The United States just spent Two Trillion Dollars on Military Equipment. We are the biggest and by far the BEST in the World! If Iran attacks an American Base, or any American, we will be sending some of that brand new beautiful equipment their way...and without hesitation!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 5, 2020
ADDED: This tweet reminds me of another Trump tweet, from just about exactly a year ago: "I too have a Nuclear Button, but it is a much bigger & more powerful one than his, and my Button works!"
Posts
129 comments:
Young males between 18 and 25 not named Noah or Riley all on board with that, Sir.
What would Jesus do? Shouldn't we just turn the other cheek? If they attack sovereign US territory (our embassy), shouldn't we just turn the other cheek and ignore it?
Maybe if send them more pallets of moolah to the mullahs, they will like us. That should work, don't you think?
Here is one take:
Orchestrated attack on US Embassy was a strategic move, a probe to test American response in preparation for a slightly more nefarious move. They understand Trump's disdain for war, just as they did Obama's. The difference now appears that Trump may actually have line in the sand, whereas Obama was discovered not to have one. BTW, what was Obama final kill count via drones when he left office? Anyone know?
As much as I love GWB the person, and I hate Trump the person, I wish Trump were president when Bush was. He would not have swallowed the neo-con tripe about nation building. We have seen the results of building a "free and democratic nation" in Iraq.
Yes, Angelo Codevilla has an interesting piece on this -
https://amgreatness.com/2020/01/03/war-with-iran/
Basically, Iran didn't find Obama's act of surrender satisfactory, and now they get to see whether Trump is really gonna burn their asses. I hope the 52 targets, one for each of the hostages threat is a real one.
The conservative quip is no new nuclear weapons until we've used the ones we have.
i Know i'm tooting the same old horn:
But, if Barry O'Bama had killed these guys; That would have been THE BEST THING IN THE WORLD
right?
I mean, What made this BAD; was that Trump did it
right?
war is stupid and does NOT work anymore
Soleimani was a rat bastard directly responsible for killing over 500 Americans and who knows how many others. Reading his obituary gives me great pleasure. Knowing several other rat bastards went with him is even better. Trump has told Iran that if they make any trouble, he has a list of 52 targets (one for each of the hostages they held when they seized our embassy in 1979). If they have any sense at all, they should know he’ll do it unlike that pussy Obama.
"war is stupid"
sunsong: "war is stupid and does NOT work anymore"
Try saying that to your islamic supremacist allies.
Remember Saddam Hussein's 'Elite Republican Guards'? They were supposed to be such a threat and turned out to be pretty ineffective. We do have the military clout and shouldn't be afraid to use it--if necessary. What do they have going for them? Religious zeal and death wish, making them capable terrorists. If we were smart [heh!] we would stay out of their territory and keep them the hell out of ours. Instead, we have done the opposite, occupation in the ME and clutching a viper to our bosom in the form of Muslim immigration.
Modern war takes out the leaders. Like neutron bombs that leave the population standing too.
Islam is dedicated to improving the next world, the West to improving this one.
Ben Rhodes let the Armed Forces deteriorate for eight years. Trump has been rebuilding for every year he's been in office and he's notifying that he's got the job done. So don't mess with Texas.
War is stupid but there are stupid people in other countries, not just in California politics or sitting in Nadler or Schiff's chair. And a section of these stupid people are in Iran and have been at war with the US since they took over the Embassy in Jimmy Carter's day. It's no use pretending that they don't exist or that we caused them by orange-white badmanism. we can't make them go away by the right contrition contortion. They have an agenda and its name is conquest. The same people who think we can make outside enemies just go away, haven't even been able to make Harvey Weinstein go away. And Epstein went away but ... Key is not to hate the Iranians who have their Comeys and Brennans trampling on them just like here, only in Iran their Comeys and Brennans had thug-Soleimani to do killing for them. Now they don't.
The obvious partition would be to move Islam to the next world and leave this one to the West.
BTW, if anyone paid attention to the election in Great Britain they would have seen the Conservatives get some campaign traction around Labour's waffling on continued funding for their Trident missile program and even more traction around Corbyn's moronic public declarations of No First Use Ever, thereby publicly destroying the deterrent effect of their Nuclear Deterrent Systems!!
Here we see Trump pulling an Anti-Corbyn move and I would bet democratics and LLR-lefties will now publicly attack our own military systems just to "own" Trump!
"war is stupid"
Only the dead have seen the end of stupid.
One last observation: Middle East populations follow "the Strong Horse".
Trump IS the Strong Horse.
With his statements and actions over the last several years Trump has demonstrated a better instinctive understanding of human nature and realities on the ground than the last 5 generations of Foggy Bottom/Media legacy morons and lefty/LLR-lefties.
Btw, how many Althouse readers have heard that Trump has been holding meetings with enlisted combat personnel and ONLY enlisted personnel? (No Officers)
That tells one quite alot, doesnt it?
Modern war takes out the leaders. Like neutron bombs that leave the population standing too.
Thank you Ginsu (tm) Bomb!
We are not at war, in the classical sense. We are replacing strongly worded letters, lines in the sand, sanctions, or any other political blustering which have been pathetically ineffective, with military action.
These countries - Middle East countries that are ruled by religious doctrine - have absolutely no interest in peace, trading, or just generally getting along. They want to obliterate the west and western ideals. So, that is the war we are waging.
But there will never ever be another...Trump.
What's the point of all this equipment if we don't at least threaten to use it?
"Guitars leaning in a corner threatened folk music."
- P.J. O'Rourke
"Orchestrated attack on US Embassy was a strategic move, a probe to test American response in preparation for a slightly more nefarious move. They understand Trump's disdain for war, just as they did Obama's. The difference now appears that Trump may actually have line in the sand, whereas Obama was discovered not to have one. BTW, what was Obama final kill count via drones when he left office? Anyone know?"
It was a major move. They stepped up from their proxies attacking us in a foreign country, to essentially attacking us on our own soil. Last time they tried that, it worked out well for them. But that was 40 years ago, and we had a Democrat, not a Republican in the White House.
What it says to me is that Trump's sanctions against Iran, including blockading its oil sales, is hurting them a lot. Their economy is cratering, and they appear to have killed over 1,000 of their countrymen in order to quell the riots they experienced a month or so ago. Things aren't getting better. So they tried to repeat the strategy that got them the backing of the Iranian people 40 years ago. Except that Apache gunships showed up immediately, several hundred more Marines the next day, and Airborne troops the day after.
The fine line here is that we cannot be seen by the Iranian public attacking Iran directly, without serious provocation, and probably cannot afford to put troops on the ground there. Thank, in particular, to Clinton, Obama, and the Democrats, we no longer have nearly enough to do the job of pacifying a country with that many people. But probably more importantly, an attack on Iranian soil by our ground troops would probably unite the Iranian people, which is exactly the opposite of what we want. I think that we can do tit for tat without getting into trouble, but should otherwise stay away from attacking Iran directly on its own soil. And this is why we could safely take out their Quds commander on Iraqi soil, but not if he had been on Iranian soil, esp now that so many Iranians question their country spending its money on foreign adventures, instead of feeding its own people.
"war is stupid and does NOT work anymore"
I think that was, indeed, the lesson that Trump was trying to teach the Iranians.
MattL: "I think that was, indeed, the lesson that Trump was trying to teach the Iranians."
Wanna have a good laugh?
Ask sunsong when, specifically, war became stupid and does not work anymore and specifically how she knows that!
Hilarity, as always, sure to follow.
This certainly bares repeating, so to speak:
Walk bigly and carry bigly a big stick.
Drago,
LOL, I'm sure that neither sunsong nor the Iranians are learning the correct lesson but I'd bet the Iranians are learning something from all this.
Althouse
good song! I had not heard it before
MattL: "Drago, LOL, I'm sure that neither sunsong nor the Iranians are learning the correct lesson but I'd bet the Iranians are learning something from all this."
The Iranians are rapidly learning a couple things:
1) Terrorist Group Leadership succession planning is critical while Trump is President
2) Trump understands just where and how hard to squeeze them
Major point here: Did everyone catch Trumps threat to initiate Secondary Sanctions against Iran?
Secondary sanctions are where the US threatens to cease all trading with ANY nation that trades with the target nation.
So, not just the US ceases trading with the target nation, but other nations that depend on the US for trade will cut off the target nation.
And that would be on top of potentially blockading Iran and hitting key economic targets.
Much, much better song: Edwin Starr - War (Original Video - 1969)
Using precision non wmd weapons to remotely attack the politicians and senior leaders on day one would be the best improvement to war fighting in 5000 years. Then you would know when to worry, when they all run away. Let them be the national champions of mortal combat and leave the 18 year olds alone. It would be almost Japanese, if the national interest was so high, make the decision knowing that war is worth your own life.
Putin would not have rolled into Georgia under this rule, but it would need some game theory to prevent abuse
And thus mankind. We have perfected killing man. It's one of the things we do best. Been that way since the monkeys were waving bones as weapons at the foot of the monolith.
As a child during the Cold War I always hoped they DIDN’T use all of that expensive “equipment”. (Especially since I grew up next to a SAC base, prime target)
"Except that Apache gunships showed up immediately, several hundred more Marines the next day, and Airborne troops the day after."
And what happens if Iraq kicks all our troops out because they don't want us fighting a war with Iran on Iraqi soil.
You people aren't very good at thinking out the consequences.
Trump is the Classy Freddie Blassie of international relations.
war is stupid and does NOT work anymore
Yeah, sure, tell that to the European Jews.
“War is stupid.”
OK. They go first. We anticipate total unilateral Iranian disarmament and recall of all Iranian financial assets seny around the world to foment death, destruction, and terror.
They can show their good faith. Then China.
War is not stupid. The people running a war might or might not be stupid. But war is not stupid per se. It can be a useful instrument of policy. I'm very much a Clausewitzian in that regard.
Tweet of the day comes from the Twitter account named "Spiro Agnew's Ghost":
"All General Soleimani had to do was announce an investigation into the Bidens and he’d still be alive."
You do know (but probably don't care) that targeting civilians and cultural sites, as trump has threatened, is a war crime under both U.S. and international law. Committing war crimes against a country we are not even at war with makes us a terrorist state.
Trump: "I will end the endless wars."
MAGA: "Boo, wars!"
Trump: "I assassinated the top general in Iran."
MAGA: "Yay, wars!"
Trump: "I will bring the troops home."
MAGA: "Yay! Bring them home!"
Trump: "I'm sending more troops to the Middle East."
MAGA: "Yay! Go Troops!"
"Yeah, sure, tell that to the European Jews."
If the Europeans hadn't fought the pointless 1914-18 war the conditions that gave rise to. Hiler would have never existed. He would have died a penniless failed artist in Vienna.
"The United States just spent Two Trillion Dollars on Military Equipment. We are the biggest and by far the BEST in the World! If Iran attacks an American Base, or any American, we will be sending some of that brand new beautiful equipment their way...and without hesitation!"
"I too have a Nuclear Button, but it is a much bigger & more powerful one than his, and my Button works!"
I love the way he talks to the enemy -- the boasting, the mockery, and the threats.
Question: How long ago did Comrade LLR become a parody of himself? (Or did Inga just take over his handle?)
"All General Soleimani had to do was announce an investigation into the Bidens and he’d still be alive."
All General Soleimani had to do was announce he WAS a Biden and the lefties/LLR-lefties would declare him untouchable and he'd still be alive today.
Marty Keller: "Question: How long ago did Comrade LLR become a parody of himself? (Or did Inga just take over his handle?)"
In the last year or so, especially after the Mueller report failure, Banned Commenter LLR-lefty Chuck and Inga and ARM and Freder and a few others went completely round the bend.
They had spent almost 3 years to that point concocting and pushing the most fantastical lies ever seen on the American political stage and then, to be caught out, was really too much.
We also saw that in the unbelievably stupid Brett Kavanaugh gang rape smears where the lefties/LLR-lefties literally claimed Kavanaugh led a rape gang that roamed the Maryland countryside for 2 decades raping thousands of women. The FBI has in its hand over 5,000 lunatic lefty/LLR-lefty gals who claim Kavanaugh gang raped them.
This is going to make for a very interesting next supreme court battle when the LLR-Chuck and his allies will have to somehow convince everyone Amy Coney Barrett is raping hundreds of women.
Freder: "If the Europeans hadn't fought the pointless 1914-18 war the conditions that gave rise to. Hiler would have never existed."
If the Europeans hadn't allowed the German and Italian unification wars to turn out the way they did in the 1860's/1870's there never would have been a Germany or Italy that could have participated in WWI the way that they did the conditions that gave rise to Hitler would have never existed.
If the Europeans hadn't successfully fended off the encroachment of the Muslims at the gate of Vienna the conditions that gave rise to Hitler would have never existed.
See where this goes?
sunsong: war is stupid and does NOT work anymore
Matt L: I think that was, indeed, the lesson that Trump was trying to teach the Iranians.
Well stated!
War is a terrible thing, but appeasement is much worse. If Neville Chamberlain stayed PM instead of Winston Churchill we would all be speaking German today. At least those of us of the Nordic races who were allowed to live.
They had spent almost 3 years to that point concocting and pushing the most fantastical lies ever seen on the American political stage and then, to be caught out, was really too much.
This can only be appreciated by reading "Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds," or by studying the day care hysteria or the recovered memory hysteria.
The Salem Witch Trials are also similar but too far in the past to account for modern communication, which has spread the insanity far beyond its origin.
More Blogger burps.
See where this goes?
No, he doesn't.
What people don't seem to understand is, between our assets and the Saudis, the Persian Gulf is under nearly constant electronic surveillance. Radar, SIGINT, satellite imagery, etc. At this moment, we probably have a very good idea of the position and status of every Iranian warship at sea, and also likely have a fix on most if not all of their "irregular" units (speedboats, dhows, RHIB craft, etc). If Trump gives the word, we can put every one of these assets on the bottom within an hour or less, hitting the bigger targets with guided missiles launched from cruisers and strafing or bombing the smaller craft using land or carrier based air assets. At the same time, we could hit the 5 largest Iranian naval bases (and Kharg Island) with about 10-15 cruise missiles each, and still have plenty left in the regional "inventory" to strike other targets of opportunity as they reveal themselves.
For too long we've been fighting in the Middle East using "last war" strategies. Against Iran, we don't need boots on the ground. We need to leverage our massive advantages in both technology and operational expertise and deliver a decisive blow over a matter of a few hours. What does the Iranian leadership do when their naval assets and bases begin falling like dominoes? Double down on the strategies that delivered this wrath in the first place? Launch a ground invasion of Iraq? They saw what happened on the "Highway of Death". It can happen just as easily to them. Would you want to be in command of the first Iranian armored division crossing the border into Iraq, knowing that death from the sky can be delivered without warning at any moment, and there's not a whole lot you can do to stop it?
Blogger Freder Frederson said...
You do know (but probably don't care) that targeting civilians and cultural sites, as trump has threatened, is a war crime under both U.S. and international law. Committing war crimes against a country we are not even at war with makes us a terrorist state.
The field marshal is back to instruct us. Did you notice that Iran has not stopped its war on us that began in 1979? Did you notice that Suleiman=i was in Iraq and not in his own country ?
I actually kind of agree with you on WWI but you are too ignorant to have a discussion with.
What does the Iranian leadership do when their naval assets and bases begin falling like dominoes? Double down on the strategies that delivered this wrath in the first place?
I am actually against attacking any Iranian site that involves significant civilian or even low level military casualties. Go for the leaders like we did. The mullahs would be good targets, too. They are hated.
They think their fight is warranted
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/15377/donald-trump-caricatures?fbclid=IwAR0cftBjtOc7sKXrU_EREQd1bdzqryURRzSU-gOfVZVQrEwZarYfj_bFKf8
Think of it as an Iranian version of Pearl Harbor. Except in this case, the Iranian Navy doesn't have assets in another ocean halfway around the world that it can draw from to keep the fight going (or any aircraft carriers out at sea surviving the attack). America shrugged off the disaster at Pearl and kept fighting because we COULD - not just with surviving assets but in the knowledge that our industrial capacity+national will would inevitably lead to victory. Modern day Iran has a fraction of a fraction of 1940's America's industrial might.
Dr. K: "I am actually against attacking any Iranian site that involves significant civilian or even low level military casualties. Go for the leaders like we did. The mullahs would be good targets, too. They are hated."
I mostly agree with that. The option I laid out would be in case Iran decides to go balls-out in retaliation for Sulemaloneys death, or maybe as a Phase 3 or 4 in escalation. Until then, I'm perfectly happy slicing and dicing and exploding the Head Bad Guys. Shows the Bad Guy Troops that we're not trying to gun for them, just the idiots they are led by.
More like who was the commander of japanese land forces re the siege of singapore,
And speaking of "surgical strikes", we have a version of the AGM-114 Hellfire missile that deploys BLADES from the body of the missile before impact. No explosive warhead to note - aside from whatever solid fuel fragments remain unburned after the missile's initial boost phase. That's how we killed the Head ISIS Baddie (though it appears we used a regular exploding version against Sulemaloney). We're literally taking a fucking scalpel to the cancer of Islamofascism, in this case delivered at twice the Mach from a drone 6 miles thataway.
You do know (but probably don't care) that targeting civilians and cultural sites, as trump has threatened, is a war crime under both U.S. and international law. Committing war crimes against a country we are not even at war with makes us a terrorist state.
Yawn, I'm sure it's all properly lawyered up. And after all it's not happened yet. So save some peach mint for later. You're right though, the entire nation of Iran is forfeit and if they don't surrender and repent of their misdeeds then I don't care what happens to them. I'm fine with smallpox BTW.
Why do you think that surrender and withdrawal and caution is fine for us but inconceivable for the Iranians? Because they're wogs?
Cultural sites i explained last night, arent museums
That said I've long preached decapitation attacks, which were always the best thing to do in history but now we have the technology to regularize, and we can certainly start with the surgical.
Again, why is it inconceivable to all assembled that Iran will think this over and say Gee, maybe we should lay off this global terror thing and feed our people?
Is there some man who is an obstacle? If so, what is his name and address? Because we have an app for that.
Blogger Freder Frederson said...
"You do know (but probably don't care) that targeting civilians and cultural sites, as trump has threatened, is a war crime under both U.S. and international law. Committing war crimes against a country we are not even at war with makes us a terrorist state."
Here's my question. How does Freder know that we are targeting civilians and cultural sites? I saw where the president said we had another 52 targets picked out. I have not seen a list of what those sites are. I'm sure there are 52 legitimate military targets in Iran and Iranian controlled areas of Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, and Iraq. So we could easily hit them without unduly endangering civilians and cultural sites.
Note that in Chuck's little "Trump-MAGA" play, not one line is spared for "Iran attacks a US embassy. Again."
Freder is typical of the TDS left. If Trump is for it, even if he hasn't done anything, it is a war crime or impeachable or illegal or immoral or nasty or icky.
rhhardin said...Modern war takes out the leaders. Like neutron bombs that leave the population standing too.
I thought the neutron bomb killed all the people but left buildings and holy sites standing?
Let's ask its inventor, J. Frank Parnell.
I also wondered where Freder got "civilian and cultural" sites from. Kinda seems like a completely made up smear.
But you know what I'm pretty sure counts as a civilian site?
The US Embassy in Iraq.
Which the Iranians targeted.
So, Freder, did they commit a war crime when they attacked it? If not, why not?
Nichevo said...
That said I've long preached decapitation attacks, which were always the best thing to do in history but now we have the technology to regularize, and we can certainly start with the surgical.
Again, why is it inconceivable to all assembled that Iran will think this over and say Gee, maybe we should lay off this global terror thing and feed our people?
Is there some man who is an obstacle? If so, what is his name and address? Because we have an app for that.
You notion was falling apart even as you were typing it.
We now have the Iraqi parliament and Prime Minister uniting in opposition to the U.S., and taking steps to expel all U.S. forces from the country. An almost unimaginably great tactical win for Iran. Arguably, if someone had said to Soleimani, "Would you give up your life if it led to the immediate explusion of U.S. armed forces from Iraq and all other environs where Hezbollah could threaten those forces?", Soleimani would have said, "Oh yes of course, Allahu Akhbar."
That is what has now happened. And in the process, Trump was just called out for personal humiliation by the Iraqi PM:
"This is stunning - #Iraq prime minister tells parliament US troops should leave. Says @realDonaldTrump called him to ask him to mediate with #Iran and then ordered drone strike on Soleimani. Says Soleimani carrying response to Saudi initiative to defuse tension when he was hit."
https://twitter.com/janearraf/status/1213823941321592834
Sure, Chuck, Soiledremains organized the attack on our embassy in Iraq, and then 2 days later was just innocently and valiantly trying to 'defuse tensions" when we killed him.
You can't be that stupid. No one can. That level of apparent idiocy can only really be enemy action.
Says Soleimani carrying response to Saudi initiative to defuse tension when he was hit
Chuck is saying that Clooney Beard was a peacemaker who saw God.
Chuck, you've become a personal threat to our security. I wish you ill in the worst possible way.
How dare Trump threaten Iran in such plain forceful language. How gauche. Doesn't he know he's supposed to send super-nuanced messages using Diplomatic code words?
Qwinn said...
Sure, Chuck, Soiledremains organized the attack on our embassy in Iraq, and then 2 days later was just innocently and valiantly trying to 'defuse tensions" when we killed him.
You can't be that stupid. No one can. That level of apparent idiocy can only really be enemy action.
The last time we tangled personally, I had caught you lying to these readers about the claim that Christianity Today was "funded by Soros." Wasn't that enough shit-eating for you?
Yes, war is stupid.
But then people are stupid.
Isn't it weird that all the people who are screaming in terror about "endless war" are now whining that the Iraqis asking us to leave would be some sort of massive failure?
No one who is happy with what Trump did seems to have a problem with it. Cause Trump retaliated for an attack on our Embassy, and even if we pull all of our troops out of Iraq, our Embassy will still be there.
If Trump defers to the Iraqis and pulls all our troops out now... why is that a problem for the "Trump is a warmonger" crowd? It's pretty obvious it's just Tails We Win, Heads Trump Loses.
If people were smart we wouldn't have had the Civil war, WW I or WW II.
Oh, Chuck, if that Soros-CT thing is what passes for you as a victory, holy shit that's pathetic. The only person here who thought you made a distinction worth making was you.
Ever been to Utah? Ra-di-a-tion. Yes, indeed. You hear the most outrageous lies about it. Half-baked goggle-box do-gooders telling everybody it's bad for you. Pernicious nonsense. Everybody could stand a hundred chest X-rays a year. They ought to have them, too. When they canceled the project it almost did me in. One day my mind was full to bursting. The next day - nothing. Swept away. But I'll show them. I had a lobotomy in the end.
Otto: Lobotomy? Isn't that for loonies?
Parnell: Not at all. Friend of mine had one. Designer of the neutron bomb. You ever hear of the neutron bomb? Destroys people - leaves buildings standing. Fits in a suitcase. It's so small, no one knows it's there until - BLAMMO. Eyes melt, skin explodes, everybody dead. So immoral, working on the thing can drive you mad. That's what happened to this friend of mine. So he had a lobotomy. Now he's well again.
You like music, listen to this. I was into these dudes before anyone. Wanted me to be their manager. I called bullshit on that. Managing a pop group is no job for a man.
Qwinn, you wrote it:
https://althouse.blogspot.com/2019/12/president-donald-trump-would-have-you.html
And you told these readers that it was "All you need to know." But it wasn't all that they needed to know. It was fundamentally untrue. Not only was CT NOT funded by Soros, I pointed out that CT had exposed other online publications that were funded by Soros. You lied. You relied on some stray publication from some Trumpist/apologist site that had tried to smear CT. And I showed these readers what the truth was, with links.
Of course, my postings weren't popular here, where Althouse has cultivated and curated the Trump Cult.
Of course, my postings weren't popular here, where Althouse has cultivated and curated the Trump Cult.
You could leave. Just a thought.
Yes, instead of "Soros funded CT", the truth is "CT gave over its pages to Soros operatives to spread Soros propaganda without disclosing Soros ties".
The only difference your objection makes is "If CT *wasn't* funded by Soros, CT got ripped off". To you, this is a win. Hilarious.
Pray for peace but prepare for war. Yes, war is exceedingly stupid but there will always be wars so we may as well accept that fact. The only means of world peace would be a World Government with absolute power and control over a populace of robots.
Banned Commenter LLR-Chuck is very very very upset that Trump went and blew the journolist-coordinated lefty/LLR-lefty campaign narrative of Trump as weak/"Benghazi!!" right out of the water.
So now LLR-lefty Chuck is trying to regain his "footing" by referencing non-existent previous Pecan Pie-like Conspiracy "wins".
On one level it is amusing as the leftists like Chuck seek out "wins" against Trump in weird and bizarre and psychologically damaged ways.
LLR-lefty Chuck: "We now have the Iraqi parliament and Prime Minister uniting in opposition to the U.S., and taking steps to expel all U.S. forces from the country. An almost unimaginably great tactical win for Iran."
OMG!!!
Chuck is pretending to understand Middle East history, foreign policy and military tactics again!!
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
Oh this is going to be good!!
"How does Freder know that we are targeting civilians and cultural sites? I saw where the president said we had another 52 targets picked out."
Because Trump tweeted the 52 targets include cultural sites.
"Because Trump tweeted the 52 targets include cultural sites."
Direct quote please.
The rag Christianity Today is just another cultural outpost of the left, as Conquest predicted in his Second Law.
Thats why its circulation has collapsed.
It has zero influence similar to The Bulwark and other FakeCon Lefty/LLR-lefty Fronts.
@rcocean: Let's get sushi and not pay.
Meade said...
"Because Trump tweeted the 52 targets include cultural sites."
Direct quote please.
Okay.
Donald J. TrumpVerified account @realDonaldTrump
Follow Follow @realDonaldTrump
....targeted 52 Iranian sites (representing the 52 American hostages taken by Iran many years ago), some at a very high level & important to Iran & the Iranian culture, and those targets, and Iran itself, WILL BE HIT VERY FAST AND VERY HARD. The USA wants no more threats!
2:52 PM - 4 Jan 2020
https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1213593975732527112?s=11
You're welcome!
re: War
Or its progressive sequel: Abortion! What is it good for? Absolutely nothing.
But we have a large supply of scalpels, vacuums, and other weapons of womb destruction. And clinical cannibalism for medical progress and profit.
That said, we can sustain the status bo, deliver another bribe, then standby and observe the progress. Some suggest that we should remain neutral and profit from all the parties. Let's Gaddafi the Iranians and proxies and redistribute the arms to more deserving recipients.
"some [sites] at a very high level & important to Iran & the Iranian culture"
does not equal
"targets include cultural sites."
Unless you're you're a liar.
"....targeted 52 Iranian sites (representing the 52 American hostages taken by Iran many years ago), some at a very high level & important to Iran & the Iranian culture, and those targets, and Iran itself, WILL BE HIT VERY FAST AND VERY HARD. The USA wants no more threats!"
Y'know what I would do if I were a rational leader of Iran and I read this? I would consider the state of American warfighting capability (second to none), the tone of the statement (sounds pretty serious and thorough), and the temperament of the man making the statement (not one to be trifled with, loves a fight, pulls out completely shocking wins that leaves his enemies in tears and literally - literally - screaming at the sky), and I would BACK THE FUCK DOWN.
That this is NOT the message that the Democrats/Leftists/LLRs/MSM is trying to convey to the world - rather they are practically drooling over Iran's next move - shows just how anti-American they've become.
Meade @ 11.22
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-iraq-security-usa/trump-says-u-s-would-hit-52-iranian-sites-if-iran-attacks-american-targets-idUSKBN1Z30OB
I'm assuming it's accurate. It's reuters.
And Trump gets his wish of the US out of Iraq!
The entire Islamic World was shocked when the US left Iraq under Obama.
Look what happened to Iraq after the US left last time...
>And what happens if Iraq kicks all our troops out because they don't want us fighting a war with Iran on Iraqi soil.
LLR-lefty Chuck apparently is too stupid (or too leftist...both?) to understand the cultural importance of Irans perception of its historical military prowess and position.
Imagine the cultural impact in Iran of the US taking out their major military communications nodes, the canoe-like "Navy" and cratering their primary missile sites and major airfields....and we havent even discussed the possibility of commandeering their offshore rigs.
LOL
You see LLR-lefty Chuck, this is why you should stick to getting MI electoral politics wrong and not branching out to Admiral Inga/Field Marshall Freder-level military/political strategy where you will naturally be wrong as always but on a much bigger scale.
Of course, no US President should ever act overseas without first consulting The Most "Brilliant" Strategist Who Has Ever Lived (according to Chuck) Justin Amash (I-ChiComs).
You know, now that LLR-lefty Chuck has literally deemed both Rachel Maddow and Justin Amash (I-ChiComs) as "brilliant", it begs the question: which of these LLR-lefty Chuck's heroes is the most "brilliant-y"?
Based on degrees of LLR-lefty Chuck adoration, I am going to go with Maddow at this point.
I'm noticing that no one answered my question:
Doesn't our Iraq Embassy count as a civilian, non-military target?
If so, and applying the standards that the Left is pushing to apply to Trump now, didn't Soiledremains commit a war crime? Didn't Trump just take out a war criminal? How can killing a war criminal with zero collateral damage be a war crime?
More importantly, why is ANSWER hosting 70 rallies across the country mourning the killing of an Iranian war criminal?
Meade:
"some [sites] at a very high level & important to Iran & the Iranian culture"
does not equal
"targets include cultural sites."
Unless you're you're a liar."
Quite so.
Field Marshall Freder is back in Bundy Case misrepresentation mode.
Bigly.
"Unless you're you're a liar."
Really?! What other possible meaning is there? Describe a site that is important to Iranian culture but is not a cultural site.
Scuds for Quds works much better than Moolah for Mullahs.
(eaglebeak)
"War is stupid"? Which war?
There is no War, there are only wars.
World War II wasn't stupid. The Civil War wasn't stupid. The American Revolution wasn't stupid.
World War I was stupid. The Pelopponesian War was stupid.
The Six-Day War was stupid on Egypt's part but not on Israel's.
For the assertion that War Is Hell there is only War, but for the assertion War Is Stupid, there is not.
Meade said...
"some [sites] at a very high level & important to Iran & the Iranian culture"
does not equal
"targets include cultural sites."
Unless you're you're a liar.
I quoted the Trump Tweet. With the hyper link. And that is pretty much all that I did. Don't you fucking dare call me a liar! Go ahead and tie yourself into a pretzel to avoid the clear meaning of what Trump wrote. Better yet; get Trump to make it clear just what the fuck his Tweet really meant. Just maybe, Trump has not the slightest notion of any US military attack on any Iranian cultural sites. Trump can make that clear if he wants to. He probably should, given the ambiguity and the carelessness and ultimately the seriousness of his Tweet.
But here's the thing, Meade. What Trump cannot do is put out shit like that on Twitter, and let his base believe one thing ('Yeah! Trump is being tough and he's threatening the very culture of Iran!') while pretending that there is another legalistic meaning ('Trump has no plans to hit any Iranian cultural sites that would violate U.S. and international law.')
No, Meade. Somebody's got to choose what the meaning is. And we see, on this very page, Trump fans liking the idea that Trump just might attack a symbolic number of Iranian sites without regard to whether or not they are cultural sites under applicable law.
This is the old story with Trump, Meade. Did Trump really say, "shithole countries"? Some Trump fans loved the idea that he said it. But the White House would not even admit that he said it. They went to extraordinary lengths -- getting other meeting participants to lie about it -- to deny it and/or avoid it.
This is the thing with everybody in the Trump Administration. They are inherently unbelievable, unless and until they are under oath, and under cross-examination.
"Doesn't our Iraq Embassy count as a civilian, non-military target?"
Nobody addressed your question because it is a stupid question. Of course it is. But the Iranians committing war crimes is not a justification for war crimes on our part.
Lefties (including Chuck) still hyperventilating about Trump potentially, at some future date, attacking a civilian target, while steadfastly ignoring Iran's attacks on our Embassies in Benghazi and Iraq that actually already happened.
Making it clear, they would have the rules apply only to Trump, never to those who attack the US.
Because they are lying traitors who are lusting for American blood so they can attack Trump for it.
"But the Iranians committing war crimes is not a justification for war crimes on our part."
As far as I can tell, the Left doesn't believe that Iranians committing war crimes justifies ANY military response from us, including even just killing the war criminal responsible with zero collateral damage.
70 ANSWER rallies mourning his death. Colin Kapaernick calling our attack on him a "terrorist attack". Michael Moore calling it an "assassination". Lefties everywhere bleating agreement.
So tell me, Freder, what DOES Iranians committing war crimes justify?
Qwinn, Senator Rand Paul called the targeting of Soleimani an "assassination."
VMaking it clear, they would have the rules apply only to Trump, never to those who attack the US."
If I have ever posted anything that could be interpreted as supporting such a view, I am very sorry.
But can Chuck bring himself to call the attacks on our embassies "war crimes"?
And if he does, can he posit a more appropriate and proportional response than what Trump did?
"some [sites] at a very high level & important to Iran & the Iranian culture"
does equal
"targets include cultural sites."
Unless you're not a liar.
“Senator Rand Paul called the targeting of Soleimani an "assassination."
Of course it’s an assassination. Like every personnel-targeting drone strike ever. So what?
"And if he does, can he posit a more appropriate and proportional response than what Trump did?"
I don't know where you got the idea that this was retaliation for the embassy attack. The stated reason was to prevent planned future attacks. So far, no evidence has been presented.
Both statements by the Dept of Defense and the State Dept acknowledged and confirmed that he was responsible for the attack on the Embassy. He was killed 2 or 3 days after. Whatever the stated reason was, it should be automatically and easily conceded that retaliation was more than enough justification, and the stated reasons are just bonus/icing.
But the Left concedes none of the above. Why?
If you wanted to draw up a list of 52 targets in Iran, you wouldn’t need to list a single cultural sites. You could go after command an control infrastructure, ships, air bases, refineries to cripple their economy, electric power plants, and perhaps some of their nuclear facilities. That’s probably more than 52 targets right there. Going after cultural sites accomplishes nothing, but then that’s the kind of thing a deluded lefty would say.
I dare to call Chuck a fucking liar.
He's called himself a liar.
What the ever loving fuck you gonna do about it?
An American site that is cultural: The Pentagon.
Perfectly valid military target.
Does Iran have no such buildings?
More importantly, why is ANSWER hosting 70 rallies across the country mourning the killing of an Iranian war criminal?
Because - as I've said before - the fifth-column left in America is far more of a threat to the survival of this nation than anything in the Middle East.
They are the enemy within. And need to be treated as such.
Field Marshall Freder: "The stated reason was to prevent planned future attacks. So far, no evidence has been presented."
LOL
The "a video caused the spontaneous riot in Benghazi" crew checks in to demand all the most sensitive intel the US has gathered be laid out for our enemies!!!
Psycho Boy LLR-lefty Chuck: "No, Meade. Somebody's got to choose what the meaning is. And we see, on this very page, Trump fans liking the idea that Trump just might attack a symbolic number of Iranian sites without regard to whether or not they are cultural sites under applicable law."
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
Just read that one a few times and let it mainate...
I'm guessing that's the gin talking.
" Don't you fucking dare call me a liar! Go ahead and tie yourself into a pretzel to avoid the clear meaning of what Trump wrote. Better yet; get Trump to make it clear just what the fuck his Tweet really meant."
Chuck, you are on notice: Moderate yourself or prepare to have your comments moderated for you.
And that includes some of your high level comments & comments important to you & to the Chuckian culture.
I don’t buy your reading of the Tweet. Trump is emphasizing how mismatched Iran really is. True, right? Relevant too.
Meade is right of course and ChuckFreder is lying again. A site of cultural importance is not necessarily a cultural site. I think the Pentagon is a site of cultural importance. So is Pearl Harbor.
I don't know where you got the idea that this was retaliation for the embassy attack. The stated reason was to prevent planned future attacks. So far, no evidence has been presented.
Freder, I didn't know you were this stupid. Stupid, yes, but this stupid ? Killing the guy who planned the attacks is not preventing future attacks ?
Jesus ! Maybe you should apply for Social Security, if you haven't already. Mental retardation should not be difficult to prove.
That was this morning so I assume Chuck did not know there was no quorum and no time table for us to leave.
Or, he could be lying as usual.
The comment did not include Chuck's delusional stuff about the Iraq Parliament demanding we leave.
I'm fine with it,.
You notion was falling apart even as you were typing it.
We now have the Iraqi parliament and Prime Minister uniting in opposition to the U.S., and taking steps to expel all U.S. forces from the country.
Oh, it's you, Chuck. Everyone else has already savaged you so I'll just say that I didn't think you were this stupid. But, obviously, I was mistaken.
Drago said...
Psycho Boy LLR-lefty Chuck: "No, Meade. Somebody's got to choose what the meaning is.
Why? Why forgo the weapon of strategic ambiguity?
And we see, on this very page, Trump fans liking the idea that Trump just might attack a symbolic number of Iranian sites without regard to whether or not they are cultural sites under applicable law."
The point is not the PDT supporters' reaction. The point, perhaps is the Iranians' reaction...
Why am I trying? You are an ineducable retard. There is no point in trying to get through to you. You can serve no other purpose on this website other than as a target of abuse. You really would do very well to withdraw, or at least moderate your impulses.
There is no applicable law. All of the international treaties are stipulated only if both belligerents adhere to them. Since the Iranians are not signatories to any of the relevant treaties, and would not adhere to them any more than they did to Obama's bribe-fueled non-treaty "agreement", we are not beholden to any treaties or agreements in our actions. The only thing we are beholden to is our own sense of what is acceptable and what is not. After 40 years and the realization that true realpolitik is the only sustainable option vis a vis Iran, the definition of what is acceptable is becoming much broader.
Personally - and I can't speak for anyone else in this comment section and certainly not for some organized American political party - the Iranian government's actions for the last 40 years makes me not really care if we even nuked one of their true "cultural sites". I'll care when the Hagia Sophia has the Orthodox Mass chanted, Jews are allowed to saunter and pray around the top of the Temple Mount, and I can go take photos of the Kabbala in Mecca without converting to a syncretistic, animist religion.
Post a Comment