Man, if that actually does happen. How bad will that be for Iran?
I'm going to tl;dr this:
No one fucking knows. Anyone who claims to know is a liar talking out their ass. (
Trump may know. But he is a politician, and thus a liar talking out his ass by nature) The scale goes all the way from "not much worse than now" to "complete and total national collapse into warlords & bandits with fragmented cities". No one knows precisely what Trump is talking about, what he plans, or how close those plans will be to reality.
There are so many possibilities its almost pointless to speculate. Once things start happening and something takes shape, it'll be worth looking at the possiblities.
Not sure why it took this long to start killing these pricks, but better late than never, I guess.
tl;dr: Iraqi politics. See how many Iranian militia share bases with Iraqi Army. The US has to present a fairly airtight case they are militia and not just random civilians.
I might try to do an effort post about precisely how absolutely fucked post-OEF Iraqi politics are, but I really don't think I can properly convey the level of complete dysfunctional madness.
Also some of my information is stale and I haven't bothered trying to update but it doesn't matter.
You will not see Iraq change from its current position of "We allow terrorist militia to operate openly in our country and go around armed, but we also allow the US to drone and airstrike them pretty much whenever".
Pakistan, Turkey, and Egypt each have the most to gain from a "stable" iran, so it makes sense. Turkey has the Kurds to worry about in the south, and Pakistan has the Baloch separatists in the southwest. Both benefit from the IRGC taking care of the relevant elements on the Iranian side of the border, and Egypt needs stability so the Suez canal can open back up to normal capacity, being Egypt's economic lifeline. None of them is doing this because they actually like the Iranian government. It's just self-interest.
I think these three would actually LIKE a deal because all three know there's no backing Iran in an armed conflict, and frankly, that Iran would sell them out for a bottle of water if given the chance.
For Turkey, as well as the Kurds, E-dog doesn't want a ground war/Police action in Iran which he will almost certainly will have unless there is a fast and clean coup (due to the Kurdish Issue). E-dog wants to reform the Ottoman empire, and Iran collapsing will fuck with that. Firstly, getting sucked into ground action will deplete his armed forces build up - this far from a critical blow, but it will likely push Turkey being able to overwhelmingly bully Iraq with its military to outside E-dog's life-time.
Second, Shiite Iran is a useful negotiating tool as Turkey tries to take over the Middle-East. The KSA-Iran cold war has cooled greatly since the peace deal in Yemen, but sectarian divides persist. A lot of Sunni groups don't like the KSA but fear violent deathcult retarded Iran more; Turkey offers a '3rd way' for groups tired of KSA high-handedness (they also get Shia support by being "not Iran and look! We don't oppress Shiites!" but fewer groups turn on Iran). Turkey was able to recruit a puppet and put them into the top role in Syria specifically beause they recruited the Sunni groups from KSA-intelligence and due to the spat between KSA, Qatar, and UAE over thier proxies. If Iran implodes and isn't funding Shiite groups to shit-stir anymore, the Sunni groups now lack a compelling reason to switch allegiance.
edit: something else I remembered, Turkey will eventually need to puppet Iraq. They will likely have good inroads with the Sunnis, but Kurdistan will be a problem - but one they can ignore. The real issue will be the Shiites, specifically the Shiite militias. A stable Iran in control of the militia and with warm relations with Turkey can give the order "You support the Turkish Puppets, they are your friends". An imploded Iran cannot. A pro-western Iran will cut off those militia. And win, lose, or draw if Turkey is seen as going against Iran, Turkey will have a very difficult time convincing those militia to back any plays they make in Iraq.
Egypt doesn't want a non-distracted KSA nor an unfettered Israel. Egyptian relations with Israel are complicated, but Egypt wants to make sure Palestinians and other Arab groups in the Sinai are directing their attacks at Tel Aviv, not Cairo. Don't forget that the Muslim Brotherhood took over temporarily, and tour groups in the Sinai still come under occasional fire from desert-dwelling goat fuckers. Egypt also doesn't trust the Jews to not get upto Jewshines in the south if their North suddenly becomes secure.
Egypt also has headbutting issues with the KSA due to both nations have (for arabs) reasonably powerful armies. Egypt fears a KSA doing to the red sea what Iran is doing to the Persian Gulf.
I don't think I'm doing a great job of explaining it but "we have never had beef with Iran, Iran has never had beef with us. We have an agreement where Iranian agents do not work with our terrorist groups and prevent their proxies from doing same. We want regional stability and fear that a new Iranian government might cause the masterless Iranian proxies to allign with our internal terrorists. KSA might also stop treating us nicely since 'Well, then maybe we'll start working with Iran' is no longer a consideration.
Egypt has been having budget issues (when haven't they) and is worried about Sudan. So they are probably the ME nation most ready and able to deploy given lack of viable external enemies. But the last Egypt expedition to Yemen didn't go so well, so despite being run by the military they have some "vietnam foreign boondoggle" weariness in the population; Iran is definitely not where they want to spend their credibility with the population.
Pakistan doesn't want the Baloch people to start wilding. Pakistan also has warm-cold relations with Iran. Right now, they are cold, and Pakistan clearly wants to ingratiate themselves with the regime as well as not have a refugee crisis on its border. They want to focus on fucking up Afghanistan as a method of pressuring India in Kashmir, and Iran collapsing will highly fuck with that, as well was any hope of pressuring India.
tl;dr: They are only simping for Iran because they don't want to deal with the power vaccum implosion should it topple
Of course, it's the three most pro-Iran countries that keep trying to mediate.
Everyone else in the Gulf knows there's zero point in even trying to get Iran to negotiate (as do these countries, but they hope that they can stall America/Israel by teasing some magic deal that's right around the corner).
Ver archivo adjunto 8805076
Source |
Archive
Pakistan might be CCP control, but the others are more about just wanting Iran to not implode vs. any sort of actual allyship.
E-dog talks a sort of big game about their relations vis-a-vis hating the Jews & oppressing Kurds but he has no love of them, he just doesn't want their collapse to fuck up his Ottoman reformation plans.
Pakistan, Turkey, and Egypt each have the most to gain from a "stable" iran, so it makes sense. Turkey has the Kurds to worry about in the south, and Pakistan has the Baloch separatists in the southwest. Both benefit from the IRGC taking care of the relevant elements on the Iranian side of the border, and Egypt needs stability so the Suez canal can open back up to normal capacity, being Egypt's economic lifeline. None of them is doing this because they actually like the Iranian government. It's just self-interest.
Exactly. Also see above points about not wanting to deal with a KSA throwing its weight around, and E-dog not wanting to have to put troops to stabilize Iran instead of trying to get Iran to convince their puppets to support him.
The US also has deployed forward elements from several Army divisions, including the 82nd Airborne.
Most notably, they have deployed the 82nd's HQ company which has several fascinating possibilities.
For Civies, HQ means Headquarters - that is, the command element. The 82nd's command is built to not just command the 82nd Division, but elements - and potentially entire other divisions - from other units. Basically if shit goes down, the 82nd HQ was to command the 82nd as they'd be tip of the spear, and take charge and integrate other units as they arrive.
If the entire* 82nd was activated, that wouldn't be too surprising. But only some of the actual shit-kicking elements of the 82nd were brought online and notified for deployment or deployed.
In short, Trump has activated Command infrastructure that has capacity to command forces that vastly exceeds the total number of US personnel it would have to command.
Now, Let's be 100% clear this could mean nothing; Trump just wanted to have any 82nd action commanded by 82nd leadership, or he wanted Army command and the 82nd is just set up to do precisely that: Quickly call up, deploy, and take over operations.
Another thing to consider is, as people who were watching this situation since December know, it takes a while to get forces and logistics into position. Trump may just be making moves to ensure he has CAPABILITIES in theater even if he never uses them/only veiws them as a last resort.
But, it
could mean that Trump intends for them to take command of a large force which may not be US forces. That is, if you are trying to organize an side in a civil war, a US general on hand with his intelligence apparatus would be a very helpful thing to have.
* you never sent an entire division. But you get what I mean.
They'll probably claim asylum in France
Ver archivo adjunto 8805426
Source |
Archive
God damn, this is exactly what I voted for. They need to go back. MORE need to go back. Just imagine if Europe did the same. (Just imagine if I could fly and pull solid gold bars from nowhere)
The shockwave exposed her ankles and sadly she was hung by the IRGC.
Wait but how? The bridge was blown up, they have no where to hang her from.
Why do these terrorist shitheels even still have accounts?
Ver archivo adjunto 8805698
Source |
Archive
How could laugh at them if they didn't?
It took me a while to figure it out too, but TJD in this context is Total Jeet Death, not Total Jew Death.
I mean I support both but in this case you need to be specific.
