Iran fiercely aggress Isreal & USA, Dotard calculated losses he cannot afford & want to dodge! Kim Jong Nuke must Pitch-In!

[Ang4MohTrump]

http://www.sohu.com/a/314510718_414734




大国策
835文章 6.5亿总阅读
查看TA的文章>


191

• 分享到

原创 伊朗铤而走险，又撂狠话单挑两大军事强国！其中一个正是美国

2019-05-17 06:38

作者:阙兴明；图片来自网络

近期以来，美国向伊朗周边增派军力的动作依然在不停的进行之中，伊朗局势的紧张气氛正在不断加剧。在美国向伊朗极限施压之际，以色列也向伊朗露出了战争的獠牙。对此，已面临绝境的伊朗作出了要单挑美以两国的强硬表态

5月16日，环球网援引路透社报道称，伊朗国防部长阿米尔·哈塔米明确表示，“伊朗已经做好了最高水平的国防军事准备，可以应对任何类型的威胁与过分要求。我们将击败美国犹太复国主义阵线。”哈塔米在讲话中还强调称，我们将击败美国与以色列的军事联盟。

哈塔米的这一言论显然是同时针对美国与以色列两国的。其实本来也就如此，在向伊朗施压方面，美国从来就与以色列有着共同的诉求。众所周知，伊朗是中东地区什叶派国家的主心骨，是阻挠美国势力在中东推进的最大堡垒，美国要推翻伊朗现政权的想法并不是秘密。近期，美国派舰队进入波斯湾，其中甚至包括战斗力强大的“林肯”号航母战斗群；5月9日，美国一批B-52轰炸机也已在卡塔尔美军基地完成了部署。种种军事动作表明，美国正在对伊朗磨刀霍霍。

同时，伊朗跟以色列也是一对死敌，被犹太人视为最大的生存威胁。近年来伊朗伊斯兰革命卫队在叙利亚的军事存在就让以色列忧心忡忡，如去年5月初当特朗普正要撕毁伊朗核协议的前夕，以色列总理便“及时”的搜罗出来了大量伊朗违反核协议的所谓“证据”。并且在5月8日美国正式退出协议的当天，以色列便急不可耐的向伊朗驻叙利亚的20多个军事据点实施了轰炸，让伊朗地面部队遭到了重创。其实，以色列在叙利亚武装打击伊朗军事目标的行动一直都在延续之中。

尽管在美国最近向伊朗周边所作出军事部署的过程中，以色列并没有参与进来。但可想而知，以色列是不可能不做出对伊朗开战的准备的。这从以色列总理最近的表态便可以显见一二。5月14日，以总理内塔尼亚胡公开表示，以色列将与美国站在一起来对抗伊朗。并指出，“我们(美以两国)要团结一致来制止伊朗的侵略”。可见以色列的口吻跟美国完全一致，一边对伊朗实施几乎毫无退路可言的军事威胁，一边却反诬伊朗的所谓“侵略”。当然这也正显现出了以色列急欲对伊朗动武的野心。

如今的伊朗已经处于了悬崖边上。一面要承受美国严厉到极致的经贸制裁，一面还要应对美国与以色列的军事威胁。并且美以两国还同为世界军事强国。在这一危急关头，其实除了哈塔米作出以上表态而外，伊朗伊斯兰革命卫队也同样语出铿锵。就在5月15日，该军队新上任不久的总司令萨拉米表态称，伊朗的敌人正在计划“打破伊朗人民坚定不移的信念”，我们目前正处于跟敌人的全面对抗的高峰期。

伊朗国防部作出强硬表态之后，作为该国主要国防力量的伊斯兰革命卫队便立即呼应。这毫无疑问是表明，在当前这一生死攸关之际，伊朗军方已经众志成城形成了牢不可破的统一阵营。在这一严峻的军事施压之下，伊朗反而被激发出来了敢于同时应对美以两大军事强国的强大决心。返回搜狐，查看更多


http://www.sohu.com/a/314515252_414734




大国策
835文章 6.5亿总阅读
查看TA的文章>


354

• 分享到

特朗普突然作出明确表态！到底打不打伊朗，这下有答案了

2019-05-17 07:15

作者:阙兴明；图片来自网络

最近一段时间以来，美国几乎竭尽全力，拿出了所有手段对伊朗进行极限施压。这种施压既体现在经贸、金融方面，也在军事方面赤裸裸的表现了出来，作出了一系列危险的战争部署。总体来看，美国在伊朗周边营造出来的战争气氛已经非常浓烈了，似乎有一种战争就要一触即发的迹象。然而美国真的要对伊朗采取军事行动吗？就在当前这一危急时刻，特朗普刚刚作出了一个重磅表态。

5月17日，《纽约时报》报道称，美国总统特朗普于本周四在白宫的一场记者招待会上，当被记者问及“是否会与伊朗爆发战争?”时，他作出十分明确表态，称“他不希望美国与伊朗发生战争”。而值得一提的是，就在周三《纽约时报》还大量披露了美国最近向中东大搞军事部署的情报，并预计美伊之间即将发生战争。显而易见，特朗普的这一表态可说是一个极大的反转。

毫无疑问的是，这是在目前伊朗局势正在变得极度紧张之际，美国总统作出的一次极其重要的表态，让关注中东局势的整个国际社会松了一口气。不过最近美国的确对伊朗进行了极为严厉的施压。在经济上，比如从4月份以来便利用在其操纵下的国际货币支付体系对伊朗进行金融封锁，用第三方制裁的方式极力限制伊朗石油出口，加强对伊朗金属制品的制裁等，让伊朗经济陷入绝境。似乎是要尽力挤压伊朗应对战争的能力。

此外美国在军事方面对伊朗的施压也可说是空前严厉的。就在5月份，一个搭载有F-35B战机的两栖攻击舰编队已经在波斯湾进驻，最近美国又向该水域派出了“林肯”号航母战斗群；5月9日，美国B-52战略轰炸机群已部署在了卡塔尔的乌代德空军基地，而此前就已在该基地部署的一个F-35A战机中队。从这些军事部署情况来看，美国这一积聚在伊朗周边的海空军力量已经完全达到了足以发动一场战争的战备水平。

可有些耐人寻味的是，美国在作出这些紧张军事部署的同时，也似乎在尽力小心翼翼的避免战争的发生。如5月13日《纽约时报》披露，美国代理防长沙纳汉提出了一个向中东增派12万美军的军事计划。该报道再度掀起了美国或要对伊朗动武的热议，毕竟向中东派出地面部队更能意味着开战可能性的增大。然而特朗普却于15日劈头劈脸的将报道这一消息的《纽约时报》怒斥了一通，指出“这是假新闻”。

另外早在5月10日，特朗普也干出了一件看似十分微妙的行为。当天，特朗普发布了一则推文，内容是“我们的电话已经通过瑞士使馆发给伊朗领袖了，你们赶紧给我打电话吧！”很明显，这是在主动寻求与伊朗方面的何谈，希望美国与伊朗双方回到谈判桌上来。而此际正值风传美国“林肯”号航母战斗群及B-52轰炸机群要向中东部署的紧急关头。这种一边以武力施压，一边又释放出和谈信号的行为，无疑显露出了美国只是在“以武促谈”的一贯伎俩。

特朗普之所以在军事施压的同时又不时露出避战的表现，此次更是明确声明“不希望与伊朗发生战争”，是跟美国目前的现状有关。众所周知，美国新世纪以来已经先后在阿富汗与伊拉克发动了两场战争，而这两场战争至今还在成为美国两大沉重的包袱，可伊朗的综合实力又并不比以上两国弱。因此美国若向伊朗开战，很可能将自己拖垮，从而加速自己全球霸权的萎缩。5月15日有伊朗高级官员也指出了这一关键点，称“德黑兰已经准备好应对'从对抗到外交'的所有情况，但美国无法在中东再打一场仗了。”

之所以特朗普此次要作出这种表态，除了美国自身的因素而外，还与伊朗方面越压越强的强硬态度有关。5月15日，伊朗军方作出密集表态。先是伊朗国防部长哈塔米指出，德黑兰已经做好了最高水平的战争准备，可以应付“任何类型的威胁与过分要求”。同时伊朗伊斯兰革命卫队总司令萨拉米也表示，我们正处于跟敌人全面对抗的高峰期，我们完全能挫败伊朗敌人的计划。

通过美国一面施压一面又寻求和谈的表现来看，这完全是像特朗普在他的“著作”——《交易的艺术》里面喋喋不休的向人们告诫的那样，要以“极限施压”来让对手让步。如今在美国不能承受大规模战争的现状以及伊朗的强硬态度的情况下，压力反而回到了美国一方，也让美国“纸老虎”的真面目再次暴露了出来。难怪要让特朗普表态称“不希望与伊朗发生战争”了。返回搜狐，查看更多





声明：该文观点仅代表作者本人，搜狐号系信息发布平台，搜狐仅提供信息存储空间服务。

35b 沙纳汉 哈塔米 萨拉米 交易的艺术


Http://www.sohu.com/a/314510718_414734





Great country policy
835 articles 6.5 billion total reading
View TA's article >


191


share to




Original Iran is taking risks and is arguing for two military powers! One of them is the United States

2019-05-17 06:38




Author: Quexing Ming; images from the network


Recently, the US’s move to send more troops to Iran is still going on, and the tension in the Iranian situation is growing. At the time when the United States put pressure on the Iranian limit, Israel also revealed the ravages of war to Iran. In this regard, Iran, which has already faced a desperate situation, has made a tough stance to single out the United States and Israel.


On May 16, the World Wide Web quoted Reuters as saying that Iranian Defense Minister Amir Khatami made it clear that "Iran has prepared the highest level of defense and military preparations to deal with any type of threat and excessive demand. We will Defeat the American Zionist Front." Khatami also stressed in his speech that we will defeat the military alliance between the United States and Israel.


Khatami’s remarks are clearly aimed at both the United States and Israel. In fact, this is also the case. In terms of pressure on Iran, the United States has always had a common aspiration with Israel. As everyone knows, Iran is the backbone of the Shiite countries in the Middle East and the biggest bastion that hinders the advancement of American power in the Middle East. It is no secret that the United States wants to overthrow the current regime in Iran. Recently, the United States sent a fleet into the Persian Gulf, which even included the powerful "Lincoln" aircraft carrier battle group; on May 9, a group of US B-52 bombers were also deployed at the US military base in Qatar. Various military actions indicate that the United States is sharpening the knife against Iran.




At the same time, Iran and Israel are also a pair of deadly enemies, regarded by Jews as the greatest threat to survival. In recent years, the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard’s military presence in Syria has worried Israel. As early as the beginning of May when Trump was about to tear up the Iranian nuclear agreement, the Israeli Prime Minister’s “in time” collected a large number of Iran’s alleged violations of the nuclear agreement. "evidence". On the day of the official withdrawal of the US agreement on May 8, Israel was eager to bomb the Iranian military presence in Syria, causing heavy damage to Iranian ground forces. In fact, Israel’s actions to arm Iran’s military targets in Syria have continued.


Despite the recent military deployment of the United States to Iran, Israel did not participate. But it is conceivable that it is impossible for Israel to prepare for the war against Iran. This can be seen from the recent statement by the Israeli Prime Minister. On May 14, Prime Minister Netanyahu publicly stated that Israel will stand with the United States to fight against Iran. He also pointed out that "we (the United States and Israel) must unite to stop Iran's aggression." It can be seen that Israel’s tone is exactly the same as that of the United States. While carrying out a military threat to Iran with almost no retreat, it has opposed Iran’s so-called "aggression." Of course, this is also showing Israel’s eagerness to use force against Iran.




Today's Iran is already on the edge of the cliff. On the one hand, it must withstand the harsh economic and economic sanctions imposed by the United States, and it must also deal with the military threats between the United States and Israel. And the United States and Israel are also the world's military powers. At this critical juncture, in fact, in addition to Khatami made the above statement, the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps also said the same thing. On May 15, the new commander-in-chief of the army, Salami, stated that Iran’s enemies are planning to “break the unwavering conviction of the Iranian people.” We are currently at the peak of the overall confrontation with the enemy.


After the Iranian Defense Ministry made a tough stance, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, the country’s main defense force, immediately responded. This undoubtedly shows that at the moment of this life and death, the Iranian military has formed an unbreakable unity camp. Under this severe military pressure, Iran has been provoked to have a strong determination to cope with the two major military powers. Go back to Sohu and see more



Http://www.sohu.com/a/314515252_414734





Great country policy
835 articles 6.5 billion total reading
View TA's article >


354


share to




Trump suddenly made a clear statement! In the end, I won’t fight Iran. There is an answer.

2019-05-17 07:15




Author: Quexing Ming; images from the network


In the recent past, the United States has almost done its utmost to put all the means to impose extreme pressure on Iran. This kind of pressure is reflected not only in the economic and trade, financial aspects, but also in the military, and has made a series of dangerous war deployments. On the whole, the atmosphere of war created by the United States around Iran is already very strong. There seems to be a sign that war will be triggered. But does the United States really want to take military action against Iran? At this critical moment, Trump has just made a heavy statement.


On May 17, the New York Times reported that US President Trump was asked by a reporter at a press conference at the White House this Thursday, "Will it be a war with Iran?" Expressly stated that "he does not want the United States to have a war with Iran." It is worth mentioning that on Wednesday, the New York Times also disclosed a large amount of information about the US military deployment to the Middle East recently, and expected an upcoming war between the United States and Iraq. Obviously, Trump's statement can be said to be a great reversal.


Undoubtedly, this is an extremely important statement made by the President of the United States at a time when the situation in Iran is becoming extremely tense, and the entire international community concerned about the situation in the Middle East is relieved. However, the United States has indeed imposed extremely severe pressure on Iran. In the economy, for example, since April, the international currency payment system under its control has been used to block the financial blockade of Iran, and third-party sanctions have been used to restrict Iran’s oil exports and strengthen sanctions against Iran’s metal products. Fall into desperation. It seems that it is trying to squeeze Iran’s ability to deal with war.




In addition, the US’s military pressure on Iran can be said to be unprecedentedly severe. Just in May, an amphibious assault ship formation equipped with F-35B fighters has been stationed in the Persian Gulf. Recently, the United States sent the "Lincoln" aircraft carrier battle group to the waters; on May 9, the US B-52 strategic bomber The group has been deployed at Uday Air Force Base in Qatar, and an F-35A fighter squadron has been deployed at the base. Judging from these military deployments, the US air and sea forces that have accumulated around Iran have fully reached the level of readiness to launch a war.


What is intriguing is that while the United States is making these intense military deployments, it seems that it is trying to avoid the war. As disclosed in the New York Times on May 13, the US Acting Defense Minister Shanahan proposed a military plan to send an additional 120,000 US troops to the Middle East. The report once again set off a hot debate on the United States or the use of force against Iran. After all, sending ground troops to the Middle East is more likely to mean an increase in the possibility of war. However, on the 15th, Trump screamed at the New York Times, which reported the news, and pointed out that "this is fake news."


In addition, as early as May 10, Trump also did a seemingly subtle behavior. On the same day, Trump issued a tweet saying, "Our phone has been sent to the Iranian leader through the Swiss Embassy. Please call me quickly!" Obviously, this is the initiative to seek for Iran. I hope that the United States and Iran will return to the negotiating table. At this time, it is at a critical juncture that the US "Lincoln" aircraft carrier battle group and the B-52 bomber group will be deployed to the Middle East. This kind of act of exerting pressure by force and releasing the signal of peace talks undoubtedly reveals that the United States has always been consistent in its tactics of "promoting talks by force."




Trump’s military pressure also revealed the performance of avoiding war from time to time. This time, he clearly stated that “I don’t want to have a war with Iran”, which is related to the current status of the United States. As is known to all, the United States has launched two wars in Afghanistan and Iraq since the new century. These two wars are still becoming two heavy burdens for the United States, but Iran’s comprehensive strength is no weaker than the two countries. Therefore, if the United States fights against Iran, it is likely to drag itself down, thus accelerating the shrinking of its global hegemony. On May 15th, senior Iranian officials also pointed out this key point, saying that "Tehran is ready to deal with all the situations from 'confrontation to diplomacy', but the United States cannot fight another battle in the Middle East."


The reason why Trump wants to make this statement, in addition to the US's own factors, is related to the tougher attitude of the Iranian side. On May 15, the Iranian military made a dense statement. First, Iranian Defense Minister Khatami pointed out that Tehran has prepared for the highest level of war and can cope with "any type of threat and excessive demand." At the same time, the commander-in-chief of the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guards, Salami, also said that we are at the peak of the full confrontation with the enemy, and we can completely defeat the plan of the Iranian enemy.


Through the pressure of the United States to pressure and seek peace talks, this is exactly what Trump told him in his "writing" - "The Art of Trading", to "extreme pressure". Let the opponent give in. Now that the United States cannot withstand the current situation of large-scale wars and Iran’s tough attitude, the pressure has returned to the United States, and the true face of the American "paper tiger" has once again been exposed. It is no wonder that Trump stated that he "does not want to have a war with Iran." Go back to Sohu and see more






Disclaimer: This article only represents the author himself, Sohu is the information publishing platform, and Sohu only provides information storage space services.

35b Shanahan Hatami Salami The art of trading

 

[Ang4MohTrump]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...e9-bd25-c989555e7766_story.html?noredirect=on

America and Iran are both oddly eager for war

National security adviser John Bolton, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and President Trump in Hanoi on Feb. 28. (Leah Millis/Reuters)



By David Ignatius

Columnist
May 16 at 7:18 PM

In any tense military confrontation, diplomats start looking for an “off ramp” that could de-escalate tensions. But in the current standoff between the United States and Iran, it’s hard to find any such exit route.

The U.S.-Iran faceoff is one of those odd situations where both players appear eager to set off sparks, although neither seems to want a raging fire. They seem comfortable in a halfway zone of conflict, where nations use force in deniable ways across different domains, hoping they don’t set off an explosion.

The problem is that nobody in Washington, Europe or the Middle East has a convincing answer to the obvious question: What’s next? Each side says it fears an attack by the other, but hard-liners in both capitals seem eerily ready for an exchange of blows.

Here’s how a senior Trump administration official put it in a talk with reporters Thursday: “Because we are applying levels of pressure that don’t have any historic precedent, I think we can expect Iran to increase its threats to increase its malign behavior.”

Washington and Tehran both view the confrontation through rosy lenses, tinged by ideology.

The Trump administration sees an Iran straining to cope with punitive sanctions; White House officials are telling colleagues that in six months, the Iranian regime will have to make a deal — or face chaos in the streets. Rather than reducing sanctions, Trump officials are talking about adding even more, affecting petrochemicals, for example. Intelligence analysts here and abroad are skeptical about the Trump policy assumption that Iran will cave.

The Iranians, for their part, appear to have concluded that confrontation is the only way to deal with what they see as an untrustworthy, bellicose United States. Tehran decided a few weeks ago that waiting out the Trump administration wasn’t working. Sanctions were squeezing too hard, and Trump looked as though he might be reelected.

Iranian leaders then began messaging the Revolutionary Guard Corps and its proxies in Iraq and elsewhere to begin planning strikes against American targets, U.S. and European analysts believe. This messaging, accompanied by some new Revolutionary Guard Corps shipments of missiles that could attack U.S. forces, rang the Pentagon’s alarm bell.

President Trump sits astride the war machine with an optimistic but probably incorrect assumption that the Iranian regime will capitulate under pressure. He doesn’t want a war with Iran (indeed, he’s somewhat allergic to war in the Middle East), but he thinks that a weak Iran will bargain for a new mega-deal that limits its nuclear options and regional meddling. “I’m sure that Iran will want to talk soon,” Trump tweeted Wednesday.

Reality check: Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader, has insisted emphatically that he is not prepared to talk with the United States. He grudgingly agreed to the 2015 nuclear deal, warning colleagues that the United States was unreliable and would renege, and he isn’t going to be fooled again. Khamenei’s whole career is premised on the defiant logic of resistance.

Khamenei may die or be overthrown. But even if that happened, there’s little evidence he would be replaced with a more pliable regime — unless the United States was prepared to fight a protracted war for regime change. So what’s Trump’s plan? That’s the part that mystifies analysts in Washington and abroad.

As independent Sen. Angus King of Maine told me this week, “Some of the president’s people act like they want Iran to punch America in the nose, so we can hit them with a baseball bat.”

For now, Iran has kept its actions in the gray zone of a deniable “hybrid” war. Floating mines, perhaps placed by Iran, damaged ships anchored off the coast of the United Arab Emirates this week. A drone attack by Iran-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen damaged a Saudi oil pipeline. These were low-risk power plays. The United States is probably looking at its own range of deniable, gray-zone operations, too, including cyberwarfare.

Off ramps exist, if either side is ready to bargain. The UAE could refer the tanker attacks to the United Nations Security Council for discussion; the U.N. mediator for Yemen could build on his recent success in starting the movement of the Houthis out of the port of Hodeidah. Moscow and Washington could jointly sponsor a dialogue to contain Iranian regional meddling and stabilize the Middle East.

But those de-escalation measures assume that Washington and Tehran are ready to talk. And there’s no sign of that, yet. Instead, each wants to make the other feel more pain — softening them up for what hard-liners expect will be later concessions.

As Gen. David Petraeus famously said during the invasion of Iraq in 2003: “Tell me how this ends.”

Read more from David Ignatius’s archive, follow him on Twitter or subscribe to his updates on Facebook.




https://edition.cnn.com/2019/05/15/politics/iran-donald-trump-john-bolton-war/index.html

Iran tensions spotlight Trump's questionable credibility

Analysis by Stephen Collinson, CNN

Updated 1245 GMT (2045 HKT) May 16, 2019






Washington (CNN)The Trump administration, which has disdained truth and consciously snubbed its allies, is now facing a tough burden of proof and history as it barrels toward a confrontation with Iran.
The White House is facing skepticism about its warnings and bombastic talk about Iranian activity after two years systematically building economic, diplomatic and, finally, military pressure on Tehran -- that was bound to trigger a response from its bitter foe.
President Donald Trump's pyrotechnic approach to the presidency has solidified his base but alienated half the country, a factor that would complicate his efforts to sell Americans on another war.
And Trump's incessant fight against fact and denials of obvious truth may also mean he has a credibility issue even if he comes before the nation to talk about what he sees as a credible threat.
There is also suspicion among American allies and domestic critics of Trump about the motives of key players on the White House team, uncertainty about the President's sometimes erratic instincts and wider disdain for his bulldozing foreign policy.
Alarm bells are ringing among Trump critics because the cranking up of tensions appears to be largely orchestrated by national security adviser John Bolton.
Bolton is on record before he joined the Trump administration calling for regime change in Iran and US bombing, and his new power is providing a troubling reminder for American allies of the run-up to war with Iraq.
Bolton was a hawkish member of the Bush administration that used now-discredited intelligence about weapons of mass destruction and hyped the threat from Saddam Hussein that led America and its allies into a quagmire in the Middle East.
Trump denied on Wednesday that there was any disagreement inside his administration about Iran policy and sought to show in a tweet that he was in control.
"Different opinions are expressed and I make a decisive and final decision - it is a very simple process. All sides, views, and policies are covered. I'm sure that Iran will want to talk soon," Trump tweeted.
He appeared to be referring in part to a Washington Post story that suggested that the President was losing patience with Bolton and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo over their aggressive approach to Iran, which he fears runs counter to his reluctance to get embroiled in major conflicts like the Iraq War.
The White House, meanwhile, announced that Trump would meet Thursday with Swiss President Ueli Maurer. Switzerland acts as a diplomatic proxy for the US with Iran in the absence of diplomatic relations, and the meeting may be a sign that Trump wants to push for dialogue with Tehran -- however unlikely such a scenario appears to be.

• 
  

Tom Cotton: We want Iran to change its behavior 18:05
Pompeo has been frenetically traveling to and from Europe, stiffening US rhetoric on Iran, though he insists Washington is not trying to provoke the Islamic Republic into war.
In another foreboding sign, the administration Wednesday pulled back non-emergency employees from its embassy in Iraq, warning of threats in a country where pro-Iranian militia operate.
Unnamed US officials have said Iran or Iran-backed forces are suspected of carrying out "sabotage" attacks on shipping off the United Arab Emirates including two Saudi tankers and a Norwegian flagged vessel. So far they have presented no evidence of Iranian involvement.
State Department officials said Tuesday the threat to US interests in Iraq was similar to what was seen at a previous time of tension with in 2011, including the possibility of barrel bombs, explosives targeting diplomats' homes and rockets targeting diplomatic compounds involving militia groups sponsored by Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.
In a region as consumed by conflict, conspiracy theories and power struggles as the Middle East the fog of war is always thick. It could well be that Iran is deliberately testing the US in response to Washington's own escalation and that the administration is simply passing on and not exaggerating threats.
There is no argument among the US and its allies that Iran is often a nefarious influence. But the question is how to deal with it.
Divisions over the nature of the problem burst into the open Tuesday in an unusual show of transatlantic military discord. The British general serving as deputy commander of the US-led military coalition against ISIS said there had been "no increased threat" from Iranian-backed forces in Iraq or Syria.
In an extraordinary statement issued hours later, a spokesman for US Central Command said Major General Chris Ghika's comments "run counter to the identified credible threats available to intelligence from U.S. and allies regarding Iranian backed forces in the region."
The rebuke came a day after British Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt said he was worried about a US-Iran conflict "happening by accident" on the back of suddenly rising tensions.
European foreign ministers did not offer Pompeo a group meeting during his sudden visit to Brussels this week, perhaps fearing a photo-op would be seen as an endorsement of the US approach.
And Spain decided to recall a frigate from a US armada that is now steaming towards the Persian Gulf.
Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Arkansas, a proponent of a robust US foreign policy, told CNN's Christiane Amanpour that warnings of a rising Iran threat to US forces were sincere.
"That British general and I may have a different kind of interpretation of that threat or how severe that threat is," he said. "But I can only say that on the Senate Intelligence Committee, we've seen in recent days heightened reporting about potential threats to US personnel and our allies in the Middle East, and we take that very seriously."
The administration will attempt to convince less supportive lawmakers after offering a briefing for "Gang of Eight" congressional leaders on Thursday.
Logical consequence of events


Iran accuses US of escalating tensions as Russia decries 'downward spiral'
In many ways, the Trump administration is now reaping what it has sown with a domestic approach that often challenges established fact and a foreign policy that has often gone out of its way to insult and demean allies while elevating US adversaries.
European Union states all but begged Trump not to pull out of the Iran nuclear deal signed by the Obama administration -- noting that US intelligence agencies assessed that Tehran was in compliance with the accord.
The rising tensions between Iran and the US might be seen as a logical consequence of events that flowed from Trump's decision -- that appeared more influenced by political than diplomatic motivations. The White House argued correctly that the international accord did not halt what Washington sees as destabilizing regional activity, including missile launches and support for extremist groups.
But its supporters say it put a decade-long lid on Iran's nuclear program -- the only way it can pose an existential threat to its enemies -- in return for a lifting of sanctions.
If the deal collapses completely and Iran decides to enrich uranium to weapons grade, Trump could face a decision on risky military action that could cause shock waves around the world and provoke full-scale war.
Alarm bells are ringing among Trump critics because the cranking up of tensions appears to be largely orchestrated by Bolton.
Bolton is on record before he joined the Trump administration calling for regime change in Iran and US bombing and his new power is providing a troubling reminder for American allies of the run-up to war with Iraq.
Bolton was a hawkish member of the Bush administration that used now discredited intelligence about weapons of mass destruction and hyped the threat from Saddam Hussein that led America and its allies into a quagmire in the Middle East.
Trump denied on Wednesday that there was any disagreement inside his administration about Iran policy and sought to show in a tweet that he was in control.
"Different opinions are expressed and I make a decisive and final decision - it is a very simple process. All sides, views, and policies are covered. I'm sure that Iran will want to talk soon."
The Iraq war's still potent influence on politics in Europe cannot be underestimated and might tie the hands of any allied US leader if asked to join a US coalition against Iran.
Trump's unpopularity in Europe and his disregard for its leaders and priorities -- including the nuclear deal and the Paris climate accord -- are also an impediment to his subordinates as he seeks to sell his Iran policy.
The Trump administration is yet to provide any public proof of its allegations about a rising Iran threat. And the drip, drip, drip of accusations against Iran by anonymous officials in the media is a reminder of the campaign for war with Iraq in the 2000s.
Democrats seek to exploit Iran fever

https://www.sammyboy.com/javascript:void(0);

• 
  

Democrats block effort to kill the Iran nuclear deal 02:48
But concern about Bolton's influence on US policy is not confined to Europe. The veteran foreign policy bureaucrat's power is turning into a political issue for Trump's domestic opponents.
"John Bolton is telling him what to do. Bolton did the same with President George W. Bush and Iraq," said Democratic Rep. Seth Moulton, who is running for the Democratic nomination.
"As someone sent four times to that misguided war, I have seen the costs of Bolton's disastrous foreign policy in a way he never will -- firsthand, and at the loss of thousands of American lives," Moulton said in a statement.
One of the front-running Democratic 2020 hopefuls, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, is also now mobilizing amid rising war fever.
"A lesson that we should have learned a long time ago is the unintended consequences of war. That is you think something is going to happen but the result is very, very different," Sanders said on AC360 on CNN on Tuesday night. "We should have learned the lesson of Iraq and apparently at least John Bolton has not."
The administration says its policy of massive economic pressure on Iran and a precautionary military build-up is not an overt attempt at regime change -- though officials would not object if Iranians rise up against the clerical regime.
But it is a policy rooted in a belief that Washington has the power and knowledge to shape events in the Middle East -- an idea that seems hardly credible given events in the last 15 years.
There is also the question of whether Bolton and Pompeo, who have been hawks on Iran for years, are forcing the President into a position which will leave him few strategic options.
There are not many restraining influences left in the foreign policy team, with the departure of generals who have known the human cost of war -- such as former Defense Secretary James Mattis who was no dove on Iran, but was also trusted by US allies.
An emerging political question is whether Trump -- who has been happy to fling bellicose rhetoric about Iran but has been wary of large-scale foreign military entanglements -- will get spooked by rising tensions and rein Bolton back in.
CNN's Nicole Gaouette, Michelle Kosinski, Barbara Starr and Kylie Atwood contributed to this story

https://www.ft.com/content/1e59341a-77fa-11e9-be7d-6d846537acab




Donald Trump says he hopes US can avoid war with Iran

Democrats demand proof from administration on claims of increased threat from Tehran

Tensions are running high between Washington and Tehran following a series of warnings by US officials of unspecified ‘escalatory action’ by Iran © EPA-EFE/REX/Shutterstock

• Share on Twitter (opens new window)
• Share on Facebook (opens new window)
• Share on LinkedIn (opens new window)

• Save to myFT

Aime Williams in Washington, Andrew England and David Bond in London and Najmeh Bozorgmehr in Tehran
yesterday
Print this page 254


President Donald Trump said he hoped the US would not go to war with Iran, cooling tensions at the end of a week in which worries spiked over the risk of conflict between the US and the Islamic republic.
As he stood outside the West Wing waiting to meet Swiss president Ueli Maurer on Thursday, Mr Trump was asked by a reporter whether the US was going to war with Iran. He replied: “I hope not.”
The president’s retort followed growing speculation that he was less supportive of engaging Iran than his hawkish advisers.
Western diplomats in Tehran said Iran remained wary of provoking the US to strike the country as the Islamic republic’s strategy was to avoid a military confrontation.
“Iran has no interest in a war with the US. Why would Iran even think of striking the US first?” said a senior western diplomat in Tehran. “And Trump is not into a war, either, unless the two sides are caught in an accidental war.”
The New York Times reported on Thursday that Mr Trump — in a meeting the previous morning — had told Patrick Shanahan, the acting defence secretary, that he did not want to go to war with Iran
The White House did not respond to requests for comment on the matter.
Although the US and Iran do not have a formal diplomatic relationship, Switzerland serves as a “protecting power” for the US in the country, meaning it represents the US in Tehran.
Mr Maurer told reporters on Thursday that Iran had taken up less of his conversation with Mr Trump than expected. “Iran has not been that big of an issue, the discussion has not been majorly about Iran,” he said.
Earlier, US lawmakers demanded to see intelligence on the increased threat the Trump administration says Iran poses to American interests as questions grew about the evidence on which Washington’s claims are based.
Bob Menendez, the top Democrat on the Senate foreign relations committee, said that it was “hard to justify” the administration’s position on Iran as it refused to provide Congress with “specifics about what these increased threats actually are”.
Tensions have been running high between Washington and Tehran following a series of warnings by US officials of unspecified “escalatory action” by Iran, which have been accompanied by US military deployments to the region.
Mr Menendez said senators were requesting “a comprehensive briefing from appropriate, senior level administration officials on exactly what these increased threats are, and whether there is consensus within our intelligence community and the broader national security structure.”
John Bolton, the US national security adviser who has in the past called for regime change in Iran, announced last week that the US was deploying an aircraft carrier strike group, bombers and other military assets to the Middle East as he talked up the threat he said Iran posed. He said the US would respond to any attack with “unrelenting force”.
But Mr Trump this week dismissed a report that defence officials are revising a plan that envisaged the US deploying up to 120,000 troops to the Middle East if Iran attacked American forces.

Why tensions are rising in the Middle East

Nancy Pelosi, the Democratic House of Representatives Speaker, said the administration had “no authorisation” to declare war with Iran. “I like what I hear from the president that he has no appetite for this. It’s one of the places where I agree with the president,” said Ms Pelosi, who added that some of Mr Trump’s supporters were “rattling sabres”.
On Wednesday the US ordered the departure of all non-essential staff from its diplomatic missions in Iraq, citing security concerns.
The New York Times reported that the intelligence behind the White House warnings on the Iranian threat comprised photographs of suspected Iranian missiles on board boats in the Gulf.
However, Jim Risch, the Republican chairman of the Senate foreign relations committee, said the president was responding to a “wide range of intelligence information”, and not “just” the pictures.
On Wednesday Lindsey Graham, a Republican senator, said: “I would urge the state department and [Pentagon] to come down here and explain to us what’s going on because I have no idea what the threat stream is beyond what I read in the paper.”
Chuck Schumer, the top Senate Democrat, has demanded a full briefing from Mr Shanahan and General Joseph Dunford, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff.
Intelligence officials were expected to brief a small number of lawmakers, including Ms Pelosi, on Thursday afternoon.
Adding to nervousness in the region, the Saudi-led coalition fighting in Yemen said on Thursday that it had conducted a series of air strikes on Houthi rebels in retaliation for attacks on the kingdom’s oil infrastructure in recent days.
The Iran-aligned Houthis claimed responsibility for a drone attack on Saudi oil pumping stations earlier this week. Riyadh said the attack caused “limited damage” to the stations run by Saudi Aramco, the state oil company, on its east-west pipeline.
The drone attack came days after two Saudi oil tankers were among four vessels struck in a sabotage operation off the coast of the United Arab Emirates. Nobody has claimed responsibility for the ship attacks. Riyadh and Abu Dhabi are Mr Trump’s staunchest Arab allies in his efforts to counter Iran’s regional influence.
Arab News, a Saudi pro-government paper, on Thursday called for surgical strikes against Iran, saying the Trump administration had set a precedent by bombing Syria in the wake of gas attacks. “There has to be deterrent and punitive action in order for Iran to know that no sinister act will go unpunished; that action, in our opinion, should be a calculated surgical strike,” the paper said.
Jeremy Hunt, the British foreign minister, said the UK shared “the same assessment of the heightened threat posed by Iran”.
“As always we work closely with the US,” he said on Twitter.
Recommended







Global Insight Edward Luce

US sets course for its next Middle Eastern war of choice





Britain’s Foreign Office was frustrated that comments by the British deputy commander of the US-led coalition against Isis were interpreted as the UK’s government position and signalled scepticism about the US’s warnings in London, an official said.
In a video briefing with the Pentagon on Tuesday, Major General Christopher Ghika had said there was “no increased threat from Iranian-backed forces in Iraq and Syria”.
On Thursday, the UK defence ministry raised the threat level for its troops stationed in Iraq.
Although the UK says British troops do not have a combat role in Iraq, Britain has 400 soldiers on the ground. Working with allies in the global coalition against Isis, they provide training and equipment to Iraqi and Kurdish security forces.
The defence ministry declined to comment on why the threat level had been raised or whether it was connected to a specific Iranian security threat against British or allied assets in the region.
The Netherlands and Germany said earlier this week that they would be suspending their military training missions in the country.
Additional reporting by Ahmed Al Omran in Hofuf



https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/16/world/middleeast/iran-war-donald-trump.html

Trump Tells Pentagon Chief He Does Not Want War With Iran

President Trump told Patrick Shanahan, left, the acting defense secretary, that he does not want to go to war with Iran.CreditSarah Silbiger/The New York Times

Image

President Trump told Patrick Shanahan, left, the acting defense secretary, that he does not want to go to war with Iran.CreditCreditSarah Silbiger/The New York Times
By Mark Landler, Maggie Haberman and Eric Schmitt

• May 16, 2019

• 
  
• 
  

WASHINGTON — President Trump has sought to put the brakes on a brewing confrontation with Iran in recent days, telling the acting defense secretary, Patrick Shanahan, that he does not want to go to war with Iran, administration officials said, while his senior diplomats began searching for ways to defuse the tensions.
Mr. Trump’s statement, during a Wednesday morning meeting in the Situation Room, sent a message to his hawkish aides that he does not want the intensifying American pressure campaign against the Iranians to explode into open conflict.
For now, an administration that had appeared to be girding for conflict seems more determined to find a diplomatic off-ramp.
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo called the leader of Oman, Sultan Qaboos bin Said, on Wednesday to confer about the threat posed by Iran, according to a statement. Long an intermediary between the West and Iran, Oman was a site of a secret channel in 2013 when the Obama administration was negotiating a nuclear agreement with Iran.
Mr. Pompeo also asked European officials for help in persuading Iran to “de-escalate” tensions, which rose after American intelligence indicated that Iran had placed missiles on small boats in the Persian Gulf. The intelligence, which was based on photographs that have not been released but were described to The New York Times, prompted fears that Tehran may strike at United States troops and assets or those of its allies.
Asked on Thursday whether the United States was going to war with Iran, Mr. Trump replied, “I hope not.”

You have 2 free articles remaining.
Subscribe to The Times


The developments cast into sharp relief a president who is instinctively wary of military adventures and a cadre of advisers — led by the national security adviser, John R. Bolton — who have taken an uncompromising line toward Iran. The internal tensions have prompted fears that the Trump administration is spoiling for a fight, even if the commander in chief may not be.
Those divisions are playing out against a fierce internal debate among administration officials about the gravity of the Iranian threat. While officials and British allies say the intelligence about the threat is valid, lawmakers and some inside the administration accuse Mr. Trump’s aides of exaggerating the danger and exploiting the intelligence to justify a military clash with Tehran.
The administration’s internal debate over Iran was described by five senior officials who demanded anonymity to discuss sensitive internal deliberations.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/17/...on=CompanionColumn&contentCollection=Trending

Iran dismissed any suggestion of a dialogue with Mr. Trump. “The escalation by the United States is unacceptable,” the Iranian foreign minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif, said Thursday.
Indeed, there was a new potential flash point in Iran’s standoff with the United States, stemming from its vow last week to step away from some of the limitations imposed by the nuclear deal, a year after Mr. Trump pulled the United States out of the agreement that was negotiated between Tehran and world powers in 2015.
State Department officials, speaking to reporters, set a red line that they warned Iran would cross at its peril: It could not ramp up its nuclear fuel production to the point where it could produce a nuclear weapon in less than one year.
The officials did not specify what kind of reaction — military or otherwise — would come if Iran built up enough of a stockpile of uranium and took other steps to cross that threshold. But they acknowledged that the steps announced by Iran’s president, Hassan Rouhani, could eventually give Tehran that ability.
No new information was presented to Mr. Trump at the Situation Room meeting that argued for further engagement with Iran, according to a person who attended.
Mr. Shanahan and Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr., the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, presented the president with a range of military options and checked off the troop levels, costs and risks of each, one of the officials said.
But Mr. Trump was firm in saying he did not want a military clash with the Iranians, several officials said.
Sign up for The Interpreter
Subscribe for original insights, commentary and discussions on the major news stories of the week, from columnists Max Fisher and Amanda Taub.


The president has sought to tamp down reports of divisions among Mr. Bolton, Mr. Pompeo and the Pentagon. Military officials have warned against escalating the confrontation, even as Mr. Bolton ordered the Pentagon to present options to send as many as 120,000 troops to the Middle East to respond to Iranian provocations.
Video




4:41John Bolton Wants Regime Change in Iran. What’s His Alternative?
Tensions between the United States and Iran have sharply increased. John Bolton, the national security adviser, has long pushed for regime change in Iran. One of his chosen replacements is the dissident group Mujahedeen Khalq, known as M.E.K.CreditCreditDoug Mills/The New York Times
“There is no infighting whatsoever,” Mr. Trump said Wednesday on Twitter. “Different opinions are expressed and I make a decisive and final decision - it is a very simple process. All sides, views, and policies are covered.”
Mr. Trump added that he was confident that Iran “will want to talk soon,” though one senior official said the White House was highly unlikely to pursue a secret diplomatic channel for talking to Iran, as the Obama administration had done.
Mr. Pompeo has outlined 12 steps that Iran must take to satisfy the United States — including halting all ballistic missiles tests and cutting off support for militant groups in Syria and Yemen — which critics in the Pentagon view as unrealistic and could back Iranian leaders into a corner. He recently described American policy as being calculated to produce domestic political unrest in Iran.
But for all of his harsh words toward Tehran, several officials said Mr. Pompeo was rankled by being lumped in with Mr. Bolton as bent on war. A former Republican lawmaker, Mr. Pompeo is an astute reader of Mr. Trump’s preferences and will plunge into diplomacy, if necessary, as he has with North Korea.
Mr. Bolton, as a private citizen, long called for regime change in Tehran. He has resisted compromises that would open the door to negotiations, has stocked the National Security Council with Iran hard-liners and has masterminded recent policy changes to tighten the economic and political vise on the clerical government in Tehran.
Three officials said Mr. Trump is less frustrated with Mr. Bolton over his handling of Iran — he favors the tougher measures as a warning to Tehran — than over the evolving narrative that his national security adviser is leading the administration’s policy in the Middle East.
The president, they said, is well versed and comfortable with the administration’s recent steps, which have included imposing increasingly onerous sanctions on Iran and designating an arm of the Iranian military, the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, a foreign terrorist organization.
Some officials have argued that Iran’s actions did not warrant a significant American response, like potentially deploying thousands of troops to the Middle East, or the partial evacuation of the United States Embassy in Baghdad.
“It’s a situation where this president has surrounded himself with people, Pompeo and Bolton in particular, who believe that getting tough on a military basis with Iran is in our best interest,” said Senator Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, the No. 2 Democrat, as he emerged from an intelligence briefing on Thursday. “I do not.”
Mr. Bolton, several of the officials said, has quietly voiced frustration with the president, viewing him as unwilling to push for changes in a region that he has long seen as a quagmire. He has kept an unusually tight grip on the policymaking process for a national security adviser.
Mr. Bolton’s independence has rankled the acting chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney, and has even prompted rumors that his job might be in jeopardy — something the White House denies.
But Mr. Trump has poked fun at Mr. Bolton’s reputation for hawkishness, joking in meetings with him. “If it was up to John, we’d be in four wars now,” one of the senior officials recalled Mr. Trump as saying.
Mr. Trump is also impatient with another of Mr. Bolton’s campaigns: the effort to oust President Nicolás Maduro in Venezuela. After the opposition’s failed attempt to peel away key Maduro allies and turn the Venezuelan military against him, Mr. Maduro appears harder to dislodge than ever.
In recent days, officials said, Mr. Trump has begun consulting outsiders, including Jack Keane, the former Army vice chief of staff and architect of the Iraq war troop surge who now appears regularly on Fox News.
Mr. Keane declined to discuss any conversations he had with Mr. Trump, but said, “I’m confident that we’re not heading to a war with Iran, and whatever measures we will use, if in fact Iran does something provocative, will be measured and deliberate in not tolerating provocation.”
Other former government officials, however, criticized the Trump administration’s policy as hobbled by internal disarray.
Derek Chollet, an assistant secretary of defense for international security affairs under President Barack Obama, said the Trump administration was “riddled by a fundamental contradiction — a president who wants to withdraw from the Middle East and an administration with a maximalist policy of regime change.”
Diplomats who were involved in negotiations with Iran during the Obama administration said intermediaries like Oman could theoretically ease the tensions. But they said the White House’s unyielding position — epitomized by Mr. Pompeo’s 12 demands — would make fruitful negotiations impossible.
“Reinserting diplomacy into the strategy is not just about signaling that you want to talk and finding a channel, but about actually being ready to talk realistically,” said William J. Burns, a former deputy secretary of state who led the secret talks with Iran and recently published “The Back Channel,” an account of the diplomacy.

Reporting was contributed by David E. Sanger, Helene Cooper, Edward Wong and Annie Karni.

 

[Ang4MohTrump]

Dotard's ass is firmly locked in at least 7 major pot of hot soup and he cannot even find 1 that he can win. He is going to get impeached and he is fucking struggling desperately!

1. Iran Nuke
2. Kim jong Nuke
3. Syria
4. Afghanistan
5. Syria
6. Xijinping Trade War
7. Venezuela

Putin locked Dotard's ass under cross hair of 6 types of newest and invincible nukes, and Dotard have no counter-measure against ANY of the six! It is a six-fold checkmate!

 

[Ang4MohTrump]

Modern Civilized ways are the ways for the WEAKLINGS and UNFIT for SURVIVAL, and foolishly attempt to preserve and pamper them!

Carnage and Elimination and Brutalism is the way of the Strong the Fit and the Survivors.