2020 Political Thread (3 Viewers)


Evan

Member
Messages
1,657
Location
McCalla, AL
This jives with what I was saying earlier. Save face, show you could have taken American lives, and then say you're done if we are.

Question is, can those promises be trusted? I don't think they can. Secondly, would Trump agree to de-conflict after the Iranians used ballistic missiles?

 

Kory

Member
Messages
4,689
Location
Tuscaloosa, Alabama
What kind of message would it send if a key Americans base is attacked and we do nothing? Genuinely curious if we don't retaliate, would this give momentum to the adversary?
 

gangstonc

Member
Messages
2,610
Location
Meridianville
We have no Director of National Intelligence, no Deputy Director, no Homeland Security Secretary, no Dep Sec, no head of CBP or ICE, no State Dept Under SecRetaryof Arms Control, no Asst Sec for Europe, and no Navy Sec.

Not the way to go into a military crisis and build allies.
 
Messages
84
Location
Manchester, Tn
I may end up being wrong, but I think it is possible Iran may have targeted parts of the bases away from housing/mess/admin areas hoping to avoid American casualties but demonstrating they could have inflicted casualties.

I don't think we will see any American deaths or serious injuries from the current attack. If we did, then we all know all bets are off. But, I think it there were American injuries or deaths we'd have already heard about it.
I think you are correct. Could have been a face saving effort. Time will tell.
 
Messages
84
Location
Manchester, Tn

This is why you don’t let your unqualified kids handle Middle East peace.


This is why you don’t let your unqualified kids handle Middle East peace.
I would be careful relying on anything the Washington Post reports. Actually Trump has done the exact opposite. He has formed an alliance with Saudi Arabia, Jordan and others with Israel against Iran. That’s a good thing.
 

WesL

Devil's Advocate
Staff member
Administrator
Moderator
2020 Supporter
Messages
2,632
Location
Fayetteville, AR
Special Affiliations
SKYWARN® Volunteer
I would be careful relying on anything the Washington Post reports. Actually Trump has done the exact opposite. He has formed an alliance with Saudi Arabia, Jordan and others with Israel against Iran. That’s a good thing.
Saudi Arabia is a joke. Why are we guarding their oil facilities with our troops? Jordan and Israel are good allies but seriously that would not be a big enough force to incapacitate the Iranians.
 
Messages
84
Location
Manchester, Tn
I actually agree with you
Saudi Arabia is a joke. Why are we guarding their oil facilities with our troops? Jordan and Israel are good allies but seriously that would not be a big enough force to incapacitate the Iranians.
I actually agree with you. Saudi has purchased enough U.S. military hardware that they should be able to take care of themselves.
 

gangstonc

Member
Messages
2,610
Location
Meridianville
I would be careful relying on anything the Washington Post reports. Actually Trump has done the exact opposite. He has formed an alliance with Saudi Arabia, Jordan and others with Israel against Iran. That’s a good thing.
Trump did not form those alliances. Jordan has been an ally since 1996 and friends for much longer. We have been friends with SA for a similarly long time.

As far as the false reports, mostly Twitter. People (like myself), like to post things here from twitter because of the brevity (it is the soul of wit after all), but a lot of time the reports on Twitter are speculative.
 

KoD

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
2020 Supporter
PerryW Project Supporter
Messages
1,100
Location
Huntsville, AL
I would be careful relying on anything the Washington Post reports.
Yes, even a fairly reliable news organization should be viewed skeptically. That should apply to any source of any information.
Actually Trump has done the exact opposite. He has formed an alliance with Saudi Arabia, Jordan and others with Israel against Iran. That’s a good thing.
Trump formed those alliances? Does he also have a DeLorean with a flux capacitor?
I was under the impression that those alliances were around before 2017.
 

Evan

Member
Messages
1,657
Location
McCalla, AL
What kind of message would it send if a key Americans base is attacked and we do nothing? Genuinely curious if we don't retaliate, would this give momentum to the adversary?
Certainly not excusing it, but Iran's proxies have been attacking our bases for over 15 years now. We made our point with Soleimani. They made theirs by showing they "could" have inflicted casualties had they intended to. For all we know we had Intel this was their plan and that's why we didn't try to intercept their missiles. It's probably still too early to tell so I'm just WAGing.

If we hold up here after this attack, it allows Trump to show the world and his domestic anti-war opponents that he's reasonable and truly doesn't want a war. It's an opportunity to just issue a statement and say that future attacks by Iran and their proxies will not be tolerated even if American forces don't sustain casualties. You lay out very clearly that if Iran does undertake anymore attacks or revenge, including terror attacks, proxy attacks, cyber, eytc that you will retaliate with overwhelming force.

You say we're are giving Iran a chance to show they're serious about descalation and come back to the negotiating table.

I really don't know that our readiness and force levels are currently at a high enough level to really get into a legitimate war with Iran right now. We'd need a WHOLE lot more time to build up men, material, and equipment.

Even though we have air superiority and superior technology, Iran has come a long way in the past 5-10 years. If they suddenly mobilized to hit all of our Middle East infrastructure and personnel, we'd take heavy losses and we'd need time to mount a response. There's no doubt that at this exact moment Iran has an overall advantage militarily over us because we have so few troops and resources in the area.

Even if you want to retaliate I think you take time to first build up your forces so that you can more easily deter any Iranian retaliation after your own. Right now we don't have the pieces in place to do that. I'm sure DoD and the Joint Chiefs have impressed this upon Trump and even he should understand it.
 

gangstonc

Member
Messages
2,610
Location
Meridianville
Certainly not excusing it, but Iran's proxies have been attacking our bases for over 15 years now. We made our point with Soleimani. They made theirs by showing they "could" have inflicted casualties had they intended to. For all we know we had Intel this was their plan and that's why we didn't try to intercept their missiles. It's probably still too early to tell so I'm just WAGing.

If we hold up here after this attack, it allows Trump to show the world and his domestic anti-war opponents that he's reasonable and truly doesn't want a war. It's an opportunity to just issue a statement and say that future attacks by Iran and their proxies will not be tolerated even if American forces don't sustain casualties. You lay out very clearly that if Iran does undertake anymore attacks or revenge, including terror attacks, proxy attacks, cyber, eytc that you will retaliate with overwhelming force.

You say we're are giving Iran a chance to show they're serious about descalation and come back to the negotiating table.

I really don't know that our readiness and force levels are currently at a high enough level to really get into a legitimate war with Iran right now. We'd need a WHOLE lot more time to build up men, material, and equipment.

Even though we have air superiority and superior technology, Iran has come a long way in the past 5-10 years. If they suddenly mobilized to hit all of our Middle East infrastructure and personnel, we'd take heavy losses and we'd need time to mount a response. There's no doubt that at this exact moment Iran has an overall advantage militarily over us because we have so few troops and resources in the area.

Even if you want to retaliate I think you take time to first build up your forces so that you can more easily deter any Iranian retaliation after your own. Right now we don't have the pieces in place to do that. I'm sure DoD and the Joint Chiefs have impressed this upon Trump and even he should understand it.
I really hope you are right. It wouldn’t match what Trump has said recently, but we all know his words are meaningless.
 

Evan

Member
Messages
1,657
Location
McCalla, AL

All is well! We don’t know if anybody died or not, but it’s fine! What an imbecile.
I don't have a problem with it. He's likely playing off the attack as no big deal to either descalate things or because he's about to go full nutter with his response and wants to catch the Iranians off-balance. I feel good about it being the former rather than the latter. He's probably just soothing his own ego.
 

gangstonc

Member
Messages
2,610
Location
Meridianville
I don't have a problem with it. He's likely playing off the attack as no big deal to either descalate things or because he's about to go full nutter with his response and wants to catch the Iranians off-balance. I feel good about it being the former rather than the latter. He's probably just soothing his own ego.
I’m in no way fine with our troops potentially dead and their commander saying “all is well.”
 

KoD

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
2020 Supporter
PerryW Project Supporter
Messages
1,100
Location
Huntsville, AL
I don't think Trump would say "All is well!" if there were any US casualties. I'm sure he's been briefed that all US personnel are accounted for, otherwise he wouldn't "mission accomplished" this event.
 

gangstonc

Member
Messages
2,610
Location
Meridianville
I don't think Trump would say "All is well!" if there were any US casualties. I'm sure he's been briefed that all US personnel are accounted for, otherwise he wouldn't "mission accomplished" this event.
In the tweet he says the casualty assessment is ongoing, but I hope you are right.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 3)

Top