Iran's New Conditions to End the War..

...now Iran has a tollbooth in the Strait of Hormuz... Originally Posted by pxmcc

Might oughtta check the International 12 mile rule and how it applies to a 21 mile wide channel bordering other countries.

...ya, we're gonna need those 10,000 troops. shit is fixin to get real.. Originally Posted by pxmcc

Depends on your objective. You decide:

A) Retain the ability of a new regime for the newly freed Iranian population to be able to fund their new found freedom: Might well needs boots to protect it, along with some fancy-schmancy ground based technologies to keep the Straight open.

B) A couple of B52s could level it in under an hour, thus thwarting all of the above. I think I would call it the Futt-Buck 'em approach.

USA is a net exporter of oil.
So the stuff ain't coming here, but it is going to Europe and Asia.
Besides, we gots us a side piece with Venezuela. Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

The U.S. is still a net importer of raw crude oil itself, as its refineries import heavy, high-sulfur crude, despite exporting more products in total.

Venezuela oil is garbage, like tar, super heavy crude that won't flow through pipelines. It has to be mixed with lighter oils to be transported. Expensive and not that high of volume.

if i was to get indicted in the Hague for war crimes, i'd much prefer explaining seizing Kharg Island than explaining taking down Iran's entire electric grid..

i'm not saying taking Kharg Island isn't a war crime; it might be, i'm not sure, but far more defensible than Trump's idea of bombing all of Iran's civilian power stations. instead of postponing that op for 10 days, he should postpone it indefinitely..

the irony of all of this is that the U.S. is currently in a worse position than before the first bomb was dropped on Iran. Trump got overconfident and greedy after his successful Venezuela op, and that is the kiss of death. for one thing, Iran is no Venezuela..

i learned that lesson-getting overconfident and greedy-the hard way shooting dice at the casino, with a 100k bankroll and 150k in my rails lol..

as soon as you think you're all that, you're fucked..

and right now, to an extent, unfortunately, we're all kinda fucked lol. thanks, Trump! Originally Posted by pxmcc

No it would not be a war crime (still waiting for Bush and Cheney to be arrested for "war crimes" like several people kept claiming). Funny how everything the USA (or Israel) does gets called a "war crime" but nothing the enemy ever does even gets brought up. Despite it being much worse than taking out a power grid.

No it would not be a war crime (still waiting for Bush and Cheney to be arrested for "war crimes" like several people kept claiming). Funny how everything the USA (or Israel) does gets called a "war crime" but nothing the enemy ever does even gets brought up. Despite it being much worse than taking out a power grid. Originally Posted by Lantern2814

It definitely is a war crime to attack a civilian operation, on several levels. There have been about 90 strikes on the island targeting military targets...

• Attack on Objects Indispensable to the Survival of the Civilian Population
• Failure to Protect the Civilian Population
• Widespread and Severe Environmental Damage
• Illegal Seizure of State Assets
• Failure to Provide for the Occupied Population (yes we would have the responsibility to feed and house the civilians on that island)
  

i found a very good article about how the U. S. could secure the Strait of Hormuz. not at all straightforward.

https://theconversation.com/why-hasn...-hormuz-279224

Seizing Kharg Island which is mostly civilian oil workers is going to be a war crime... Originally Posted by royamcr

Seizing the island would be viewed as an unlawful act of aggression in violation of the UN Charter, and... blah, blah, blah...

Targeting it solely to bankrupt the Iranian government or as economic leverage constitutes a war crime... Originally Posted by royamcr

Thanks for clarifying that for everyone, royamcr!

Since you're the self-proclaimed resident eccie expert on what is or is not a "war crime" - please let us know if this one qualifies:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMIA_bombing

I'm guessing you will say no, since Iran and Argentina were not formally at war back in 1994 when the atrocity occurred.

The Iran regime killed 30,000 or more of its own people recently. Where does that fall under war crimes ?

The Iran regime killed 30,000 or more of its own people recently. Where does that fall under war crimes ? Originally Posted by VitaMan

+1

Royamcr is too obsessed right now with warning us against trying to "bankrupt" the Iranians or pursue any kind of "economic leverage" against them. By golly, that would be a fucking war crime!

But hey, if the mullahs unleash the IRGC and the Basij to slaughter 30,000+ of their own people? No biggie! That one doesn't even register on royamcr's moral compass!

The Iran regime killed 30,000 or more of its own people recently. Where does that fall under war crimes ? Originally Posted by VitaMan

Actually this is an example of state terrorism or a violation of human rights. But I’m really just nitpicking.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_terrorism

State terrorism is terrorism conducted by a state against its own citizens or another state's citizens. It contrasts with state-sponsored terrorism, in which a violent non-state actor commits acts of terrorism under the sponsorship of a state.

Governments that are accused of using state terrorism may justify their actions as efforts to combat internal dissent, suppress insurgencies, or maintain national security, often framing their actions within the context of counterterrorism or counterinsurgency. Accused actions of state terrorism are normally also criticised as severe violations of human rights and international law.

Historically, governments have been accused of using state terrorism in various settings. The exact definition and scope of state terrorism remain controversial, as some scholars and governments argue that terrorism is a tool used exclusively by non-state actors, while others maintain that state-directed violence intended to terrorize civilian populations should also be classified as terrorism.

That's the point lol. The Baghdad Bobs and Tehran Teds of the world are NEVER in a "surrendering mood".

Iranians aren't in control of the Strait, and neither are we. In coming weeks, Hormuz will become increasingly militarized, with new strategies developed and tested to attack and defend all shipping using drones, mines, etc. I would be placing my bets on the folks who are determined to reopen it.

I would also be surprised if Trump doesn't order an assault on Kharg Island soon. Once we deprive Tehran Ted of $200 million a day in oil export revenues, he'll really start squealing! Originally Posted by lustylad

Tehran Ted, as you describe, sure seems to be doing well on below the poverty line income. Sure is costing us a bundle, along with the rest of the world, for our actions.

Iran must have never heard of the term


Unconditional Surrender


We the people of the United States demand that Iran agree to unconditional surrender or face "prompt and utter destruction". Originally Posted by CG2014

Well that just rips out a bit of the Constitution.

Who said anything about destroying it? The point is to keep it viable while cutting off the mullahs' main source of income. Keep the facility intact for a future civilized & well-behaved pro-Western regime, if one should emerge in Tehran.

Are YOU thinking this through? It makes zero sense to let Iran continue to have access to $200 million in daily revenues while we're at war with them. They already have a 47-year history of diverting their oil income for nefarious purposes such as centrifuges, domestic repression, and foreign terrorism, instead of using it to improve the lot of the average Iranian. Time to turn off the spigot. Originally Posted by lustylad

Hmmm. Could you list the specific objectives of said war? I don't think any were communicated between the WH and JCoS.

Iran's list of demands gets egg on Trump's face. from a news conference he gave (linked in the article below):

"And Trump has said that this war has killed so many Iranian leaders that there is no one he can negotiate with — yet he said Monday that the administration has held 'very, very strong talks” and that 'we have major points of agreement.' "

https://www.ms.now/opinion/trump-ira...-spin-strategy

it's pretty obvious from both countries' list of demands that there are basically no points of agreement lol..

so ya, once again, Trump is full of it. quite the shocker, huh..

a nation ruled by mullahs and ayatollahs is more reliably truthful and believable than the POTUS. whiskey tango foxtrot..

maybe Trump was actually negotiating with himself. those dialogues can get pretty intense. understandable that he got confused.. Originally Posted by pxmcc

*If* he was correct in that some tankers were allowed through and the Iranian govt. is also true in stating no talks are happening, it would seem that another party is at play here. *I* would think it is one motivated by profit. That is someone donny would love to deal with.

Technically, you might be somewhat correct, as that's about where the pResident Autopen regime had driven it to. Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

Yeah, donny of the 1600 pardons is doing good on that.

Take control of Kharg Island and cut off the money supply and the mullahs will roll over fairly quickly. It's a simple concept really. Originally Posted by Lantern2814

That why didn't dummy donny do that from the start?!

... Agreed... And SHUT OFF Iran's power.
No lights - no electricity - no cellular phones - NO NOTHING!

... Just Iran's "leaders" and the citizenry who hates them
ALL in the dark.

Now THAT will be a new condition for Iran to END the War.

##### Salty Originally Posted by Salty Again

The mullahs are quite good doing that on their own. Just look at the past couple of uprising quashed.

if i was to get indicted in the Hague for war crimes, i'd much prefer explaining seizing Kharg Island than explaining taking down Iran's entire electric grid..

i'm not saying taking Kharg Island isn't a war crime; it might be, i'm not sure, but far more defensible than Trump's idea of bombing all of Iran's civilian power stations. instead of postponing that op for 10 days, he should postpone it indefinitely..

the irony of all of this is that the U.S. is currently in a worse position than before the first bomb was dropped on Iran. Trump got overconfident and greedy after his successful Venezuela op, and that is the kiss of death. for one thing, Iran is no Venezuela..

i learned that lesson-getting overconfident and greedy-the hard way shooting dice at the casino, with a 100k bankroll and 150k in my rails lol..

as soon as you think you're all that, you're fucked..

and right now, to an extent, unfortunately, we're all kinda fucked lol. thanks, Trump! Originally Posted by pxmcc

Yeah. To think this stuff didn't happen when Obama has a deal with the Iranians. Took donny to say that was a bad deal, tear it up, bomb the beejeebers out of the place and than demand it goes back to when it was like with Obama.

Maggies are funny.

USA is a net exporter of oil.
So the stuff ain't coming here, but it is going to Europe and Asia.
Besides, we gots us a side piece with Venezuela. Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

You'd figure we'd be having petrol at 99 cents than. Wonder why the big grift?

99 cents-ish, but plus taxes. ya we hate them but taxes are still a thing..

Tehran Ted, as you describe, sure seems to be doing well on below the poverty line income. Sure is costing us a bundle, along with the rest of the world, for our actions.



Well that just rips out a bit of the Constitution.



Hmmm. Could you list the specific objectives of said war? I don't think any were communicated between the WH and JCoS.



*If* he was correct in that some tankers were allowed through and the Iranian govt. is also true in stating no talks are happening, it would seem that another party is at play here. *I* would think it is one motivated by profit. That is someone donny would love to deal with.



Yeah, donny of the 1600 pardons is doing good on that.





That why didn't dummy donny do that from the start?!



The mullahs are quite good doing that on their own. Just look at the past couple of uprising quashed.



Yeah. To think this stuff didn't happen when Obama has a deal with the Iranians. Took donny to say that was a bad deal, tear it up, bomb the beejeebers out of the place and than demand it goes back to when it was like with Obama.

Maggies are funny.



You'd figure we'd be having petrol at 99 cents than. Wonder why the big grift? Originally Posted by Precious_b

+1

Royamcr is too obsessed right now with warning us against trying to "bankrupt" the Iranians or pursue any kind of "economic leverage" against them. By golly, that would be a fucking war crime!

But hey, if the mullahs unleash the IRGC and the Basij to slaughter 30,000+ of their own people? No biggie! That one doesn't even register on royamcr's moral compass! Originally Posted by lustylad

Makes a difference that we are at war with Iran, and terrorism. Both are crimes in a sense, but a deliberate war crime(s) committed by us puts us down to their level. We aren't a terror state, I think...

^^hopefully..

Makes a difference that we are at war with Iran, and terrorism. Both are crimes in a sense, but a deliberate war crime(s) committed by us puts us down to their level. We aren't a terror state, I think... Originally Posted by royamcr

So in your (warped) little mind those who fight terrorism are as evil as the terrorists?

You have issues.

Hmmm. Could you list the specific objectives of said war? I don't think any were communicated between the WH and JCoS. Originally Posted by Precious_b

Those objectives were amply communicated from Day One. Perhaps you should change, or at least broaden, your news sources.

FOUR KEY OBJECTIVES:

1. Destroying Iran's missile capabilities.

2. Knocking off Iran's navy.

3. Ensuring Iran can never obtain a nuclear weapon.

4. Ensuring the Iranian regime cannot arm, fund and direct terrorist armies outside their borders.

Trump's 4 objectives in Iran explained https://share.google/ptBAYtlMeVM9IUKOk