Quantcast
Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
    1. Welcome to GTAForums!

    1. GTANet.com

    2. GTANet 20th Anniversary

    1. GTA Online

      1. The Cayo Perico Heist
      2. Find Lobbies & Players
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Vehicles
      5. Content Creator
      6. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Online

      1. Frontier Pursuits
      2. Find Lobbies & Outlaws
      3. Help & Support
    3. Crews

    1. Red Dead Redemption 2

      1. PC
      2. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Redemption

    1. Grand Theft Auto Series

      1. St. Andrews Cathedral
    2. GTA VI

    3. GTA V

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
    4. GTA IV

      1. The Lost and Damned
      2. The Ballad of Gay Tony
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Help & Support
    5. GTA San Andreas

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
    6. GTA Vice City

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
    7. GTA III

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
    8. Portable Games

      1. GTA Chinatown Wars
      2. GTA Vice City Stories
      3. GTA Liberty City Stories
    9. Top-Down Games

      1. GTA Advance
      2. GTA 2
      3. GTA
    1. GTA Mods

      1. GTA V
      2. GTA IV
      3. GTA III, VC & SA
      4. Tutorials
    2. Red Dead Mods

      1. Documentation
    3. Mod Showroom

      1. Scripts & Plugins
      2. Maps
      3. Total Conversions
      4. Vehicles
      5. Textures
      6. Characters
      7. Tools
      8. Other
      9. Workshop
    4. Featured Mods

      1. Design Your Own Mission
      2. OpenIV
      3. GTA: Underground
      4. GTA: Liberty City
      5. GTA: State of Liberty
    1. Rockstar Games

    2. Rockstar Collectors

    1. Off-Topic

      1. General Chat
      2. Gaming
      3. Technology
      4. Movies & TV
      5. Music
      6. Sports
      7. Vehicles
    2. Expression

      1. Graphics / Visual Arts
      2. GFX Requests & Tutorials
      3. Writers' Discussion
      4. Debates & Discussion
    1. Announcements

    2. Support

      1. Court House
    3. Suggestions

Middle Eastern Conflict [General]


Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, ilovebender.com said:

Iran violated Iraqi sovereignty anyway when they propped up this puppet government in Iraq to serve Iran. 

Imagine being so deluded and backwards in your thinking that Iran being in Iraq specifically at Iraq's own behest is an invasion of Iraqi sovereignty.

 

Then imagine saying this while bloviating on end in several other topics about how individual countries should have the right to do what they please without getting pushed around by bigger ones.

 

As always Benalicious, your stunted thinking is entertaining. As far as D&D goes you are the intellectual equivalent of a wet fart in an elevator.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Raavi said:

 

Please point me to the part of the resolution that instituted the travel ban where it states that violation makes him fair game to be blown to smithereens by drone?

 

 

Ah yes the horrible attack that consisted of rioting outside the embassy gates and causing a grand total of 0 casualties. Please tell me how this constitutes an imminent/ongoing armed attack?

 

It's like talking to a brick wall.

 

No matter what happens, America = wrong; That's called prejudiced.

The fact that you're willing to side with f*cking Iran's regime in Iraq to defy America proves you're a moron.

You were just shown how America defended itself under international law in the region.

I mean, are all you Remainers born hating America with your pro EU ways or what?

I'm glad you're a Remainer and a supporter of Iran, because it shows me you're blind and full of hatred for freedom.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Pesos said:

The fact that your only retort here is, "omg you hate America!?!?!" proves you're a moron.

No, the fact that your forum flag isn't a burning American flag means you're a liar.

 

 

Tell me, why do you hate America?

 

Anyone willing to justify the EU against America or justify Iran's targeting of America and America's defense as wrong, is a moron.

 

Why don't you educate yourself first instead of blindly siding against America without knowing all the facts about the EU or Iran.

Edited by ilovebender.com
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, ilovebender.com said:

Tell me, why do you hate America?

You are, without a shadow or question of a doubt, the stupidest person who has ever posted in D&D.

 

4 minutes ago, ilovebender.com said:

Why don't you educate yourself

Says quite literally the most ignorant man on the forum.

 

Maybe come back when you can do something other than reciting Fox News headlines and accusing anyone who disagrees with you of hating America. 

 

Your absence of critical thinking endless cheerleading of hugely harmful (to Western interests and potentially your own safety and security) events is both embarrassing and hilarious. Truly an absolute turkey, voting endlessly for Christmas.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Critiquing something != hating something. Once again, it has to be said. I mean personally, I wouldn't potentially be moving to a country I hate ;)

 

The only person who needs an education is you. Every single thread you've participated in thus far, you've demonstrated just how completely clueless you are; be it not knowing how your own government works, how the EU works, what various pieces of legislation in the EU you take issue with actually do and now you can add the Middle East and international law to the lengthy list of things you've proven to know f*ck all about. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Pesos said:

The only person who needs an education is you. Every single thread you've participated in thus far, you've demonstrated just how completely clueless you are; be it not knowing how your own government works, how the EU works, what various pieces of legislation in the EU you take issue with actually do and now you can add the Middle East and international law to the lengthy list of things you've proven to know f*ck all about. 

You always, always, side against America, why is that?

Whenever someone criticises Iran for targeting America in Iraq, you're all

"It was illegal for America to defend themselves from Iran!"

Or when Brexit wants UK to be close to America and diverge from the EU, you're all like

"America have maggots in their OJ."

 

 

Come back when you're willing to see America as valid.

16 minutes ago, Pesos said:

Critiquing something != hating something. Once again, it has to be said. I mean personally, I wouldn't potentially be moving to a country I hate ;)

Oh please, one embassy would take one look at your facebook and there is no way you're going to America legally.

You ain't moving to America.

How do you plan to go America? Walk up through Mexico?!

 

This is @Pesos going to America. ;)

 

Edited by ilovebender.com
Link to post
Share on other sites

And yet, you continue to denigrate yourself yet further. You must truly have no shame or self respect. Or literally zero self awareness.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, sivispacem said:

And yet, you continue to denigrate yourself yet further. You must truly have no shame or self respect. Or literally zero self awareness.

We all know Iran shouldn't be controlling Iraq with militia, and we all know the commander was under a UN travel ban prohibiting him from leaving Iran when he was killed in Iraq after his people attacked American interest.

So cut the 'I think America can't defend itself crap' because we all know who attacked who and who responded to who, where, and why and how that was legal under international law to defend yourself against an attack.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, sivispacem said:

And yet, you continue to denigrate yourself yet further. You must truly have no shame or self respect. Or literally zero self awareness.

Proof that Brexiters love to gloat that they won, but they suddenly go all 'snowflake,' when they try to work out what the actual prize is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

When the UN rules America didn't unlawfully kill him and acted in self defense (and they will), then will you accept you were wrong? @Pesos

Why isn't there a rush to condemn America outside of Iran?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ilovebender.com said:

When the UN rules America didn't unlawfully kill him and acted in self defense (and they will), then will you accept you were wrong? @Pesos

 

Prove, without a shadow of a doubt they will.

 

Even Boris has made it clear to Trump that by targeting '52 cultural sites' within Iran, he's pushing international law, if he hits them he'll be in front of the ICC in the Hague for War Crimes.

 

1 minute ago, ilovebender.com said:

 

Why isn't there a rush to condemn America outside of Iran?

The rest of the world ain't exactly cheering him for doing it either....

 

No one, bar Trump, wants a war.  Most understand what the price of invading Iran really will be.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, ilovebender.com said:

When the UN rules America didn't unlawfully kill him and acted in self defense (and they will), then will you accept you were wrong? @Pesos

 

 

^ From the UN Special Rapporteur on extra-judicial killings.

Link to post
Share on other sites

How was it illegal to kill him given what he did (arrange attacks against America), where he did it (in Iraq a violation of the UN travel ban) and why he did it (because he was working to protect Iranian interest in the region). America were defending American interest in the region, case closed @Uncle Sikee Atric

Link to post
Share on other sites

Free Enterprise....  As in, what Trump preaches?

God, you're an almighty Moron!  The world has more than one business model to rely on.

 

-----

 

As for your reasoning about his killing, well done for falling into the trap, Moron!

 

Iran has played a blinder and shown the rest of the world what a fool Trump is.  To them, that was worth the cost of Soleimani's assassination.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, ilovebender.com said:

How was it illegal to kill him given what he did 

Because the limitations of when preemptive military action can be legally justified are exceptionally stringent. Something that has been explained to you multiple times now.

 

The US' own military doctrine expressly forbids targeted killings of military and political figures in this manner:

 

31. Assassination and Outlawry

It is especially forbidden * * * to kill or wound treacherously individuals belonging to the hostile nation or army.

 

This article is construed as prohibiting assassination, proscription, or outlawry of an enemy, or putting a price upon an enemy's head, as well as offering a reward for an enemy "dead or alive". It does not, however, preclude attacks on individual soldiers or officers of the enemy whether in the zone of hostilities, occupied territory, or elsewhere.

 

Where it has been exercised in the past, the US justification has been that the targets are not representatives of a state (either political or military) and therefore are not afforded the protections as combatants. Hard to argue that's the case in this instance given the guy is, or was, the most senior military officer of the Iranian state.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Even the House Foreign Affairs Committee is reminding him of the facts :

81479621_10158060936849680_8208536612737

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Uncle Sikee Atric said:

Free Enterprise....  As in, what Trump preaches?

God, you're an almighty Moron!  The world has more than one business model to rely on.

I'm arguing that the Iranian backed militia targeting America (or anyone for that matter) make for a very hostile business environment; even more hostile than Corbyn's Britain, even more hostile than Maduro's Venezuela; and when you target foreign investment in this manner of targeted attacks, you deserve any reprisals given they're just defending themselves.  

 

He shouldn't have been in Iraq for starters given his travel ban imposed on to him by the UN forbidding his travel out of Iran, and he certainly shouldn't have actively sought to rage war on foreign interests in the region.

So Iran and America have a common enemy called ISIS and he was good at protecting Iran from ISIS, doesn't mean he was right to attack American interest now does it?

America was right to rid the world of this person.

 

Edited by ilovebender.com
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ilovebender.com said:

I'm arguing that the Iranian backed militia targeting America (or anyone for that matter) make for a very hostile business environment; even more hostile than Corbyn's Britain, even more hostile than Maduro's Venezuela; and when you target foreign investment in this manner of targeted attacks, you deserve any reprisals given they're just defending themselves.  

 

So you're happy to argue a target was assassinated, because it's bad for business, not for civilians, foreign governments or even the stability of the entire Middle East, business....

 

Ronald is so proud of you, ahead of his new branch opening in Tehran :

 

giphy.gif

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Uncle Sikee Atric said:

 

So you're happy to argue a target was assassinated, because it's bad for business, not for civilians, foreign governments or even the stability of the entire Middle East, business....

 

Ronald is so proud of you, ahead of his new branch opening in Tehran :

 

giphy.gif

 

 

How do you know he wasn't planning to kill more Americans like that American contractor killed by his militia?

You're not in a position to confirm nor deny that American intelligence feared for American lives working in Iraq because of this guy.

The only thing America have to be sorry for is that they never killed him sooner.

 

Not 1, but 2 former presidents decided against killing this guy, Donald delivers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ilovebender.com said:

How do you know he wasn't planning to kill more Americans like that American contractor killed by his militia?

You're not in a position to confirm nor deny that American intelligence feared for American lives working in Iraq because of this guy.

 

You can't prove he was planning to kill anyone either!

So you've just confirmed the evidence he was assassinated for was purely circumstantial.  Doesn't look good for Trump does it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Uncle Sikee Atric said:

 

You can't prove he was planning to kill anyone either!

So you've just confirmed the evidence he was assassinated for was purely circumstantial.  Doesn't look good for Trump does it?

Equally, you can't confirm he wasn't planning to kill anyone, and, if America choose to declassify their intelligence on the matter, then we'd know.

You can't just assume guilt because 'Murica! - that's just ignorant, you might have to give the Americans the benefit of the doubt here until they're asked to prove it (and I'm sure someone somewhere will ask for this proof to justify this self defense claim) so don't worry about that.

Edited by ilovebender.com
Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, ilovebender.com said:

I'm arguing that the Iranian backed militia targeting America

Which they aren't, by the way- targeting US interests abroad is, legally speaking, not the same as targeting the US proper.

 

36 minutes ago, ilovebender.com said:

He shouldn't have been in Iraq for starters 

It has been suggested- and I have not seen the originating source so cannot comment on its validity first hand- that he was in Iraq at the request of the United States.

 

39 minutes ago, ilovebender.com said:

America was right to rid the world of this person.

Taking him as an individual and entirely in isolation, I don't think too many people outside of Iran are going to shed tears at his death. But events like this don't happen in isolation, and their repercussions are often felt decades or even centuries into the future. 

 

Your issue is that you falsely conflate criticism of the legality of the act, concerns about it's repercussions and the wider impact, with favouring Iran. This is terminally stupid as an approach, even putting aside your complete lack of any understanding of regional geopolitics.

 

22 minutes ago, ilovebender.com said:

Equally, you can't confirm he wasn't planning to kill anyone

He doesn't need to; the burden of proof is on you to justify the action with evidence, not on him to prove a negative. That's logic 201; a class you clearly never enrolled in.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, sivispacem said:

 

 

He doesn't need to; the burden of proof is on you to justify the action with evidence, not on him to prove a negative. That's logic 201; a class you clearly never enrolled in.

I'm not America, I don't have to prove sh*t, you mean, the burden is on America.

And if they choose to declassify their intelligence that resulted into the action they took, then will you be satisfied if they can prove American lives were in danger because of this commander or his militia?

Edited by ilovebender.com
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, ilovebender.com said:

I'm not America, I don't have to prove sh*t

Actually, as you've asserted the killing was justified, you do.

 

12 minutes ago, ilovebender.com said:

if they choose to declassify their intelligence that resulted into the action they took, then will you be satisfied if they can prove American lives were in danger 

If it's unequivocal, then yes absolutely...but we already know it isn't because people actually involved in decision making within the intelligence community have described the evidentiary basis as "threadbare".

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Svip said:

Wasn't he travelling with a high commander in the Iraqi military?  Seems like he was invited.

According to the Iraqi prime minister, he was due to meet with him for the purposes of de-escalating tensions with Saudi Arabia.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, sivispacem said:

Actually, as you've asserted the killing was justified, you do...

When America disclose that information.

 

 

Initially, Pompeo also indicated that the strike had thwarted an “imminent” attack in the region, but declined to detail the intelligence on which he based his statement.

Special Representative for Iran, Brian H. Hook, told Al Arabiya that he had seen “all of the intelligence” on the action and suggested that “American personnel and facilities in Lebanon, Iraq, Syria and beyond” were the planned targets.

Suleimani "was actively developing plans to attack American diplomats and service members in Iraq and throughout the region,” added a Pentagon statement, which called the strike a “decisive defensive” action aimed at deterring future Iranian attacks.

Adm. Isoroku Yamamoto, Imperial Japanese Navy (1884-1943), an official portrait, by Shugaku Homma, 1943. (U.S. Naval History and Heritage Command)

Adm. Isoroku Yamamoto, Imperial Japanese Navy (1884-1943), an official portrait, by Shugaku Homma, 1943. (U.S. Naval History and Heritage Command)

Targeting enemy commanders is lawful and we’ve done it before

On April 18, 1943, the United States targeted and destroyed the aircraft carrying Adm. Isoroku Yamamoto, the architect of the attack on Pearl Harbor and the commander of Combined Fleet of the Imperial Japanese Navy, while it was preparing to land at Balalae Airfield on Bougainville in the Solomon Islands.

Admirals Chester W. Nimitz and William F. Halsey, Jr. — acting on decoded intercepts of Yamamoto’s planned itinerary, which had been read by Navy code breakers — authorized a joint force strike, led by long range Army Air Force P-38 Lightnings, part of AirSlos (Air Forces, Solomons), and commanded by Adm. Marc A. Mitscher.

The fighters waited over water near Yamamoto’s destination and ambushed the landing Japanese transport bombers.

It is unclear if President Franklin D. Roosevelt authorized Operation Vengeance and there is no evidence trail pointing to his direct involvement.

https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-navy/2020/01/04/explainer-inside-the-lawful-killing-of-qassim-suleimani/

 

Edited by ilovebender.com
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • 3 Users Currently Viewing
    0 members, 0 Anonymous, 3 Guests

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using GTAForums.com, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.