U.S. manufactured tanks have reportedly ended up in the arsenal of fighters from an umbrella organization of mostly Iran-allied Shiite militias in Iraq that have expressed hostility towards troops from the United States
The global jihad is taken seriously by unrelenting jihadists, but was not even acknowledged by the previous Obama Administration. Now Iran has been given resources through the disastrous Iranian deal to expand its powers and work toward its dream of a revived Persian empire.
Iran has been expanding its proxy wars throughout the Middle East after the fall of the Islamic State. Last year, the human rights group Amnesty International “obtained government data showing that the U.S. Army had lost track of more than $1 billion worth of weapons and other equipment destined for local allies combating ISIS.”
America returning to its place as a beacon of democracy in the world under the Trump Administration is not only good news, but an urgent necessity in the face of Islamic supremacist and jihadi expansion, and now, brazen provocation against US forces in Iraq.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has stated “that Iran and its rapidly expanding regional power, as well as its nuclear program, would be the major focus” of discussions between him and Trump on Monday.
“Report: Anti-American Iran-Allied Shiite Militias Take Control of U.S. Tanks in Iraq,” by Edwin Mora, Breitbart, March 6, 2018:
U.S. manufactured tanks have reportedly ended up in the arsenal of fighters from an umbrella organization of mostly Iran-allied Shiite militias in Iraq that have expressed hostility towards troops from the United States, according to an audit by the top inspector general (IG) for overseas operations.
Some militias from the Iran-backed Popular Mobilization Forces/Units (PMF/U), also known as Hashd al-Shaabi, have threatened American troops in recent months, urging the United States to entirely withdraw from Iraq now that Baghdad has declared defeat over the Islamic State (ISIS/ISIL).
Although some PMU fighters fought alongside the U.S.-led coalition against ISIS, some of those Shiite fighters may have American blood on their hands having clashed with the United States armed forces following the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
In a quarterly report issued to Congress, the Lead Inspector General for Overseas Contingency Operation (LIG-OCO), which covers activities by the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD), the U.S. Department of State (DoS), and the U.S. Agency for International Development, auditors found:
This quarter [October 1, 2-17 thru December 31, 2017] , the DoS acknowledged that some U.S.-provided military equipment sent to support the mission, including as many as nine M1 Abrams tanks, had fallen into the hands of Iranian-backed militias that fought against ISIS in Iraq. The DoS pressed the Iraqi government to prioritize the return of defense articles provided by the United States as designated in the sale agreements.…
PMF units had obtained as many as nine M1 Abrams tanks. These tanks, originally provided by the United States to the Iraqi Army, included some tanks seized by the PMF from ISIS after the fall of Mosul and the second battle of Tikrit.
However, seven of the nine tanks have already been recovered, notes Foreign Policy (FP)…..
christianblood says
This article is one sided and is mostly based on US propaganda against Iran and its allied Shiite militia and it also fails to mention the fact that without these Shiite militias the defeat of ISIS in Iraq would have been totally impossible. The article does not also mention that the US and its Western and Saudi, Qatari and Turkish allies are collaborating with ISIS, Al-Qaeda and many other islamic jihadist groups in Syria in order to overthrow the internationally recognized government of Syria. I am by no means saying that Iranian government is a saintly government but compared to Saudi Arabia, ISIS, Al-Qaeda and dozens of various other Takfiri/Wahhabi jihadist groups that the US and West openly and secretly support in Syria and supported in Libya, Iran looks the lesser of these two evils. In fact, if were not the Iranian support, Saudi Arabian and US-backed islamic jihadist groups would have already over run Syria and Yemen as they did in Libya a few years ago and millions of Christians and other minorities in Syria would have been mass-murdered by these murderous jihadists. More of this please click on the link below:
https://southfront.org/us-helicopters-evacuate-over-20-isis-commanders-from-deir-ezzor-media/
Steve says
Sunni threat, and Shia threat, are the same side of the coin.
Steve says
https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/261559/end-world-muhammad-mahdi-coming-dr-majid-rafizadeh
christianblood says
Nope. All the islamic terror attacks that are happening daily around the globe, including many jihadist massacres against Shiites are perpetrated by Sunni Takfiri, jihadists, not Shiites.
Rob says
Yes, two evils!
christianblood says
Rob
Let us be rational and specific: The FACT is that ALL the islamic terror attacks that are happening daily around the globe, including the 9/11 attacks in the US are perpetrated not by Shiite or Ahmadis but Tafkfiri/Wahhabi islamic jihadists that are ideologically, religiously and financially based in Saudi Arabia, which is the closest US Ally. Please see the picture below:
https://heavy.com/news/2017/05/trump-bows-to-saudi-king-photos-video-bowed-bowing-obama/
Ray Jarman says
Christianblood,
While the Sunnis are the most visible on the stage of terrorism, the Shia is still the most dangerous. The Saudis with their alliance is unable to fully crush the Houthi Rebels in Yemen. The Shia apocalypse version of islam and the mullahs’ conviction that it is true pose a much more dangerous situation for they have no fear of mutual destruction. Since their alliance with N. Korea and the myopic stupidity of Putin in his quest for unwanted influence aiding and abetting Iran’s determination to acquire (probably already have a few thanks to Hussein Obama) nuclear weapons, the entire Middle East as well as Europe are within their range of terror. The west seems to be repeating history again and the quote, “First they came for the Jews, then they came for the gypsies, then the homosexuals and now they have come for me.” is very applicable, especially in Europe, today. Israel is definitely in their cross hairs at this moment.
krishna says
the only solution of iran’s problem in the middle east is overthrowing mullah regime as soon as possible
christianblood says
krishna
The real source of global jihadist problem is not Iran but Saudi Arabia and its Western, US allies who are collaborating with ISIS, Al-Qaeda and various other murderous takfiri/wahhabi jihadists in Syria as they did in Libya few years back. As I said, Iran is not a pacifist country but it is actually the real force that is standing in the way of complete victory by ISIS, Al-Qaeda and many other Saudi and Western-backed jihadist groups in Syria and Iraq. As we speak, the US is now considering attacking the Syrian government forces in support of their islamic jihadist proxies that are now encircled in Eastern Ghouta by the Syrian government forces and it is not impossible that could eventually lead to a nuclear exchange between Russia and the US as Russia won’t allow the US to forcefully overthrow the Syrian government in support of their takfiri/jihadist proxies in Syria. Click on the link below to read more of this please:
https://sputniknews.com/us/201803071062309965-us-considering-attack-syria/
J D S says
Or maybe turning Israel loose on them…
…probably quicker.
Ibrahim itace muhammed says
It means the evil united states has failed to take away Iraqi oil to offset the $1 lost and Iraqi resistance groups are now using the same weapons brought for armed. Americans are fools !!
Ibrahim itace muhammed says
ï mean more than $1 trillion lost during invasion of Iraq
Halal Bacon says
why do you worship a pedophile?
CRUSADER says
I can’t argue with Mr Irritate’s logic on this topic of the loss of a dollar.
Ibrahim itace muhammed says
Halal, no ignorant idiot.we don’t worship human being. we worship the creator of all unlike you pagans worshiping Godman.
LeftisruiningCanada says
you bow yourself down to a rock and desire to live like a pedophile.
sorry for the crossed wires there.
Ray Jarman says
Ibrahim, You are a complete moron. I assume that you are talking about Jesus Christ as the “Godman.” Just incase no one has ever apprised you, Jesus Christ came to earth to suffer the pains that mankind suffers and only through his atonement can one return to the presence of our Heavenly Father. God permitted everyone free agency but at the same time suffer the consequences for making bad choices. Free agency does not mean without judgement and while the Heavenly Father may forgive sin, he certainly will not forgo judgement and consequences for certain sins such as murder and perdition. Only in your subverted (maybe perverted) concept of Heaven and Hell can a man slaughter millions of defenseless human beings and raping the few women and boys left alive and upon death expect an afterlife full of rape of virgins and little boys. Personally, I would rather suffer in Dante’s Inferno than in an afterlife with your kind.
Halal Bacon says
Hope they have On-Star enabled – to shut them down
LeftisruiningCanada says
exactly. might want to be careful sitting in someone elses high tech tanks.
CRUSADER says
Land Bridge from Iran to the Med Sea is working quite well for Shi’ite domination plans.
Israeli be watchful.
Ibrahim itace muhammed says
Ray Jarman, when jesus was to the earth as Godman,did the main God remain in the heaven ? Do mithraist christians worship earthly and heavenly God at the same time or only earthly God Who created the earth according to mithraist Bible ? Did jesus creat his own Mother you Call the Mother of God ?
Ray Jarman says
IIM, I have no idea why I or anyone would answer this but how about reading the Gospels of Mathew, Mark, Luke & John. In the scriptures you will discover that Jesus Christ was/is the Son of our Heavenly Father who died on the cross for our sins and was resurrected from the grave. His Sermon on the Mount is one of the most beautiful and fulfilling talks ever provided to his flock. As others have pointed out to you in the past, Jesus Christ died so we can return from where we came, i.e., at the feet of the Heavenly Father whereas your allah demands that you slaughter, kill, rape and every kind of perdition imaginable but above all to die for him. In fact maybe you should read “Proverbs” and “Ecclesiastes” for many of the examples of stupidity and arrogance fit you to a tee.
LeftisruiningCanada says
Against Ray’s admittedly sound advice, i will make a few quick points in the hope that you may be able to find a way out of your confusion, Ibrahim.
You “Mithraist” stuff will be ignored this time, since it’s so clearly the case that it is false.
1. “Main God in heaven”
Trinitarians don’t think in terms like that. There is only the one God who exists in Triune nature. It is obviously a completely unique kind of existence, but there is nothing illogical or impossible about it.
Remember, Trinitarians believe in One God who exists in Three Persons, or centers of consciousness, which is one way i’ve read it described.
Though within the Trinity they are equal in all ways, for their work in the world and in time they have taken certain roles. This is why you see the Son in a subservient position – He is Sent by the Father, for example, or may not do certain things until the Father shows Him it is time to do them.
This distinction between the three Person’s equal nature as God outside of time, and their differing positions within time, is the source of much confusion and attack by those who reject Trinitarianism.
So, to now answer your question, no, the “main god” did not stay in heaven while ‘another God” came to earth. The Father was in Heaven, while the Son became incarnated in the person of Jesus Christ as the Godman. He is still incarnated as the Godman and will always be so, from what we can tell. The One God remained everywhere, upholding all things. We don’t know everything about this most Holy of subjects, but there is nothing contradictory or against reason about it.
If anyone is telling you that Christians believe in three Gods by declared doctrine or implied consequence, they are either ignorant or lying to you. Seriously, you can use this one point as a test to see who you should not be listening to.
2.”Do mithraist christians worship earthly and heavenly God at the same time or only earthly God Who created the earth according to mithraist Bible ?”
“We worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; Neither confounding the Persons; nor dividing the Essence.” Athanasian creed.
“No sooner do I conceive of the One than I am illumined by the Splendor of the Three; no sooner do I distinguish Them than I am carried back to the One. When I think of any One of the Three I think of Him as the Whole, and my eyes are filled, and the greater part of what I am thinking of escapes me. I cannot grasp the greatness of That One so as to attribute a greater greatness to the Rest. When I contemplate the Three together, I see but one torch, and cannot divide or measure out the Undivided Light.
– Gregory of Nazianzus, Oration 40, On Holy Baptism
Preached at Constantinople Jan. 6, 381
Ibrahim, there is only one God alone Who is worthily and properly worshiped.
3.”Did jesus creat his own Mother you Call the Mother of God ?”
Please do not misunderstand what “Mother of God” is supposed to mean.
The phrase has a long history, but it is meant only to say that Jesus was the Godman from the moment of His conception. There were several ideas going around at the time the phrase was being debated that claimed that Jesus only became the Godman at some later point in His life (Baptism, for example).
In that context there is no problem at all with saying that the Son created Mary, just like He was responsible for the creation of everything else in, and including, the universe. (Though of course, creation was a Triune act anyway)
We do not believe that Mary’s womb is the place where God started to exist, if that is possibly what you are getting at.
Any other, more educated Christians are welcome to correct or clarify anything i’ve typed. Though depending on how Ibrahim replies, it may not be appropriate to continue.
Ray Jarman says
LeftisruiningCanada, Thanks. I did not wish to go into too much detail as even we Christians disagree on certain points and I did not want to totally confuse our friend. I would like the opportunity to sit down at a table with beef suya and discuss one on one the aspects of Christianity and his cult. Maybe we should invite him to visit say Victoria since I don’t live all that far from there for high tea.
LeftisruiningCanada says
Victoria is very nice in the Spring time, as you probably know….the cherry blossom strewn streets are wonderful.
Ibrahim probably lives in Canada already anyway, so this shouldn’t be too hard to arrange 😉
CRUSADER says
+++++++++
DEUS VULT
+++++++++
Ibrahim itace muhammed says
Leftruinigcanada, if Jesus is part of God sent to earth, why father and begotten son of God ? How did God the father beget Jesus the son?According to mithraist Bible jesus is to be worshiped as God,is that worship to the son alone or to the father or both ? If Jesus created the universe,did he do It before he was born or after ?
LeftisruiningCanada says
It’s seems like there is a chance you are interested in understanding this, so we can continue a little longer.
1: if Jesus is part of God sent to earth, why father and begotten son of God ?
Trinitarians wouldn’t use terms like “part of God”, since it could mislead people into thinking that each Person is 1/3 of God, which we do not believe. We would say something like ‘the Son came to earth’.
I’m not sure i understand your question though Ibrahim. Are you asking why God decided to use those terms?
2:How did God the father beget Jesus the son?
How? By sending the Son, the divine Person who has existed from all eternity, into union with His body in Mary’s womb. We usually say that this happened from the moment of conception.
3:According to the Bible Jesus is to be worshiped as God, is that worship to the son alone or to the father or both ?
This was addressed in section 2 of my last reply to you, above.
4: If Jesus created the universe,did he do It before he was born or after?
Jesus is the name of the Godman, who is a unique joining or union of the divine Person of the Son and human flesh. Before the Godman came into existence in Mary’s womb, the Son was already existing.
It is the Son, though not only the Son, who created everything.
I can see why that might be a little confusing to you, since we Christians often saying things like “Jesus created the universe”, when in fact, the Son was not called Jesus when He was creating the universe (so far as we know).
Ibrahim itace muhammed says
Leftruinigcanada, in John it is stated that jesus was God with God at the begining, it means at there two gods(father and son) who in the heaven and the son was sent to earth and became flesh. was god the son not a partner to god the father, is that not clear polytheism as in Idol worships. Did the son came out of the father and formed an entity.
LeftisruiningCanada says
My reply to you showed up below.
CRUSADER says
“Field of Fight: How We Can Win the Global War Against Radical Islam and its Allies”
— book on United States national security strategy coauthored by Michael T. Flynn and Michael Ledeen.
United States is engaged in a religious world war against what the authors call “Radical Islam” — defined as a violent “tribal cult” emanating from a “failed civilization” — but has so far been hampered in its response by political correctness.
The authors claim that the United States and its allies face “an international alliance of evil countries and movements that is working to destroy us” and advocate a combination of increased military action and ideological warfare in response. They identify a range of enemies of which Iran is the foremost, and advocate a strategy of regime change aimed at overthrowing the Iranian government as a key step towards defeating “Radical Islam”.
Ibrahim itace muhammed says
crusader, your crusade war to be led by evil united states Will be defeated by determined Muslims in a true iihad fighting in the same way salahaddeen defeated brutal crusaders led by mithraist churchmen.
CRUSADER says
Or …
….Not !
Jacqueline says
Everybody seems to ignore the basic principle pervasive in Islamic governments and that is Sunni vs. Shiite.
Both these religious philosophies embrace Islam yet hate each other. The only people they hate worse than each other are infidels (or people who don’t believe as they do). The government of Iraq is currently controlled by Shiites. Iran is Shiite – therefore a natural ally of Iraq. If Iraq were controlled by Sunnis, Iran would hate Iraq – as it did when Sadaam Hussein controlled that country. Likewise, Syria is Shiite. Al Qaeda and ISIS are Sunni. Anything done to eradicate these entities helps Shiites. When Donald Trump promised to get rid of ISIS, he unwittingly became the dupe of the Shiites. I’m quite sure that Iran, Iraq, and Syria are laughing at him. Yet who else was going to do it? These countries spend all their money and effort controlling their own populations and funding terrorist activities.
That is what’s so confusing to ordinary U.S. citizens who just want to help the underdog. Unfortunately, I think that if the Syrian rebels (Sunni) were able to topple Bashar al Asaad (the Syrian Shiite dictator) the Syrian Sunni rebels would happily oppress the minority Shiite Syrian population in reprisal for the way the rebels had been treated for decades.. Western governments, in helping either side in these Middle East wars, simply refuse to admit that they are basically religious wars.
LeftisruiningCanada says
+1
Agreed – they are religio-tribal conflicts. The violence cannot stop so long as the other tribe exists.
LeftisruiningCanada says
If we take a closer look at the beginning of John, you will see that John explicitly wrote it in a way which rules out ideas of there being a ‘partner”, or any kind of polytheism. He also rules out the idea that the Word was created at a point in time:
“In the beginning was the Word”
The form of the word “was” used here (in Greek) does not refer to a point in the past. Instead, it is telling us that, however far back you want to think, the Word was already existing. Here we already have the Word being given equality with God, since only God has eternal existence.
And the Word was with God
The word “with” used here (again in Greek) is often used to describe a personal, face to face, relationship. John is telling us that the Word, who has always existed, is not some kind of idea or impersonal “thing”, but is a Person in close relationship with God.
If John had stopped here, you would be right to suspect polytheism….but he didn’t:
And the Word was God
The Word, who is a Person distinct from God, but who has existed forever in a face to face relationship with God, is also in some way, God.
Note that it doesn’t say the Word was “a” god, which is sometimes claimed. No, the Word who was with God, is also, God. There are not two Gods being described here, there is only one God. But this God that John is telling us about, is in someway able to “be” with himself in a personal way.
This portion of Scripture is one of the reasons why Christians have come to speak of God in terms of “Person” and “Being”, or “Nature”.
We actually all do this anyway to some extent: We know that a car, for example, has being. It exists as a car, and has a “car” nature. But it doesn’t have Personhood (Herby excepted) – it doesn’t feel or know or desire. Same for a rock or whatever.
In this way we have found a greater understanding of what the Holy Spirit through John wrote. We see the plurality of Persons within the Nature, or Being, of God.
John, in the shortest way possible, has described in brief the great mystery of God’s innermost nature – the eternal, plural, one God.
I know that for Muslims this can seem like a deception to get you to commit Shirk. But it isn’t. We are absolute Monotheists, Ibrahim, and always have been. John was a Monotheist, and so of course was Jesus Christ.
We just believe that this One God has revealed Himself to be more unique and amazing, and complex, than He ever revealed Himself to be before the time when Christ Jesus walked the earth.
“Did the son came out of the father and formed an entity.”
The general belief is that for as long as the Father has existed, so has the Son. Eternally, of course.
Ibrahim itace muhammed says
Leftruinigcanada, “Begotten son “never connotes sending the son. A Christian Evangelist Throsh said “Begotten son of God “was a title given to Jesus. But Ahmed Deedat countered that many were addressed as sons of God. I Pity you ,Leftruinigcanada, believing in this rubbish,it originated from paganism of mithraism of old.
LeftisruiningCanada says
I’m not sure what you are saying now Ibrahim.
” “Begotten son “never connotes sending the son.”
Maybe, maybe not. But it doesn’t matter, because other places in the NT do tell us that the Son was sent:
“16For God so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son, that everyone who believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through Him. 18Whoever believes in Him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe has already been condemned, because he has not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.…”
John 3:16-18
“A Christian Evangelist Throsh said “Begotten son of God “was a title given to Jesus”
I have no idea who “Throsh” is, and i don’t know what point you are making by quoting him.
“But Ahmed Deedat countered that many were addressed as sons of God.”
Yes yes, i’ve heard his “sons by the tons” nonsense. That man was so dishonest and so willfully misrepresented and lied about Christian belief, that you really shouldn’t pay any attention to him whatsoever. Seriously Ibrahim, you would have to try very hard to find a worse teacher on what we believe.
I refer you to the quote from John 3:16-18 again. Notice how it calls Christ “God’s one and only
Son”? This is far from the only place where this is stated.
Do you think it’s possible to use the word “son” in different ways? You are the literal son of your father and mother, but you may also consider yourself the spiritual “son” of a great teacher or imam or whatever.
The NT makes it quite clear that Jesus, the Godman, was and is God’s Son in a unique way, so to continue with arguments that try to devalue that fact is pointless. Yes, we know that other people have been called a son of God, the Bible is clear about that. We also know that Jesus Christ is the Son of God in very different and unique way, also because the Bible is clear about that.
Did you know, for example, that even where you focus on the phrase “only begotten Son” from John 1:18 actually means “unique, one of a kind” rather than being something to do with being born or generated?
Goodness, just read the first chapter of John.
” I Pity you ,Leftruinigcanada, believing in this rubbish,it originated from paganism of mithraism of old.”
And yet you are the one who has neither interacted or contradicted anything i’ve said in response to your questions. If you want to persist in following the example of mohammad, about which nothing more need be said, then you are free to do so. If you consider his life and teachings to be more Godly than that of Jesus Christ, and are willing to stomach mohammad’s many evils while rejecting Christ based on your willful misunderstandings about who He is, then go right ahead.
You’ve had more Christians extend patience towards you than many in this world get, and more exposure to the real Jesus and Gospel than a lot of people are blessed to have. If you want to reject it all on the utterly untrustworthy teachings of men like Deedat, without at least trying to be intellectually honest and check what he was saying, then away you go, knock yourself out.
Your sins are many Ibrahim. You’ve been warned.
“Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for unless you believe that I am He, you will die in your sins.”
John 8:24