Trumps reckless designation of the IRGC to have dangerous consequences Watch

Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#21
Report Thread starter 5 days ago
#21
(Original post by Palmyra)
Iran did help the US hugely in the early stages of its invasion of Afghanistan. Sharing key intel, offering Iranian airspace, even joint military ops.

As I mentioned above, after Genius George rewarded Iranian reformists for putting their neck on the line like this by labelling Iran as part of an 'axis of evil', Iran cut off all co-operation with the US - including (in fact primarily) in Afghanistan, and justifiably so.
Excellent reply!
Alas you dont seem to have a button to like your posts anymore though?
0
reply
Palmyra
Badges: 17
#22
Report 5 days ago
#22
(Original post by Molseh)
I mean the OP used the word instrumental - their help was useful on invasion no doubt, but beyond that in the 17 years since they have been actively opposing the US - whether that be the 'axis of evil' effect or more the worry of US having a permanent base next door and gaining influence in the region I don't know.
Numerous US military officials have criticised Genius George for his axis of evil comment, throwing Iranian reformists under the bus and ensuring a more hardline Iranian approach.

Iran was instrumental in helping the US overthrew the Taliban - that's a fact. Iran also stopped helping the US after the US showed zero gratitude (or intelligence). But yes, I wouldn't want the US on my doorstep for 17 years either.
reply
Molseh
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#23
Report 5 days ago
#23
Calm down pal, you are rambling.

The Taliban gained US weaponry due to ANA/ANP incompetence and defeats. Same way ISIS were driving around in Humvees in Iraq up until recently.
Iranian's were involved in training and supplying the Taliban Insurgents in Helmand - I know that for a fact. No allegedly about it.
(Original post by Napp)
Rendered assistance/helped ... I am using the two as synonyms here as the outcome is the same.
Err no that is exactly what it makes it. The fact it wasnt permanent help is irrelevant - especially as the yanks then stabbed the Iranians in the back.
Yes and no. Its no secret the Iranians hated the Taliban and wanted them gone but seeing as Rasfanjani was a moderate who reached out with America for a detente to imply this was nothing but cynicism is dubious at best.

Of course it did, so what? Why would they be happy with a hostile imperial force on their door step who actively threatened to attack them? Dont be so silly.
No there were claims of it. Seeing as the Taliban and various other terror groups have been found with large amounts of US weaponry as well i'd try not to open that jar of worms if i were you.
However, whats wrong with Iran *allegedly* aiding the Taliban? It makes perfect sense. America has been soundly beaten and the Taliban have won that war, it would be foolish for the Iranians to not cultivate an understanding with the next leaders there, especially as thanks to America ISIS is active around them.

To paint the Iranians as doing anything especially bad or unreasonable here is risible im afraid, its nothing more than classic defensive realism.
0
reply
Molseh
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#24
Report 5 days ago
#24
The outcome during the 2001 invasion would have happened, with or without Iran aid.
(Original post by Palmyra)
Iran was instrumental in helping the US overthrew the Taliban - that's a fact. Iran also stopped helping the US after the US showed zero gratitude (or intelligence). But yes, I wouldn't want the US on my doorstep for 17 years either.
0
reply
Palmyra
Badges: 17
#25
Report 5 days ago
#25
(Original post by Molseh)
The outcome during the 2001 invasion would have happened, with or without Iran aid.
You can't prove the counterfactual, so that's a pointless comment.

A pointless comment that ignores how much harder it could have been for the US without Iran actively giving so much help in the fight against the Taliban.
reply
Molseh
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#26
Report 5 days ago
#26
You mean like the pointless comments on how much aid Iran provided without any actual sources?
(Original post by Palmyra)
You can't prove the counterfactual, so that's a pointless comment.

A pointless comment that ignores how much harder it could have been for the US without Iran actively giving so much help in the fight against the Taliban.
0
reply
Palmyra
Badges: 17
#27
Report 5 days ago
#27
(Original post by Molseh)
You mean like the pointless comments on how much aid Iran provided without any actual sources?
https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/tim...pter-title-0-8

https://www.mepc.org/us-iran-engagem...gh-afghanistan

etc
reply
Molseh
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#28
Report 5 days ago
#28
No quantitative measure on their assistance to the invasion there, just some minor assistance that could have been provided elsewhere. Well googled though.
The fact is that as soon as Iran realised they wouldn't be getting a favourable government in power in Afghanistan they joined the opposition and were a massive reason for the drawn out conflict... if you call that instrumental in defeating and preventing (that failed) the Taliban in Afghanistan then . . .
Last edited by Molseh; 5 days ago
0
reply
Palmyra
Badges: 17
#29
Report 5 days ago
#29
(Original post by Molseh)
No quantitative measure on their assistance to the invasion there, just some minor assistance that could have been provided elsewhere. Well googled though.
First you want "actual sources", now you want a "quantitative measure" of Iran's assistance (how shall I quantify shared intelligence and offers to lend Iranian airspace?).

Let me just go ask Khamenei how much they spent on assisting the US in Afghanistan. Would you like the figures in USD or EUR?
reply
Palmyra
Badges: 17
#30
Report 5 days ago
#30
(Original post by Molseh)
Iranian's were involved in training and supplying the Taliban Insurgents in Helmand - I know that for a fact. No allegedly about it.
But, but, where's your quantitative evidence???
reply
Molseh
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#31
Report 5 days ago
#31
Would offer some if I could.
(Original post by Palmyra)
But, but, where's your quantitative evidence???
All I see in your links are anecdotes of Iranian assistance - which was beneficial, I never argued that. Was it instrumental? absolutely not. Was their interference post invasion a massive detriment to the long term defeat of the Taliban? In my experiences, absolutely.
(Original post by Palmyra)
First you want "actual sources", now you want a "quantitative measure" of Iran's assistance (how shall I quantify shared intelligence and offers to lend Iranian airspace?).

Let me just go ask Khamenei how much they spent on assisting the US in Afghanistan. Would you like the figures in USD or EUR?
Last edited by Molseh; 5 days ago
0
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#32
Report Thread starter 5 days ago
#32
(Original post by Molseh)
Calm down pal, you are rambling.

The Taliban gained US weaponry due to ANA/ANP incompetence and defeats. Same way ISIS were driving around in Humvees in Iraq up until recently.
Iranian's were involved in training and supplying the Taliban Insurgents in Helmand - I know that for a fact. No allegedly about it.
If you can’t read that’s not my problem old chap.

Ahaha nil point for you. The Taliban and AQ were armed, funded and trained along with various other groups by the CIA to fight the soviets.

Yeah unfortunately you are a nobody on an online forum so unless you can put up for your allegations don’t try and claim them as fact.

But, to humour you, so what if they are arming and training them? Unless you know nothing of the local politics there, not to mention geopolitics writ large, there’s no reason to be either surprised and childishly outraged about it.

If you have any original or even mildly inciteful comments to make about this which aren’t opinions of dubious providence now would be the time to posit them. As, unfortunately for you, palmyra and myself have variously outlined quite plainly why your opinions are simply wrong.
Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
0
reply
Molseh
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#33
Report 5 days ago
#33
You two are completely mental quasi-socialists. Enjoy your echo chamber.
2
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#34
Report Thread starter 5 days ago
#34
(Original post by Palmyra)
First you want "actual sources", now you want a "quantitative measure" of Iran's assistance (how shall I quantify shared intelligence and offers to lend Iranian airspace?).

Let me just go ask Khamenei how much they spent on assisting the US in Afghanistan. Would you like the figures in USD or EUR?
You're debating some politically ignorant dolt im afraid chap, you'd have better luck debating the wind.
(Original post by Molseh)
You two are completely mental quasi-socialists. Enjoy your echo chamber.
So in essence you admit you havent a clue what you're talking about ?
0
reply
Molseh
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#35
Report 5 days ago
#35
I never got into the politics of it if you could actually read. I was making a statement about the lack of importance Iran involvement had from a military perspective.

I simply stated that Iran's support in 2001 was not Instrumental to success, added to the fact that they were actively a hindrance in the years after the invasion your point was inaccurate. You both were too busy trying to focus on politics instead of accurately reading my point and making a coherent argument back.
My source was I was on the ground there, the details therefore are as I said bound by my signing of the Official Secrets Act as part of my employment.

This is my last post here, so you two can toss each other off in your threads without any other opinions. Enjoy.
1
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#36
Report Thread starter 5 days ago
#36
(Original post by Molseh)
I never got into the politics of it if you could actually read. I was making a statement about the lack of importance Iran involvement had from a military perspective.

I simply stated that Iran's support in 2001 was not Instrumental to success, added to the fact that they were actively a hindrance in the years after the invasion your point was inaccurate. You both were too busy trying to focus on politics instead of accurately reading my point and making a coherent argument back.
My source was I was on the ground there, the details therefore are as I said bound by my signing of the Official Secrets Act as part of my employment.

This is my last post here, so you two can toss each other off in your threads without any other opinions. Enjoy.
Are you done demonstrating your complete and utter ignorance on this topic yet?
Not to mention i rather doubt your specious claim to have had any "source" let alone being bound by the OSA. Such claims do nothing but demonstrate your childish grasp of the subject that you have to resort to such risible lies.
0
reply
Molseh
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#37
Report 5 days ago
#37
Ok pal, I made it all up to annoy some whack job lefty on the internet :cool:
(Original post by Napp)
Are you done demonstrating your complete and utter ignorance on this topic yet?
Not to mention i rather doubt your specious claim to have had any "source" let alone being bound by the OSA. Such claims do nothing but demonstrate your childish grasp of the subject that you have to resort to such risible lies.
0
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#38
Report Thread starter 5 days ago
#38
(Original post by Molseh)
Ok pal, I made it all up to annoy some whack job lefty on the internet :cool:
Cool story kiddo :lol:
0
reply
Just my opinion
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#39
Report 5 days ago
#39
(Original post by Napp)
Now this is an interesting one as whether or not you like Iran or the IRGC we should all be in agreement this move was one of the dumbest that orange tosspot could have made vis-a-vis Iran. Let me explain.
As I said, whether or not you like these people, designating them a terror group has manifold 3rd order effects and i'll detail them here;
1) Designating a countries armed forces a terror group sets a rather bad precedent as by all rights (whether you like it or not) A LOT of countries can now return the favour to America and under this precedent can kill and maim them willy nilly. This is also ignoring the fact the IRGC, whilst guilty of many questionable activities, in no way meet the definition of terrorism. Yes, it is true that terrorism doesnt technically have a definition but this simply further dilutes the term to being abjectly meaningless.
2) Iran is not Syria, Iraq or any of the other tin pot countries America beat up (and got kicked by) it has extensive influence across the region, and to a lesser degree, the world. It can make Americans lives bloody miserable in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and most other ME countries. ... also possibly in N/S America as well.
3)Leading on from p2, Iran was instrumental in helping America in Afghanistan and IRaq [without their assistance it would have been a lot worse for them - by designating Iran as a terror group [this is effectively what theyre doing] they are empowering the hard liners to act without any restraint. They know that America cant invade them after iraq and are free to reap merry mayhem.
4) the only people this benefits are the right in Tehran, not only has trump ruined the progressives chances with his terrorizing of iran economically and diplomatically (not to mention spreading mendacious lies) but he is doing his best to turn Iran from an ambivalent country into one of die hard radicals who will seek to hurt America, her allies and her interests.
5) last, but not least, as I imagine the quasi-fascists bibi and MBS had a hand in this it could well end up harming Americas dubious friends. Not only are both countries within range of Iranian IRBM's but Israel is well within range of the tens of thousands of advanced missiles from Lebanon which (despite iron dome and davids sling) will reap serious carnage on Israeli cities - the same goes for KSA's oil fields. Plus such actions are likely to intice Iran into restarting her nuclear ambitions, which despite many stupid people believing them to exist, have not since 2003.

With all things considered this is a serious dumb decision by a half-wit president and his acolytes who are themselves mentally sub-par, religious fanatics or zionist loons (ironically enough only so that Israel will burn at the end of days when Christ comes again) ... its a fun bunch of people in power right?

But by all means if you disagree with my assessment do comment


https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/04/11...o-strike-back/
Yeah well, that's just like, your opinion man.🤔
1
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#40
Report Thread starter 5 days ago
#40
(Original post by Just my opinion)
Yeah well, that's just like, your opinion man.🤔
Indeed it is, however it’s an informed opinion back up by 2 reputable sources.
Have you got anything to even remotely hint to the contrary? Especially given even the USSC concurs with me on this.
Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Have you registered to vote?

Yes! (314)
37.74%
No - but I will (64)
7.69%
No - I don't want to (62)
7.45%
No - I can't vote (<18, not in UK, etc) (392)
47.12%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise