Trump contradicted by staff after U.S. assassination of Iran general

In his short statement to reporters, Trump specifically said the US is not seeking “regime change” in Iran after the killing of general Qassem Suleimani.

But just hours after the strike was carried out, the president’s former national security adviser, John Bolton, expressed hope that the attack would be “the first step to regime change in Tehran.”

https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2020/jan/03/iran-general-qassem-suleimani-killed-us-trump-drone-strike-baghdad-reaction-live-updates

I can't believe we're assassinating foreign officials now.

You should believe anything. Anything is possible when you’re rich, famous and powerful.

eddie wrote:You should believe anything.  Anything is possible when you’re rich, famous and powerful.

It's just that every time I think I've seen the worst, Trump comes out with a new low. It's not that I can't believe it, it's that I don't want to.

Ben Reilly wrote:

In his short statement to reporters, Trump specifically said the US is not seeking “regime change” in Iran after the killing of general Qassem Suleimani.

But just hours after the strike was carried out, the president’s former national security adviser, John Bolton, expressed hope that the attack would be “the first step to regime change in Tehran.”

https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2020/jan/03/iran-general-qassem-suleimani-killed-us-trump-drone-strike-baghdad-reaction-live-updates

I can't believe we're assassinating foreign officials now.

While I think there will be some negative blowback from this, what Bolton says now is irrelevant. He was fired by Trump.

Ben Reilly wrote:

eddie wrote:You should believe anything.  Anything is possible when you’re rich, famous and powerful.

It's just that every time I think I've seen the worst, Trump comes out with a new low. It's not that I can't believe it, it's that I don't want to.

Well, someone richer and more powerful is possibly letting him get away with it. Unless one thinks that he’s the richest and most powerful?

Just a thought.

Maddog wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:

In his short statement to reporters, Trump specifically said the US is not seeking “regime change” in Iran after the killing of general Qassem Suleimani.

But just hours after the strike was carried out, the president’s former national security adviser, John Bolton, expressed hope that the attack would be “the first step to regime change in Tehran.”

https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2020/jan/03/iran-general-qassem-suleimani-killed-us-trump-drone-strike-baghdad-reaction-live-updates

I can't believe we're assassinating foreign officials now.

While I think there will be some negative blowback from this, what Bolton says now is irrelevant. He was fired by Trump.  

He's right, though. No way you assassinate a general and then leave it.

Ben Reilly wrote:

Maddog wrote:

While I think there will be some negative blowback from this, what Bolton says now is irrelevant. He was fired by Trump.  

He's right, though. No way you assassinate a general and then leave it.

I guess it depends on what Iran does now. But my point is, Bolton is not "staff" anymore.

eddie wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:

eddie wrote:You should believe anything.  Anything is possible when you’re rich, famous and powerful.

It's just that every time I think I've seen the worst, Trump comes out with a new low. It's not that I can't believe it, it's that I don't want to.

Well, someone richer and more powerful is possibly letting him get away with it. Unless one thinks that he’s the richest and most powerful?

Just a thought.

Ahem.

eddie wrote:

eddie wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:

eddie wrote:You should believe anything.  Anything is possible when you’re rich, famous and powerful.

It's just that every time I think I've seen the worst, Trump comes out with a new low. It's not that I can't believe it, it's that I don't want to.

Well, someone richer and more powerful is possibly letting him get away with it. Unless one thinks that he’s the richest and most powerful?

Just a thought.

Ahem.

Still looking into this -- I have no idea who really made the call, or whether it's good or bad. I'm reserving judgement until I understand more.

I just feel icky at my government using mine and my fellow Americans' tax money to do stuff like this. That's the extent of my first-blush reaction.

Look above Trump. Ain’t no one allowing him movement in any direction unless they want it.

eddie wrote:Look above Trump. Ain’t no one allowing him movement in any direction unless they want it.

I disagree -- I think that while the rich and powerful have a lot of influence over the U.S. president, they don't and can't keep tabs on everything he does.

If anybody was calling the shots on this decision, I would think it would be more the culture warrior types and less the money-bags types. The wealthy tend to favor stability and predictability, and nobody knows what will happen after this assassination.

Ben Reilly wrote:

In his short statement to reporters, Trump specifically said the US is not seeking “regime change” in Iran after the killing of general Qassem Suleimani.

But just hours after the strike was carried out, the president’s former national security adviser, John Bolton, expressed hope that the attack would be “the first step to regime change in Tehran.”

https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2020/jan/03/iran-general-qassem-suleimani-killed-us-trump-drone-strike-baghdad-reaction-live-updates

I can't believe we're assassinating foreign officials now.

If in 1942, when Reinhardt Heinrich was assassinated, who was a foreign official

Would you have objected

Both murdered thousands

I saw the poorest piis poorest arguments on twitter tonight about the cost of american lives

What about the thousands of lives this monster has killed in Iran itself

For fuck sake

Is this the reality we live in, that we are that shit sacred to act?

Well finally a line was drawn and thank fuck for that, as countless people in the middle east are celebrating the death of this monster

Ben Reilly wrote:

eddie wrote:Look above Trump. Ain’t no one allowing him movement in any direction unless they want it.

I disagree -- I think that while the rich and powerful have a lot of influence over the U.S. president, they don't and can't keep tabs on everything he does.

If anybody was calling the shots on this decision, I would think it would be more the culture warrior types and less the money-bags types. The wealthy tend to favor stability and predictability, and nobody knows what will happen after this assassination.

I disagree. But you know that.

eddie wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:

I disagree -- I think that while the rich and powerful have a lot of influence over the U.S. president, they don't and can't keep tabs on everything he does.

If anybody was calling the shots on this decision, I would think it would be more the culture warrior types and less the money-bags types. The wealthy tend to favor stability and predictability, and nobody knows what will happen after this assassination.

I disagree. But you know that.  

Maybe listen to the people of Iran who are calling ourt for us?


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-50444429

https://twitter.com/AlinejadMasih/status/1195748052801339393

https://twitter.com/AlinejadMasih/status/1195745230785523712

https://twitter.com/AlinejadMasih/status/1195740031232724993

https://twitter.com/vahid_yucesoy/status/1195735804913565698

https://twitter.com/SamanArbabi/status/1195731593169649665

https://twitter.com/HadiNili/status/1195703030911512578

https://twitter.com/AlinejadMasih/status/1195706034431709189

Thorin wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2020/jan/03/iran-general-qassem-suleimani-killed-us-trump-drone-strike-baghdad-reaction-live-updates

I can't believe we're assassinating foreign officials now.

If in 1942, when Reinhardt Heinrich was assassinated, who was a foreign official

Would you have objected

Both murdered thousands

I saw the poorest piis poorest arguments on twitter tonight about the cost of american lives

What about the thousands of lives this monster has killed in Iran itself

For fuck sake

Is this the reality we live in, that we are that shit sacred to act?

Well finally a line was drawn and thank fuck for that, as countless people in the middle east are celebrating the death of this monster

And others are creating a Shiite martyr. There will some blowback. Might even harm the more western factions in Iran who were making some headway.

Ben Reilly wrote:

eddie wrote:Look above Trump. Ain’t no one allowing him movement in any direction unless they want it.

I disagree -- I think that while the rich and powerful have a lot of influence over the U.S. president, they don't and can't keep tabs on everything he does.

If anybody was calling the shots on this decision, I would think it would be more the culture warrior types and less the money-bags types. The wealthy tend to favor stability and predictability, and nobody knows what will happen after this assassination.

This is pretty simple. Trump isn't going to have an Iranian embassy hostage situation or a Benghazi on his watch. As soon as Iranian forces messed with our embassy he decided to make it very clear that he won't tolerate it. Probably a step too far in my opinion, but I think we need to get the fuck out of the region. and let them handle it.

Maddog wrote:

Thorin wrote:

If in 1942, when Reinhardt Heinrich was assassinated, who was a foreign official

Would you have objected

Both murdered thousands

I saw the poorest piis poorest arguments on twitter tonight about the cost of american lives

What about the thousands of lives this monster has killed in Iran itself

For fuck sake

Is this the reality we live in, that we are that shit sacred to act?

Well finally a line was drawn and thank fuck for that, as countless people in the middle east are celebrating the death of this monster

And others are creating a Shiite martyr.  There will some blowback.  Might even harm the more western factions in Iran who were making some headway.  

The blowback is this

For once, someone has stood up to iran and now they are shit scared, as they are in a precarious position with their people

The place is ripe for a revolution

Now its leaders will be scared to move because a leader I hate, had the balls to do something no other leader could do

Stick a rocket up the arse of a tyrant

Thorin wrote:

Maddog wrote:

And others are creating a Shiite martyr.  There will some blowback.  Might even harm the more western factions in Iran who were making some headway.  

The blowback is this

For once, someone has stood up to iran and now they are shit scared, as they are in a precarious position with their people

The place is ripe for a revolution

Now its leaders will be scared to move because a leader I hate, had the balls to do something no other leader could do

Stick a rocket up the arse of a tyrant

We shall see. Maybe peace will break out in the region.

Maddog wrote:

Thorin wrote:

The blowback is this

For once, someone has stood up to iran and now they are shit scared, as they are in a precarious position with their people

The place is ripe for a revolution

Now its leaders will be scared to move because a leader I hate, had the balls to do something no other leader could do

Stick a rocket up the arse of a tyrant

We shall see. Maybe peace will break out in the region.  

Or maybe for once Iran will be set free

In his short statement to reporters, Trump specifically said the US is not seeking “regime change” in Iran after the killing of general Qassem Suleimani.

But just hours after the strike was carried out, the president’s former national security adviser, John Bolton, expressed hope that the attack would be “the first step to regime change in Tehran.”

So Ben, it was Bolton, a sacked member of staff who contradicted him, not a serving member. He probably has a grudge?

I dislike Trump for his megalomania and utter gaucheness and for the fact that many of the things he criticised the previous Potus for, he did the same things - or even worse - when he himself took up office.

However unless a high ranking current staff member contradicts him, I won't take too much notice.

Iran was orchestrating attacks against Americans in American-controlled Baghdad...

America hit back..

Suck it up,  snowflakes.


The USA's military leaders, and the DoD, made the call and set up the reprisals..

Trump was simply their "chief" who ok'ed the strike --  he's certainly no military genius...

What he has done is taken an opportunity, which will also help to shore up his dwindling support base at home leading up to November..

Ben Reilly wrote:

eddie wrote:

Ahem.

Still looking into this -- I have no idea who really made the call, or whether it's good or bad. I'm reserving judgement until I understand more.

I just feel icky at my government using mine and my fellow Americans' tax money to do stuff like this. That's the extent of my first-blush reaction.

Congress seems to have only one recourse. Christmas will come up with coals in the DOD's stocking. Ya wanna waste taxpayers' money on more wars in the Middle East, pay for it outta the Trump trust. Trump has just sent in the 82nd Airborne to Iraq, that's 5,000 soldiers put in harm's way, just like GWB and his Iraq war.

The only way to stop it, is don't pay em. Congress has the power of the purse...the answer is, they don't allocate money for the way home. Trump's gotta find it. Trump took money from the military to pay for part of his wall, now that seems to be working in the right direction. If the soldiers haven't got the money, they'll have to find their own way home. Wire home for the wife to send you airfare, soldier, the US don't have the resources.

Do you want the USA to bend the knee to the Iran ? Iran has been responsible for terrorist attacks all round the Middle East ! They got away with seizing Oil Tankers , and nothing was done about it, witch made them think the west was frightened of them. They have got away with promoting terrorism for a long time.A lot of their people in Iran celebrated his death if you noticed. Good one Trump !

nicko wrote:Do you want the USA to bend the knee to the Iran ?

I want the USA to get out of the Middle East, where they have no interests, nor business.

nicko wrote:Iran has been responsible for terrorist attacks all round the Middle East !  They got away with seizing Oil Tankers , and nothing was done about it, witch made them think the west was frightened of them.

Let those nations who have an interest in protecting ME oil, come to the rescue. America is self-sufficient when it comes to oil. Indeed, America is trying to sell oil on the world market. That's what the Bakken pipeline is all about.

nicko wrote:They have got away with promoting terrorism for a long time.A lot of their people in Iran celebrated his death if you noticed.   Good one Trump !

I saw no one in Iran celebrating his death. If anything, an attack on a sovereign nation tends to rally the people...and this is redoubled in Shi'ite Muslim nations.

If the Trump administration wants war with Iran, it should get the authorization of Congress. The 2003 Act cannot be construed to cover war with Iran, not even a Sunni nation.

But first, they must tell the American people what the endgame is. Or is this to be another perpetual war like Korea or Afghanistan?

I saw on BBC ,of all places ,hundreds of Iranians running through the Streets celebrating his death . They don't want Gays hung from Cranes or Women beaten and jailed for showing their Hair and lots of other "crimes" ,Get real quill and don't let your hatred of Trump colour your thinking !

PS, ditto Lurker !

nicko wrote:I saw on BBC ,of all places ,hundreds of Iranians running through the Streets celebrating his death . They don't want Gays hung from Cranes or Women beaten and jailed for showing their Hair and lots of other "crimes"  ,Get real quill and don't let your hatred of Trump colour your thinking !

1.  My thinking on US vacating the ME was acquired long before Trump was a gleam in anyone's eye.  We don't need yet another war in the ME...especially as we have no interest there.

2.  I suggest the crowds you saw on BBC were Iraqi Sunni demonstrators in Iraq.  Sunnis and Shi'ites are sworn enemies of each other, and any misfortune by one is celebrated by the other.  A lot has happened in quick succession, and I understand your confusion.  It is difficult to keep straight exactly who is who, and related to which story.

But there has been no activity in Iran, and I doubt that BBC would be permitted to film it if it ever did happen.  There have been demonstrations of Sunnis in Baghdad and in Basra.  See, https://www.tellyupdates.tv/iraqis-dance-on-the-streets-of-sulaimanis-death-us-secretary-of-state-shared-video/

You'll keep making excuses till an Iranian Nuke is dropped on NY !

nicko wrote: You'll keep making excuses till an Iranian Nuke is dropped on NY !

It's not excuses, nick. It's called mutually assured destruction. See, Thomas C. Schelling, The Strategy of Conflict (1960). At any moment the heavy weights (nuclear protagonists) know that all other heavy weights have missiles aimed at them; hence they will launch their missiles with knowledge and awareness that it is certain suicide for their own nation. Gives them a bit of pause, eh?

nicko wrote:I saw on BBC ,of all places ,hundreds of Iranians running through the Streets celebrating his death . They don't want Gays hung from Cranes or Women beaten and jailed for showing their Hair and lots of other "crimes"  ,Get real quill and don't let your hatred of Trump colour your thinking !

+1 mate

Its like there has been some celebrities like Quil apologising for taking out this butcher

You cannot make it up how out of touch with realities some people in the west are

Its like i said, these very same people would be apologising to Germany when Reinhardt Heinrich was assassinated in 1942

Like you say countless people across the Middle East are celebrating the death of this monster

This monster before was able to push US Presidents around, without fear of consequence and for once Trump has shown some balls, that the US is not to be messed with

Trump maybe a racist wanker, but on this he sent a clear message to Iran

Dont fuck with the US, or we will take you out

phil wrote:Its like there has been some celebrities like Quil apologising for taking out this butcher

But, what is the cost/benefit to taking out Sulaimani?  Thirty years of war?  Thirty thousand lives?  Another $17-trillion in debt?  And what do we get in return?  Nothing!

Alternatively, people are always complaining about how expensive is universal healthcare.  The simple solution is, don't start a war with Iran, and put the money into you combating the real enemy: injury and illness.

When you know enough about American politics, you realize that this is all about domestic consumption.  Trump just got impeached and is awaiting trial.  What better way to rally things domestically, than to trigger faux antagonisms with a country with which we have no quarrel?

One writes a plot in which one casts the other nation as the bad guy, and then you cast yourself in the starring 'good guy' role...white horse, white hat, silver spurs.  Only problem is, there is no quarrel.  Things were fine until Trump reneged on the nuclear deal.

Finally, there's this tired old terrorism angle.  Terrorism is over there, not over here.  The only time terrorism reached our shores (9/11), the perps were the Saudis, not the Iranians.  Bomb the Saudis if you must, not the Iranians.  But we give them love and kisses despite the fact that they butchered an American resident.  If we've got no problems with the Saudis, we sure have no problem with the Iranians.

Bringing in the 82nd Airborne is like swatting gnats with mortars.  So, you know it's all for show.  Chrissake, Pence in an email even replayed the 'Iraq caused 9/11' ploy, only with Iran.

In the '86 election Trump played upon the sentiment that we had no business in the ME.  The Republicans were lying to us, he said.  Now he wants to go in there and start a new war?  Now he's got Pence telling the same lies?  The naked hypocrisy of it tells you he's doing it to create a distraction.  Look over there, not over here.

Original Quill wrote:

phil wrote:Its like there has been some celebrities like Quil apologising for taking out this butcher

But, what is the cost/benefit to taking out Sulaimani?  Thirty years of war?  Thirty thousand lives?  Another $17-trillion in debt?  And what do we get in return?  Nothing!

How many US lives were lost taking out this monster?

Zero

You have no comprehension of modern warfare

The US can sit back and use their technology to continually take out Iranian targets and from the safety of home

There is no need to invade Iran, just help those already trying to topple a Theocratic regime.

We get plenty out of this, peace in the Middle East if the Theocracy falls

If not, we continually take out their military capability

Look at how Russia and China are doing nothing

Trump has more balls than Putin

What's the endgame?  If you are so confident, didge, tell us.

We are still in Iraq, losing lives.  We are still in Afghanistan, losing lives.  Hell, we're still in Korea.  Trump has no endgame because he has  no policy, no strategy.

You have no endgame, because you favor perpetual war...as long as it's the other nation's taxpayer who pays for it. We have no stake in the game. We don't need oil...you do. You want us to fight your wars for you. Take a hike.

Thorin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

But, what is the cost/benefit to taking out Sulaimani?  Thirty years of war?  Thirty thousand lives?  Another $17-trillion in debt?  And what do we get in return?  Nothing!

How many US lives were lost taking out this monster?

Zero

You have no comprehension of modern warfare

The US can sit back and use their technology to continually take out Iranian targets and from the safety of home

There is no need to invade Iran, just help those already trying to topple a Theocratic regime.

We get plenty out of this, peace in the Middle East if the Theocracy falls

If not, we continually take out their military capability

Look at how Russia and China are doing nothing

Trump has more balls than Putin

I guess Quill cannot read

Anyway the far leftist is irrelevant here

At last we have someone not taking anymore shit from the extremists in the region

Happy days

phil wrote:I guess Quill cannot read

Anyway the far leftist is irrelevant here

At last we have someone not taking anymore shit from the extremists in the region

I'll take that as my score. Trump is a counter-punchers, for sure. But the point of the game is to win. He has no endgame with Iran.

Original Quill wrote:

phil wrote:I guess Quill cannot read

Anyway the far leftist is irrelevant here

At last we have someone not taking anymore shit from the extremists in the region

I'll take that as my score.  Trump is a counter-punchers, for sure.  But the point of the game is to win.  He has no endgame with Iran.

Trump has just made himself equivalent to Churchill, in taking action

Again i think the man is an egotistic racist wanker, but at least he does not take any shit from Islamic extremists

This move has shaken the entire middle east

They now kno he wont take anymore crap

+1

phil wrote:Trump has just made himself equivalent to Churchill, in taking action

Taking a piss in the morning is taking action. Trump doesn't care about the national security of the US. He is simply creating a diversion because the last 3-4 months have been rough on him domestically.

Every politician knows that starting a war gins up popularity for people in power. Bush knew that when he lied about WMD's to invade Iraq. War is good for the guy in charge, on the domestic front. Everybody loves a parade, and uniforms with pretty ribbons make the guy wearing it handsome as hell. Only after a few thousand deaths of our sons and daughters and, say, $17-trillion in debt, do people give you that inquisitive look and ask, What was this all about?

Well, it's all about Trump getting impeached in the last quarter of last year. Trump is trying to rally his supporters with a 'jolly good war'. GHB lied about WMD’s in Iraq when he failed to win election…hell, Trump isn’t even giving you a reason. He says, “something immanent was about to happen”. Trump, ever the authoritarian, says fook the people, they are stupid and don’t need to know.

Churchill had a war before him. His endgame was ready-made: win the war. Occupy the territory. Trump has no endgame, because his aims are directed at the home front. The election is coming, and once again Trump is willing to sacrifice the nation’s security for his own personal gain.

phil wrote:Again i think the man is an egotistic racist wanker, but at least he does not take any shit from Islamic extremists

The one question you avoid, is the one question most important of all. What is the endgame?

Even if Trump takes over the territory of Iran, he still will have 1.6 billion Muslims willing to wage asymmetric war against the US. The Third World War will truly be a world war, because it will be a war of creed, not land or states.

What is the endgame of wars of creed? I believe Trump has in mind a mass genocide.

Original Quill wrote:

phil wrote:Again i think the man is an egotistic racist wanker, but at least he does not take any shit from Islamic extremists

The one question you avoid, is the one question most important of all.  What is the endgame?

No he took out the one who committed mass genocide

He need to also learn what I have written, as I already gave two options for outcomes

Not going to continually repeat for you

Original Quill wrote:

phil wrote:Trump has just made himself equivalent to Churchill, in taking action

Taking a piss in the morning is taking action.  Trump doesn't care about the national security of the US.  He is simply creating a diversion because the last 3-4 months have been rough on him domestically.

Translation

Thorin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

The one question you avoid, is the one question most important of all.  What is the endgame?

No he took out the one who committed mass genocide

He need to also learn what I have written, as I already gave two options for outcomes

Not going to continually repeat for you

You haven't answered my question: what is the endgame?

And don't give me this bullshite that 1.6 Muslims in the world are just going to lay down their arms and ask for our forgiveness.  They see us as the invaders and murderers...the bad guys.  And, indeed, we do seem to have a penchant for killing babies.

Thorin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

But, what is the cost/benefit to taking out Sulaimani?  Thirty years of war?  Thirty thousand lives?  Another $17-trillion in debt?  And what do we get in return?  Nothing!

How many US lives were lost taking out this monster?

Zero

You have no comprehension of modern warfare

The US can sit back and use their technology to continually take out Iranian targets and from the safety of home

There is no need to invade Iran, just help those already trying to topple a Theocratic regime.

We get plenty out of this, peace in the Middle East if the Theocracy falls

If not, we continually take out their military capability

Look at how Russia and China are doing nothing

Trump has more balls than Putin

Two scenarios for an end game

This is the last time I will post this again for someone unable to read

If you cannot be bothered to read posts Quill,m then I will place you on ignore again

I am not doing this pathetic stance you take when you cannot read posts

Original Quill wrote:

Thorin wrote:




No he took out the one who committed mass genocide

He need to also learn what I have written, as I already gave two options for outcomes

Not going to continually repeat for you

You haven't answered my question: what is the endgame?

And don't give me this bullshite that 1.6 Muslims in the world are just going to lay down their arms and ask for our forgiveness.  They see us as the invaders and murderers...the bad guys.  And, indeed, we do seem to have a penchant for killing babies.

So quill now thinks 1.6 billion Muslims are now all extremists apparently

The vast majority are peace loving people, but quill now thinks they are war like and violent

Just about the ,most hateful statement by quill who is clearly endorsing a view that Islam is violent

Maybe he could explain why over the last two decades why 1.6 billion Muslims have not risen up and the number who have goes into the thousands.

Quill just exposed himself as anti-Muslims

https://youtu.be/-x88HVir4qA

That's a lot of people. I think regime change is probably less likely now.

phil wrote:So quill now thinks 1.6 billion Muslims are now all extremists apparently

No, you are the extremist. You have entered their homeland, based upon your values, and gone about murdering their babies.

They are just reasonable people, going about protecting their homeland, according to their own values.

Maddog wrote:https://youtu.be/-x88HVir4qA

That's a lot of people.  I think regime change is probably less likely now.  

That is not even 0.1% of the people of iran

More turned up protesting mate

Original Quill wrote:

phil wrote:So quill now thinks 1.6 billion Muslims are now all extremists apparently

No, you are the extremist.  You have entered their homeland, based upon your values, and gone about murdering their babies.

They are just reasonable people, going about protecting their homeland, according to their own values.

lol quill defending a mass murderer again and now shitting on all those Muslims standing up for freedom in Iran

http://www.newsfixboard.com/t28270-its-kicking-off-in-iran

Thorin wrote:

Maddog wrote:https://youtu.be/-x88HVir4qA

That's a lot of people.  I think regime change is probably less likely now.  

That is not even 0.1% of the people of iran

More turned up protesting mate

It's a hell of a turnout for a funeral of someone that wasn't liked.

I may be wrong, but I think we just created a Shiite martyr.