No, that too is fake news.
Between social media and the liberal media, there is a lot of fake news out there.
Trump Just Surrendered to Iran--Pathetic
- Thread starter GDead_Tiger
- Start date
No, that too is fake news.
Between social media and the liberal media, there is a lot of fake news out there.
I think the drone concept has changed that dynamic...this is the first conflict where I've seen the Pentagon equate cost with battle.
well, they should join the marines and charge the beach against an enemy that has not been as weakened as possible..and surely folks would be on here - after the US casualty reports - wondering why the military strategy didn't include taking out the defenses prior to sending in ground troops.
Don't you find it to be a little unique that people who have never served or have never served in war planning are critical of something they know little about. It's kind of like a mechanic complaining about how a cardiologist is going to perform heart surgery. And a ground force commander has a lot more lives at stake than the single patient on the operating table.
Last edited:
Gonna try this one more time. Look at the map...please...
You can't just take the strait. You have to take the entire Persian Gulf on the Iranian side all the way down through the Gulf of Oman. The strait is just a chokepoint. Shipping would still be threatened all the way down Iran's 1,100-mile coastline. To put that in perspective, that's perhaps 200 miles less than the west coast from Washington to California. How do US troops cover all of that? All the Iranians need to do to close the Persian Gulf is hit one tanker with one missile. The insurers do the rest. Do you think the Russians would be averse to supplying Iran with drones? That's a win for them as Trump clearly demonstrated. Choke off the Persian Gulf and Russian oil becomes far more valuable and it costs Putin next to nothing.
A military "victory" in Iran is less likely than it was in Afghanistan. It's just more waste of American lives and money. How about we spend that on renewable research and deployment, development of molten salt nuclear reactors, national energy efficiency standards...you know, things that we can actually do.
You can't just take the strait. You have to take the entire Persian Gulf on the Iranian side all the way down through the Gulf of Oman. The strait is just a chokepoint. Shipping would still be threatened all the way down Iran's 1,100-mile coastline. To put that in perspective, that's perhaps 200 miles less than the west coast from Washington to California. How do US troops cover all of that? All the Iranians need to do to close the Persian Gulf is hit one tanker with one missile. The insurers do the rest. Do you think the Russians would be averse to supplying Iran with drones? That's a win for them as Trump clearly demonstrated. Choke off the Persian Gulf and Russian oil becomes far more valuable and it costs Putin next to nothing.
A military "victory" in Iran is less likely than it was in Afghanistan. It's just more waste of American lives and money. How about we spend that on renewable research and deployment, development of molten salt nuclear reactors, national energy efficiency standards...you know, things that we can actually do.
@baltimorened is a hammerhead...and he sees every single problem as a nail. Add to that he's a Trump apologist no matter his denials and you've got someone not worth arguing with.
I'd love to see it happen. The best outcome would be to find Bibi's name hidden away in there.
I find it a little wild how you seem incapable of saying that any negotiation about uranium or any other stated objective is severely weakened by not having the strait. No one is arguing against the point you keep repeatedly making. No one is calling our military weak.
They are saying the strategy of starting a war without planning on immediately securing the strait is misguided.
well obviously I'm not making the point correctly, it has been stated more than one time, on more than one network, but more than one retired senior officer, that the Pentagon has plans and has wargamed assuming control of the strait.
I don't know anything about uranium other than that getting it has been part of our objectives from day 1. Not getting it would, in my mind be a failure. And there are only two or three ways to get it...Iranians dig it up and give it to us, a third party gets it or we put people on the ground to get it. I don't know how the strait and uranium are tied together in your mind. We can get the uranium if the strait is closed or open, and we can get the strait opened without getting the uranium...in fact if what' s being reported is accurate, that's what;s happening the strait will be opened and negotiations on the uranium will happen later.
But maybe I'm talking around your question and I'm not incapable, but so far I don't see the correlation.
No, he isn't lying. Vance supported the decision to take out Iran's nukes.
Is CNN is trying to spin it some other way?
You are making your point, its just not the counter point to what people are saying. No one is arguing we couldn't take the strait. We are arguing that getting into this conflict without that being a part of the objective was folly. I understand that it would likely take a ground force which would be messy, have different political ramifications, etc. Which is again, the point. We shouldn't be in this conflict in the first place, and this is the reason others haven't gotten in to it. Without clarifying your own point again, do you understand my point? I have acknowledged yours repeatedly in this chain, please acknowledge mine.
I acknowledge that you attempted to make a point. The D's have been begging for the U.S. to send ground forces. And you are assuming that we would need to send ground forces. But you're likely wrong, just like the D's have been right wrong on just about everything regarding Iran.
Every foreign policy or ex military person that I’ve heard/read has stated pretty clearly that the military understood the costs to control the straight.
The problem is clearly that DJT doesn’t understand foreign policy and multinational conflicts.
This is a total shitshow from the T administration
Can you give me an example of the D's begging for the US to send ground troops? And you are correct that I am assuming we'd need to send troops. Are you saying that isn't true and we just aren't opening the strait because we like it being choked? Assume its like a kink or something?
But we didn't take out their nukes and Trump just told the G7 that taking their HEU isn't important
It was more a stab at whiskey constantly defending sh it he has no clue about other that rightwing programming.
MAGA - We stand with Israel!!!!
Trump - I’m bored and need to get off this negative news train. Just give them what they want.
Bibi- Wait..what?
MAGA - Israel who?!
Trump - I’m bored and need to get off this negative news train. Just give them what they want.
Bibi- Wait..what?
MAGA - Israel who?!
But would it be our job to spend American lives to do that?
So we are to believe that Gulf states are going to pay out $300 billion to allow Iran to start shipping and selling their own oil internationally and thus most likely lowering the profits of their own countries?
Paying $300 bil to lose money is how casinos go bankrupt.
So.....
1) oh no!
2) When will the roasting begin?
3) At this point Iran is a more reliable source than Vance/Trump. That isn't based on personal bias, that is based on the lie counters.
You obviously haven't thought this through. The nukes are buried and Iran can't use them.
Do you really want for us to remove them while being shot at?
Excellent article. The bit above may be my favorite part.
The bit about the US abdicating it's role as defender of the seas and international trade may prove the most important part.
Some discussion of the impact on the dollar - from purchasing power to status as the default trading currency - would have been welcome.
To clean up Obama's mess.
We are eliminating Iran's nukes. While we are there, we are eliminating their ability to fund terrorism.
Shot at by who? I thought the military was totally destroyed
You just told us they are buried and Iran can’t use them? And if the latter is true, we won’t give them any access to funds at all in the future agreement, yes?
Watching you try to explain away this obvious shitshow from the Trump admin is kinda hilarious.
Iran had enriched uranium that was approaching weapons grade levels that can be used to develop nuclear weapons.
Apparently, CNN didn't tell you that.
Having uranium is not the same as having nukes.