The US happily helped Saddam gas Iranian civilians. This pretense that the US is the one which has been abused by Iran is throughly pathetic.We’re responding to years of getting poked in the eye by the regime. The worm has turned.
Out of chaos may come order.If the regime falls, my hazy crystal ball tells me the clerical establishment will continue to exert their historical influence. But factions within the majority Persians will compete among themselves and with competing factions from the oppressed minority Arabs, Kurds, and Turkic peoples. (Not to mention about ten other smaller minority groups.) In other words, no matter which outsiders have a plan for post Islamic Iran, internally there will be chaos with no clear favorite in sight.
That's an interesting term that's been used to justify all sorts of things that are the opposite of what that means. The "common sense" question here is whether Israel's security is worth destabilizing the region by eliminating the current regime; devil you know and all that.If you're going to debate the Israeli-Iran crisis, then do it using common sense and what it means to Israel's existence and peace in the region.
It's a bit optimistic to say Iran is a dying snake, since their military is still intact despite Israeli air dominance. For there to be the kind of change some are advocating, it would take a lot more than just air superiority, hence the question of what comes next in the minds of those pushing this approach.If the dying snake is still deadly, then cut off its head and/or get rid of what makes it deadly to the region.
That's my main concern given US actions in the region over the past few decades. The optimistic view is moderates will assume control, but the moderates aren't the ones with the guns, so a lot of things to sort out there. Now, the short term solution is Israel/US don't have to worry about Iran backed groups or this supposed threat of Iran having a nuclear weapon, which Netanyahu has been warning about for decades; it's the equivalent of the 2 weeks for Trump's infrastructure plan. The long term outcome is the big question mark should the regime be deposed.If the regime falls, my hazy crystal ball tells me the clerical establishment will continue to exert their historical influence. But factions within the majority Persians will compete among themselves and with competing factions from the oppressed minority Arabs, Kurds, and Turkic peoples. (Not to mention about ten other smaller minority groups.) In other words, no matter which outsiders have a plan for post Islamic Iran, internally there will be chaos with no clear favorite in sight.
Good question. It would have likely been a cat and mouse game with Iran, but the advantage of the JCPOA is it gave us more access to what they were up to and what they were hiding. Once we were out of it we lost that outside of what we knew from intel. What I'm more interested in seeing play out is how this attack affects sentiment in the Arab world because while the governments of nations in the region want a closer relationship with Israel, their respective populaces aren't keen on that because of precisely these kind of situations.What a mess. One has to wonder if the world would be in this position if Trump hadn't cancelled the Accord. Nonetheless, we are. The worrisome thing is that what this war, the war in Gaza, as well as other attacks Israel has made in the region , guarantees a new generation of terrorists. The cycle will never stop until negotiations and treaties replace wars.
Sometimes they call it a "special military operation" and you're fine with THAT.me as well. now they call it kinetic military action, or deny a proxy war funding is complicit in the war...like Ukraine.
Anyways that's a topic to itself. Peace out brother
FTFYWhat a mess. One has to wonder if the world would be in this position if Trump hadn't cancelled the Accord. Nonetheless, we are. The worrisome thing is that what this war, the war in Gaza, as well as other attacks Israel has made in the region , guarantees a new generation of terrorists. The cycle will never stopuntil negotiations and treaties replace wars.
Given that all of this just breeds more terrorists, I fear you are right.FTFY
If you draw a box around what used to be the Byzantine empire, Iran, and the entire Arab peninsula, they have never been anything other than what they are right now. People have been fighting there over grudges since the early bronze age at least, and they aren't going to stop tomorrow.Given that all of this just breeds more terrorists, I fear you are right.
Or rather terrorists breed the need to strike in defense.Given that all of this just breeds more terrorists, I fear you are right.
Then they fought each other. Now they attack us as well...and with good reason sometimes.If you draw a box around what used to be the Byzantine empire, Iran, and the entire Arab peninsula, they have never been anything other than what they are right now. People have been fighting there over grudges since the early bronze age at least, and they aren't going to stop tomorrow.
Chicken and egg. If you were a little boy watching bombs fall on your home, seeing your father and mother die, maybe brothers or sisters losing limbs. Tired hungry , terrified.......you learn to hate the people that did that to you. Even if they had a reason.Or rather terrorists breed the need to strike in defense.
Well, no. Apparently you should be grateful to your "liberators". You don't want JD Vance showing up and ask you when was the last time you showed some gratitude would you?Chicken and egg. If you were a little boy watching bombs fall on your home, seeing your father and mother die, maybe brothers or sisters losing limbs. Tired hungry , terrified.......you learn to hate the people that did that to you. Even if they had a reason.
I remember all those cheering, American flag-waving Iraqis that greeted us during and after the ground invasion.Well, no. Apparently you're supposed to be grateful for your "liberators". You don't want JD Vance showing up and ask you when was the last time you showed some gratitude would you?
Yep, and then there were those same Iraqis asking the US to leave.I remember all those cheering, American flag-waving Iraqis that greeted us during and after the ground invasion.
There were many hardships suffered by humans throughout the ages that didn't result in people deciding to murder completely innocent people in the name of their God.Chicken and egg. If you were a little boy watching bombs fall on your home, seeing your father and mother die, maybe brothers or sisters losing limbs. Tired hungry , terrified.......you learn to hate the people that did that to you. Even if they had a reason.
The nauseating lies coming from the anti-Trumps is to be expected. Trump has been clear. Iran cannot have nuclear weapons/capabilities. He is trying to save lives, but look at them spin the narrative into something evil.The last thing Trump wants is human lives lost while trying to carry out a goal he's been crystal clear about (that Iran cannot have nuclear bombs). Frankly, that's also a big difference in many of the tactics we've seen used by Israel and Iran. Iran's tactics are geared toward killing civilians. Israel's tactics are geared toward dismantling capabilities.
I don't think his statements and actions now, are ambiguous. Trump wanted to reach a deal with Iran and he gave it the 60 days he was clear about. Ambiguity was his purposeful tactic then. It isn't now.
If the regime appears to teeter on collapse, will the Islamic Republican Guard have the strength and resources to prop it up? They have economic as well as political interests to protect. If you remember back to the early mass street demonstrations, they were confronted not by the military but by motorcycle riding rural loyalists.That's my main concern given US actions in the region over the past few decades. The optimistic view is moderates will assume control, but the moderates aren't the ones with the guns, so a lot of things to sort out there. Now, the short term solution is Israel/US don't have to worry about Iran backed groups or this supposed threat of Iran having a nuclear weapon, which Netanyahu has been warning about for decades; it's the equivalent of the 2 weeks for Trump's infrastructure plan. The long term outcome is the big question mark should the regime be deposed.
Ask yourself the simple question: What is Israel's security worth to them? Isn't that what's important?That's an interesting term that's been used to justify all sorts of things that are the opposite of what that means. The "common sense" question here is whether Israel's security is worth destabilizing the region by eliminating the current regime; devil you know and all that.
It's a bit optimistic to say Iran is a dying snake, since their military is still intact despite Israeli air dominance. For there to be the kind of change some are advocating, it would take a lot more than just air superiority, hence the question of what comes next in the minds of those pushing this approach.
I don’t think anyone on here pretty much gives a shit what you think anymore. You’re like a broken record.The US happily helped Saddam gas Iranian civilians. This pretense that the US is the one which has been abused by Iran is throughly pathetic.
The nuclear threat according to who, Netanyahu? He's been saying Iran's 2 weeks from a nuclear bomb for decades; it's the longest 2 weeks ever. Gabbard, who works for the administration, is not aligned with that assessment and Trump threw her under the bus in favor of Netanyahu who views the US as the tool needed to complete his mission, not the US mission. He basically upended the ongoing negotiations and went straight to military conflict. If Trump had any sense, he would have pumped the brakes on this but since he doesn't, now things have gone south.During his campaigns, (both), Trump repeatedly criticized U.S. involvement in "endless wars" and positioned himself as a peacemaker, vowing to avoid new conflicts. He gave Iran 60 days to come to their senses, and they rejected his offer. Israel would be fully within their right to use what they need from the US's military to stop the nuclear threat. That's it.
If there is direct U.S. involvement, and I've yet to see it, I will say Trump didn't keep his word to us.
Poor tiger, No one understands him the way he does.I don’t think anyone on here pretty much gives a shit what you think anymore. You’re like a broken record.
You wrote "If Trump had any sense, he would have pumped the brakes on this but since he doesn't, now things have gone south."The nuclear threat according to who, Netanyahu? He's been saying Iran's 2 weeks from a nuclear bomb for decades; it's the longest 2 weeks ever. Gabbard, who works for the administration, is not aligned with that assessment and Trump threw her under the bus in favor of Netanyahu who views the US as the tool needed to complete his mission, not the US mission. He basically upended the ongoing negotiations and went straight to military conflict. If Trump had any sense, he would have pumped the brakes on this but since he doesn't, now things have gone south.
If that were even remotely true you wouldn’t have replied to begin with.I don’t think anyone on here pretty much gives a shit what you think anymore. You’re like a broken record.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?