War with Iran
- Thread starter Butler1000
- Start date
Holy fuck. Good luck with that. Guaranteed a draft needed. You think that will happen? We are talking war economy needed, manufacturing nationalized, the works.
He would be impeached first.
The middle east needs to wake up and expel American forces from the region.
They should drop their Shia Sunni or whatever other clan loyalties they have, and instead recognize the shared danger they face from US and Israel.
Do you have any idea what new regime the current regime
in Iran is to change to according to Trump's plan?
Pete Hegseth: The goal of the attacks in Iran is not regime change
Pete Hegseth: The goal of the attacks in Iran is not regime change
spotmedia.ro
You obviously dont know the difference between the regimes and the Arab in the Streets. They are already attacking embassies, cheering strikes.
Say goodbye to Dubai tourism for a very long time.
Draft? Which century are you living in? First airstrikes, then drones, then troops. Expensive? Yes. War economy? Are you crazy? Was there a war economy during the Cold War? There will be lots of government expenditure, but it also means increased manufacturing in the USA, more jobs, economic boom. Government debt will increase. But Iran will pay with its oil reserves after the war in some way or another, so, the combined effect to the US economy will also be positive. Canada will also win with higher oil prices now; however, once they go down after the new Iran starts exporting again, it may hurt the Canadian economy. Overall, the world will win because there will be one less potential crazy country with nuclear bombs, and also much less money going to terrorists.
Rephasing Saul Goodman from Breaking Bad: "Solgers are getting killed. It is known to happen."Remember
American soldiers at Bahrain bases who died for Israel: - Lombardo, Geoffrey Charles - Whitted, David Wayne - Johnson, Patrick Devon - Hsiao, Allen Gene - Protasio, John Gallardo (NAVY)
https://x.com/Megatron_ron/status/2028635705656619437/photo/4
Dude, you are nuts. Iran is huge nation. 92 million. You think you can passify it? They couldn't pacify Afghanistan against 40,000 tribesmen. You would be looking at millions of fanatics here, armed to the teeth. On home territory.
They would destroy all the oil infrastructure. They are experts in asymmetrical warfare, they are trainers of terrorists. And you just killed the Pope.
Holy fuck, you have some polling at 75% USA against it. So there is no buy in. They maybe have 6 weeks of ammo left. And it takes years to make more.
The Cold War difference? No body bags. No actual extensive use of ammo. No major shots fired.
Boots in Iran, start investing in coffin manufacturing.
One only needs to look at how they fought in the 8 year war against Iraq, that was being supplied by Israel and the US. They even used kids.
Yeah, I hope so too, so he cements the killing fields during the midterms when the voters go scorched earth on his fat diapered ass.
Carney is a climate advocate. I have no problem with that in general even
though I believe climate change is BS and that Carney is one climate
hypocrite.To me what matters is Carney's climate policy is so far innocuous.
With Iran Carney simply went along with pretty much the same
narrative major NATO allies of the U.S. have bought into. And yet
unlike the UK, France and other U.S. lackeys Carney has hinted
Canada is not going to contribute to Trump's war efforts.
I am not a fan of Carney. But I understand he has the job of
a politician to do which requires him to be politically savvy.
Just thinking and looked it up. If the Iranians can hit the desalination plants in the region that represents about 60% of the fresh water supply.
How Trump’s 2026 Iran ‘war’ script echoes and twists the 2003 Iraq playbook
Mohammad Mansour
26 Feb 2026
In January 2003, President George W Bush stood before the United States Congress to warn of a “grave danger” from a “dictator”, a former US client in the Middle East, armed with weapons of mass destruction (WMD).
Twenty-three years later, in the same chamber, President Donald Trump used his State of the Union address to paint a strikingly similar narrative: A rogue regime, a looming nuclear threat, and a ticking clock.
In a dark twist of historical irony, Iraq’s Saddam Hussein, who was armed to the teeth by the US in Iraq’s 1980-1988 war with the fledgling Islamic Republic of Iran, became Washington’s public enemy number one, surpassing Osama bin Laden. Now, that label has been seemingly applied to Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, a key leader during that ruinous war against Iraq that left a million dead.
But while the “war script” sounds familiar, the geopolitical stage has shifted dramatically.
As Washington pivots from the neoconservatives’ “preemptive” doctrine of the Bush era to what experts are calling the “preventive maintenance” of the Trump era – following the June 2025 strikes on Iran in tandem with Israel’s attack in the 12-day war – questions are mounting about the intelligence, the endgame, and the alarming lack of checks and balances.
The semiotics of fear: From clouds to tunnels
In 2003, the visual language of war was vertical: The fear of a “mushroom cloud” rising over US cities, or a biological weapon seeping into populated areas. Today, the fear has gone in the other direction: Purportedly deep underground.
“The administration is updating the visual dictionary of fear,” says Osama Abu Irshaid, a Washington-based political analyst. “They are exaggerating the nuclear threat exactly as the Bush administration did with the ‘smoking gun’ metaphor. But there is a key difference: In 2003, US intelligence was manipulated to align with the lie. In 2026, the intelligence assessments actually contradict Trump’s claims.”
While Trump asserted in his State of the Union address that Iran is “rebuilding” its nuclear programme to strike the US mainland, his own officials offer conflicting narratives. White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt insisted Tuesday, parroting her boss, that the 2025 “Operation Midnight Hammer” had “obliterated” Iran’s facilities. Yet, days earlier, Trump envoy Steve Witkoff claimed Tehran was “a week away” from the bomb.
This “information chaos”, analysts argue, serves a specific purpose: Keeping the threat vague enough to justify perpetual military pressure.
“Bush benefitted from the post-9/11 anger to link Iraq to an existential threat,” Abu Irshaid told Al Jazeera. “Trump doesn’t have that. Iran hasn’t attacked the US homeland. So, he has to fabricate a direct threat, claiming their ballistic missiles can reach America – a claim unsupported by technical realities.”
The regime change quagmire
Perhaps the most glaring contrast with 2003 is the internal coherence of the administration.
The Bush team – Vice President Dick Cheney, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and his deputy Paul Wolfowitz – moved in ideological lockstep. Cheney famously predicted US troops would be “greeted as liberators”.
They were anything but. The made-for-television scene of a statue of Saddam Hussein being torn down in central Baghdad quickly gave way to sustained, organised fighting against the US occupation, heavy US troop losses, as well as sectarian bloodletting that forced Iraq onto the cusp of all-out civil war.
Bush declaring major combat operations over under a huge “Mission Accomplished” banner in May 2003 came back to haunt his administration and the US for years to come.
The Trump team of 2026 appears far more fractured, torn between “America First” isolationism and aggressive interventionism.
The official line: Vice President JD Vance and Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth have publicly stated the goal is not regime change. “We are not at war with Iran, we’re at war with Iran’s nuclear programme,” Vance said Sunday.
The president’s instinct: Trump contradicted them on social media, posting: “If the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn’t there be a Regime change??? MIGA!!!”
“The Neocons who hijacked policy under Bush have been weakened,” notes Abu Irshaid. “But they have been replaced by figures like Stephen Miller, who holds absolute loyalty to Trump and close ties to the Israeli right. Trump is driven by instinct, not strategy. He seeks the ‘victory’ that eluded his predecessors: The total hollowing out of Iran, whether through zero-enrichment surrender or collapse.”
The lonely superpower: Coercion over coalition
In 2003, Bush and United Kingdom Prime Minister Tony Blair worked tirelessly to build a “Coalition of the Willing”. It was a diplomatic veneer, but it existed. Blair remains a much-loathed figure in the Middle East and in some quarters in the West for giving diplomatic cover to the Iraq debacle.
In 2026, the US is operating in stark isolation.
“Trump is not building a coalition; he is alienating allies,” Abu Irshaid explains. He points to a pattern of “extortion” extending from tariffs on the European Union to attempts to “buy” Greenland. “The Europeans see the coercion used against Iran and fear it could be turned against them. Unlike 2003, only Israel is fully on board.”
This isolation was highlighted when the UK reportedly refused to allow the US to use island bases for strikes on Iran, forcing B-2 bombers to fly 18-hour missions directly from the US mainland during the 2025 campaign.
The collapse of checks and balances
Following the damning intelligence failures and lies of the Iraq war, promises were made to strengthen congressional oversight. Two decades later, those guardrails appear to have vanished.
Despite efforts by US Representatives Ro Khanna (a Democrat) and Thomas Massie (a Republican) to invoke a “discharge petition” to block an unauthorised war, the political reality is grim.
“The concept of checks and balances is facing a severe test,” warns Abu Irshaid. “The Republican Party is now effectively the party of Trump. The Supreme Court leans right. Trump is operating with expanded post-9/11 powers that allow for ‘limited strikes’ – strikes that can easily spiral into the open war he claims to avoid.”
With the administration citing “32,000” protesters killed by Tehran – a figure significantly higher than independent estimates, and which Iran dismissed as “big lies” on Wednesday – the moral groundwork for escalation is being laid, bypassing the need for United Nations resolutions or congressional approval.
As US and Iranian negotiators meet in Geneva for make-or-break talks under the shadow of last year’s “Operation Midnight Hammer”, the question remains: Are the two nations with decades of enmity boiling between them on the brink of a new deal, or the prelude to a war that could ignite the entire region in flames?
How Trump’s 2026 Iran ‘war’ script echoes and twists the 2003 Iraq playbook
Echoes of 2003: How Trump is using conflicting intel and homeland threats to justify a new escalation with Iran.www.aljazeera.com
I have not followed the matter closely, yet even minimal attention makes plain that Mr. Trump’s conception of victory is unencumbered by conventional restraints. The destruction of high-ranking figures or institutions may itself suffice; ruin, in this calculus, is indistinguishable from success.
As said, A second victory condition is diversion. A well-timed spectacle concentrates attention, displaces scrutiny, and spares one the inconvenience of explanation.
Third, symbolism alone will do. The bombing of something—anything—so long as it provokes applause, qualifies as achievement. Applause is immediate; consequences are deferred. Anything in the net like in South America.
Finally, the long term exerts no claim. Posterity, having no vote, may be safely ignored. Within such a framework, any short-term triumph, however empty or destructive, is victory enough. He defeated Greenland. Now a new nation to "win"
You kidding?
They can't even explain why they attacked Iran, except that Israel made them do it.
This could be the end of the Israeli/american colonial project in the middle east.
I do fear relious nuts have nukes. Now we have Pakistan Indian and of course t he Trumpians. Its not if but when he will Nuke Canada if he lives long enough but he probably wont live to a 3rd or 4th term.
trump fucked up
Iran is prepped to last through a 60-90 day war.
Israel and america will be out of defensive missiles in a day or two.
Israel used most of their bombs on Gaza and now have to attack Lebanon as well.
Iran is still using lesser missiles to waste defensive stock.
