The US assasinated Iran's Qassem Soleimani - Page 39 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Talk about what you've seen in the news today.

Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods

#15060901
Commander Abd Al-Hussein Mejdami killed in the Ahvaz region by armed men.

So it seems the Ahvazi Arabs will join up whenever the Kurds re-start their insurgency in the fight for independence.
Also, this is where the oil in Iran, if an insurgency began there, the regime loses all hopes of surviving.


Let's see, So we now have renewed clashes with the Kurds starting in November with the potential for a full insurgency.
And now we might see another insurgency in the Ahvaz, alongside the already existing mass protests and uprisings there.
Only left to see the Azzari Turks and the Lurs join up and the entire Zagros is gone.
This would be more than enough for the regime to fall in the core due to the uprisings.


However, if the Balochi will rise up as well and re-start their insurgency, this would be a bit problematic since it would immediately spread to Pakistan.
If the Balochi began a cross border armed insurgency, they'll probably receive help from the Pashtun tribes along the Durand Line, which in turn could turn into an alliance with the Taliban and the Hazara to incircle the American forces, bring down both Iranian and Pakistani governments (The Pashtun and Balochi both claim a large mass of lands in Pakistan which they've been fighting over for the past century), and potentially pursue independence or federalization.

On the other end of the map, we could see the Turks (Turkey) involving itself in North West Iran to prevent Kurdish independence, which in turn could spiral into another Turkish-Kurdish war, this time from Iran, Iraq, and Syria.

We could also expect Russian intervention in the north to prevent Azzari independence and merger with Azerbaijan as the Azzaris have been trying to do for around 5 decades now.

If an insurgency did break out throughout the western mountain range, which so far everything indicates it will since the past insurgencies have started due to much lesser spark, we could not only see the end of both the Iranian and Pakistani states, both shedding their imperial remnants (Iran of its past empire, and Pakistan of the artificial British borders) and returning to the original nation-state borders, but we could also see the conflict with Kurds reigniting throughout Kurdish territories, as well as a break in Turkish-Russian relations due to the Azzari pursuit of independence.

However, we might see an Indian support to all these actors as the Indians would love nothing more than not only to fuck with the Pakistanis, but also to establish a corridor to central Asia for gas and oil supplies.
Also, it would be in India's strategic interests to support these insurgencies and independence movements as it would be able to bring Chinese expansion in the western half of the continent to a halt.

It's unclear where the Gulf states will stand as they would obviously support the insurgencies in western Iran, but would likely fight against those spreading to Pakistan.
#15060903
anasawad wrote:we could not only see the end of both the Iranian and Pakistani states, both shedding their imperial remnants (Iran of its past empire, and Pakistan of the artificial British borders) and returning to the original nation-state borders,

What original nation state borders?
#15060934
@Rich
For Pakistan, the land was owned not by one but by multiple nations.
The Baloch, Pashtun, and Punjabis own most of the land while the remaining land (I believe 10-15%) is split among various minority groups.
Pakistan, at its inception, was an idealistic dream by mostly Punjabi Muslims who wanted to separate from India so they don't become a minority under Hindu rule; The problem is that they were blinded to the fact the Muslims not only aren't one nation, but that they often don't like each other all that much due to a variety of historical reasons, all while the British didn't really care much.

As it stands right now, the Baloch have been fighting on and off for the past several decades, and the Pashtuns have been in conflict with the Pakistani government all the way back to Pakistani independence, making the ruling group to be Punjabi Muslims.

If the Balochi people joined hands with the Arabs, Kurds, and Azzaris in Iran, then they can achieve independence, which would open the door for their insurgency and potential war with independence in Pakistan.
The difference in Pakistan is that the Pashtuns are already fighting (Who do you think the US drone strikes target in Pakistan?), and India would be eager to support them.

In short, the fall of the regime in Iran and the highly likely redrawing of the map of the Iranian Plateau, we could see the map of Pakistan and Afghanistan be redrawn shortly after.


It is unclear whether the US will choose to maintain relations with the Pakistani government or ally with the Baloch and Pashtun to ensure the encirclement of China since the ports China wants are in Baloch territory not in Punjabi territory, noting the US could also co-operate with India to ensure the encirclement of China throughout western Asia by supporting all these independence movements and could gain access to central Asia, both empowering its ally, India, and weakening China.


Note: Before any of the regular bullshitters come and start calling stuff, I know this is harmful to Iran and harmful to even my people in Iran (we're the Turko-Persian tribes in the northeast), but I'm not going to ignore the obvious or deny it just because it goes against my interests.



EDIT:
These borders:
Image
Not very integrated isn't it, eh?



EDIT 2:
Incase anyone wonders how easy it is for an insurgency is to spread to Pakistan.
The Pashtun insurgency has been going on for decades where even the US is involved, and the Balochi insurgency is on and off and Baloch militias have been killing Pakistani soldiers routinely with the last attack happening in November, with the fear of the Iranian situation spilling over to Pakistan and potential Indian use of it being serious enough to the point where China is considering deploying troops to the region to maintain control.
#15061420
Huge rally as Iraqis demand US troops pull out

Huge crowds have taken to the streets of Iraq's capital, Baghdad, to demand that US forces leave Iraq.

Powerful Iraqi Shia cleric Moqtada al-Sadr earlier called for a million people to join Friday's march, close to the US embassy in the capital.

Iranian-backed militias were among those protesting in the city.

The US killing of the top Iranian military commander, Gen Qasem Soleimani, on 3 January at Baghdad airport has fuelled tensions.

What's the latest from Baghdad?

Protesters started to gather in central Baghdad early on Friday, and several hours later, the area was packed with people.

Many carried Iraq's national flags as well as placards denouncing the US military presence in Iraq.

"Death to America!" demonstrators chanted, and some carried a cardboard cut-out of US President Donald Trump.

A statement was read from Mr al-Sadr, although he did not attend the march.

The demonstration threatens to eclipse a separate protest movement involving mainly young people who for several months have been demanding a complete overhaul of the Iraqi government, says the BBC's Martin Patience in Baghdad.

Earlier this month, Iraqi lawmakers passed a non-binding resolution calling for foreign troops to leave the country.

Some 5,000 US soldiers are in Iraq as part of the international coalition against the Islamic State (IS) group.

The two airbases targeted by Iran are in Irbil and al-Asad, west of Baghdad


I'm guessing that like the protests in France, Trump and his army of online shills such as Jack Posobiec aren't going to be cheering on this protest.
#15061534
maz wrote:Huge rally as Iraqis demand US troops pull out



I'm guessing that like the protests in France, Trump and his army of online shills such as Jack Posobiec aren't going to be cheering on this protest.
I find it amazing that the report blatantly mentioned Iranian militia presence, suggesting the protest being infiltrated or incited by Iran. In contrast, they do not report that in rallies that I participated in Hong Kong (only some Sinophile or Commiephile will assert that). I wonder whether this is a stance thing or is it that less democratic regimes just like to hijack rallies?
#15061539
Patrickov wrote:I find it amazing that the report blatantly mentioned Iranian militia presence, suggesting the protest being infiltrated or incited by Iran.


It's probably just as easy for Iranian intelligence to whip up the emotions of a sympathetic Iraqi protest movement as it is, let's say hypothetically, for American intelligence to whip up the emotions of sympathetic Hong Kong protest movement.

And of course the Western media would make this accusation even if Iran was not involved.

For the record, I'm not saying definitively that American intelligence is involved with Hong Kong protest movement but there are some media outlets making this very accusation.

More importantly, why doesn't America just leave? Isn't this the democracy that they wanted for Iraq?

Image
#15061542
maz wrote:More importantly, why doesn't America just leave? Isn't this the democracy that they wanted for Iraq?


It is a tough call. While they probably shouldn't step in in the first place (especially when Saddam had been loyal to the United States for a significant period of time), leaving now may induce a risk that different factions of Iraq might start fighting each other like there is no tomorrow.

Staying there as a symbol of common enemy, and in effect making the people there stay united (against them), might not be too bad an idea.
#15061601
maz wrote:More importantly, why doesn't America just leave? Isn't this the democracy that they wanted for Iraq?


Because the US isn't really there for the US. For one, the US has plenty of oil. They are there for political Zionism. They'll leave when the political Zionists tell them to leave.

The American way of doing invasions wouldn't even make sense to empires of old. Romans made sure that every country they invaded turned into Rome. It was a lot more honest. The Americans just reduce everything to ashes for Zion, and tries to convince the world that it's about bringing freedom and democracy.
#15061603
Code Rood wrote:The Americans just reduce everything to ashes for Zion, and tries to convince the world that it's about bringing freedom and democracy.


This more or less should be blamed on the governments of other countries, who actually made the "turning into ash" thing sounds more appealing.
#15061618
Because the US isn't really there for the US. For one, the US has plenty of oil. They are there for political Zionism. They'll leave when the political Zionists tell them to leave.


This is nonsense. The US is there to protect oil supplies to its allies. IT is also there as a tripwire to Iranian and Turkish expansionism. I will never understand the obsession some people have with Israel. It is a nuclear armed backwater in the region and it is going nowhere. The US hardly gives it notice, even during election years. A few weird Evangelicals are concerned with it so Trump threw them a bone but on a day-to-day basis...meh. :|
#15061623
@Patrickov
leaving now may induce a risk that different factions of Iraq might start fighting each other like there is no tomorrow.

True, which is why the Kurds are already preparing for conflict, and also why I believe there will be an all out insurgency inside of Iran.

Even if the US didn't leave, the limitation placed on US mobility in Iraq is already more than enough for the Kurds and the Sunni tribes to become aggressive.
Add to that the already restarting insurgency inside of Iran for the Kurds (it stopped around 2016, but restarting gradually now), then other groups who sought and are seeking independence from Iran might see this as an opportunity and align with the Kurds as it seems to be already the case for the Ahvazi Arabs and the Azzari Turks.

It's also obvious that the Iranian government is seeing and expecting these developments since it is deploying military units (mainly revolutionary guards) to the Kurdish, Arab, and Azzari areas.

The scenario with Pakistan could also occur if the Baloch decided to join in, they're already in semi insurgency inside of Pakistan, which could spread to Iran then the overall situation spilling back into Pakistan on a larger scale.
#15061726
Drlee wrote:This is nonsense. The US is there to protect oil supplies to its allies. IT is also there as a tripwire to Iranian and Turkish expansionism. I will never understand the obsession some people have with Israel. It is a nuclear armed backwater in the region and it is going nowhere. The US hardly gives it notice, even during election years. A few weird Evangelicals are concerned with it so Trump threw them a bone but on a day-to-day basis...meh. :|


For some reason only Americans still believe that political Zionists don't have a stranglehold over American politics. Is it fear? Is it stupidity? Just travel the world. Many people know exactly who runs the show in the USA. It's not rocket science for Pete's sake.

You can call it an obsession all you want, but the Zionist influence in American politics and media is completely insane... and it affects the world in a very bad way.

The neoliberals, neocons and their Zionist donors have destroyed your reputation throughout the world. You've burned bridges for Zion. You've destroyed (possible) friendships for Zion. You've teared up agreements for Zion. Who can honestly still trust the US? This was the goal all along. You've been infiltrated and taken for a ride. Heck, can we still call it infiltration? They openly brag about their control, and the American masses seem to cheer it on.

It's about time that you guys stand up to your masters, or else I'm afraid that karma is going to be extremely horrible for you guys.

Just imagine if Uncle Sam could get them off his back. He could finally start building up the mid-east and turn it into Americana like the Romans turned their conquered lands into Rome; that is if the US wants to be an empire. Because right now it's not really clear what the US wants. The only thing that's clear is that they're the whore of Zion. The Russians have a vision. The Chinese have a vision. The Americans do not.
#15061727
Code Rood wrote:
For some reason only Americans still believe that political Zionists don't have a stranglehold over American politics. Is it fear? Is it stupidity? Just travel the world. Many people know exactly who runs the show in the USA. It's not rocket science for Pete's sake.

You can call it an obsession all you want, but the Zionist influence in American politics and media is completely insane... and it affects the world in a very bad way.

The neoliberals, neocons and their Zionist donors have destroyed your reputation throughout the world. You've burned bridges for Zion. You've destroyed (possible) friendships for Zion. You've teared up agreements for Zion. Who can honestly still trust the US? This was the goal all along. You've been infiltrated and taken for a ride. Heck, can we still call it infiltration? They openly brag about their control, and the American masses seem to cheer it on.

It's about time that you guys stand up to your masters, or else I'm afraid that karma is going to be extremely horrible for you guys.

Just imagine if Uncle Sam could get them off his back. He could finally start building up the mid-east and turn it into Americana like the Romans turned their conquered lands into Rome; that is if the US wants to be an empire. Because right now it's not really clear what the US wants. The only thing that's clear is that they're the whore of Zion. The Russians have a vision. The Chinese have a vision. The Americans do not.


:eek:

Just lending a helping hand to emphasise the important parts :excited:
  • 1
  • 36
  • 37
  • 38
  • 39
  • 40
Election 2020

Interestingly, there doesn't seem to be such a lar[…]

The President of the United States of America, who[…]

Maz hates black people. This is a one line post[…]

Biden prides himself on his history of working w[…]