Iran just invaded Iraq [updating]

[gumOnShoe]

I don't know anything else, I just saw it.

Now I think we can easily say Iran is trying to test us and whether Obama is just a lightweight. The crazy person in me is thinking: let the games begin.

But this could be very horrible. They've essentially grabbed an oil well, as far as I know.

[gumOnShoe]

[source]

Possibly less than it appeared to be when I first saw the headline, but that's probably what they would be aiming for.

[Elfer]

I'd say you should maybe be a bit cautious here, as recent history has shown us that the reasons for attacking a country can later turn out to be largely trumped up and false.

[gumOnShoe]

At 12/18/09 11:32 AM, Elfer wrote: I'd say you should maybe be a bit cautious here, as recent history has shown us that the reasons for attacking a country can later turn out to be largely trumped up and false.

Yeah, I may have because I only saw the headline when I made the topic as there wasn't anything else uploaded.

It's definitely suspicious though, happening on the same day that this happens:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/12/18/twitt er.hacked/index.html

[Elfer]

At 12/18/09 11:41 AM, gumOnShoe wrote: It's definitely suspicious though, happening on the same day that this happens:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/12/18/twitt er.hacked/index.html

That's really not that suspicious. Hacker groups pull shit like that to get street cred for themselves all the time. The fact that some allegedly Iranian group did something on the same day could easily be a coincidence, especially considering that groups with certain political views would have a vendetta against Twitter right now.

Besides that, can you imagine any military scenario where part of the plan would be "compromise the Twitter DNS info for maybe an hour"?

[gumOnShoe]

At 12/18/09 11:49 AM, Elfer wrote:

At 12/18/09 11:41 AM, gumOnShoe wrote: It's definitely suspicious though, happening on the same day that this happens:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/12/18/twitt er.hacked/index.html

That's really not that suspicious. Hacker groups pull shit like that to get street cred for themselves all the time. The fact that some allegedly Iranian group did something on the same day could easily be a coincidence, especially considering that groups with certain political views would have a vendetta against Twitter right now.

Besides that, can you imagine any military scenario where part of the plan would be "compromise the Twitter DNS info for maybe an hour"?

I think you vastly underestimate the stupidity of some of the people who run Iran. (Some of them).

They automatically think foreigners are spies no matter what. Twitter was used during the protests to spread information and their government shut down access within. If Iran is seeing Twitter as a security risk it makes perfect sense that they'd attack the site before an operation they don't want to get out.

That said, what you said makes sense. It could have been a gang. It's just less likely given the circumstances. I view this more as the same kind of thing with the Russian/Georgian conflict. It may not have been the Iranian government, but it probably was someone tied close to them.

[Elfer]

At 12/18/09 12:22 PM, gumOnShoe wrote: That said, what you said makes sense. It could have been a gang. It's just less likely given the circumstances. I view this more as the same kind of thing with the Russian/Georgian conflict. It may not have been the Iranian government, but it probably was someone tied close to them.

Well, most likely it would have been government sympathizers, but it's not like shutting down Twitter would do anything at all about this oil well thing, since it takes several hours for news to enter the public consciousness anyway, and it's not as if people are going to see posts on Twitter and hop in their jet to go help out. It's really irrelevant.

Personally I think the two events being directly causally linked is less likely than a coincidence in this case.

[Locke357]

While we definitely have to exhibit proper prudence, something major is going down here. I'm sure very quickly we'll see the US response . . . and they won't be happy. I think we should be very critical of the information we receive on this event, and be wary of false-flag operations. Not to throw the magical word "conspiracy" out there, but it wouldn't be the first time the US military used or planned to use a false-flag op to find an excuse to go to war.

[Ace360]

At 12/18/09 11:21 AM, gumOnShoe wrote: [source]

Possibly less than it appeared to be when I first saw the headline, but that's probably what they would be aiming for.

Oh, boy...

[gumOnShoe]

At 12/18/09 02:15 PM, Locke357 wrote: it wouldn't be the first time the US military used or planned to use a false-flag op to find an excuse to go to war.

I highly doubt the Obama administration would do this though, with his consent anyway. :/

And yes, its looking a lot less like anything globally important now... continues to speculate. Invade certainly was way to harsh.

[satanbrain]

iran is taking over the world. is that surprising you?

[animehater]

Let's just hope the opposition can gain enough traction to overthrow these fools and avoid and possible conflict. That and maybe give Iraq some breathing room to be the regional power I know it can be.

[BrianEtrius]

Also interesting, US stimulates an Iran Missile Defense system Very odd.

Okay, but here's the point I don't get: Why would Iran do this? It makes no logical sense for them to purposely invade a rebuilding country when a foreign enemy is helping rebuild infrastructure. It simply doesn't make sense for them to do so, seeing how it would weaken their position globally.

Oh top of that, these are just Iraqi reports, not US intelligence reports, so I'm not too sure I can trust them yet.

[TheladiesMan47]

I read in Reuters that this is a contested oil field, and they interviewed an engineer that worked at the place and He said this happens like 4 or 5 times a year, and the soldiers usually stay for a few days before going back home.

[Korriken]

At 12/19/09 01:07 AM, BrianEtrius wrote: Also interesting, US stimulates an Iran Missile Defense system Very odd.

Okay, but here's the point I don't get: Why would Iran do this? It makes no logical sense for them to purposely invade a rebuilding country when a foreign enemy is helping rebuild infrastructure. It simply doesn't make sense for them to do so, seeing how it would weaken their position globally.

a war with Iran would be highly unpopular with the american people, and Obama's leftist friends. Iran knows this. It would be logical for them to attack now because it would force Obama to either attack Iran to drive them off (unpopular with his friends) or let them take parts of Iraq. And we all know Obama is all about appeasing his friends.

Oh top of that, these are just Iraqi reports, not US intelligence reports, so I'm not too sure I can trust them yet.

time will tell.

[McPaper]

Thats a pretty bold topic title.

"The oil field is in disputed territory in between Iranian and Iraqi border forts," he said, adding that such incidents occur quite frequently. - NASIRIYAH, Iraq (AFP)

[MrPercie]

First irans missile/nuclear power crisis now suspected of sending troops into Iraqi oil field.

[JediSlayer15]

Actually A war with Iran could Be popular. If its seen as Iran as trying to get closer to Israel and Europe to Use Nukes and the such. This would cause the same International Tizzy 9-11 did. The whole world would rally around Iraq and send troops to quell Iran's Imperialist, Anti-Semitic, Democracy hating war.

I will, however, give the benefit of the doubt to the approval rating of such a war.

It could be like Post WW1 Europe where everyone is trying to avoid war and No one cares. Iran would Expand, Make Iraq its new territory and set its eyes further west and further East. If the lack of care continued Iran could rename itself Persia and begin a new quest for domination. Its Anti American Views would pull Nations Like Venezuela and A portion of the Middle East with it. WWIII would begin.

I don't think the Iranians are that Desperate right now, especially considering the Internal problems they have. If they did go to war their internal dissidents could become Pro-Western Insurgents and could destroy the nation from inside out. That would be most interesting to watch.

[BrianEtrius]

At 12/19/09 10:25 AM, Korriken wrote: a war with Iran would be highly unpopular with the american people, and Obama's leftist friends. Iran knows this. It would be logical for them to attack now because it would force Obama to either attack Iran to drive them off (unpopular with his friends) or let them take parts of Iraq. And we all know Obama is all about appeasing his friends.

That would be every reason NOT for Iran to go to war. Iran knows by now Obama's going around and kissing ass to make amends. Wouldn't you think they'd want to capitalize on this? Besides, if they really wanted a war with America they would have had an easier time earlier in the War in Iraq, say before the Surge. Furthermore, wouldn't provoking a war-minded president like Bush make it easier to get support from other Middle Eastern countries?

If anything, ANYTHING, all this does is make Iran look even stupider and unpopular on a global scale, thus they would get little, if any, support. And I seriously doubt this has little to do with American politics.

All of this just doesn't make sense.

[LordJaric]

found this

An unknown number of troops crossed the border and raised an Iranian flag over the Fakkah oil field, a US military spokesman told the AFP news agency.

They are understood to have stayed for several hours and then withdrawn back across the border.

"This news is not true," Deputy Interior Minister Ahmed Ali al-Khafaji told the Reuters news agency.

"This field is disputed and now it is neglected by both sides. There was no storming of the field. It's empty, it's abandoned. It is exactly on the border of Iraq and Iran."

link

[BrianEtrius]

At 12/19/09 10:27 PM, LordJaric wrote: link

See, this makes much more sense. Iran wouldn't do something this spontaneous. Diplomatically it's just stupid.

[MrPomponopolis]

At 12/19/09 01:07 AM, BrianEtrius wrote: Also interesting, US stimulates an Iran Missile Defense system Very odd.

Okay, but here's the point I don't get: Why would Iran do this? It makes no logical sense for them to purposely invade a rebuilding country when a foreign enemy is helping rebuild infrastructure. It simply doesn't make sense for them to do so, seeing how it would weaken their position globally.

Oh top of that, these are just Iraqi reports, not US intelligence reports, so I'm not too sure I can trust them yet.

Iran doesn't need, nor are they "stupid" enough (like some have been claiming them to be), to invade Iraq. They already have an overwhelming influence over the country and direct invasions are completely against the MO of Iran in regards to its pseudo-empirical expansion.

[Gortag]

Do you know what an invasion is?

Iran didn't "Invade" Iraq.It's a border dispute.An oil well is located closer to an Iranian border fort(couple hundred metres) than an Iraqi one(the closest Iraqi border fort is a kilometre away.Anyways,as of this morning the small squad of Iranians has left,taking the Iranian flag that they had put over the installation with them.Iraq and Iran are planning to demarcate their land and sea borders within the coming months.

This has nothing to do with your Obama.

[erenahmed]

Iran Iraq
what serousely is
the difference between
them.

[ThePretenders]

At 12/27/09 08:12 PM, erenahmed wrote: Iran Iraq
what serousely is
the difference between
them.

Except the fact that the ethnic majority in Iran are Persians and in Iraq, the Arabs comprise most of the country. That and many ethnic and cultural differences.

[Warforger]

At 12/19/09 11:22 AM, JediSlayer15 wrote: Actually A war with Iran could Be popular. If its seen as Iran as trying to get closer to Israel and Europe to Use Nukes and the such. This would cause the same International Tizzy 9-11 did. The whole world would rally around Iraq and send troops to quell Iran's Imperialist, Anti-Semitic, Democracy hating war.

I will, however, give the benefit of the doubt to the approval rating of such a war.

It could be like Post WW1 Europe where everyone is trying to avoid war and No one cares. Iran would Expand, Make Iraq its new territory and set its eyes further west and further East. If the lack of care continued Iran could rename itself Persia and begin a new quest for domination. Its Anti American Views would pull Nations Like Venezuela and A portion of the Middle East with it. WWIII would begin.

I don't think the Iranians are that Desperate right now, especially considering the Internal problems they have. If they did go to war their internal dissidents could become Pro-Western Insurgents and could destroy the nation from inside out. That would be most interesting to watch.

They won't rename themselves Persia, in fact the renaming has to do with them thinking there Aryans (strangly enough...). Now Israel has nukes, and the US is in nearby Afghanistan, there other friend, North Korea, is geographically displaced to do anything besides diversion. A portion of the Middle East? How many countries are against us? Even the Shariah law countries like Qatar and Saudi Arabia are great allies with us, the only country which could come close to attacking us is Syria, and thats because its still mad at Israel. Then there's the fact that Israel and the USA have nukes vs. Irans 0 nukes, the only country in the world that has more nukes then the US is Russia, and they don't want a war anymore then the US does.

At 12/27/09 08:12 PM, erenahmed wrote: Iran Iraq
what serousely is
the difference between
them.

Iraq-Arabs
Iran-Persians
Iraq-speaks Arabic
Iran- Speaks Farsi (or Persian)
Iraq-Arabic culture
Iran-Persian culture

[hongkongexpress]

Babylon-Persia, Iraq Iran, ptttth big deal.

[ThePretenders]

At 12/27/09 09:02 PM, Warforger wrote:

They won't rename themselves Persia, in fact the renaming has to do with them thinking there Aryans (strangly enough...).

What's so strange about this? The term Aryan is descended from the word Arya, a Sanskrit word which means the speakers of the Iranian languages. Aryans originated from that region and the only reason you find it strange is because the word has been hijacked by Nazis, when they have used that term to describe themselves thousand of years before the Nazis.

[fli]

At 12/19/09 10:25 AM, Korriken wrote: a war with Iran would be highly unpopular with the american people, and Obama's leftist friends. Iran knows this. It would be logical for them to attack now because it would force Obama to either attack Iran to drive them off (unpopular with his friends) or let them take parts of Iraq. And we all know Obama is all about appeasing his friends.

I'm begging you, please tune in when you're speaking.
OH MY GOD...

I don't put past any country to use its own people has a ploy to start wars for greater plans...
President Polk comes to mind... although, so does Ozymandeus from Watchman too...

But they're thinking of SIGNIFICANT gains... (Like, gaining more land and things like that)

Possibly swaying, very indirectly, American politics is... at best... trivial.
It's not logical... it's downright illogical.

After all, the president isn't exactly king. It's just one branch of power of three... and then there's congress and senate and things like that!

Even if Iran accomplishes the absurd and makes the democrats as the enemies Obama, what exactly does that accomplish? Obama is just signing stuff into laws (or rejecting them), not making them. In fact, the democrats and the president can feel indifferent and ambivalent to one another, and yet have a working relationship.

No.
If Iran is gonna attack Iraq... it would be for greater things like land or money.

[fli]

Add to that list... Revenge.

Either it's about conquest (gaining money or land) or revenge.