Mullahs Out Of Control: 'Get out of Syria,' Iran tells U.S

Senior Iranian figures said on Wednesday that Syria was a top foreign policy priority and American troops should withdraw, as planned by U.S. President Donald Trump.“Whether they want to or not, the Americans must leave Syria,” Ali Akbar Velayati, a senior adviser to Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was reported as saying.There are fears in the West that Trump’s plan to extricate about 2,000 soldiers from Syria will cede influence to Tehran, which has backed President Bashar al-Assad in the nearly eight-year war, and also allow Islamic State militants to regroup. “Now 90 percent of Syrian soil is under the control of the government and the rest will soon be freed by the Syrian army,” Velayati added during a meeting with Syria’s Foreign Minister Walid al-Moualem in Tehran, according to the Tasnim news agency. President Hassan Rouhani told Moualem that peace in Syria was a priority. “One of the important regional and foreign policy goals of the Islamic Republic is the stability and complete security of Syria,” Tasnim quoted him as saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meanwhile the people of Iran secretly desire freedom from their jailers. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's funny. U.S. has already said they are leaving. Btw. after statement as this one, I would think twice about leaving a Syria.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As long these religious mullah are in power, there is no hope for Iran and the poor people there...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Is that an order or a request? Now US troops are never going to leave...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Birds of a feather flock together .... Russia, Turkey, Iran.... All rather neatly line up.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

U.S. CENTCOM Commander Joseph Votel at Senate Armed Forces Committee hearing:
"Our future in the Tanf base in Syria is a very important and principle issue. Iran and her proxies would like to exploit this strategic area. We will very carefully consider disposition from Tanf."

Clear and precisely....

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, I am far more curious how Bolton, one the most severe anti-Iran hawks, reconciled with Trump's proclamation to get out. His mustache probably twitched pretty darn hard.

All if this was absolutely bound to happen when we destabilized Iraq. 

We need to leave and let things happen. We only make it worse. Time and time again. 

  • Great Response! 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, John Foote said:

Personally, I am far more curious how Bolton, one the most severe anti-Iran hawks, reconciled with Trump's proclamation to get out. His mustache probably twitched pretty darn hard.

All if this was absolutely bound to happen when we destabilized Iraq. 

We need to leave and let things happen. We only make it worse. Time and time again. 

the only sensible approach

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, John Foote said:

We need to leave and let things happen. We only make it worse. Time and time again.

umm we did and got ISIS..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, pinto said:

That's funny. U.S. has already said they are leaving. Btw. after statement as this one, I would think twice about leaving a Syria.

The solution to this problem is to annihilate Iran. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, mthebold said:

The solution to this problem is to annihilate Iran. 

more boots on the ground? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

more boots on the ground?  

Not necessary.  Destroy anything of importance and mercilessly hunt the leadership.  When it's made clear that any nation engaging in dickery will be bombed into the stone age, the dickery will stop.  If the leaders refuse to comply, the people will revolt and comply for them. 

Saddam Hussein understood well that Middle Eastern cultures only respond to force.  Iran had a habit of sending agents into Iraqi cities to sow dissent.  When this happened, Saddam would surround the city with artillery and present an ultimatum: give me the foreigners, or I will reduce your city to dust with you in it.  The foreigners were always promptly expelled. 

I'm sure this sounds harsh to the delicate sensibilities of Northern Europe, but that's how much of the world works.  It's naive to ascribe Western values and Western behavioral norms to cultures that have proven for millennia that they have no interest in those values and norms. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, mthebold said:

Not necessary.  Destroy anything of importance and mercilessly hunt the leadership.  When it's made clear that any nation engaging in dickery will be bombed into the stone age, the dickery will stop.  If the leaders refuse to comply, the people will revolt and comply for them. 

Saddam Hussein understood well that Middle Eastern cultures only respond to force.  Iran had a habit of sending agents into Iraqi cities to sow dissent.  When this happened, Saddam would surround the city with artillery and present an ultimatum: give me the foreigners, or I will reduce your city to dust with you in it.  The foreigners were always promptly expelled. 

I'm sure this sounds harsh to the delicate sensibilities of Northern Europe, but that's how much of the world works.  It's naive to ascribe Western values and Western behavioral norms to cultures that have proven for millennia that they have no interest in those values and norms. 

And how much US hatred would this create? I think you would be sowing the seeds for another few 9/11s if this was done.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

And how much US hatred would this create? I think you would be sowing the seeds for another few 9/11s if this was done.

This line is one of my favorites.  AS IF infidels aren't targets already, with BIG SATAN at the top of the list because he represents all that is not of their preaching.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Dan Warnick said:

This line is one of my favorites.  AS IF infidels aren't targets already, with BIG SATAN at the top of the list because he represents all that is not of their preaching.

Maybe. No need to throw fuel at the fire I guess. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

Maybe. No need to throw fuel at the fire I guess. 

Defend yourself, first, always.  Start with a wall and make sure to deploy all technology and screening at all entry points.  One of the great things that Immigration has done is to have their checkpoints at the foreign airports.  This makes sure that a great many threats don't get onto our shores to begin with.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole US policy in the Middle East since the Iraq invasion has mainly ended in failure, empowering Iran being the main result..

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Guillaume Albasini said:

The whole US policy in the Middle East since the Iraq invasion has mainly ended in failure, empowering Iran being the main result..

For Pete's sake.  What is Iran empowered to do, pray tell?  They are isolated and not selling most of their oil.  Their generals talk a good talk and everyone, everyone, takes them as seriously as they warrant, which is not much.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

And how much US hatred would this create? I think you would be sowing the seeds for another few 9/11s if this was done.

 

33 minutes ago, Dan Warnick said:

This line is one of my favorites.  AS IF infidels aren't targets already, with BIG SATAN at the top of the list because he represents all that is not of their preaching.

 

28 minutes ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

Maybe. No need to throw fuel at the fire I guess. 

Islam already wishes to exterminate infidels; the fire is as big as it can possibly get.  At this point, adding fuel won't make things worse, and being nice won't change them.  Our only option is to deal with Islamic extremism the way we dealt with Nazi Fascism and Japanese militarism: obliterate it.  Break the wills of entire populations.  Make it clear that their ideology will only lead to their extermination.

It would be easy to destroy their governments, kill their leaders, demolish their culture, erase their history, steal their oil, and build monuments to remind them of their ideology's failure.  Once they've nothing left to cling to, the populations can be given a choice: they can adopt acceptable values, or they can remain penniless, irrelevant, and quarantined from the civilized world. 

In general, I'm in favor of being nice to people.  However, Islamic extremism has gone beyond the pale.  They must be broken. 

  • Like 1
  • Great Response! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Dan Warnick said:

For Pete's sake.  What is Iran empowered to do, pray tell?  They are isolated and not selling most of their oil.  Their generals talk a good talk and everyone, everyone, takes them as seriously as they warrant, which is not much.

They are less isolated than you believe. The power vacuum created in Iraq by the removal of Saddam Hussein has led to a growing political and economical Iranian influence in Baghdad. Iranian non-commodities exports to Iraq are ten times higher now than in 2003

https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2019/02/iran-iraq-economic-exchanges-trade-us-sanctions-impact.html

Then you can add the growing Iranian influence in Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, Bahrein, Qatar...

I can bet that the coming withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan will also increase Iranian influence in this country.

https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/190204092658549.html

 

Isolated ?... think again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

2 hours ago, mthebold said:

Not necessary.  Destroy anything of importance and mercilessly hunt the leadership.  When it's made clear that any nation engaging in dickery will be bombed into the stone age, the dickery will stop.  If the leaders refuse to comply, the people will revolt and comply for them. 

Saddam Hussein understood well that Middle Eastern cultures only respond to force.  Iran had a habit of sending agents into Iraqi cities to sow dissent.  When this happened, Saddam would surround the city with artillery and present an ultimatum: give me the foreigners, or I will reduce your city to dust with you in it.  The foreigners were always promptly expelled. 

I'm sure this sounds harsh to the delicate sensibilities of Northern Europe, but that's how much of the world works.  It's naive to ascribe Western values and Western behavioral norms to cultures that have proven for millennia that they have no interest in those values and norms. 

1 hour ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

And how much US hatred would this create? I think you would be sowing the seeds for another few 9/11s if this was done.

1. There is an old joke: " Somebody else's dogs were pooing & fighting on the street. Big brother used to fork out $$ to bash both dogs & onwers up; wipe dogs ass; clean dogs poops; hire patrols for dognity; sell dogs' onwers some doggie gears but now focus on needs of own dogs?😳

2.9/11 ............... according to a book "the rise of disaster capitalism"............. has another side of story................ 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Guillaume Albasini said:

They are less isolated than you believe. The power vacuum created in Iraq by the removal of Saddam Hussein has led to a growing political and economical Iranian influence in Baghdad. Iranian non-commodities exports to Iraq are ten times higher now than in 2003

https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2019/02/iran-iraq-economic-exchanges-trade-us-sanctions-impact.html

Then you can add the growing Iranian influence in Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, Bahrein, Qatar...

I can bet that the coming withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan will also increase Iranian influence in this country.

https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/190204092658549.html

 

Isolated ?... think again.

The first article you cite is written by "Mohsen Shariatinia is an assistant professor of regional studies at Shahid Beheshti University in Tehran."

Maybe Mohsen is right; maybe he's wrong.  If you choose to believe that is up to you.  And the 10 fold figure is compared to trade in the Saddam era, you know, when they were enemies.  Any way you slice it Iran is no more relevant than they were 30 years ago, but they keep wailing like they are.

But that's just my opinion; I could be wrong.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 2/6/2019 at 7:37 AM, 50 shades of black said:

As long these religious mullah are in power, there is no hope for Iran and the poor people there...

What Mr. Trump and much of the recent US Iran policies neglects to consider is the age of the people in Iran. The young are the majority and the old religious zealots are dying off. That 10 year nuclear deal would have worked just fine due to the changing of the guard over there.

It seems that the previous admin and other countries realize this but the bias among many republicans does not allow them to see the reality of the situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites