Does someone have a better source than the POTUS on whether or not this actually happened?
5478
InternetGoodGuy5 days ago
+2285
Like another comment pointed out, he's almost definitely talking about the kurds but he's too stupid to know the difference because he doesn't pay attention to any of his briefings.
2285
CharcoalGreyWolf5 days ago
+335
Nor would he bother to he accurate if he had
335
GourangaPlusPlus5 days ago
+151
This man refuses to pay his workers, no way he's paying attention
151
AlexandbroTheGreat5 days ago
+74
He's the embodiment of why Netflix movies have to recap the plot every fifteen minutes for the modern audience.
74
CharcoalGreyWolf5 days ago
+13
Him caring is even less.
13
feldoneq2wire5 days ago
+152
There's no WAY Kurds would believe the US a 4th time after we completely abandoned them the last 3 times.
152
WafflePartyOrgy5 days ago
+91
Unlike the orange embarassment, the Kurds can remember 6 years ago when Trump sold them out and violated their trust in Syria after they lost thousands of soldiers fighting ISIS. Loyalty is a one-way street with Trump, which is why his brain is completely broken on why Europe isn't clamoring to get into the Hormuz and fix what he broke.
91
TjW05695 days ago
+31
I don't think 'loyalty' is in his vocabulary, either direction. He uses suckers. If you're willing to do something without the cash up front, he'll take it. He doesn't think they're 'loyal'. He thinks they're *stupid*.
31
misdirected_asshole5 days ago
+6
>He thinks they're *stupid*.
Does he just think it, or are they? Especially at this point
6
Additional_Teacher455 days ago
+105
And they didn't, the Kurds reportedly told the US to f*** off when they were approached about entering Iran.
105
Equivalent-Resort-635 days ago
+49
They learn faster than us. We are still repeating the same mistakes and expecting different results.
49
Wurm425 days ago
+27
No, but some Kurdish militia groups would absolutely accept a big shipment of American munitions and *then* tell the CIA to f*** off.
27
ArcFurnace5 days ago
+17
I'd believe they'd take the weapons, free guns are free guns.
Would they expect any support beyond that? Absolutely not.
17
AthleteHistorical4905 days ago
+39
The only Kurds he’s familiar with are cheese curds.
39
MrBeansOnToast30005 days ago
+16
When did McDonald’s start selling cheese curds?
16
chowmushi5 days ago
+4
In Canada they have always sold Kurds in their poutine.
4
Amazing_Athlete_22655 days ago
+5
So you're saying... blame Canada?
5
porridge_in_my_bum5 days ago
+20
I like how we can infer the truth off of his lies by this point because his lies are either so predictable or too stupid.
20
Srcunch5 days ago
+32
“US President Donald Trump told Fox News that the United States secretly armed Iranian protesters with firearms earlier this year, sending “a lot of guns" through Kurdish intermediaries as the regime cracked down on demonstrations.”
It’s the first paragraph.
32
pegothejerk5 days ago
+44
So there’s a pretty good chance our low flying rescue planes and helicopters were being fired at by American guns and bullets fresh off cargo planes
44
OkStop83135 days ago
+6
There were rumors at the time that US/Isreal armed protesters and were actively trying to instigate things a few months back.
Whether or not that is true I have no idea, because I feel like we're getting propaganda from all sides, but it was talked about previously.
6
Amazing_Athlete_22655 days ago
+3
> I feel like we're getting propaganda from all sides
Is this your first war?
3
jason23545 days ago
+7
“Thanks for the guns! We’re going to sit this one out though.”
7
lostroadrunner225 days ago
+48
You mean the guy whose lawyers would bring their own lawyers with them when they met Trump cause he lies so much they wanted a second lawyer in the meeting to vouch for the first lawyer may not be the bastion of truth?
48
nineraviolicans5 days ago
+7
I completely forgot about that.
There's just too much to keep track of.
7
y___o___y___o5 days ago
+1001
Assume false until a trustworthy source is obtained.
1001
lNFORMATlVE5 days ago
+559
Right, this is american evangelicals’ beloved president who said
*“open the fuckin strait you crazy bastards or you’ll be living in hell. ***Praise be to Allah***”*
on Easter Sunday of all days.
He’s completely cracked.
559
EastHillWill5 days ago
+47
I know it’s pretty trite to even mention it nowadays, but just imagine if Obama had given praise to Allah, on Easter Sunday. There would be folks on the right self-immolating in rage (both real and fake)
47
xdr5675 days ago
+118
God works in mysterious ways™
118
goddoc5 days ago
+58
Ive read the bible. This is exactly the kind of a$$hole god is.
58
DillBagner5 days ago
+38
nah, Bible God actually hated when other people did the smiting, especially without direct instruction.
38
cheebear125 days ago
+13
I miss that old white haired short guy who played God back in the 80s. He smoked a cigar and wore a sweater. He seemed nice.
13
southerndude425 days ago
+4
oh man.... what memories. Yeah, he was a great God. Alanis Morissette is the next one.
4
eharvill5 days ago
+3
You Devil!
3
Wabbit_Wampage5 days ago
+8
God's a kid with an ant farm. He's not planning anything.
-John Constantine
Yeah, I constantly want to ask my dad and all the other MAGA Bible thumpers I run into, "have you actually read this f****** thing? Like, all of it?" Rhetorical question, of course.
8
Mana_Seeker5 days ago
+17
It's technically the same Abrahamic god v3
17
Kidpidge5 days ago
+8
As if he would know that.
8
hcornea5 days ago
+16
He quite literally would not know his Abraham from his Abel.
16
posthuman045 days ago
+14
Has no one stated the obvious? Being the outside agitator that tried to turn protestors into a rebellion gave the IRGC the reason to treat protestors as an enemy force.
14
wheres_my_hat5 days ago
+25
Iran already treated protestors as an enemy force
25
lNFORMATlVE5 days ago
+7
I don’t think they were really looking for an excuse.
7
Momik5 days ago
+16
Or assume misinformation—why this particular lie, why now?
16
GiblertMelendezz5 days ago
+5
Assume the opposite of everything he says and you’ll be right 99 percent of the time
5
d0ctorzaius5 days ago
+3
"~~Trust but~~ Verify"
3
Bobby8375 days ago
+5
Rather assume stupid, that he did give guns to Iranians while indiscriminately bombing them expecting nothing but praise when sending US troops, since that would be worse than simply lying.
edit:
And with Trump, the most stupidest is the most assured option.
5
InsanelyAverageFella5 days ago
+106
So insane how the POTUS is the least reliable source for any information. He can literally say it and print it on his official social media and everyone still looks around and asks if their is an adult in the room who can verify is this is so or not.
106
Brambletail5 days ago
+14
I don't think that is new. What is new is how obvious it is when POTUS lies because this POTUS lies incredibly badly, so badly that the lies can be verified in real time.
14
FISHYBRAD5 days ago
+10
big beautiful lies, they’re big, really really big, i know they are big, and they are beautiful.
10
onarainyafternoon5 days ago
+8
It's definitely new to this degree, though. We have never had a POTUS that lies as much as Trump does. It's like he's literally incapable of telling the truth.
8
SnowMantra5 days ago
+111
This is a wild question to ask, and so true. How far we've fallen.
111
pablocael5 days ago
+16
If Trump says, the likelihood of the statement is false is like 90%.
16
poopey_doopey_Sr5 days ago
+7
I dunno man, 90% seems kinda low...
7
sjr005 days ago
+15
When it comes to Trump:
If he says something stupid, unhinged, reckless or strategically unwise, believe him.
If he says something de-escalatory or measured, he's lying or market manipulating.
15
sambare5 days ago
+25
Sure, lemme ask my 4-year old.
25
poopey_doopey_Sr5 days ago
+10
So?... What did he say?
10
owa005 days ago
+4
He said "shit's fucked"
4
mycatisgrumpy5 days ago
+8
It's so depressing how true this statement is.
8
Nonya55 days ago
+5
That is such a mind f*** question.
5
Cameronbic5 days ago
+5
Because he is the source, I consider it confirmation that it didn't happen.
5
3-DMan5 days ago
+5
Lol "Can we have a real, non-stupid source, not the President of the country?"
5
JustAnotherN0Name5 days ago
+4
Imagine asking this ten years ago. Man, the world's become quite an... interesting place since then
4
AtlantaDoesItBetter5 days ago
+4
lol… but so true… why do people still care what he says anymore … the opinion of a drunk deckhand on anyone of Boston’s fishing vessels isn’t discussed everyday - and the deckhands words have a better chance of being truthful
4
Im_better_than__u5 days ago
+7
I think he's talking about the iran-contra affair from the 80's.
7
Neversoft4long5 days ago
+514
I know the CIA absolutely hates this mf
514
userhwon5 days ago
+208
I can't imagine CIA has anything functional going on. The purge would not have missed them, and the people remaining would corrupt and stupid.
208
UnfriendlyToast5 days ago
+95
Didn’t they lose a bunch of people in his first term because he sold them out to different foreign nations?
95
userhwon5 days ago
+62
Aside from the colossal security failures that have doubtless gotten many assets and operatives killed and jailed, he's likely simply fired a lot of people for whatever despotic reasons he and his lickspittles have chosen.
62
Tentacle_poxsicle5 days ago
+11
Russian puppet indeed
11
OkAstronaut94545 days ago
+6
Not really. The people in question were spies, who aren't actually CIA officers. Spies are foreign assets who give the CIA information, and every employee of the CIA is considered an "officer".
HOW and WHY those people were killed or arrested is also up for debate. Articles around the time when this came up (due to a leaked CIA cable about how many spies and informants they were losing) blamed poor tradecraft, underestimating foreign adversaries, and not considering the risk to the asset.
And this kind of makes sense. Think about it: for 20+ years, the CIA has been focused on fighting terrorists and insurgents in the war on terror. And that means you're in an asymmetrical war with a non-governmental entity that doesn't have similar training, budgets, or capabilities.
Now they're back to tangling with Russia and are really dealing with China for the first time. And that means they're back to facing off against an actual peer. So, they're sloppy.
6
Cocotosser5 days ago
+22
They could do something about it.
22
TigerUSA205 days ago
+2036
But they didn’t.
They gave the guns to the Kurds, and then expected the Kurds to just stroll into downtown Tehran and give them to protestors.
We really have stupid people in government.
2036
Dominarion5 days ago
+446
The Kurds just bunkered in, right?
446
Cobra-D5 days ago
+517
Pretty much, they are just like “thanks for the cool toys, aiight we out”
517
Dominarion5 days ago
+292
Look, the Kurds have been there for a f****** while. It's not their first rodeo. They have survived the Babylonians, the Assyrians, the Persians, the Greeks, the Romans, the Arabs, the Mongols...
They know how that game begins, is played and how it ends.
So. When a turd flies across the room in direction of the fan, they go up the mountains and bunker down. So when it finally hits the fan, they don't get too much spray.
292
WeirdSysAdmin5 days ago
+274
Trump fucked over the Kurds in 2019 in Syria. There’s no constructive way I can describe the thought process that went into thinking this was going to work out in his favor.
274
BothChampionship175 days ago
+96
America in general has always fucked 'em over.
96
jacobhamselv5 days ago
+73
But not as much as almost everyone else, which is why depending on government, the kurds like the US. That being said, the old saying is the mountains are the only friends of the kurds
73
BothChampionship175 days ago
+26
That makes my heart hurt for them.
26
Task_Defiant5 days ago
+18
He Fucked over most Americans between 2016 and 2020 and got re-elected. Can't really blame him for thinking the Kurds had shorter memories than his d*** too.
18
moan_of_the_arc5 days ago
+33
Just to add to this, these ancient guys are literally the civilisations which heralded pivotal changes in human history. For example, the Assyrians heralded the onset of Iron Age. This was the whole system of warfare for the next millennia till gunpowder was introduced. So the Kurds have lived through a huge part of human history with their simple strategy of running to the mountains when shit hits the fan. Trump is no new thing for them.
33
Dominarion5 days ago
+13
Totally!
They know when to move down too.
They are probably the ones who wrecked the shit of the Hittites. When they were part of the Median coalition, they participated in the destruction of the Assyrian empire.
And Saladdin... Well, he did knock the Crusaders down several pegs when he captured Jerusalem with his pals from Diyarbakir, Van, Kermanshah and Tikrit.
13
pmormr5 days ago
+37
Who's gonna tell the room full of recently armed angry kurds they can't stay? Any volunteers?
37
CosineDanger5 days ago
+19
The Iranian government will tell them.
They seem to be bombing northern Iraq a lot. Can't let a minor war with the United States distract you from the important stuff.
The U.S. has tried arming the Kurds in Syria, Iraq, and now Iran. We've also repeatedly betrayed them, pulling support when they stopped being a convenient distraction and never letting them form their own nation. They're also a bit mad about how close the U.S. is with Turkey because Turkey also sees massacring Kurds as incredibly important.
Whether they consent or not, they will be roped into yet another brutal fight for survival.
19
Muggsy4235 days ago
+4
They saw how it went for the turkish kurds, and the iraqi kurds, and the syrian kurds, and said no thanks.
4
zhaoz5 days ago
+16
Can't wait for them to be used against the US in the future. As is tradition.
16
Gonzostewie5 days ago
+34
Can ya blame them? How many times are we gonna leave em hanging?
34
Flashy_Month_54235 days ago
+13
The last time would have been enough even if it was the only time, since the president at the time was some guy named Donald J. Trump.
They gave 11,000 young lives in the fight against ISIS, and we rewarded them by letting Erdogan come after them with tanks.
13
Dominarion5 days ago
+8
Oh absolutely. They also can read about the Vietnam and Afghan wars and what happened to the Montagnards, the Chams, the Hazaras and Tajiks of Afghanistan.
The Kurds also lived right at the border between the Romans and the Persians, the Turks and... Well the Persians again..
8
Indiana_Indiana5 days ago
+52
Kurds: “Oh yea we can definitely deliver those to Tehran for you”
*an hour later, in the truck*
Kurd: “So guys, how much longer till Tehran?”
*truck erupts in laughter*
52
WeddingPKM5 days ago
+90
America: Here are some guns for the Iranian dissidents.
Kurds: These are for the Iranian dissidents.
…
Kurds: These are my guns.
90
BOPSurfcasting5 days ago
+109
The Kurds keep getting screwed over by the US whenever they team up with them, nobody is stupid enough nowadays to team up with the Americans.
109
Asleep_Document98115 days ago
+22
I sincerely hope they're smart enough here to not accept US assistance again. I want a free Kurdistan more than most and I can tell that we won't be the path through which it's created.
22
NotVoss5 days ago
+17
After the US betrayed the Kurds in 2019, I'm surprised we trusted them to follow through in the first place.
17
wwhsd5 days ago
+15
> After ~~the US~~ Donald Trump betrayed the Kurds in 2019 …
15
TAV635 days ago
+14
This after were key helping to fight ISIS and then they betrayed them?
14
McortezLSU5 days ago
+12
CIA: Here are guns, you go overthrow the iranians k, we swear we wont betray you this time, promise!
Kurds: Hey Guns! Thats neat Thanks!
CIA: You are not going right?
Kurds: Nah, we not going.
CIA: is it because we betrayed you too many times?
Kurds: yeah, pretty much that.
CIA: The fuhrer is not going to be happy about this.
Kurds: You could just say that we went. Its not like he reads reports right?
CIA: Hey, thats a good idea!
12
omgahya5 days ago
+15
Stupid people, who elected stupid people, to do stupid stuff.
15
CARmakazie5 days ago
+3
At this point, I’d phrase it “we have *really* stupid people in government.”
3
BluntCity1015 days ago
+697
So protestors should have guns??
697
IAmBoring_AMA5 days ago
+546
Yes except in America, where Alex Pretti was killed for legally carrying a firearm.
546
BluntCity1015 days ago
+146
Yes. Thank you. That was he point of my question. Appreciate you explaining it for the folks who may have not got the tone.
146
Xignu5 days ago
+40
You know wht they say, the only standards Conservatives have is a double standard
40
Rycross5 days ago
+29
Nah conservatives are extremely vocal about the right to bring guns to protests when it is a right-wing protest. It was a whole thing during "tea party" protests. It's only when its a liberal that they shouldn't do that.
29
smltor5 days ago
+12
\[quote\]It's only when its a liberal that they shouldn't do that.\[/quote\]
Or a black person. You probably know but for the sake of the xkcd 10,000 Reagan made lots of gun control changes because the black panthers decided that if gun rights were rights then they would have all the guns. Which scared the shit out of white conservatives.
This is from memory, there are wikis and podcasts and so on for anyone that want to learn more.
12
jeremybeadlesfingers5 days ago
+12
Not in the US. Where they have the right to do so, but get shot anyway simply for lawfully carrying.
12
FutureofHumanity4205 days ago
+21
yes. we're living in might = right times according to conservatives. time to serve them up a big heap of their own medicine.
21
NoCSForYou5 days ago
+14
The USA and Israel will arm anyone who doesn't like the Iranian government.
Edit: who is also in Iran or capable of going to Iran and open to commiting treason.
14
dirty_hooker5 days ago
+11
Oh hey! I don’t like the Iranian government. May I have guns, please? Guns are expensive.
I don’t like the current American or Israeli governments either but that’s a tomorrow question.
11
Im_with_stooopid5 days ago
+234
Remember when America armed the Mujahideen. Absolutely zero chance this blows up in their face.
234
SwimmingThroughHoney5 days ago
+20
Honestly, this is even dumber.
He's supposedly arming these people and at the same time publicly saying he's going to bomb the shit out of them and destroy their homes and infrastructure.
20
Big-Compote-54835 days ago
+12
Please don't compare Mujahideen to the Kurds. I know people who fought with the Kurds and they are not the same type of religious radicals (largely). If this is true, they took the weapons to defend themselves knowing the US would just f*** them over like every US president has for the last 30+ years.
12
Dead_Internet694205 days ago
+13
Ah, yes. The Taliban, before they were the Taliban. The Mujahideen did a very good job using those weapons against the USSR when they invaded Afghanistan. That foreign quagmire ended up being so expensive that the USSR is now just Russia.
13
dafeiviizohyaeraaqua5 days ago
+2
To clairify, only *some* of the former Mujahideen joined the Taliban when it incorporated five years later. Some also joined the anti-Taliban Northern Alliance. Moreover, the Taliban did not directly attack America. They harbored Al Qaeda which did.
2
cheebear125 days ago
+23
Saudis attacked us on 9/11. Mujahideen and Taliban (who hated USSR btw) just provided cover. Sometime in the future, we will know exactly how Russia, not the Taliban or even the Saudis, got back at us for arming Mujahideen. So, you can predict Russia will be behind all of it - no matter how ever it pans out. It should be obvious.
23
SauronWasRight-5 days ago
+7
No, that's literally conjecture.
7
IntrepidWeird97195 days ago
+83
If true, can you imagine if a foreign country armed US civilian protestors? And how much did that antic cost US taxpayers?
83
OozeNAahz5 days ago
+16
One must wonder if they would need to arm US protesters. Short of fully auto or rocket launchers I think we have all we need. Like sending sand to the beach.
16
forgotaboutsteve5 days ago
+8
Just yesterday I was thinking about the suspicious pallets of bricks that people were filming that kept popping up after the George floyd incident.
8
Hendlton5 days ago
+4
> can you imagine if a foreign country armed US civilian protestors?
No, I literally can not imagine how they could possibly be any more armed than they are.
4
donkeykong641235 days ago
+137
This happened earlier this year, and it's being made public in the hopes that it pressures the IRGC to come to the table to open the strait.
"US President Donald Trump told Fox News that the United States secretly armed Iranian protesters with firearms earlier this year, sending “a lot of guns" through Kurdish intermediaries as the regime cracked down on demonstrations.
The move came after the Iranian regime reportedly killed 45,000 civilians in their own country.
“We sent them guns to the protesters, a lot of them," Trump said in a telephone interview. “We sent them through the Kurds. They kept them, so we sent more to the protesters, a lot of them.""
137
redeyeflights5 days ago
+90
There’s a wide gulf between “this happened earlier this year,” and “Trump said this happened earlier this year.”
90
maced_airs5 days ago
+17
And even if it did it doesn’t help the protestor position. Imagine if china said they are helping protestors in America. That group isn’t going to look good.
17
MalodorousNutsack5 days ago
+3
The late, great Hannibal Lecter told me it happened, he was there playing golf with the president and Donald got a hole-in-one. It was a hole-in-one like no one had ever seen before. Big, strong Kurds with tears in their eyes said "Sir, can you please teach us how to golf?"
3
FuggyGlasses5 days ago
+52
Lmaooooooo
We sent guns and they kept them so we sent moreee and they kept them too.
52
Cool_Town_67795 days ago
+26
“When I first came here, this was all swamp. Everyone said I was daft to build a castle on a swamp, but I built in all the same, just to show them. It sank into the swamp. So I built a second one. That sank into the swamp. So I built a third. That burned down, fell over, then sank into the swamp. But the fourth one stayed up.”
26
Dead_Internet694205 days ago
+6
Then we sent some guns to the women, and the children, and then we sent some guns to the IRGC, just for good measure.
6
Fenris_uy5 days ago
+33
It justifies the IRGC hitting the protesters hard. Once they are armed by an enemy they aren't just civilians.
33
r20025 days ago
+8
How does this apply pressure? It’s admitting large scale incompetence.
8
Campcruzo5 days ago
+3
Also kills the narrative Iran was killing it's own citizens. Any sovereign state is going to put down any armed insurrection propped up by a declared enemy of the state. That should be the expected response. Unless this was a game to get Iran to kill its own people, in which case, you burn any chance at regime change you would want and kill an entire premise for the war before starting said war.
3
Heavyweighsthecrown5 days ago
+14
> This happened earlier this year, and it's being made public
...earlier this year, when western media said the iranian government was killing 'peaceful protesters'.
...also earlier this year, when Mossad was trying to coup the iranian government, and failed, as they themselves have confirmed by also making it public now.
I'm sure these 3 pieces of information - the US arming protesters, Mossad trying a coup, and iran killing 'peaceful protesters' -, all from the same period, must be completely unrelated /s
14
BeautifulOk62605 days ago
+10
also "earlier this year" as if we didn't just finish month #3. These people will massage a narrative into full blown looney toon town.
America armed protestors hoping they would overthrow the government and it didn't work out and got a lot of people killed. Then they massively inflated the numbers and claimed these were peaceful unarmed protestors instead of a foreign intelligence op.
10
whatproblems5 days ago
+3
kurds are probably thinking why are you mentioning us!
3
OozeNAahz5 days ago
+51
Cause arming an opposition force has never come back to bite us in the ass…. These people are so f****** dumb.
51
Dead_Internet694205 days ago
+13
At least he didn’t help drug cartels flood American cities with cocaine in order to pay for the guns that we gave to Iranians.
13
OozeNAahz5 days ago
+6
Reagan and North. Still feeling the after effects of those folks.
6
OmahaWarrior5 days ago
+11
But no healthcare, Medicaid or daycare for Americans. What a crazy world we are in.
11
fivepopes5 days ago
+9
He’s just pressing random buttons now, like a tired toddler who can’t figure out a Fischer Price toy
9
Maleficent_Owl_70015 days ago
+70
Trump: " i am a complete moron who cannot see what anyone with a brain cell can see"
70
Efficient_Age_694205 days ago
+8
To be used against the US at some point if history shows anything.
8
redditobserverone5 days ago
+6
It is sad and funny that more than 70 million people saw this fool as an ideal leader.
6
BlackBeanGuest5 days ago
+5
My american friends, how does it feel to know that your president is a f****** idiot?
5
Garekos5 days ago
+7
We have been familiar with the feeling since 2000. We have been acutely aware of the feeling since 2016. Unfortunately we underestimated how stupid a little under half the population is.
7
jawadur15 days ago
+60
That's how you can start another Taliban
60
lateread9er5 days ago
+15
But US protesters can’t be armed?
15
RetroTheGameBro5 days ago
+28
>sending guns to an anti-government group in hopes they'll overthrow their government with them
Am I tripping or didn't Reagan and Oliver North almost get executed for treason for doing this exact thing?
28
PaxNova5 days ago
+8
No. Firstly, far off from execution for treason. Secondly, they were in trouble for doing it when Congress passed a law against it specifically. There is no law against arming anti-Iran protesters.
8
Anothernamelesacount5 days ago
+14
but they didnt
in fact Reagan became one of the most beloved US presidents (by the worst people on earth, might add) and Ollie North is loaded
so no wonder this is happening again, and the next time, IDK, they're just going to send bioweapons, I just dont know what war crime comes after that
14
hates_writing_checks5 days ago
+5
"But it was totally justified!"
🎶*Ollie North! Ollie North*!🎶
Seth McFarlane really hit it on the nose with that sketch in *American Dad.*
5
ManfredSideous5 days ago
+5
There were reports of arm protestors and the regime made the claims that protestors had fired on law enforcement and military. Could Trump have poured gas on the fire that lead to thousands of Iranian protesters dying? I am not saying that is the case but the dots do kinda align here.
5
kombiwombi5 days ago
+4
There is no way this happened.
Protestors were already being said to be puppets of the US. If they were armed puppets of the US that would have been on the Iranian news immediately a gun was fired back at the police and military which were killing thousands of protesters.
This statement immediately delegitimises any opposition movement to the Iranian government. After all, the US President himself said he is arming them for a violent overthrow of the government :-|
This is exactly the situation George HW Bush sought to avoid when he told the CIA to stand clear of eastern European democracy movements in the closing years of the Cold War.
4
benhereford5 days ago
+5
Now watch the interview of him saying it was unfortunate that Alex Pretti was murdered but that he shouldn't have had a gun at a protest......
5
JohnBrownSurvivor5 days ago
+9
I'm sure somewhere, on some accounting sheet, it shows that money for guns went somewhere. I think we can be pretty sure that there were never any guns, and all that money went into Trump's pocket.
9
Rakhsev5 days ago
+44
So while the Iranian regime is directly responsible for all those deaths, this just confirms the US and Israel provoked these bloody 48 hours, and lied about providing serious assistance. We see the *assistance* they're giving now, blowing up a major bridge, and threatening to destroy power plants.
I can understand hope, but anyone thinking those two assholes were going to save Iran were deluded from the start.
44
Initial-Return88025 days ago
+10
Surely the plan was simple... carry out the initial strikes on IRGC and heads of Iran *during the protests*, that's it, that's all they had to do. That would have given the protestors enough to fight and possibly take Tehran
Why do it a month later?
10
__Yakovlev__5 days ago
+11
Because he was too busy bombing Venezuelan boats and threatening Greenland so the carriers, that were supposed to be near Iran, were not there in time.
Yes he's that f****** stupid. They missed the once in a lifetime opportunity to topple the Iranian regime because he was too busy threatening NATO allies.
Though to be honest he probably didn't want them to succeed either since that would likely lead to a functioning democracy. And he just wants some yesmen in charge that give him oil and other deals.
11
DemadaTrim5 days ago
+8
So he's just handed the Iranian government a gold plated excuse for any violence against protestors. I mean, they would have said that anyway, but now they have even more evidence to support it being true. Great.
8
VeryluckyorNot5 days ago
+3
CIA facepalm hard that was a secret operation, revealed by Trump.
3
SHUT_DOWN_EVERYTHING5 days ago
+3
Finally some journalist that bothers to put it on the headline clearly that this is “Trump says” rather than making it appear as a statement of fact.
3
ash_ninetyone5 days ago
+3
If he gave them to the Kurds, they won't flow them down to Iranian protestors. They will see free weapons and turn them towards the Iranian and Turkish states since they desire an independent Kurdish state.
3
vroart5 days ago
+4
He keeps insulting their country and their people….. so he’s arming them for what again?
4
so_dope245 days ago
+4
Are these the paid actors the Republicans warned us about?
4
happyColoradoDave5 days ago
+3
What? Is he serious? And if he is, that would not seem like public information. Wow. Someone needs to get him out of there.
3
leftrightside545 days ago
+4
He just admited that, now every news caster talking about why did you kill those innocent protesters, Iran will just say because they were not innocent but a faction arm by the USA.
4
lordnacho6665 days ago
+22
Hmm I'll need to see receipts
22
bummerdeal5 days ago
+17
Insane that anyone is doubting this. The US has done this type of thing for decades. This is how regime change has always happened.
17
Old_Belt71275 days ago
+4
All the commenters who took Trump at his word on his other posts are suddenly skeptical now that this one goes against the narrative lol.
4
Warlord685 days ago
+5
We’d like other people to die for our war.
5
Snarl_Marx5 days ago
+8
Arming a rebel group in the Middle East has generally gone really well for the US.
8
ION-045 days ago
+6
Now all he needs to do is admit he sends arms to Mexico to keep it destabilized and people on Listnook will finally…. who am I kidding, Listnook still thinks the US is innocent in all of this.
6
One-Swimming93905 days ago
+3
He sent them to the Kurds. Who kept them. He’s just trying to save face for allowing the protesters to be slaughtered.
3
carterartist5 days ago
+3
Remember when the republicans sent stinger missiles to the Mujahideen?
3
InvalidDescription5 days ago
+3
Iran: "We sent transcripts of you and Epstein to 'No Kings' rallies."
3
ocwilly5 days ago
+3
What would be better is to send ICE agents to Iran!
3
Ch3v4l13r5 days ago
+3
What a f****** amateur hour.......
3
artbystorms5 days ago
+3
Hey, I've seen this one before! Reagan said "We sent guns to the Mujahideen" and that didn't turn out badly for us right?
3
Cheap_Standard_42335 days ago
+9
This has always worked out well.
9
ScottOld5 days ago
+6
Iranian protesters who won't have a country left to run
6
thegreatlizard995 days ago
+5
Yes America gives weapons to “protesters” that’s how America destabilizes nations. Put sanctions on a nation to starve the people. The people suffer and blame their government and America backs this while demonizing the government. America bolsters protest, tries to bride military officials and arm radicals. Protests turn violent. Governments respond. The US uses this as pretense to invade or bomb.
Also American and Israeli officials all said they had people on the ground supporting the protests. What did you think “supporting the protesters” meant? Tossing at AKs and bombs
5
Oxbix5 days ago
+8
If that's true, why would he tell?!
8
bhadau85 days ago
+6
Dementia
6
AIDSofSPACE5 days ago
+7
Such an American solution.
7
Tweed_Man5 days ago
+7
Whether or not this actually happened, saying your armed protesters of a hostile government is a sure fire way to empower that government with even more justification to kill protesters. Imagine is Iran publicly claimed it was arming No Kings protesters. Trump would be able to declare an emergency and have LEO shoot on sight.
7
thenerdwrangler5 days ago
+5
You can pretty much be sure that they didn't. This POS just says whatever floats into his brain at the time
5
CindysandJuliesMom5 days ago
+6
But we couldn't get the ACA subsidies extended. This America First thing is working great. /s
6
ByFarTheGreatestTeam5 days ago
+2
Oh fancy that almost like those “peaceful protestors” were armed and shooting at law enforcement
2
jWas5 days ago
+2
Idiots are creating taliban 2.0. That’s exactly the same fkn thing they did in Afghanistan
2
Any_Negotiation_67165 days ago
+2
Y’all think trump would shit himself if Iran send guns to Americans protesting trumps regime ?
2
Independent_Dot_14485 days ago
+2
POTUS said it so it’s a lie.
2
The_Reverend_Dr5 days ago
+2
The problem here is that Trump doesn't even know when he's lying.
2
the_wessi5 days ago
+2
What could possibly go wrong? Worked perfectly when USA sent weapons to the mujahideen fighting against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan.
2
Silverleaf965 days ago
+2
Why didn't he send them to BLM or not my king protest
2
Cerbatiyo-sesino5 days ago
+2
Oh yeah? You okay with people angry with their government using guns against it? You don't have a problem with it, Donnie the Diddler? Is that what I'm hearing?
2
BilboStaggins5 days ago
+2
So the exact thing that caused the Iranian regime to slaughter its citizens. The Ayatollah swore it was the USs fault...
2
SquonkMan615 days ago
+2
Well apparently the opposition decided not to use them.
2
No_Criticism_58615 days ago
+2
I would hope not. Theres no shortage of assault rifles in the usa, I can't imagine if the narcos and Iranians teamed up to create havoc :(
2
Cor26005 days ago
+2
“More guns, more peace”. I keep hearing that excuse for no gun control.
2
markjo123455 days ago
+2
I’d rather send guns to the Iranian opposition than go in and invade the country. Just saying
2
Substantial_Gap_15325 days ago
+2
He just burned an entire intelligence operation. Way to go dipshit.
199 Comments