It doesn't matter where the Drone was. This is what we should be creeping out about

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by Golem, Jun 21, 2019.

  1. Golem

    Golem Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2016
    Messages:
    42,517
    Likes Received:
    18,640
    Trophy Points:
    113
    When Bush-Cheney made up their Iraq-WMD fantasy, the UK knew we were lying. As did Canada. As did any NATO nation that had any sort of intelligence agency of their own. But most of them stood behind us. They went to the U.N. with us. Ninety-something nations signed a war declaration against Saddam with us. Why? Because our alliances were clear.

    How many are behind us now? Who believes us?

    This is a direct consequence of having a pathological liar at the helm. And an administration with absolutely no leadership in the world stage.

    It doesn't matter if we're right or wrong about the drone that Iran shot down. What we need to be worried about is the fact that we basically have no fully committed allies. Not even the UK or Canada. We have all the military might. But we have no real power. We can do great damage to Iran. But they can do great damage to our interests. Much greater than Iraq would have ever hoped for.

    But this is just a symptom. There are threats out there that are much greater than Iran.
     
    Last edited: Jun 21, 2019
  2. Reality

    Reality Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2014
    Messages:
    21,452
    Likes Received:
    7,603
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The Saudis have agreed to throw down, so have the Israeli's.
    We don't actually need any support to take down Iran, so that should be enough. Occupying them is another story, and something our military has never been cut out for (see afghanistan and iraq occupations, clusterfucks thereof)


    And it sort of does matter where the plane was. Iranian airspace? Shooting it down is not causus belli. International airspace? Shooting it down is causus belli.
     
  3. vman12

    vman12 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2015
    Messages:
    66,645
    Likes Received:
    46,476
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No need to occupy them.

    We could always pull out and let the Iranians sink all our allies shipping, because that's what they'll do.
     
  4. Reality

    Reality Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2014
    Messages:
    21,452
    Likes Received:
    7,603
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I know there is no need to occupy them. There was no need to occupy afghanistan or iraq either.
    We have a distressing habit of attempting to use our military as "peacekeeping forces" or "nation builders" which is not their function.
     
    Eleuthera, rcfoolinca288 and vman12 like this.
  5. vman12

    vman12 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2015
    Messages:
    66,645
    Likes Received:
    46,476
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well, we weren't so much "occupying" them as using bases to hunt ISIS and other terrorist groups.

    If we strike only specific targets like their ships, their air force, their bases and nuclear/chemical factories we wouldn't even have to go in on foot.
     
  6. Reality

    Reality Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2014
    Messages:
    21,452
    Likes Received:
    7,603
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We were occupying them. We were nation building.

    Half measures don't work. Total war or we shouldn't be going at all.
     
    garyd and rcfoolinca288 like this.
  7. vman12

    vman12 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2015
    Messages:
    66,645
    Likes Received:
    46,476
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm not sure what you mean.

    You say we shouldn't occupy them we should apply "total war".

    What does "total war" mean.
     
    ButterBalls likes this.
  8. Golem

    Golem Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2016
    Messages:
    42,517
    Likes Received:
    18,640
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's an even more naive statement than the one about the Iraq war being over in "six days... six weeks.... I doubt six months..." And I'm not talking about occupying them. We cannot "take down" Iran without them doing huge damage to us..

    No. it doesn't. In other times our allies would be our allies no matter where it was.

    Now we might even end up wishing Trump hadn't done this to the President of Montenegro.

     
    Last edited: Jun 21, 2019
    Sallyally likes this.
  9. Jonsa

    Jonsa Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    39,871
    Likes Received:
    11,452
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Trump breaks America's word in an international treaty and then employs a strategy so subtle that it appears to be stupid blundering to virtually every observer and then get's all huffy when Iran says 'screw you". Meanwhile MBS and BiBi are rubbing their hands at the prospect they might get Donnie to blunder into destroying their mortal enemy for them.

    There wouldn't be a crisis if trump actually had a strategy other than "if obama negotiated it, its weak and crap so Iran has to completely capitulate and then we'll talk again". I can't decide if its naivety, ignorance, arrogance or stupidity. Probably a dollop of each.
     
  10. doombug

    doombug Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2012
    Messages:
    56,871
    Likes Received:
    22,778
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Hahaha! Fear mongering from lefties.

    Who cares what Canada, Great Britain, et al....think? This is leftover obama thinking.

    Let me be clear: This is Make America Great Again times. The failed obama policies are gone.

    Shooting down a drone with no loss of life is no reason to attack Iran and kill people. More sanctions were added which will cost Iran. That is good enough and a proper response.

    The US does not need Iran. We are producing more oil that we can use.
     
    ButterBalls likes this.
  11. vman12

    vman12 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2015
    Messages:
    66,645
    Likes Received:
    46,476
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Iran didn't have a treaty with America.

    It had a deal between Obama, Kerry, and Iran.

    Congress approved no treaty.

    Congress approved no payments.

    Call it what it was: Obama's personal donation to nuclear weapon development and global terrorism.
     
    xwsmithx, garyd, ArchStanton and 3 others like this.
  12. Reality

    Reality Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2014
    Messages:
    21,452
    Likes Received:
    7,603
    Trophy Points:
    113
    A protracted bombing campaign of any strategic targets, followed by an invasion which seeks to eliminate anything of strategic value the air campaign does not. Then you get back on the planes and you LEAVE.

    TLDR: Glass them back to the stone age, send some boots down to toe the wreckage and ensure everyone who should be dead is, then go back home.

    Occupying is where you do what I described above, then you hang out there and spend a whole **** ton of money and lives trying to make the people you just stomped on the face of like you.
     
  13. Reality

    Reality Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2014
    Messages:
    21,452
    Likes Received:
    7,603
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Except the iraq war always contemplated nation building and occupation afterward. I'm not talking about that, explicitly.

    And what "huge damage" are the iranians going to inflict?


    Which, again, has nothing to do with whether or not we can take Iran with the Saudis and Israeli's on side. Try to stay on topic.

    Montenegro doesn't do dick for us.
     
    Last edited: Jun 21, 2019
  14. opion8d

    opion8d Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2018
    Messages:
    5,864
    Likes Received:
    4,631
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Wow! Just wow! So the U.S. inks a deal, not a treaty, with a foreign power along with six other nations and it's just personal deal some transient ****** in the White House dreamed up for grins. Got it.

    Now here's one for you, how many allies are with us on this Iranian situation. Answer, none. Attaboy Trump, You just turned my country from a world power into a voice in the wilderness. Meanwhile, tough guy, what do you think the other 6 in the G-7 think about your tough guy's stance in the world.

    I wonder what Teddy (speak softly but carry a big stick) Roosevelt would think of our little moron in chief? Jeezzes, how low can we go? Answer - if you think Trump hit bottom, just look down.
     
  15. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    150,175
    Likes Received:
    62,815
    Trophy Points:
    113
    how much should we borrow for another middle east war? credit card is getting full
     
    Last edited: Jun 21, 2019
  16. vman12

    vman12 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2015
    Messages:
    66,645
    Likes Received:
    46,476
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The US didn't ink a deal.

    It was a personal deal between Obama and Iran. Even Democrats didn't want to vote for Obama's "deal".

    The cash payments were sent to Iran without Congress knowledge or approval, and Obama broke US sanctions and banking laws to do it.

    Just like Dems funded nukes in North Korea, they're just as hell bent on doing it for Iran.
     
  17. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    150,175
    Likes Received:
    62,815
    Trophy Points:
    113
    now we have no deal and talking about war.... thanks Trump
     
  18. vman12

    vman12 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2015
    Messages:
    66,645
    Likes Received:
    46,476
    Trophy Points:
    113
    None. We should pull out of the ME and let Europe deal with it and let Iran sink their ships, which is exactly what will happen.
     
    ArchStanton and Gatewood like this.
  19. vman12

    vman12 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2015
    Messages:
    66,645
    Likes Received:
    46,476
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We had no deal before either.

    That's why Obama didn't take his "deal" to Congress. He knew even Democrats wouldn't vote for it.

    What kind of deal says we can't inspect military sites as part of the deal?

    Where would they keep nuclear weapons? So dumb.
     
  20. Reality

    Reality Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2014
    Messages:
    21,452
    Likes Received:
    7,603
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It is, which has no bearing on whether or not we pack a hard enough punch to take Iran
     
  21. Jestsayin

    Jestsayin Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2016
    Messages:
    16,798
    Likes Received:
    17,571
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Are you going to tell us who? Globull warming seems to dominate the alt-leftie mind. 11years 9 months. Let's have a party.
     
  22. Golem

    Golem Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2016
    Messages:
    42,517
    Likes Received:
    18,640
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Iraq was never contemplated as "nation building" until we found ourselves with a devastated nation in our hands. That's when the Bush Administration started realizing that it had no choice but to rebuild it.

    Iran has been preparing for retaliating against a U.S. attack for almost 20 years. They use their huge geographical area as a weapon and they have military might that extends beyond their borders. And over the Strait of Hormuz where they can do great damage to our economy. Their armament is much more sophisticated than Iraq's or any other enemy we have confronted in the last decades.

    Forget it! They could do massive damage. For starters, get ready to pay at least $8 per gallon for gas

    Right. Because we can't! Even with NATO it's doubtful we could. And even that at a huge cost.
     
    Last edited: Jun 21, 2019
  23. Golem

    Golem Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2016
    Messages:
    42,517
    Likes Received:
    18,640
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Who believes us? Nobody! Did I actually need to tell you that?

    Looks like you're already having one. A very lively one, I see..
     
    Last edited: Jun 21, 2019
  24. Reality

    Reality Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2014
    Messages:
    21,452
    Likes Received:
    7,603
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Iraq was contemplated as nation building. Halliburton was ready from the jump.

    And what is this might you speak of that extends beyond their borders, exactly? You've only discussed it in vague and nebulous terms.

    You realize that they have already taken to mining international waters and shooting at aircraft over international waters?
    They're already trying what you suggest they would do, and gas is 2.36 here.
     
  25. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    150,175
    Likes Received:
    62,815
    Trophy Points:
    113
    but Trump wants to be a tough guy, he wont pull out, his ego wont let him, cause we all know when we pull out it's gonna get ugly like it did in Iran and he doesn't want that, so he will pass it on to the next President to do

    basically we got the tiger by the tail, and gonna be ugly when we let go, someone is gonna get bit
     
    Last edited: Jun 21, 2019
    ImNotOliver likes this.

Share This Page