Let's face it Iran is indiscriminatly hitting Israeli civilians targets including schools using cluster bombs.....

[mids2019]

Iran is firing missiles into heavily populated Israeli towns and have abandoned the pretence of targeting anything military.....this is just pure terrorism and does make you think what would happen if Iran did manage to develop a nuclear weapon.

Just hoping more of the missile launch sites can be taken out and this terrorist regime falls.

Pertinent questions,

Maloney's bio : Maloney previously served as an external advisor to senior State Department officials on long-term issues related to Iran. Before joining Brookings, she served on the secretary of state's policy planning staff, as Middle East advisor for ExxonMobil Corporation, and director of the 2004 Council on Foreign Relations Task Force on U.S. policy toward Iran, chaired by former National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski and Defense Secretary Robert Gates.
https://www.wilsoncenter.org/person/suzanne-maloney

The ExxonMobil position is interesting, Big Oil, many of whom lobbied for the Iraq war in 2003 (remember Cheney and Halliburton) has been lobbying for similar change in Iran, there are a lot of opportunities to be "exploited". Iraq was a goldmine for some of these companies at the expense of Iraqis.

All think tanks serve the aims of whomever funds them, none are truly neutral. Remember the Brookings Institute authored the 2009 paper "Which path to Persia" of which Maloney was a contributer:

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/which-path-to-persia-options-for-a-new-american-strategy-toward-iran/

Huh ?

IMV Iran will feature as the largest state sponsor of terrorism if you do not include Russia on the list of state sponsors of terrorism.

That doesnt make me a supporter of the IRGC, it means I think the US should have included Russia on the list of states sponsoring terrorism. I resent any implication otherwise.

What more do you need? Your posts go for the player.

I think I agree we haven't seen outright support but we have seen a bit of ' they are not so bad as some others who we won't mention '.

I think quite a few don't realise quite how much influence the regime has had all over the region.

Where ?

Example please ?

The repeated flat earther name calling at the pp.

Is that another version of the 'if you don't support Trump in bombing Iran, you don't care about the people in Iran'?

No absolutely not.

I think everyone has been clear they care about the people of Iran.

I think some of us differ on whether the best thing for the people of Iran was to start bombing without a proper plan in place.

Or at least thats my position.

I doubt it. It’s what @dairydebrissaid. People can recognise the full extent of the IRGC on the region and the Iranian people separately to what should be done about it.

In many ways as we enter a quagmire this shows just how powerful Iran is without.nukes. I can't imagine what they would be like with

They could hold the world to ransom over the straight threaten to nuke anyone who uses it.take it over and charge vast prices !

Unfortunately I think we are in for a penny in for a penny in for a pound now.

Re no plan it Seems that perhaps along with the shock bombing they should have gone straight for the island and secured it and used that to keep the straight open

I was simply following your own 'logic' there. You made a straw man point instead of responsing to my earlier post. I then responded to that point. I wasn't trying to claim exact equivalence. You seem to have completely misunderstood my point.

I think they should have had a guaranteed group waiting in the wings for the people to get behind. I think ideally they should have had a hard and fast guarantee the army would support the new leadership. They certainly should have had a plan for the Strait. I initially hoped all this would be the case. I had hopes for Pahlavi. Now it just all looks like a spectacular SNAFU. I really hope I'm wrong.

Glad you finally agree on that.

It’s not ‘finally’. I’ve always thought that about posts on here.

People seem to get caught on the below, such as disproving how much terrorism Iran exports. You can be realistic about how brutal they are and make a case for what should happen next.

This whole argument is painful to read, of course there needs to be actual credible evidence of a country being a threat to another before a war is justified and it behooves us all to check our sources and their biases.

But also deciding whether you think an organisation is a threat to YOUR country before going to war and deciding it isn’t, is not the same thing as condoning the government there. Otherwise we’d have the U.K. interfering in many many countries outside Iran.

It doesn’t make you a supporter of the IRGC to not support the war in Iran or think the US and Israel are acting unlawfully.

I am not name calling anyone.

That poster said I was like a flat earther. And just by chance, flat earth debates are an interest of mine. I have watched many flat earth debates and been in lots of online ones myself. I am a glober, not a flerth.

So because I was "accused" of being like a flat earther, I added a bit of commentary when relevant about debate techniques they use. I directed those comments to nobody. They were just observations.

As I said upthread, debating flerths is a good exercise. Learn a lot about fallacies, debate styles etc. And the importance of evidence to support propositions.

It's a common thing flerths do by the way. When challenged to produce evidence for a claim made, and they can't produce said evidence, they often try lead the debate away from the subject into what eventually becomes a "he said she said" pile on thing. All while the Glober keeps asking... "about this evidence ?"

There is a threat from the IRGC. Even if people push back on biggest sponsor all are agreeing on major or the line below.

Yes I get you’ve enjoyed repeatedly questioning the pp. She’s answered. No one knows for certain who is the biggest exporter of terror. It could be Iran, or maybe not.

All your posts don’t change that uncertainty.

I does make you wonder why people are not more welcoming to those fleeing the IRCG and seeking asylum in the UK

Or why people back a party that pretty much stops women trying. I’ve always said the current system is male centric. Devise a better system.

Safe routes, but iirc you are not a fan of that.

But that wasn't my point as I am sure you know.

Not what we have which excludes women.

Allow me to use all caps...

IF IT IS AN UNCERAINTY THEN WHY STATE IT AS FACT !

I would actually go so far as to say it's not an uncertainty, it's plain untrue. In terms of the world outside of Israel anyway.

And it's not a case of enjoying anything. It's about debunking. Describing Iranians as wanting to do terror on the whole world more than likely puts Iranian refugees at risk. And I am sure there is nobody here against asylum for Iranians.