US official: US drone shot down by Iran in international airspace

  • 68 results
  • 1
  • 2
Avatar image for kadin_kai
Kadin_Kai

2247

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#51 Kadin_Kai
Member since 2015 • 2247 Posts

@ronvalencia: Point by point.

What has Macron got to do with any of the points relating to Iran? Syria and Iran are entirely two separate sovereign nations.

Regarding Libya, you clearly have zero understanding of the situation. As evil as Gadaffi was, his rule over Libya is by far better than than the war that is going on now.

The war has been going on since 2011 and it still rages on. Thousands and thousands have died as a result. On Libyan ground and in the Mediterranean Ocean as refugees drown crossing over to Europe.

Is American military adventurism a good thing in your opinion? Has it actually made any of those countries safer, more prosperous?

Avatar image for kadin_kai
Kadin_Kai

2247

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#52 Kadin_Kai
Member since 2015 • 2247 Posts

@ronvalencia: Links?

Do you really need links for the comments I made above?

You need links to prove that America used waterboarding on prisoners?

You need links to show you that the US invasion of Iraq was illegal?

You need links to prove American planes are above Syria airspace?

You need links to show the US government has a ridiculous amount of debt that is owed to China and other nations?

It’s all be widely reported. Which rock do you live under?

Avatar image for ronvalencia
ronvalencia

29612

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#53 ronvalencia
Member since 2008 • 29612 Posts

@kadin_kai said:

@ronvalencia: Point by point.

1. What has Macron got to do with any of the points relating to Iran? Syria and Iran are entirely two separate sovereign nations.

2. Regarding Libya, you clearly have zero understanding of the situation. As evil as Gadaffi was, his rule over Libya is by far better than than the war that is going on now.

3. The war has been going on since 2011 and it still rages on. Thousands and thousands have died as a result. On Libyan ground and in the Mediterranean Ocean as refugees drown crossing over to Europe.

4. Is American military adventurism a good thing in your opinion? Has it actually made any of those countries safer, more prosperous?

1. Both Russia and Iran has their "little green men" proxies in Syria and they were wiped out when attacked US base.

French argument is for Syria. Hint: Oil from Saudi to Turkey then to EU.

2. Bullshit.

3. Refer to my French argument on Libya.

4. US doesn't need Middle East oil. Your "The US and practically most countries in the world will be short of crude oil" argument is bullshit.

In the third quarter of 2018, the U.S. imported roughly 10.2 million barrels of petroleum per day, with the largest amounts coming from Canada (41%) and Saudi Arabia (10%).

In the third quarter of 2018, the U.S. exported roughly 7.5 million barrels of petroleum per day.3 The largest markets for U.S. petroleum exports are Mexico and Canada, but the U.S. exports petroleum to 180 countries.

The recent increase in domestic oil production, especially since 2010, has had a significant impact on U.S. petroleum imports and exports. From 2005 to 2015, the United States’ reliance on petroleum imports fell from 60% to 25% of total consumption, while exports increased by over 300%. Since 2015, imports have remained fairly steady at approximately 10 million barrels per day, but exports have continued to increase, from 4.7 million barrels per day in 2015 to 7.6 million barrels per day in early-mid-2018. The Energy Information Administration projects that U.S. import reliance for oil will continue to fall over the coming decade.

US doesn't need Middle East oil.

Avatar image for ronvalencia
ronvalencia

29612

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#54  Edited By ronvalencia
Member since 2008 • 29612 Posts

@kadin_kai said:

@ronvalencia: Links?

Do you really need links for the comments I made above?

1. You need links to prove that America used waterboarding on prisoners?

2. You need links to show you that the US invasion of Iraq was illegal?

3. You need links to prove American planes are above Syria airspace?

4. You need links to show the US government has a ridiculous amount of debt that is owed to China and other nations?

It’s all be widely reported. Which rock do you live under?

1. Who cares

2. Who cares. Read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Bush,_House_of_Saud

3. Who cares.

4. US government debt is mostly owned by US entities. China's proportion is minor.

https://www.willistowerswatson.com/-/media/WTW/Images/Press/2018/01/Global-Pension-Asset-Study-2018-Japan.pdf

Nanny state savings (pension funds) vs GDP ratio

Australia: 138.4 percent

US: 131.2 percent

UK: 121.3 percent

Canada: 107.8 percent

...

Japan: 62.5 percent

Germany: 12.9 percent

China: 1.5 percent

Try again.

Attacks on Japanese's Middle East trade only accelerates Japanese re-armament. Norway is useless.

Avatar image for kadin_kai
Kadin_Kai

2247

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#55 Kadin_Kai
Member since 2015 • 2247 Posts

@ronvalencia:

1. Waterboarding? Who cares? I care and millions and millions of others.

2. Invasion of Iraq was illegal? Again, who cares? I do so do millions of others.

3. American invasion of Syrian airspace? Who cares? Well everyone does, no one wants illegal entry into their airspace.

4. Yes true the majority of US debt is owed to Americans. But is it not embarrassing it owes over a trillion to China, over a trillion to Japan. Is the debt not an issue?

5. Crude oil. Here you seriously lack understanding of crude oil and refining.

Not all crude oil is equal. As I said above, US oil production is very light-sweet and after refining you mainly produces condensate, naphtha and gasoline. You cannot fly a plane with it, nor can you move a tank or a ship with this type of crude oil.

Also as the article you showed, the US imported imported 10.2m bbl/day and exported 7.2m bbl/day!

No country is oil independent. Even Saudi Arabia buys oil!

Avatar image for JimB
JimB

3867

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#56  Edited By JimB
Member since 2002 • 3867 Posts

@plageus900 said:

@JimB: The US never sent "150 bullion in cash" to Iran. As part of the US/Iran nuclear deal, the US unfroze Iranian assets, equaling ~1.9 billion dollars.

Wow after this post and your comment about U.S Navy headgear, you might be better off by deleting your account and moving out of your mom's basement.

They flew it over in planes ,all large transactions are done in wire transfers. That was a pay off. History has shown you can't buy peace.

As far as navy head gear their ship hats are part of their working uniform. When you leave a ship tp go on liberty or functions you wear a dress uniform which has a prescribed cover for the uniform.

Avatar image for HoolaHoopMan
HoolaHoopMan

14724

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#57  Edited By HoolaHoopMan
Member since 2009 • 14724 Posts

@JimB said:
@plageus900 said:

@JimB: The US never sent "150 bullion in cash" to Iran. As part of the US/Iran nuclear deal, the US unfroze Iranian assets, equaling ~1.9 billion dollars.

Wow after this post and your comment about U.S Navy headgear, you might be better off by deleting your account and moving out of your mom's basement.

They flew it over in planes ,all large transactions are done in wire transfers. That was a pay off. History has shown you can't buy peace.

Literally none of this is true. Assets were simply unfrozen. How can one human be so wrong and disingenuous with every post he makes? You're the poster child for misinformation and the spread of propaganda.

Avatar image for horgen
horgen

127506

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#58 horgen  Moderator
Member since 2006 • 127506 Posts

@HoolaHoopMan said:
@JimB said:
@plageus900 said:

@JimB: The US never sent "150 bullion in cash" to Iran. As part of the US/Iran nuclear deal, the US unfroze Iranian assets, equaling ~1.9 billion dollars.

Wow after this post and your comment about U.S Navy headgear, you might be better off by deleting your account and moving out of your mom's basement.

They flew it over in planes ,all large transactions are done in wire transfers. That was a pay off. History has shown you can't buy peace.

Literally none of this is true. Assets were simply unfrozen. How can one human be so wrong and disingenuous with every post he makes? You're the poster child for misinformation and the spread of propaganda.

Maybe he just watches conservative news?

Avatar image for HoolaHoopMan
HoolaHoopMan

14724

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#59 HoolaHoopMan
Member since 2009 • 14724 Posts

@horgen said:
@HoolaHoopMan said:

Literally none of this is true. Assets were simply unfrozen. How can one human be so wrong and disingenuous with every post he makes? You're the poster child for misinformation and the spread of propaganda.

Maybe he just watches conservative news?

'News' would be a stretch.

Avatar image for horgen
horgen

127506

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#60 horgen  Moderator
Member since 2006 • 127506 Posts

@HoolaHoopMan said:
@horgen said:
@HoolaHoopMan said:

Literally none of this is true. Assets were simply unfrozen. How can one human be so wrong and disingenuous with every post he makes? You're the poster child for misinformation and the spread of propaganda.

Maybe he just watches conservative news?

'News' would be a stretch.

Not much difference between news and entertainment on Foxnews, so I guess the lines are blurred out.

Avatar image for ad1x2
ad1x2

8430

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#61 ad1x2
Member since 2005 • 8430 Posts

@MirkoS77 said:
@ad1x2 said:

I would try to get a little more information about how everything went down instead of immediately assuming it was because of dangerous indecisiveness. Intel (to include estimated casualties) gets updated over time and updated intel may cause commanders to adjust their decisions.

The situation also tells Iran that if they escalate too far they will be looking at some unwanted retaliation. Both Saddam and Gaddafi found out how their people really felt about them when they were stripped of power by foreign forces, and I’m not sure that the Supreme Leader of Iran wants to risk being on the wrong side of angry citizens that lost family in a war with the US.

If you still want to criticize him even though he made the decision most of us wanted him to make, then that is still your right.

Decisions shouldn't be made without pertinent intel to inform it. This was information from his generals, information I assume they were informed of before Trump initially pulled the trigger just as much as when he decided to back off. The only difference was, Trump decided to ask. I give him credit for that, but not at the cost of making us look indecisive and weak to our adversaries. If he didn't have the information, he shouldn't have made the call.

In the end, I'm ultimately glad he decided what he did, but I believe it may make our enemies believe they got an inch.....and now they're going to try for a mile, simply from the impression he's given. And from what I've seen, Trump is nothing but a windbag. He talks big and tough, but when it comes down to it, he's like a bully on a playground....stand up to him, and he crumples and immediately attempts to be your best friend.

Like I said, intel can change over time, even over the course of a few minutes. One example I can give you is when I was in Afghanistan we had to call off a strike on a compound less than a minute before we would have hit the target because an innocent party drove their vehicle too close to the impact area.

Neither one of us were there when the initial briefing was made, so we can’t say what the original conversation went like as well as the subsequent one that caused Trump to cancel it. It’s the job of his military advisers to ensure he is briefed for those decisions and they usually give the big picture on the initial briefing, especially since mistakes are made political no matter who is in office. President Obama got a lot of shit for some of his decisions as Commander-in-Chief too, with a decent portion of it undeserved.

Avatar image for deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51
deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51

57548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

#62 deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51
Member since 2004 • 57548 Posts

Seems like a dumb thing to go to war over. Both nations need to grow up.

Avatar image for MirkoS77
MirkoS77

17660

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#63 MirkoS77
Member since 2011 • 17660 Posts

@ad1x2 said:

Like I said, intel can change over time, even over the course of a few minutes. One example I can give you is when I was in Afghanistan we had to call off a strike on a compound less than a minute before we would have hit the target because an innocent party drove their vehicle too close to the impact area.

Neither one of us were there when the initial briefing was made, so we can’t say what the original conversation went like as well as the subsequent one that caused Trump to cancel it. It’s the job of his military advisers to ensure he is briefed for those decisions and they usually give the big picture on the initial briefing, especially since mistakes are made political no matter who is in office. President Obama got a lot of shit for some of his decisions as Commander-in-Chief too, with a decent portion of it undeserved.

And like I said, it's not so much the decision as it is changing his mind for the world to see which gives off an impression of indecisiveness and weakness. From what I'm reading, no new intel came about at the last second, it was only Trump's inquisitiveness that changed his mind but this was after it had come out that a strike was already underway.

Frankly, I'm curious if Trump actually has any real foreign policy strategy at all, because from the looks of it, he seems to be winging it as it comes his way.

Avatar image for zaryia
Zaryia

21607

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#64  Edited By Zaryia
Member since 2016 • 21607 Posts
@sonicare said:

Seems like a dumb thing to go to war over. Both nations need to grow up.

No doubt both sides are acting dumb, but Trump and Bolton started provocations and increased tensions dramatically..

They pulled out of the deal even though the ICA and EU told them not to, as all data showed Iran was not breaking the deal. Then they put up economic sanctions.

Avatar image for Jacanuk
Jacanuk

20281

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 42

User Lists: 0

#65 Jacanuk
Member since 2011 • 20281 Posts
@zaryia said:
@sonicare said:

Seems like a dumb thing to go to war over. Both nations need to grow up.

No doubt both sides are acting dumb, but Trump and Bolton started provocations.

They pulled out of the deal even though the ICA and EU told them not to. Because they knew this would all happen. Then they put up economic sanctions. Even though everything was going well.

Wait, so your argument is that a shitty deal that only benefits the Iranian dictatorship and helps destabilise the middle-east even more than it already is, is better than no deal and heavy sanctions on a country that apparently feels like it´s ok to attack 2 tankers and shoot down a US drone.

And no Trump and the us did not start any provocation, he saw the deal for what it was and of course backed out it as you should.

Avatar image for zaryia
Zaryia

21607

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#66  Edited By Zaryia
Member since 2016 • 21607 Posts
@Jacanuk said:
@zaryia said:
@sonicare said:

Seems like a dumb thing to go to war over. Both nations need to grow up.

No doubt both sides are acting dumb, but Trump and Bolton started provocations.

They pulled out of the deal even though the ICA and EU told them not to. Because they knew this would all happen. Then they put up economic sanctions. Even though everything was going well.

Wait, so your argument is that a shitty deal

And no Trump and the us did not start any provocation, he saw the deal for what it was and of course backed out it as you should.

That's either subjective or 8ball stuff.

I'm just telling you factually how all of these tensions started. This is Trump and Bolton's botched foreign policy.

Obama, others warned Trump that pulling out of Iran nuke deal could lead to war

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/obama-others-warned-trump-pulling-out-iran-nuke-deal-could-n1020461

How Donald Trump created one hell of a mess with Iran

https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/20/opinions/us-iran-mess-trump-endgame-bergen/index.html

Trump Abandoned a Nuclear Deal a Year Ago. The U.S. and Iran Are Now on a Collision Course

https://time.com/5586246/iran-nuclear-deal-anniversary/

Avatar image for Jacanuk
Jacanuk

20281

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 42

User Lists: 0

#67 Jacanuk
Member since 2011 • 20281 Posts

@zaryia: well, first of all, the threat of something should not keep anyone in a bad deal that in the long term is far worse than no deal.

And your 3 sources are all stating opinions not facts and to boot, they are all far-left leaning.

Avatar image for zaryia
Zaryia

21607

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#68  Edited By Zaryia
Member since 2016 • 21607 Posts
@Jacanuk said:

And your 3 sources are all stating opinions not facts and to boot,

They have a factual time line of events within them. They have factual statements from the ICA. They have factual statements from the EU. This is Trump and Bolton's foreign policy disaster. Pulling out of the deal and applying economic sanctions caused this mess.

Saying otherwise is to say reality has been altered. This is on Trump, sorry.