Iran-Israeli Conflict Thread
- Thread starter LaAguilaNegra
- Start date
The last remnants of bankster political power over China were purged in the early 2010s. They're still present in HK, notably the Sassoons, and have minority stakes in industrial conglomerates like CITIC but they're boxed in and surveilled. They did indeed build up a golem in China, but the cultural barriers and Chinese insularity eventually prevailed. This is a people that is very nationalistic with a ruling elite with deep cultural roots. You have had no real exposure to China, so your views are likely derived from grainy pictures of Mao with Rittenberg, Rosenfeld and Israel Epstein, and 15 year old pics of Chinese officials kissing the wall.
Russia is a different case, they are somewhere around where the US or say France were in the 50s or 60s, while Jewish presence was important, it wasn't anywhere near where it is today. Both JFK and Nixon fought them and ultimately lost. Putin is roughly where Nixon was, he is a Russian nationalist but also a very pragmatic, risk averse lawyer-bureaucrat.
The US still had some leeway under Bush Sr with WASPs like George Schulz who were still capable of putting Israel in its place, that fell by the wayside once the neocons took over under Dubya and engineered a second coup on America with the 9/11 false flag (the first coup was the JFK assassination, or if you want to go further back, the creation of the Fed). At the same time Jewish financiers like Kravis, Singer, Milken etc took over Wall Street and old money was gradually sidelined.
American industry has been gutted not so much by a grand geopolitical design, but by sheer greed, and also borderline hatred (and fear) for middle America. So American and European industry were stripped and squeezed out and labor outsourced to the Chinese golem.
This is a great capsule of that process, with the case study of Cabela's:
People like Singer, Ellison, Adelson have been running foreign policy for decades now, and their loyalty doesn't lie with the US. That is why the US has been fighting Iran on behalf of Israel, and on Israel's terms.
It's pretty naive to think, as you did above, that Israel isn't going to get tens of billions more on top of the tens of billions they've already got out of this operation.
Last edited:
When Trump rails about Spain not committing to spend 5% of its GDP on the military, he is not really concerned with Spanish security, the expectation is that the majority of that will go towards the US MIC. It's just protection money and the fee for pax Americana.
For the Gulf countries, it's even more extreme because their military doesn't have real armies or foot soldiers, The ruling families fear being overthrown by the military. KSA has been spending fortunes on their military since the 1970s, as a way to give back the oil revenue surpluses gathered from around the world to their main protector, the US.
These countries' future is undecided. At some point, the plan, along the outlines of the Oded Yinon Plan devised by Israel in 1982, will be to break up and balkanize Saudi Arabia, or at the very least destroy it much like they did to Syria, in order to eventually colonize it and build their Greater Israel plan. But first they have to take care of Iran.
Iranian drone carrier ship managed to survive two more days after initial statement but is now on fire. IRGCN+ Artesh Navy should abandon all vessels barring small mounted speedboats and focus on consolidating a deterrent by usage of missile and drone forces in both striking Gulf targets (nobody in Tehran aims at Israel anymore) and imposing a naval blockade of the Strait of Hormuz.
That's a big boom bytheway
Last edited:
Seriously contemplating making another list of CooperBloopers, this time focusing on bizarro predictions and fraudulent analysis throughout the years.
The one below is a proper appetizer. Two months ago you mistakenly concluded that US bases in Syria were there to aid the Greater Israel project through facilitating the Kurdish proxy and ultimately manufacture the build up of a land axis from Israel to the Iranian border through the Gideon Corridor. This was in spite of repeated attempts by yours truly to explain to you that the US bases in Syria weren't there for that purpose, but instead existed to facilitate the downfall of Assad and handle the immediate aftermath, and that much of Syria would be delegated to Ankara - which is on collision course with Tel Aviv.
Literally 3 weeks after your totally off-the-mark prediction DC indeed greenlit Erdogan+ Al Sharaa's operation, as forecasted, to curbstomp Israel's proxy (SDF). This was then followed by the DoS announcement that the US would withdraw from all DC's forward positions in Syria, also forecasted, leaving Israeli influence beyond Syria's three Southern provinces at basically nill. The reason for Washington's withdrawal: the need had disappeared.
US begins withdrawing from its largest military base in Syria
Pullout comes after Syrian military takes control of northeast region from Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF).
There is a risk involved to violent engagement and I'm not familiar of examples of Saudi taking such risks in the past 60 years, but it's def. not my area.
While it is normal for vultures to attack a corpse, that is a very low risk engagement.
Think back to Gulf War 1 & 2. How much risk did Saudi take with Iraq? They allowed the USA to build a hyuge base to do their fighting for them.
I'm familiar with them putting down some Bahrainis around 2014 and the recent stuff with the Houthis and they are not impressive.
If they can pay or induce the Americans to do their fighting for them, that's what they're likely to do.
Who is talking about NATO? You said that Spain was in opposition to "US interests" by not allowing their airbases to be used to fight Israel's war. Fighting a war on behalf of Israel yet again is not in the interest of the US. That is becoming more and more evident by the hour. You are flailing, dude. This is not going the way you thought it was going to go.
You want to talk about embarrassing predictions, and staying on topic here:
-You just claimed only 2 hours ago that "nobody in Tehran aims at Israel anymore", and funnily enough 2 posts later IIMT shows a random reporter in Tel Aviv walking around getting pounded.
And here is the latest news earlier tonight:
You are the prime poster of zionist propaganda points on this site, goyslop whoppers like:
-Israel doesn't really run US foreign policy, no, seriously!
-85%-90% of Iranian missiles have been intercepted
The real rate is the opposite, 85% to 90% is a good estimate of percentage of missiles that do get through.
I've tried to help you out last week by posting the analysis of Dr Postol, a leading expert in the field from MIT. Here is his latest assessment on Iranian missile capabilities, which in his estimate are far from having been suppressed:
And another new assessment from Italian expert Gus, host of Millennium 7, one of the best channels on military air tech:
Keith Kellogg on applying maximum pressure on Iran through undercutting the economic lifelines. With Tehran's conventional abilities degraded and its Navy out of the way Kellogg argues that the US should take over Kharg Island, located in the Northern Persian Gulf. Kharg Island is home to Iran's biggest export terminal and apparently 80- 90 percent of Iran's crude oil gets processed through this facility.
Right now the US refrains from attacking Iranian oil infrastructure and for good reason - Asia in its entirety is dependent on a steady flow from the Middle East. The Iranians on the other hand are constantly attacking oil infrastructure and tankers in the Gulf and beyond, attempting to create such economic upheaval that it would alter DC's cost- benefit analysis and result in a change in approach aka step back.
By taking Kharg Island the US would undercut Iran's oil production and simultaneously gain even more leverage. If the Iranians then decide to bomb their own facilities it will be on them.
Right now the US refrains from attacking Iranian oil infrastructure and for good reason - Asia in its entirety is dependent on a steady flow from the Middle East. The Iranians on the other hand are constantly attacking oil infrastructure and tankers in the Gulf and beyond, attempting to create such economic upheaval that it would alter DC's cost- benefit analysis and result in a change in approach aka step back.
By taking Kharg Island the US would undercut Iran's oil production and simultaneously gain even more leverage. If the Iranians then decide to bomb their own facilities it will be on them.
Clever, if so!
It's a pretty good sign nobody thought so.
Why didn't you post a prediction of a US-Iranian war? My first guess is that you weren't expecting it at all.
They have been using the Yemen and Syria ward as an opportunity to hone their experience
Not wit their military
Bet you're wrong
The most obvious comparison is Iran and Ukraine.
The US under Biden flushed around $250 billion through Ukraine. The EU nations flushed several dozen additional billions through Ukraine. Anybody would have to agree that Ukraine wouldn't have done as well over the past four years without this kind of graft.
Nobody is flushing money like this through Iran. Some people say Russia and China will flush money like this through Iran, but this is quite unrealistic.
Without the support levels flushed through Ukraine, Iran will fare poorly against Western attacks. This is indeed an existential struggle for the Islamic regime.
The Saudis are useless, and their fighting capability is a joke. They buy tons and tons of modern weaponry from the US, but they essentially just let it gather dust and rust. Like a spoilt rotten kid with a room full of toys. The purchasing of equipment is basically a deal with the military-industrial complex in exchange for US security guarantees.
US is going to work with local armed groups, these have been cultivated for years already and they have much wider local support + a staging base in the direct rear (Pakistan, Iraqi Kurdistan) than any outsider will ever have. These local fighters will receive heavy CAS but for that to work you need American specialists embedded on the ground to properly communicate and navigate strikes. Likely highly trained SF teams will be working as well.
This move is yet premature though, US is still softening the military infrastructure in many regions and wearing down IRGC forces, ammo depots, command and control structures, etc. through relentless bombing campaigns. The problem: if these local groups, which are poorly trained and relatively small in number, fail to establish a foothold then the appetite for little nudge by US forces might increase and that's a slippery slope to actual boots on the ground, should not happen.
As for the Saudis, like all other high income and (relatively) cultured societies, they are casualty averse. This is somewhat of a problem, because the Saud Monarchs are ambitious in a number of fields, Empire building being one of them. In the first year in Yemen the 1000+ bodybags boundary was topped already, and constant Houthis incursions into Saudi territory became a national disgrace, aka advancing in reverse. Solving the problem of saving face and not losing their own people at this rate anymore was done the traditional Saudi way: by throwing money at it.
In this case that meant fat contracts for Western PMCs, and relatively decent contracts for the thirdworld rank and file. In the 2016-2020 timeframe the Saudis relied mostly on Sudanese, Colombians, Filipinos, Ugandans, Syrians and Pakistani, their cumulative numbers above 150k. Later, and other Gulf States did the same, the switch was made to Muslim Subcontinentals. Late last year the Sauds officialized this setup by signing a Defence Pact with Pakistan, this in reality means that Pakistan will fight for Saudi Arabia's interest and the Saudis will pay them big money to do so.
It's the same in other Gulf States. The Emirati forces are even worse, 80 percent foreigners whereas with the Saudis its mostly irregulars/ auxiliaries. In the Emirati forces foreigners mostly have the same national backgrounds as with the Saudis. In some recruiting countries signing military contracts with Gulf States as a soldier of fortune is now considered a top tier career move, it's a paycheck everybody desires. The Emiratis even copied the French Foreign Legion and started their own Emirati Foreign Legion
Check the community notes. This isn't anything to do with Iran/Israel.
There's so much bickering in this thread. I'm trying to get some updates from you guys who usually have your ears to the ground but you're all fighting with each other over nonsense.