Iran Watch...

[stumuz1]

Make sure you start at the beginning of the story of flight 103 or as we know it, the Lockerbie bombing.

http://alt-f4.org/img/seaoflies.html

[kenneal - lagger]

Does Trump want a war? Well, he's coming up for an election and what better way to get re-elected?

[stumuz1]

Does Trump want a war? Well, he's coming up for an election and what better way to get re-elected?

Yup.

[UndercoverElephant]

“We Do Not Seek War,� Says President Who Just Started A War

"No, really, we don't want to start a war. All we're trying to do is to demonstrate that we are above international law, and can do whatever the F--k we like, and everybody else just has to accept this. So please don't retaliate, because that might start a war."

[ReserveGrowthRulz]

“We Do Not Seek War,� Says President Who Just Started A War

"No, really, we don't want to start a war. All we're trying to do is to demonstrate that we are above international law, and can do whatever the F--k we like, and everybody else just has to accept this. So please don't retaliate, because that might start a war."

[stumuz1]

Are you talking about the 747 that the Libyans blew up? Flight 103?

Iran Air 655 was a US shoot down, and then we paid them off later, couple hundred $1000 for each passenger.

Yes flight 103 was the Iranians.

You will need to read quite widely to gather all the evidence.

Apparently so do you. Your particular conspiracy angle isn't even the best of the bunch.

Some spy claiming something after the fact isn't near as good as the others folks dreamed up.



I mean, most of this stuff looks no better than Mike Ruppert and the claptrap he manufactured to marry up up peak oil and 9/11.

Here's a start for your literature review.

That wasn't what your reference was. My link was far better in its range of cool conspiracies to choose from.

Classic RGR.
Answer rhetorical questions that were not asked. When confronted with something challenging scream conspiracy theory, Don't engage with the proposition.

Pointless debating anything with you.

[kenneal - lagger]

Is the Sheriff of Washington (the world's self appointed policeman) any better than the Sheriff of Nottingham? Probably not at the moment. They both take/took from the poor to give to the rich using any method available, moral or immoral. That is not to say that any nation is the Equivalent of Robin Hood at the moment.

[Little John]

Yes flight 103 was the Iranians.

You will need to read quite widely to gather all the evidence.

Apparently so do you. Your particular conspiracy angle isn't even the best of the bunch.

Some spy claiming something after the fact isn't near as good as the others folks dreamed up.



I mean, most of this stuff looks no better than Mike Ruppert and the claptrap he manufactured to marry up up peak oil and 9/11.

Here's a start for your literature review.

That wasn't what your reference was. My link was far better in its range of cool conspiracies to choose from.

Classic RGR.
Answer rhetorical questions that were not asked. When confronted with something challenging scream conspiracy theory, Don't engage with the proposition.

Pointless debating anything with you.

yep

[Little John]

“We Do Not Seek War,� Says President Who Just Started A War

"No, really, we don't want to start a war. All we're trying to do is to demonstrate that we are above international law, and can do whatever the F--k we like, and everybody else just has to accept this. So please don't retaliate, because that might start a war."

that's about the size of it

[ReserveGrowthRulz]

Classic RGR.
Answer rhetorical questions that were not asked. When confronted with something challenging scream conspiracy theory, Don't engage with the proposition.

Pointless debating anything with you.

You need to learn what a "debate" even is. It isn't synchronous nodding to whatever the conspiracy nutter idea of the day is.

[stumuz1]

Hassan Rouhani, President of Iran ( or Conspiracy nutter to RGR) has stated,

“This crime that the US committed . . . is similar to the coup attempt . . . and similar to the downing of Airbus passenger flight in the Persian Gulf [in 1988], “These crimes will never be forgotten.�

So, the president of Iran rates the '53 coup and the shooting down of flight 655 as equally heinous (to Iranians)

So, according to RGR the US will pay the daughter of the killed General $100k dollars and it will be all forgotten.

Looking at the millions whom took to the streets today.

I don't think so.

Iran Air 655 was a US shoot down, and then we paid them off later, couple hundred $1000 for each passenger

[UndercoverElephant]

“We Do Not Seek War,� Says President Who Just Started A War

"No, really, we don't want to start a war. All we're trying to do is to demonstrate that we are above international law, and can do whatever the F--k we like, and everybody else just has to accept this. So please don't retaliate, because that might start a war."

Not amazing at all that this quote would apply to the world's policeman.

What is amazing is that you actually think the US has a right to be the world's policeman. Policeman, in the real world, are put there by legitimate authorities. They don't just declare themselves to be the policeman, and then insist everybody else abides by the law but they do not. That's not the police. That is the mafia.

Besides, it isn't as though the Brits are about to stand up and take on the job.

What "job"? Assassinating generals from foreign states when not at war? No, the UK doesn't do that. We usually at least pretend to abide by international law.

The US is neither brave nor free. It is a land of brainwashed cowardly slaves.

[Little John]

The problem here is that RGR is not prepared to debate honestly. As has already been noted by others, his modus operandi seems to be in serving up facile aunt-sallys with a significant side-order of snide as a way of side-stepping addressing substantive points put to him.

It's pathetic and, in fact, detracts from coherent alternative arguments that could be mounted.

[clv101]

Who actually thinks the US is going to war with Iran this year? By war, I mean mobilisation on a similar scale to Iraq in 2003 or Afghanistan, not just a few dozen air strikes.

This fantasy war has been talked up for many years, it perpetually just weeks or months away and yet the years pass. I don't think the US is going to war with Iran in any significant way, any time soon.

[Little John]

Who actually thinks the US is going to war with Iran this year? By war, I mean mobilisation on a similar scale to Iraq in 2003 or Afghanistan, not just a few dozen air strikes.

This fantasy war has been talked up for many years, it perpetually just weeks or months away and yet the years pass. I don't think the US is going to war with Iran in any significant way, any time soon.

I actually agree with this.

The American empire already has a growing list of countries that it no longer has any realistic prospect of successfully waging war against. Instead it is now limited to petty and largely empty provocations such as this in addition to continuing to foment coups in already unstable, weaker countries that happen to have some industrial resources it wants to get its hands on. So, no, I don't think the American Empire is likely to go to war with Iran when push comes to shove. But, the danger of a black-swan escalation from such foolish shenanigans is real nonetheless. Just not likely.

In truth, I think the economic collapse of America is on the cards sometime this decade. It's already politically all but collapsed.