U.S. National Security Council Sought Military Options Against Iran Upon Request From John Bolton – Report

bolton is the liaison man between the deep shit and the mic and is instructed to make certain that there is a continuous demand for weapons from the desperate states of friggin a so that the war profiteers won’t have to wait for windfall profits. they much prefer the steady and reliable profits from any and all wars kept going by bolton. bolton would be better off locked up in the nearest asylum for the mad and insane!

Americans think that all leaders are as corrupt as they are in the USA. Americans simply cannot accept that people like Putin put their country ahead of personal wealth. Honesty, look it up.

Lukashenko is everything but Putin’s friend Stop puking your Atlanticist MSM propaganda here. f**k o*f you NATO twat!

Iran been attacked by nato and israel for 8 years when they convinced Iraq to attack Iran, in full force and with the use also of chemicals. No country helped them then and they have not only prevailed but have not lost an inch of their land.

In today’s reality of Iran who ever attack it will be destroyed, in a very short time. As for the rest you say about russia or china, I think you need to be educated a little based on military realities around the world and I mean in today’s realities and not the myths western story tellers have created and teach as reality.

Also understand a simple fact. If the war is conventional and west attack any of the countries you mentioned, they stand no chance of winning and will be totally destroyed in a very short time. If the war is nuclear then none wins and earth is destroyed.

US have won none of the wars they started and that was when they was at their strongest and still have warriors in their armies and not been controlled by psychopaths and perverts. So take a leap into today`s realities and re think the way you think.

You jump on the conclusions to know what I think

Also you are comparing incomparable…. Russia-China-Iran stick together for reason. To resist US and “allays” None of the countries would be able to resist on the long run against conventional+tactical nukes …. Iraq is not comparable US+NATO+Israel+Saudi+UAE are immensely bigger…. ——————- “In today’s reality of Iran who ever attack it will be destroyed, in a very short time” ————— I tend to totally disagree. Iran will be able to resist but not forever if not helped… —————— “I mean in today’s realities and not the myths western story tellers have created and teach as reality.” ————— Do tell please? Enlighten me ! Maybe…about Iran creating copy of US F-5 (3rd generation jet) as proves of Iranian know how?! Copy of T-90 tank maybe? Would be copy of the Shkval supercavitating torpedoe

All this Iranian rocket tech that originates ( ballistic) from N. Korea and Ukraine and reverse engineered Russian & Chinese AA missiles is respectful but that’s about it…. Etc, etc.. Their “power” That would do for Israel only but not for US+NATO+Israel and bunch of gulf criminals

” If the war is conventional ” U.S. has NO chance (with “allays” or without them) against China…Only with nukes But for nukes they have Russia to back them up… Russia would lose conventional war against US-NATO ..on the longer run but than Russia would NUKE all NATO troupes with tactical nukes. Iran also would lose conventional war and go to the mountains to resist. It is 100% probable that US would use smaller nukes in Iran

I dont jump to conclusions as to what you know my friend your statements tell me what you know and how you evaluate.

In a war that becomes global if any of this 3 countries you mentioned is attacked is only natural their allies will take their side. You did not obviously understand what I answered to you.

And what I said any of this countries you mentioned, is attacked in a conventional way they can with out any help to destroy what comes against them.

Iraq in their attack against Iran was not alone had the whole of nato behind them. And yes in population the countries you mentioning maybe bigger all together than Iran, but the damage Iran can inflict on them alone it be enough to stop them on their tracks. And we seen what houthis are doing to saudi arabia so let us stay within the realm of military reality and not a combination of holywood and Ifs.

In syria they send more than a million mercenaries and iraq and you seen the results after russia with very little mobilization did to them and their allies. Numbers dont win wars warriors do and west and allies they dont have that.

Whatever…. I was concrete enough. There was no “holywood and Ifs.” in my comment and I’ve heard no real counter-argument from you.

You for some reason OVERESTIMATE Iran’s power (maybe you are Iranian) but that’s your right….I don’t care. Talking that war will be “conventional only” against Iran can think only ignorant people. U.S. would nuke the shit out of Iranian forces with tactical nukes. Because US-NATO forces are not match to Iranian ground forces.

But think whatever you want I can’t care less.

and you of course went to so many wars and lead so many men in battle that you know exactly what you speaking about correct?

What part of conventional war dont you understand? If any one use nukes then the opposing nuclear powers will respond to the attacker and I said that. So yes you run too many holywood scenarios in your mind when you conclude.

No I am not iranian. Do you understand that the first one to use nukes against any country will provoke an attack from both russia and china? So when you say what you saying, you are talking holyshit scenarios and not something it will happen in real life.

And IF nato could attack Iran and win as you suggesting and they have attack it using as proxy Iraq and did not win, explain to me why they been for 30 years now farting from the mouth what they do to Iran but never dare to attack it.

All your thinking is based IF the americans do this or that, not military reality.

” If any one use nukes then the opposing nuclear powers will respond to the attacker ” ———————– NO Russia&China will NOT “respond” for Iran!

First your basic proposition was about CONVENTIONAL war which was unrealistic and FLAWED in logic from the start. Like it is unrealistic to claim that if US would use TACTICAL nukes that Russia would start MAD because of Iran and call for destruction of Russia automatically! Only ignorant people would say such thing! Tactical nukes with small yield are used against troupes usually. NO REASON for Russia to start MAD because of that ! They would never do that!

Again maybe you are Iranian, but Russians are NOT Iranians and have no desire to die all because of some tactical nukes are used on Iranian troops in Iran Russia would help Iran not to lose the war YES but not for the price to scarify every Russian & Russia because of Iran!!

——————————— “opposing nuclear powers will respond to the attacker” ———————– YES “opposing nuclear powers” would do that but IRAN IS NOT NUCLEAR POWER !!!

Listen you keep labeling me with “Hollywood” bullshit label That doesn’t change facts or my arguments!

—————- Do you understand that the first one to use nukes against any country will provoke an attack from both russia and china? ————- I was talking about TACTICAL nukes in Iran but you see no difference because too ignorant. Saying that is totally ignorant and pure bullshit detached from reality!! You have NO clue what are you talking about! Maybe you watch too much Iranian-Bollywood movies?! —————- “All your thinking is based IF the americans do this or that” ———- NO “if” at all ! I’m 100% sure that US will use TACTICAL nukes against Iran ! —————– “they have attack it using as proxy Iraq and did not win”, ————– Another BULLSHIT. Are you saying that NATO troops were attacking together with Saddam’s troops Iran’s positions maybe? NO! So what is your problem ? Why you EXAGGERATE all the time? I have told you already you can’t compare fucking Iraq to US+NATO+Israel+gulf twats. Iraqis were not even true”proxy” like you would like to present them. They had US selling some ( limited )weapons to them and Europe some chemicals. That was all ! If you say they were more involved than you are more than ignorant! Do not waste my time with such rubbish comments PLEASE! Do not waste my time THINK WHATEVER YOU WANT I can’t care less.

now you calling policies for other countries as well ok jako I rest my case. You seem to speak for every one here so I am sure you know best.

No they will not respond for Iran but they will respond to any one use nuclear against their allies as their turn is next and Russia already as US have a law about preemptive strikes.

No you said that, what I said is that Iraq had the full logistical support of nato US/UK as well Israel in its attack against Iran same as the mercenaries attacked Syria had the full logistical support of nato. And the one who is BS is you and from your comments I see you filling what ever caps of ignorance you have with assumption and not true knowledge of what went down then or now.

And before call bullshit what I said better get educated as to what went down then and after come and apologize for your ignorance of fact. Forgive me if I dont respond to your jerking off again.

tactical nukes are nukes and the ignorant is you kid so take a walk and go get educated.

I don’t know the “best” but I know what I know and I din’t see that in “Hollywood movies”!

I at least do not call Iran super power capable to “destroy everybody” who attacks them (pure bullshit)

I don’t think that Russian’s are willing to all die for Iran (pure bullshit)

I do not think that ” Iraq had the full logistical support” whatever that means (is pure exaggeration)

US was happy to see Iraq & Iran kill each other and (Iran was on losing side of the war more than Iraq)

YES “Russia already has a law about preemptive strikes” BUT NOT Iran because they have no nukes! So your comments are all ill placed or plane ignorant.

Russian law is SAYING NOTHING about nuke attacks on other countries let alone declaring war for TACTICAL nukes in Iran! That law doesn’t even talk about attack on Belarus let alone others. That law talks about attack on RUSSIA! Russia will NOT start WW3 for Iran or China BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT formal ALLAYS !

There is NO signed agreement between them yet can’t you understand that simple words?!? —————————- they will respond to any one use nuclear against their allies —————- The closest Russian allay is Belarus because they have SIGNED certain defense agreements But not much if at all with others SCO, such Kazakhstan, China… (Iran is not even member) and others.

Since you ignore difference between allays (Belarus) and others less allays (Shanghai Cooperation Organisation ) no point talking to you.

“tactical nukes are nukes” For you and some teenage girl who has ZERO knowledge they are all “NUKES” … It takes knowledge to see the difference between 0.3 KT or 3KT and 3 MEGA TON nukes

I did not called Iran super power and you are very limited both in knowledge and common sense and you are taking what I say out of context. as I said when you learn to think and put the dots together you also understand what I am saying.

Now walk in peace and think what ever you like I am sure the closer you come to war is from your screen and keyboard.

You “did not call Iran super power” directly but indirectly – you have said this (which is the same as calling them super power): ” Iran who ever attack it will be destroyed,” Saying that Iran can “destroy” literally anybody is the same like calling them super power who can “destroy” US+NATO+Israel with no problem. All your comments were pure exaggeration from declaring Iran stronger then Iran is, to the presumption that Russia & China would haste directly into the war and start WW3 over Iran. In the latest voting in UN-national assembly over Crimea China did NOT even vote in favor of Russia (they were neutral) but 43 other countries did vote in favor of Russia! So much of Iran, China & Russia being allays!!! How do you expect at all that Russians would start World War over Iran ?! They would HELP Iran with weapons and everything not to be completely defeated and that would be sufficient

They would only go into the war if the STRATEGIC nukes were used against Iran (but not tactical nukes against their troops) —— To “walk in peace”?! Oh I am personally all for war against NATO I do not hide it! I hate them with all my heart ! If World War started I would grab some weapon and TRY to get involved against NATO soldiers (before all planet goes to hell )

kid give it a rest, you sound like a child trying to win an argument so it translates in his peanutbutter brain, how ever he wants what it reads. I know what I say and I stand by it but the idiotic way you chose to understand what I say, in order to make a very stupid argument, shows how very low thinking span you have as well reasoning.

Now take a walk while I am still humoring you.

Iranian Greek you can call your father “kid”. I couldn’t care less how do I “sound” I will not take your bullshit arguments as valid

I have nothing else to tell you any more transgender Iranian in the skirt.

and you can call yours a jerk off, after all the jerk, dont fall very far for the tree.

I hope for you to have panties, thongs under that skirt…

Watch out for homos you might be (pleasantly) surprised from behind.

motherfucker stop describing your self, not interested.

So why I you so upset if I ….”describe myself”?

upset? you flatter yourself again. is no if in what I say kid. go jerk someplace else.

Ha, ha, ha, ha you are pathetic!

what ever you say jerk off.

Iranian-Greek transgender who hates Russia …what else to expect from your kind of people.

“””Russia would lose conventional war against US-NATO ..on the longer run….but than Russia would NUKE all NATO troupes with tactical nukes (and offer MAD).”””

I am kind of curious to hear how Russia would loose to NATO……in the longer run?

That was just HYPOTHETICAL for the sake of comparison… on condition that war is conventional (without growing into the nuke conflict (which is not realistic)).

All is in numbers GDP, population, resources, industrial capacity number of armies, weapons systems etc. Compare Russia to US+NATO. “In the longer run” -smaller human and other resources..

It is not that only I say that Many people say that including some Russians…and it seam logical

Future conventional wars among peer countries will be devastating expanding large quantities of armaments and ammunition, and given the destructiveness and accuracy of weapons will be relatively short lived. GDP, population, industrial capacity would be somewhat moot points considering most western nations outsourced significant portions of the manufacturing capabilities to Asia, and we are not in a strategic posture of WW2……where you take a beating for 2 years and then the strategic balance shifts in your favour because aliens come to your rescue.

NATO has been sitting on its ass doing very little, being involved in color revolutions and counterinsurgencies, their platforms and weaponry are old, their stockpile of munitions is low, the quality of their long range weapons is obsolete, and the icing on the cake,…….after three decades of doing very little, US and its poodles lack the brain power and moral compass to come out of the induced comma they have been in. Russia on the other after it broke from the western establishment underwent a rearmament program followed by another one, establishing new weapon platforms that checkmate NATO strategic concepts.

The concept and deployment of hypersonic weaponry gives Russia a strong qualitative edge, neutralizing the Atlantic Ocean shipping and disrupting any efforts to resupply and reinforce NATO war effort.

You need to join the dots. The US attacks Iran. Iran stops all Persian Gulf oil supplies. Oil prices rise to $300 a barrel. The US loses $10 trillion in petrodollar cash flow.

The US would have bombed Iran decades ago, if it wasn’t for the fact that Iran holds Americas economic testicles in the palm of its hand, and could economically neuter the US easily.

OK all that $300 a barrel would help lot to their fracking oil & gas industry and make turnover of expensive oil dollars compensate for the quantity of cash flow percentage. I don’t know how did you get ” $10 trillion”calculated?!? The essence of the problem is that 300$ oil would push whole planet in economic DEPRESSION bigger than 1929. On the other hand they need WW3 to erase the debt…. Thus I think that only reason U.S. doesn’t attack Iran is because they look for good excuse to make NATO, Israel do that for them. It is not that much problem to attack Iran The biggest problem is to get permanent control of Iran’s oil & gas. Which looks close to impossible.

The fracking industry is like the collateralized debt obligation industry, a huge con. But US oil production is irrelevant, it’s the tax on foreign oil production and sale that the US would lose, that would bring down the US economy.

Even though they are one year “miracle” by becoming the biggest world producer of oil. “Con” or not that doesn’t change that fact. So at least that one year I doubt that they can be ignored or called “irrelevant”at all.

Also US has no “tax on foreign oil production”. Where did you get flawed information? They have provisions on dollar transactions and projecting that earning on huge “10 trillion” earnings sounds way to o exaggerated. It is important earning but even more important is that “Petro” dollar keeps dollar relevant as world currency. That way US can continue their endless manipulations of the world (rigged) financial markets and printing money for FREE.

300$ oil would bring weak world economy down and push WHOLE planet into the depression. Asia, (China) would quickly exit depression (and all the countries that have plenty of gold) but many countries would not exit quickly at all !

“Also US has no “tax on foreign oil production”.” You have to pay for oil in US dollars, you have to buy US dollars to buy oil, the US banks charge you to buy US dollars. When the oil producer gets the US dollars, he either has to pay the American banks to change it into his currency, or leave it in an American bank. Also you have confused earnings with cash flow, they are not the same thing. In earnings the US earns 0.2% on every foreign exchange. The Saudis sell about 10 million barrels a day at say 50 bucks equals $500 mil a day. 0.2% of 500M is a million a day, just from the Saudis, it’s a great racket, it costs the US nothing, gives it power over other currencies, and makes an awful lot of money for the US.

“You have to pay for oil in US dollars, you have to buy US dollars to buy oil, the US banks charge you to buy US dollars.”

So you keep repeating of what I have said already (without going into unnecessary details) of every possible dollar transaction…. Stop your empty lecturing and read my comment again please.

Learn first basic economic vocabulary please! You have used this words; “it’s the tax on foreign oil production ”

US can NOT impose international “tax” on “foreign oil production” That is utter nonsense! Provisions on dollar transactions are NOT “tax”, only countries have rights to impose “taxes” on “production” in their own territory! Those are standard provisions for using dollars paid for dollar transactions paid to the U.S. banks and US – FED.

And those earnings do NOT amount on 10 trillion dollars like you claim.

You are acting as if you are an expert on economy and in the same time saying pure nonsense by saying that US is imposing “tax” on “foreign oil production” That is pure ignorance of basics in economy. You (maybe ) have meant right but you have used totally WRONG words and now you try to retract by making idiot out of me with your attempt to present me like I didn’t understand…

You are “convincing” me of something I have said my self before you that PROVISIONS for ANY using of the dollars are paid to U.S. So I find that as travesty and dishonest

just think of the billions of junk bonds paying the way for the tight oil venture and which at today’s prices won’t ever be repaid and moreover have been cónsistently over valued so the total production foreseen ín the loan agreements are far to large so some lenders will be mighty pissed off in the near future and the exports of crude from the desperate states of a might just never be realized.

Iran is not Iraq and has the capacity to do some damage to US interests and bog the insane US into decades of very costly asymmetrical warfare. It is a big country and a very nationalistic population and will fight back destabilizing the whole western economic system dependent on oil.

I guess that would relieve the burden of the IOU and the residual usury as well. Tell us more Richard D, especially the part about Tommy’s demise.

explain away what you think the angle is on ‘tommy’

Tommy has already shared that, “If Israel sail into Black Sea as frontrunner for NATO behind them, Putin cant do a sh.t.”. First of all Israel has already tried to drag NATO in for its greater Israel plan but they will soon learn like the Kurds are going to they are in no mans land, trapped and the subject of their past grievances against its neighbors and its host/s.

He seems to forget (or like the most lame never attended geography education) the only entry is through the Bosporus (Turkey). Sail in but it will be like the Hotel California where you can check out but you can never leave.

The Bosporus allows maritime connections from the Black Sea all the way to the Mediterranean Sea and the Atlantic Ocean via Gibraltar, and the Indian Ocean through the Suez Canal, making it a crucial international waterway, in particular for the passage of goods coming in from Russia.

Outlaw Judaism as a criminal organization that rapes 1,000 children worldwide every week. And clear the IDF out of the occupied territories and implement UN resolutions like the right of return so that Israel can be voted out of existence and Palestine unified to replace Israel at the UN.