Jump to content

What's happening in Iran?


Parliament

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

It’s going to cause a problem but it gets a bit more complicated than that.  The facility has to be in use for a diplomatic or consular purpose. You can easily think of obvious examples where this doesn’t work. If the PRC constructed a small airfield next to its mission in say, Vancouver with the permission of the Canadians, and then started flying drone sorties from it against Seattle and proclaimed it was an inviolable facility that wouldn’t work as a defense. Even if Canada agreed, you can’t use a consulate as a military base to launch attacks. 
 

This is a grayer area of course, but revolutionary states in the Middle East have a history of playing in this gray zone. Plenty of terrorist attacks have been planned and launched from diplomatic facilities. The Libyans famously shot a protester in the middle of London from their mission.  The aforementioned BA bombings were planned and directed inside of the Iranian embassy in Argentina. 
 

You generally lose inviolability if a facility is used to break laws. The normal response is expulsion but in this case the facility is operating with permission of the Syrians. The presence of so many IRGC operatives raises the obvious question of what the facility really was— they weren’t doing visas or promoting commercial ties. 

Don't agree. That is why we have cold sites.

So want to talk about the US mission and other groups in Berlin during the Cold War?

Iran will hit back. Where? Won't be a mission. It will be a soft target. That is what they do.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Berlin was an interesting case because for much of the time it was a legally occupied city and the mission answered to the U.S. general in control of the occupation zone. 
 

There’s a zone of shenanigans under diplomatic cover as well as responses and this is for sure on the upper end of the “fafo” spectrum for both sides given the activities and tensions.
 

The Russians used “consulates” across Eastern Europe for all sorts of bullshit and after Ukraine some countries got fed up and just announced that the facilities were to be vacated and returned to the municipalities because they weren’t being used properly. That’s the standard way of dealing with this, but it’s also true that if they get a foothold in one country they use that to do illegal shit all across the region. It presents a big problem when they go beyond standard cloak and dagger stuff and real civilians get killed. 

 It appears like this building itself was attached to the broader compound and had some legit purposes. 

My sneaking suspicion is that these guys were most likely moved into the building because Israel had been blowing up IRGC meeting points all over Syria and Damascus and this was a bid to try and protect them.  Hezbollah stated that one of its people was killed in there as well. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree they were using it. Mischievous and Churlish.

Um and no on Berlin. Dad was in the 77th. They reported to the deputy chief of station, not DOD, for operations. Oh well, lets start fucking up Diplomatic places around the globe.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

I agree they were using it. Mischievous and Churlish.

Um and no on Berlin. Dad was in the 77th. They reported to the deputy chief of station, not DOD, for operations. Oh well, lets start fucking up Diplomatic places around the globe.

Mission Berlin reported to the U.S. commanding general until 1974, when we recognized East Germany. In Berlin the Mission even had occupation authorities when it came to approving important municipal roles.  MPs and not Marines guarded the facility. 
 

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Mission Berlin reported to the U.S. commanding general until 1974, when we recognized East Germany. In Berlin the Mission even had occupation authorities when it came to approving important municipal roles.  MPs and not Marines guarded the facility. 
 

 

Notice who I referenced. I have the pellet gun used to piss off Russian troops on the wall. The Embassy was in Bonn. DON'T FUCKING BLOW UP DIPLOMATIC LOCATIONS.

Oh, and in El Salvador they hit my moms window with a RPG-7. RSO armored the embassy so much it collapsed in the 1986 earthquake.

Brah, been there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, FartingMonk said:

Not a political opinion.  We ran missions out of there.  That's not an opinion.  

Spell out your comparison. Are you comparing Ambassador Stevens to the Iranian RG commander?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

Notice who I referenced. I have the pellet gun used to piss off Russian troops on the wall. The Embassy was in Bonn. DON'T FUCKING BLOW UP DIPLOMATIC LOCATIONS.

We once had an embassy in Iran. Do you know why we don’t anymore?

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, statsman said:

Spell out your comparison. Are you comparing Ambassador Stevens to the Iranian RG commander?

We ran CIA missions out of Benghazi.  Ambassador Stevens is not the comparison to the RG commander but those CIA dudes probably did just as crazy shit as the RG commander.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

Notice who I referenced. I have the pellet gun used to piss off Russian troops on the wall. The Embassy was in Bonn. DON'T FUCKING BLOW UP DIPLOMATIC LOCATIONS.

Oh, and in El Salvador they hit my moms window with a RPG-7. RSO armored the embassy so much it collapsed in the 1986 earthquake.

Brah, been there.

This one?

U.S. EMBASSY HEAVILY DAMAGED IN ARMED ATTACK IN SAN SALVADOR
UPI
March 26, 1981

Gunmen attacked the United States Embassy today with rocket-propelled grenades and submachine guns, extensively damaging the building, an embassy spokesman said. Leftists claimed responsibility for the attack, the fourth this month.

No one was injured in the incident, Howard Lane, the spokesman, said. The attack was carried out by 12 men, one of whom fired the handheld grenade launcher from a parking lot across the street while the others fired submachine guns at the building in an apparent diversion, according to Mr. Lane.

They also threw a hand grenade that blew up under a car parked near the embassy in another apparent diversion, he said. Leftist guerrillas from the Popular Liberation Forces, claiming responsibility for the attack in phone calls to radio stations, said that it was in retaliation for United States military aid to the Government and ''against the Salvadoran people's fight.''

Mr. Lane said that both United States Marines and Salvadoran policemen guarding the bunkerlike embassy in northern San Salvador had opened fire on the gunmen who staged the attack.

Mr. Lane said that no one was injured inside the building but that a rocket that hit the building had destroyed a 20-foot window and most of its concrete frame on the front side of the embassy's third floor. The blackened area around the hole was pockmarked with bullet holes.

Mr. Lane's official communique on the incident said that it was ''the fourth attack in three weeks.'' Only three attacks had previously been reported in March -the mission was swept by gunfire from passing cars on March 4 and again on March 17 - but embassy sources said that journalists had not noticed another incident earlier this month, the firing of ''several shots'' at the embassy.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, statsman said:

We once had an embassy in Iran. Do you know why we don’t anymore?

Something about Ben Affleck making a sci-if movie there, and pretending to be a Canadian or something, and smuggling some Canadians out.

/Gen Z

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, bolverk said:

This one?

U.S. EMBASSY HEAVILY DAMAGED IN ARMED ATTACK IN SAN SALVADOR
UPI
March 26, 1981

Gunmen attacked the United States Embassy today with rocket-propelled grenades and submachine guns, extensively damaging the building, an embassy spokesman said. Leftists claimed responsibility for the attack, the fourth this month.

No one was injured in the incident, Howard Lane, the spokesman, said. The attack was carried out by 12 men, one of whom fired the handheld grenade launcher from a parking lot across the street while the others fired submachine guns at the building in an apparent diversion, according to Mr. Lane.

They also threw a hand grenade that blew up under a car parked near the embassy in another apparent diversion, he said. Leftist guerrillas from the Popular Liberation Forces, claiming responsibility for the attack in phone calls to radio stations, said that it was in retaliation for United States military aid to the Government and ''against the Salvadoran people's fight.''

Mr. Lane said that both United States Marines and Salvadoran policemen guarding the bunkerlike embassy in northern San Salvador had opened fire on the gunmen who staged the attack.

Mr. Lane said that no one was injured inside the building but that a rocket that hit the building had destroyed a 20-foot window and most of its concrete frame on the front side of the embassy's third floor. The blackened area around the hole was pockmarked with bullet holes.

Mr. Lane's official communique on the incident said that it was ''the fourth attack in three weeks.'' Only three attacks had previously been reported in March -the mission was swept by gunfire from passing cars on March 4 and again on March 17 - but embassy sources said that journalists had not noticed another incident earlier this month, the firing of ''several shots'' at the embassy.

No, we came in later. FMLN and their groups would shoot at it all the time. And the Embassy was in Downtown, not north.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, InkaUtexas said:

Iran will hit back. Where? Won't be a mission. It will be a soft target. That is what they do.

Maybe use the Houthi?  I don’t see how they can do something directly against Israel, but they can try and pressure their allies.  Hitting the allies in Iraq or Syria just gives those allies an open season to hit more Iranian assets.  Using the Houthis to fuck with shipping, or worse, hit an American ship, seems  a little less risky.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

US braces for retaliation after attack on Iran consulate — even as it says it wasn’t involved

WASHINGTON (AP) — Shortly after an airstrike widely attributed to Israel destroyed an Iranian consulate building in Syria, the United States had an urgent message for Iran: We had nothing to do with it.

But that may not be enough for the U.S. to avoid retaliation targeting its forces in the region. A top U.S. commander warned on Wednesday of danger to American troops.

And if Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s recent broadening of targeted strikes on adversaries around the region to include Iranian security operatives and leaders deepens regional hostilities, analysts say, it’s not clear the United States can avoid being pulled into deeper regional conflict as well.

The Biden administration insists it had no advance knowledge of the airstrike Monday. But the United States is closely tied to Israel’s military regardless. The U.S. remains Israel’s indispensable ally and unstinting supplier of weapons, responsible for some 70% of Israeli weapon imports and an estimated 15% of Israel’s defense budget. That includes providing the kind of advanced aircraft and munitions that appear to have been employed in the attack.

Israel hasn’t acknowledged a role in the airstrike, but Pentagon spokeswoman Sabrina Singh said Tuesday that the U.S. has assessed Israel was responsible.

Multiple arms of Iran’s government served notice that they would hold the United States accountable for the fiery attack. The strike, in the Syrian capital of Damascus, killed senior commanders of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps for Syria and Lebanon, an officer of the powerful Iran-allied Hezbollah militia in Lebanon, and others.

American forces in Syria and Iraq are already frequent targets when Iran and its regional allies seek retaliation for strikes by Israelis, notes Charles Lister, the Syria program director for the Middle East Institute.

“What the Iranians have always done for years when they have felt most aggressively targeted by Israel is not to hit back at Israelis, but Americans,” seeing them as soft targets in the region, Lister said.

cont'd

Spoiler

On Wednesday in Washington, the top U.S. Air Force commander for the Middle East, Lt. Gen. Alexus Grynkewich, said Iran’s assertion that the U.S. bears responsibility for Israeli actions could bring an end to a pause in militia attacks on U.S. forces that has lasted since early February.

He said he sees no specific threat to U.S. troops right now, but “I am concerned because of the Iranian rhetoric talking about the U.S., that there could be a risk to our forces.”

U.S. officials have recorded more than 150 attacks by Iran-backed militias in Iraq and Syria on U.S. forces at bases in those countries since war between Hamas and Israel began on Oct. 7.

One, in late January, killed three U.S. service members and injured dozens more at a base in Jordan.

In retaliation, the U.S. launched a massive air assault, hitting more than 85 targets at seven locations in Iraq and Syria, including command and control headquarters, drone and ammunition storage sites and other facilities connected to the militias or the IRGC’s Quds Force, the Guard’s expeditionary unit that handles Tehran’s relationship with and arming of regional militias. There have been no publicly reported attacks on U.S. troops in the region since that response.

Grynkewich told reporters the U.S. is watching and listening carefully to what Iran is saying and doing to evaluate how Tehran might respond.

Analysts and diplomats cite a range of ways Iran could retaliate.

Since Oct. 7, Iran and the regional militias allied to it in Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen have followed a strategy of calibrated attacks that stop short of triggering an all-out conflict that could subject Iran’s homeland forces or Hezbollah to full-blown war with Israel or the United States.

Beyond strikes on U.S. troops, possibilities for Iranian retaliation could include a limited missile strike directly from Iranian soil to Israel, Lister said. That would reciprocate for Israel’s strike on what under international law was sovereign Iranian soil, at the Iranian diplomatic building in Damascus.

A concentrated attack on a U.S. position abroad on the scale of the 1983 attack on the U.S. Embassy in Beirut is possible, but seems unlikely given the scale of U.S. retaliation that would draw, analysts say. Iran also could escalate an existing effort to kill Trump-era officials behind the United States’ 2020 drone killing of Iranian General Qassem Soleimani.

How far any other retaliation and potential escalation goes may depend on two things out of U.S. control: Whether Iran wants to keep regional hostilities at their current level or escalate, and whether Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s far-right government does.

Sina Toossi, a fellow at the Center for International Policy, said analysts in Iran are among those trying to read Netanyahu’s mind since the attack, struggling to choose between two competing narratives for Israel’s objective.

“One perceives Israel’s actions as a deliberate provocation of war that Iran should respond to with restraint,” Toossi wrote in the U.S.-based think tank’s journal. “The other suggests that Israel is capitalizing on Iran’s typically restrained responses,” and that failing to respond in kind will only embolden Israel.

Ultimately, Iran’s sense that it is already winning its strategic goals as the Hamas-Israel war continues — elevating the Palestinian cause and costing Israel friends globally — may go the furthest in persuading Iranian leaders not to risk open warfare with Israel or U.S. in whatever response they make to Monday’s airstrike, some analysts and diplomats say.

Shira Efron, a director of policy research at the U.S.-based Israel Policy Forum, rejected suggestions that Netanyahu was actively trying with attacks like the one in Damascus to draw the U.S. into a potentially decisive conflict alongside Israel against their common rivals, at least for now.

“First, the risk of escalation has increased. No doubt,” Efron said.

“I don’t think Netanyahu is interested in full-blown war though,” she said. “And whereas in the past Israel was thought to be interested in drawing the U.S. into a greater conflict, even if the desire still exists in some circles, it is not more than wishful thinking at the moment.”

U.S. President Joe Biden is facing pressure from the other direction.

So far he’s resisting calls from growing numbers of Democratic lawmakers and voters to limit the flow of American arms to Israel as a way to press Netanyahu to ease Israeli military killing of civilians in Gaza and to heed other U.S. appeals.

As criticism has grown of U.S. military support of Israel’s war in Gaza, State Department spokesman Matthew Miller has increasingly pointed to Israel’s longer-term need for weapons — to defend itself against Iran and Iranian-allied Hezbollah in Lebanon.

The U.S. is ″always concerned about anything that would be escalatory,” Miller said after the attack in Damascus. “It has been one of the goals of this administration since October 7th to keep the conflict from spreading, recognizing that Israel has the right to defend itself from adversaries that are sworn to its destruction.’'

Israel for years has hit at Iranian proxies and their sites in the region, knocking back their ability to build strength and cause trouble for Israelis.

Since the Oct. 7 attack by Hamas, one of a network of Iran-aligned militias in the region, that shattered Israel’s sense of security, Netanyahu’s government has increasingly added Iranian security operatives and leaders to target lists in the region, Lister notes.

The U.S. military already has deepened engagement from the Mediterranean to the Red Sea since the Hamas-Israel war opened — deploying aircraft carriers to the region to discourage rear-guard attacks against Israel, opening airstrikes to quell attacks on shipping by Iran-allied Houthis in Yemen.

It is also moving to build a pier off Gaza to try to get more aid to Palestinian civilians despite obstacles that include Israel’s restrictions and attacks on aid deliveries.

 

  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/4/2024 at 9:19 PM, The Dog said:

3yearletterman trying to start WWIII:

https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/05/politics/us-israel-iran-retaliation-strike/index.html
 

Quote

The US is on high alert and actively preparing for a “significant” attack that could come as soon as within the next week by Iran targeting Israeli or American assets in the region in response to Monday’s Israeli strike in Damascus that killed top Iranian commanders, a senior administration official tells CNN.

Senior US officials currently believe that an attack by Iran is “inevitable” – a view shared by their Israeli counterparts, that official said. The two governments are furiously working to get in position ahead of what is to come, as they anticipate that Iran’s attack could unfold in a number of different ways – and that both US and Israeli assets and personnel are at risk of being targeted.

Excited Ice Hockey GIF by NHL

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/5/2024 at 10:04 PM, atomheartbevo said:

Senior US officials currently believe that an attack by Iran is “inevitable”

A week later and US officials are claiming that we are seeing Iran move long-range drones and cruise missiles around, possibly for a strike inside Israel, and Iran is talking shit publicly. Launching cruise missiles into Israel proper seems like it would start a new level of shit.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it’s pretty clear the whole “we’ve got intelligence on what you’re about to do” is to act as a deterrent.  
 

I think I’m done fucking around with Iran.  The revolution has burnt itself out and they are essentially Russia but with more religion and melanin.  They’ll persist as an autocratic petrostate trying to export insurgencies as long as we allow it.  

Edited by LCHorn
  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...