President Donald Trump
I assume it's still acceptable to have a Trump thread in a Politics forum?
So this is an obvious lie - basically aimed at
It still informs their worldview and it should probably inform ours more as well. We talk up democracy but when we had a chance to welcome a potential friendly democratic nation we imposed a brutal dictator on them.
Dismissing it is like dismissing the relevance of WW2 for us because we weren't alive a the time. Pahlevi was a monster and he was our doing and our friend.
Miss the point much, chez? I simply was noting that Iran becoming a functional democracy any time soon seem improbable because Iran doesn't have a legacy of durable democratic institutions to fall back on. I wasn't stanning for U.S./British foreign policy in the 1950s or for Pahlevi.
Hitler built his society in the image of the USA
I haven't seen Victor say anything inconsistent with communism. And I don't have a problem allowing communists to post in this forum. So I don't have a problem with Victor posting.
The problem is the Right thinks the Progressives are The Left, and the Progressives think they're The Left. But on the global scale Progressives are more like Reps who voted for Trump but don't sport all the MAGA gear and the Dems are like MAGA.
Xi said they're hoping to become a fully socialist country by the party's 100 year anniversary in 2050. What he meant is then the people would have direct control over the country. That's not something what we call Western Democracies not only dont have but can't ever have under our constitutions.
And then look at all the human rights violations China committed to get there. They view that as necessary to achieve the socialist ideal. Same applies to the likes of Stalin and Lenin and all the stuff they did.
Point with all that being it's not difficult to grasp why the actual Left would view the biggest proponent of anti-democrcy, the US, along with its allies as evil or whatever. Same goes with people enabling it as opposed to calling for its end. And then dismiss whatever is done at their behest as necessary means to their end goal.
“The Dems are globally right-wing” is a dumb myth that should die. This isn’t 1997 anymore.
Cuba is next in line. I wouldn't be surprised if it happens within the next couple of months.
Then probably Columbia. It's not going to end since none of the guardrails are being enforced.
Iraq and Iran are two different countries. It's not been obvious to anybody that is literate and willing to read experts on the topic that the U.S. ability to defeat Iran militarily rests on "level of commitment" unless by that you mean drop a nuke on them.
Where do you get this nonsense? I mean, it's either out of your own ass or from ZBS propaganda so which one?
I think there would be a sliver of an argument here if this was 2003 but the US had a massive military boost (mostly through a natural tech revolution) during the Obama years. Circa 2010-2015 for the military was insane. Im not sure what experts your reading or if your interpreting regime change or even collapse but like Roc said, it really does come down to how hard the US wants to take this - with none of this even including NATO forces.
But Iran can't decimate the US economy like you said. Thats just not how things work. They can spook oil prices but a war like this could strengthen the US economy, just like other wars have.
I think there would be a sliver of an argument here if this was 2003 but the US had a massive military boost (mostly through a natural tech revolution) during the Obama years. Circa 2010-2015 for the military was insane. Im not sure what experts your reading or if your interpreting regime change or even collapse but like Roc said, it really does come down to how hard the U
On TV yesterday, Lindsey Graham admitted the GOP has no plan w/ Iran. Maybe it's similar to Trump's health care plan, where there are concepts of a plan.
But from all the sources I've read to this point, he thinks he can do to Iran what he did to Venezuela and just install someone who is more US/Israel friendly. However, nobody that I've read or listened to has ever thought regime change could happen in Iran w/o years (some say even decades) of boots on the ground in a full scale war.
Trump already said this past summer that he completely obliterated Iran's nuclear program... so what they think they are doing, nobody seems to fully know right now. And all guesses so far are, neither does Trump.
I think there would be a sliver of an argument here if this was 2003 but the US had a massive military boost (mostly through a natural tech revolution) during the Obama years. Circa 2010-2015 for the military was insane. Im not sure what experts your reading or if your interpreting regime change or even collapse but like Roc said, it really does come down to how hard the U
but like Roc said, it really does come down to how hard the US wants to take this
well this went from a 4 day air war, to a 4 week air war, to possible boots on the ground.
during the Obama years. Circa 2010-2015 for the military was insane.
during this time Russia and Iran were creating insane missiles that have never been imagined before. the US isnt even close to this stuff.
in other words, the USA needs to find a way to destroy the Iranian production and stockpiles of missiles. they havent shown any ability to do so yet. and I think probably to achieve that would incur a lot of casualties.
Im going to disagree with you there. The usa has the toys and the know how in finding that way. Unfortunately we just wont know that until after the death toll.
But I will agree that there will be no mission accomplished and no regime change and this is all last for years with probably 100k plus deaths including lots of American deaths.
Im going to disagree with you there. The usa has the toys and the know how in finding that way. Unfortunately we just wont know that until after the death toll.
But I will agree that there will be no mission accomplished and no regime change and this is all last for years with probably 100k plus deaths including lots of American deaths.
Not really sure what you mean there.
As usual when Iran is in a bad mood, oil and gas prices are soaring, putting pressure on Western economies, because of fears about the Strait of Hormuz. You do wonder what the US Navy, with a budget bigger than many countries, is actually for if it can't guarantee and enforce freedom of navigation through the Strait of Hormuz. I appreciate that the President has made destructio
Isn't it similar to the Houthis? Iran just needs to graze a tanker or two and that spooks the insurance companies enough to stop all traffic? I guess it's a little different as there is no alternate route but there isn't much anyone can do.
I think there would be a sliver of an argument here if this was 2003 but the US had a massive military boost (mostly through a natural tech revolution) during the Obama years. Circa 2010-2015 for the military was insane. Im not sure what experts your reading or if your interpreting regime change or even collapse but like Roc said, it really does come down to how hard the U
They've done massive war simulations of war with Iran. Iran wins. What part of that don't you understand? I mean war games costing 100s of millions of dollars in which the U.S. was given artificial advantages.
Here is the AI overview:
In the 2002 Millennium Challenge war game, retired Marine Lt. Gen. Paul Van Riper, leading a simulated Iranian force ("Red Team"), defeated the U.S. military ("Blue Team") by using unconventional tactics, such as motorcycle couriers and small boat swarms, to sink 19 ships within days. The simulation showed that low-tech, asymmetric strategies could overcome high-tech U.S. forces.
The National Interest
The National Interest
+4
Key Details of the Simulation (Millennium Challenge 2002):
The Scenario: A $250 million simulation designed to test U.S. military technology and doctrine against a Middle Eastern adversary (Iran).
The Strategy: Instead of fighting conventionally, Van Riper utilized non-electronic communication (motorcycle messengers), swarmed ships with small boats, and exploited gaps in satellite coverage.
The Outcome: The Red Team ("Iran") crippled the Blue Team's fleet, including an aircraft carrier, cruisers, and amphibious ships.
The Aftermath: The simulation was "reset" by planners to ensure a U.S. victory, a decision criticized by Van Riper, who noted that the "rigged" scenario prevented valuable lessons from being learned.
If you didn't know about this then you should ask yourself why you have this smug confidence in your outlook. We cannot invade Iran with ground troops and win. That is a physical impossibility. And without that, you cannot sustain a regime change.
What fascinates me about you (and Rococo) is that you don't know anything, you know you don't know anything, yet you have this inexhaustible sense of wisdom that motivates you to spit out all this nonsense propaganda which you obviously cannot recognize as propaganda. How do they do it? How do they turn perfectly intelligent people into oblivious propaganda spouts? I just can't figure it out.
Miss the point much, chez? I simply was noting that Iran becoming a functional democracy any time soon seem improbable because Iran doesn't have a legacy of durable democratic institutions to fall back on. I wasn't stanning for U.S./British foreign policy in the 1950s or for Pahlevi.
My bad. You can be hard top understand sometimes. I wasn't suggesting you were stanning fort anything.
I agree with your conclusion but it would really help if there were democratic countries the Iranian population were keen to emulate and confident they could then rely on as friends. That might be worth them fighting for.
They've done massive war simulations of war with Iran. Iran wins. What part of that don't you understand? I mean war games costing 100s of millions of dollars in which the U.S. was given artificial advantages.Here is the AI overview:
This is just too much for me, Deuces.
Your advanced US military wisdom such as your belief of droned commercial airliners flying into the WTC with such explosive technology causing avalanches of molten steel and the well timed detonation of building 7 will magically be at the mercy of a 25-year-old war game with "unconventional tactics" such as motorcycle couriers and small boats that sank 19 ships to specifically test weaknesses might be one of the worst and most unconvincing attempt to argue a specific ideological position that I have ever read on this forum. You really should stick to building 7 or find a weaker audience.
But I do hope that Trump ether forgets that he started this war or decides that he wants to use the military to carve his face into Mt Rushmore instead. Because a lot of people are going to die.
But I do hope that Trump ether forgets that he started this war or decides that he wants to use the military to carve his face into Mt Rushmore instead. Because a lot of people are going to die.
I think this will wind down sooner than later. There's zero chance China will allow them to shut down the Straight since they're highly reliant on Gulf oil. And it's literally economic suicide for the Iranians since their economy is completely dependant on that oil revenue.
As to the drone swarm, sure that's an issue but only short-term. At the end of the day you still need a protected base to operate from, which in the modern world means you control the sky above you, which they lost.
Cuba is next in line. I wouldn't be surprised if it happens within the next couple of months.
Then probably Columbia. It's not going to end since none of the guardrails are being enforced.
It's a lot like the Cold War with the USSR where countries were forced to pick a side or forced to a side, but this time it's China.
