War with Iran?

135,661 Views | 2180 Replies | Last: 4 mo ago by whiterock
nein51
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Realitybites said:

LIB,MR BEARS said:


And we may be the only country in the world with the money and technology to build them…. for now.


I think we underestimate the military technology of the BRICS nations to our own peril. Consider that it basically took us 40 years to go from the P-51 to the F-14, and that was with nobody to steal tech from and the funding and research limitations inherent in our system.

We have given China the same 40 years, letting them start with the F-14, while allowing the Red Army to steal from every university in the US while our flawed trade policy showered their economy with money.

I have no doubt that they have used those 40 years to achieve technological leaps far greater than the P-51 to the F-14. I would be surprised if what our side is dismissing as UFOs aren't actually Chinese military assets.

I can't explain this but it's not about the tech. It's about American ingenuity. Our pilots are just better. They are better trained, better able to make decisions and lack rigidity the other countries tend to have.

Think of it like F1. You won't find Indian or Chinese drivers that are competitive. They are just too rigid and don't take the right risks at the right time.

In person I could explain to you but I've heard actual training audio from when we were training foreign pilots and it's rough.
Porteroso
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Waco1947 said:

Porteroso said:

boognish_bear said:



Did he really say that?

Where are the people who wanted to fire that lady for saying the same thing?

Fire what lady?

Tammy Bruce

https://truthout.org/articles/rubio-spokesperson-says-us-is-greatest-country-on-earth-next-to-israel/
KaiBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
nein51 said:

Realitybites said:

LIB,MR BEARS said:


And we may be the only country in the world with the money and technology to build them…. for now.


I think we underestimate the military technology of the BRICS nations to our own peril. Consider that it basically took us 40 years to go from the P-51 to the F-14, and that was with nobody to steal tech from and the funding and research limitations inherent in our system.

We have given China the same 40 years, letting them start with the F-14, while allowing the Red Army to steal from every university in the US while our flawed trade policy showered their economy with money.

I have no doubt that they have used those 40 years to achieve technological leaps far greater than the P-51 to the F-14. I would be surprised if what our side is dismissing as UFOs aren't actually Chinese military assets.

I can't explain this but it's not about the tech. It's about American ingenuity. Our pilots are just better. They are better trained, better able to make decisions and lack rigidity the other countries tend to have.

Think of it like F1. You won't find Indian or Chinese drivers that are competitive.


With respect……

Such illusions of US superiority in pilots , jets and tactics were blown apart in both Korea and Vietnam.

Now in both cases ; after we got over the initial shock……our aviators did bounce back and kicked some ass.
nein51
How long do you want to ignore this user?
KaiBear said:

nein51 said:

Realitybites said:

LIB,MR BEARS said:


And we may be the only country in the world with the money and technology to build them…. for now.


I think we underestimate the military technology of the BRICS nations to our own peril. Consider that it basically took us 40 years to go from the P-51 to the F-14, and that was with nobody to steal tech from and the funding and research limitations inherent in our system.

We have given China the same 40 years, letting them start with the F-14, while allowing the Red Army to steal from every university in the US while our flawed trade policy showered their economy with money.

I have no doubt that they have used those 40 years to achieve technological leaps far greater than the P-51 to the F-14. I would be surprised if what our side is dismissing as UFOs aren't actually Chinese military assets.

I can't explain this but it's not about the tech. It's about American ingenuity. Our pilots are just better. They are better trained, better able to make decisions and lack rigidity the other countries tend to have.

Think of it like F1. You won't find Indian or Chinese drivers that are competitive.


With respect……

Such illusions of US superiority in pilots , jets and tactics were blown apart in both Korea and Vietnam.

Now in both cases ; after we got over the initial shock……our aviators did bounce back and kicked some ass.

Just to be perfectly clear you do realize Korea and Vietnam were 72 and 49 years ago, respectively and since that time we have been involved and many, many operations that all prove my point.

You're right, there was some surprise there and it has literally never been the same since.
whiterock
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Porteroso said:

whiterock said:

Porteroso said:

whiterock said:

Porteroso said:

whiterock said:

muddybrazos said:

Mothra said:

muddybrazos said:

Mothra said:

Realitybites said:

We saw the stick, perhaps we are going to see the carrot.

" President Donald Trump is considering a $30 billion plan to help Iran develop a civilian nuclear program as an incentive to return to full-fledged talks over a nuclear deal, CNN reported on Thursday, citing sources.

Washington and its Middle East partners have been holding secret negotiations with Tehran, even as Iran and Israel exchanged strikes earlier this month, four sources familiar with the matter told the network.

The US reportedly has not dropped its key demand that Iran agree to zero enrichment of uranium, which has been a red line for Tehran. To sweeten the deal, however, Washington is said to have floated several incentives.

These include an estimated $20-30 billion investment project in Iran's nuclear program for civilian energy purposes though the money would not come directly from the US, but rather from its Arab partners, the report claims.

Israel sought to kill Iran's Khamenei defense chief
Other incentives reportedly under consideration include easing some sanctions and allowing Iran access to approximately $6 billion in frozen funds currently held in foreign bank accounts,"

If this is accurate, this will be the most brilliant exercise in US foreign policy since Reagan spanked Khadaffi for the Pan Am bombing without getting involved in a regime change war.

But Bibi, AIPAC, and the neocons are going to have steam coming out of their ears.
Kind of like the chicken little's doom and gloom predictions of the US being "at war," and this being the end of America as we know it, I don't believe this for a second.
I dont know about end of America or the WW3 stuff but I still believe that this whole Iran situation is far from over and Israel will not quit until they do regime change there. I hope the war stuff doesnt escalate and drag us into it, though.
But your ilk was predicting all of the above.

You're kind of the boy who cried wolf.
No, not really. The majority of the MAGA base doesnt want any wars and Trump has been made aware of that so I think he is doing his best to avoid that situation. The war hawks like you and Mark Levin are pushing for all out ww3 so I hope your side ends up disappointed.
you are imputing to others what you need them to be rather than what they are, have said, etc...

No one here came remotely close to advocating an invasion of Iran. And one was never in the cards anyway. You are apparently not old enough to remember, the First Gulf War. It took us better part of FIVE MONTHS to get deployed to slice up Saddam's army in a few days. We requisitioned civilian sea lift. We requisitioned civilian airlift. Moved an entire Corps plus some (700k troops) into theater. We didn't lift a finger to do anything like that this time. Just moved some ships & aircraft around and staged some fuel & weapons to keep planes in the air to interdict Iranian incoming.

So the "war" everyone screamed about literally could not have happened. But they wanted to have one to ***** about so badly that they 100% conjured one up out of whole cloth.


That is not accurate. We could easily have ramped up, escalating were by week, for months. We could have said our goal was finding the enriched uranium and recovering it. Or that we needed nuclear specialists to actually investigate the sites we bombed, to know how damaged they were.

There was no way we were invading without troop movement, but anyone 25 years old remembers how easy it is for the federal government to convince themselves invasion is good.
I did not speculate about what we could have done. I merely noted that we did not do ANYthing necessary to go to war. We did not preposition ANY soldiers, armored vehicles, supplies, support infrastructure. Nothing. Zip. Zilch. Nada. An invasion did not happen because one could not have happened. Nothing to invade with. Most of the talking heads screaming about us going to war full well knew that. They were just pandering to their base, and flexing their muscles to protect their positions.

You can't "sneak" 750k troops and all their weapons, armor, and supply chain to the far side of the world without someone spotting it. It took 5 months for us to do for 1GW, even with all the requisitions of civilian air/sea lift. Woulda taken years to try to do it the way you suggest (and still get spotted...you can't hide an armored division, much less a half dozen of them).

All we did was conduct flight & refueling operations to help protect Israeli airspace (and by extension Jordanian & Saudi & potentially Egyptian airspace). So did most of the militaries in the region, btw. Several Nato countries, too.... What we did was conduct a robust air defense mission, with allies and for allies, with a single air raid against a strategic target of immense national security significance. Israel did all the grunt work, taking out Iranian aircraft, air defense systems, command & control, etc..... They paved the street for us. (again, proving their worth as an asset).
I largely agree, but disagree with your previous statement that ground invasion "could not have happened." It absolutely could have. We simply chose to stop after targeting their nuclear facilities, and accepted that they still have their enriched uranium.
LOL well, of course we could have invaded Iran rather than bombed it..... IF we had taken 6 months or so of moving an entire corps of troops & logistics into theater. Last time we did that, Congress voted in advance to to it. Then we had a flurry of Executive Orders requisitioning civilian air/sea lift assets followed by warning orders for troops to mass at embarkation points. And on and on and on....weeks of steady build up (affording ever more leverage to diplomats), to include resolutions at the UN and announcements of formal alliance participants. But NONE that never happened this go-around. Not so much as a synapse in that direction.

The prospect of war so many screamed about by definition could not have happened. It was a terrible waste of political capital by the isolationist right.

Just not a reasonable take. It's reasonable to be wary of another war in the Middle East. Saying "it could not happen" just doesn't quite ring true.
it's a FACTUAL take. An invasion of Iran cannot happen if troops and ammunition and weapons systems and logistical chains are not deployed to the Iranian border, which would require Congressional approval. So until we see that happening - a vote by Congress to fund massing of armies at the embarkation line - it is not just reasonable but obligatory to ridicule all the nutjobs running around with their hair on fire about Gulf War 3.

If Trump is so bad, why do you have to work so hard to contrive things to criticize him about? Dude just solved the problem of Iranian nukes with a single bombing mission.
Total equipment exposed over Iran: 7 B2 bombers, 14 MOPs, 24 Tomahawks.
Total personnel exposed over Iran: 14 pilots.
All the heavy lifting to degrade Iranian A2AD and C&C structures was done by proxies.

That's it. A masterful job by the mightiest nation in the world to forestall the prospect of having to deal with a nuclear armed jihadist regime. Minimal risk, maximal outcome. And yet, you squeal in outrage
historian
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Don't forget the zero casualties by the bomb crews, refueling aircraft crews, and all other support crews.
“Incline my heart to your testimonies, and not to selfish gain!”
Psalm 119:36
whiterock
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

whiterock said:

Porteroso said:

whiterock said:

Porteroso said:

whiterock said:

muddybrazos said:

Mothra said:

muddybrazos said:

Mothra said:

Realitybites said:

We saw the stick, perhaps we are going to see the carrot.

" President Donald Trump is considering a $30 billion plan to help Iran develop a civilian nuclear program as an incentive to return to full-fledged talks over a nuclear deal, CNN reported on Thursday, citing sources.

Washington and its Middle East partners have been holding secret negotiations with Tehran, even as Iran and Israel exchanged strikes earlier this month, four sources familiar with the matter told the network.

The US reportedly has not dropped its key demand that Iran agree to zero enrichment of uranium, which has been a red line for Tehran. To sweeten the deal, however, Washington is said to have floated several incentives.

These include an estimated $20-30 billion investment project in Iran's nuclear program for civilian energy purposes though the money would not come directly from the US, but rather from its Arab partners, the report claims.

Israel sought to kill Iran's Khamenei defense chief
Other incentives reportedly under consideration include easing some sanctions and allowing Iran access to approximately $6 billion in frozen funds currently held in foreign bank accounts,"

If this is accurate, this will be the most brilliant exercise in US foreign policy since Reagan spanked Khadaffi for the Pan Am bombing without getting involved in a regime change war.

But Bibi, AIPAC, and the neocons are going to have steam coming out of their ears.
Kind of like the chicken little's doom and gloom predictions of the US being "at war," and this being the end of America as we know it, I don't believe this for a second.
I dont know about end of America or the WW3 stuff but I still believe that this whole Iran situation is far from over and Israel will not quit until they do regime change there. I hope the war stuff doesnt escalate and drag us into it, though.
But your ilk was predicting all of the above.

You're kind of the boy who cried wolf.
No, not really. The majority of the MAGA base doesnt want any wars and Trump has been made aware of that so I think he is doing his best to avoid that situation. The war hawks like you and Mark Levin are pushing for all out ww3 so I hope your side ends up disappointed.
you are imputing to others what you need them to be rather than what they are, have said, etc...

No one here came remotely close to advocating an invasion of Iran. And one was never in the cards anyway. You are apparently not old enough to remember, the First Gulf War. It took us better part of FIVE MONTHS to get deployed to slice up Saddam's army in a few days. We requisitioned civilian sea lift. We requisitioned civilian airlift. Moved an entire Corps plus some (700k troops) into theater. We didn't lift a finger to do anything like that this time. Just moved some ships & aircraft around and staged some fuel & weapons to keep planes in the air to interdict Iranian incoming.

So the "war" everyone screamed about literally could not have happened. But they wanted to have one to ***** about so badly that they 100% conjured one up out of whole cloth.


That is not accurate. We could easily have ramped up, escalating were by week, for months. We could have said our goal was finding the enriched uranium and recovering it. Or that we needed nuclear specialists to actually investigate the sites we bombed, to know how damaged they were.

There was no way we were invading without troop movement, but anyone 25 years old remembers how easy it is for the federal government to convince themselves invasion is good.
I did not speculate about what we could have done. I merely noted that we did not do ANYthing necessary to go to war. We did not preposition ANY soldiers, armored vehicles, supplies, support infrastructure. Nothing. Zip. Zilch. Nada. An invasion did not happen because one could not have happened. Nothing to invade with. Most of the talking heads screaming about us going to war full well knew that. They were just pandering to their base, and flexing their muscles to protect their positions.

You can't "sneak" 750k troops and all their weapons, armor, and supply chain to the far side of the world without someone spotting it. It took 5 months for us to do for 1GW, even with all the requisitions of civilian air/sea lift. Woulda taken years to try to do it the way you suggest (and still get spotted...you can't hide an armored division, much less a half dozen of them).

All we did was conduct flight & refueling operations to help protect Israeli airspace (and by extension Jordanian & Saudi & potentially Egyptian airspace). So did most of the militaries in the region, btw. Several Nato countries, too.... What we did was conduct a robust air defense mission, with allies and for allies, with a single air raid against a strategic target of immense national security significance. Israel did all the grunt work, taking out Iranian aircraft, air defense systems, command & control, etc..... They paved the street for us. (again, proving their worth as an asset).
I largely agree, but disagree with your previous statement that ground invasion "could not have happened." It absolutely could have. We simply chose to stop after targeting their nuclear facilities, and accepted that they still have their enriched uranium.
LOL well, of course we could have invaded Iran rather than bombed it..... IF we had taken 6 months or so of moving an entire corps of troops & logistics into theater. Last time we did that, Congress voted in advance to to it. Then we had a flurry of Executive Orders requisitioning civilian air/sea lift assets followed by warning orders for troops to mass at embarkation points. And on and on and on....weeks of steady build up (affording ever more leverage to diplomats), to include resolutions at the UN and announcements of formal alliance participants. But NONE that never happened this go-around. Not so much as a synapse in that direction.

The prospect of war so many screamed about by definition could not have happened. It was a terrible waste of political capital by the isolationist right.
No one said it would happen this week. Please, for pity's sake, leave that poor straw man alone. I can't watch any more.
So then we should also whine & squeal about imminent war with Chile, Argentina, Paraguay, Bolivia, Peru, Uruguay, Brazil, Ecuador, Colombia, Venezuela, Guyana, Suriname, French Guyana, Panama, Costa Rica, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Honduras, Belize, Mexico, Jamaica, Cuba, Haiti, Dominican Republic, etc.....around the whole world because, technically, it could happen next week or next month since we are so powerful we can go and do anything we want and of course are an imperial power seeking to dominate the whole world, turning every square inch our solidiers' boots touch as American territory because, you know, we can..... I mean, everybody knows that the USA is the great Satan of the world, dominating everyone and everything to inflict the tryanny of baseball, hot dogs, and apple pie on unsuspecting huddled masses everywhere because we have manifest destiny to...... Did you know we have NUCLEAR WEAPONS? Dear God, what a menace we are to everyone.

Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
whiterock said:

Sam Lowry said:

whiterock said:

Porteroso said:

whiterock said:

Porteroso said:

whiterock said:

muddybrazos said:

Mothra said:

muddybrazos said:

Mothra said:

Realitybites said:

We saw the stick, perhaps we are going to see the carrot.

" President Donald Trump is considering a $30 billion plan to help Iran develop a civilian nuclear program as an incentive to return to full-fledged talks over a nuclear deal, CNN reported on Thursday, citing sources.

Washington and its Middle East partners have been holding secret negotiations with Tehran, even as Iran and Israel exchanged strikes earlier this month, four sources familiar with the matter told the network.

The US reportedly has not dropped its key demand that Iran agree to zero enrichment of uranium, which has been a red line for Tehran. To sweeten the deal, however, Washington is said to have floated several incentives.

These include an estimated $20-30 billion investment project in Iran's nuclear program for civilian energy purposes though the money would not come directly from the US, but rather from its Arab partners, the report claims.

Israel sought to kill Iran's Khamenei defense chief
Other incentives reportedly under consideration include easing some sanctions and allowing Iran access to approximately $6 billion in frozen funds currently held in foreign bank accounts,"

If this is accurate, this will be the most brilliant exercise in US foreign policy since Reagan spanked Khadaffi for the Pan Am bombing without getting involved in a regime change war.

But Bibi, AIPAC, and the neocons are going to have steam coming out of their ears.
Kind of like the chicken little's doom and gloom predictions of the US being "at war," and this being the end of America as we know it, I don't believe this for a second.
I dont know about end of America or the WW3 stuff but I still believe that this whole Iran situation is far from over and Israel will not quit until they do regime change there. I hope the war stuff doesnt escalate and drag us into it, though.
But your ilk was predicting all of the above.

You're kind of the boy who cried wolf.
No, not really. The majority of the MAGA base doesnt want any wars and Trump has been made aware of that so I think he is doing his best to avoid that situation. The war hawks like you and Mark Levin are pushing for all out ww3 so I hope your side ends up disappointed.
you are imputing to others what you need them to be rather than what they are, have said, etc...

No one here came remotely close to advocating an invasion of Iran. And one was never in the cards anyway. You are apparently not old enough to remember, the First Gulf War. It took us better part of FIVE MONTHS to get deployed to slice up Saddam's army in a few days. We requisitioned civilian sea lift. We requisitioned civilian airlift. Moved an entire Corps plus some (700k troops) into theater. We didn't lift a finger to do anything like that this time. Just moved some ships & aircraft around and staged some fuel & weapons to keep planes in the air to interdict Iranian incoming.

So the "war" everyone screamed about literally could not have happened. But they wanted to have one to ***** about so badly that they 100% conjured one up out of whole cloth.


That is not accurate. We could easily have ramped up, escalating were by week, for months. We could have said our goal was finding the enriched uranium and recovering it. Or that we needed nuclear specialists to actually investigate the sites we bombed, to know how damaged they were.

There was no way we were invading without troop movement, but anyone 25 years old remembers how easy it is for the federal government to convince themselves invasion is good.
I did not speculate about what we could have done. I merely noted that we did not do ANYthing necessary to go to war. We did not preposition ANY soldiers, armored vehicles, supplies, support infrastructure. Nothing. Zip. Zilch. Nada. An invasion did not happen because one could not have happened. Nothing to invade with. Most of the talking heads screaming about us going to war full well knew that. They were just pandering to their base, and flexing their muscles to protect their positions.

You can't "sneak" 750k troops and all their weapons, armor, and supply chain to the far side of the world without someone spotting it. It took 5 months for us to do for 1GW, even with all the requisitions of civilian air/sea lift. Woulda taken years to try to do it the way you suggest (and still get spotted...you can't hide an armored division, much less a half dozen of them).

All we did was conduct flight & refueling operations to help protect Israeli airspace (and by extension Jordanian & Saudi & potentially Egyptian airspace). So did most of the militaries in the region, btw. Several Nato countries, too.... What we did was conduct a robust air defense mission, with allies and for allies, with a single air raid against a strategic target of immense national security significance. Israel did all the grunt work, taking out Iranian aircraft, air defense systems, command & control, etc..... They paved the street for us. (again, proving their worth as an asset).
I largely agree, but disagree with your previous statement that ground invasion "could not have happened." It absolutely could have. We simply chose to stop after targeting their nuclear facilities, and accepted that they still have their enriched uranium.
LOL well, of course we could have invaded Iran rather than bombed it..... IF we had taken 6 months or so of moving an entire corps of troops & logistics into theater. Last time we did that, Congress voted in advance to to it. Then we had a flurry of Executive Orders requisitioning civilian air/sea lift assets followed by warning orders for troops to mass at embarkation points. And on and on and on....weeks of steady build up (affording ever more leverage to diplomats), to include resolutions at the UN and announcements of formal alliance participants. But NONE that never happened this go-around. Not so much as a synapse in that direction.

The prospect of war so many screamed about by definition could not have happened. It was a terrible waste of political capital by the isolationist right.
No one said it would happen this week. Please, for pity's sake, leave that poor straw man alone. I can't watch any more.
So then we should also whine & squeal about imminent war with Chile, Argentina, Paraguay, Bolivia, Peru, Uruguay, Brazil, Ecuador, Colombia, Venezuela, Guyana, Suriname, French Guyana, Panama, Costa Rica, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Honduras, Belize, Mexico, Jamaica, Cuba, Haiti, Dominican Republic, etc.....around the whole world because, technically, it could happen next week or next month since we are so powerful we can go and do anything we want and of course are an imperial power seeking to dominate the whole world, turning every square inch our solidiers' boots touch as American territory because, you know, we can..... I mean, everybody knows that the USA is the great Satan of the world, dominating everyone and everything to inflict the tryanny of baseball, hot dogs, and apple pie on unsuspecting huddled masses everywhere because we have manifest destiny to...... Did you know we have NUCLEAR WEAPONS? Dear God, what a menace we are to everyone.


You all right?
Waco1947
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Realitybites said:

Those of you looking at Patriots and the Iron Dome, these are yesterday's technologies. With the proliferation of cheap offensive drones and hypersonic missiles the battle space is radically different than it was in the 20th century.

If you rely on these systems you rapidly find your self on the losing end of an economic war.

Reusable laser weaponry is going to be what it takes to build a winning defensive shield going forward.
I had not thought of lasers. Maybe Marjorie was on to something. ; )
But still good to advance the technologies.
Waco1947
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Porteroso said:

Waco1947 said:

Porteroso said:

boognish_bear said:



Did he really say that?

Where are the people who wanted to fire that lady for saying the same thing?

Fire what lady?

Tammy Bruce

https://truthout.org/articles/rubio-spokesperson-says-us-is-greatest-country-on-earth-next-to-israel/
Thanks
LIB,MR BEARS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Waco1947 said:

Realitybites said:

Those of you looking at Patriots and the Iron Dome, these are yesterday's technologies. With the proliferation of cheap offensive drones and hypersonic missiles the battle space is radically different than it was in the 20th century.

If you rely on these systems you rapidly find your self on the losing end of an economic war.

Reusable laser weaponry is going to be what it takes to build a winning defensive shield going forward.
I had not thought of lasers. Maybe Marjorie was on to something. ; )
But still good to advance the technologies.


Okay, maybe you're not as evil as we all believed.


boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Waco1947
How long do you want to ignore this user?
We dropped the bomb June 22 how do you understand its implications for Iran and its standing among Arab nations?
cowboycwr
How long do you want to ignore this user?
boognish_bear said:




Even if they were forced to cheerlead for Israel at the threat of their job this does even come close to the biggest media scandal of all time, or the last 10 years or even this year.
Oldbear83
How long do you want to ignore this user?
More of 'modern reading comprehension', I see.

He never said, 'could not happen', he said the invasion 'did not happen'.

Some of ya'll just cannot give up your war porn.
Assassin
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Remember back in the O days?

Facebook Groups at; Memories of Dallas, Mem of Texas, Mem of Football in Texas, Mem Texas Music and Through a Texas Lens. Come visit! Over 100,000 members and 100,000 regular visitors
KaiBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cowboycwr said:

boognish_bear said:




Even if they were forced to cheerlead for Israel at the threat of their job this does even come close to the biggest media scandal of all time, or the last 10 years or even this year.


The BBC is overtly left wing.

I read their webpage frequently.

Certainly didn't notice any blatant cheering for Israel.

Although the BBC has certainly been cheerleading for Ukraine since their war with Russia began.
historian
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Assassin said:

Remember back in the O days?



Demonstrates the difference between a strong leader and a metrosexual wuss
“Incline my heart to your testimonies, and not to selfish gain!”
Psalm 119:36
ShooterTX
How long do you want to ignore this user?
historian said:

Assassin said:

Remember back in the O days?



Demonstrates the difference between a strong leader and a metrosexual wuss


Pretty sure Barry is gay. No other reason to be married to Big Mike for all these years.
ShooterTX
LIB,MR BEARS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Jack Bauer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
boognish_bear said:


Porteroso
How long do you want to ignore this user?
whiterock said:

Porteroso said:

whiterock said:

Porteroso said:

whiterock said:

Porteroso said:

whiterock said:

muddybrazos said:

Mothra said:

muddybrazos said:

Mothra said:

Realitybites said:

We saw the stick, perhaps we are going to see the carrot.

" President Donald Trump is considering a $30 billion plan to help Iran develop a civilian nuclear program as an incentive to return to full-fledged talks over a nuclear deal, CNN reported on Thursday, citing sources.

Washington and its Middle East partners have been holding secret negotiations with Tehran, even as Iran and Israel exchanged strikes earlier this month, four sources familiar with the matter told the network.

The US reportedly has not dropped its key demand that Iran agree to zero enrichment of uranium, which has been a red line for Tehran. To sweeten the deal, however, Washington is said to have floated several incentives.

These include an estimated $20-30 billion investment project in Iran's nuclear program for civilian energy purposes though the money would not come directly from the US, but rather from its Arab partners, the report claims.

Israel sought to kill Iran's Khamenei defense chief
Other incentives reportedly under consideration include easing some sanctions and allowing Iran access to approximately $6 billion in frozen funds currently held in foreign bank accounts,"

If this is accurate, this will be the most brilliant exercise in US foreign policy since Reagan spanked Khadaffi for the Pan Am bombing without getting involved in a regime change war.

But Bibi, AIPAC, and the neocons are going to have steam coming out of their ears.
Kind of like the chicken little's doom and gloom predictions of the US being "at war," and this being the end of America as we know it, I don't believe this for a second.
I dont know about end of America or the WW3 stuff but I still believe that this whole Iran situation is far from over and Israel will not quit until they do regime change there. I hope the war stuff doesnt escalate and drag us into it, though.
But your ilk was predicting all of the above.

You're kind of the boy who cried wolf.
No, not really. The majority of the MAGA base doesnt want any wars and Trump has been made aware of that so I think he is doing his best to avoid that situation. The war hawks like you and Mark Levin are pushing for all out ww3 so I hope your side ends up disappointed.
you are imputing to others what you need them to be rather than what they are, have said, etc...

No one here came remotely close to advocating an invasion of Iran. And one was never in the cards anyway. You are apparently not old enough to remember, the First Gulf War. It took us better part of FIVE MONTHS to get deployed to slice up Saddam's army in a few days. We requisitioned civilian sea lift. We requisitioned civilian airlift. Moved an entire Corps plus some (700k troops) into theater. We didn't lift a finger to do anything like that this time. Just moved some ships & aircraft around and staged some fuel & weapons to keep planes in the air to interdict Iranian incoming.

So the "war" everyone screamed about literally could not have happened. But they wanted to have one to ***** about so badly that they 100% conjured one up out of whole cloth.


That is not accurate. We could easily have ramped up, escalating were by week, for months. We could have said our goal was finding the enriched uranium and recovering it. Or that we needed nuclear specialists to actually investigate the sites we bombed, to know how damaged they were.

There was no way we were invading without troop movement, but anyone 25 years old remembers how easy it is for the federal government to convince themselves invasion is good.
I did not speculate about what we could have done. I merely noted that we did not do ANYthing necessary to go to war. We did not preposition ANY soldiers, armored vehicles, supplies, support infrastructure. Nothing. Zip. Zilch. Nada. An invasion did not happen because one could not have happened. Nothing to invade with. Most of the talking heads screaming about us going to war full well knew that. They were just pandering to their base, and flexing their muscles to protect their positions.

You can't "sneak" 750k troops and all their weapons, armor, and supply chain to the far side of the world without someone spotting it. It took 5 months for us to do for 1GW, even with all the requisitions of civilian air/sea lift. Woulda taken years to try to do it the way you suggest (and still get spotted...you can't hide an armored division, much less a half dozen of them).

All we did was conduct flight & refueling operations to help protect Israeli airspace (and by extension Jordanian & Saudi & potentially Egyptian airspace). So did most of the militaries in the region, btw. Several Nato countries, too.... What we did was conduct a robust air defense mission, with allies and for allies, with a single air raid against a strategic target of immense national security significance. Israel did all the grunt work, taking out Iranian aircraft, air defense systems, command & control, etc..... They paved the street for us. (again, proving their worth as an asset).
I largely agree, but disagree with your previous statement that ground invasion "could not have happened." It absolutely could have. We simply chose to stop after targeting their nuclear facilities, and accepted that they still have their enriched uranium.
LOL well, of course we could have invaded Iran rather than bombed it..... IF we had taken 6 months or so of moving an entire corps of troops & logistics into theater. Last time we did that, Congress voted in advance to to it. Then we had a flurry of Executive Orders requisitioning civilian air/sea lift assets followed by warning orders for troops to mass at embarkation points. And on and on and on....weeks of steady build up (affording ever more leverage to diplomats), to include resolutions at the UN and announcements of formal alliance participants. But NONE that never happened this go-around. Not so much as a synapse in that direction.

The prospect of war so many screamed about by definition could not have happened. It was a terrible waste of political capital by the isolationist right.

Just not a reasonable take. It's reasonable to be wary of another war in the Middle East. Saying "it could not happen" just doesn't quite ring true.
it's a FACTUAL take. An invasion of Iran cannot happen if troops and ammunition and weapons systems and logistical chains are not deployed to the Iranian border, which would require Congressional approval. So until we see that happening - a vote by Congress to fund massing of armies at the embarkation line - it is not just reasonable but obligatory to ridicule all the nutjobs running around with their hair on fire about Gulf War 3.

If Trump is so bad, why do you have to work so hard to contrive things to criticize him about? Dude just solved the problem of Iranian nukes with a single bombing mission.
Total equipment exposed over Iran: 7 B2 bombers, 14 MOPs, 24 Tomahawks.
Total personnel exposed over Iran: 14 pilots.
All the heavy lifting to degrade Iranian A2AD and C&C structures was done by proxies.

That's it. A masterful job by the mightiest nation in the world to forestall the prospect of having to deal with a nuclear armed jihadist regime. Minimal risk, maximal outcome. And yet, you squeal in outrage

This is one of the dumbest things I've ever read. Try less hard and you will get further.
Porteroso
How long do you want to ignore this user?
boognish_bear said:



You should not take this at face value. The BBC has been one of the most pro Palestinian media groups in past years, and from what I understand, this is the pro Palestinians who are mad that the parent organization won't go all in on things like calling Israel's war genocide. The BBC itself is definitely not pro Israel in this conflict.
Porteroso
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Oldbear83 said:

More of 'modern reading comprehension', I see.

He never said, 'could not happen', he said the invasion 'did not happen'.

Some of ya'll just cannot give up your war porn.

No he actually said could not happen. And you question my reading comprehension lol. What a joke your posting is.

Quote:

The prospect of war so many screamed about by definition could not have happened. It was a terrible waste of political capital by the isolationist right.
Oldbear83
How long do you want to ignore this user?
"This is one of the dumbest things I've ever read. "

So you never read your own posts.
muddybrazos
How long do you want to ignore this user?
boognish_bear said:


Can we just send this guy to Isarael already. Im tired of him larping as a Texan or American whatever hes supposed to be.
The_barBEARian
How long do you want to ignore this user?
boognish_bear said:



This clown needs to step down after this term... every election cycle is a struggle to keep him in office.

He consistently under preforms all the other major establishment Republicans in statewide races.

As someone who voted for him twice and dragged my family to vote for him, I wont do it again.

If they force him on us again, we will end up with our first Texas democrat senator in my lifetime.
whiterock
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

whiterock said:

Sam Lowry said:

whiterock said:

Porteroso said:

whiterock said:

Porteroso said:

whiterock said:

muddybrazos said:

Mothra said:

muddybrazos said:

Mothra said:

Realitybites said:

We saw the stick, perhaps we are going to see the carrot.

" President Donald Trump is considering a $30 billion plan to help Iran develop a civilian nuclear program as an incentive to return to full-fledged talks over a nuclear deal, CNN reported on Thursday, citing sources.

Washington and its Middle East partners have been holding secret negotiations with Tehran, even as Iran and Israel exchanged strikes earlier this month, four sources familiar with the matter told the network.

The US reportedly has not dropped its key demand that Iran agree to zero enrichment of uranium, which has been a red line for Tehran. To sweeten the deal, however, Washington is said to have floated several incentives.

These include an estimated $20-30 billion investment project in Iran's nuclear program for civilian energy purposes though the money would not come directly from the US, but rather from its Arab partners, the report claims.

Israel sought to kill Iran's Khamenei defense chief
Other incentives reportedly under consideration include easing some sanctions and allowing Iran access to approximately $6 billion in frozen funds currently held in foreign bank accounts,"

If this is accurate, this will be the most brilliant exercise in US foreign policy since Reagan spanked Khadaffi for the Pan Am bombing without getting involved in a regime change war.

But Bibi, AIPAC, and the neocons are going to have steam coming out of their ears.
Kind of like the chicken little's doom and gloom predictions of the US being "at war," and this being the end of America as we know it, I don't believe this for a second.
I dont know about end of America or the WW3 stuff but I still believe that this whole Iran situation is far from over and Israel will not quit until they do regime change there. I hope the war stuff doesnt escalate and drag us into it, though.
But your ilk was predicting all of the above.

You're kind of the boy who cried wolf.
No, not really. The majority of the MAGA base doesnt want any wars and Trump has been made aware of that so I think he is doing his best to avoid that situation. The war hawks like you and Mark Levin are pushing for all out ww3 so I hope your side ends up disappointed.
you are imputing to others what you need them to be rather than what they are, have said, etc...

No one here came remotely close to advocating an invasion of Iran. And one was never in the cards anyway. You are apparently not old enough to remember, the First Gulf War. It took us better part of FIVE MONTHS to get deployed to slice up Saddam's army in a few days. We requisitioned civilian sea lift. We requisitioned civilian airlift. Moved an entire Corps plus some (700k troops) into theater. We didn't lift a finger to do anything like that this time. Just moved some ships & aircraft around and staged some fuel & weapons to keep planes in the air to interdict Iranian incoming.

So the "war" everyone screamed about literally could not have happened. But they wanted to have one to ***** about so badly that they 100% conjured one up out of whole cloth.


That is not accurate. We could easily have ramped up, escalating were by week, for months. We could have said our goal was finding the enriched uranium and recovering it. Or that we needed nuclear specialists to actually investigate the sites we bombed, to know how damaged they were.

There was no way we were invading without troop movement, but anyone 25 years old remembers how easy it is for the federal government to convince themselves invasion is good.
I did not speculate about what we could have done. I merely noted that we did not do ANYthing necessary to go to war. We did not preposition ANY soldiers, armored vehicles, supplies, support infrastructure. Nothing. Zip. Zilch. Nada. An invasion did not happen because one could not have happened. Nothing to invade with. Most of the talking heads screaming about us going to war full well knew that. They were just pandering to their base, and flexing their muscles to protect their positions.

You can't "sneak" 750k troops and all their weapons, armor, and supply chain to the far side of the world without someone spotting it. It took 5 months for us to do for 1GW, even with all the requisitions of civilian air/sea lift. Woulda taken years to try to do it the way you suggest (and still get spotted...you can't hide an armored division, much less a half dozen of them).

All we did was conduct flight & refueling operations to help protect Israeli airspace (and by extension Jordanian & Saudi & potentially Egyptian airspace). So did most of the militaries in the region, btw. Several Nato countries, too.... What we did was conduct a robust air defense mission, with allies and for allies, with a single air raid against a strategic target of immense national security significance. Israel did all the grunt work, taking out Iranian aircraft, air defense systems, command & control, etc..... They paved the street for us. (again, proving their worth as an asset).
I largely agree, but disagree with your previous statement that ground invasion "could not have happened." It absolutely could have. We simply chose to stop after targeting their nuclear facilities, and accepted that they still have their enriched uranium.
LOL well, of course we could have invaded Iran rather than bombed it..... IF we had taken 6 months or so of moving an entire corps of troops & logistics into theater. Last time we did that, Congress voted in advance to to it. Then we had a flurry of Executive Orders requisitioning civilian air/sea lift assets followed by warning orders for troops to mass at embarkation points. And on and on and on....weeks of steady build up (affording ever more leverage to diplomats), to include resolutions at the UN and announcements of formal alliance participants. But NONE that never happened this go-around. Not so much as a synapse in that direction.

The prospect of war so many screamed about by definition could not have happened. It was a terrible waste of political capital by the isolationist right.
No one said it would happen this week. Please, for pity's sake, leave that poor straw man alone. I can't watch any more.
So then we should also whine & squeal about imminent war with Chile, Argentina, Paraguay, Bolivia, Peru, Uruguay, Brazil, Ecuador, Colombia, Venezuela, Guyana, Suriname, French Guyana, Panama, Costa Rica, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Honduras, Belize, Mexico, Jamaica, Cuba, Haiti, Dominican Republic, etc.....around the whole world because, technically, it could happen next week or next month since we are so powerful we can go and do anything we want and of course are an imperial power seeking to dominate the whole world, turning every square inch our solidiers' boots touch as American territory because, you know, we can..... I mean, everybody knows that the USA is the great Satan of the world, dominating everyone and everything to inflict the tryanny of baseball, hot dogs, and apple pie on unsuspecting huddled masses everywhere because we have manifest destiny to...... Did you know we have NUCLEAR WEAPONS? Dear God, what a menace we are to everyone.


You all right?
indeed, Had a lot of fun there with satire, channeling some Sam.
whiterock
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

whiterock said:

Porteroso said:

whiterock said:

Porteroso said:

whiterock said:

muddybrazos said:

Mothra said:

muddybrazos said:

Mothra said:

Realitybites said:

We saw the stick, perhaps we are going to see the carrot.

" President Donald Trump is considering a $30 billion plan to help Iran develop a civilian nuclear program as an incentive to return to full-fledged talks over a nuclear deal, CNN reported on Thursday, citing sources.

Washington and its Middle East partners have been holding secret negotiations with Tehran, even as Iran and Israel exchanged strikes earlier this month, four sources familiar with the matter told the network.

The US reportedly has not dropped its key demand that Iran agree to zero enrichment of uranium, which has been a red line for Tehran. To sweeten the deal, however, Washington is said to have floated several incentives.

These include an estimated $20-30 billion investment project in Iran's nuclear program for civilian energy purposes though the money would not come directly from the US, but rather from its Arab partners, the report claims.

Israel sought to kill Iran's Khamenei defense chief
Other incentives reportedly under consideration include easing some sanctions and allowing Iran access to approximately $6 billion in frozen funds currently held in foreign bank accounts,"

If this is accurate, this will be the most brilliant exercise in US foreign policy since Reagan spanked Khadaffi for the Pan Am bombing without getting involved in a regime change war.

But Bibi, AIPAC, and the neocons are going to have steam coming out of their ears.
Kind of like the chicken little's doom and gloom predictions of the US being "at war," and this being the end of America as we know it, I don't believe this for a second.
I dont know about end of America or the WW3 stuff but I still believe that this whole Iran situation is far from over and Israel will not quit until they do regime change there. I hope the war stuff doesnt escalate and drag us into it, though.
But your ilk was predicting all of the above.

You're kind of the boy who cried wolf.
No, not really. The majority of the MAGA base doesnt want any wars and Trump has been made aware of that so I think he is doing his best to avoid that situation. The war hawks like you and Mark Levin are pushing for all out ww3 so I hope your side ends up disappointed.
you are imputing to others what you need them to be rather than what they are, have said, etc...

No one here came remotely close to advocating an invasion of Iran. And one was never in the cards anyway. You are apparently not old enough to remember, the First Gulf War. It took us better part of FIVE MONTHS to get deployed to slice up Saddam's army in a few days. We requisitioned civilian sea lift. We requisitioned civilian airlift. Moved an entire Corps plus some (700k troops) into theater. We didn't lift a finger to do anything like that this time. Just moved some ships & aircraft around and staged some fuel & weapons to keep planes in the air to interdict Iranian incoming.

So the "war" everyone screamed about literally could not have happened. But they wanted to have one to ***** about so badly that they 100% conjured one up out of whole cloth.


That is not accurate. We could easily have ramped up, escalating were by week, for months. We could have said our goal was finding the enriched uranium and recovering it. Or that we needed nuclear specialists to actually investigate the sites we bombed, to know how damaged they were.

There was no way we were invading without troop movement, but anyone 25 years old remembers how easy it is for the federal government to convince themselves invasion is good.
I did not speculate about what we could have done. I merely noted that we did not do ANYthing necessary to go to war. We did not preposition ANY soldiers, armored vehicles, supplies, support infrastructure. Nothing. Zip. Zilch. Nada. An invasion did not happen because one could not have happened. Nothing to invade with. Most of the talking heads screaming about us going to war full well knew that. They were just pandering to their base, and flexing their muscles to protect their positions.

You can't "sneak" 750k troops and all their weapons, armor, and supply chain to the far side of the world without someone spotting it. It took 5 months for us to do for 1GW, even with all the requisitions of civilian air/sea lift. Woulda taken years to try to do it the way you suggest (and still get spotted...you can't hide an armored division, much less a half dozen of them).

All we did was conduct flight & refueling operations to help protect Israeli airspace (and by extension Jordanian & Saudi & potentially Egyptian airspace). So did most of the militaries in the region, btw. Several Nato countries, too.... What we did was conduct a robust air defense mission, with allies and for allies, with a single air raid against a strategic target of immense national security significance. Israel did all the grunt work, taking out Iranian aircraft, air defense systems, command & control, etc..... They paved the street for us. (again, proving their worth as an asset).
I largely agree, but disagree with your previous statement that ground invasion "could not have happened." It absolutely could have. We simply chose to stop after targeting their nuclear facilities, and accepted that they still have their enriched uranium.
LOL well, of course we could have invaded Iran rather than bombed it..... IF we had taken 6 months or so of moving an entire corps of troops & logistics into theater. Last time we did that, Congress voted in advance to to it. Then we had a flurry of Executive Orders requisitioning civilian air/sea lift assets followed by warning orders for troops to mass at embarkation points. And on and on and on....weeks of steady build up (affording ever more leverage to diplomats), to include resolutions at the UN and announcements of formal alliance participants. But NONE that never happened this go-around. Not so much as a synapse in that direction.

The prospect of war so many screamed about by definition could not have happened. It was a terrible waste of political capital by the isolationist right.
No one said it would happen this week. Please, for pity's sake, leave that poor straw man alone. I can't watch any more.
what we should not have to watch any more is the flimsy strawman of a pending US invasion of Iran.

Until there is a vote in Congress to fund the deployment of an expeditionary force, nothing is going to happen. But if you want to continue attritting your own credibility, by all means please proceed.
whiterock
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The_barBEARian said:

LIB,MR BEARS said:

LIB,MR BEARS said:

J.R. said:

I don't necessarily have a problem dropping the Bunker Busters to destroy their Nuclear program , however, if we help Izzy, I would insist a lasting FIX for Gaza (a Palestinian State) with no Netanyahu BS in return. I DO NOT trust Netanyahu and his govt in the least.

Do a lend-lease on a couple B1s. Sell the IDF a dozen bunker busters. Problem solved. We would be no more involved than China and Russia already are.

We sell arms
China sells arms
Russia sells arms

Shouldn't be a problem.


It looks like lend-lease may be on the table



Josh Gottenhiemer is Jewish.... shouldnt he recuse himself from weapons sales involving Israel?

Why is that not considered a conflict of interest?
From whom would you demand other recusals?
Might any of them involve you?

I mean, if you are a Christian, are you going to recuse yourself from voting on any trade deals with Christian countries?
whiterock
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Realitybites said:

Those of you looking at Patriots and the Iron Dome, these are yesterday's technologies. With the proliferation of cheap offensive drones and hypersonic missiles the battle space is radically different than it was in the 20th century.

If you rely on these systems you rapidly find your self on the losing end of an economic war.

Reusable laser weaponry is going to be what it takes to build a winning defensive shield going forward.
yes, but that will take metric ****-tons of electricity, which just moves the vulnerability to a different point in the logistics chain.

Key problem TODAY, is that the Patriot and Iron Dome are not designed to deal with Long range ballistic missiles, and particularly those with MIRVs. Takes different systems for that. What they have now is perfectly suited to the technology that Hamas and Hizballah had (but not the full arsenal available to Iran). That is a solvable problem in the short term.

What Western and Arab air and naval forces did to help defend Israel is massively unreported. Iranian missiles were being shot down on re-entry by non-Israeli aircraft and naval vessels all over the region. Until proven otherwise, it should be presumed that some airborne laser weapons were used for that mission, real-world testing of system in development.

Israel did NOT fight this one alone. Far from it. Dozens of countries assisted in one way or the other.

F-35 will have silenced a lot of its critics, too. Did a fantastic job of attritting Iranian A2AD which paved the way for our decisive bombing run.
whiterock
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Porteroso said:

whiterock said:

Porteroso said:

whiterock said:

Porteroso said:

whiterock said:

Porteroso said:

whiterock said:

muddybrazos said:

Mothra said:

muddybrazos said:

Mothra said:

Realitybites said:

We saw the stick, perhaps we are going to see the carrot.

" President Donald Trump is considering a $30 billion plan to help Iran develop a civilian nuclear program as an incentive to return to full-fledged talks over a nuclear deal, CNN reported on Thursday, citing sources.

Washington and its Middle East partners have been holding secret negotiations with Tehran, even as Iran and Israel exchanged strikes earlier this month, four sources familiar with the matter told the network.

The US reportedly has not dropped its key demand that Iran agree to zero enrichment of uranium, which has been a red line for Tehran. To sweeten the deal, however, Washington is said to have floated several incentives.

These include an estimated $20-30 billion investment project in Iran's nuclear program for civilian energy purposes though the money would not come directly from the US, but rather from its Arab partners, the report claims.

Israel sought to kill Iran's Khamenei defense chief
Other incentives reportedly under consideration include easing some sanctions and allowing Iran access to approximately $6 billion in frozen funds currently held in foreign bank accounts,"

If this is accurate, this will be the most brilliant exercise in US foreign policy since Reagan spanked Khadaffi for the Pan Am bombing without getting involved in a regime change war.

But Bibi, AIPAC, and the neocons are going to have steam coming out of their ears.
Kind of like the chicken little's doom and gloom predictions of the US being "at war," and this being the end of America as we know it, I don't believe this for a second.
I dont know about end of America or the WW3 stuff but I still believe that this whole Iran situation is far from over and Israel will not quit until they do regime change there. I hope the war stuff doesnt escalate and drag us into it, though.
But your ilk was predicting all of the above.

You're kind of the boy who cried wolf.
No, not really. The majority of the MAGA base doesnt want any wars and Trump has been made aware of that so I think he is doing his best to avoid that situation. The war hawks like you and Mark Levin are pushing for all out ww3 so I hope your side ends up disappointed.
you are imputing to others what you need them to be rather than what they are, have said, etc...

No one here came remotely close to advocating an invasion of Iran. And one was never in the cards anyway. You are apparently not old enough to remember, the First Gulf War. It took us better part of FIVE MONTHS to get deployed to slice up Saddam's army in a few days. We requisitioned civilian sea lift. We requisitioned civilian airlift. Moved an entire Corps plus some (700k troops) into theater. We didn't lift a finger to do anything like that this time. Just moved some ships & aircraft around and staged some fuel & weapons to keep planes in the air to interdict Iranian incoming.

So the "war" everyone screamed about literally could not have happened. But they wanted to have one to ***** about so badly that they 100% conjured one up out of whole cloth.


That is not accurate. We could easily have ramped up, escalating were by week, for months. We could have said our goal was finding the enriched uranium and recovering it. Or that we needed nuclear specialists to actually investigate the sites we bombed, to know how damaged they were.

There was no way we were invading without troop movement, but anyone 25 years old remembers how easy it is for the federal government to convince themselves invasion is good.
I did not speculate about what we could have done. I merely noted that we did not do ANYthing necessary to go to war. We did not preposition ANY soldiers, armored vehicles, supplies, support infrastructure. Nothing. Zip. Zilch. Nada. An invasion did not happen because one could not have happened. Nothing to invade with. Most of the talking heads screaming about us going to war full well knew that. They were just pandering to their base, and flexing their muscles to protect their positions.

You can't "sneak" 750k troops and all their weapons, armor, and supply chain to the far side of the world without someone spotting it. It took 5 months for us to do for 1GW, even with all the requisitions of civilian air/sea lift. Woulda taken years to try to do it the way you suggest (and still get spotted...you can't hide an armored division, much less a half dozen of them).

All we did was conduct flight & refueling operations to help protect Israeli airspace (and by extension Jordanian & Saudi & potentially Egyptian airspace). So did most of the militaries in the region, btw. Several Nato countries, too.... What we did was conduct a robust air defense mission, with allies and for allies, with a single air raid against a strategic target of immense national security significance. Israel did all the grunt work, taking out Iranian aircraft, air defense systems, command & control, etc..... They paved the street for us. (again, proving their worth as an asset).
I largely agree, but disagree with your previous statement that ground invasion "could not have happened." It absolutely could have. We simply chose to stop after targeting their nuclear facilities, and accepted that they still have their enriched uranium.
LOL well, of course we could have invaded Iran rather than bombed it..... IF we had taken 6 months or so of moving an entire corps of troops & logistics into theater. Last time we did that, Congress voted in advance to to it. Then we had a flurry of Executive Orders requisitioning civilian air/sea lift assets followed by warning orders for troops to mass at embarkation points. And on and on and on....weeks of steady build up (affording ever more leverage to diplomats), to include resolutions at the UN and announcements of formal alliance participants. But NONE that never happened this go-around. Not so much as a synapse in that direction.

The prospect of war so many screamed about by definition could not have happened. It was a terrible waste of political capital by the isolationist right.

Just not a reasonable take. It's reasonable to be wary of another war in the Middle East. Saying "it could not happen" just doesn't quite ring true.
it's a FACTUAL take. An invasion of Iran cannot happen if troops and ammunition and weapons systems and logistical chains are not deployed to the Iranian border, which would require Congressional approval. So until we see that happening - a vote by Congress to fund massing of armies at the embarkation line - it is not just reasonable but obligatory to ridicule all the nutjobs running around with their hair on fire about Gulf War 3.

If Trump is so bad, why do you have to work so hard to contrive things to criticize him about? Dude just solved the problem of Iranian nukes with a single bombing mission.
Total equipment exposed over Iran: 7 B2 bombers, 14 MOPs, 24 Tomahawks.
Total personnel exposed over Iran: 14 pilots.
All the heavy lifting to degrade Iranian A2AD and C&C structures was done by proxies.

That's it. A masterful job by the mightiest nation in the world to forestall the prospect of having to deal with a nuclear armed jihadist regime. Minimal risk, maximal outcome. And yet, you squeal in outrage

This is one of the dumbest things I've ever read. Try less hard and you will get further.
I know facts and reality are painful for you, but they exist nonetheless. We cannot invade Iraq without a deployment of an expeditionary force which will take 6 months to deploy preceded by a vote in Congress to fund it. No bill has even been filed to do so. No troops or materiel has even been propositioned to do so. Ergo the deployment cannot happen. Ego the invasion cannot happen. And it is not necessary for it to happen, as the problem has been solved, at least in the intermediate term, by 24 ship-launched cruise missiles and a single bombing run involving 14 bombs launched from 7 aircraft. Total military personnel at risk over Iran = 14 pilots. We solved an existential strategic problem with the proverbial flick of a finger. Yet, you insist that we are about to go on another decades long war & nation-building exercise. (even though there is no evidence whatsoever that such is in the works and much to the contrary.)

Why do you have such a hard time with such simple realities?
historian
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Not quite the same thing since Israel is the only Jewish state and none of the so-called Christian states follow Christ very well today.
“Incline my heart to your testimonies, and not to selfish gain!”
Psalm 119:36
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
whiterock said:

Sam Lowry said:

whiterock said:

Porteroso said:

whiterock said:

Porteroso said:

whiterock said:

muddybrazos said:

Mothra said:

muddybrazos said:

Mothra said:

Realitybites said:

We saw the stick, perhaps we are going to see the carrot.

" President Donald Trump is considering a $30 billion plan to help Iran develop a civilian nuclear program as an incentive to return to full-fledged talks over a nuclear deal, CNN reported on Thursday, citing sources.

Washington and its Middle East partners have been holding secret negotiations with Tehran, even as Iran and Israel exchanged strikes earlier this month, four sources familiar with the matter told the network.

The US reportedly has not dropped its key demand that Iran agree to zero enrichment of uranium, which has been a red line for Tehran. To sweeten the deal, however, Washington is said to have floated several incentives.

These include an estimated $20-30 billion investment project in Iran's nuclear program for civilian energy purposes though the money would not come directly from the US, but rather from its Arab partners, the report claims.

Israel sought to kill Iran's Khamenei defense chief
Other incentives reportedly under consideration include easing some sanctions and allowing Iran access to approximately $6 billion in frozen funds currently held in foreign bank accounts,"

If this is accurate, this will be the most brilliant exercise in US foreign policy since Reagan spanked Khadaffi for the Pan Am bombing without getting involved in a regime change war.

But Bibi, AIPAC, and the neocons are going to have steam coming out of their ears.
Kind of like the chicken little's doom and gloom predictions of the US being "at war," and this being the end of America as we know it, I don't believe this for a second.
I dont know about end of America or the WW3 stuff but I still believe that this whole Iran situation is far from over and Israel will not quit until they do regime change there. I hope the war stuff doesnt escalate and drag us into it, though.
But your ilk was predicting all of the above.

You're kind of the boy who cried wolf.
No, not really. The majority of the MAGA base doesnt want any wars and Trump has been made aware of that so I think he is doing his best to avoid that situation. The war hawks like you and Mark Levin are pushing for all out ww3 so I hope your side ends up disappointed.
you are imputing to others what you need them to be rather than what they are, have said, etc...

No one here came remotely close to advocating an invasion of Iran. And one was never in the cards anyway. You are apparently not old enough to remember, the First Gulf War. It took us better part of FIVE MONTHS to get deployed to slice up Saddam's army in a few days. We requisitioned civilian sea lift. We requisitioned civilian airlift. Moved an entire Corps plus some (700k troops) into theater. We didn't lift a finger to do anything like that this time. Just moved some ships & aircraft around and staged some fuel & weapons to keep planes in the air to interdict Iranian incoming.

So the "war" everyone screamed about literally could not have happened. But they wanted to have one to ***** about so badly that they 100% conjured one up out of whole cloth.


That is not accurate. We could easily have ramped up, escalating were by week, for months. We could have said our goal was finding the enriched uranium and recovering it. Or that we needed nuclear specialists to actually investigate the sites we bombed, to know how damaged they were.

There was no way we were invading without troop movement, but anyone 25 years old remembers how easy it is for the federal government to convince themselves invasion is good.
I did not speculate about what we could have done. I merely noted that we did not do ANYthing necessary to go to war. We did not preposition ANY soldiers, armored vehicles, supplies, support infrastructure. Nothing. Zip. Zilch. Nada. An invasion did not happen because one could not have happened. Nothing to invade with. Most of the talking heads screaming about us going to war full well knew that. They were just pandering to their base, and flexing their muscles to protect their positions.

You can't "sneak" 750k troops and all their weapons, armor, and supply chain to the far side of the world without someone spotting it. It took 5 months for us to do for 1GW, even with all the requisitions of civilian air/sea lift. Woulda taken years to try to do it the way you suggest (and still get spotted...you can't hide an armored division, much less a half dozen of them).

All we did was conduct flight & refueling operations to help protect Israeli airspace (and by extension Jordanian & Saudi & potentially Egyptian airspace). So did most of the militaries in the region, btw. Several Nato countries, too.... What we did was conduct a robust air defense mission, with allies and for allies, with a single air raid against a strategic target of immense national security significance. Israel did all the grunt work, taking out Iranian aircraft, air defense systems, command & control, etc..... They paved the street for us. (again, proving their worth as an asset).
I largely agree, but disagree with your previous statement that ground invasion "could not have happened." It absolutely could have. We simply chose to stop after targeting their nuclear facilities, and accepted that they still have their enriched uranium.
LOL well, of course we could have invaded Iran rather than bombed it..... IF we had taken 6 months or so of moving an entire corps of troops & logistics into theater. Last time we did that, Congress voted in advance to to it. Then we had a flurry of Executive Orders requisitioning civilian air/sea lift assets followed by warning orders for troops to mass at embarkation points. And on and on and on....weeks of steady build up (affording ever more leverage to diplomats), to include resolutions at the UN and announcements of formal alliance participants. But NONE that never happened this go-around. Not so much as a synapse in that direction.

The prospect of war so many screamed about by definition could not have happened. It was a terrible waste of political capital by the isolationist right.
No one said it would happen this week. Please, for pity's sake, leave that poor straw man alone. I can't watch any more.
what we should not have to watch any more is the flimsy strawman of a pending US invasion of Iran.

Until there is a vote in Congress to fund the deployment of an expeditionary force, nothing is going to happen. But if you want to continue attritting your own credibility, by all means please proceed.
Said the guy who's comparing Iran with Costa Rica.
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.