Iran puts forward bill to charge a toll for safe passage through Hormuz Straits

originally posted by: ufoorbhunter
a reply to: Agit8dChop

What about charging Tehran with a bill for Lockerbie, Lebanon 250 US Marines killed by bombing, bill for Beunos Airies Jewish Centre attack, indeed thousands more deaths to bill the Mullahs for

I think we essentially did this through sanctions over the decades, leaving Iran as a shell of what it used to be.

But I guess it would be fair since we paid for the plane we shot down, flight 655, and 300,000 dollars for wage earners killed, and 150,000 dollars for non wage earners.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Nah the bill needs renewing with a big extra charge on it for present day terror preparations worldwide. That is essentially what this is all about and unless Iran pays the bill be curtailing mischief outside its borderts the Trump and allies gonna have to send in the Baliffs and reposess the property

Sounds like piracy on the High Seas.

Iran quickly becoming Somalia.

originally posted by: roadgravel
Iran is providing security?

I see. Pay us or your tanker may encounter a mine.

I was watching a youtube vid yesterday regarding those tankers which blew and i thought hmmm.... maybe the people who did that weren't from Iran but from the US, Saudi or Israel and then posting all over the news that it was Iranians, this gives a creditable reason to blame Iran and prepare for War, the Drone being shot out of the sky was something that any country would do if that Drone isn't supposed to be there...

originally posted by: butcherguy
This is funny.
Yesterday, in another thread, a poster blamed the US for running a protection racket in the Strait of Hormuz.

Oh I'm sure said poster will be back in here spouting more of his Iran-apologist bs. They can do no wrong.

This is great for us actually. It will further hurt Iran's standing with the world and alienate the countries it was trying to get to stand up to us, for example the members of the EU it has been courting.

originally posted by: gortex

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: Agit8dChop

Why is war with Iran ALWAYS the ONLY answer???????

Because Iran are next on the list.

This was supposed to have happened over 10 years ago. None of it has happened. Learn to think.

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: Agit8dChop

Why is war with Iran ALWAYS the ONLY answer???????

Why is making things up always the only answer?

Not even Bolton is calling for war with Iran.

a reply to: ufoorbhunter

Nah the bill needs renewing with a big extra charge on it for present day terror preparations worldwide.

The whole terror thing doesn't really resonate with me. It's a hijacked word meant to pull at our heartstrings.

Am I saying Iran is good or even OK? Not at all.

But you tell me a terror organization we haven't become "friends" with in that region. Hell, we just teamed up with Al Qaeda in Syria recently.... Not to mention we're still allies with Saudi Arabia who's terror exportation made its way to NYC.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Yeah know where you are coming from. Human beings aznd their monkey business slapping each other down. Will it ever end.

originally posted by: ufoorbhunter
a reply to: CriticalStinker

Yeah know where you are coming from. Human beings aznd their monkey business slapping each other down. Will it ever end.

It doesn't look like it.

American's think a robot spying on another country and coming down is an attack on our country... But it's a 130~ million dollar inconvenience. "But we can't just let them shoot down millions of dollars worth of our equipment", so to teach them we spend billions or trillions?

It's like on 9/11 when we lost 3,000- we said hold our beer and sacrificed that on sands of countries who had no parts while selling weapons to those that did have a part.

Bin Laden's mission was to draw the US into the Middle East weakening us economically and with our credibility abroad. He knew that neighboring Arab countries would eventually grow tired of their unwelcome "guests" and give em' hell. And here we are, playing into the hands of the very people who attacked us. Trillions more in debt, thousands of young lost, tens of thousands neglected and left to call the VA who's opening recording gives directions for suicidal thoughts.

originally posted by: ressiv
yeaa sanctions aka blackmail had its best time …..bet the usa are sanction thereself douwn in time ..

what would happen if china should stop all import and export to the usa….

The Chinese economy would crash and billions would starve.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Was quoting a recent wired mag article concerning the 220 million, million here or there......meh lol, they had a pic as well, that's a big mother of a drone!

originally posted by: CriticalStinker

originally posted by: ufoorbhunter
a reply to: CriticalStinker

Yeah know where you are coming from. Human beings aznd their monkey business slapping each other down. Will it ever end.

It doesn't look like it.


It's like on 9/11 when we lost 3,000- we said hold our beer and sacrificed that on sands of countries who had no parts while selling weapons to those that did have a part.

Yeah that's not what happened. You're conflating Afghanistan and Iraq. We attacked Afghanistan after 9/11 because it was an Al Qaeda attack and Al Qaeda was mostly based and training in Afghanistan. That war has cost us fewer lives than the 9/11 attacks did, with the difference being we're forcing them to fight our military instead of just kicking back and waiting for them to attack our civilians. It's been largely successful, despite the media propaganda that it hasn't been. The goal was never to end terrorism or a conventional war of gaining and holding territory, it was to deny the terrorists the opportunity to plan and train in a consequence-free environment where they could coordinate mass-casualty attacks like 9/11. We haven't had any other large-scale attacks like that, largely due to the success of the war and the changes we made at home. You can debate all day whether it was the "right" thing to do or not but it's been a success.

Iraq is an entirely separate issue.

a reply to: face23785

Yeah that's not what happened. You're conflating Afghanistan and Iraq.

They're the post 9/11 wars.

You can debate all day whether it was the "right" thing to do or not but it's been a success.

I totally could debate whether it's been a success. Right now we have son's of the original soldiers going to the same theater. It's the longest active conflict we've been involved in.

We got Bin Laden and rained on the Al Qaeda parade, cool... But it's 18 years later, so I don't know if success would be my first descriptor to use when we couldn't do our mission and get out efficiently.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: face23785

Yeah that's not what happened. You're conflating Afghanistan and Iraq.

They're the post 9/11 wars.

I didn't dispute that. But the way you said it looked like you were putting Iraq in the same bucket. Iraq was not a response to 9/11. Syria is a post-9/11 war. ISIS is a post-9/11 war. Is every war from now on going to be linked to 9/11? Afghanistan and Iraq are entirely separate issues.

You can debate all day whether it was the "right" thing to do or not but it's been a success.

I totally could debate whether it's been a success. Right now we have son's of the original soldiers going to the same theater. It's the longest active conflict we've been involved in.

This would be a great point if the length of a conflict had any bearing on whether or not it's successful. It doesn't.

We got Bin Laden and rained on the Al Qaeda parade, cool... But it's 18 years later, so I don't know if success would be my first descriptor to use when we couldn't do our mission and get out efficiently.

This is based on a complete misunderstanding of what our mission was. See my previous post. It wasn't to get bin Laden. It was to deny the terrorists the freedom of operation we ignored for years in Afghanistan because it hadn't impacted us here at home. That goal has largely been met. Nobody ever claimed we would stop all terrorist attacks, anymore than anyone thinks a wall will stop all illegal immigration.

a reply to: face23785

The Iraq plans were brought up shortly after 9/11... To say the two were unrelated is disingenuous.

Your opinion is that Afghanistan was a success, and that's fine, you have the right to an opinion.

My opinion is not to use the word success when objectives have been met in a mediocre way requiring vast amounts more time and resources than originally projected.

As far as their open training obstacle courses are concerned, their mission was with planes which the hijackers trained for here in the states. Terrorism isn't a conventional enemy, you can thin it out as you implied, that is it.

But our Middle East endeavors just breeds the next round of terrorists by pissing the Arab world as a whole off just because some assholes attacked us and we bunch the whole region together.

The original reason Bin Laden did this is because he saw Saudi Arabia (his home country) as a cuck who gave into American wishes. His plan was to draw us into prolonged wars like the soviets in Afghanistan. So far we're playing into his objective more than completing our own, IMO.

Trump should have just bombed the # out of Iran, those kind of people believe that doing something humane is a sign of weakness. Trump's not wanting to kill a hundred fifty Iranians is a weakness in the eyes of Muslims.

This is not going to go over well at the next Freedom of the Seas Exercise.

a reply to: gortex

Give up nuclear ambitions. It's their move.

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: Agit8dChop

Why is war with Iran ALWAYS the ONLY answer???????

If that was true they would be gone already. We aren't, so your post is already proven false.