United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: John Bolton says the USA is invading Iran in 2018
Source:
FromThe Trenches
URL Source: http://fromthetrenchesworldreport.c ... s-invading-iran-in-2018/223816
Published: Apr 16, 2018
Author: Watchman's Cry
Post Date: 2018-04-17 08:59:35 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 2673
Comments: 27
Published on Apr 16, 2018 John Bolton recently stated that America will be in Tehran, Iran before 2019. In order for that to happen, it will require an American and NATO invasion with boots on the ground in Iran to conduct regime change. Donald J Trump is a war president! He has selected his war cabinet. And in the remaining minutes of America, the United States is going to return to the neoconservative doctrine of preemptive war, regime change, imperialism, and chaos. It is happening before our eyes. John Bolton oversaw the recent bombing in Syria. He is going to also oversee many military campaigns that are approaching, because ladies and gentlemen, this is just the beginning. False Flags are Coming Prepare to see another chemical attack in Syria, as well as other false flags events throughout the world. When they occur, some of them will be blamed on the Axis of Evil, which includes Iran, North Korea, and now Syria. Get ready folks! Get your lives in order. Nathan Leal http://watchmanscry.com/
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Deckard (#0)
You really are an excitable little girl,ain't ya? Quick,tell me when John Bolton was put in charge of the Presidency and the US Congress. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Well, if we're going to do it, then let's do it! Congress must declare war this time, and we need the draft to put together a 5 million man army that cannot be stopped. Fire up the factories, get it going. If we invade Iran, we're going to end up in a war with China and with Russia, so let's be ready to pre-empt the Chinese nukes, and knock out the Russian boomers. I guess this is it. We're going to rule the world or go down in flames. Seems legit.
Not really "recently". That video is of Ambassador John Bolton speaking to Iranian exiles at the Free Iran gathering in Paris on July 1, 2017. He wasn't Trump's National Security Advisor back then. Talk about FAKE NEWS!
He wasn't Trump's National Security Advisor back then. Talk about FAKE NEWS! July 1, 2017 is quite recent, are you saying that Mr Bolton had change of heart?
I was wondering who he was talking to. They were certainly cheering him on. It must be fun telling exiled people what they want to hear and giving them false hopes. Iran has a population of 81 million, which is more than twice the population of Canada and more than half the population of Russia, and fully 25% of the USA. Bolton is certainly a war-mongering ass who's presence in Trump's cabinet defies understanding, but we won't be invading Iran. If we tried, it would be the last straw for one or more of the following: The US dollar It ain't happening, and that's a good thing.
It's not recent, despite the fact that a) the author posted it with today's date, b) with the headline "John Bolton says (not 'said') the USA is invading Iran in 2018" and c) refers to John Bolton in the video as the National Security Advisor which he was not at the time. A change of heart? He told the crowd what they wanted to hear. No one (except you, obviously) thought he had any power to actually make that happen.
I understand. It sends a message to Iran, North Korea and Russia that we're ready for war ... if that's what they want. Or, they can sit down and negotiate. Couple that with our recent strike in Syria along with a massive increase in defense spending and it reinforces the message.
Negotiate with each other, you mean? The US is not interested in any negotiations. Tell me a single thing that the US has conceded to Russia in the last 10 years. US negotiation: Shut up and get back in line. That's all it's been. The US does not talk to Russia.
Negotiate what? Unconditional surrender?
And given that we broke Ukraine and overturned the result of a popular election there by supporting minority insurgents, we've really made a hash of things. Of course, that was under Obama. We could do better under Trump. For that to happen, this nonsense about "Russian Collusion" needs to end. How much does Trump look like he's colluding with the Russians now? Answer: He's not. And he didn't. As obsessed as people are with politically "getting" Trump, truth is Trump always said - and meant - that he wanted better relations with Russia, and we COULD. But the Russia collusion investigation means that he CAN'T reach out to Russia the way he would like to, because any conciliatory move he makes towards Russia will be pointed to as proof of collusion. If we want normal relations with Russia, the "Trump colluded with Russia" bullshit has to be spiked and Mueller's investigation needs to be ended. Otherwise we can just go on pushing Russia around and causing problems - just like Trump doesn't want to do. The President needs a free hand in dealing with Russia, something that Obama had, and he does not have right now. The political harpies in America are paralyzing our Russia policy. They need to be handed a loss so that more important things, like superpower relations, can go forward. In truth, I think there are Democrats and Trump haters who would rather see the world destroyed in a nuclear holocaust than back down an inch about Trump. So therefore we'll have a war with Syria and maybe Iran.
Give up their nuclear program.
Give up their nuclear program. If they do it, they will end up like Libya.
Is that their argument?
Is that their argument? No. They act on it. They just prefer to make stand near Damascus than near Sankt Petersburg/Estonia.
What difference does it make, he still said it and probably still means it. I do not go to church every time the doors are opened, but I love Jesus Christ. I am only human and fail Him daily. I believe Jesus is the Son of God, was born of a virgin, was crucified on a cross, died for my sins and rose from the dead and that He loves us dearly, and is faithful to forgive us of our sins. But He says that if you deny me in front of your friends I will deny you in front of my Father. Can I get an Amen!
Sure. But what did he say? He said America's policy should be the overthrow of the regime. But not by the United States. Right before that statement he said the center of the opposition is "right here in this room". Meaning, he expects the Iranian people to make the change.
He is late. They already made the change, in 1979.
Iran can field at the start 3 million troops. Take in the account high mountains and that Persians will be fighting on their own ground, you need much more than 5 millions. Iran is not Somalia.
Yeah. And how's that working out for them?
Ask them.
They can field them. They can't feed them.
Financial Tribune - Iran's Food Exports Booming
Russia is a vast country with huge manpower and resources of every kind. But they lacked sufficient logistical infrastructure to turn the resources into usable weapons, munitions and supplies, and to get those supplies to their front line troops in World War I. And that was BEFORE the age of the airplane able to blow up trains and supply depots. If the Iranians put 5 million men in the field, they will have a lot of hungry, demoralized, unarmed men in a hurry. Medieval armies had the same problem. Against an organized invader, a levee en masse could create a huge army for a few days. But then it would be a huge mass of hungry people starting to get diseases and the like. The Gauls at Alesia outnumbered the Romans 10:1, but the Romans had logistics, and the discipline, training, tactics and equipment, while the Gauls had courage and little else. The Gauls lost. The Iranians could put a big, crappy army into the field, where it would be paralyzed by US airstrikes and, soon enough, starve. Iran cannot defeat the United States in an all-out war. It is to be hoped that it does not come to that.
On Iranian territory?
It's not going to happen anyway, so why speculate?
Very simple - to evaluate the actual balance of forces. You see, in 99% of conflicts, it does not come to the blows, because mere evaluation is sufficient to decide the outcome. If a heavily armed burly policeman meats skinny punk with a small pocket knife, the punk ends up in jail. But if the punk has bazooka and a few crazed buddies on meth, the police salutes him and moves on to search for easier targets. That is why proper evaluation is so critical.
If the US formally declared war and mobilized, Iran would not stand a chance. If we do our usual chicken-shit, minimal forces and get out, without a full mobilization, Iran would end up a massive Vietnam-in-the-desert for us.
#2. To: Deckard (#0)
#3. To: Deckard (#0)
John Bolton recently stated that America will be in Tehran, Iran before 2019.
#4. To: misterwhite (#3)
Not really "recently". That video is of Ambassador John Bolton speaking to Iranian exiles at the Free Iran gathering in Paris on July 1, 2017.
#5. To: misterwhite, Deckard (#3)
That video is of Ambassador John Bolton speaking to Iranian exiles at the Free Iran gathering in Paris on July 1, 2017.
Russia's patience
The American People
#6. To: A Pole (#4)
July 1, 2017 is quite recent, are you saying that Mr Bolton had change of heart?
#7. To: Pinguinite (#5)
Bolton is certainly a war-mongering ass who's presence in Trump's cabinet defies understanding
#8. To: misterwhite (#7)
It sends a message to Iran, North Korea and Russia that we're ready for war ... if that's what they want. Or, they can sit down and negotiate.
#9. To: misterwhite (#7)
I understand. It sends a message to Iran, North Korea and Russia that we're ready for war ... if that's what they want. Or, they can sit down and negotiate.
#10. To: Pinguinite (#8)
US negotiation: Shut up and get back in line. That's all it's been. The US does not talk to Russia.
#11. To: A Pole (#9)
Negotiate what? Unconditional surrender?
#12. To: misterwhite (#11)
Negotiate what? Unconditional surrender?
#13. To: A Pole (#12)
If they do it, they will end up like Libya.
#14. To: misterwhite (#13)
If they do it, they will end up like Libya.
#15. To: misterwhite (#3)
Not really "recently".
#16. To: U don't know me (#15)
"... he still said it and probably still means it."
#17. To: misterwhite (#16)
he expects the Iranian people to make the change.
#18. To: Vicomte13 (#2)
we need the draft to put together a 5 million man army that cannot be stopped.
#19. To: A Pole (#17)
They already made the change, in 1979.
#20. To: misterwhite (#19)
Yeah. And how's that working out for them?
#21. To: A Pole (#18)
Iran can field at the start 3 million troops. Take in the account high mountains and that Persians will be fighting on their own ground, you need much more than 5 millions.
#22. To: Vicomte13 (#21)
They can't feed them.
#23. To: A Pole (#22)
#24. To: Vicomte13 (#23)
Iran cannot defeat the United States in an all-out war.
#25. To: A Pole (#24)
#26. To: Vicomte13 (#25)
(Edited)
It's not going to happen anyway, so why speculate?
#27. To: A Pole (#26)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]