When Our Dear Supreme Leader pulled out of the Iranian nuke deal I said then that the toads in his admin, the Neocons, are pushing all the buttons to a possible conflict, armed conflict, with Iran.
Trump is throwing new sanctions at Iran after the deal he did not like…..
Representatives from the nations that, along with the United States, signed on to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JPOA), are still trying desperately to salvage the agreement, which is on life support since the U.S. pulled out of it. The latest attempt concerns SWIFT, and Iranian access to it. SWIFT, officially the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication, is a secure messaging service that transmits millions of instructions per day to banks and other financial institutions. Among the many sanctions that Trump is re-imposing on November 5, in violation of an international agreement to which the U.S. is a signatory, one is to prevent these communications to and from Iran.
Does Trump have an Iran policy? Or is he just pushing the buttons for a new war?
Much indicates that the likely murder of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi will be transformative for Saudi-U.S. relations. But whether it will affect the one issue where Saudi pressure on the United States was the greatest—Iran—is unclear. The Iran strategy favored by Saudi Arabia and the Netanyahu government in Israel, and eagerly adopted by the White House, will likely lead to a military confrontation regardless of whether its assumptions about the status of Iran’s economy and political survivability are true or not.
The Trump administration’s pressure strategy on Iran assumes that the Islamic Republic is standing on its last leg. The White House believes a gentle nudge will cause its collapse in the next few months. This is a shaky assumption—one which makes the policy immensely risky for a simple reason: what if President Donald Trump and the Saudi Crown Prince are wrong? What if the Iranian theocracy survives, albeit far angrier and hostile than it was before? And what if the assumption is correct? Will the clerical rulers sit quietly as the United States, Saudi Arabia and Israel orchestrate their demise? History is riddled with examples where pressure has triggered confrontation rather than capitulation—even when the underlying assumption has been correct.
For the last 30 years Israel has had a plan to make Iran the aggressor…..fist it was their search for nukes….yes Iran has been chasing nukes for at least 30 years and so far they have nothing…..but now that Israel got the US to pull out of the Iranian nuke deal….they are looking at Iran in Iraq and accusing them of planning to attack from Iraqi soil……
Israeli Internal Security Minister Gilad Erdan said yesterday that Iran would launch attacks on Israel from Iraq, Israel Hayom reported.
Speaking at a conference hosted by the Jerusalem Institute for Strategic Studies, Erdan underscored the increasing military presence of Iran and its allies “along Israeli borders”, according to the Israeli newspaper.
He said that Iran had sponsored Hezbollah in the south of Lebanon “along the Israeli border”, stating that Hezbollah’s arsenal had grown to more than 150,000 missiles and rockets.
The extremist Israeli minister stressed that Iran maintains strong ties with Iraq and this could draw it into a potential war with Israel in the future.
Seriously? Israel will generate a threat if they cannot find one occurring naturally….it is almost pathetic to watch the poor bastards search for a reaso0n to be the aggressor.
When Trump replaced the different people with the uber Neocons like Pompeo and Bolton then the die has been cast……
In covering President Donald Trump’s recent pregnant comments about Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, The Wall Street Journal tucked away in its story an observation that hints at the president’s foreign policy direction. In an interview for CBS’s 60 Minutes, the president described Mattis as “sort of a Democrat if you want to know the truth” and suggested he wouldn’t be surprised if his military chief left his post soon. After calling him “a good guy” and saying the two “get along very well,” Trump added, “He may leave. I mean, at some point, everybody leaves…. That’s Washington.”
Actually that’s Trump. He demands total and utter loyalty from his people and gives none in return. In just his first 14 months as president, he hired three national security advisors, reflecting the unstable relationships he often has with his top aides. Following the 60 Minutes interview, Washington was of course abuzz with speculation about what all this might mean for Mattis’s fate and who might be the successor if Mattis were to quit or be fired. It was just the kind of fodder Washington loves—human drama revealing Trump’s legendary inconstancy amid prospective new turmoil in the capital.
Iran is in he cross hairs and Trump policies are showing the ammo he is using to rev up the weapons of war.