What do you think about it? Was this real? He wanted to do it, but generals pulled back? Or was it a show down?
He can't declare war like that can he? Isn't that the congress' job?
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/20/world/middleeast/iran-us-drone.html
"WASHINGTON â€" President Trump approved military strikes against Iran in retaliation for downing an American surveillance drone, but pulled back from launching them on Thursday night after a day of escalating tensions.
As late as 7 p.m., military and diplomatic officials were expecting a strike, after intense discussions and debate at the White House among the president’s top national security officials and congressional leaders, according to multiple senior administration officials involved in or briefed on the deliberations.
Officials said the president had initially approved attacks on a handful of Iranian targets, like radar and missile batteries.
The operation was underway in its early stages when it was called off, a senior administration official said. Planes were in the air and ships were in position, but no missiles had been fired when word came to stand down, the official said.
For Mr. Trump, “judgment time is coming†on how to respond to Iran.]
The abrupt reversal put a halt to what would have been the president’s third military action against targets in the Middle East. Mr. Trump had struck twice at targets in Syria, in 2017 and 2018.
It was not clear whether Mr. Trump simply changed his mind on the strikes or whether the administration altered course because of logistics or strategy. It was also not clear whether the attacks might still go forward. ..."
It would be wrong to order strikes against Iran, since the provocation isn't sufficient, and Iranian self defense is justified.
This applies to US presence in Syria as well. We have no need to be there. And no need anywhere to engage in false flags.
This is why "entangling alliances" are a bad idea. I look forward to the replacement of NATO with an EU defense force (minus American involvement).
BTE = NYT is not a reliable source for anything. Bird cage fodder.
"“In light of the targeting of an unmanned U.S. drone by Iran, it is essential that we remain fully engaged with our allies, recognize that we are not dealing with a responsible adversary and do everything in our power to de-escalate." - Pelosi
"Trump told reporters that Iran made a "very big mistake" but also said he had the feeling that it might have been the result of someone being "loose" or doing something "stupid," rather than a deliberate provocation by Iran."
Supposedly Iranian Revolutionary Guards did it. They are already labeled a terrorist organization. The analogy is the the Japanese Kwantung Army in Manchuria, that tried to pretend it wasn't part of the Japanese government (to give it plausible deniability). The US has done the same thing with Al Qaeda and ISIS.
But it begs the question. Technically, the US has been at war with Iran, since Iran supported the Houthi rebels in Yemen against our ally, Saudi Arabia. And one of the reason for challenging/shooting down reconnaissance planes is for SIGINT. And the shutdown will provide the US with clues to true Iranian/Russian capabilities.
Who cares who shot the drone? It's offically Iran's Armed Forces in Iran, isn't it? Iran officially declared that they shot it down on purpose to protect their air space.
Whatever the reason or whoever shot it down, it's not a mistake. And he keeps saying it is a big mistake. 'Deliberate provocation by Iran?' LOL Then he orders a strike but calls it off when planes in air and ships in position?!
It's not even the usual US vs some country win-lose scenario. It's a right down lose-lose scenario.
All I can think it is a bluff or he really tried to pull something liked that but slapped down by some generals who actually has an idea about war and also a one with Iran.
The United States is the rogue nation, that already has nukes and other weapons of mass destruction, and apparently has little compunction about using them.
Quote from: drunkenshoe on June 21, 2019, 06:10:48 AM
Who cares who shot the drone? It's offically Iran's Armed Forces in Iran, isn't it? Iran officially declared that they shot it down on purpose to protect their air space.
Whatever the reason or whoever shot it down, it's not a mistake. And he keeps saying it is a big mistake. 'Deliberate provocation by Iran?' LOL Then he orders a strike but calls it off when planes in air and ships in position?!
It's not even the usual US vs some country win-lose scenario. It's a right down lose-lose scenario.
All I can think it is a bluff or he really tried to pull something liked that but slapped down by some generals who actually has an idea about war and also a one with Iran.
No, Revolutionary Guards are separate, like SS in Nazi Germany. Iran did own up to it. If they cut the Revolutionary Guards connection to the regime, then the regime would fall. The regular Iranian Army isn't pro-ayatollah. That is why the Revolutionary Guards exist. Why Hitler had to create the SS, after dumping the Brownshirts.
US reaction is relief, and more support for Trump. Therefore may have all been planned in advance. Yes, you have to be willing to recall the forces 10 mins (so I am told) before something bad happens. Calling it a mistake (by the Iranians) is the first diplomatic thing Trump has ever done with Iran (who Israel wants to see genocided). But don't expect a pseudo friendship to breakout, like between Trump and Un.
It's supposed to be the Legislative Branch's job to declare war, but the President has the ability to go over their heads in the event of an emergency. However, Presidents have been ignoring that limitation and declaring their own wars for years. The rules don't matter anymore.
QuoteHe can't declare war like that can he? Isn't that the congress' job?
Congress gave that right away to allow us into the War on Terror, and have never officially reclaimed the exclusive right to do so back. However a Senator from Oregon is proposing a bill that would make it where the Executive Branch could be sued for declaring war without the Senate's approval... which doesn't do much good if the first strike is gotten off before that process can begin.
It's a bit worse than that though; Tulsi Gabbard, a Congresswoman from Hawai'i, claims that Congress was recently voting on a bill that gives the Executive Branch the legal authority to both plan and implement "defensive strategies" against Iran. If it went through, which she assumed it was going to, it means that not just Trump but men like John Bolton and Pompeo (both of whom are notorious warhawks and in favour of war with Iran) are given free reign to start moving the military into position to strike... and in doing so provoking a fight in the first place.
Quote from: drunkenshoe on June 21, 2019, 02:32:13 AM
He can't declare war like that can he? Isn't that the congress' job?
Technically, only Congress can declare war. And the last time it did so was 1942.
The President, as Commander In Chief, can authorize the use of force at any time - essentially fighting an undeclared war.
Congress may rubberstamp the President's actions with a surprisingly broad and vague "authorization to use force" like they did with Iraq and/or provide additional military funds.
As you can see from the sheer number of conflicts the US has been involved in since WWII, the US has a rather frequent habit of sending troops without a declaration of war.
Quote from: Blackleaf on June 21, 2019, 03:32:20 PM
It's supposed to be the Legislative Branch's job to declare war, but the President has the ability to go over their heads in the event of an emergency. However, Presidents have been ignoring that limitation and declaring their own wars for years. The rules don't matter anymore.
Since 1941 ... in continuous war. With truces/change in war zone. Congress controls where in general the universal war is being fought (Iran for example) not that there is war. The US economy can't survive without war. Technically, from Truman to Nixon, the President had a big loophole as to initiating a new war zone. Because nukes. With Ford forward, this unilateral power has been cut back. The bigger problem is once the Congress does give a go ahead to back a new war zone (opened tentatively by the White House) ... they have a hard time giving it up. See our failure in Afghanistan. The Patriot Act did jigger more leeway to the White House in 2001 ... terrorists ... cough, cough.
Why would any of you take anything that the Orange Shitgibbon says at face value?
He's a lying sack of shit. Period.
Quote from: Minimalist on June 21, 2019, 09:46:17 PM
Why would any of you take anything that the Orange Shitgibbon says at face value?
He's a lying sack of shit. Period.
Why would you believe a shit bag like Obama or Hillary? Like our Syria, Ukraine and Libya interventions. What about Yemen?
NYT is unhappy. NYC is of Israel, by Israel, for Israel. There were no dancing Israelis when Trump decided not to take 150 Iranian servicemen's lives.
So John Bolton is saying, he has restrained the President's non-violent tendencies. And that all the interventions from Afghanistan forward were successes. But that is what you get with a maniac with a big mostache.
Quote from: Minimalist on June 21, 2019, 09:46:17 PM
Why would any of you take anything that the Orange Shitgibbon says at face value?
He's a lying sack of shit. Period.
I don't... but I also haven't seen anyone refuting that story either, and his administration is prone to leaks. I don't necessarily buy his reason why he did it, only that he probably did... and probably for no other reason than he is a sick fuck who wants to play life and death situations like a reality show just to get his knocks.
QuoteWhy would you believe a shit bag like Obama or Hillary?
I'm still not sold on Obama being the anti-Christ (though he was certainly no Jesus), but I will agree that believing Hillary is a fool's choice.
I also am not sure what either have to do with the price of kebab in Qom.
Quote from: Shiranu on June 21, 2019, 09:57:47 PM
I don't... but I also haven't seen anyone refuting that story either, and his administration is prone to leaks. I don't necessarily buy his reason why he did it, only that he probably did... and probably for no other reason than he is a sick fuck who wants to play life and death situations like a reality show just to get his knocks.
I'm still not sold on Obama being the anti-Christ (though he was certainly no Jesus), but I will agree that believing Hillary is a fool's choice.
I also am not sure what either have to do with the price of kebab in Qom.
Like Obama, like Hillary? Yes, ordering death is a rush. Even better, being in the line of fire yourself. An ugly truth about humanity.
So Trump is wrong if he attacks Iran, and Trump is wrong if he doesn't attack Iran. And he is the crazy one?
BTW ... Tucker Carlson, has John Bolton to rights ... let you haters heads explode with that.
QuoteSo Trump is wrong if he attacks Iran...
Yes, particularly if his admin continues to provoke a fight... and especially if it's over their nuclear enrichment program that he pulled out of the regulations on.
QuoteAnd Trump is wrong if he doesn't attack Iran.
Nope. Only if Iran poses a unprovoked, legitimate and eminent threat to us would it be right.
Quote from: Shiranu on June 21, 2019, 10:34:31 PM
Yes, particularly if his admin continues to provoke a fight... and especially if it's over their nuclear enrichment program that he pulled out of the regulations on.
Nope. Only if Iran poses a unprovoked, legitimate and eminent threat to us would it be right.
Yes, is that you Lord Halifax? If you don't realize that humans are predators, then enjoy being someone else's beta boy hamburger.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xA1Uz_TMzhs
The world history is war, war of every tribe against every other tribe. Support your tribe! (whichever it might be).
Right now the Iranians are a direct threat, in Syria, to Israel. Not my tribe BTW. But on the basis of fight-forward policy, there is every reason to join Israel in destroying the Iranian regime. Not my policy.
I am a beta, I know my limitations. And I will almost always vote for peace (which includes non-violent inter-tribal competition like the Olympics).
As pointed out by Tucker Carlson vs John Bolton ... you need to think twice before taking the advice of a Great White shark.
Quote from: Baruch on June 21, 2019, 10:00:41 PMSo Trump is wrong if he attacks Iran, and Trump is wrong if he doesn't attack Iran.
Well, a more accurate statement for that last part would be to whip out a gun, wave it around a little bit, and then holster it. And yeah, that's a tad fucked up, not as fucked up as pulling the trigger, but kinda bad, too.
The unspoken third option (and it's curious that you didn't think to articulate it, maybe you're hoping that we'd forget?) is of course to not escalate the situation to a war that *almost* no one wants. Sure, you don't get a poll boost for not dropping bombs, but being a decent human being rarely earns accolades.
Quote from: Shiranu on June 21, 2019, 10:34:31 PMOnly if Iran poses a unprovoked, legitimate and eminent threat to us would it be right.
Or starts some major shit with an ally. Though their main adversary is Saudi Arabia, and considering Saudi Arabia's lengthy rap sheet including ongoing you know, genocide... I dunno if I'd be too broken up about both of them savaging each other to death.
Quote from: Hydra009 on June 21, 2019, 10:51:54 PM
Well, a more accurate statement for that last part would be to whip out a gun, wave it around a little bit, and then holster it. And yeah, that's a tad fucked up, not as fucked up as pulling the trigger, but kinda bad, too.
The unspoken third option (and it's curious that you didn't think to articulate it, maybe you're hoping that we'd forget?) is of course to not escalate the situation to a war that *almost* no one wants. Sure, you don't get a poll boost for not dropping bombs, but being a decent human being rarely earns accolades.
Well, since people want things. Badly. Such that the end justified the means, including warfare ... you will run across people like Herr Hitler. Stalin was evil too, but more sly. His intent was for Germany to fight France/England, to exhaustion, then stab Hitler in the back, and then the Warsaw pact would extend all the way to the English channel. But the French/English folded too soon. And England held out too long. And Hitler got impatient.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2zrqzvtWio
Strategy is about what is in your mind vs what you think is in the mind of your opponent.
Hitler and Stalin are the only two alpha male politicians worth studying from the 20th century.
https://babylonbee.com/news/in-act-of-aggression-iran-puts-its-country-right-next-to-our-aircraft-carriers?fbclid=IwAR1jZo92ZRMgQTWNkUYziH0wM3M6id7BZh-H1PhgGmNhCZgQEKEI6gtaLYQ
Quote from: Shiranu on June 21, 2019, 11:49:44 PM
https://babylonbee.com/news/in-act-of-aggression-iran-puts-its-country-right-next-to-our-aircraft-carriers?fbclid=IwAR1jZo92ZRMgQTWNkUYziH0wM3M6id7BZh-H1PhgGmNhCZgQEKEI6gtaLYQ
Where does policy come from?
IN the 1930s, we don't want any foreign wars. So when Japan, Italy and Germany do bad things, we don't intervene. When the Axis is successful, it gets stronger, future allies are let down, the future situation becomes more dire. So the policy changed in 1948 ... the US will assume everyone is Hitler, and intervene early and often. Forward deployment gets us the Korean War, and forward aggression get us the Vienam War. That is why we have tried more than one color-revolution in Iran, and assisted Saddam Hussein as long as he was fighting Iran.
Quote
Why would you believe a shit bag like Obama or Hillary?
Because neither one was a lifelong mafia scumbag like Trump.
Quote from: Minimalist on June 22, 2019, 01:56:42 AM
Because neither one was a lifelong mafia scumbag like Trump.
Love some people, hate some people. Usually ones we don't know personally.
What is this? Partisanship and psychopathology. The usual monkey shines.
BTW - I don't love any of these politicians. But I find the Roman Mob sport of thumbs up/thumbs down to be mildly amusing,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gladiator#/media/File:Jean-Leon_Gerome_Pollice_Verso.jpg
When in Rome do as the Romans do, capiche? I find your anti-Italian prejudice ... disturbing. Guido! I have a job for you ...
Thanks, guys. ... Sigh.
Quote from: drunkenshoe on June 21, 2019, 02:32:13 AM
What do you think about it? Was this real? He wanted to do it, but generals pulled back? Or was it a show down?
He wanted to, put someone in his cabinet stopped him before he went all bananas.
Quote from: Baruch on June 21, 2019, 10:00:41 PM
Like Obama, like Hillary? Yes, ordering death is a rush. Even better, being in the line of fire yourself. An ugly truth about humanity.
So Trump is wrong if he attacks Iran, and Trump is wrong if he doesn't attack Iran. And he is the crazy one?
BTW ... Tucker Carlson, has John Bolton to rights ... let you haters heads explode with that.
Why do you insist on living in the past!? Obama is gone, Clinton is gone - we have to deal with the world we have now, not the world as you imagined it years ago. And now we have Uncle Scam to deal with.
Quote from: Unbeliever on June 22, 2019, 01:29:48 PM
Why do you insist on living in the past!? Obama is gone, Clinton is gone - we have to deal with the world we have now, not the world as you imagined it years ago. And now we have Uncle Scam to deal with.
Hillary is god, she is immortal. She is the perpetual zombie candidate for the D party as in Death party ;-)
The world as it is, can't end soon enough. Death to you all, evil monkey people. ;-(
Nobody got the obvious joke in the OP title? Coitus interruptus?
Where is the Resistance to Ming the Merciless when you need them?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VnTHypbLlkE
How about the dementia y'all have today? Silly silly man.
Every politician ever ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7KgR_H9VsI
perhaps it is simply the move he perfected for sex and thought...why not?
Quote from: Baruch on June 22, 2019, 10:46:32 PM
Nobody got the obvious joke in the OP title? Coitus interruptus?
Got it, thought it too obvious to need a mention.
Quote from: Unbeliever on June 23, 2019, 05:29:38 PM
Got it, thought it too obvious to need a mention.
Some people are so INCEL they need reminding?
I pass freedom gas in your general direction! :-P
Quote from: Unbeliever on June 24, 2019, 07:38:09 PM
I pass freedom gas in your general direction! :-P
Prune juice can help with that, old man. A drink approved by the Klingons.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3SZ8H52p0Zk
Who you calling an old man, old man!?
:-P
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-06-25/iran-says-new-sanctions-mean-diplomatic-path-closed-forever?utm_content=business&cmpid=socialflow-twitter-business&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=socialflow-organic&utm_source=twitter
QuoteIran said the path to a diplomatic solution with the U.S. had closed after the Trump administration imposed sanctions against its supreme leader and other top officials, ramping up tensions further in the Middle East.
President Donald Trump on Monday put sanctions on Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and eight senior military commanders, that deny him and his office access to financial resources. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin also said financial restrictions would be imposed on Iran’s Foreign Minister Javad Zarif later this week.
“The futile sanctions against the Iranian leader and the country’s chief diplomat mean the permanent closure of the diplomatic path with the government of the United States,†foreign ministry spokesman Abbas Mousavi was quoted as saying by semi-official Iranian Students News Agency. “The Trump government is in the process of destroying all the established international mechanisms for the maintaining global peace and security.â€
Cool.
Hard to say what will happen. Too many different cultures and politics involved. China for example has to be a frenemy ... since they hate Muslims.
I would be happy for the Muslims to simply stop pumping oil and gas for a year, take a breather from their competition. The rest of us can walk.
I don't believe that the US actions are crucial in any case, it is important that the US "seem" influential". That is the problem with branding.
In the event that Iran tests a nuclear device, or before that, Israel will destroy them. And that will be the end of the world, with or without the US.
The alternative is for Pakistan to supply nuclear weapons to Saudi Arabia. To equalize the situation. That would be jolly.
Actual journalism ...
Iran is a special case ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EXnYi_kOoE4
Netanyahu is crazy ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5asWYmGOa8
Democrats want a Trump war, that will be lost ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AccjEv2eVe0
Congress gave the right to have "endless wars" in the Middle East
They even called it "the long war."
"truth is the first casualty of war" ain't that the goddamn truth
Quote from: Sal1981 on June 25, 2019, 05:28:59 PM
"truth is the first casualty of war" ain't that the goddamn truth
That is why we have a permanent war. That way, we never have to tell the truth again. Perfect for politics!