 |
| Silverfiddle Rant! |
Barack Obama's "deal" with Iran was a colossal stupidity eclipsed in our nation's history only by the Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld-Rice humanitarian disaster.
Iran was on the ropes economically and the Iranian people hated the regime. The nation was ripe for some destabilization and a "Persian Spring..." and then Obama and Kerry staggered into the Persian Bazaar looking for magic beans in exchange for a regime lifeline to the tune of billions of dollars.
Yes, it was Iran's money, but the cash infusion breathed new life into Iran's global terror network, and Obama-Kerry demanded no concessions from Iran on halting their global terror enterprise. On top of all this, Obama shut down a US operation against Hezbollah's global drug trafficking and money laundering network.
Here is a concise summary making the case Iran has been at war with us for four decades. Please read this short article and tell us what you think.
Nuke Deal or Not, Iran Has Already Declared War on Us
What say you?
RN,
ReplyDeleteQuit declaring as truth that which is not truth.
1. Iran was complying with the terms of the agreement
According to what I read, we don't know that because the IAEA inspectors haven't had full access.
Besides, the agreement front-loaded all the benefits for Iran and kicked the can down the road. Dangerous, IMO. See OBAMA 2015: Iran nuclear deal only delays inevitable…leaves problem for future presidents.
2. As for has PROVEN HE will stop at nothing to insure his own reelection, Trump's ordering the killing of Soleimani does anything but guarantee Trump's re-election as he campaigned on reducing our involvement in the Middle East.
President Trump will address the nation today. Let's hear what he has to say.
ReplyDeleteFrom the Persian perspective, last nights strikes were likely not the actual, promised retribution. Going back through Iran’s timeline, when they’ve been dealt a setback, there is usually a longer stretch of time before the actual retributory response occurs.....and often not against the original perpetrator.
ReplyDeleteI would be wary, were I one of our FVEY partners right now. It would have been ridiculously easy to target our force concentrations, but they were purposefully avoided. This event is Iran’s version of smoke and mirrors.
CI,
DeleteThe evidence I see suggests Iran is overextended and facing opposition from the locals where they are wielding influence. I did not know until yesterday about Iraqis attacking their consulates in Southern Iraq. Our press does a horrible job of reporting facts and incidents and providing agenda-free context.
I do not want to go to war with Iran. I want us and our allies to play it smart for once and use smart containment, info ops, and yes, propaganda to counter the Iranian terror threat.
Having said that, do you see the Iranian regime as overextended and facing opposition in nations they are meddling in as well as in their own nation of Iran?
I definitely want to respond to you when I have more time. As you might suspect, work is bananas right now. But overtime pay rocks. Be back when I can.
DeleteHUA. Rock on
DeleteWithout getting into the weeds too much, I would disagree that Iran is overextended, as least as it is in regard to support for proxy forces, with the exception of Yemen. IRGC support to the Huthi forces, especially in the area of UAV technology and resourcing......has been vast. In Iraq, Syria and Lebanon however, a combination of semi-self reliant proxies and front companies, have allowed the IRGC to provide vast technical and material support at a lower cost, as some of these proxies (as in Iraq) are also funded and equipped by a national government, or in Lebanon......where similar circumstances are the case.
DeleteI can’t speak as much for the conventional forces or other mainstream economic activities, as they aren’t in my field.
I’d also add that we haven’t seen any local retaliation (yet) for Muhandis (Deputy PMC Chairman, but the real driver behind the Shi’a Militia Groups in Iraq, and the sponsor of the rash of rocket attacks against Coalition locations this year.
DeleteI expect that response any time now.
They may try and divide us by attacking European targets and blaming it on us. But for the most part Europe has been perfectly ok with Muslims slicing and dicing their citizenry..
ReplyDeleteIn fact, they are even welcoming more in order for the native born to become extinct. Pick your poison.
Q: What would be better than our European "allies?"
DeleteA: No allies at all
The agreement also allows Iran to spin up new, much more efficient centrifuges after 10 years.
ReplyDeleteLes: Do you deny Iran is running proxy militaries across the levant?
SF, per Armscontrol.org:
ReplyDeleteAfter ten years, Iran will be able to begin using advanced machines for enrichment. However, the total enrichment capacity will not increase between years 11–13. This means that the enrichment capacity will remain equal to 5,060 IR-1s. For any advanced machines that Iran introduces, it must remove the equivalent enrichment capacity in IR-1s. For instance, if the IR-6 is seven times more efficient than the IR-1, Iran must remove seven IR-1s for every IR-6 that it begins operating. This means that the time it would take Iran to amass enough fissile material for a bomb remains over 12 months through year 13.
In years 14–15, Iran will be able to increase its separative work units “SWU” capacity, but breakout time will still be longer than the current estimate of 2–3 months, in part because of the 300 kilogram limit on LEU. SWU is the measurement of the efficiency of centrifuges.
The agreement did absolutely nothing to rein in Iran's terror proxy archipelago.
ReplyDelete@Silverfuddle - I do not. Nor am I highly concerned about the Levant. Neither I, nor any family lives or works there. In short the west is most responsible for the reality we've orchestrated.
ReplyDeleteRelative to Iran, studying history of the ME w/o western bias is the ONLY way the west will ever find a way to resolve the problems existing in our current reality. Frankly, I do not believe cons today or the MIC understand or care to resolve problems.
Continuation of what is happening now will continue until... you fill in the blank Silverfiddle.
@AOW - I've seen reports you refer to. I've also seen reports that debunk them. We shall continue to see things differently. You support a pathological liar for president. I DO NOT.
No it did not do that. What it did was cut the enrichment capacity by roughly 75%, enough energy for their use but not enough for bombs.
ReplyDeleteTrump blundered when he ordered the assasination of Suliemani. He should have waited until the Iranians fired missiles at our bases or some other act justifying his actions. Had he done so I would be by far less critical.
ReplyDeleteThe ME nations want us out of their region of influence. We should oblige them. Then let them fend for themselves as we cut off all aid to everyone in the ME.
Start implementing alternative strategic defense strategies in the unlikely event they "come after us". They won't.
Why does the USA govt feel the need to continually prove how great and powerful our military might is?
Thank you R.J.W.
ReplyDelete@Silverfuddle - Do not put words in my mouth. I have never, not once, defended the Iranian regime's treatment of their own people. Not once. Not ever But that isn't the issue. So, stop deflecting and lying.
ReplyDeleteSo Silverfiddle, are you saying the USA should,or should not be policemen for the entire world? Something true conservatism was opposed to for a very long time. Until Vietnam (another place we had no business in) and beyond. Cause the implication seems to be should.
ReplyDeleteRN,
ReplyDeleteTrump blundered when he ordered the assasination of Suliemani. He should have waited until the Iranians fired missiles at our bases or some other act justifying his actions.
Are you unaware of the run-up to the ordered killing of Soleimani? There were several provoking acts on the part of Iran -- including, but not limited to, the seizing of our embassy in Baghdad.
I have yet to see anything from any credible source. Trump, an DC by extension officials of his administration have little if any credibility at all. That is what results from being a known pathological liar and cheat. Both character traits Trump excels in.
ReplyDeleteTrump's blunder was when he walked out of the deal in 2018 and later re-imposed sanctions. Between 2015 and then, Iran had been in compliance and had satisfied IAEA.
ReplyDeleteHe was warned of his shoot-from-the-hip strategy then of the fallout and those predictions are now a reality.
I think we should give Iran as many nuclear weapons as they want.
ReplyDeleteOne Arleigh Burke class destroyer can deliver 56 of them via Tomahawk missile.
Les: No.
ReplyDeleteWhat I am doing is putting FACTS before us. Iran has been a war against us for 40 years.
Notice I also don't say we should go to war with them. Can you accept the facts in the link provided in this blog post?
Yes... the truth is something as significant number of Americans choose to ignore and deny
ReplyDeleteLes,
ReplyDeleteI call you by your advertised name. One more "Silverfuddle" and you're zapped. Pull you head out of your MSNBC and debate like an adult.
Rational Nation - why do conservatives overwhelming support a strong American military with global presence and strike capabilities? For looks?
ReplyDeleteYour argument seems rather inarticulate.
** STOP THIS SUBTHREAD **
ReplyDeleteGo to the bottom of the main thread and respond to the posited assertion of this blog post:
Iran has committed various acts of war against the US over the past 40 years.
Disagree?
State your case, and please be logical and on-topic. The diversionary smoke bombs are tiresome and I will delete them.
TC,
ReplyDeleteDemocrat argumentation--such as it is--is emotion-propelled nonsense and a farrago of canards and diversionary smoke bombs.
Silverfiddle - to paraphrase Trotsky, we may not be interested in the war, but the war is interested in us. From your linked articles, it's crystal clear Iran has been at war with us for over 40 years. May as well oblige them. Turn them into the world's largest glass top table. 6 hours max.
ReplyDeleteRe: Democrat arguments... is it rude to point out the Clinton Administration pointed out Iran's support for Al Qaeda in the federal indictments of Osama Bin Laden over 5 years before the September 11th attacks?
ReplyDeleteMuh bad.
TC:
ReplyDelete"the Clinton Administration pointed out Iran's support for Al Qaeda in the federal indictments of Osama Bin Laden over 5 years before the September 11th attacks"
I did not know that. Do you have a link? I believe you, but I want to see the citation.
Democrats also ignore footnotes 3, 4, and 5 of the Gatestone doc I linked to.
I do not understand the softspot so many Americans have to Iran. I suppose its a reactionary knee-jerk to anything stated by a conservative.
Donald Trump could cause a mass Christian revival on the left if he would call a public press conference and shout "Hail Satan."
I suspect by definition, of coarse Iran has committed various acts of war since at least the Carter admin.
ReplyDeleteConsidering the Reagan Doctrine and 12 years of,, uh, oh wait, that might be a smoke bomb. Let's instead talk of your "Obama and Kerry staggered into the Persian Bazaar".
... a mass Christian revival on the left if he would call a public press conference and shout "Hail Satan".
ReplyDeleteHyperbole beneath you Silverfiddle. The sad thing is I believe you know it.
https://fas.org/irp/news/1998/11/98110602_nlt.html
ReplyDelete3 years before 9/11 (correction)
RN's swipe at conservatives is facile at best, given Trump is, on most foreign policy, less conservative than Cindy Sheehan.
It is NOT.
Delete@CI - As expected. Thanks for confirming.
ReplyDeleteThe MIC and the necessity for perpetual conflict somewhere on the globe is evident. The fact you support this is also obvious. DDE forewarned the nation of the dangers of the MIC. We didn't listen and we have arrived at that point of no return.
A super powerful military to provide for our national defense is necessary. We have that. Being the world's policemen is not.
But I won't convince you nor will you convince me of your inarticulate posistion.
Have a good day.
Tell me what it is that I support?
DeleteAnd how is it inarticulate, given that I commented on one specific point? You project too much.
DeletePlease forgive my error. My comment was meant for ((Thought Criminal)), not you CI. You're comments, while I may disagree certainly aren't inarticulate. My humble appology.
DeleteNo worries.....we’ve all done that.
DeleteRN, your argument is inarticulate and appropriately skewered as such. Notice that you didn't answer my counter, that conservatives do support a strong, globally present and capable military. Answering why they do pretty much stomps mudholes in the second part of your argument, and walks it dry. Conservatives don't want to be world police. True Conservatives want to turn nations that mess with America into rubble. You gotta look a little further left towards the center and beyond to find anyone that wants to rebuild defeated enemies or cares to.
DeleteThat's all moot considering Trump represents American conservatism with about as much ideological affinity as Dog the Bounty Hunter grasps quantum physics.
...and Iran has attacked 2 US bases in Iraq with missiles. Trump's response so far... has not been to nuke Tehran. Fail.
ReplyDeleteOur problem with Iran began a long time ago —and I have to say that inept United States policy toward Iran is partly to blame for this. Sticking our noses into Iranian affairs is a nasty habit we picked up from the British Empire, which offers no surprise. What does surprise me is that our political leaders and diplomats (eggheads who graduated from the best Ivy League schools and proudly display their Rolex watches) have never learned any worthwhile lessons from their past mistakes.
ReplyDeleteI do agree with RN that Iranians aren’t stupid. They’ve been major players in global diplomacy for a few thousand years. We Americans haven’t been around that long, of course, but in our short history, the Iranians have learned who we are and how to play us. This playbook began around 1801 and we’ve been consistently amateurish ever since. Here’s what they know: (1) American voters are dim-bulbs; (2) American politicians would sell their mothers into prostitution for a few bucks; (3) America prefers to support or elect incompetent politicians: Carter, Kerry, Bush I and II, Clinton, and Obama. (4) Americans know better than to think about invading Iran —the 17th largest country in the world with vast areas of nothingness. Aside: the best thing America ever did for modern-day Iran is invade Iraq.
Where I disagree with RN is his placing all of this at the feet of DJT. Every one of our leaders since the end of World War II have contributed to our current situation.
All this aside, there is no question that Iran has been at war with the United States since 1979. They’ve never tried to hide it, and they’ve never denied it. The Iranians (like most of America’s more erstwhile enemies), have learned that the way to defeat US policy, is to wait us out. Our people, who vote for national leaders, have the memory of a gnat. Our policies shift with the wind.
I’m sure the Iranians have a playbook for America. It begins in 1801, our first encounter with the Moslem horde. In all this time, US officials have never understood Moslem culture, or how these people (regardless of their nationality) view the world. If we did understand Moslem culture, we’d realize that they will never embrace enlightened governance. There are several proofs for this, not the least of which is the number of people who migrate to America demanding our acceptance of Sharia Law. US diplomats would also realize that nothing sends tingles up the legs of Iranian diplomats more than America’s lack of commitment to a common-sense, long term foreign policy.
So now this long-term mess confronts us and the sophomores in our society want to blame DJT. Iran has had such tremendous success devising, supporting, coordinating, and employing surrogates to conduct terrorist attacks on the innocent, there is nothing we can do to change this behavior except to acknowledge that yes … we are at war with Iran. The next question must be, if this is true, what do we intend to do about it? Business as usual? Pffft.
Inept American diplomacy doesn’t work with Iran —it never has, it never will. What Iran must understand is that (a) we have no intention of invading that god-forsaken place, but (b) we are able to transform their vast deserts to shelves of glass. They should believe that we will hold Iran accountable for any of their surrogate’s attacks on our people, our allies, or our property. Going forward, the Iranians should come to the realization that living in a cave and eating chevre du jure is not a viable option.
+++
DeleteIran's strategery is exponentially more sophisticated than our Ivy League Checkers Club.
My only quibble is with your last paragraph. I disagree with nuking them. We need to structure our strategy to directly damage the regime leadership and Quds forces, also their geographically-scattered proxies.
We have the power to make it hurt to cooperate with Iran.
YUP! Piet Hein said it ALL when he wrote (in Grooks) more tn fifty ears ago:
DeleteThe universe may
Be as great as they say,
But it wouldn't be missed
If it ceased to exist!
It would not be wise to dismiss that pity little witticism as insignificant.
@ SF
DeleteI’m not one who thinks we ought to go around nuking everyone; quite the contrary. Still, what we can say about your suggestion as a matter of fact is that sanctions haven’t worked. The reason for this is that actors routinely circumvent sanctions, even including our our NATO allies. If our strategy isn’t working, for whatever reason, then we need to change our strategy.
I do believe we are at war with Iran (declared or otherwise) and what concerns me most is Iran’s ability to shut down our electrical grid. I think you would agree that such an event would devastate this country for years (not months). Under such circumstances, anarchy would show itself within mere weeks. I think that waiting for the bad guys to shoot first is irresponsible, which is why I favor preemption when there is no question that the bad guys are getting ready to do terrible things to the American people. As always, let preemption be commensurate with the threat, but let’s stop pussyfooting around with evil people.
Mustang,
DeleteAgree. I thought you were merely making the point that we could nuke them, and we should leverage that somehow, so I'm glad you clarified.
We agree that our government needs fresh thinking.
@Mustang - Let me be clear, I do not place all blame at the feet of DJT. Our inept diplomacy with Iran goes back a long time. 1953 was a banner year of ineptness.
DeleteBut I do hold DJT responsible as president for our return to the inept diplomacy of of many years.
I must note that Persian people are NOT evil. Which is why nuking Iran is not now, and never will be a viable option.
Essentially I think you, Siverfiddle, and me are not far apart here. There certainly seems to be more areas of agreement than not.
@ RN
DeleteInept diplomacy begins, I believe, when foreign policy devised or implemented has no bearing on our national security or interests. I have been asking what our “national interests” are in Afghanistan, but have never received an explanation. What, in Afghanistan, is worth the blood of a single American soldier? Simply saying that our presence in Afghanistan furthers our national interest doesn’t make it so. Spending billions of dollars “creating” a country that never existed (in thousands of years) is hardly in the interests of the American people.
A good illustration of inept policy, as you pointed out, was in the overthrow of a popular Iranian prime minister in 1953, engineered by the CIA because the Shah of Iran felt threatened by the prime minister’s popularity and his proposed anti-monarchical policies. We can see that the long term consequences of US behavior have been severe—and NOT in our national interests. Similarly, President Carter’s policies toward Iran were a disaster and the implications of this remain with us today.
So the question remains: what would you have Trump (or any president) do when the leader of the Iranian Quds Force participates in the sacking of the US Embassy in Iraq? I have no problem holding Trump accountable for his decisions. So, noting that attacking an embassy is an act of war, should our president ignore it —and by ignoring it, encourage more of the same? How would you decide?
Historical note: In 1985, Islamists kidnapped four Russian diplomats in Beirut. After one of these diplomats was killed, Russia’s Alpha Group (military counter-terrorists) tracked down a relative of one of the terrorists, dismantled his body, and sent body parts to the leader of the Islamic Liberation Organization. As barbaric as this action was, it is noteworthy to observe that no Russian diplomats or embassies have been assaulted by Islamists since 1985. As barbaric as this action was, this kind of violence is the only thing Islamists understand.
Good points Mustang. The Russians response was proportional as it applied the ole am eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth response.
DeleteAssasination of a high level official of a foreign nation on flimsy unsubstantiated justification simply bothers me. You don't terminate a person's employment on flimsy unsubstantiated innuendoes. Neither should we assassinate a foreign military office w/o convmcrete demonstrable proof of alleged activities. If you have take action and then SHOW the proof that justfied the sniffing.
The problem with Trump? He's lied so damn much his credibility is in th toilet. He's simply not believable to a majority of Americans.
I'll say this... watch and wait. If US/Iranian relations stabilize and there is no more BS I'll be the first to credit Trump for it. But I'm not holding my breath that's for certain.
RN,
DeleteRest assured! Recent past history has revealed the CIA and the US Army has political officers embedded in the Trump White House to verify his actions are correct and to blow the whistle when his decisions or behavior goes out of bounds.
I hope so Silverfiddle.
DeleteDeliberate misses for propaganda purposes. No American casualties, but Iran is claiming 80 were killed. Doesn't matter. Nuke them anyway.
ReplyDeleteWhat do you mean by "misses", they shot down their own plane.... Planes just don't "catch on fire" before they crash.
DeleteJoe,
DeleteThat is suspicious about those black boxes.
call and raze ya
DeleteSpace Force tungsten rod from God teehee
There were 176 passengers and crew aboard: 82 Iranians, 63 Canadians, 11 Ukrainian passengers and crew, 10 Swedes, four Afghans, three Germans and three Britons on board. Additionally, what appears to be the nose of an M1 Surface to Air Missile (SAM) has been identified in a debris field near the crash site.
DeleteDidn't you forget the Partridge in a Pear Tree,, FJ?
Delete];^}>
Agreed Mustang. We don't have to be the world's policeman. Being Iran's policeman will suffice. If some Hezbollah flunkie in Argentina (yes, they're there) jaywalks in Buenos Aires, nuke Tehran. Zero tolerance.
ReplyDelete@Silverfiddke - NO
ReplyDeleteGatestone Institute is a far right think tank (propaganda machine). I read neither far left articles or far right articles. Both the bias and agenda is obvious and political.
I tend to put much more stock in the analysis of those less stridently biased.
But out of respect for YOU Sikverfiddle I will read the link and get back to you.
BTW, not at full steam. Just returned from a hospital stay with shiny new stents in one coronary artery. Guess Frankie won't get his wish to see me dead just yet
Ad hominem is a logical fallacy. Evaluate the content. It is well-sourced.
ReplyDeleteIgnoring those views which have demonstrable extreme bias in policy, as well as journalism, is, in my NHO, not illogical. Quite the contrary.
ReplyDeleteI agree the article is factually written Silverfiddle. BTW, the Silverfuddle was not intended. Typing on my cell results in unintentional typos occasionally. Also, I am one of the VERY few who have had the balls to use my given name. I do not mind you use it. As you once requested I've NEVER used your given name. Nor will I ever.
ReplyDeleteThe message, which is anti Iran revolutionary guard, makes its points based on documented facts.
However, it is my belief that if our strategy is more of the same failed sanctions and rhetoric there is little hope for ever arriving at resolution of our hostilities.
BTW, I do not watch MANBC Silverfiddle. Nor do I watch their twin opposite FOX. Thank you.
@ RN: "However, it is my belief that if our strategy is more of the same failed sanctions and rhetoric there is little hope for ever arriving at resolution of our hostilities."
ReplyDeleteYes! I have been preaching that for years. Going in a smashing things up didn't work out so good in Iraq and Afghanistan.
RN: To continue... you and many others make an immediate leap to war and every rightwing talking point when all someone like me is trying to do is to get us to a place where we can all stipulate some facts.
ReplyDeleteGotta disagree SF... "Going in a smashing things up didn't work out so good in Iraq and Afghanistan."
ReplyDeleteStrongly disagree. We stopped bombing them well before we got to the point we were bombing them for asking us to stop bombing them without permission. Which is almost as much as they needed to be bombed. We could have cut the resulting humanitarian crisis in half by bombing Iraq's 40 million people down to 20 million.
No, what's messed things up are all these half-ass military efforts that leave people alive to bitch. Kill them all or don't fight.
"Lie down with dogs; get up with fleas."
ReplyDelete"Any attempt stage a profitable debate with proven madmen, persons with reprehensble views, and malevolent morons is bound to turn even a respectable discussin forum into a raving madhouse."
Disbelieve THAT at your peril.
UNLIKE the LEFTIST CREEPS of Nasty Pelousy's, Gavin Newsom's and Blll di Blasio's putrid ilk, I do NOT believe that lunatics, criminals, and other fractious, irresponsible, snotty, antisocial types should be permtted to run around loose.
WHY?
For one thing they have a disquietiing habit of dropping their pants in public and POOPING unabashedly on crowded sidewalks and busy street corners –– and that's just for starters.
What these types do to BLOGS shouldn't happen to a Pregnant Welfare Queen.
];^}>
"Lie down with dogs; get up with fleas."
ReplyDelete"Any attempt stage a profitable debate with proven madmen, persons with reprehensble views, and malevolent morons is bound to turn even a respectable discussin forum into a raving madhouse."
Disbelieve THAT at your peril.
UNLIKE the LEFTIST CREEPS of Nasty Pelousy's, Gavin Newsom's and Blll di Blasio's putrid ilk, I do NOT believe that lunatics, criminals, and other fractious, irresponsible, snotty, antisocial types should be permtted to run around loose.
WHY?
For one thing they have a disquietiing habit of dropping their pants in public and POOPING unabashedly on crowded sidewalks and busy street corners –– and that's just for starters.
What these types do to BLOGS shouldn't happen to a Pregnant Welfare Queen.
];^}>
Trump plays his cards right, and the Middle East exhales
ReplyDeleteNew York Post
by Staff
President Trump got it exactly right Wednesday morning: “Iran appears to be standing down, which is a good thing for all parties concerned and a very good thing for the world.” Trump was serious, firm — but, above all, cool. In response to Tehran’s wet-firecracker missile attacks of late Tuesday, he’s simply tossing a few more sanctions on the regime, while again expressing his hope for a new agreement that curbs Iran’s meddling. He’s already made it plain he’s not aiming at regime change, as former national security adviser John Bolton and others want. But the drone strike that took out the country’s terrorist-in-chief, Gen. Qassem Soleimani . . .
FROM THE TRUMP ORGANZAtION TO REELECT THE PRESIDENT:
ReplyDelete“As long as I am President of the United States, Iran will never be allowed to have a nuclear weapon.”
- President Donald J. Trump, January 8, 2020
When President Trump took the Oath of Office, he swore to Keep America Safe by putting AMERICA FIRST, no matter what.
This morning, he addressed the Nation regarding the swift action he took to take out Qassem Soleimani and Iran’s missile response to that last night. All is well! There were no casualties and Iran has made the smart decision to stand down.
President Trump made it clear that should Iran strike any American citizen or target, the United States will be ready to quickly and fully strike back without hesitation.
Democrats and the Fake News media are failing to understand that this isn’t about politics and this isn’t a game. The Left is attacking the President for eliminating a dangerous world leader who repeatedly threatened our Nation. It’s disgusting.
Look at just a few examples of what the 2020 Democrats had to say about the President’s actions to Keep America Safe:
Chuck Schumer: “I plan to fight him tooth and nail on this.”
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: “This is a war crime... It makes [Trump] a monster.”
Bernie Sanders: “I am proud to have opposed all of Trump’s military budgets.”
Elizabeth Warren: “Donald Trump is dangerous.”
They truly hate our country, but he doesn’t care what they think, as long as America is SAFE.
No Franco, your claim that democrats mentioned above truly hate America exists only in the minds of those who enjoy using hyperbole and ad hominem as weapons against the truth.
DeleteIn other words YOUR hate for those who stand in opposition to YOUR your positions and beliefs affects your ability to see the truth. The VAST majority of Americans who are democrats actually LOVE their country. They simply have LEGITIMATE disagreements with the current administration and reject the notion that the ends always justifies means.
@Silverfiddle - We often disagree on minutiae, but on this issue there is really little difference between us.
ReplyDeletehttps://libertasandlatte.wordpress.com/2020/01/05/iran-and-letters-of-marque-and-reprisal/
ReplyDelete"I’ve been supporting our military and intelligence efforts in Iraq since 2011, working for the same agency [no, not that Agency, but very much related], with multiple deployments to Iraq…..and nothing makes me happier in the offensive sense, than to see Qasem Soleimani and Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis [as well as others] killed with extreme prejudice. I know intimately the imminent threat that prompted the timing of this strike, and had it not been authorized, a loss of American life in a short window would have occurred that was rivaled only by 9/11. Full credit to POTUS for giving the green light, and full credit to the dedication of the teams of analysts and operators who made this happen."
Regarding cultural sites:
ReplyDeleteThe Last English Prince has read the complete Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran twice in prior years.
Constitution of Iran
Of interest regarding the current situation:
Article 141 gives ample reason why Tehran pushes back against U.S. military bases, training, and housing in an adjoining proxy.
Article 151 lets us know why the blood red flag of doom is hoisted aloft from cultural centers, known by their more common name of masajid (plural of masjid).
During time of war, the Basij are mustered from the local mosque. It is temporarily transformed into an HQ quarterdeck.
At the point there is military billeting and activity inside a mosque it ceases to be a house of worship. Based on international rules of armed conflict the designation should be changed, and active targeting sought of these sites.
Ed,
ReplyDeleteThanks for calling our attention to the above.
Trump is unpredictable. I think it is natural for anyone who doesn't trust him to be aghast whenever he brings us to the brink of war like this.
ReplyDeleteI can't think of anything about him which inspires confidence -- he lies, persistently and without relent. I don't say this merely to insult him (not that I expect it would register as such to him), but I believe some of his supporters acknowledge this habitual lying (maybe they prefer some cosy euphemism) and I'm interested in how they make themselves comfortable with his use of force. (I dare say some of his supporters do find him plausible, but I'm less interested in them.)
Also, does this remind anyone of Operation Infinite Reach? (Bill Clinton was accused of using middle-eastern missile strikes to distract from his own impeachment / sex scandle.)
Also also, has anyone checked for a correlation between election years and military strikes? (it looks like there isn't, at least up to 1998 according to James Meernik's "The Political Use of Military Force in US Foreign Policy")
Jez,
DeleteI'm not one who stands comfortably shoulder-to-shoulder with Trump supporters and all the other kinds of America hating leftists, but bottom line nobody sells neocon realpolitik better than rabid bearded crazies screaming "Death to America" for 40+ years. In short, Iran makes me comfortable with anybody smiting Iran. I wish Trump would.
Doesn't remind me of Clinton's Serbian bombing campaign because 1.) Serbia got wrecked, and 2.) extra-marital sex seems exponentially less impeachable than an attempted arms-for-subverting-American-due-process scheme. We need evidence of a crime to go after Joe Biden here, let's see what the Kafka-esque Slavs can come up with for gun money? Naaah. Nobody's distracted from impeaching Trump, least of all most of America.
The last part is rather inapplicable. I could get elected on an "Iran will wiped off the earth on my first day in office" platform, but I ain't running.
What should a president do, any president, regardless of political party, when a foreign government orchestrates or participates in the sacking of a US Embassy? I suppose there are two options. Do nothing, a la Jimmy Carter in 1979 —which encourages more of the same kind of behavior, or punish the actors in an extreme demonstration that such behavior will not be tolerated no matter where in the world it occurs? An attack on an embassy is an attack on the country that owns it; it is, factually, an act of war, so I am confused why so many people are now claiming that Trump is leading us to war. He isn’t —but the Iranians are. People need to get a grip on reality —or better yet, refrain from showing everyone how ignorant they are.
DeleteMustang,
DeleteAn attack on an embassy is an attack on the country that owns it; it is, factually, an act of war, so I am confused why so many people are now claiming that Trump is leading us to war. He isn’t —but the Iranians are.
HEAR, HEAR!
My question is, why should an intelligent person like you trust Trump's claims of a planned embassy attack?
DeleteThis is the problem with voting in an incorrigible liar as commander in chief. I wish you better luck this time round!
@ jez:
Delete"Iran hits UK/Japan tankers
Trump ignores it
Iran shoots down US drone
Trump calls off attack
Saudi oil fields hit
Trump ignores it
Iran hits Americans in Iraq
Trump plans small hit
Iran attacks Embassy
Trump hits Soleimani to prevent further escalation
Left: TRUMP WANTS WAR!"
When ones opinions are so expansive they become meaningless or so focused that context is not considered, they cease to be opinions but instead, ideology reinforced by pathology.
What Trump has said has been re-enforced by The Joint Chiefs of Staff and one of our own commenters who is still actively involved in foreign security concerns and is certainly no fan of Trump.
Show me a politician who isn’t an inveterate liar. Trump was elected precisely because he isn’t a politician. I’m sure he still lies, though ... who among us doesn’t? I am always amazed how readily leftists criticize someone who doesn’t share their point of view, while overwhelming supporting the planet’s worst liars and thieves who do share their world view. Truly, if clairvoyance enables leftists to judge another man’s heart, then how is it possible for them to support the likes of Hillary Clinton or Jeremy Corbin?
DeleteJez,
DeleteRecent history has revealed the CIA and the US Army have political officers embedded in the Trump White House to verify his actions are correct and to blow the whistle when his decisions or behavior goes out of bounds.
Rest assured, if the President is lying about any of this, we'd all hear about it.
Embedded by who? Come on SF, you’ve always been better that that.
DeleteCould be the RNC for all I know...
DeleteMakes about as much sense I guess.
DeleteEntrenched Establishmentarians don't their status quo disrupted, damn the elections.
Delete@mustang: It's not the same. I do not deny or excuse Clinton's or Corbyn's lies (actually, I think I'm safe claiming that Clinton lies a lot more than Corbyn, if only because Corbyn is frustratingly mute so much of the time!), but Trump's lies belong in a different category. Clinton lies fluently and prolifically, but I get a sense that she understands that truth exists, and would prefer to tell it if she could. Whereas for Trump, lying is not even an inconvenience. He's like a superconductor for falsehood. He lies even when there is little or no benefit in doing so. It's like it's his hobby.
Delete@Silverfiddle: Yes, I think we will too; but not immediately.
Over at Facebook -- and accurate:
ReplyDelete"Iran hits UK/Japan tankers
Trump ignores it
Iran shoots down US drone
Trump calls off attack
Saudi oil fields hit
Trump ignores it
Iran hits Americans in Iraq
Trump plans small hit
Iran attacks Embassy
Trump hits Soleimani to prevent further escalation
Left: TRUMP WANTS WAR!"
So unpredictable and unstable!
DeleteExcellent news: Congress to vote on limiting DJT's war making capabilities.
ReplyDeleteKudo to one Rand Paul for his steadfast position that the congress, not the president is given that authority in our Constitution.
Personally I believe the misguided War Powers Act should be vacated. Or at least SERVERLY limited.
lol! Non-binding virtue signaling by the House.
DeletePerhaps. But if the power to declare and make war against another nation, as specified in OUR CONSTITUTION has n ok teeth then we might as well throw the Constitution in the waste basket. Oh wait, Trump has been trying to get that done for three years now.
DeleteRepeal the War Powers Act and return the decision to the framework specified in the Constitution by our founding fathers.
Thank you.
What specific actions has President Trump taken that attempts to throw the constitution in the waste basket?
DeletePresidential war powers have always been limited by the Constitution. How has the House of Representatives changed or further limited this authority? And, if the House imposed further limitations, on the president's constitutional authority, wouldn't this be an "unconstitutional" act?
DeleteIf I'm mistaken The War Powers Act grants a presdent the power to initiate war w/o a congressional declaration of war. There are some restraints yes. But my view is repeal and return to congress the sole power to initiate war. Period.
DeleteIf not repeal the WPA at least severely limit the duration and scope until a formal congressional declaration of war is declared.
I'm with RP on this one.
The democrats have to keep trying to remain relevant and that means always attacking trump.
DeleteMost liberals get their opinions from MSDNC or CNN and spout this as fact, I believe the above is a good example and had his idol not given billions to Iran to expand their nuclear program their might have been a regime change.
The war powers act provides that the president can send the U.S. Armed Forces into action abroad only by declaration of war by Congress. As madam pelosi has shown, the democrat controlled house can not make a decision that is best for the country in any timely manner but can try to destroy trump and take down the country with urgency .
As I've been thinking all along was a strong possibility....
ReplyDeleteUkrainian jet crash that killed 176: Evidence suggests plane shot by Iranian missiles.
Excerpt:
U.S. intelligence officials have evidence that suggests the Ukraine International Airlines jetliner that crashed in Iran on Wednesday, killing 176 people, was downed by an Iranian missile, multiple officials told NBC News....
From CBS News:
ReplyDeleteU.S. intelligence picked up signals of a radar being turned on, sources told CBS News. U.S. satellites also detected two surface-to-air missile launches, which happened shortly before the plane exploded, CBS News was told.
Federal officials were briefed on the intelligence Thursday, CBS News transportation Kris Van Cleave reports. A source who was in the briefing said it appears missile components were found near the crash site.
Thanks for the confirmation, AoW!
Delete...because the Left is going to blame Trump for it, irregardless.
DeleteIrregardless is a double negative. Correct word? Regardless.
DeleteYour welcome Thersites.
Nope. Regardless is its synonym. There's nothing wrong with using Nonstandard words or spellings. Irregardless emphasizes regardless.
DeleteOkay.. Whatever you say genius.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThere should be a comma between "say" and "genius" in your sentence above.
ReplyDeleteLOL
You're RIGHT! Thank you so much.
Delete