Pickering Angels

War with Iran

Phil C. McNasty

Go Jays Go
Dec 27, 2010
31,352
8,788
113
The fact that you don't suffer from TDS does give you a unique vantage point in this regard.

Play out the scenario where Iran continues to build more and better missiles. It also races to build nuclear weapons.
My opinion is that they would not be for defensive purposes or deterrence
I think I've answered this before in another thread, but why not just hit Iran every time they restart their nuclear program??
Just bomb the shit out of them each time. Do it every 6 months if you have to.
This way you never start a war, and you never have to put boots on the ground.

Problem solved
 

squeezer

Well-known member
Jan 8, 2010
26,831
22,524
113
I don't think you measure events of the last week in days or weeks.
You might not even measure them in months.
You certainly don't measure events based on tertiary insight from YouTubers and Twitterati.
Now Ted Devotee Syndrome?
I don't know how much he knows and how much he's hedging.

PS- You didn't answer my question about a Kamala Presidency. You brought her up speculating that her Presidency would have brought a safer and more stable world. How so?

The clip isn’t about the podcaster’s “insight.” It simply shows several influencers and commentators who loudly supported Donald Trump and helped promote his campaign now publicly criticizing or distancing themselves from him. That’s a real shift within the same media ecosystem that amplified him in the first place. Observing that isn’t relying on their analysis; it’s just noting that some of the people who helped build the movement are no longer fully aligned with it.

And it’s interesting that when someone on your side criticizes Trump, the reflex seems to be that they must be ignorant or “hedging.” That’s not really engaging with the criticism; it’s dismissing it or pretzelling it to fit your narrative.

As for the question about a presidency under Kamala Harris, the point isn’t that everything would be perfect. The point is that it would likely look much more like the conventional diplomatic approach the U.S. followed under Joe Biden: predictable messaging, stronger coordination with allies, and fewer erratic policy shifts.

For instance, the Biden administration prioritized rebuilding alliances through organizations like NATO, coordinated closely with the European Union, and led coalition responses to events like the Russian invasion of Ukraine. That approach emphasized stability and partnership.

You may disagree with those policies, but it’s hard to argue that allies generally viewed that style of leadership as chaotic or unpredictable. A Harris presidency would almost certainly have continued that general framework, something that tends to produce a calmer international perception of the U.S.

In other words, not a clown show brought to us by Donald Barnaby Ringling Circus and Cast.
 

WyattEarp

Well-known member
May 17, 2017
9,555
3,409
113
Wait, Trump set back the Iranian nuclear program last year? And they rebuilt the whole thing so quickly? Because Trump says they were two weeks away from having a nuke, thats why he attacked. Again. For a second time in a year.
Why would anyone think that was the end of that?
The Iranian regime was more determined as ever.
The negotiations before the war were not going well.

I might not have the strategic insight you have and some of our other members have. When do you attack Iran again if they persist with their missile and nuclear programs. While we are at it, how often do you go in and over what period of time? Do you conduct limited attacks every two years?

Again I don't have your strategic mind, but I think the war began earnestly in June after decades of hostilities and threats. The war would have only ended if Iran was willing to negotiate.
 

WyattEarp

Well-known member
May 17, 2017
9,555
3,409
113
I think I've answered this before in another thread, but why not just hit Iran every time they restart their nuclear program??
Just bomb the shit out of them each time. Do it every 6 months if you have to.
This way you never start a war, and you never have to put boots on the ground.

Problem solved
It sounds good, but I fear you are oversimplifying it.
I think Iran would continue to try to hide their nuclear development sites and would simply get better at concealing them.
 

Phil C. McNasty

Go Jays Go
Dec 27, 2010
31,352
8,788
113
If Trump can somehow pull this off and get a Western friendly regime change, I'll give him credit for it.

But if I had to put odds on it, I'd say the chance of success is less than 10%
 

oil&gas

Well-known member
Apr 16, 2002
16,532
3,186
113
Ghawar
If Trump can somehow pull this off and get a Western friendly regime change, I'll give him credit for it.
I cannot predict how western friendly the regime in Iran (changed or
unchanged) will be after the war. But I have the confidence to predict
that Iranians and the population across the Middle East who already
hate the U.S. would hate the U.S. a lot more after the war is over. Be
prepared for the most horrendous terrorist attacks you can imagine
that will make 9/11 like child's play.

But if I had to put odds on it, I'd say the chance of success is less than 10%
Israel would agree with you. They suckered Trump to sacrifice American
interest not because they want regime change in Iran and to bring freedom
and democracy to the Iranians. They just want to weaken and better to
destroy Iran.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
109,517
33,034
113
Please note those photos of the servicemen with hands behind their heads are from appx 5 years ago, when there was an accidental confrontation with US/Iranian boats. Thus at least we can conclude that the claim this just happened is BS. This also now puts those other photos into doubt.

However, various cos play plans being discussed - eg putting troops onto an island in the Gulf closer to Iran - will make this scenario more likely to be true.
Thanks, post edited.
There is nothing to back up that claim, looks like it hasn't happened.
Though there are lots of posts saying trump is sending troops soon.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
109,517
33,034
113
Of course, anything that goes against your narrative is a false misinterpretation.

Try to pull yourself out of your fetish and look at information from an unbiased basis.
What information is available right now that you think is unbiased?
That's the big question.

There are no official reports of Israeli damage or losses.
trump is hiding his own losses and troop injuries, you think there are only 7 americans killed?
Iran is allowing video of damage and has allowed CNN (despite the Bari Weiss filter) to report from Tehran.

Al Jazeera is limited because journalists are blocked.
Western media is biased, american is mostly republican owned.
Social media is owned or controlled by right wingers and zionists now.

So where can you get the unbiased news you think I should be listening too?
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
34,005
7,883
113
Do you think Kamala would have set back the Iranian nuclear program last year if she was President?

I think all the dancing with the Iranian regime for over ten years caused the Ayatollah and company to continually test U.S. resolve.
Did you ever stop to think that neither was a good choice, both fucked up, and that is because your entire nation is basically fucked up at this point?

Seriously, your nation's place in the world is ending.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dragon77 and Klatuu
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts