So, a liberal columnist said something negative about the current POTUS, why, I'm shocked.
Iran
- Thread starter BLITZ
- Start date
at the very least, try to understand and put into context your next verbal beat down.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-administration-temporarily-lifts-sanctions-on-iranian-oil-at-sea/
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2014
- Messages
- 17,407
- Reaction score
- 6,832
- Points
- 113
And Trump was better served being a game show host.
and a casting couch is missing AOC.
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2014
- Messages
- 17,407
- Reaction score
- 6,832
- Points
- 113
Bassent is arguing that the administration had planned to do this, he might as well argue that they had planned on Iran closing the Strait of Hormuz… after the U.S. had won the war… but before asking allies for help… and asking for an additional $2 Billion in funding…. and deploying 7,000 troops.
So their nuclear facilities were obliterated, but their nuclear program was only significantly damaged and set back years. But only eight months later it was somehow an eminent threat? Dance, boy, dance!
Was Hegseth telling the truth when he says Tomahawk stocks were depleted after Biden sent them to Ukraine?
It's apparent that you've devolved to the level of hyper-petty. Somehow you feel like you score a WIN if Trump/this Administration was wrong about something and you want me or the board to agree - so you can say "See!!! Gotya!"
Do you ever bother to stop and analyze your selective outrage? We can point to thousands of things the prior administrations got wrong - 6 feet of social distance, masks work, Joe Biden's family dealings were on the up and up, no Joe didn't take classified docs, Obama didn't spy on his political opponents - and you didn't care about any of those lies or wrongs.
Now you do because you only hunt political scalps.
They said the program was set back and facilities were destroyed/obliterated. There's no arguing that.
What does it matter to you what I or anyone else calls it? Truly, why does this matter to you?
I called Obama's 15,000+ drones strikes campaign a war. Dems didn't. Doesn't matter at all, in any way shape or form. Nor does it matter what this is called.
Iran's been at war with us for 47 years. So sure, engaging here could be considered a war. Or one could say we've been at war for this long. Or one could say this is a limited engagement. Who cares?
This just exposes your ideology, which controls you. I'm asking God to Bless this engagement, so it may succeed and the Iranian people are set free from the brutal tyranny they have lived under for generations.
You hate the Iranian people, so this won't make sense to you.
You need to go back and read the education I gifted you on this money. That money was not owed to the IRGC.
You still need to go look up the definition of a cult.
"too many words! triggered!"
/Flog, being flogged
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 14,313
- Reaction score
- 22,353
- Points
- 113
Tim, I hope we meet some day. I really want to shake your hand.
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2014
- Messages
- 12,022
- Reaction score
- 7,829
- Points
- 113
Looks like Trump is giving Iran 4 days before infrastructure is targeted. I think targeting the infrastructure would send a bad message to the Iranian people. Assuming regime change happens rebuilding infrastructure would cost so much more money and take so much more time. I also don't think targeting infrastructure is going to make the regime cave. Im sure they have backup plans and the only people I see suffering would be the Iranian people
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 14,313
- Reaction score
- 22,353
- Points
- 113
Maybe true about the inconvenience to the little guy.
The Iranians will not turn on Trump and Israel. They are praying for Trump to continue his fighting.
The regime must leave. Dead or alive, they must leave.
imma punch him in the mouff when i meet him.
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2014
- Messages
- 1,348
- Reaction score
- 2,025
- Points
- 113
What a silly question. I will always believe the Iranians over their Islamic Republic rulers.
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 12,068
- Reaction score
- 17,192
- Points
- 113
The New Yorker!!! 
Shocking
And just $10.99 for 30 pages of propaganda, what a deal.
ShockingAnd just $10.99 for 30 pages of propaganda, what a deal.
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 13,848
- Reaction score
- 6,412
- Points
- 113
JFC, you can't make this sh*t up. So Trump is eternally grateful to the Islamic Republic because it graciously allowed eight Pakistan-flagged tankers to pass through the Straight of Hormuz? So kind and generous of them.
America has never looked this weak and pathetic as under Trump.
From FoxNews:
America has never looked this weak and pathetic as under Trump.
From FoxNews:
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 13,848
- Reaction score
- 6,412
- Points
- 113
The New Yorker!!!
And just $10.99 for 30 pages of propaganda, what a deal.
If it stings, it stings. Sorry about that, Zona. Trump is proving to be the utter buffoon everyone knew that he was.
You need a padded cell.
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 13,848
- Reaction score
- 6,412
- Points
- 113
You'll obviously go down with the MAGA ship, there was never any question about that. Shamelessly loyal to the very end. I hope that it will all have been worth it for you, kneeling in fealty, as you have.
You ain't gonna do nuffin!
Now you are just making **** up because your TDS is raging. American has literally - quite literally - never looked stronger. What is it about you Libs that allows you to look at a man and say "yep, that's a woman" and say America is weak while watching the most militarily superior invasion in world's history?
Even the NY Times agrees.
Opinion: The war is going better than you think
If past generations could see how well this war has gone compared with the ones they were compelled to fight at a frightening cost, they would marvel at their posterity’s comparative good fortune.
Most Americans probably don’t look back at March 2012 — if they remember it at all — and think of terrifyingly high gas prices. In the month when “The Hunger Games” ruled the box office and President Barack Obama was on his way to a comfortable reelection, the price of Brent crude closed the month around $123 a barrel. That would be about $175 a barrel in today’s dollars.As of Tuesday, despite Iran’s effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz and its attacks on its neighbors’ energy facilities, it’s hovering around $100, slightly higher than the average inflation-adjusted price since January 2001, roughly $95.
That ought to provide some perspective on the panic over the war in the Middle East. To hear the critics’ version of events, an unprovoked and unnecessary attack on Iran, launched at Israel’s behest, is already a foreign-policy fiasco that has put the global economy at risk without any clear objective or endgame. As Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., told NBC’s Kristen Welker over the weekend, “We’ve never seen this level of incompetence in war-making in this country’s history.”
Really? Let’s take a tour of some of the recent history.
• During the 1991 Operation Desert Storm against Iraq’s Saddam Hussein, a campaign that is widely considered a brilliant military success, the U.S.-led coalition lost 75 aircraft, 42 of them in combat. In this conflict, four manned aircraft have been destroyed, three to friendly fire and one in an accident. Not a single manned plane has yet been lost over Iran.
• The U.S. air and land campaign in that operation lasted a full six weeks. Today it’s remembered as a lightning-fast war. The current conflict with Iran is less than four weeks old.
• In the 1989-90 invasion of Panama, whose military phase lasted a few days, the United States lost 23 soldiers, with 325 more wounded. So far in this war, U.S. losses are 13 dead. Among the more than 230 wounded, most have swiftly returned to duty.
• During the Persian Gulf crisis that began with Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait in August 1990, the U.S. economy went into recession and the Dow fell by about 13% before the allied air war began. Since conflict with Iran began last June with Operation Midnight Hammer, the Dow is up by 9% as of Tuesday morning.
• At the outset of the 2003 invasion of Iraq, the United States made a failed decapitation strike against Saddam and his senior leadership, some of whom became leaders of the insurgency. In this war, much of Iran’s top leadership was killed on the first day and there is still no proof of life from the new supreme leader. Yousef Pezeshkian, the son of the current president, has written that if Iran can’t prevent the continued assassination of its leaders, “we will lose the war.”
• Between 1987 and 1988, in the final stages of the so-called tanker war, the Reagan administration reflagged Kuwaiti tankers and had the U.S. Navy escort them out of the Strait of Hormuz. An Iranian mine nearly sank an American frigate. The conflict wound down after the United States sank a handful of Iranian navy ships. This time around, we have destroyed almost all of Iran’s navy with no naval losses of our own.
• In 1991, Iraq fired roughly 40 missiles toward Israel. Hardly any were intercepted despite the deployment of Patriot batteries there. In this war, Israel is registering an interception rate of 92% against more than 400 missiles. Iran’s overall rate of fire has dropped from 438 ballistic missiles on the first day of the war to 21 on Monday. Drone fire has also declined from 345 to 75 for the same dates.
• In the months leading up to the second Iraq war, the George W. Bush administration made a case based on erroneous information that Saddam possessed weapons of mass destruction. In the current war, there is no question that some 970 pounds of highly enriched uranium lies stashed and buried in Iran — possibly enough, with further enrichment and conversion into uranium metal, for 11 nuclear bombs. If the outrage of the Iraq war is that Saddam didn’t have WMD capabilities, is it now supposed to be somehow more outrageous that Iran does?
• One of the worst mistakes of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan was the attempt by U.S. administrators to remake societies in both countries — well-intended efforts with some noble results that nonetheless were beyond our grasp. In this war, despite some varying rhetoric from President Donald Trump, the goal has been reasonably clear and consistent: Iran cannot have nuclear weapons or other means to menace its neighbors. As for regime change, we hope the Iranian people use the opportunity of their leadership’s weakness to seize their own destiny. But we won’t do it for them.
• The Bush administration had little support from Arab nations during the 2003 invasion of Iraq and its aftermath. Now The New York Times reports, “Saudi Arabia’s de facto leader, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, has been pushing President Trump to continue the war against Iran, arguing that the U.S.-Israeli military campaign presents a ‘historic opportunity’ to remake the Middle East.” Hopefully, one way in which it can be remade is through a peace treaty between Riyadh and Jerusalem.
• In hindsight, the single biggest error of the Gulf War was to end it too soon, before Saddam’s forces were thoroughly routed. Trump should not make the same mistake.
I am not blind to the Trump administration’s failures in planning, particularly its unwillingness to make a stronger public case for war and get more allies on our side before the campaign began. I am also purposely comparing the war with Iran to past wars of similar scale, rather than our true military fiascos in Vietnam, Korea and the two world wars — in which tens of thousands of Americans died due to poor tactical planning and bad strategy.
Still, if past generations could see how well this war has gone compared with the ones they were compelled to fight at a frightening cost, they would marvel at their posterity’s comparative good fortune. They would marvel, too, at our inability to appreciate the advantages we now possess.
