Trump’s fear of Iran becoming ‘another Libya’ stalls decision on nuke site strikes for two weeks: sources

The problem is who is going to take leadership. So far there’s nobody but more radicals in that position.

My (limited) understanding is that the Ayatollah is not popular with his own people, and the populace would be far more receptive to a change of government than say in Iraq or Afghanistan.

But I have no idea if that's true, and a healthy skepticism is certainly a worthy approach.
 
Bro, i will take any random person in Iran. Chances are, we wont end up with something worse than we have right now, but in the end does it really matter? If their nuclear program is completely shut down, who really cares who they get? We always have more bombs for the next guy anyway. :dunno:
That’s the problem though. Just like Libya you may leave a vacuum that ends up in nothing but gangs. We don’t need Iran to collapse and become a tribal war type place.
 
My (limited) understanding is that the Ayatollah is not popular with his own people, and the populace would be far more receptive to a change of government than say in Iraq or Afghanistan.

But I have no idea if that's true, and a healthy skepticism is certainly a worthy approach.
I think you’re right, there has to be a lot of people that remember being free in the 70’s before the sharia lock down. It may be a way back to that but how do we get there. There has to be someone that can stand up and be that leader.
 
That’s the problem though. Just like Libya you may leave a vacuum that ends up in nothing but gangs. We don’t need Iran to collapse and become a tribal war type place.
Better that than a place inching closer to getting nukes. :dunno:
 
WASHINGTON — President Trump’s wariness over bombing Iran is due in part to concerns about creating “another Libya” if Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei is toppled, administration insiders told The Post — as Trump shelves his decision for up to two weeks.

The president in recent days has specifically mentioned the oil-rich North African country’s decade-long plunge into anarchy in 2011 — after the US joined a NATO bombing campaign to oust dictator Muammar Gaddafi — three sources close to the administration said.

Trump “doesn’t want it to turn into Libya,” said one insider familiar with the administration’s deliberations on potentially joining Israel’s airstrikes against Iran’s nuclear program.

On Thursday afternoon, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt announced that the president was also biding his time before deciding whether to join Israel’s strikes “based on the fact that there’s a substantial chance of negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future.”


BJ -

President Trump clearly doesn't want to repeat the Hilliary Clinton disaster.
The difference is that Libya was not a nation of Twelvers.
2 days is 'Within Two Weeks."
 
WASHINGTON — President Trump’s wariness over bombing Iran is due in part to concerns about creating “another Libya” if Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei is toppled, administration insiders told The Post — as Trump shelves his decision for up to two weeks.

The president in recent days has specifically mentioned the oil-rich North African country’s decade-long plunge into anarchy in 2011 — after the US joined a NATO bombing campaign to oust dictator Muammar Gaddafi — three sources close to the administration said.

Trump “doesn’t want it to turn into Libya,” said one insider familiar with the administration’s deliberations on potentially joining Israel’s airstrikes against Iran’s nuclear program.

On Thursday afternoon, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt announced that the president was also biding his time before deciding whether to join Israel’s strikes “based on the fact that there’s a substantial chance of negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future.”


BJ -

President Trump clearly doesn't want to repeat the Hilliary Clinton disaster.
The difference is that Libya was not a nation of Twelvers.
He did lose the element of surprise.
 
WASHINGTON — President Trump’s wariness over bombing Iran is due in part to concerns about creating “another Libya” if Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei is toppled, administration insiders told The Post — as Trump shelves his decision for up to two weeks.

The president in recent days has specifically mentioned the oil-rich North African country’s decade-long plunge into anarchy in 2011 — after the US joined a NATO bombing campaign to oust dictator Muammar Gaddafi — three sources close to the administration said.

Trump “doesn’t want it to turn into Libya,” said one insider familiar with the administration’s deliberations on potentially joining Israel’s airstrikes against Iran’s nuclear program.

On Thursday afternoon, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt announced that the president was also biding his time before deciding whether to join Israel’s strikes “based on the fact that there’s a substantial chance of negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future.”


BJ -

President Trump clearly doesn't want to repeat the Hilliary Clinton disaster.
The difference is that Libya was not a nation of Twelvers.

Here's a thread that didn't age well. And it's only been 3 days.

If the USA goes to war, or there's terrorist attack on US soil. Trump will have unlimited power under the Constitution, and the last of the guardrails will be gone.

Good luck with that.
 
Here's a thread that didn't age well. And it's only been 3 days.

If the USA goes to war, or there's terrorist attack on US soil. Trump will have unlimited power under the Constitution, and the last of the guardrails will be gone.

Good luck with that.
3 days is in the two weeks, moron.

Trump lulled them to sleep.
 
My (limited) understanding is that the Ayatollah is not popular with his own people, and the populace would be far more receptive to a change of government than say in Iraq or Afghanistan.

But I have no idea if that's true, and a healthy skepticism is certainly a worthy approach.

The people might be happy to see the back end of the Mullahs, but not at the hands of the USA or Israel. The last time the USA was involved in regime change in Iran, 200,000 Iranians were murdered by the Shah of Iran. YOU are the last people in the world they want back in their country. You EARNED their hatred the last time you did this.

The US installed Saddam Hussein in Iraq. The Iranians had an uprising to get rid of you last time. Plus you don't have a government in exile waiting to replace the Mullahs, and there is no strong opposition to the current regime, at this time.
 
The people might be happy to see the back end of the Mullahs, but not at the hands of the USA or Israel. The last time the USA was involved in regime change in Iran

We didn't change any regime here.

We just dispensed with their nuclear program, rendering your argument one giant strawman built on a rickety structure of falsehoods.

Ya know....

Par for the course with you.
 
Here's a thread that didn't age well. And it's only been 3 days.

If the USA goes to war, or there's terrorist attack on US soil. Trump will have unlimited power under the Constitution, and the last of the guardrails will be gone.

Good luck with that.

It aged perfectly
Real world.
 
The people might be happy to see the back end of the Mullahs, but not at the hands of the USA or Israel. The last time the USA was involved in regime change in Iran, 200,000 Iranians were murdered by the Shah of Iran. YOU are the last people in the world they want back in their country. You EARNED their hatred the last time you did this.

The US installed Saddam Hussein in Iraq. The Iranians had an uprising to get rid of you last time. Plus you don't have a government in exile waiting to replace the Mullahs, and there is no strong opposition to the current regime, at this time.

Literally none of that is true
 
15th post
I'm aware.
Good. Some are not even aware of the difference between that and the 60 days that Trump gave them?

download.webp


The Ayatollah's group also understand the difference, and now they understand that Trump is definitely someone to listen very closely and have someone well versed in diplomatic statements to clarify the intentions of the speaker.
 
Back
Top Bottom