Trump is Being Set-Up for War with Iran

24,653 Views | 9 Replies | Last: 4 yr ago by Mag Tiger
Richyb83
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I certainly hope not...they don't want him re-elected..especially with GDP up

http://www.americanfreedomunion.com/trump-is-being-set-up-for-war-with-iran/
Mag Tiger
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Richyb83 said:

I certainly hope not...they don't want him re-elected..especially with GDP up

http://www.americanfreedomunion.com/trump-is-being-set-up-for-war-with-iran/

I hope not either. As much as I oppose the regime in Tehran and what they stand for, an outbreak of war would be costly to everyone involved, in many ways. Trump campaigned on not getting into more wars. As the article implies, John Bolton does have a history of beating the war drums, so I'm actually surprised Trump hired him on to his current position as NSA. Bolton was also a director of the Project for a New American Century think tank whose members had a disproportionate influence in the lead up to the Iraq War.

That said, I'm not a big fan of the article vis a vis its anti Israeli slant. The statement accusing the Israeli military as nothing more than killers of unarmed and helpless Palestinian women and children is disingenuous at best. The article smacks of being a hit piece on Israel. I take the article's attitude as Israel has no right to self defense as anyone who follows events there knows who the real troublemakers are. (Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, Fatah.)

I don't believe for one minute that Israel needs us to fight her battles. They're more than capable of dealing with Iran at this time. I believe, if anything, it's the US that restrains Israel from taking out certain Iranian targets that deal with their nuclear program. There's more complex geopolitical issues to deal with (Russia/China), moreso than when the Israelis took out Saddam's facility, as well as the one in Syria.

Of course, I'm aware the position I'm taking can be construed as precisely the reason of the article's slant. The concept of "plausible deniability". I hope what the article supposes isn't the case. Only time will tell.
Richyb83
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Thank you for the reply...I highly value your feed back
ZZTIGER
How long do you want to ignore this user?
One fact is clear, It's easier to deal with Iran now than later. Just saying. Iran is at the center of much of the worlds problems and is often ultimately America's problem through proxies. I do realize that war with Iran could potentially be a blood bath. However, I'm not convinced that war with Iran can be avoided forever. I'm also not sure that if the US Military strikes Iran with overwhelming force on the first strike that Iran will have the will to try and retaliate.

I'm not sure a full blown war is absolutely necessary as a significant first strike on Iran could take out a great deal of infrastructure Iran would need to conduct warfare. Iran talks big and bad but be certain that Iran would get its ass kicked in any war with America as the Iran military has nothing close to the might of the United States Navy.

No question that Iran is a far greater challenge than Iraq. The problem with Iran is that America has never kicked their ass properly. Trump may be the only president with the balls to do it. Hopefully it doesn't come to that. You can rest assured that much of what is being reported in the media is nothing more than public posturing and likely not what is really happening behind the scenes in back channel discussions.

Tiger Stripe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
If we do go into Iran, it's going to have to be full blown war like Iraq (at first), not one hand tied behind our back like in Afghanistan (and later in Iraq). Go in heavy, kick that ass, and then get out and let them pick up their own pieces.
jandk
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I was really hoping going full energy independent would get us out of that region. Let other nations deal with it. We could still defend Isreal if need be. But I suspect they can defend themselves
Mag Tiger
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Tiger Stripe said:

If we do go into Iran, it's going to have to be full blown war like Iraq (at first), not one hand tied behind our back like in Afghanistan (and later in Iraq). Go in heavy, kick that ass, and then get out and let them pick up their own pieces.
This here.
Most everyone except for some neocon warmongers don't want to see us get into more war. However, if it is to be, go hard and go heavy. I'm of the opinion that if one goes to war, it should be total war. Get in it with a complete commitment for victory.
Mag Tiger
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Richyb83 said:

Thank you for the reply...I highly value your feed back
Appreciate the link, richyb. It's a subject worthy of principled discussion.
Mag Tiger
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ZZTIGER said:

One fact is clear, It's easier to deal with Iran now than later. Just saying. Iran is at the center of much of the worlds problems and is often ultimately America's problem through proxies. I do realize that war with Iran could potentially be a blood bath. However, I'm not convinced that war with Iran can be avoided forever. I'm also not sure that if the US Military strikes Iran with overwhelming force on the first strike that Iran will have the will to try and retaliate.

I'm not sure a full blown war is absolutely necessary as a significant first strike on Iran could take out a great deal of infrastructure Iran would need to conduct warfare. Iran talks big and bad but be certain that Iran would get its ass kicked in any war with America as the Iran military has nothing close to the might of the United States Navy.

No question that Iran is a far greater challenge than Iraq. The problem with Iran is that America has never kicked their ass properly. Trump may be the only president with the balls to do it. Hopefully it doesn't come to that. You can rest assured that much of what is being reported in the media is nothing more than public posturing and likely not what is really happening behind the scenes in back channel discussions.

You're right about it being easier to deal with Iran sooner than later. But that's the paradox we find ourselves in at present. Do we conduct a preemptive first strike in order to diminish the threat Iran poses, or do we wait until they do something so rash as to invite an initiation of general hostilities?

At this juncture, I don't believe engagement could be contained. The entire region will erupt into war, along with the involvement of Russia and possibly China. This developing situation has global implications especially economic ones. Let's hope the back channel discussions as you say are being carried out in some rational discourse.
Richyb83
How long do you want to ignore this user?
This was my bother's response when i E-Mailed him this.

I know... it looks that way... f'n blood thirsty warmongering *******s with itchy trigger fingers.... why is amerikka always at war with someone ??????
Mag Tiger
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Richyb83 said:

I certainly hope not...they don't want him re-elected..especially with GDP up

http://www.americanfreedomunion.com/trump-is-being-set-up-for-war-with-iran/

Looks like it's getting closer and closer. Appears Trump overruled Bolton & Co at the last minute when he canceled the retaliatory strike. Do you or anyone else see any historical parallel vis a vis sanctions ala pre warJapan? I can. It cannot be ruled out that Iran may lash out at some point out of desperation over these increased sanctions. One thing's for sure, they can't be trusted.
Refresh
Page 1 of 1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.