Iran v US confrontation

berbatrick said:
Click to expand...


Its true. I keep seeing comments from libs like "he only reversed the strike because his gay lover (who he has sex with) Vladimir Putin told him to!!!".

Which would be great, why would you not want that? I swear some of these people care more about insulting Drump J Cheeto than actually avoiding a war where people die.
 
Eboue said:
Its true. I keep seeing comments from libs like "he only reversed the strike because his gay lover (who he has sex with) Vladimir Putin told him to!!!".

Which would be great, why would you not want that? I swear some of these people care more about insulting Drump J Cheeto than actually avoiding a war where people die.
Click to expand...

I saw multiple Hillary gifs captioned with- wouldn't you want a competent leader at a moment like this.
 
berbatrick said:
I saw multiple Hillary gifs captioned with- wouldn't you want a competent leader at a moment like this.
Click to expand...

Absolutley not. Trump is not a peace candidate and any good moves he makes are coincidental because hes too stupid to follow conservative orthodoxy but Hillary absolutely would have us hurtling towards war in this position.
 
Red Defence said:
Trump’s going to go down for a lot in the future and so are some associated with him. They’re probably anticipating that if they’re honest with themselves and are trying to achieve their objectives, or want to be seen to achieve their objectives, without any undue risk to themselves. Trump couldn’t care less, he thinks he’s invincible. They now realise he is not.
Click to expand...
I’d bet my house he won’t. We don’t live in a fair world, he’ll enjoy a full 8 years in office and will retire without stepping foot inside a single courtroom.
 
Eboue said:
Absolutley not. Trump is not a peace candidate and any good moves he makes are coincidental because hes too stupid to follow conservative orthodoxy but Hillary absolutely would have us hurtling towards war in this position.
Click to expand...

I think she'd have struggled to replace any of Obama's signature achievements in the first place. If the nuclear deal wasn't scrapped, none of this would be an issue right now.
 
2mufc0 said:
You're preaching to the converted mate.

But you fail to acknowledge Iran have been meddling in the Syria, Iraq and Yemen civil wars too.
Click to expand...

Again, Not comparable, for the quantity and intensity. Is like comparing a slap on the face with beating up someone till multiple fractures
 
Camy89 said:
Pure speculation and smells of bullshit to me. I reckon he was talked out of it by someone and has twisted it into his tweets to make him seem like the righteous and merciful demi-god sparing those 150 lives. Just doesn't seem right. He's been stubborn and petulant his entire presidency...why change now?
Click to expand...

All Trump's faults aside, he's been consistent in one key message since launching his first election campaign 4 years ago. No more endless, unnecessary, expensive wars in the Mid.East.

This is one of the reasons he won the votes of many Bernie fans in 2016. Going against that and starting a new hot M.E conflict would render it all as BS and basically kill the one claim he could have in his re-election campaign. " I DID NOT START ANY NEW WARS IN THE MIDDLE EAST, AS I PROMISED."

Remember , in 2016, Hillary advocated a no-fly zone over Syria, would could have led to direct conflict and shooting between US-Russian army, which god knows what it would have led to, and what state the Syrian conflict be in now, had that happened.

Eboue is 100% spot on. Lots of people are so eager to always get one over Trump, even if it means death of hundreds of random innocent civilians.

Let's say they are right, and it was the secret gay lover of Trump (I thought they are progressives btw and won't resort to gay jokes as a way of degrading an individual?) who talked him down of striking Iran...then maybe Vova deserves some credit? :wenger:

I still don't think this is done. Maybe this was Trump A/B testing the public's reaction to an "almost" war? If he doesn't feel like public care too much and media and opposition are actually mocking him for not starting the hot war, then next time an Iranian farts within 100km radius of a US intelligence asset in the nation (whatever that means), then it's finally game on.

Next few weeks will tell.
 
Hanks said:
All Trump's faults aside, he's been consistent in one key message since launching his first election campaign 4 years ago. No more endless, unnecessary, expensive wars in the Mid.East.

This is one of the reasons he won the votes of many Bernie fans in 2016. Going against that and starting a new hot M.E conflict would render it all as BS and basically kill the one claim he could have in his re-election campaign. " I DID NOT START ANY NEW WARS IN THE MIDDLE EAST, AS I PROMISED."

Remember , in 2016, Hillary advocated a no-fly zone over Syria, would could have led to direct conflict and shooting between US-Russian army, which god knows what it would have led to, and what state the Syrian conflict be in now, had that happened.

Eboue is 100% spot on. Lots of people are so eager to always get one over Trump, even if it means death of hundreds of random innocent civilians.

Let's say they are right, and it was the secret gay lover of Trump (I thought they are progressives btw and won't resort to gay jokes as a way of degrading an individual?) who talked him down of striking Iran...then maybe Vova deserves some credit? :wenger:

I still don't think this is done. Maybe this was Trump A/B testing the public's reaction to an "almost" war? If he doesn't feel like public care too much and media and opposition are actually mocking him for not starting the hot war, then next time an Iranian farts within 100km radius of a US intelligence asset in the nation (whatever that means), then it's finally game on.

Next few weeks will tell.
Click to expand...

He's a political opportunist so its quite likely the strikes didn't happen last night because he thought it could hurt him politically after having previously criticized Dubya, Jeb, and Hillary about their positions. Bear in mind that this is the same guy who dropped a MOAB in eastern Afghanistan and has greenlit the caging of children. He will always do what is most politically expedient to his own interests, and its pretty likely he was either told this would be bad for him, or else he himself came to that conclusion.
 
barros said:
Why so many of you hate US? Russia and China committed unbelievable atrocities all over the world and against they own people but no hate against them and the reason you guys are able to be in this forum was because of this country. Even when Obama was the president was still hate and now I think with Trump you guys feel right to hate the country.
Click to expand...

Everyone knows China and Russia are the baddies. But so is the US, that had been policing and bullying the world since the WWII. The problem is that US and specially fanboys of their international policy, pretend to be better and with a higher moral than those 2.
 
4bars said:
Everyone knows China and Russia are the baddies. But so is the US, that had been policing and bullying the world since the WWII. The problem is that US and specially fanboys of their international policy, pretend to be better and with a higher moral than those 2.
Click to expand...

Well one is democratic and the other two are dictatorships, so they may have a point.
 
Raoul said:
He's a political opportunist so its quite likely the strikes didn't happen last night because he thought it could hurt him politically after having previously criticized Dubya, Jeb, and Hillary about their positions. Bear in mind that this is the same guy who dropped a MOAB in eastern Afghanistan and has greenlit the caging of children. He will always do what is most politically expedient to his own interests, and its pretty likely he was either told this would be bad for him, or else he himself came to that conclusion.
Click to expand...

He's a strange one, since he actively wants to put kids in jails where they face torture, and he is also the first president I can remember who showed any concern for the loss of life of those he's targeting.
 
berbatrick said:
He's a strange one, since he actively wants to put kids in jails where they face torture, and he is also the first president I can remember who showed any concern for the loss of life of those he's targeting.
Click to expand...

I'm thinking the concern was wholly on loss of life to American troops, which would be a public opinion killer for him. His base don't care about "the others."
 
MrMarcello said:
I'm thinking the concern was wholly on loss of life to American troops, which would be a public opinion killer for him. His base don't care about "the others."
Click to expand...

Nah, he explicitly mentioned the 150 Iranians who'd die in the airstrike.
We were cocked & loaded to retaliate last night on 3 different sights when I asked, how many will die. 150 people, sir, was the answer from a General. 10 minutes before the strike I stopped it, not proportionate to shooting down an unmanned drone
Click to expand...
 
berbatrick said:
Nah, he explicitly mentioned the 150 Iranians who'd die in the airstrike.
Click to expand...

Granted we believe his bullshit this one time. I have my doubts.

I do know a few colleagues of mine all felt launching a strike, potentially starting a war, over a fecking drone was ludicrous and not what we want in our profession.
 
MrMarcello said:
Granted we believe his bullshit this one time. I have my doubts.

I do know a few colleagues of mine all felt launching a strike, potentially starting a war, over a fecking drone was ludicrous and not what we want in our profession.
Click to expand...

ya i know he tends to lie, but it's mostly bluster and macho shit. it's unlike anything i can remember for a president to say the opposition casualties would be too high.
for this one thing i'll give him credit.
 
Raoul said:
Well one is democratic and the other two are dictatorships, so they may have a point.
Click to expand...
All the stupid shit the US has done over the past few decades, including putting babies in cages and using the term collateral damage to absolve themselves of bombing hospitals and wedding parties were carried out by a democratically elected government in the name of their public voters.

Having a democratically elected government doesn't automatically make their actions morally superior.
 
So how did they know how many people would be there and why were they choosing to hit something where there would be people?

I’m beginning to think that was just an excuse for backing down. Or that he didn’t intend to hit anything at all and it was just pretence. Trump trying to appear tough but then being concerned about the loss of lives. Yeah right!
 
Last edited:
Red Defence said:
So what were they? He could just be making this up about casualty numbers?
Click to expand...

I'm guessing they are the air defence stations involved in tracking and shooting the drone. But this stuff is usually classified and there's no way to know for sure.
It makes no sense for him to make this up.
 
berbatrick said:
I'm guessing they are the air defence stations involved in tracking and shooting the drone. But this stuff is usually classified and there's no way to know for sure.
It makes no sense for him to make this up.
Click to expand...
It does because it’s Trump. He had to appear tough after a US drone was shot down because the worse thing to Trump is to appear weak. However there was nothing he could realistically fire at without starting a much wider conflict so he pretended that he backed off because of casualties. Now he looks like a winner and he’s being patted on the back. You’ve all fallen for his manipulating ways again. But he saved face didn’t he.
 
Red Defence said:
It does because it’s Trump. He had to appear tough after a US drone was shot down because the worse thing to Trump is to appear weak. However there was nothing he could realistically fire at without starting a much wider conflict so he pretended that he backed off because of casualties. Now he looks like a winner and he’s being patted on the back. You’ve all fallen for his manipulating ways again. But he saved face didn’t he.
Click to expand...

A US Republican president saying he is worried about other lives, will appear to his base as a traitorous pussy. He didn't save face with his party, or with people like you flooding his replies about his spelling mistakes or his non statesman-like reversal.
He might have gained some praise from me but I'm not American and most Americans probably aren't like me, and the ones who are are't going to vote for him.

About a wider conflict - the US intermittently bombed Iraq on average once every few days throughout the 90s. Trump has twice bombed Syrian bases, close to where Russia operates. Israel likewise, on many more than two occasions. Israel has assassinated several Iranian scientists. US and Israel collaborated to produce a virus that destroyed Iranian infrastructure. None of these led to escalation.


Occam's razor dictates that what he's saying is true, since alternative explanations don't make sense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.