US - Iran Flare Up

U.S. embassy in Baghdad evacuated as protesters denounce U.S. air strikes

U.S. embassy in Baghdad evacuated as protesters denounce U.S. air strikes
Protesters and militia fighters gather to condemn air strikes on bases belonging to Hashd al-Shaabi, outside the main gate of the U.S. Embassy in BaghdadMore
By Ahmed Rasheed

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - The U.S. ambassador to Iraq and other staff were evacuated from their embassy in Baghdad for their safety on Tuesday, Iraqi officials said, as thousands of protesters and militia fighters outside the gate denounced U.S. air strikes in Iraq.

On Sunday, U.S. planes had attacked bases belonging to an Iranian-backed militia, a move that risks drawing Iraq further into a proxy conflict between Washington and Tehran at a time when mass protests are challenging Iraq's political system.

The attack on the Kataib Hezbollah militia was in response to the killing of a U.S. civilian contractor in a rocket attack on an Iraqi military base.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: screambowl
Qasem Soleimani reportedly killed in Baghdad Airport, militia leader blames Israel, US
January 03, 2020

451341

An Iraqi Airways plane lands at Baghdad International airport (photo credit: REUTERS/THAIER AL-SUDANI)​

Iraqi paramilitary groups report that IRGC Quds Force commander Qasem Soleimani was among those killed in an air strike on their vehicles inside Baghdad International Airport, militia sources reported on early Friday, after Iraq's Security Media Cell announced that three katyusha rockets had targeted Baghdad Airport.

The militia members were hosting "important guests" at Baghdad airport who were being driven in two militia vehicles that were struck by two rockets, said the militia sources.

Two militia sources said the two guests were also killed in the attack but declined to identify them. Police and health sources said that at least five people were killed and nine wounded. Iraqi state media reported that Soleimani and the deputy head of the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF), Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, were both killed in the attack.

Shi'ite PMF said in a post on Facebook that its director of public relations was killed in what it described as "cowardly U.S. bombing."
Iraqi PMF spokesman Ahmed al-Assadi blamed "Americans and Israelis" for being behind the attack.

"The American and Israeli enemy is responsible for killing the mujahideen Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis and Qassem Soleimani," said Assadi.There was no immediate claim of responsibility.

Supporters of Iranian-backed Iraqi paramilitary groups stormed the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad on Tuesday following U.S. air raids on Sunday against Kataib Hezbollah militia bases in retaliation for missile attacks that killed a U.S. contractor in northern Iraq last week.

Tension between the United States and Iran has ramped up in the region over U.S. economic sanctions hurting the Iranian economy. The two sides have traded blame over attacks on oil installations, militia arms depots as well as military bases hosting U.S. forces.

Speaking to Reuters, US officials speaking on condition of anonymity confirmed that the US had struck targets in Baghdad related to Iran.
It is unknown if they were referring to the airport, as they declined to give further details.

Jerusalem Post Staff contributed to this report.
------------------------------------------------
Source: The Jerusalem Post
-----------------------------------------------

This is huge if true. General Soleimani was very high ranked and famous among Iranians/Shia.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BMD
Ginvincible said:
This can potentially ignite the whole region. I will be surprised if Iran let's this go unanswered. Anecdotally, I've heard Soleimani mentioned by other researchers I work with, iranian-americans mainly. He was a highly respected and admired figure in Iran, a hero to them.
Click to expand...
Or maybe instead of igniting the whole region they will just bring two more towers down in US, cost effective and very impactful.

It's impossible for IRAN to let this go.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ginvincible
Ginvincible said:
This can potentially ignite the whole region. I will be surprised if Iran let's this go unanswered. Anecdotally, I've heard Soleimani mentioned by other researchers I work with, iranian-americans mainly. He was a highly respected and admired figure in Iran, a hero to them.
Click to expand...

This is why perhaps US warned it's airliners to avoid flying over Pakistan, as I said on other thread. The shia milita can use their land for anything.

screambowl said:
The event which occured outside US embassy Baghdad, Pakistan or India might have shared some input. I believe Pakistan has, they want to have a nice image to gain US trust
Click to expand...
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Ginvincible and BlackOpsIndia
BlackOpsIndia said:
Or maybe instead of igniting the whole region they will just bring two more towers down in US, cost effective and very impactful.

It's impossible for IRAN to let this go.
Click to expand...

Attacks on American soft targets would be foolish. Any attacks domestically would actually invite the lance of the US. Targeting troops in the region as well as the PMU's going nuts in Iraq is certain. A new tanker war is also a possibility. There is too much potential for this to escalate out of control.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: jetray and BlackOpsIndia
Ginvincible said:
Attacks on American soft targets would be foolish. Any attacks domestically would actually invite the lance of the US. Targeting troops in the region as well as the PMU's going nuts in Iraq is certain. A new tanker war is also a possibility. There is too much potential for this to escalate out of control.
Click to expand...
Sulla84 said:
Targeting US homeland will prove too costly for Iran. Iranian cities will see massive destruction...
Click to expand...
US can't win from Taliban after fighting 18years, still begging to surender, infact every country they have fought was never really militarily prepared to face a professional force but still they couldn't win a single one.

Iran is whole another ball game, if US invades Iran they will start targeting more US cities and trust me within few days US will agree for peace. Only Russia has capability to strike their cities and their public still wet their pants by mere mention of Russia, not to mention those drills kids were trained to hide during nuclear strike.

They will make US to surender or whatever to feel safe again. North Korea, Iran, Iraq, Taliban and other allied groups can run rampage in US and no amount of FBI, CIA can stop it but feel helpless.
 
BlackOpsIndia said:
US can't win from Taliban after fighting 18years, still begging to surender, infact every country they have fought was never really militarily prepared to face a professional force but still they couldn't win a single one.

Iran is whole another ball game, if US invades Iran they will start targeting more US cities and trust me within few days US will agree for peace. Only Russia has capability to strike their cities and their public still wet their pants by mere mention of Russia, not to mention those drills kids were trained to hide during nuclear strike.

They will make US to surender or whatever to feel safe again. North Korea, Iran, Iraq, Taliban and other allied groups can run rampage in US and no amount of FBI, CIA can stop it but feel helpless.
Click to expand...

I think you vastly overestimate the ability of Iran to project terror overseas. I don't doubt that they could sponsor major terror attacks, but security is really good domestically. I doubt they could sustain the effort. Regardless, any attacks would basically be signing a death warrant for Khamenei and any potential for the Iranian economy to ever recover.

The US won't invade Iran, we know we can't win a war of occupation and that style of war is so massively unpopular here. The US could absolutely rain death from above and would do so with impunity. Unlike Iran, the US could sustain the effort. Also big lol at the prospects of North Korea and the Taliban avenging the death of an Iranian general.

If I'm Israel or Saudi Arabia I would be on high alert since those are the most reasonable targets Iran could hit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sulla84
BlackOpsIndia said:
US can't win from Taliban after fighting 18years, still begging to surender, infact every country they have fought was never really militarily prepared to face a professional force but still they couldn't win a single one.

Iran is whole another ball game, if US invades Iran they will start targeting more US cities and trust me within few days US will agree for peace. Only Russia has capability to strike their cities and their public still wet their pants by mere mention of Russia, not to mention those drills kids were trained to hide during nuclear strike.

They will make US to surender or whatever to feel safe again. North Korea, Iran, Iraq, Taliban and other allied groups can run rampage in US and no amount of FBI, CIA can stop it but feel helpless.
Click to expand...
Look.. US lost Afghanistan the day they allied with Pakistan to defeat the Taliban. The US has Russia and Iran as its enemies, and hence, it went ahead and relied on Taliban chief sponsor Pakistan, to provide a logistics route to eliminate the Taliban. There was only one way this would end.
Long wars like counter insurgency operations are impossible to win if you have a neighbouring state sponsoring terror... like kashmir...
And who said US wants to invade Iran. Invading Iran is a logistical nightmare. The US would only do a massive bombing campaign on Iranian cities, if US homeland is attacked...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ginvincible
I think Iran might look for retaliation in SA , especially near yemen border where its proxies have good presence. Oh I forgot our neighbor..........:giggle:
 
Ginvincible said:
Regardless, any attacks would basically be signing a death warrant for Khamenei and any potential for the Iranian economy to ever recover
Click to expand...
I think you vastly overestimate might of US, they are strong, no doubt, but even after all their might they couldn't even remove Assad, the country already half occupied by IS and what's what.

Good luck with signing death warrant of every country and thinking others will plainly watch.
Ginvincible said:
I don't doubt that they could sponsor major terror attacks, but security is really good domestically. I doubt they could sustain the effort.
Click to expand...
That's the whole point, they don't need to. Terriosts don't need to strike daily, even small attacks, once in a month will instill more fear in common public than killing 100 Marines per month.

You are ignoring the lifestyle of public in both countries. One is habitual of death and poverty and state violence, you kill few more, big deal, they will just unite in name of country and Islam

Other is habitual of safe secure lifestyle, even a bearded man shouting Allah Hu Akbar makes the whole area go crazy.

Then comes the democracy, the biggest weakness in war. If those 'raining' hell gets shot down by S300 or S400 and paraded on TV the opposition will make you end the war (or maybe you have mature opposition but still they won't leave this lucrative opportunity to stab the knife).

The fundamental problem in a conflict between a strong side and weaker side is that weaker may not need to win it, stalemate is a glorious victory for them and for stronger side even a small victory is nothing short of defeat.

Taliban has strong links with Iran and North Korea has own axe to grind, you can lol as much you like but opening too many fronts is a sure shot receipe to disaster.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vingensys, Abhay rajput and Ginvincible
Rumour that Iran targeting Operation Inherent Resolve HQ, sent query to some people for confirmation. Time to grab some popcorns....
 
Sulla84 said:
And who said US wants to invade Iran. Invading Iran is a logistical nightmare. The US would only do a massive bombing campaign on Iranian cities, if US homeland is attacked...
Click to expand...
That is actually invasion.

jetray said:
I think Iran might look for retaliation in SA , especially near yemen border where its proxies have good presence. Oh I forgot our neighbor..........:giggle:
Click to expand...
Saudi oil supplies are just appetizers. Killing offical commander of a nation, actually two nations won't stop with attacking Saudi Arabia. Though with Raheel Sharif there chances of Saudi surrendering are pretty high and makes it a lucrative target ;)
 
BlackOpsIndia said:
US can't win from Taliban after fighting 18years
Click to expand...
what makes you think they are fighting to win? foothold in area between two enemies china & Iran has far more benefits.
BlackOpsIndia said:
prepared to face a professional force but still they couldn't win a single one.
Click to expand...
For the military they have post world war their record has been abysmal. They try to destroy a country economically before moving in , they will try to scare countries which have some thing to lose economically but against countries like NK or Iran it seems to have little effect. Near home cuba has shown more or less on how to handle the music and dance as well.
 
BlackOpsIndia said:
I think you vastly overestimate might of US, they are strong, no doubt, but even after all their might they couldn't even remove Assad, the country already half occupied by IS and what's wha
Click to expand...

Assad never directly attacked the US, only his own people. As much as our political elite wanted to remove him, doing so overtly was massively unpopular. If Iran directly sponsors terrorism against the US population the gloves will come off.

BlackOpsIndia said:
That's the whole point, they don't need to. Terriosts don't need to strike daily, even small attacks, once in a month will instill more fear in common public than killing 100 Marines per month.
Click to expand...

I think you underestimate the tolerance Americans have for internal violence. Dozens of people are killed here daily, foreign sponsored violence would absolutely raise eyebrows and, in the short term, raise morale for retaliation against Iran. Again, I highly doubt Iran could coordinate significant enough attacks for a protracted conflict. I may be wrong.

BlackOpsIndia said:
Taliban has strong links with Iran and North Korea has own axe to grind, you can lol as much you like but opening too many fronts is a sure shot receipe to disaster.
Click to expand...

North Korea absolutely won't do anything, Kim Jong Un isn't a fool and his main prerogative is remaining in power. The Taliban equally want the US to leave Afghanistan and will limit their attacks to forces in Afghanistan. Neither of these groups have any interest in poking the US excessively.

Regardless, this is all a moot point unless Iran actually targets the US mainland, which they logically have no incentive to do. They gain nothing and potentially lose everything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom