US bases in Iraq under missile attack

[achooloco 1065]

28 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

I’m gonna give you the benefit of the doubt saying this is hyperbole. Otherwise congrats, it might be the dumbest take on the internet. 

Yeah... but tomorrow you’ll still be kind of a piece of shit for supporting trump. So he has that going for him, which is nice.

[Goredho 17341]

Anyone who thinks they know how this has played out three days later is an idiot.  If this ineffectual retaliation by Iran is where it ends, then the President’s risky decision paid off.  Let’s see if he can shut the fuck up and take the win (pussy).

We won’t really know the effects of this decision for another 12 months, perhaps longer.

[atomheartbevo 89396]

9 minutes ago, Goredho said:

Anyone who thinks they know how this has played out three days later is an idiot.  If this ineffectual retaliation by Iran is where it ends, then the President’s risky decision paid off.  Let’s see if he can shut the fuck up and take the win (pussy).

We won’t really know the effects of this decision for another 12 months, perhaps longer.

His staff is doing a fantastic job of hiding his phone this morning (And kudos to them for last night).

[Macanudo 12925]

12 minutes ago, Goredho said:

Anyone who thinks they know how this has played out three days later is an idiot.  If this ineffectual retaliation by Iran is where it ends, then the President’s risky decision paid off.  Let’s see if he can shut the fuck up and take the win (pussy).

We won’t really know the effects of this decision for another 12 months, perhaps longer.

12 months?  In this part of the world we wont know for decades.  And that could mean anything up to 100 decades.

[atomheartbevo 89396]

From CNN, sounds like the Murdochs handed down the talking points this morning.

Quote

After three hours of "Fox & Friends" segments about Iran's missile strikes at Iraqi bases housing US troops, co-host Ainsley Earhardt summed up the show's main message.

"All the experts are saying they don't think we need to respond now because it looks like they" -- the Iranians -- "are shaking in their boots, they're terrifed of us," she said.

Indeed, many of the military veterans and other guests on President Trump's favorite morning TV show said the overnight strikes were merely a face-saving move on Iran's part, not a severe escalation in hostilities. America "has superior strength," one guest said. Trump has "restored US effective deterrence in the region," another said.

 

[NowThis 931]

2 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

From CNN, sounds like the Murdochs handed down the talking points this morning.

 

yes, 100% total air superiority makes the reality.

[wildcat09 29213]

10 minutes ago, Goredho said:

Anyone who thinks they know how this has played out three days later is an idiot.  If this ineffectual retaliation by Iran is where it ends, then the President’s risky decision paid off.  Let’s see if he can shut the fuck up and take the win (pussy).

We won’t really know the effects of this decision for another 12 months, perhaps longer.

Iran's not done retaliating, but depending on how things go now the rest of their revenge may take a vastly different (and more tolerable) form and it may not happen for awhile.

My guess for now is that Pompeo and Esper want a war but know we don't have the necessary forces in the region, so they'll encourage Trump to take the offramp Iran is giving him. Trump doesn't have a huge war boner (he just has a constant need to look tough) so might take it. But Pompeo will keep pushing further escalatory action, forcing Iran to respond and goad Trump into supporting a war in a situation where doing so is the only way he can look tough.

At this point our best hope is that Iran understands all of this and refuses to engage with further escalation in a hope to avoid further hostilities before the election. If Trump is reelected, Pompeo will absolutely get his war.

 

[Goredho 17341]

4 minutes ago, Macanudo said:

12 months?  In this part of the world we wont know for decades.  And that could mean anything up to 100 decades.

Well, we will at least know of proximal effects if not everything that they will lead to.

[WhatTheBuck 28703]

Trump is addressing the public this afternoon. I think I'll probably sit this one out. I expect it will be a slow, sleepy, sniffly reading of someone else's prepared statement. Then at his next rally he'll use his own words and brag about the killing of Soleimani, repeating the lie that he was an imminent threat, then he'll gloat about Iran's weak and ineffective response. 

[Biff Tannen 45491]

6 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Trump is addressing the public this afternoon. I think I'll probably sit this one out. I expect it will be a slow, sleepy, sniffly reading of someone else's prepared statement. Then at his next rally he'll use his own words and brag about the killing of Soleimani, repeating the lie that he was an imminent threat, then he'll gloat about Iran's weak and ineffective response. 

I sit out every time he tries to speak.  No one needs to be subjected to that nonsense.

[Cheeseweasel 26437]

27 minutes ago, Goredho said:

Anyone who thinks they know how this has played out three days later is an idiot.  If this ineffectual retaliation by Iran is where it ends, then the President’s risky decision paid off.  Let’s see if he can shut the fuck up and take the win (pussy).

We won’t really know the effects of this decision for another 12 months, perhaps longer.

Sorry, we live in a world where EVERYONE is an expert on EVERYTHING and therefore we need to rule immediately. Either this is the greatest presidential decision ever or WWIII. There is no middle ground. 

[Goredho 17341]

2 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Iran's not done retaliating, but depending on how things go now the rest of their revenge may take a vastly different (and more tolerable) form and it may not happen for awhile.

My guess for now is that Pompeo and Esper want a war but know we don't have the necessary forces in the region, so they'll encourage Trump to take the offramp Iran is giving him. Trump doesn't have a huge war boner (he just has a constant need to look tough) so might take it. But Pompeo will keep pushing further escalatory action, forcing Iran to respond and goad Trump into supporting a war in a situation where doing so is the only way he can look tough.

At this point our best hope is that Iran understands all of this and refuses to engage with further escalation in a hope to avoid further hostilities before the election. If Trump is reelected, Pompeo will absolutely get his war.

 

Exactly.  Hell, they are not done retaliating for stuxnet.  Before anyone wants to proclaim victory in the middle east, I think important to remember that it is in Iran's best interest to:

1. Avoid a full-on war with the US that would result in their government being destroyed
2. Make some visible but relatively benign show of force that allows them to say they did something
3. Focus the majority of their efforts on less overt attacks that allows them to damage the US while avoiding annihilation

They carried out #2 and said they are good with that.  That shows they have an understanding of #1.  What remains to be seen is whether #3 comes to pass.  I think basic human nature dictates it will.

[Cheeseweasel 26437]

5 minutes ago, Goredho said:

Before anyone wants to proclaim victory in the middle east,

[lemonlime 5503]

8 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

Sorry, we live in a world where EVERYONE is an expert on EVERYTHING and therefore we need to rule immediately. Either this is the greatest presidential decision ever or WWIII. There is no middle ground. 

Haha at the idea of trump making a "presidential decision."  He is pure narcissistic id.  He hasn't made any sort of presidential decision ever.  He just tweets crap and tells people to do things based on his ego.  There's no actual decision making involved.

It's not likely, but maybe things will work out for the best.  But it's certainly not due to any plan, expertise, or presidential decision making.  It will be due to happenstance and whether, god help us, Iran acts with more forethought than our own government.

[gsoda3 3234]

if you look at trump's MO he's extreme bluster and brashness in his demands.  then when it comes time to make a deal he walks back on it a bit, makes a not terrible deal, and declares it a victory.  i think that's what's going to happen here too.  we're about to find out in this presser.  

[wildcat09 29213]

12 minutes ago, Goredho said:

Exactly.  Hell, they are not done retaliating for stuxnet.  Before anyone wants to proclaim victory in the middle east, I think important to remember that it is in Iran's best interest to:

1. Avoid a full-on war with the US that would result in their government being destroyed
2. Make some visible but relatively benign show of force that allows them to say they did something
3. Focus the majority of their efforts on less overt attacks that allows them to damage the US while avoiding annihilation

They carried out #2 and said they are good with that.  That shows they have an understanding of #1.  What remains to be seen is whether #3 comes to pass.  I think basic human nature dictates it will.

We're not even talking about their nuke program either. It will be interesting to see how quickly they move to get a bomb. Right now, even though they're no longer complying with most of the JCPOA's restrictions, they also haven't really taken any significant steps to reducing their breakout time. Literally the entirety of the last 30 years of American foreign policy is a big signal to anyone we might consider an enemy that they need to get a bomb, so you've got to expect that they'll accelerate their program this year in case Trump gets reelected. But that will lead to more pressure on Trump from the pro-war factions in our own government, as well as the Saudis and Israelis, to force regime change ASAP.

Maybe we get lucky and the Iranians don't accelerate their program, gambling on Trump losing reelection. If so, they've got more faith in the American people right now than I do.

[WhatTheBuck 28703]

13 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

I sit out every time he tries to speak.  No one needs to be subjected to that nonsense.

I pick and choose. I figure sometimes I have to hear what he has to say in real time even though the sound of his voice is like nails on a chalkboard. It doesn't matter if it's sleepy & sniffly Trump reading from the teleprompter or raving & drooling Trump ranting off script. 

[tantric superman 4667]

6 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Maybe we get lucky and the Iranians don't accelerate their program, gambling on Trump losing reelection. If so, they've got more faith in the American people right now than I do.

The Dem candidates are terrible.  Trump should win convincingly.

[WhatTheBuck 28703]

8 minutes ago, gsoda3 said:

if you look at trump's MO he's extreme bluster and brashness in his demands.  then when it comes time to make a deal he walks back on it a bit, makes a not terrible deal, and declares it a victory.  i think that's what's going to happen here too.  we're about to find out in this presser.  

Like how he got Kim Jong Un to give up his nuclear program? Remember when he told us all we could sleep peacefully? Is that the sort of "not terrible deal" you're talking about?

[gsoda3 3234]

2 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Like how he got Kim Jong Un to give up his nuclear program? Remember when he told us all we could sleep peacefully? Is that the sort of "not terrible deal" you're talking about?

no that was a complete failure.  if you can even call it that (did he even have a plan beyond he'll like me as a person..?)

 

 

[atomheartbevo 89396]

32 minutes ago, Goredho said:

Exactly.  Hell, they are not done retaliating for stuxnet.  Before anyone wants to proclaim victory in the middle east, I think important to remember that it is in Iran's best interest to:

1. Avoid a full-on war with the US that would result in their government being destroyed
2. Make some visible but relatively benign show of force that allows them to say they did something
3. Focus the majority of their efforts on less overt attacks that allows them to damage the US while avoiding annihilation

They carried out #2 and said they are good with that.  That shows they have an understanding of #1.  What remains to be seen is whether #3 comes to pass.  I think basic human nature dictates it will.

Right now, Iran’s response is overshadowed by them possibly shooting down a civilian airliner.  They have to get their foot off their dick before they can proceed to #3.   

[Anastasis 23390]

The less he says right now the better.  Shut off the mic and call it a day. 

[yoladu 4066]

ugh

[yoladu 4066]

listening on my phone... his breathing sounds labored, like he can't complete even a short sentence without taking a breath.

Edited January 8, 2020 by yoladu

[Anastasis 23390]

he's having trouble with words on the teleprompter. 

[Pato del Muerto 52336]

39 minutes ago, Goredho said:

Exactly.  Hell, they are not done retaliating for stuxnet.  Before anyone wants to proclaim victory in the middle east, I think important to remember that it is in Iran's best interest to:

1. Avoid a full-on war with the US that would result in their government being destroyed
2. Make some visible but relatively benign show of force that allows them to say they did something
3. Focus the majority of their efforts on less overt attacks that allows them to damage the US while avoiding annihilation

They carried out #2 and said they are good with that.  That shows they have an understanding of #1.  What remains to be seen is whether #3 comes to pass.  I think basic human nature dictates it will.

I don’t know who tells trump what and whether he listens, but he will take 1 of two lessons from this and neither are good. That he can respond militarily to their response and perpetuate this into something larger, or that he can get away with any action to anyone in the future because nobody will really challenge the US military. 

[Pasken 1309]

2 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

he's having trouble with words on the teleprompter. 

Giving a speech from a prompter is a skill you have to practice. No one is naturally perfect at it. Trump is just probably lazy and doesn't practice it as much as other public figures. 

[gsoda3 3234]

and there we have it.  

 

iran will never have a nuclear weapon.  we won't let it happen.  (reiterated several times)

pushed US allies to walk away from previous iranian agreement.

will let NATO lead the pursuit of a NEW agreement with iran.  

we have advanced weapons at our disposal but we don't want to use them.   

 

 

[gsoda3 3234]

4 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

he's having trouble with words on the teleprompter. 

he has trouble with words, either off the teleprompter or extemporaneously he's always had trouble with pronunciation.   

[WhatTheBuck 28703]

10 minutes ago, gsoda3 said:

no that was a complete failure.  if you can even call it that (did he even have a plan beyond he'll like me as a person..?

What deal has he made, not terrible or otherwise?

[gsoda3 3234]

1 minute ago, WhatTheBuck said:

What deal has he made, not terrible or otherwise?

you really can't think of any deals he's made?  

[Anastasis 23390]

LOL.  Dow up nearly 200.  600pt swing since low in the futures last night. 

[wildcat09 29213]

5 minutes ago, gsoda3 said:

and there we have it.  

 

iran will never have a nuclear weapon.  we won't let it happen.  (reiterated several times)

pushed US allies to walk away from previous iranian agreement.

will let NATO lead the pursuit of a NEW agreement with iran.  

we have advanced weapons at our disposal but we don't want to use them.   

 

 

It'd be pretty on brand if this all ends with us giving Iran $15 billion merely to come back into compliance with the JCPOA.

[Guest Lobo]

3 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

LOL.  Dow up nearly 200.  600pt swing since low in the futures last night. 

So an artificially manipulated stock index is leading indicator for Geo political security around the world?   Should we go back and look at what the broader markets were doing in the early 1940s?

[Junior Miller 1502]

2 hours ago, EMAWesome said:

Not only did he not walk through any of them, at least in some of the situations he had John Bolton whispering in his ear and he still didn't walk through any of them.

What a complete dumbass you are. Can't even troll properly. How hard is it to log out and log in another account? Fucking trumpkins are the dumbest supporters of evil the Earth has ever seen. 

[Anastasis 23390]

2 minutes ago, Lobo said:

So an artificially manipulated stock index is leading indicator for Geo political security around the world?   Should we go back and look at what the broader markets were doing in the early 1940s?

Yes.  That is exactly what "LOL" means. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

So about that trial in the Senate

[gsoda3 3234]

6 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

It'd be pretty on brand if this all ends with us giving Iran $15 billion merely to come back into compliance with the JCPOA.

i'm guessing it'll look something like that, but with other NATO members paying in also.  that's what'll be sold as the "not terrible" part-  all out war or giving more money to assure "peace".  move the goalposts enough and you too can take credit for creating peace in the middle east.  

[wildcat09 29213]

Just now, gsoda3 said:

i'm guessing it'll look something like that, but with other NATO members paying in also.  that's what'll be sold as the "not terrible" part-  all out war or giving more money to assure "peace".  move the goalposts enough and you too can take credit for creating peace in the middle east.  

I'd gladly take it at this point, but the gloating from Trumpers who would suddenly support giving Iran at a minimum 10x more money than they received under the original JCPOA (which was simply us returning their money with interest) would be nauseating. 

[Junior Miller 1502]

The only thing that matters here is this is 100 percent only an issue with Iran right now because Trump made it an issue. There was zero evidence Iran was pursuing nuclear weapons any more than they are now (most likely it was less) when trump renegged on the deal and started this whole conflict. He started this entire fire then he poured the gasoline on it with the assassination and we had to rely on the calm calculated shrewdness of FUCKING IRAN just to avoid an all out additional middle east war. 

This idiot starts this whole thing, escalates the shit out of it, puts the onus on IRAN to be the smarter side and not start a major war, then tries to take credit for the whole thing being de-escalated. And some of you morons actually believe he did great work here. 

It's only a matter of time until someone hits us back in the mouth again for these stupid bullying tactics and we're right back in a full blown additional war. 

[gsoda3 3234]

3 minutes ago, Junior Miller said:

The only thing that matters here is this is 100 percent only an issue with Iran right now because Trump made it an issue. There was zero evidence Iran was pursuing nuclear weapons any more than they are now (most likely it was less) when trump renegged on the deal and started this whole conflict. He started this entire fire then he poured the gasoline on it with the assassination and we had to rely on the calm calculated shrewdness of FUCKING IRAN just to avoid an all out additional middle east war. 

This idiot starts this whole thing, escalates the shit out of it, puts the onus on IRAN to be the smarter side and not start a major war, then tries to take credit for the whole thing being de-escalated. And some of you morons actually believe he did great work here. 

It's only a matter of time until someone hits us back in the mouth again for these stupid bullying tactics and we're right back in a full blown additional war. 

no.  trump fanned the flames but he didn't start the fire.  you can argue this latest round of escalation was his fault, but that he STARTED this? that's just not accurate.

[wildcat09 29213]

4 minutes ago, Junior Miller said:

The only thing that matters here is this is 100 percent only an issue with Iran right now because Trump made it an issue. There was zero evidence Iran was pursuing nuclear weapons any more than they are now (most likely it was less) when trump renegged on the deal and started this whole conflict. He started this entire fire then he poured the gasoline on it with the assassination and we had to rely on the calm calculated shrewdness of FUCKING IRAN just to avoid an all out additional middle east war. 

This idiot starts this whole thing, escalates the shit out of it, puts the onus on IRAN to be the smarter side and not start a major war, then tries to take credit for the whole thing being de-escalated. And some of you morons actually believe he did great work here. 

It's only a matter of time until someone hits us back in the mouth again for these stupid bullying tactics and we're right back in a full blown additional war. 

Nobody with a functioning brain could possibly look at the last 75 years of our foreign policy in the middle east, particularly with regard to Iran, and conclude that it's Iran and not us that is run by fundamentalist religious whackjobs. 

[WhatTheBuck 28703]

3 minutes ago, gsoda3 said:

you really can't think of any deals he's made?  

Nothing worth citing as an achievement. No trade deal with China while growing the trade deficit with China to record levels. Tore up the Iran nuclear deal and we're witnessing the results of that. This is a crisis of his own creation, just like the threat of war with N. Korea. (He's very good at creating crises that he then sets out to "solve.") He isn't getting Mexico to pay for the wall. He said he could replace Obamacare with a better plan for less cost, and it would be so easy. Where's that? (That of course was never going to happen.) 

The workers at the Carrier plant in Indy still got laid off and saw their jobs shipped to Mexico. We're still losing manufacturing jobs. We're bailing out farmers to the tune of $28 Billion. He's not saving the coal jobs. Where are the deals? Cosmetic upgrades to NAFTA don't count. 

What is his greatest deal made as POTUS? Or, what is his most not terrible?

[F250 28674]

7 minutes ago, Junior Miller said:

This idiot starts this whole thing, escalates the shit out of it, puts the onus on IRAN to be the smarter side and not start a major war, then tries to take credit for the whole thing being de-escalated. And some of you morons actually believe he did great work here. 

This is a reoccurring theme with Trump.

[Junior Miller 1502]

9 minutes ago, gsoda3 said:

no.  trump fanned the flames but he didn't start the fire.  you can argue this latest round of escalation was his fault, but that he STARTED this? that's just not accurate.

We had an internationally recognized deal with Iran in place and very little public conflict with them over the previous few years until idiot went and backed out for no legitimate reason. No, he didn't start the initial conflict in the middle east but you'd have to be a real moron to think that's what I meant. He started THIS current escalation of conflict with Iran. 

I mean, I even said in the post you quoted when trump renegged on the deal and started this whole conflict. For you to read that and think I'm saying trump is responsible for the very beginning of all conflict with Iran takes a really stupid level of reading comprehension. 

Edited January 8, 2020 by Junior Miller

[CowboyFred 1151]

6 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Nothing worth citing as an achievement. No trade deal with China while growing the trade deficit with China to record levels. Tore up the Iran nuclear deal and we're witnessing the results of that. This is a crisis of his own creation, just like the threat of war with N. Korea. (He's very good at creating crises that he then sets out to "solve.") He isn't getting Mexico to pay for the wall. He said he could replace Obamacare with a better plan for less cost, and it would be so easy. Where's that? (That of course was never going to happen.) 

The workers at the Carrier plant in Indy still got laid off and saw their jobs shipped to Mexico. We're still losing manufacturing jobs. We're bailing out farmers to the tune of $28 Billion. He's not saving the coal jobs. Where are the deals? Cosmetic upgrades to NAFTA don't count. 

What is his greatest deal made as POTUS? Or, what is his most not terrible?

DO YOU NOT LIKE YOUR TAX CUTS?!?!?!? (even if they aren't doing shit to spur our economy and we still operated in the red to the tune of about 980 billion just last year)  King. Of. Dealmaking.

 

also to your point of bailing out farmers, we've already spent more bailing them out than we did on the auto industry.  I wonder if the farmers are going to pay the $ back like the auto industry did... (they won't)

[workswithseed 2033]

7 minutes ago, Junior Miller said:

We had an internationally recognized deal with Iran in place and very little public conflict with them over the previous few years until idiot went and backed out for no legitimate reason. No, he didn't start the initial conflict in the middle east but you'd have to be a real moron to think that's what I meant. He started THIS current escalation of conflict with Iran. 

I'd figure ISIS would have something to do with that.

Edited January 8, 2020 by workswithseed

[gsoda3 3234]

1 minute ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Nothing worth citing as an achievement. No trade deal with China while growing the trade deficit with China to record levels. Tore up the Iran nuclear deal and we're witnessing the results of that. This is a crisis of his own creation, just like the threat of war with N. Korea. (He's very good at creating crises that he then sets out to "solve.") He isn't getting Mexico to pay for the wall. He said he could replace Obamacare with a better plan for less cost, and it would be so easy. Where's that? (That of course was never going to happen.) 

The workers at the Carrier plant in Indy still got laid off and saw their jobs shipped to Mexico. We're still losing manufacturing jobs. We're bailing out farmers to the tune of $28 Billion. He's not saving the coal jobs. Where are the deals? Cosmetic upgrades to NAFTA don't count. 

What is his greatest deal made as POTUS? Or, what is his most not terrible?

when i say not terrible i mean that from the perspective of what could have been if no deal had been made.  i.e. not from status quo.  he makes a situation worse, threatens the opposing party(ies) with how bad it can get, and then scares everyone into agreeing with something that's not as bad as that but then takes credit for a victory.  so i'm not arguing whether or not the deals themselves were good deals vis a vis the situation before.  

 

if you want to talk about what his best deals have been that's a different discussion

[krevo 142]

Damn reading this thread from page 1 to present - a lot of you guys are really a bunch of chicken littles.  OMG TRUMPS GOING TO USE THIS AS AN EXCUSE TO USE A NUKE.  LOOK AT THIS TWEET FROM SOME UNKNOWN MIDDLE EASTERN TWITTER JOURNALIST.

Shut the fuck up.  You can't possibly be that stupid.

Edited January 8, 2020 by krevo

[workswithseed 2033]

1 minute ago, gsoda3 said:

when i say not terrible i mean that from the perspective of what could have been if no deal had been made.  i.e. not from status quo.  he makes a situation worse, threatens the opposing party(ies) with how bad it can get, and then scares everyone into agreeing with something that's not as bad as that but then takes credit for a victory.  so i'm not arguing whether or not the deals themselves were good deals vis a vis the situation before.  

 

if you want to talk about what his best deals have been that's a different discussion

Now I'm wondering what his best deal is.