Trump signals end to Iran negotiations with fiery Truth Social post

[JoeB131]

Which would put us into War Crimes territory

 

[Zincwarrior]

Well, no, what won WWII was the Red Army's willingness to take impossible levels of casualties.

The USSR collapsed because 300 million non-Russians got tired of 150 million Russians telling them what to do.

The US and China beat Japan.

The US and UK beat Italy.

Without the US/UK airwar and Lend Lease Germany would not have lost like it did.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Which would put us into War Crimes territory

We will see.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

We will see.

Considering this administration has already gleefully committed so many war crimes, I think you know where the smart money lies.

 

[JoeB131]

We will see.

It's not a matter of seeing, it's a matter of whether certain military actions cross a line.

For instance, Nixon's bombing campaigns in Cambodia and North Vietnam are seen as war crimes today, even though Nixon was never held accountable for them. They didn't achieve the desired goal (the Communists still won).

If Trump's goal is to inflict misery on the Iranian people before signing an agreement that leaves the IRGC in charge, I'm not sure that's much to be proud of.

 

[Gabe Lackmann]

If it takes WWIII to end islam in the west, that's what it takes. The alternative is too horrific to contemplate.

Stop...lol!

 

[TemplarKormac]

It's not a matter of seeing, it's a matter of whether certain military actions cross a line.

For instance, Nixon's bombing campaigns in Cambodia and North Vietnam are seen as war crimes today, even though Nixon was never held accountable for them. They didn't achieve the desired goal (the Communists still won).

If Trump's goal is to inflict misery on the Iranian people before signing an agreement that leaves the IRGC in charge, I'm not sure that's much to be proud of.

I'm beginning to agree that we need ground troops. But that's a bridge too far for me.

Now, if we run commando raids for the fissile material, that wouldn't be as bad. But otherwise, I'd like not to see another Iraq here.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Except our troops being ordered not to pursue Vietcong into Laos and Cambodia.

I knew a man who fought in the battle of Khe Sanh, one of the bloodiest battles of the Vietnam War. He told me precisely why we lost.

Oh, oh, they couldn't go into other countries and start wars with other countries.....

Come off it.

 

[TemplarKormac]

It's not a matter of seeing, it's a matter of whether certain military actions cross a line.

Question.

And I mean this with all due respect:

Why are we concerned about what actions "cross a line" when Obama was droning American citizens and innocent civilians? I don't recall there being much of an uproar over that back then.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Why are we concerned about what actions "cross a line" when Obama was droning American citizens and innocent civilians?

This is a low IQ tu quoque turd

 

[TemplarKormac]

Oh, oh, they couldn't go into other countries and start wars with other countries.....

Come off it.

No. If you aren't serious about war, you will always suck at war. That's what that was.

When your enemies lie in the halls of congress instead of on the battlefield, you are gifting your enemy a win. You are guaranteeing that more blood and treasure are expended than need be.

 

[TemplarKormac]

This is a low IQ tu quoque turd

Oh?

That brilliant riposte is a deflection, then.

 

[TemplarKormac]

This is a low IQ tu quoque turd

Furthermore, no condemnation for Iranian oppression of their citizens, then, either?

 

[frigidweirdo]

No. If you aren't serious about war, you will always suck at war. That's what that was.

When your enemies lie in the halls of congress instead of on the battlefield, you are gifting your enemy a win. You are guaranteeing that more blood and treasure are expended than need be.

So, you need to be "serious about war"???

So, just go to war with every country on the planet to prove you're "serious about war"?

And then change the name of the department to "The Department of War" to show how serious you are about it??

What are you going on about?

 

[yidnar]

I've been saying all along, at this point you either take over the Straits of Hormuz or take out the regime.

And since the later is not aided by public support or the ability monetarily, that only leaves controlling the Straits of Hormuz.

Can anyone tell me how the international community continues to allow Iran to hold hostage 1/5 of the oil reserves? They should form a coalition to take over the Straits of Hormuz.

the US controls the strait .. 100 millions barbells have been let through by the US recently .. oil prices are down .. and no Iranian oil can get through the Strait .. the US controls the Strait .the US has guided 200 ships through .. gas in my area is less than 3.40 a gallon ..

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

the US controls the strait

It's easy to tell when a person watches nothing but Newsmax.

 

[yidnar]

It's easy to tell when a person watches nothing but Newsmax.

watching the gas prices in my area .. more oil on the market ..

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

watching the gas prices in my area ..

44% higher than one year ago. Helping the 4% inflation along.

Thanks, Trump!

 

[TimFitz]

That chopper cost us 50 million; I wonder what we have cost Iran so far.


When has Iran ever been interested in peace? Never. I've said all along that Iran would never settle, never surrender. It is all about stall, deflect and delay. Either Trump bought into it, Trump needed the pause, or it really was all about the PC of demonstrating our peaceful intentions to justify war--- either way, Trump is about a week past my deadline for getting this shitshow on the road.

Iran will not agree to any deal where they cannot immediately declare the other side in violation (while adding more and more conditions like Israel and Lebanon) so they can then retaliate, break the deal then claim its the other side's fault. Maybe he can starve out Iran eventually over enough time but really, thank heavens he is finally rolling the ball forward knocking out some facilities and water towers.

Gonna take a whole lot more. Until Iran in on the ground in tears begging us to stop, exhausted and helpless to resist, this thing ain't over.

There was no war until Trump started it. Trying to claim that Iran isn’t interested in peace only reflects your parochial world view.

Iran isn’t the agressor here. Trying to pretend that they are is dishonest and a clear attempt to shift blame for starting the war away from the man who started it.

Isreal and Lebanon are not part of “adding more and more conditions”. They were part of Iran’s first conditions.

Trump can’t deliver on them either. He tried this week, and his buddy Netanyahu told him to pound sand.

Trump couldn’t deliver on that condition if he wanted to.

Netanyahu conned Trump into attacking Iran. They used it as a distraction for their planned invasion of Lebanon (again).

When you get done with the chest beating jingoism, consider what would have to happen to make your threats happen.

Iraq went on for 8 years.

Like Trump’s war, it was launched with little planning and no clear long term plan.

Trump is urging us down the same failed path.

Only this time, it will be against a country four times larger, surrounded on all side by mountains.

The fool in the White House was convinced that Iran would be over in days. none of his lackeys, bag men, and stooges would dare tell him otherwise. And starting a war was exactly what Netanyahu wanted.

 

[TimFitz]

Yes, trump could stay at the table. Iran did.

Trumps latest string of insane social media posts is all on him and his fragile ego.

He’s afraid of his base.