook has nothing to do with my latent antipathy towards Islam.
    If Iran is providing support to Yemenis that includes creating the ability to Strike Saudi/Gulfies oil production and Iran knows that the support will be used in that manner, then the support is, quite purposefully, serving more than one end – one end being to further Iran’s position with regards to US pressure against it by demonstrating the ability to retaliate against the US. In that case, Iran’s friends in Yemen are, indeed, proxies.
    Damaging the flow of oil from the region is a global economic problem. It negatively impacts our friends, enemies and everyone in between. Is the US supporting anyone who is causing externalities of that magnitude? I don’t think so.
    If Iran wants to play at being the “mouse that roared” using Yemeni proxies and their roaring is going to seriously damage economies across the globe, should they be allowed to continue?
    Of course I have no idea whether or not Iran is involved. I suspect they are, but they very well might not be. I don’t think the possibility should be dismissed so quickly.

  28. Eric Newhill says:

    Flavius,
    Damaging the oil flow, damages global business which damages US interests. America is all about business (in the minds of many). The US has the mightiest military and economy and therefore is the logical choice of actors to make sure that business continues unimpeded. That is the argument I believe.

  29. turcopolier says:

    Eric Newhill
    “Is the US supporting anyone who is causing externalities of that magnitude? I don’t think so.” This is a joke, yes? The US now meddles and tinkers with other countries’ fates with no sense of irony at the contrast between our expressed ideals and our presumption of imperial grandeur. have you not noticed that we aided and abetter the “Arab Spring” which led to so many disastrous struggles throughout the ME. Do you not think that we created “externalities” in many countries through our neocon intervention in Iraq? I do not accept your statement that your Armenian ancestry plays no role in your attitude in this. you would love to see the Muslims slam the hell out of each other with our help. BTW, it was not the Iranians who mistreated the Armenians.

  30. BABAK MAKKINEJAD says:

    “It was not the Iranians who mistreated the Armenians.”
    Tell him Sir – tell him how a few tens of thousands of them fled to Iran, how Muhammad Ali Jamalzadeh saw them on his way back from Europe and offered his last piece of bread to this former professor – who kept it to himself – and told Jamalzadeh: “I will keep it for myself, my son is too weak is going to die in any case.”
    Tell him about the Siege of Isfahan by Afghans and how the residents of Julfa had to supply the Afghans with their young boys and girls.

  31. BABAK MAKKINEJAD says:

    Do you understand Honor?

  32. Eric Newhill says:

    Sir,
    I’m talking about current FP policy under Trump. Yes, Bush and Obama created all kinds of negative externalities with their meddling. I don’t know that they intended to do that. Maybe they were so stupid as to believe their own BS.
    IMO, The US can’t self-deprecate forever over the idiocy of past administrations any more than it can over slavery. At some point we have to move on.
    Believe it or not, I do not want to see Muslims slam the hell out of each other because it will impact our economy badly. Otherwise, sure; have at it. They’re going to do it anyhow.

  33. doug says:

    Exactly. The Maximum Pressure policy requires that Iran be pointed to. It gets magnified by the media echo chamber and generates political pressure to “do something.” The wishful thinking is that Iran will capitulate and agree to a more nuclear program more favorable to Western interests. Ideally no nuclear program at all.
    After the undetected, precision attack against key oil infrastructure it should be abundantly clear that isn’t going to happen. It’s certainly clear to the large majority of people with more than two functioning neurons.
    We, and especially Trump with neocon urging, dug this hole and it isn’t clear how he can extract us from it. Perhaps he has undisclosed Houdini skills.

  34. Eric Newhill says:

    Babak,
    I understand honor. Sometimes it demands that a lot of people who feel their honor has been called into question get killed – and still materially lose, but I understand it. It’s the warriors’ way. Is every man woman and child in Iran a warrior? Do they want to be?

  35. JamesT says:

    “Can we defeat Iran and take out the mullahs?”
    Taking out the mullahs might turn out to be as much of an “own goal” as taking out Saddam Hussein has proven to be. Iran would remain a geostrategic competitor to the US and Israel – but reform could leave them that much more economically productive, just like Russia is much more economically productive with communism gone.

  36. JamesT says:

    The US is indeed preventing the flow of oil from the region – it has taken extensive steps to stop Iranian oil exports. Times have changed – it is currently China, Russia, and Iran who most want shipping lanes to remain open and trade to flow freely.

  37. prawnik says:

    Question: how secure are Oman’s borders?
    Could tribals sort of slip in and out, unnoticed by anyone? I honestly don’t know.

  38. Stephanie says:

    Militaristic countries (and how can the United States be described as anything except militaristic) get caught up in their own propaganda. A parallel might be Hitler’s invasion of Russia in which, when he failed to take Moscow, certainly his general staff and probably Hitler himself realized the war was over (https://www.globalresearch.ca/70-years-ago-december-1941-turning-point-of-world-war-ii/28059). The point being that Iran has bought a ton of time to prepare for pretty much any military attack by the U.S. including nuclear. I don’t think the risk associated with *any* military attack on Iran is appreciated… enough. I don’t know anything about drones and cruise missiles, but if they could hit the oil field, could they not just about anything else over there including Bahrain and Qatar less than 90 miles away?
    What is happening is regime change in Saudi Arabia, and Pompeo was undoubtedly sent to tell them it could never happen. “We’ve got your back.”

  39. Keith Harbaugh says:

    While of course we would never, ever, scream like wounded pigs
    if any other power tried to meddle in our politics.
    (Yes, that’s obviously a joke.)

  40. Factotum says:

    Good time for a re-read of Barbara Tuchman’s March of Folly – and the curious theme of “wooden headedness” that can grip those marching its peoples into unwinable wars – starting with the Trojans accepting the wooden horse from the “departing” Greeks, regardless of warnings against its acceptance.
    Wooden headedness is more than being stubborn or blind – it carries a taint of defeatedness as well. A surrender to forces larger than oneself and loss of survival alternatives – a certain weariness that capitulates ones own downfall. Tuchman goes on to also assess the US engagement in Vietnam under the same lens. As well as the Renaissance excesses of the Vatican that led to the Protestant revolution forever altering the Holy Roman Empire grip on European history.
    Hubris – catharsis – war – annihilation – defeat- since the beginnings of western story – these elements are always in play.

  41. Aristophones says:

    Trump left a nuclear agreement and imposed severe sanctions on Iran. This was a hostile act. There was a decent possibility Iran would retaliate. Let’s agree that Iran or one of their allies successfully took out half of KSA oil production in one attack. What was the plan once Iran retaliated?
    That’s enough current “negative externalities” and stupidity for my plate.

  42. JP Billen says:

    The Saudis have nixed any US retribution on Iran. They may be feckless, but they ain’t that stupid. They know that the House of Saud would never survive in the event of a war. They cannot discount the threat of attack from three different axis: Iran, Iraq, and Yemen.
    But worse, there is still the internal threats to consider. They have two million Saudi Shia that have been oppressed for a hundred years or more. Those people of the Eastern Province may or may not start a major insurgency, but many would resort to sabotage and any other methods to support an Iranian war effort. Then there are the people on the Left Coast that bin-Salman has to account for. The Hejazi have always hated the House of Saud. Hejazis consider the Saud family to be unlearned country bumpkins and usurpers. And they have no appetite for Wahabbi fundamentalism. Speaking of Wahabbis, there are some in that sect that have come to despise the Sauds for stripping power away from the religious police and allowing women driving privileges. Furthermore there are economic woes – there would be no money to pay off the tribal sheikhs for their loyalty.
    IMHO in a war with Iran the Saud Dynasty would be toast. They know it too!

  43. BABAK MAKKINEJAD says:

    Iranians understand Honor as well as dis-honor.

  44. Eric Newhill says:

    Assumes that Iran was honoring the agreement and was planning to continue doing so. If true, I agree with you.

  45. Eric Newhill says:

    That is different that general chaos that stops the whole shebang from delivering

  46. turcopolier says:

    Eric Newhill
    As I have repeatedly stated, I see no evidence that Iran had a nuclear WEAPON program after 2003 when Khomeini shut their program down because he thought it evil. the JCPOA IMO was from thre Iranian POV a giant joke and a way to get some of their money back.

  47. Murali says:

    Mr.Newell, I agree with you that can’t hold ourselves responsible for the slavery and should move on. But in the case of Bush and Obama their actions are in the present time say less than 20 years. When the high priests of western nations held the Nuremberg trials for Nazis how can you in good conscience accept no responsibility for the hundreds of deaths in Iraq and Libya (where if I am not wrong, the old slave market is in full swing for which you obsolved us). Just wondering if it is the American Exceptionalism that Saint Obama said feels it in every bone of his body.

  48. JP Billen says:

    Eric,
    I admire your patriotism. However I believe your ill will against Islam is misplaced. It should be reserved for the Turks. Or for the Saudis whose Mutaween, the religious police, prohibit Christian worship by the million plus expatriate oilfield workers, mostly Filipino Catholics.
    I don’t believe there has ever been a pogrom of Armenians in Iran. Do you know differently? Many of the Armenians living in Iran fled persecution in Turkey and Azerbaijan.

  49. In some countries and at some points in time, failure on the battlefield meant execution.

    It sure did, including decimation. But it does not apply to neocons because most of them…. never served a day in uniform and, as we all know, not eligible to be put in a front of a firing squad. I would, however, as a punishment, have limited their food options in D.C. to McDonald’s (breakfast, lunch, dinner–life, without parole–and Applebee’s (on 4th of July only) to finally see Robert Kagan turn into Baron Vladimir Harkonnen until his fat ass explodes or, otherwise, he dies from starvation.

  50. Eric Newhill says:

    Sir,
    Yes, perhaps their nuclear program is all about peaceful applications, such as energy and medical, as they claim.
    It all comes down to risk assessment, doesn’t it?
    They could the lift religious restrictions you’re relying on and they could develop nuclear weapons capability fairly quickly. Khamenei is what, 80 years old? They have been working all along on ballistic missiles with increasing range. They continue to deny the right of Israel to exist. To continue to seek an expansion of their influence in the region, which includes hostility to SA. They continue to sponsor terrorism.
    Whether we like it or not, The US is going to support Israel into the foreseeable future. The US is also going to support the Saudis and Gulfies for various reasons; some related to Israel, some related to global markets and some related to personal graft. These are realities that Iran has chosen to defy. How far they would go and how far we are willing to let them go depends on the assessment and level of risk aversion in the Whitehouse and in Israel and SA.
    I’m sure there are factors at play, but those are the big ones that Trump has to look at – and that could be used to sell war with Iran.
    I can see how an assessment would be made by a highly risk averse group that an honor bound/religiously bound Iran would seek to use its ballistic missiles and nuclear program to try to obliterate its enemies; enemies that have cozied up to the US for protection against such an event.
    Why take the chance? For what? The preservation of a theocracy? Now Iran wants to show us why – they can inflict damage. Ok. That cuts both ways. Destroy them now and minimize the damage, or be forced to destroy them later when the damage they inflict would be greater and more on their terms.
    Not saying that’s what I think. Just saying that it seems like a reasonable position for people that are charged with making such decisions.

  51. turcopolier says:

    Eric Newhill
    You are now a neocon. “Destroy them now.” My God, man do you have any proof at all that your neocon assertions have any basis in Fact. What level of risk do you balk at” “1%” like Cheney and Natanyahu?

  52. Larry, we agree again. Doesn’t seem to happen often, but when it does we should celebrate. Seems this drone/cruise missile strike did some good. The Saudis just offered to stop bombing Yemen if the Houthis stop their strikes. The Houthis are reacting favorably to the offer. Pretty much seals the deal on who struck the Aramco facility. All the talk about Iran doing it seems silly now.

  53. turcopolier says:

    TTG
    “The Saudis just offered to stop bombing Yemen if the Houthis stop their strikes. The Houthis are reacting favorably to the offer. Pretty much seals the deal on who struck the Aramco facility. All the talk about Iran doing it seems silly now.” You mean I got this right? Remarkable.

  54. JamesT says:

    Eric Newhill,
    What evidence is there that Iran is sponsoring terrorism? What actual terrorist attacks have Iran or her proxies carried out since 1990?

  55. BABAK MAKKINEJAD says:

    The Soviet Union was the country that had prosecuted the largest number of war criminals.
    There were dedicated units of the Red Army who would follow its advance and interview the residents of the liberated areas and gathered evidence.
    In China, neither the Communists nor the Nationalists did anything similar.

  56. BABAK MAKKINEJAD says:

    Blessed are the Peace Makers.

  57. JP Billen says:

    And yet the Saudis just launched an airstrike on Hodeidah in Yemen less than three hours ago. Shows that the Saudi Foreign Ministry does not know what their Air Force is doing. Or perhaps there are hardliners who are refusing to follow a path to peace?

  58. different clue says:

    Perhaps writing things here in the hopes that Tucker Carlson might read them here is the best way to try getting “second thoughts” and “corrective information” to Trump.

  59. different clue says:

    It seems very clear to me. Trump can “disclose” that the “discovery” of “new information” makes it strategically and tactically wise at this time to drop all the new sanctions against Iran and unilaterally rejoin the JCPOA as-is/was.
    What if the many millions of people who make up Trump’s base were themselves to organize a movement to float that exact advice up the chains of command to Trump himself? He and they could all agree to pretend that “Obama” had nothing to do with it and that the name of “Obama” need not be mentioned at all. If it were to play out that way, I would promise not to gloat from the sidelines.
    ( Not that Trump would even hear me anyway).

  60. oldman22 says:

    I am reading that the Houthi have said they will stop attacking Saudi and they expect reciprocity. I have NOT read that Saudi have discontinued bombing Yemen. Please post a link TTG.
    https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/09/houthis-stop-attacks-saudi-arabia-190920183802126.html

  61. different clue says:

    And maybe also make them eat GMO-cornfed farm salmon while beholding their enemies eating copper river sockeye salmon in their presence.

  62. Eric Newhill says:

    TTG,
    Could the attack not serve multiple purposes?
    One, being what you note. Another being Iran – via proxy, either purposefully or incidently – demonstrating why going to war against Iran would be a costly decision?

  63. Now that 1st of his class is walking back the war-war, what other parts of the soft underbelly of KSA are exploitable? Iran and her proxies in Yemen and Iraq should double-down.
    Change will not come until MBS is gone.

  64. walrus says:

    Mr. Newhill, I respectfully suggest that you should look up “the golden rule” which exists in one form or another in all religions, and apply it to your own opinions.
    To put that another way; suppose Russia and China developed a super weapon capability that could utterly destroy America while leaving the rest of the planet untouched.. How would you like it if you heard them solemnly debating whether they should permit your continued existence? ………Especially if some of the arguments advanced for your destruction you knew to have no basis in fact, like perhaps some of yours regarding Iran?

  65. Charlie Wilson says:

    Jesus Christ! An Armenian neocon! Who would have thunk it?
    Eric, do you know how many neocons cried the day you were born?

  66. ISL says:

    You miss the Colonel’s point. If you set the precedent, then the US has a lot of sold weapons we are responsible for which will be used by states and terrorists for which the US has no control. This is the kind of precedent that probably bites the US in the backside.
    OTH, why do you think facts have anything to do with whether the US will or will not go to war? Blair noted that they can be fixed as needed.
    So why choose a “fact” that can blowback. Why not just say Iran is killing (choose your favorite minority). Its not as if proof will ever be needed. Last I checked those responsible for the Iraq war and its dead and shattered soldiers and civilians are doing find on the TV chat shows and in the halls of power.

  67. charly says:

    Is it different because the US is doing it? I don’t see any difference between what the US is going to Venezuela, Russia and Iran except that Yemen is in a just war with Saudi Arabia which legitimized it. Can’t say the same with the US

  68. oldman22 says:

    Same reported by Bloomberg, behind a paywall
    here is a copy

    Bloomberg ›
    Houthi Rebels Announce Halt of Drone and Missile Attacks
    Mohammed Hatem September 20, 2019
    Yemen Shiite Houthi rebel leader Mahdi al-Mashat, president of the ruling political council, announced Friday the halt of drone and ballistic missile attacks on Saudi Arabia, reported the rebel-held Saba news agency.
    “We announce the halt of targeting Saudi territories with drones and ballistic and wing missiles and we are waiting on the return of this greeting with the same,” said al-Mashat according to Saba. The announcement comes on the fifth anniversary of the rebel groups seizure of the capital city of Sana’a.
    “We reserve the rights to respond in case there is a response to this initiative and we stress that the continuation of the war will not be in the benefit of anyone as continuation of the war would lead to serious developments which we do not want,” he added.
    Al-Mashat also called on the Saudi-led coalition to lift the blockade on the port of Hodeidah and reopen Sana’a International Airport.
    He also called for a national reconciliation with the Yemeni parties that stand in opposition to the Houthi rebels.
    https://outline.com/sHWbUZ

  69. And maybe also make them eat GMO-cornfed farm salmon while beholding their enemies eating copper river sockeye salmon in their presence

    Your vengefulness, your truly sick mind of a sadist, has no bounds, indeed. ;-)))) Now, I am sure you would suggest an ancient Inquisition tortures by pointy soft pillows or, God forbids, by comfy chair;)))

  70. Croesus says:

    Adam Schiff & Gerold Nadler are digging deeper the hole Trump is in.
    They’re digging all the way to China.
    China will be Trump’s escape route just as Russia was Obama’s.

  71. Croesus says:

    Erasing the name, Obama, is one thing.
    What to do about “Adelson”? Or is his star falling along with Bibi?

  72. ted richard says:

    there is a dimension touched on briefly by andrei here
    http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2019/09/why-would-you-ask.html
    but not really elaborated that needs fleshing out. since the 1980s america by design, greed or plain stupidity has continuously outsourced our industrial base to the point now where we would be hard pressed if not find it impossible to prosecute a real conventional war against anyone capable of hurting us such that our attaining victory fast was unlikely. our ability to produce and deliver war fighting materiel has become circumscribed by our gutted industrial base. these issues are well known by those that need to understand these matters.
    there is however another dimension touched upon in andrei’s last sentence or 2 which is really the crux of the matter for investors, pension funds and anyone american citizens and residents. in point of fact our currency and bond market have become detached from what once was our collassal and productive industrial base. our currency the world reserve deserved more or less that place. now the only thing holding this reserve currency status upright in the world eyes are 3 factors:
    1. the enormous DEPTH of our bond market able to allow the parking of trillions of dollars into LIQUID instruments. no other place on earth is as YET capable of supporting such sums in and out with minimal market fluctuations.
    2. the united stated has NEVER cancelled its currency, EVER, a dollar from 1870 is still legal tender and can be spent though no one would do so since its value exceeds a dollar. no other nation has the same record of no F—G over the holders of its currency. in europe governments REGULARLY screw the populace with currency cancel dates. forget the 3rd world.
    3. and finally with a gutted industrial base what now holds our dollar reserve status allowing us to buy goods for promises is the PERCEIVED invincibility of the US military whose image is CAREFULLY cultivated in movies and media. the message is mess with us and we’ll seal your fate.
    point 3 is the real fear in washington. if no one fears us or takes our threats seriously its only points 1 and 2 holding up the dollars status and for how long what with the rise of asia?
    once pax americana goes the dollars reserve status will follow with a lag of some unknown amount of time. the world will take some losses and move on. for those living in america it will be nothing less than catastrophic much worse than russia in the 1990’s and it will go from normal to a shit storm in a relatively short amount of time with little pre warning.

  73. catherine says:

    ”If the missiles were fired from Iranian territory then our intel collection certainly captured the launch or tracked the origin of the drones or missiles used in the attack. So where is it? ”
    Good question. I have wondered also. Maybe I overestimate US capability but I thought our satellites saw and tracked everything. Somewhere it was claimed that there were imagines of Iran loading some missiles awhile ago.
    So why would not firing of missiles be seen?

  74. Rd says:

    ” Eric Newhill said in reply to turcopolier…
    Damaging the flow of oil from the region is a global economic problem. It negatively impacts our friends, enemies and everyone in between. Is the US supporting anyone who is causing externalities of that magnitude? I don’t think so.
    If Iran wants to play at being the “mouse that roared” using Yemeni proxies and their roaring is going to seriously damage economies across the globe, should they be allowed to continue?”
    How could anyone argue with that logic!! damaging world economy deserves a capital punishment! right? How would Mr. Newhill suggest the banksters who caused the 2008 global disaster be dealt with? perhaps a pad on the back?
    how does 5% loss of global oil production effecting your daily life? vs the 2008 which damaged livelihood of millions across the globe.. just the number of those who lost their homes and livelihood in US was painful enough. Should the US Mil be summoned to flatten the wall street? necon mindset is a logic hard to argue with!

  75. VietnamVet says:

    Larry,
    You are assuming that the United States could do an invasion twice as big as Iraq. It cannot. The artillery and tanks are not in position. For a successful occupation more than a million troops are needed. The USA is all by itself. Iran has Russia and China as allies. Their survival is at stake too.
    If an aerial bombardment of Iran is launched, Saudi Arabia and possibly American bases and Israel will be under missile and UAV attack within the hour. American troops in the Gulf will replay “They Were Expendable” – the great John Ford movie of the Philippines in 1942. Except there is no draft this century. Due to despair and addiction from the loss of family jobs and homes plus the cut in public health services, 71% of young Americans don’t qualify for military service. America is headed for civil war. Nationalist and globalist oligarchs are at each other’s throat. Iranians will never surrender. Without gulf petroleum energy, the global economy will collapse.
    I still think that Houthis contributed 10 UAVs to the attack and the rest came from Shiite proxy forces from Iraq and Syria who have damn good reasons to attack Saudi Arabia. That some UAVs flew or were transported into the Western desert from Iraq is likely why the facts are hidden like the MH-17 shoot down.
    The Iraq invasion was crazy. Bombing Iran is utterly insane. With Russian aid, bombers will be shot down and possibly US Navy ships sunk. The only military response available to Iranian retaliation is nuclear weapons.
    Our only hope is that Donald Trump wants to have a second term as President.

  76. JP Billen says:

    I stand corrected.

  77. Thanks. I fully agree that an invasion of Iraq is beyond our current capabilities. Great comment.

  78. Amir says:

    What about israel??? They have this type of sophistication, they can fly from above Jordan, and americans can shut down radars for them, like they did in Iraq. And they want a war between iran and US

  79. Amir says:

    Read my comment. But israel has damn good benefits from these attack that happened. And they have done it before more than 10 times. What about them???

  80. DH says:

    Disagree. Nothing higher than Bob Evans on Fourth of July.
    I’m reminded of the time when many had a sincere wish to see Rumsfeld and Cheney dropped into Iraq with full packs and no radio.

  81. charly says:

    Only some states. In others you can still exchange your money at the central bank

  82. VietnamVet says:

    Amir,
    It was reported that Russia told Israel that planes attacking Syria now will be shot down. I assume that applies to Iran too. I also assume that if Iran identifies the attacker as Israel, Iran’s and thousands of Hezbollah missiles and UAVs will fired at Israel. Iran’s ability to retaliate is what has changed The problem with the fog of war is that the Iranian missiles that target Saudi Arabia and American bases in the Region will likely be fired also at that point to avoid being destroyed on the ground. WWIII starts.

  83. turcopolier says:

    Vietnamvet
    Hizbullah has about 100k missiles and artillery rockets.

  84. turcopolier says:

    amir
    I would not have approved this comment. You have no business making snide anti-American comments here for which you have no evidence, And we DID NOT shut down Iraq’s radars for the Israelis. When Arabs fail, they fail on their own, not with our “help”

  85. Babak Makkinejad says:

    He is not Armenian, his last name does not end with the common Persian suffix “ian”, indicating Lineage. Armenian is full of Middle Persian words Azat=Free: going back to the times when Armenians were bilingual in bothe languages.

  86. catherine says:

    ‘Destroy them now and minimize the damage, or be forced to destroy them later when the damage they inflict would be greater and more on their terms.’
    You think that is a reasonable position? I don’t see it.
    The Arabs and Persians fighting among themselves couldn’t possibly do any more damage to oil supplies,since they both dependent on their oil money, than the US would launching a war on Iran and having everyone chose up sides al’la WWI.
    If anyone in DC gave a hoot about oil and the global economy they wouldn’t have let Israel and Saudi create the chaos that they already have to begin with.
    What would be a great idea …is to round up all the Neos and Zios instead of the US military and FedX them to Israel and Saudi by way of Iran. The taxpayers would be happy to pay for that.

  87. Eric Newhill says:

    Walrus,
    How do you know whether or not the arguments have no basis in fact? I read pieces by credentialed people that say Iran violated the agreement and describe how. I read pieces by credentialed people that say did not violate the agreement. I’m not going to just pick the story that makes me feel good. I don’t know. Do you?
    I can be more sure that Iran is developing ballistic missiles with greater range and payload capacity. The credentialed people agree a lot more about that. I do know that Iran won’t recognize a sovereign country’s right to exist and has made statements that suggest it would like to destroy the country it says has no right to exist. I do know that Iran is a religious government that has beliefs that can compel it to fight with neighbors for sectarian supremacy. I do know that Iran has a nuclear program that could produce weapons grade material in short order if it wanted to.
    Maybe it all adds up to nothing. Maybe Iranians are as pure as the freshly fallen snow and as peace loving as Jesus and my rotten government and their evil agents are lying to me. I have no idea. I’m just keeping an open mind. That appears to be unpopular. There are lot of people that apparently have access to highly quality information that I don’t.
    China probably will develop a super weapon capability that will be able to destroy the United States. And we’ll probably let them. I’m pretty sure Russia did debate the continued existence of the USA as we debated the continued existence of Russia. Who knows what the facts are?

  88. Jack says:

    The argument that Iranian sponsored attacks on the Saudi kingdom will impinge the global economy and consequently the US should strike Iranian assets to insure the conflagration infect the whole ME including Israel and make the economic situation even worse is an example of the prescription even worse than the symptoms.
    If the Houthis with Iranian material support cripple the Saudi oil infrastructure it will primarily impact those oil importing countries who are heavily dependent on Gulf oil. It will benefit oil exporting nations who produce outside the Gulf region like Russia and Venezuela. The US in contrast are relatively self-sufficient in both oil & gas. In fact we produce so much gas there are not enough storage facilities and so we have to flare considerable amounts.
    If anyone should intervene it should be those most vulnerable to a Gulf oil shock like China. The CCP essentially have the Iranian theocracy by the short-hairs. They could end any Iranian belligerence with a single call from Xi. We have limited interests relative to Asia and Europe in a halt to Gulf oil supplies. We should definitely not be supporting the Al Qaeda sponsoring House of Saud militarily.

  89. D says:

    Hi Pat. Robert Lindsay here.
    In a way, Iran is responsible for the attack but only in a roundabout way. Obviously the Houthis did it from Yemen. God knows how they pulled it off. The Houthis are absolutely able to pull of this sort of thing. In recent months, Houthi drone technology has absolutely exploded.
    I believe that in the past few months, as the US tried to stop Iran from exporting oil, Iran has radically ramped up the supply of technology to the Houthis. Because their technology has exploded in a short period of time.
    Under Obama, Iran wanted to keep a bit of distance from the Houthis due to the nuclear deal. Trump blew up that deal and Iran had no reason to keep distance from the Houthis anymore, so they ramped up support for the Houthis. Iran absolutely exports weaponry to the Houthis. I am not sure how much gets in. It comes in on small boats. It starts on large boats but around the east end of Oman at the end of the Straight of Hormuz they shift to small boats.
    With the drones I understand that Iran may be actually flying them in from boats off the coast of Yemen! There are probably some Iranian advisors working with the Houthis on the battlefield. I have no idea if Iran is helping the Houthi build the rockets.
    However, there is now a unified command center in Iran consisting of IRGC, Iran, Houthis, Iraqi militias, Hezbollah, and Islamic Jihad. Not sure if Syria has a seat too. So Iran probably heard about the operation and said fine.
    The Houthis are not really proxies. They do what they want. Earlier Iran ordered them not to take Sa’ada, but the Houthis told Iran to stuff it and took the city anyway. On occasion they do carry out orders from Iran. One was to hit a ship off the coast of Yemen with a missile. I doubt that this refinery attack was due to an Iranian command or order.
    When you think of Houthi technological capabilities, there is a part to the equation that is being left out. Because we are talking about not “Houthi” abilities but “Houthi + Hezbollah” abilities. I guess you could argue that some attack or manufacture is beyond the Houthi, but is it beyond Hezbollah?
    Because I know how those drones are made, and they are all made in factories in Yemen.
    An Iranian prototype is supplied for most models. The rocket and missile builders are none other than Hezbollah. Hezbollah are now experts at building missiles and rockets. Hezbollah builds drones, rockets, etc. for the Houthis using the Iranian prototype, but it is always modified somewhat, often in an ingenious way. For instance the Saudi display included a Quds-1 which is a Houthi cruise missile built off the prototype of an Iranian Soumar cruise missile.
    After the initial prototype is built, I am not sure if Hezbollah makes new ones or if the Houthis just use a schematic.
    There are also Hezbollah advisors advising the Houthis on the battlefield.
    This attack surely came from Yemen. The US is lying through its teeth that the attack came from Iran. It’s Iraqi WMD all over again. There are various reasons for blaming Iran which you may be able to figure out yourself.
    The US says the attack came from the north. Nope, it came from the west. Furthermore there are Youtube videos out there of Saudis living to the west of the oil refineries where you can hear the sounds of the drones coming in. The Saudis state in these videos that they can see the drones coming in from the west due east towards the refineries.
    Also the whine you hear in the attack videos is a drone siren, not some other type of siren. It’s activated in a drone attack. It would not be activated in a cruise missile attack.
    You can hear gunfire of Saudi forces shooting at the attacking objects. This proves they were drones because you can shoot at a drone with a gun. You can’t shoot at a cruise missile with a gun. No one does that. It’s on top of you as fast as you see it.
    Also Reuters reported that a witness stated that there were 15 ambulances at one refinery that was attacked, so the Saudis may be covering up some casualties.
    The US says the radars were turned to the south and west, so they did not see the swarm. Nope, they were turned towards the north and east, towards Iran.
    If Iran launched 27 missiles at Saudi Arabia from their land, they would have been seen on the some of the 50 US and countless Saudi radars that are pointed right at Iran. Unless Iran has some stealth technology for drones and cruise missiles, this didn’t happen. And no one has that tech.
    The US says Khameini approved of the attack with the qualification of deniability. How would we know? We have spies right next to Khameini in his palace? Forget it.
    Pompouseo insisted that this was an Iranian attack very soon after the attack before he could have possibly known such a thing. You can tell when the US is trying to frame an innocent party for an attack someone else did (and we do this sometimes) because the patsy nation or group is blamed almost immediately after the attack, before anyone could possibly have known who did it, before any investigations. They are working off a script.
    The disinfo may be cooked up by the CIA. Quotes from “US intelligence sources” may be from CIA people sending disinfo to their sources in the media.
    The CIA itself says different things. Internally they want to know what really happened. They don’t want to believe lies or crap. I am sure that they know that the Houthis launched this attack.
    Internal CIA knowledge is sometimes leaked to a few select journalists such as Seymour Hersch. For instance, Hersch’s CIA sources told him that half of the CIA thinks a Ukrainian fighter jet shot down the M-17 jet in Ukraine, and the other half thinks it was a missile shot by Donbass rebels but not a Buk missile as the fake lie narrative goes. That is because the CIA says the rebels never had any Buk missile in Ukraine. So that is what the CIA believes internally.
    But they put out disinfo about this attack almost instantly after it went down when Kerry started saying the rebels shot it down with a Buk missile supplied by Russia. This was the lie story that was supposed to go out. So the CIA talks out of both sides of its mouth.
    Another thing a fake patsy US lie to frame someone does is it often changes too fast. Pompouseo said the attack came from Iraq at first. Then he met with the Iraqis, and the story changed to launched from Iran.
    Also the “intelligence material” is typically very vague and often never released. The intelligence confirming that the Donbass rebels shot down the jet has not been released to this day. That’s because there is none. Predictably the US has no evidence in this refinery attack.
    Also a delay in evidence is often due to a US lie frame story. The US is “trying to find the evidence to connect Iran to this attack.” Really they are trying to fabricatethe evidence that Iran did it. This often takes a while, hence the long delays in confirming the evidence.
    A few other things. Iran has never conducted an attack and then had one of its proxies claim it. Iran claims all of its attacks and denies all false claims of attacks directed at it. The Houthis have never taken credit for an attack that was actually launched by Iran. In fact, no Iranian proxy has ever claimed an attack that was launched by Iran. The proxies claim their own attacks, and they claim all of them.
    The photo of the wreckage of a Quds-1 cruise missile in the Saudi desert appeared mysteriously on the net soon after the attack. No one knows who put it up or what it is. Houthis have used Quds-1’s to attack Saudi Arabia in the past. They were not used in this attack, so the photo is from earlier attack. The Quds-1 wreckage in the Saudi display is not an Iranian weapon but a Houthi weapon. I know the Quds-1 and the Soumar and how to tell them apart. That is absolutely a Quds-1.
    That black drone in the front of the display is apparently from a Houthi attack on a pipeline back in May. I know because there are photos of the drone used in that attack and it is this very drone. I believe the rest of the wreckage is simply wrecked drones from past Houthi attacks recently.

  90. D says:

    Simple, they were not seen because they never happened. Absolutely we would have that on radar or on satellite. The images of Iran loading the missiles are faked because this attack absolutely did not come from Iran. Iran is not so stupid and insane as to launch an attack from their territory. That would be suicidal.

  91. artemesia says:

    “They continue to deny the right of Israel to exist.”
    Is Iran’s affirmation of Israel some legal requirement? Enforced by whom/what — UN? CUFI?
    Is Israel so insecure of its own legitimacy and identity that Iran’s affirmation of its “right to exist” is necessary? (Or does Iran’s taunts pique the consciences of some who know in their heart of hearts that Israel was founded on terrorism.)
    “Whether we like it or not, The US is going to support Israel into the foreseeable future.”
    This “we” decidedly does NOT like it, and finds that he is far from alone is his dislike and vocalization of it.
    Moreover, Robert (“Send more donuts”) Kagan’s recent OpEd sounded to me like the overture to a divorce:
    Israel and the decline of the liberal order
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/09/12/liberal-world-order-helped-israel-flourish-now-state-is-pushing-back/?arc404=true

    “[T]here is broad agreement among Israeli conservatives that the central institutions of the liberal world order created since the end of World War II — the European Union and the United Nations, and perhaps even the transatlantic alliance NATO — are hostile toward Israel and should be taken down a peg. A united Europe, regarded by many on both sides of the Atlantic as one of the great accomplishments of the post-Cold War era, “hasn’t been a blessing for this country,” Michael Oren, former Israeli ambassador to the United States, has argued. “The less united Europe is, the better.”

    The same divisive intent and agenda applies to USA, in spades.
    imo smart politicians will step out ahead of this “divorce”– USA does not need Israel–throw the bum out– and stake claims to the kids, the bank accounts, the family silver, and the family name: UNITED States of America.

  92. CK says:

    That was yesterday.

  93. Babak Makkinejad says:

    China has no leverage on Iran.

  94. Babak Makkinejad says:

    I would to your very very informative comments the following opinion: that the strategic aim of the United States pursued for the last 17 years, to destroy enemies of Israel has caused strategic stalemate: the Shia have taken Israel and Saudi Oil fields hostage.

  95. Babak Makkinejad says:

    Good point!
    If Israelis desire Iran to affirm their right to exist, they need to fly to Tehran, kiss the hand of Ayatollah Khamenei and ask him what would it take for Iran to do so. That would be the basis of ending the war over Palestine.

  96. Babak Makkinejad says:

    There was no assumption there, Iran was honorable.
    I do not think you understand Honor.

  97. Jack says:

    Yeah, right.
    The petrochemical investment deal announced demonstrates the leverage in spades.

  98. different clue says:

    I was offering hopeful advice about “don’t mention the Obama” in hopes that President Trump can find a way to re-enter JCPOA without having to admit a single thing about “Obama was right”. If Trump can say it was his own sudden new brilliant idea based on new information, he can perhaps do the beneficial thing without injury to his pride.
    About Adelson and Bibi, money is always money. But if there is no Bibi to buy support for; what will Adelson buy support for with the money?
    To the best of my extremely limited knowledge, Hantz is/was part of the long-standing Military Establishment there. If so, he might still nourish some private quiet bitterness over the Bibi-Likud engineered and incited assassination of Mr. Military Security
    Rabin. If so, Hantz might make coalitioning with Likud dependent on Likud stripping Bibi of any and every government position. Perhaps a lot of political operators in Israel have decided that Bibi’s tread has worn all the way off, that he is now just stinking up the joint, and the time has come to drop him off in the alley along with the rest of the trash.

  99. catherine says:

    ”I read pieces by credentialed people that say Iran violated the agreement and describe how.”
    Who are those credentialed people? Five minutes on goggle says it is mainly Netantahu, his US Fifth Column Think Tanker and some congressmen that claim that Iran violated the agreement even before Trump recinded the agreement. And then there is this nonsensical claim…’A White House claim that Iran violated the terms of the 2015 nuclear deal before the agreement even existed …’
    Yes Iran has recently violated the ‘non existant deal ‘ .
    Its too amusing that the Neos and Zios are all hollering that Iran should stick to the deal even though there is no longer any deal.
    But let us not forget how the current situtation started:……and it goes back before the Obama deal .
    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/04/magazine/iran-strike-israel-america.html

  100. catherine says:

    ‘infect the whole ME including Israel and make the economic situation even worse is an example of the prescription even worse than the symptoms”
    Which reminds me. I am convinced many politicians have:
    Munchausen by proxy (MSP) — is a psychological disorder marked by attention-seeking behavior in which a caregiver sickens a person or may simply lie about the symptoms of the person in order to gain attention and praise for their heroic caregiver efforts.

  101. Babak Makkinejad says:

    That is not leverage, it is interest.
    In any case, you guys could have done the same thing but no longer can; wrapping yourselves in web of legalism that cannot be untangled.

  102. Jack says:

    Ayatollah on bended knee to the godless communists. Interests? More like please, mastah, whatever you choose.

  103. Babak Makkinejad says:

    Don’t pout now that Chinese are making money where you cannot.

Comments are closed.