Let’s assume Trump declares victory then leaves

[rightwinger]

if true its a terrible mistake and tragedy .. mistakes .. sometimes terrible mistakes happen in combat .. the US does not target civilians ..

And when we do, we don’t lie about it

 

[Mac-7]

That's worked for two millenia. What's your plan? Rebuild Israel, rebuild the Temple and invite anti-christ in it?

I dont have “a plan”

God is the one with a plan, not me

 

[Mac-7]

if true its a terrible mistake and tragedy .. mistakes .. sometimes terrible mistakes happen in combat .. the US does not target civilians ..

That lib lie has never been verified

 

[CrusaderFrank]

if true its a terrible mistake and tragedy .. mistakes .. sometimes terrible mistakes happen in combat .. the US does not target civilians ..

Take a wild guess at how many other Iranian schools and hospitals have also been “tragic mistakes” by a nation with precision guided missiles from a nation with likely the most advanced ISR technology in the world and probably from outer space can read the date on a quarter on the ground

 

[Mac-7]

Take a wild guess at how many other Iranian schools and hospitals have also been “tragic mistakes” by a nation with precision guided missiles from a nation with likely the most advanced ISR technology in the world and probably from outer space can read the date on a quarter on the ground

Zero?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

That lib lie has never been verified

What about all of the other schools and hospitals? More lies? Hamas hideouts?

 

[Mac-7]

What about all of the other schools and hospitals? More lies? Hamas hideouts?

Arent you confusing iran with gaza ?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Zero?

Oh so close!

So this is like another set of Epstein Files where if you never look at it you can still continue to be MAGA

 

[Correll]

I don't think anybody believes that Iran is blameless and not responsible for their actions and decisions, going back to overthrow of the Shah. BUT - Trump should be held responsible for his actions and decisions too. To wit: was there actionable intelligence that an attack was imminent on the US or US interests abroad? That Iran is a country run by murderous bastards that should be eliminated is not the question; most of us wouldn't disagree with that. But did we have to start a war with them right now? Had to be done right now? Why?

I respectfully disagree. To me, a long standing long term threat and history of attacks and supporting terrorism, is a fine reason to "start a war with them right now".

Why now as opposed to later? Why not? Why wait. WHy not 5 years ago.

I hear some assholes that have been chanting DEATH TO AMERICA for most of my life, are being bombed by American bombers, and my first gut response is, OK, makes sense to me.

Did we or did we not destroy their abilities to build and deliver a nuke? I can see that as a legit military objective. Did we do that? If yes, then why are we still there? If not, why hasn't that been done?

Fair enough. I suspect that we have greatly destroyed their ability to build a nuke.

I can also see clearing the Straits as a reasonable military objective that our allies ought to be participating in. Other countries have mine sweepers, no? Are they using them to clear the Strait of mines? Hey, sell 'em a mine sweeper or 2. I'm good with destroying the Iranian navy, probably wasn't much to begin with. Whatever it takes to clear the Strait and keep it that way. But that needs to be a global effort, not just us or paid for by us.

The europeans seem to be butt hurt over Trump not being diplomatic enough. So they are not joining in.

NOt sure about the rest of the world.

No doubt there is quite a lot of intel that we don't know. Which can and IMHO should raise a number of questions/doubts about what's going on. But Trump cannot divulge much info without compromising future intel people and efforts, so we're kinda left with accepting his actions and decisions but with a grain of salt. How much trust he deserves is open to debate.

He had me at "iran". That is not about me trusting Trump. But about me "trusting" Iran.

As I said, they have been chanting DEATH TO AMERICA for most of my life. I "trust" that they are serious.

Bombing them sounds legit to me based on their long standing and formal and open emnity and hatred of US.

 

[Mac-7]

How many of the one million pages have

Oh so close!

So this is like another set of Epstein Files where if you never look at it you can still continue to be MAGA

How many of the one million pages have you personally read?

 

[Crepitus]

Are the iranians responsible for their own actions?

They were just sitting there. What actions are you referring to?

 

[Correll]

Trump forced their hand
Rest of the world new the result

Trump plays….nobody could have expected this

And then Iran closed the straits, by attacking innocent people.

Is it becasue they are brown? Do you think that BROWN people are not able to THINK and CHOOSE like white people are?


Because I strongly disagree with that. I hold them responsible for their actions.

 

[rightwinger]

And then Iran closed the straits, by attacking innocent people.

Is it becasue they are brown? Do you think that BROWN people are not able to THINK and CHOOSE like white people are?


Because I strongly disagree with that. I hold them responsible for their actions.

No, it is because they told the world….You fuk with us, this will happen

 

[CrusaderFrank]

How many of the one million pages have

How many of the one million pages have you personally read?

Enough

 

[Mac-7]

Enough

When you’ve read them all get back to us

 

[Zavulon]

I dont have “a plan”

God is the one with a plan, not me

But you should have a plan for your own actions, according your (or your spiritual leader's) understanding of the God's plan, shouldn't you? "We should support Israel because...." Or "we should hate Iranians because..."
Or "I'm just following the orders of reverend Joe, who is the spiritual guru of our 15th Reformation of Truly Unchangeable Church of the Crist Middle East Liberator" or something...

If you want convince people that you are reasonable people, not just crazy religious fanatics, you should use arguments. May be religious arguments, but arguments.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

When you’ve read them all get back to us

What kind of a response it that?

 

[BackAgain]

You see, by attacking a non-nuclear country, following rules of non proliferation treaty, Trump effectively cancelled this threaty.

Nonsense. The whole point of the attack was to deny them the opportunity to complete their enrichment.

Plus, treaty or not, we are determined to deny that Islamio-fascist regime any nuclear weapons production capacity. Frankly, the only sane move was the one President Trump made.

And it means, that in few years there will be not only nuclear Iran, but also nuclear Brazil, nuclear Venezuela and nuclear Mexico.

Wrong. It absolutely does not “mean”anything such thing.

Do you think that the world with that many nuclear players will be safer than now?

You confuse addition for subtraction.

Do you think — at all?

 

[Zavulon]

As I said, they have been chanting DEATH TO AMERICA for most of my life. I "trust" that they are serious.

And Russians are chanting "death to America" and "return our Alaska" for much longer time. So what? Does it mean that you should attack Russia immediately and commit mass-murder&suicide?

 

[Zavulon]

Nonsense. The whole point of the attack was to deny them the opportunity to complete their enrichment.

Enrichment was allowed to them according the threaty. The very idea of treaty was that the states without nuclear weapons should also have access to the benefits of nuclear energy.

Plus, treaty or not, we are determined to deny that Islamio-fascist regime any nuclear weapons production capacity. Frankly, the only sane move was the one President Trump made.

You say, that Iranian regime is Islamo-fascist, but this is just your opinion (may be not even opinion, but just calling the names). International law doesn't say that only Christian countries should have access to nuclear power. Quite contrary, it says that all countries should have such access if they are not trying to make nuclear weapons.

Wrong. It absolutely does not “mean”anything such thing.

Of course it means. Back in time, countries like South Africa, Switzerland, Iraq, Lybia, North Korea, South Korea, Japan and many others though: "Should we have nuclear weapons or shouldn't? Will it increase our safety or decrease?" And some of them decided to cancel their nuclear weapon program, and some decided to boost them. And now they see, that following rules is punished and breaking the rules is rewarded.

And now what Brazil or Mexico think about nuclear weapons? Right, now they know that only nuclear weapons can protect them. And they will search for it, one way or another.

You confuse addition for subtraction.

Do you think — at all?

Yes, I think. And I think for more than one move ahead.