Guest views are now limited to 12 pages. If you get an "Error" message, just sign in! If you need to create an account, click here.

Jump to content
yota691

Trump says US ‘moving forward’ with additional sanctions on Iran

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, FROSTYJACK said:

 Thank you. Does anyone else here not want the US to go to war with anybody?

 Does anyone here not want another US boy or girl killed for fun and profit. Let alone one started by a pompous, continuously lying, egotistical, ***** mongering, draft dodging, traitorous  coward.  It took that chickenshit two years to even visit Iraq. I honestly believe the reason he stopped the attack is because Putin came out publicly and said he would be making a mistake.  His idols are Putin, the Saudi prince, and Kim Jong-un. What does that tell you about this man?

I know this will bring on the Rubys from the delusional. So be it!

 

Thanks for being a true patriot Jack...

 

B/A

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, FROSTYJACK said:

 Thank you. Does anyone else here not want the US to go to war with anybody?

 Does anyone here not want another US boy or girl killed for fun and profit. Let alone one started by a pompous, continuously lying, egotistical, ***** mongering, draft dodging, traitorous  coward.  It took that chickenshit two years to even visit Iraq. I honestly believe the reason he stopped the attack is because Putin came out publicly and said he would be making a mistake.  His idols are Putin, the Saudi prince, and Kim Jong-un. What does that tell you about this man?

I know this will bring on the Rubys from the delusional. So be it!

It is so very obvious trump is not up to the job of commander and chief ,,why would he have not have known the the number of people who could have been killed before the launch 

Frosty Jack you may be right ,but we have little hope of hearing a truthful word from him

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 19

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, yota691 said:

That was the last fraud in office, Trump stated many times he didn't wanna go to war, even prior to his election. Yesterday video of Trump @ the White House, (words from out his mouth not some yahoo site that you follow) clearly states Trump doesn't want war. More going on behind the scenes then you or I will ever know. IMO this is best scenario...

💯 agree, Yota! Trump does not want war and I wholeheartedly agree with the decision not to shed blood over a unarmed drone. He’s playing chess while most people play checkers.... he is forcing Iran’s hand and at the same time galvanizing the international community by showing constraint. His egotistical business persona is a show, he’s much more level headed behind closed doors IMO. 

 

We’ll see. Hopefully reinstatement of Iraq is in the cards and if so it would show the Iranian people if they overthrow their extreme leadership, they too could participate an a growing global economy spearheaded by the US under the leadership of Trump. Hope they haven’t spent the last of the cash Obama sent them on pallets ;) They might need it 

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, bostonangler said:

Walk softly and carry a big stick... Not shoot your mouth off and do nothing... We obviously have a lack of leadership and a complete lack of organization... 

 

B/A

What information do you have that is 100% accurate and you could use to justify your actions and killing  150 people?  Please don't say media information either.  No one can rely on honest reporting from either side.  Just have patience and see how this plays out.

 

People always want a response. If the response gets us into a war then they say" send your kids to war if you want a war so bad".  The response has to be measured and not get us into a war.  The proper response makes the adversaries eyes water, the nose bleed and the brain think twice before acting out again.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Intelligent strategic planning AND proportionate AND disproportionate power applied at the right places at the right time will reveal traitors AND defeat enemies. Our leadership for the first time in a long time is thinking long term big picture ... and win win win...if you do not see that...visit you local optometrist. It is a great man who defeats a strong enemy, it is an even greater man who makes his enemy his friend...The fool continues to shadow box with the lives of innocents as a sacrifice to hell. We do not have a fool in the Oval Office. We will Win...Watch ... If you are here in this forum you are invested in it....

Gold Trump Tie.jpg

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 5
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, cranman said:

What information do you have that is 100% accurate and you could use to justify your actions and killing  150 people?  Please don't say media information either.  No one can rely on honest reporting from either side.  Just have patience and see how this plays out.

 

People always want a response. If the response gets us into a war then they say" send your kids to war if you want a war so bad".  The response has to be measured and not get us into a war.  The proper response makes the adversaries eyes water, the nose bleed and the brain think twice before acting out again.

 

You got me all wrong cranman… I don't think we should even be in the middle east.... We pour trillions into Saudi Arabia (the largest supporter of terrorism) we send our kids to die in Iraq for non-existing WMD, we unseated the elected leader of Iran and installed the Shah of Iran who was a murderous dictator, we supplied weapons to fight the Russians in Afghanistan only to see them used against us.

 

Personally I'm glad Trump didn't strike Iran only to escalate an already bad relationship. But when poll numbers go down presidents go to war... We've seen it many times. Even Trump said it about Obama in 2011.... 

 

Our government loves boogieman to scare the public. Remember last year North Korea was the big story. Before that it was the commies in China, Russia, Africa.

 

Didn't I recently read we don't need middle east oil because we have so much? What are we doing over there? Who are we protecting? Why are our kids dying? Kind of makes you wonder.

 

B/A 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
  • Upvote 5
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, bostonangler said:

 

You got me all wrong cranman… I don't think we should even be in the middle east.... We pour trillions into Saudi Arabia (the largest supporter of terrorism) we send our kids to die in Iraq for non-existing WMD, we unseated the elected leader of Iran and installed the Shah of Iran who was a murderous dictator, we supplied weapons to fight the Russians in Afghanistan only to see them used against us.

 

Personally I'm glad Trump didn't strike Iran only to escalate an already bad relationship. But when poll numbers go down presidents go to war... We've seen it many times. Even Trump said it about Obama in 2011.... 

 

Our government loves boogieman to scare the public. Remember last year North Korea was the big story. Before that it was the commies in China, Russia, Africa.

 

Didn't I recently read we don't need middle east oil because we have so much? What are we doing over there? Who are we protecting? Why are our kids dying? Kind of makes you wonder.

 

B/A 

My mistake.  I thought you were saying we should have struck back immediately no matter what.  Please accept my apology.

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, bostonangler said:

Thanks for being a true patriot Jack

Not me BA. People like my son. That enlisted because of a sense of duty and honor. Only to get caught up in a billionaire ‘s war for billions more profit and disabled 

And tossed aside by the army and our beloved government as damaged goods. 

They are the true patriots.  The only way to truly support our troops is to never have a war again.  No matter how much money it makes for a certain amount of people 

  • Thanks 2
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 4
  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, FROSTYJACK said:

The puppetmaster Putin publicly announced it would be a mistake for Trump to go to war with Iran. We all know who he listens to. The people that helped get him elected

Having a few Democratic adds removed is hardly enough to change someone's mind at the polling booth and if it was maybe they shouldn't be voting in the first place.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just my humble opinion as to why Trump stopped the raid. 1st Up coming US domestic politics; we got an election coming up. Anyone can imagine how the Socialist Democrats of America would negatively spin this if we hit the Insanians without proof. Trumps a war mongerer, yada yada. 2nd to remove all doubt, to remove any domestic belief in the Insanians propaganda " the drone was in Iranian territory" take our proof (assuming we have it)  any lay it out before the UN Security counsel. Proof that the drone was in international waters, proof that the Iranian Republic Guard was also behind the attacks on one or all of the oil tanker bombings. 3rd then let the Iranians think we wussed out, lowering their guard a smidge, get weapons to Iranian freedom fighters, then hit them with EMP's galore and smart bomb their arses strategically. Sinking as many of their fast boats/Navy as possible. Which would insure Israel's raid on their nuclear facilities to have a higher degree of success. Possibly bombing their oil and gas refineries off the face of the earth for good measure. Include a cruse of our warships on the edge of iranian territorial waters and blow any fast boats that taunt us, right out of the water. Say if they come within 3000 feet of us in international waters. That would justify our response. That would be measured.  We shall see, because I believe that we were calling for a meeting of the Security Counsel. Who knows maybe all of the above will occur. Undeniable proof of who the aggressor is, is after all undeniable. 

Edited by new york kevin
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 3
  • Upvote 5
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, FROSTYJACK said:

The puppetmaster Putin publicly announced it would be a mistake for Trump to go to war with Iran. We all know who he listens to. The people that helped get him elected

You suck dude.  That whole Russian collusion thing has been debunked . You will be talking out your rectal sphincter after the IG report comes out and AG Barr calls for Grand Juries for all Spygate and HRC-gate actors.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
  • Upvote 12
  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, FROSTYJACK said:

The puppetmaster Putin publicly announced it would be a mistake for Trump to go to war with Iran. We all know who he listens to. The people that helped get him elected

You suck dude.  That whole Russian collusion thing has been debunked . You will be talking out your rectal sphincter after the IG report comes out and AG Barr calls for Grand Juries for all Spygate and HRC-gate actors.

  • Thanks 3
  • Upvote 5
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those who give rubbies must have smoked dubbies ... in a van down by the river. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 5
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, new york kevin said:

You suck dude.  That whole Russian collusion thing has been debunked . You will be talking out your rectal sphincter after the IG report comes out and AG Barr calls for Grand Juries for all Spygate and HRC-gate actors.

Read the Muller report that Barr so misrepresented    

  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Iranian maneuver ... forcing the world to curb Trump

 
Translation: Anis Saffar 
Trump's administration has repeatedly portrayed Iran's recent moves, including threats to resume uranium storage and low enrichment in violation of the nuclear deal, as proof that Iran is a rogue state fixed on its gulf, determined to acquire nuclear weapons and can only be contained by threatening to use force. Military.
In fact, Iran has often acted provocatively in the region, but some experts on Iran and US policy in the Middle East, who do not belong to either party, see the current situation as different. 
They say that the Iranians seem to be pursuing a provocative but carefully calibrated strategy to balance what their leaders see as a US threat to Iran's existence. Economic sanctions are stifling the economy, cutting vital oil imports, and preserving the nuclear deal.
When Iran resorts to this approach, it returns to its old tactics of "rogue state," tactics that include military escalation in asymmetrical ways, such as the threat of oil shipments in the region (although Iran denies America's accusation that it attacked tankers a week) Last night) and the downing of the American March plane last Thursday (under controversial conditions) and nuclear blackmail.
Iran is doing this, analysts say, because such tactics are an integral part of Iran's power base, and because the United States has closed all avenues of response.
"Iran is striking right and left as a means of delivering a message to the rest of the world," says Dina Esfandiari, a Middle East security expert at Harvard University. We have maintained relatively disciplined behavior throughout the year since Trump withdrew from the deal
Nuclear weapons.
But now we can not wait for that. "
Esfandiari says Tehran has settled on a "two-pronged strategy, on the one hand showing that they can also put pressure and cause pain, and on the other hand they say they are willing to hold talks.
Since Iran can not challenge America's power alone, it hopes to be able to push European and Asian nations to move to block the United States.
The result, experts say, is a prudent but risky Iranian strategy that raises the prospect of a nuclear deal collapsing or even a direct war in the hope of forcing the world to intervene to ward off both.
Create a sense of stress 
Iran's threat to raise its stockpile of uranium and low enrichment is an example of its overall strategy, as well as the difficult impasse it faces. 
Country.
In 2015, Iran agreed, as part of the nuclear deal at the time, to keep its stockpiles of energy uranium, which is enriched to a certain extent beyond that required for use in power plants, within 300 kg or less. 
To meet this, and meet the other restrictions imposed on it, Iran reaps the economic sanctions that have burdened its economy, in addition to another implicit benefit is to reduce the risk of a clash with the United States, which in theory makes the nuclear weapons program less attractive to Iran.
Trump's administration withdrew gains and incentives, reimposed sanctions and put pressure on other countries to get it out of the nuclear deal.
Then the military pressure on Iran escalated, sending 1,000 additional troops to the region recently.
The US administration has also narrowed areas for Iran to get rid of its surplus uranium enriched at power stations.
In May, the administration revoked the permission granted to Iran, which was allowed to sell extra-needed uranium to third parties, which it did under the terms of the nuclear agreement.
Although Iran was disposing of this uranium by reprocessing, the cancellation was meant to give the impression that Iran was trying to violate the agreement.
As the costs of staying in the nuclear deal escalate, Iran has no choice but to shoulder its obligations and limitations to diminishing gains, as well as the overwhelming economic and military pressures imposed by the United States.
At first, Tehran could cope with all these burdens and costs, with the apparent hope that European diplomats eager for peace, as well as Asian oil-hungry economies, would be able to intervene and change the situation.
But Iran's calculations have apparently changed in recent weeks, says Elie Gernmaya, an expert on Iranian affairs from the European Council on Foreign Relations.
Gernmaya says that the recent provocative behavior seems to be aimed at removing these burdens and placing them on the shoulders of European and Asian governments. 
"The purpose of creating a sense of urgency for the Europeans, as well as the Chinese and the Russians, is to force these governments to act to rein in the United States on behalf of Iran," he said.
This is the threat that Iranians are threatening, for example, with the movement of oil tankers in the Gulf (whether Iran is the cause of these or other attacks), a threat that will hurt most of the Asian and European economies dependent on those shipments.
Are also warnings to America's allies in the Middle East.
"It is a direct message to the Saudis and the UAE that if Iran is under pressure and has lost access to the market, other major oil producers will also feel the effects of that pressure," says Girnemaya.
"Perhaps they hope Emiratis and Saudis will put pressure on the US administration to make it move towards a more peaceful strategy," he said.
The Iranian strategy is also consistent with Iran's threat to expand its stockpile of enriched uranium at the level of energy production, a threat that gives credence to Iran's argument that it should not be expected to stick to its side of the deal without getting the promised return.
The Iranian position seems to be carefully calculated to create a crisis of enough weight to put pressure on European and Asian powers to intervene to curb the US push, but it is also light weight that can be easily defused, Gernmaya said.
This strategy will keep the Iranians committed to what disarmament experts consider the most important terms of the deal, such as inspections of nuclear facilities and banning enriched uranium at the level of armaments. 
Instead of secretly stockpiling nuclear material, Tehran publicly announced the matter to the world before it was implemented in weeks.
Experts say the situation is easily reversible.
In a tweet on Twitter, Gerard Aro, who was recently France's veteran ambassador to Washington, described the Iranian threat as "a limited and calculated reaction so as not to appeal to the Europeans, while at the same time not giving the pretext for military intervention. "Iran has been forced politically, sooner or later, to react to US sanctions."
But despite all this, and even if Iran continues to claim that its goal is to maintain international restrictions on the program that threatens to expand it, the Iranian move poses a hidden threat of a return to nuclear blackmail days and playing on the brink of danger, as before the agreement.
 
Who will weaken his nerves first?
Proponents of Trump argue that confrontation with Iran is inevitable because the country's destructive behavior in the broader Middle East makes it prudent for Trump to try to force Tehran to
Bow.
But Trump's critics argue that undermining the nuclear deal will only increase Iran's motivation to force its forces beyond its borders to a greater extent.
Earlier this month, "Brit Meckgorek", who until recently was the presidential envoy of the Trump administration in the coalition forces, which fights "dashing", that the US strategy is almost pushing Iran to respond by escalating in return.
Wrote that the continuing sanctions against Iran, along with other US pressure on Iran, would not leave Iran with significant leverage to enter into negotiations if it continues to be implemented until the expected result is achieved, referring to regime change in Iran.
Trump called on Iranian leaders to talk, and although he said he was not seeking regime change, some senior officials in his administration have announced it, and it remains unclear who will have the final say.
The existence of this prospect gives Iranian leaders the whole reasons to fight in defense of themselves rather than retreat and wait
 Destruction. 
Even if the Iranians conclude that those who call for regime change are pretending and cheating, the survival of the sanctions imposed on the country carries many risks.
The experts conclude by saying that the United States, through its strategy and its use of naked force, has effectively closed any peace outlet to Iran if it wants to respond.
Unlike China, Iran can not meet US economic pressure with sanctions and tariffs on the United States.
Iran can not hope to stand up to America diplomatically because it does not have a seat on the Security Council or the vast global network of US allies.
Some countries have described Washington as the irresponsible party to this crisis, but Tehran has found that persuading the world to blame the United States is not enough.
European and Asian governments have their own disputes with the Trump administration, not to mention their suffering in other affairs directly related to them.
Experts say that by raising the threat level in the Gulf crisis, Iran hopes that it will be able to impose its position on the agenda 
Global.
The risk is like the risk of a game played by two players, each driving his own car in a rush to the other, face to face, waiting for him to turn away at the last moment.
The difference here is that this player does not seek to make the other player neutralize, but to make the spectators feel that the danger of impending collision will also be covered by them and then have to intervene to prevent the collision.
"From the point of view of Iranian officials, they tried to reason, call for dialogue and keep the deal," Esfandiari said. "They said it time after time. What would you do if you were our place?" 
 
* Max Fisher / The New York Times
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, ladyGrace'sDaddy said:

Something is DEFINITELY not right with this story. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, davis411 said:

All I believe 

is trump is a smart dude

and he does things for a reason

 

i believe there is something that made him pull back

 

a deal was made on something

Yes, it was Putin. trump had a conversation with Putin immediately before the decision to stop the attack: https://nypost.com/2019/06/20/putin-warned-us-before-drone-was-shot-down-not-to-attack-iran/

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
_w850.jpg U.S. President Donald Trump speaks as U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo stands by in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington.  Photo: REUTERS

World

Trump says he aborted retaliatory strike to spare Iranian lives

Today  06:20 am JST  
 
 

By Jeff Mason and Susan Heavey

 

WASHINGTON

U.S. President Donald Trump said on Friday he aborted a military strike to retaliate for Iran's downing of an unmanned U.S. drone because it could have killed 150 people and signalled he was open to talks with Tehran.

An Iranian surface-to-air missile destroyed a U.S. Global Hawk surveillance drone on Thursday. Tehran said the drone was shot down over its territory and Washington said it occurred in international airspace over the Strait of Hormuz.

The incident aggravated fears of a direct military clash between the longtime foes and oil prices rose more than 1% to above $65 per barrel on Friday over worries about possible disruptions to crude exports from the Gulf.

Trump's abrupt decision to cancel what he said was a planned attack on three sites suggests he wants a diplomatic solution to end weeks of festering tensions with Iran, which Washington accuses of a spate of attacks on oil tankers in the Gulf region.

Iranian sources told Reuters that Trump had warned Iran via Oman that a U.S. attack on Iran was imminent but had said he was against war and wanted talks. Washington also requested a closed-door U.N. Security Council meeting on Monday.

In a series of early morning tweets, Trump said he was in no hurry to launch a strike and that U.S. economic sanctions designed to force Iran to curb its nuclear and missile programs and its involvement in regional wars were having an effect.

"We were cocked & loaded to retaliate last night," he said.

"Ten minutes before the strike I stopped it, not proportionate to shooting down an unmanned drone. I am in no hurry, our military is rebuilt, new, and ready to go, by far the best in the world," Trump tweeted.

White House national security adviser John Bolton, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and CIA Director Gina Haspel, along with the rest of Trump's team, favored a retaliatory strike, said a senior Trump administration official.

"There was complete unanimity among the president's advisers and DOD (Department of Defense) leadership on an appropriate response to Iran's activities. The president made the final decision," said the official.

Trump's abrupt decision drew mixed reviews in Washington, with some people criticizing him for flinching while others, notably senior Democrats, praising what they saw as restraint.

"A strike of that amount of collateral damage would be very provocative, and I'm glad the president did not take that," House of Representatives speaker Nancy Pelosi, the top Democrat in Congress, told reporters.

However, Michael Makovsky, a former Pentagon official who heads the Jewish Institute for National Security of America(JINSA), a think tank that favors strong U.S.-Israeli security ties, said Trump was undermining U.S. credibility.

"Trump has given the impression he lost his nerve," Makovsky said in a statement.

Iran's destruction of the U.S. drone was the latest among ever more serious incidents in the Gulf region, a critical artery for global oil supplies, since mid-May, including explosive strikes on six oil tankers.

After interviewing Trump for NBC's "Meet the Press" program, NBC correspondent Chuck Todd said had said he had no preconditions for talks with Iran and was willing to speak to Iranian President Hassan Rouhani or Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

News of the Trump message to Iran, delivered through Oman overnight, broke shortly after the New York Times reported that Trump had called off air strikes targeting Iranian radar and missile batteries at the last minute.

"In his message, Trump said he was against any war with Iran and wanted to talk to Tehran about various issues," one Iranian official told Reuters, speaking on condition of anonymity.

"He gave a short period of time to get our response but Iran's immediate response was that it is up to Supreme Leader Khamenei to decide about this issue."

A second Iranian official said: "We made it clear that the leader is against any talks, but the message will be conveyed to him to make a decision.

"However, we told the Omani official that any attack against Iran will have regional and international consequences."

Khamenei has the last say on all state matters and has ruled out any talks with Washington while Tehran is under sanctions.

The most recent cycle of tension was sparked by Trump's decision in May to tighten U.S. economic sanctions to try to eliminate Iran's oil exports. The sanctions followed Trump's 2018 decision to unilaterally abandon the 2015 deal between Iran and major powers under which Tehran curtailed its path to building a nuclear bomb in return for sanctions relief.

The sanctions have hurt Iran's economy, squeezed its vital oil exports and barred it from the dollar-dominated global finance system, dimming hopes for a trade bonanza for Tehran for having curbed its nuclear capabilities under U.N. monitoring.

Iran this week threatened to breach one of the deal's key limits by June 27, which could aggravate tensions further.

  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21-06-2019 10:15 PM
image.php?token=189d7422f65c9d242b32146ebd43420a&c=4760247&size=
 


 

BAGHDAD (Reuters) 
- US President Donald Trump on Friday expressed his willingness to hold talks with Iranian leader Hassan Rowhani at a time when relations between the two countries are strained because Iran has dropped a US aircraft. 
President Donald Trump said in an interview with NBC News that he was ready to hold a dialogue, whether with the Iranian leader or President Hassan Rowhani, noting that he had no preconditions for negotiations. 
"The Iranian ballistic missile will be part of any future agreement with Tehran," Trump was quoted by Reuters as saying. 

Trump said during his interview with the US network that he was about to approve strikes against Iran for dropping a US aircraft near the Strait of Hormuz, but he did not accept the idea of killing lives in retaliation.
He said he had asked US military commanders about the possible number of people who might be killed in the operation, adding: "They responded by saying about 150 Sir, and I thought about it for a moment ... and I said, you know, they dropped an unmanned aircraft ... I did not accept it and I do not think it is commensurate with what happened. " 
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi welcomed Trump's decision, saying: "I am pleased with Trump's decision to cancel pre-planned military strikes against Iran." 
The United States called the UN Security Council on Friday for a closed meeting on Iran on Monday. 
"We will brief the Council on the latest developments with regard to Iran and provide further information based on our investigation into the facts of recent tankers," the US mission to the United Nations said in a note to the council members.
 
  • Thanks 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Rhona said:

It is so very obvious trump is not up to the job of commander and chief ,,why would he have not have known the the number of people who could have been killed before the launch 

Frosty Jack you may be right ,but we have little hope of hearing a truthful word from him

I may add some light to this. I was a 35A in the Army, Strategic and Tatical Intel.  It is extremely difficult to tell the number of people that are going to be killed in any engagement.  You can give it a good guess. Say you know that a barracks holds 250 soldiers. If you plan to attack at 0218 you may feel that you are going to get close go 250. Iran has a very good defense system. The alarm goes off and within 5 minutes the building is clear  leaving you with nothing. Calling out someone for a body count is a little off base. If that was the case I can not tell you how many ground and air attacks across all branchesof service would get commanders relieved because the enemy relocated from the time the information was received to the time it was acted on. 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a theory but based on what I have learned about the Prez from sites that actually report the news I suspect he may have allowed that drone to be shot down to see what their military posturing might be in the event of a potential major, eminent attack.....just I idea.

Edited by DinarDavo
  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, cranman said:

What information do you have that is 100% accurate and you could use to justify your actions and killing  150 people?  Please don't say media information either.  No one can rely on honest reporting from either side.  Just have patience and see how this plays out.

 

People always want a response. If the response gets us into a war then they say" send your kids to war if you want a war so bad".  The response has to be measured and not get us into a war.  The proper response makes the adversaries eyes water, the nose bleed and the brain think twice before acting out again.

So you think a simple hand slap would get them in line ...hey heres a thought .. maybe we can send them pallets of money to settle them down .. oh thats been tried!!

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, cranman said:

You're assuming you know all the facts and that the response was going to be proportionate to the attack.  Your analogy is a little skewed as you breaking my window is all the knowledge I would need to respond in kind.  That being said, I can't murder you for breaking my window.  A good old fashion azz whooping would be just the response required. 

 

Do you know what actually happened?  Where it happened?  Who did it (by that I mean was it a dumb soldier or was it a direct order from a general)?  Was our response going to be proportionate to the shooting down of an unmanned drone?

 

We may still respond.  It will just a measured response at the right time and directed at the right place.  Cooler heads need to prevail at times like these.  This isn't the movies and real lives are at stake.

Now that makes no sense .. i drew no blood i simply brook a few windows you must give as you get!! Was your response going to be proportionate?

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.