War Iran-United States Military Crisis of 2020 - US Baghdad embassy under siege, rocket fire in US Baghdad green zone, Ukrainian Airlines flight 752 crash, and more!

January 10th:
Exclusive: Informants in Iraq, Syria helped U.S. kill Iran's Soleimani - sources (archive)(post)
Iraqi Shia cleric whose militia killed American troops says crisis is over following Iran strike and Trump speech (archive)(post)
Iraqi PM tells US to decide mechanism for troop withdrawal (archive)(post)
Mike Pence says Congress might 'compromise sources and methods' if fully briefed on the Soleimani strike (archive)(post)
Unidentified planes hit Iraqi militiamen in Syria, killing 8 (archive)(post)
Iraq: The Master Of Mayhem Meets A Missile (archive)(post)
Eliminating Qasem Soleimani was Donald Trump’s Middle East farewell letter (archive)(post)
Iran uses BULLDOZERS to clear debris from plane crash site while accusing US of ‘big lie’ that they shot it down (archive)(post)
Swiss Back Channel Helped Defuse U.S.-Iran Crisis (post)

January 11th:
UKRAINIAN AIRCRAFT WAS BROUGHT DOWN IN IRAN DUE TO 'HUMAN ERROR' (archive)(post)
Iran minister says 'human error' caused by 'US adventurism' led to deadly crash of Ukrainian jetliner (archive)(post)
Ukrainian aircraft was brought down in Iran due to 'human error' (archive)(post)
Trump, at Ohio rally, says Democrats would have leaked Soleimani attack plans (archive)(post)
The Atlantic's David Frum blames Trump for downing of plane in Iran, deaths of 176 (archive)(post)
Associated Press changes ‘shockingly bad’ headline about Soleimani, Ukrainian plane crash after backlash (archive)(post)
GOP Rep. Doug Collins apologizes for saying Democrats are 'in love with terrorists' (archive)(post)
Iran demands West 'show findings' as new video reveals aircraft was struck before fiery crash (archive)(post)
Warren town hall interrupted by angry protester accusing her of ‘siding with terrorists’ (archive)(post)
Trump administration announces new sanctions on Iran (archive)(post)
Prepare For the Worst From Iran Cyber Attacks, As DHS Issues Warning: Experts (archive)(post)
Trump tells Fox News' Laura Ingraham 'four embassies' were targeted in imminent threat from Iran (archive)(post)
Trump tweets support for Iranian protesters as they demand Khamenei quit (archive)(post)
Trump warns Iran against ‘another massacre’ as protests flare over downed jet (archive)(post)

January 12th:
Trump tweet in Farsi 'the most liked Persian tweet' in history of Twitter (archive)(post)
Iraq warned to keep US troops or risk financial blow-WSJ (archive)(post)
Iran arrests UK ambassador in what Britain calls ‘flagrant violation of international law’ (archive)(post)

January 13th:
Trump authorized Soleimani's killing 7 months ago, with conditions (archive)(post)

edit: This is a WIP. All links are posted in the order they appear in the thread, not in chronological order of their publication.


---Original OP before the merge---
Iraqi supporters of Iran-backed militia attack US Embassy
https://apnews.com/75228a8a607a44863b57021ac33264dc (http://archive.vn/ljm9Y)

By QASSIM ABDUL-ZAHRA12 minutes ago

BAGHDAD (AP) — Dozens of angry Iraqi Shiite militia supporters broke into the U.S. Embassy compound in Baghdad on Tuesday after smashing a main door and setting fire to a reception area, prompting tear gas and sounds of gunfire.

An Associated Press reporter at the scene saw flames rising from inside the compound and at least three U.S. soldiers on the roof of the main building inside embassy. It was not clear what caused the fire at the reception area near the parking lot of the compound. A man on a loudspeaker urged the mob not to enter the compound, saying: “The message was delivered.”

The embassy attack followed deadly U.S. airstrikes on Sunday that killed 25 fighters of the Iran-backed militia in Iraq, the Kataeb Hezbollah. The U.S. military said it was in retaliation for last week’s killing of an American contractor in a rocket attack on an Iraqi military base that it had blamed on the militia.

Dozens of protesters marched inside the compound after smashing the gate used by cars to enter the embassy. The protesters, many in militia uniform, stopped in a corridor after about 5 meters (16 feet), and were only about 200 meters away from the main building. Half a dozen U.S. soldiers were seen on the roof of the main building, their guns were pointed at the protesters.

Smoke from the tear gas rose in the area, and at least three of the protesters appeared to have difficulties breathing. It wasn’t immediately known whether the embassy staff had remained inside the main building.

The protesters hanged a poster on the wall: “America is an aggressor.”

Shouting “Down, Down USA,” the crowd tried to push inside the embassy grounds, hurling water and stones over its walls. They raised yellow militia flags and taunted the embassy’s security staff who remained behind the glass windows in the gates’ reception area. They sprayed graffiti on the wall and windows in red in support of the Kataeb Hezbollah militia: “Closed in the name of the resistance.”

Hundreds of angry protesters, some in militia uniforms, set up tents outside the embassy. As tempers rose, the mob set fire to three trailers used by security guards along the embassy wall.

No one was immediately reported hurt in the rampage and security staff had withdrawn to inside the embassy earlier, soon after protesters gathered outside.

The U.S. attack — the largest targeting an Iraqi state-sanctioned militia in recent years — and the subsequent calls by the militia for retaliation, represent a new escalation in the proxy war between the U.S. and Iran playing out in the Middle East.

Tuesday’s attempted embassy storming took place after mourners and supporters held funerals for the militia fighters killed in a Baghdad neighborhood, after which they marched on to the heavily fortified Green Zone and kept walking till they reached the sprawling U.S. Embassy there.

AP journalists then saw the crowd as they tried to scale the walls of the embassy, in what appeared to be an attempt to storm it, shouting “Down, down USA!” and “Death to America” and “Death to Israel.”

U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said Sunday’s strikes send the message that the U.S. will not tolerate actions by Iran that jeopardize American lives.

The Iranian-backed Iraqi militia had vowed Monday to retaliate for the U.S. military strikes. The attack and vows for revenge raised concerns of new attacks that could threaten American interests in the region.

The U.S. attack also outraged both the militias and the Iraqi government, which said it will reconsider its relationship with the U.S.-led coalition — the first time it has said it will do so since an agreement was struck to keep some U.S. troops in the country. It called the attack a “flagrant violation” of its sovereignty.

In a partly televised meeting Monday, Iraqi Prime Minister Adel Abdul-Mahdi told Cabinet members that he had tried to stop the U.S. operation “but there was insistence” from American officials.

The U.S. military said “precision defensive strikes” were conducted against five sites of Kataeb Hezbollah, or Hezbollah Brigades in Iraq and Syria. The group, which is a separate force from the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah, operates under the umbrella of the state-sanctioned militias known collectively as the Popular Mobilization Forces. Many of them are supported by Iran.

.

 

[No Ma'ams Land]

I have found the levels of "WW3!!!!" to be ultimately hyperbolic. The usual suspects. Any article asking "WILL IRAN RESPOND WITH APOCALYPTIC FORCE???" or similar should automatically be subject to Betteridge's law.

 

[Pocket Dragoon]

It simple.

Because it's funnier.

Using something real cool makes that guy look cool by proxy. Spinning blades rototilling the guy is kind of cool in a metal death kind of way.

Getting splattered by a surplus Hellfire some drunken fuck at the Turkish AFB found at the back of the bunker isn't cool.

It's fucking hilarious.

My personal theory is that somewhere up the chain, someone has a really old-world sense of poetic justice.

Those fucks in Syria that got missile-minced; they liked to chop necks.

Suleimani liked to play with fire, hence the Hellfire.

 

[Sanshain]

That's another reason why Adolf Hitler and Napoleon Bonaparte would eventually lose because they both neglected the imporance of having a strong and well formed navy. Had they invested more in building up a navy then Napoleon Bonaparte's reign could have lasted longer and Adolf Hitler could have actually won World War 2. You can only get so far with ground forces and the less sea you have under your control the more easy it is for just about anyone to eventually kick your ass in the aftermath.

In neither case is this true. Both regimes were crippled from a material perspective, not a planning perspective. Oh, Hitler and Bony both desperately wanted to be considered naval superpowers, but this was absolutely impossible from a practical standpoint.

In Napoleon's case, it came down to supplies and training. The French Naval Doctrine was rotten to its core. They simply didn't have the incredibly high standards that the Royal Navy demanded of both its naval gunners and its able seamen. Granted, this wasn't universal. The Royal Navy had no shortage of hilariously incompetent morons bumbling about at higher echelons, and they managed to get completely blindsided by the American Heavy Frigates and their hulls of Indestructinium[TM]. But the Royal Navy had the supplies, manpower and fleet doctrine necessary to dominate in any major engagement.

A good example of this is Trafalgar. A larger French and Spanish force faced off against an inferior British force. The British also had smaller ships mounting fewer guns. Yet the French and Spanish navies lost so decisively it ended their status as significant naval powers altogether. Why? Doctrine and supplies. The French and Spanish fleets had languished at harbor for years. Their crews hadn't seen action for months, and they simply lacked the stamina to keep up with their British counterparts. The continental powers also had to make do with inferior-quality gunpowder, and could only manufacture it locally in small quantities. The British had so much high-quality gunpowder and cannonballs to spare that they frequently had their crews training with double broadsides and live ammunition. This meant that in any fight, the British crews had a much higher level of combat effectiveness, combined with access to better-quality materials to help them send frogs to hell. Quality over quantity. Except they also had quantity.

tl;dr: too many force multipliers to count.

Hitler faced a similar issue. The Nazi war-machine suffered from supply shortages from minute one of day one of World War II. The Kriegsmarine were no exception. The few surface ships they did have consumed titanic amounts of fuel and unfathomable quantities of men and material, all for little tactical or strategic value. The submarine fleet was definitely a major asset, but this was again bungled in a number of ways. The Germans simply could not figure out that their Enigma codes had been cracked, and even stopped using several extremely reliable aircraft detection systems on their submarines out of the mistaken belief that these were why their U-boats kept getting intercepted while cruising on the surface. More ships and more submarines wouldn't have solved these issues, they'd have just given the Allies more targets to shoot at.

Now, the Germans had a great navy during World War I. They had very powerful ships that were very well armored, with well-trained crews and massive guns. At the battle of Jutland, they demonstrated pound-for-pound superiority over any design the Royal Navy had, and their ships were much less susceptible to magazine explosions. But this superiority was actually what made them ineffective. They were so good that the German military was absolutely terrified of losing them. So they kept them close to home waters the entire war, and they were eventually all scrapped anyway when Germany lost.

Basically, if you want to be a naval power, start in the 1200's and never stop. Ever.

 

[Cosmos]

EDIT: Literally all I did was post screencaps of Trump contradicting himself and y'all are mad, lmao.

 

[TitanWest]

It's also sad to see Iran that it is now. You've probably seen pictures of what Iran used to be like before it became a theocratic dictatorship and what it looks like after.

This is what Iran used to look like before and after the revolution. Iran before looked like they were going to be the next Japan or Switzerland or something and then came the theocrats that fucked everything up and everything looks like something out of a dystopian novel now.

The Western looking Iranians were a relatively small number of middle class people from the cities. Most Iranians despised the Shah who banned the wearing of hijabs. Look up "hijab", "niqab", and "burqa". The hijab isn't inhumane nor oppressive of women (Like the niqab and burqa which are worn almost exclusively in Saudi Arabia, not Iran). The hijab was the traditional dress of Iranian women. Imagine the US gov't banning bluejeans. Iran today requires women to wear hijabs in public, but they are very lax with enforcement. Women often just wear them loosely as a sort of compromise between traditional Iranian customs and fashion. It's no where near as bad as Saudi Arabia.

Also the "and after" pictures are inaccurate. The women on the left dressed in all black except eye slits are Wahhabis from places like Saudi Arabia. They're called niqabs and burqas. The US and Israel are allied with the Saudis (Despite it being proven in court that elements of the Saudi gov't knew 9/11 was going to happen and didn't tell their "ally"). Saudi Arabia also funds Jihadis in Syria like ISIS and Al Qaeda.

The man in the mask holding up the knife and Qu'ran isn't Iranian either - he's an Arab. The flag looks like Hamas which is the SUNNI group that broke with Iran to back the Jihadis during the Syrian Civil War.

100% of the "bad things from Islam" are caused by Wahhabism and importing migrants to The West. Iran is causing neither of those two things. Saudi Arabia, Israel, and the Western elites are doing all of that. Don't fight wars on behalf of the people who are doing such awful things to The West.

 

[Huitzilopochtli]

I have found the levels of "WW3!!!!" to be ultimately hyperbolic. The usual suspects. Any article asking "WILL IRAN RESPOND WITH APOCALYPTIC FORCE???" or similar should automatically be subject to Betteridge's law.

This is actually another thing that confused me a little with the reporting. Iran has four options for reprisal. Discount Benghazi, Discount Cole, Discount 9/11, and Cry. They fucked up the first option, they don't have the decade plus to plan the third option, and the Navy is running modified CIWS (seaRAM and Phalanx) since the early 2000's, so good luck with the second option.

Maybe they'll have better luck with Twitter.

 

[School of Fish]

Look up "hijab", "niqab", and "burqa". The hijab isn't inhumane nor oppressive of women (Like the niqab and burqa which are worn almost exclusively in Saudi Arabia, not Iran).

That's the funniest joke that I ever heard so far. Thanks for the laugh.

 

[PS1gamenwatch]

This video got relevant again

 

[TitanWest]

That's the funniest joke that I ever heard so far. Thanks for the laugh.

Passive aggressiveness isn't a valid counter argument. I'll repeat myself:

100% of the "bad things from Islam" are caused by Wahhabism and importing migrants to The West. Iran is causing neither of those two things. Saudi Arabia, Israel, and the Western elites are doing all of that. Don't fight wars on behalf of the people who are doing such awful things to The West.

 

[School of Fish]

Passive aggressiveness isn't a valid counter argument.

Neither is disregarding that most Islamic countries in the middle east are nothing but backwater third-world shitholes where bombings and wars are an almost a commonplace occurrence.

 

[Jump]

This shit is getting good!

Air strikes targeting Iraqi militia kill six: army source

Air strikes targeting Iraq's Popular Mobilization Forces umbrella grouping ...

www.reuters.com

What Trump is basically saying now:

Hey Iran!
You bitch ass nigger! What ya gona do now?
Thats right, NOTHING!

Iran can march around and fire their AK's in the sky screaming aloah snackabar and death to America until they turn blue in the face. Doesn't matter because Trump isn't sending "boots on the ground" to get in to a 1950's style war. In Current Year+3 if any of their leaders show their face outside then some zoomer gamer sitting in an air conditioned room 500 miles away will yeet them with a reaper drone that is so high in the sky they can't even see it. They don't even get to see the thing that kills them. They are reduced to scurrying around in darkness like cockroaches now. To bad for them reapers can see in the dark too.

Oh and if you work at an Iranian oil refinery maybe tomorrow is a good time to call out sick.

 

[TitanWest]

Neither is disregarding that most Islamic countries in the middle east are nothing but backwater third-world shitholes where bombings and wars are an almost a commonplace occurrence.

We agree then. Don't back countries like Saudi Arabia and Israel who are funding those bombings and wars. Iran is a moderating influence on the Middle East. They protect Christians and combat the radical brand of Islam known as Wahhabism because Wahhabis kill Shia, Christians, Yazidis, Sufis, and even other Wahhabis.

Are you a butthurt Israeli?

 

[School of Fish]

We agree then. Stop backing countries like Saudi Arabia and Israel who are funding those bombings and wars. Iran is a moderating influence on the Middle East. They protect Christians and combat the radical brand of Islam known as Wahhabism because Wahhabis kill Shia, Christians, Yazidis, Sufis, and even other Wahhabis.

Are you a butthurt Israeli?

 

[TitanWest]

Also not an argument, butthurt Israeli.

Spoiler: Iranian-backed Syria vs Jihadis

 

[WutangLee]

Iran will have to revise their soft power doctrine from this. I guess hiring terrorists comes with consequences now.

We agree then. Don't back countries like Saudi Arabia and Israel who are funding those bombings and wars. Iran is a moderating influence on the Middle East. They protect Christians and combat the radical brand of Islam known as Wahhabism because Wahhabis kill Shia, Christians, Yazidis, Sufis, and even other Wahhabis.

Are you a butthurt Israeli?

Damn son, maybe you can go to Iraq to suck off Solemani's rotted smoldering dick if you loved him so much. Orange man and Big Nose Man bad. We get it.

 

[School of Fish]

Also not an argument, butthurt Israeli.

Spoiler: Iranian-backed Syria vs Jihadis

View attachment 1081806

First of all, I'm not Israeli. If that is the basis of you defending these types of countries then take a fucking speech class or something.

Second, citation needed. For all I know those 'stats' are probably what you pulled out of your ass using Microsoft Excel. Link me to something such as actual and credible news reports and government reports, not whatever you found on fucking Stormfront.

Thirdly:

 

[Feline Supremacist]

We agree then. Don't back countries like Saudi Arabia and Israel who are funding those bombings and wars. Iran is a moderating influence on the Middle East. They protect Christians and combat the radical brand of Islam known as Wahhabism because Wahhabis kill Shia, Christians, Yazidis, Sufis, and even other Wahhabis.

Are you a butthurt Israeli?

Islam is all kinds of fucked up. This wasn't always the case but it is now. Islam lacks a central moderating authority, which allows all kinds of idiocy to run rampant, such as pregnant women/seriously ill people fasting during Ramadan, cousin marriage, the Shia two hour marriage (muta) and loads of regional pagan beliefs too numerous to list. Any sheik claiming to interpret Islam according to his beliefs is allowed.

 

[It's HK-47]

View attachment 1081757View attachment 1081770View attachment 1081771

EDIT: Literally all I did was post screencaps of Trump contradicting himself and y'all are mad, lmao.

Probably because none of these were strikes at Iran as a whole--just the Mullahs--his poll numbers aren't tanking and he's having no trouble setting the stage for re-election. It's really not much of a comparison. These are very specific, very high-priority targets that have been on the world's shit-list for more than a decade. What was the alternative option? Allow these terrorist organizers to walk away consequence-free from a premeditated attack on a U.S. embassy?

Iran knew exactly what it was doing by staging that attack. What Iran didn't expect was that in response, America would immediately leap straight over an old-school "boots on the ground" approach and instead choose to specifically target their leadership. What Iran did to our embassy easily qualifies as a declaration of war. Instead of a war, America just mangled their generals.

I'm a much bigger fan of this approach instead of mounting some sort of post-9/11 Clusterfuck 2.0.

 

[WutangLee]

Probably because none of these were strikes at Iran as a whole--just the Mullahs--his poll numbers aren't tanking and he's having no trouble setting the stage for re-election. It's really not much of a comparison. These are very specific, very high-priority targets that have been on the world's shit-list for more than a decade. What was the alternative option? Allow these terrorist organizers to walk away consequence-free from a premeditated attack on a U.S. embassy?

They are expecting Jimmy Carter/John Kerry/Bill Clinton/Obama to get on their knees and beg for their forgiveness.

 

[MrTickles]

Iran is quite capable of targetting America's allies, leadership and assets in turn. It has far more affiliated boots on the ground across the middle east. Just a few hours ago the Us resorted to bombing the Yazidis, a group almost genocided by isis, just because it is part of the PMU. This is set up for strategic failure because to 'win' you need to bring the regional population to ones side. As things stand the vast majority of iraqi's, iranians and syrians are chanting death to the evil empire.. the us alienated its closest grassroots allies, the kurds recently, and the only reason all sunnis aren't going full isis is because they're being caged up by unsustainable absolute dictatorships like the al saud regime which is bleeding so heaily in yemen the media isnt even covering that conflict anymore.. This is not a 'war' the Us can win. You're losing the 'war' on terror. It has weakened you considerably at home and abroad.

You're setting yourselves and the west up for long term failure, like you did with the Taliban, who have emerged victorious because they have maintained actual support from the population. All you're gaining from this conflict is further expenses for your military contractors, which are weakening American tax payers and policies abroad.

Which is why this is a great thing and I support it 100%. Things will hopefully escalate measurably prior to trumps re-election. America is being stretched thin, prime position to be in for China's and Russia's goals to be fulfilled in Asia and Europe. The middle east is bleeding you, you're stuck there perpetually multiplying your enemies, and its oh so hilarious. Contrast that with Russia's stance, it managed to insert itself into syria and completely change the war for its benefit with just a third of its annual TRAINING budget. You blew more money every month since 2015 just over syria alone, all you got from it is a kurdish 'ally' that now hates you because your other 'ally' turkey (which you've sanctioned because its buying strategic weapons systems from Russia lol) is bumfucking them as we speak...even as it invades libya and props up an anti us regime. Your musical chairs leadership is aimless, self serving and without a long term strategy. This latest self defeating act was directed from tel aviv lol. More fuel for the grand conspiracy, trump informed his israeli masters of the attack before he did his own government... And the whole world knows it. Suddenly polarization at home gets another boost and uncertainty regarding the situation abroad becomes the norm.