Will Trump Start a War?

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

John Bolton is going full neocon as always and pushing hard for a war with Iran.

Trump needs SOMETHING to distract from the Mueller Report and his refusal to honor lawful subpoenas.

Will Trumpers fall in line and support a war after playing dove for three years now?

I highly doubt trump is stupid enough to start a war with Iran.

They have nukes and a properly equipped military.

The last thing trump is going to do is start a war with a nation that can actually defend itself.

They do? Since when?

 

[JJ Volty]

Why would Trump need to wag the dog? The Mueller report was underwhelming to the Dems, his aproval rating has inched up from the low 40s to the mid-upper 40s, and the Dems are looking to cough up Mr. Excitement Joe Biden or maybe Bernie or any one of the other 20 minor far left opponents.

Trump hasn't gone to war and has non-interventionist tendencies. Unfortunatly, he does have John Bolton around, as folks have mentioned, so that's always troubling.

 

[Lakhota]

John Bolton is going full neocon as always and pushing hard for a war with Iran.

Trump needs SOMETHING to distract from the Mueller Report and his refusal to honor lawful subpoenas.

Will Trumpers fall in line and support a war after playing dove for three years now?

War, huh?

Didn't the Nobel Peace Prize president start a war or two? I think I saw you
over in the corner quiet as a church mouse when that was going on.

What wars did President Obama start?

 

[Kilroy2]

I don't know he does talk tough but I believe he will not

Still when he has Bolton, and Bolton if he still follows the way he was will pull the trigger

Iraq had a couple of bumps and a third world country even with oil, still the number of Iraqi immigrants in the United States tripled between 1980 and 2007, from 32,121 to 102,000

Afghanistan, well we are still there after over 10 years

Vietnam was a waste and they are still communist

Korea was a draw and Kim is Trumps buddy yet no written agreement for anything.

if only trump didn't tear up the previous agreement then at least he can try to improve on something instead of starting from nothing

 

[zaangalewa]

If Obama had done his job properly for 8 long years instead of doing apology tours, Trump wouldn't have to play "bad cop" all over the world to manage the bad guys.

Aha: He is a bad president because Obama was a good president. Good to know. I always thought he is either an idiot or criminal or a criminal idiot on no special reason. But that's how all bad guys of the rest of the world are thinking, isn't it?

 

[zaangalewa]

You pushing the "wag the dog" bullshit, again? NK was on a path of nukes and ICBMs, Trump had to stop NK after decades of stupid foreign policy. .

how did Trump stop them? They still have nukes and ICBMs.

Imagine Trump in a white room with a white table. On this table is a red button and a piece of paper whereon's written: "Do not press this button!"

 

[toobfreak]

Will Trump Start a War?

We've been at war for 18 years, idiot. Where you been? Trump started a new war 2 years ago and is running apeshit up and down the backs of the idiot fringe Left like you until your TDS explodes your heads.

 

[McRocket]

If Obama had done his job properly for 8 long years instead of doing apology tours, Trump wouldn't have to play "bad cop" all over the world to manage the bad guys.

So you would support a war?

You pushing the "wag the dog" bullshit, again? NK was on a path of nukes and ICBMs, Trump had to stop NK after decades of stupid foreign policy. Iran was given $2-billion in cash for a 10-year hold on their nuke and ICBM programs, Trump needs to stop their programs. China has sucked jobs and technology and cash from the US for decades, now Trump is supposed to make them play fair.

Its not "wag the fucking dog". Its makeup for decades of stupid lax foreign policy.

Why?

What does what goes on in North Korea have ANYTHING to do with America? They are near-ZERO threat to attack America with nukes...MAD ALWAYS has worked and ALWAYS will. And as a sovereign nation - they have the right to develop the same weapons others have.
And if America pulled out of the Korean peninsula completely - they would have ZERO reason to even want to attack America.

And please save the 'because South Korea is our ally' nonsense...I could care less.

Helping South Korea has done NOTHING for America since the end of the Cold War. The second the Cold War ended, America should have told SK 'you are on your own' (the same with NATO).

Maybe you like risking US military personnel and wasting hundreds of billions of taxpayers dollars to fight other people's problems...I do not and will NEVER agree to that.

 

[zaangalewa]

If Obama had done his job properly for 8 long years instead of doing apology tours, Trump wouldn't have to play "bad cop" all over the world to manage the bad guys.

So you would support a war?

You pushing the "wag the dog" bullshit, again? NK was on a path of nukes and ICBMs, Trump had to stop NK after decades of stupid foreign policy. Iran was given $2-billion in cash for a 10-year hold on their nuke and ICBM programs, Trump needs to stop their programs. China has sucked jobs and technology and cash from the US for decades, now Trump is supposed to make them play fair.

Its not "wag the fucking dog". Its makeup for decades of stupid lax foreign policy.

Why?

What does what goes on in North Korea have ANYTHING to do with America? They are near-ZERO threat to attack America with nukes...MAD ALWAYS has worked and ALWAYS will. And as a sovereign nation - they have the right to develop the same weapons others have.
And if America pulled out of the Korean peninsula completely - they would have ZERO reason to even want to attack America.

And please save the 'because South Korea is our ally' nonsense...I could care less.

Helping South Korea has done NOTHING for America.

Interesting point of view. Your ally Stalin had thrown you nearly totally out of South Korea, before you reacted. Unfortunatelly - or fortunatelly - we never will know, what had happened otherwise, because history knows not experiments.

The second the Cold War ended, America should have told SK 'you are on your own' (the same with NATO).

Maybe you like risking US military personnel and wasting hundreds of billions of taxpayers dollars to fight other people's problems...I do not and will NEVER agree to that.

 

[Olde Europe]

John Bolton is going full neocon as always and pushing hard for a war with Iran.

Trump needs SOMETHING to distract from the Mueller Report and his refusal to honor lawful subpoenas.

Will Trumpers fall in line and support a war after playing dove for three years now?

There's also the seemingly unprecedented announcement by Bolton that an aircraft carrier group was sent into the region. Trump appears to follow the "madman just around the corner" tactics to exert pressure on Iran - which has a serious downside in that it might spark a war accidentally.

Here's what I found to be a good read:

If Nobody Knows Your Iran Policy, Does It Even Exist?
The Trump administration’s top foreign-policy priority is the Islamic Republic—but it’s unclear to what end.
By Stephen M. Walt | May 6, 2019, 2:04 PM

Option 5: Containment-plus. There’s a final option, however, and I think it’s actually the most likely. The maximum pressure campaign—including the threat of secondary sanctions against U.S. allies and partners—is intended simply to weaken Iran and reduce its influence within the region. In this scenario, all the talk of regime change and hints that “all options are on the table” are just palaver—or the kind of boastful swaggering that Pompeo seems to enjoy. One could acknowledge that pressure won’t alter Iran’s overall policies, won’t lead to regime change, won’t produce a better deal, and may not even push Tehran into leaving the NPT and opening the door to preventive war. All it might do is force Iran to cut back on its support for some of its local partners and thus crimp (though not eliminate) Iran’s regional influence.

This is the best justification I can think up for what the administration is doing, and it’s barely possible that this is in fact what it has in mind. There’s only two problems with it: It does heighten the risk of war, and it doesn’t point the way toward any long-term solution to regional instability. It rests on the assumption that Iran and the United States are irrevocable enemies with no common interests, and it keeps the United States firmly tied to a set of Middle Eastern allies—especially Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt—that have become accustomed to taking U.S. support and protection for granted and are increasingly deaf to its advice. It guarantees that the United States will remain at odds with a populous, well-educated quasi-democracy that cannot help but be a central player in the Middle East, and it goes a long way toward pushing that country closer to China and Russia. From the standpoint of Geopolitics 101, it’s a dumb move.

Let’s bear one more thing in mind. Despite the threat inflation that pervades the U.S. national security discourse, the current situation in the Middle East has at most a small direct effect on the security of Americans at home. (To the extent that it does, it is more likely to be the relatively modest danger posed by Sunni extremists like the Islamic State, and even that danger is far from existential.) In other words, it is hard to see how continuing to whack Iran at every turn does anything to make Americans safer or more prosperous. I understand why Saudis, Israelis, and a few others worry about Iran—though I think their fears are overblown, too—but it is by no means obvious why it is in America’s interest to take the lead in confronting their problem. After all, Israel has a very powerful military of its own and a substantial and sophisticated stockpile of nuclear weapons, and Saudi Arabia outspends Iran on defense by a margin of more than 3 to 1. Iran has hardly any conventional power projection capacity, an obsolescent arsenal of weapons, and cannot hope to dominate the predominantly Sunni states of the Arab world. It has made good use of local militias but mostly by taking advantage of others’ mistakes (such as the decision to topple Saddam in 2003).

If the United States does not take the lead in confronting Iran, some may argue, then the local powers will be forced to act and the Middle East will dissolve into even more competition, chaos, and violence than exists today. Maybe so, but if peace in the region were America’s true objective, then it would have tried to build on the JCPOA and position itself as an honest broker in the region as a whole. To do that would require real diplomatic leverage with all parties, which in turn requires talking to all of them and not be excessively beholden to any. Given that America’s core interests are to help maintain a stable balance of power (so that no local or external power can control the region), discourage proliferation, and tamp down violent extremism, a more evenhanded policy would make sense. But I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for it.​

So, we have Bolton and Pompeo advising a man most notable for being adverse to reading, Trump. They seem bent on demonstrating that, in order to avoid being attacked by the madman, acquiring nukes secretly is the way to go. For otherwise you join Saddam and Gaddhafi on their way out.

What could possibly go wrong?

 

[kyzr]

John Bolton is going full neocon as always and pushing hard for a war with Iran.

Trump needs SOMETHING to distract from the Mueller Report and his refusal to honor lawful subpoenas.

Will Trumpers fall in line and support a war after playing dove for three years now?

There's also the seemingly unprecedented announcement by Bolton that an aircraft carrier group was sent into the region. Trump appears to follow the "madman just around the corner" tactics to exert pressure on Iran - which has a serious downside in that it might spark a war accidentally.

Here's what I found to be a good read:

If Nobody Knows Your Iran Policy, Does It Even Exist?
The Trump administration’s top foreign-policy priority is the Islamic Republic—but it’s unclear to what end.
By Stephen M. Walt | May 6, 2019, 2:04 PM

Option 5: Containment-plus. There’s a final option, however, and I think it’s actually the most likely. The maximum pressure campaign—including the threat of secondary sanctions against U.S. allies and partners—is intended simply to weaken Iran and reduce its influence within the region. In this scenario, all the talk of regime change and hints that “all options are on the table” are just palaver—or the kind of boastful swaggering that Pompeo seems to enjoy. One could acknowledge that pressure won’t alter Iran’s overall policies, won’t lead to regime change, won’t produce a better deal, and may not even push Tehran into leaving the NPT and opening the door to preventive war. All it might do is force Iran to cut back on its support for some of its local partners and thus crimp (though not eliminate) Iran’s regional influence.

This is the best justification I can think up for what the administration is doing, and it’s barely possible that this is in fact what it has in mind. There’s only two problems with it: It does heighten the risk of war, and it doesn’t point the way toward any long-term solution to regional instability. It rests on the assumption that Iran and the United States are irrevocable enemies with no common interests, and it keeps the United States firmly tied to a set of Middle Eastern allies—especially Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt—that have become accustomed to taking U.S. support and protection for granted and are increasingly deaf to its advice. It guarantees that the United States will remain at odds with a populous, well-educated quasi-democracy that cannot help but be a central player in the Middle East, and it goes a long way toward pushing that country closer to China and Russia. From the standpoint of Geopolitics 101, it’s a dumb move.

Let’s bear one more thing in mind. Despite the threat inflation that pervades the U.S. national security discourse, the current situation in the Middle East has at most a small direct effect on the security of Americans at home. (To the extent that it does, it is more likely to be the relatively modest danger posed by Sunni extremists like the Islamic State, and even that danger is far from existential.) In other words, it is hard to see how continuing to whack Iran at every turn does anything to make Americans safer or more prosperous. I understand why Saudis, Israelis, and a few others worry about Iran—though I think their fears are overblown, too—but it is by no means obvious why it is in America’s interest to take the lead in confronting their problem. After all, Israel has a very powerful military of its own and a substantial and sophisticated stockpile of nuclear weapons, and Saudi Arabia outspends Iran on defense by a margin of more than 3 to 1. Iran has hardly any conventional power projection capacity, an obsolescent arsenal of weapons, and cannot hope to dominate the predominantly Sunni states of the Arab world. It has made good use of local militias but mostly by taking advantage of others’ mistakes (such as the decision to topple Saddam in 2003).

If the United States does not take the lead in confronting Iran, some may argue, then the local powers will be forced to act and the Middle East will dissolve into even more competition, chaos, and violence than exists today. Maybe so, but if peace in the region were America’s true objective, then it would have tried to build on the JCPOA and position itself as an honest broker in the region as a whole. To do that would require real diplomatic leverage with all parties, which in turn requires talking to all of them and not be excessively beholden to any. Given that America’s core interests are to help maintain a stable balance of power (so that no local or external power can control the region), discourage proliferation, and tamp down violent extremism, a more evenhanded policy would make sense. But I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for it.​

So, we have Bolton and Pompeo advising a man most notable for being adverse to reading, Trump. They seem bent on demonstrating that, in order to avoid being attacked by the madman, acquiring nukes secretly is the way to go. For otherwise you join Saddam and Gaddhafi on their way out.

What could possibly go wrong?

The US wants to keep Iran from acquiring nukes because if they have them everyone in the ME will need them. If the Sauds get nukes too it would be like India and Pakistan on steroids. Pompeo is as smart as they come, so I'm sure he and Bolton have the best info and the best strategy. He also knows how to manage-upward, by showing Trump slide shows instead of giving him volumes to read. I always made "Executive Summaries" for reports, most busy execs don't want to read volumes, just tell them the answer.
I was amazed lately to hear Chuck and Nancy cheering Trump on to get a good deal with China. I'm hoping that Chuck and Nancy also appreciate the efforts being made to quell the Iran and NK nuclear ambitions. Then there's Venezuela, India-Pakistan, or a potential South China Sea war to contend with. I'm sure Trump has busy days at the WH.
10 Wars that Will Happen in the Future

So Trump is busy avoiding wars, not trying to start one.

 

[Erinwltr]

You pushing the "wag the dog" bullshit, again? NK was on a path of nukes and ICBMs, Trump had to stop NK after decades of stupid foreign policy. .

how did Trump stop them? They still have nukes and ICBMs.

Didn't NK just launch some missles yesterday? I thought POTUS and Kim Jong-un were KY lovers.
North Korea fires likely missiles for 2nd time in 5 days, South Korea says

Dayum, my bad off topic.

 

[basquebromance]

At his rally last night, Trump says the government is unable to violently attack immigrants, then someone in the crowd yelled "Shoot them!" Trump and the crowd then bust out in laughter & cheers. They loved it. Trump says, "Only in the panhandle can you get away with that statement." It’s one of the grossest moments in the history of his rallies. And I’ve seen dozens. This is quintessential Trumpism.

 

[kyzr]

If Obama had done his job properly for 8 long years instead of doing apology tours, Trump wouldn't have to play "bad cop" all over the world to manage the bad guys.

So you would support a war?

You pushing the "wag the dog" bullshit, again? NK was on a path of nukes and ICBMs, Trump had to stop NK after decades of stupid foreign policy. Iran was given $2-billion in cash for a 10-year hold on their nuke and ICBM programs, Trump needs to stop their programs. China has sucked jobs and technology and cash from the US for decades, now Trump is supposed to make them play fair.

Its not "wag the fucking dog". Its makeup for decades of stupid lax foreign policy.

Why?

What does what goes on in North Korea have ANYTHING to do with America? They are near-ZERO threat to attack America with nukes...MAD ALWAYS has worked and ALWAYS will. And as a sovereign nation - they have the right to develop the same weapons others have.
And if America pulled out of the Korean peninsula completely - they would have ZERO reason to even want to attack America.

And please save the 'because South Korea is our ally' nonsense...I could care less.

Helping South Korea has done NOTHING for America since the end of the Cold War. The second the Cold War ended, America should have told SK 'you are on your own' (the same with NATO).

Maybe you like risking US military personnel and wasting hundreds of billions of taxpayers dollars to fight other people's problems...I do not and will NEVER agree to that.

You apparently trust loony dictators to mind their manners when they have nukes and ICBMs. I believe that left on their own problems always go from bad to worse. I don't want the US to be the world's cop, but it seems that is our role. To keep a lid on things before an unintended nuclear war makes the planet unlivable due to nuclear fallout. What if managing NK and Iran is easier than expected using "sanctions"? Isn't that the smart play? You think that anyone wants a war with the US?
We agree that wasting billions on wars is not good, but managing the bad actors using sanctions is worth the effort. There are plenty of potential wars that need attention:
10 Wars that Will Happen in the Future

 

[mudwhistle]

John Bolton is going full neocon as always and pushing hard for a war with Iran.

Trump needs SOMETHING to distract from the Mueller Report and his refusal to honor lawful subpoenas.

Will Trumpers fall in line and support a war after playing dove for three years now?

I think we should continue to let Iran push us around, capture our military, and murder our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.

 

[McRocket]

If Obama had done his job properly for 8 long years instead of doing apology tours, Trump wouldn't have to play "bad cop" all over the world to manage the bad guys.

So you would support a war?

You pushing the "wag the dog" bullshit, again? NK was on a path of nukes and ICBMs, Trump had to stop NK after decades of stupid foreign policy. Iran was given $2-billion in cash for a 10-year hold on their nuke and ICBM programs, Trump needs to stop their programs. China has sucked jobs and technology and cash from the US for decades, now Trump is supposed to make them play fair.

Its not "wag the fucking dog". Its makeup for decades of stupid lax foreign policy.

Why?

What does what goes on in North Korea have ANYTHING to do with America? They are near-ZERO threat to attack America with nukes...MAD ALWAYS has worked and ALWAYS will. And as a sovereign nation - they have the right to develop the same weapons others have.
And if America pulled out of the Korean peninsula completely - they would have ZERO reason to even want to attack America.

And please save the 'because South Korea is our ally' nonsense...I could care less.

Helping South Korea has done NOTHING for America since the end of the Cold War. The second the Cold War ended, America should have told SK 'you are on your own' (the same with NATO).

Maybe you like risking US military personnel and wasting hundreds of billions of taxpayers dollars to fight other people's problems...I do not and will NEVER agree to that.

You apparently trust loony dictators to mind their manners when they have nukes and ICBMs. I believe that left on their own problems always go from bad to worse. I don't want the US to be the world's cop, but it seems that is our role. To keep a lid on things before an unintended nuclear war makes the planet unlivable due to nuclear fallout. What if managing NK and Iran is easier than expected using "sanctions"? Isn't that the smart play? You think that anyone wants a war with the US?
We agree that wasting billions on wars is not good, but managing the bad actors using sanctions is worth the effort. There are plenty of potential wars that need attention:
10 Wars that Will Happen in the Future

America cannot afford to be the world's cops...period. Trump is currently running over a $1 trillion dollar deficit...this is madness.
So every country that America does not like that wants nukes is going to be threatened with attack from America? That is crazy and illegal.

North Korea is NONE of America's business..period. You can say it is all you wish - but that does not change things. And if a sovereign nation wants to develop nukes - that is their business...not ours.

And sanctions is the worst way to do it. Look what happened in Cuba? Did sanctions get rid of Communism? Nope. It just made life miserable for the masses and allowed their leaders to blame America for it.

If Iran wants nukes - again, none of our business. I would rather they did not have them. But it's still none of our business. And there is nothing in international law that says otherwise.

And I will say it again...MAD works. ALWAYS HAS AND IT ALWAYS WILL.

 

[beautress]

You pushing the "wag the dog" bullshit, again? NK was on a path of nukes and ICBMs, Trump had to stop NK after decades of stupid foreign policy. .

how did Trump stop them? They still have nukes and ICBMs.

Didn't NK just launch some missles yesterday? I thought POTUS and Kim Jong-un were KY lovers.
North Korea fires likely missiles for 2nd time in 5 days, South Korea says
Dayum, my bad off topic.

The Democrats have weakened America with their refusal to accept the people's elected president. They have opened America to tack by communist-backed countries. It's time to let the Democrats know they cannot bring their version of communism into this nation. It's time to oust those who break standards, traditional laws, and protocols. They're trying to take over all 3 branches of government and it's time to show them the door and to evict them from their posh jobs without pay, without protection, and without funding from the American people and our state enemies who are funding this weakening of America.

 

[Erinwltr]

You pushing the "wag the dog" bullshit, again? NK was on a path of nukes and ICBMs, Trump had to stop NK after decades of stupid foreign policy. .

how did Trump stop them? They still have nukes and ICBMs.

Didn't NK just launch some missles yesterday? I thought POTUS and Kim Jong-un were KY lovers.
North Korea fires likely missiles for 2nd time in 5 days, South Korea says
Dayum, my bad off topic.

The Democrats have weakened America with their refusal to accept the people's elected president. They have opened America to tack by communist-backed countries. It's time to let the Democrats know they cannot bring their version of communism into this nation. It's time to oust those who break standards, traditional laws, and protocols. They're trying to take over all 3 branches of government and it's time to show them the door and to evict them from their posh jobs without pay, without protection, and without funding from the American people and our state enemies who are funding this weakening of America.

If you say so, Boogie.

 

[dannyboys]

If Obama had done his job properly for 8 long years instead of doing apology tours, Trump wouldn't have to play "bad cop" all over the world to manage the bad guys.

BONOBO spent eight years taking it up the ass from world leaders.
They laughed at him behind his back.
Iran's mullahs are still laughing at him.
The first time one of Iran's 'rubber boat' navy gets too close to an American warship the rubber boat will be vaporised.

 

[Lesh]

You pushing the "wag the dog" bullshit, again? NK was on a path of nukes and ICBMs, Trump had to stop NK after decades of stupid foreign policy. .

how did Trump stop them? They still have nukes and ICBMs.

Didn't NK just launch some missles yesterday? I thought POTUS and Kim Jong-un were KY lovers.
North Korea fires likely missiles for 2nd time in 5 days, South Korea says
Dayum, my bad off topic.

The Democrats have weakened America with their refusal to accept the people's elected president. They have opened America to tack by communist-backed countries. It's time to let the Democrats know they cannot bring their version of communism into this nation. It's time to oust those who break standards, traditional laws, and protocols. They're trying to take over all 3 branches of government and it's time to show them the door and to evict them from their posh jobs without pay, without protection, and without funding from the American people and our state enemies who are funding this weakening of America.

Communist?

Trump's buddies are communist NK and China...