IRGC leader Soleimani has been killed in targeted assassination near Baghdad

a reply to: PaddyInf

I agree with you and also questioned the timing of this. I guess we will find out the answer in a few days. Who knows.

So just to recap;

Saudi Arabia is bad.
Iraq is bad.
Iran is bad.
Duran Duran is bad.
Epstein didn't kill himself.
Neither did some Iranian General who was in Iraq for a commi-con, or something.
Trump is bad.
Pelosi steps in Poo.
And we are at war with Iran because someone said so on the internet.
Someone also said I was awesome on the internet.
I like canned beets.

Did I miss anything?

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: Flavian
If this attack is because a contractor was killed then it shows Trump is up to his eyeballs with the Military-Industrial complex.

Really? Why?

Because a contractor is, in effect, a mercenary. They are not there in an official capacity, they are there in a private capacity. If this is purely down to the contractor then Trump has bowed to pressure, which could only come from the M-I-C.

I hope this isn't the case. I hope instead this was undertaken over the various proxy engagements QUDS have been heavily involved in.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
So just to recap;

Saudi Arabia is bad.
Iraq is bad.
Iran is bad.
Duran Duran is bad.
Epstein didn't kill himself.
Neither did some Iranian General who was in Iraq for a commi-con, or something.
Trump is bad.
Pelosi steps in Poo.
And we are at war with Iran because someone said so on the internet.
Someone also said I was awesome on the internet.
I like canned beets.

Did I miss anything?

You are fat and your bottom is smelly.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Someone also said I was awesome on the internet.

*raises hand*

That was me!


I want my $50 now...

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
The diplomatic mission to Saudi Arabia wasn't until 1974,

Yeah? So? You think politics is instantaneous? You think there wasn't a lot of back and forth in those 3 years?

it wasn't about gold convertibility,

Not for us - but it was for them. Would you rather have gold? Or paper containing empty promises?

it was about preventing the Soviets from gaining more traction in the Middle East.

Not exactly - it was about maintaining the superiority of the US Dollar, and ipso facto, the US as the primary world super power.

"That is precisely what I meant by 'maintaining the petrodollar'..."

There is nothing to 'maintain', Bretton-Woods established the dollar as the world reserve currency, if Saudi Arabia wanted to get paid for oil they had to take it in dollars.

Which they could promptly convert into gold - until 1971 that is, hence the need for a 'new deal'.

[[snipped]].

originally posted by: Flavian
Because a contractor is, in effect, a mercenary.

Do you know what kind of contractor he was? Maybe he was building a road? Or fixing a toilet? I don't know, seriously, but do you?

They are not there in an official capacity,

If they were working for the US Govt, then they were there in an official capacity. Don't be ridiculous.

If this is purely down to the contractor then Trump has bowed to pressure, which could only come from the M-I-C.

Again - [pb]why? What does being a contractor or not have to do with Trump being under the thumb of the MIC?

If the contractor was American, Trump is doing what he said he would do. Protecting Americans.

I hope this isn't the case. I hope instead this was undertaken over the various proxy engagements QUDS have been heavily involved in.

Heavily involved in? Like killing an American contractor and wounding 4 others in a rocket strike?

Make up your mind.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Someone also said I was awesome on the internet.

*raises hand*

That was me!


I want my $50 now...

*Removes puppets...raises two hands*


You're BOTH super awesome!


That'll be $100!



...I'll take a check.

originally posted by: ltheghost
a reply to: PaddyInf

I agree with you and also questioned the timing of this. I guess we will find out the answer in a few days. Who knows.

Here's part of your answer....

If they do we take out their oil refineries or attack their leadership.

a reply to: proximo



Better solution is simply mine their ports

No tankers get in/out

Advantage with mines is can set them to activate/deactivate by timer. Also can set them to resist sweeping attempts

Hell don't even have to be all live, just put in couple of live ones mixed in with dummies to confuse Iranians

No one is going to hazard a tanker in waters think are mined

a reply to: DBCowboy

Duran Duran is bad.

You take that back!

Iran oil: New field with 53bn barrels found - Rouhani
Coincidence?

originally posted by: DBCowboy
So just to recap;


Duran Duran is bad.

You've Gone too far this time ...

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: DBCowboy

Duran Duran is bad.

You take that back!

Sounds like someone is hungry like the wolf. . . . . .

originally posted by: DBCowboy
So just to recap;

Saudi Arabia is bad.
Iraq is bad.
Iran is bad.
Duran Duran is bad.
Epstein didn't kill himself.
Neither did some Iranian General who was in Iraq for a commi-con, or something.
Trump is bad.
Pelosi steps in Poo.
And we are at war with Iran because someone said so on the internet.
Someone also said I was awesome on the internet.
I like canned beets.

Did I miss anything?

Neo's building his new computer in about an hour.

originally posted by: Soloprotocol
Iran oil: New field with 53bn barrels found - Rouhani
Coincidence?

If only Exxon had the tech to slant drill into that field from Iraq.


Uncle Sam, a little help please
-Exxon

originally posted by: roadgravel

originally posted by: Soloprotocol
Iran oil: New field with 53bn barrels found - Rouhani
Coincidence?

If only Exxon had the tech to slant drill into that field from Iraq.

Uncle Sam, a little help please
-Exxon

They're doing a happy dance over at Halliburton!!! I might just get back in the mkt.

a reply to: DBCowboy

I'm just a big fan of girls named Rio that are dancing on the sand.

According to Israeli sources an intercepted phone call triggered the attack on Suleimani

TEL AVIV: Five days ago, an undisclosed intelligence agency intercepted a telephone call made by the head of Iran’s Quds Force, Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani, in which he was heard ordering his proxies in Iraq to attack the U.S embassy in Baghdad, as well as other Israeli and American targets, with the aim of taking hostages, Israeli sources say.

It’s unclear whether this was a lapse in tradecraft on the part of the usually savvy Soleimani or whether the notorious Iranian military leader’s phone calls were being routinely intercepted. Nor is it clear whether it was the US or another foe of Iran that made the intercept. Regardless, the intelligence seems to have led directly to Soleimani’s killing yesterday, which has thrown the Mideast into uproar.

breakingdefense.com...

originally posted by: mightmight
According to Israeli sources an intercepted phone call triggered the attack on Suleimani

TEL AVIV: Five days ago, an undisclosed intelligence agency intercepted a telephone call made by the head of Iran’s Quds Force, Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani, in which he was heard ordering his proxies in Iraq to attack the U.S embassy in Baghdad, as well as other Israeli and American targets, with the aim of taking hostages, Israeli sources say.

It’s unclear whether this was a lapse in tradecraft on the part of the usually savvy Soleimani or whether the notorious Iranian military leader’s phone calls were being routinely intercepted. Nor is it clear whether it was the US or another foe of Iran that made the intercept. Regardless, the intelligence seems to have led directly to Soleimani’s killing yesterday, which has thrown the Mideast into uproar.

breakingdefense.com...

perhaps, but you know what they say...."the first casualty of war, is the truth"

I think this Iranian war has been planned by the neocons for a long time. Soleimani was just the rationalization.