It’s been 10 years to the day since peaceful protestor Neda Agha-Soltan fell to a sniper’s bullet from an Iranian regime rifle, and four decades since Iranian Islamists took 52 Americans hostage for 444 days, effectively declaring war on the United States. The Islamic Republic of Iran has foiled efforts of multiple U.S. presidents to shut down its terrorist network and nuclear weapons program. Now oil vessels burn near Iranian waters. At what point will President Trump decide we’ve done enough coddling, and declare it’s time for war with Iran?
Categories
After Four Decades of Coddling, Is It Time for War with Iran?
20 replies on “After Four Decades of Coddling, Is It Time for War with Iran?”
So, Bill, what do you think now after the aborted military response last night? Trump decided that it (estimated 150 soldiers killed at three sites being targeted) was disproportionate to the loss of “just” a drone. Is Trump playing scary unpredictable guy, or did he actually buy into Pelosi’s plea to “de-escalate” over (presumably) Bolton’s advice to take the opportunity to establish a line that Iran had better not cross?
I’m curious as to who it is exactly that’s running around w/ their hair on fire screaming OMG OMG OMG Trump’s GONNA TAKE US TO WAR!!
Right now its Iran. A couple weeks ago, I was listing to some chin scratcher on The Federalist Radio Hour taking it seriously that some amorphous “them” was “very concerned” (diplo-speak for OMG OMG OMG!!) that Trump was going to invade Venezuela.
There seems to be this cottage industry of Panicked Trump War Talk despite pretty strong counter-evidence of Trump wanting to invade anywhere. Who profits by this? Is it simply a manifestation of TDS at very high levels?
Obama gave them 1.7 Billion – Billion with a B
We definitely missed out in 09. I’ve gotten to know a fella who was there with the protestors. He was very clear that they didn’t want troops, didn’t even want cruise missiles….they just wanted us to drop guns, and with a pretty small supply of guns, they’d have overthrown the mullahs. He left after shots were fired into the crowds; he had a passport and knew he could leave, so he did.
The video I remember seeing is of a woman getting out of a car and two men on a motorbike driving by and the one on the back shooting her in the chest. She falls to the floor and blood starts pouring out of her mouth and nose, just like in the picture. It looked like just a random drive-by shooting here in America.
I have stayed off the site for more than usual today, practically avoided it, because I don’t want to constantly be presented with the tragic image of this dead woman all day long. Is that intended? How many days before it scrolls off?
The image bothers me also. I force myself to look at it to remind me of what evil is and the consequences of not understanding it.
I agree, though it took me a few minutes to even comprehend what the photo was. When I did, I thought it was a mistake (until I watched the video).
While it is true that sometimes we need to see the pictures of violence to learn what the world is really like, I also prefer generally to avoid disturbing images that I can never unsee from ever getting into my brain.
I sincerely appreciate the tribute to this Persian martyr, especially since I did not remember anything about her, but I hope that you will not allow such usage of violent images to become a habit. I am not asking for a “safe space,” much less asking you to never do it again, but if it becomes a regular thing, I’ll have to find some way to filter them, or stop watching.
Life at its most basic level is very simple. Like Malcolm Reynolds said in the TV series Firefly so eloquently, “If someone threatens to kill you, you kill them first”. I would add, “…with extreme prejudice.”
Maybe one of their oil refineries will just happen to explode.
I hear their maintenance is really shoddy.
Messages go both ways and I know that seals just love the water.
Kinda like that nuclear reactor went a little wonky a few years back? Nothing like some creative computer code and ingenious human actions.
The Brits are going into the area today and several Asian countries, who’s ships have been attacked are also gearing up to move into the region with the UAE hosting them. Trump has been calling for the other countries to step up.
No US tankers go though the straits of Hormuz anymore so it technically is an Asian problem now. Trump is not taking the provocation bait but will be a major player in the take down of the mad mullahs.
Some have been waiting for Iran to make the critical mistake of hitting a Chinese ship. They got close but missed. The worst fanatics are blind to the consequences of attacking a Chinese ship but some in Tehran’s government are not.
Abe of Japan was negotiating a meeting in Tehran when the Japanese tanker was attacked so there is a theory that the republican guard navy was trying to break up the meeting with Abe and the more moderate diplomats in the capital. Echo’s of the palace battle the day of the Japanese surrender.
There is a theory that it was a big quad copter drone attack and it did not work as expected. It may be the same drones that attacked the pipe lines unsuccessfully last month.
Confirmed, the Trump state dept and pentagon does not believe its a confirmed government controlled actor in Iran that attacked the ships. Rouge general. So they are holding their fire.
https://apnews.com/84ad15edb7324472bb867852059a0a7a
I think Abe being involved is very interesting. Strategy Page had a photo a week or so ago of the JMSDFS Kaga conducting exercises w/ the deGaulle… in the Indian Ocean.
This is a bit of a stretch but I can see where Trump went to Abe as said, they’re your tankers, you protect them, we’ll back your play. The Indian Ocean is really far afield for the JMSDF but if Abe convince the Diet, and w/ logistic and air support, the Japanese Navy could clean Iran’s clock.
Bit of a stretch I know, but if Asian and UAE gearing up, the US’ll come to the party cause there’s abilties only the US has but for the fist time in a good 50 years… not our circus, not out monkeys. And that seems to be Trumps foriegn policy style.
Trump is not a warmonger, he’s a deal maker, (most likely to the chagrin of Bolton). I think any efforts he puts forth against Iran will be under those terms. I personally believe that Israel will handle Iran and here’s why:
Israel has recently found a huge supply of natural gas and oil on their turf. Putin needs that supply in order for his economy to survive as he’s also recently lost contracts with Europe. Putin has aligned himself with both Iran and Syria, who coincidentally, surround Israel and have troops either on the border or at the ready.
Now we might engage in a few strikes and provide military aid to Israel in the form of weapons and/or troops, or possibly even engage a privatized army that doesn’t need to follow any rules that we would have to comply with under the Geneva Convention, but I truly believe Israel will running this show.
Bolton’s job is to play the scary warmonger but not actually rush off to war. Bill is right this will be cruise missiles and new weapons. It may include a couple of tons of expendable robots dropped on military bases to raise hell then self destruct. It definitely will include the new multi-shot EMP drone. The other weapon I’m expecting is a few old C-130’s turned into drones and loaded with 30 tons of propane. Super moabs.
“You were given the choice between war and dishonor. You chose dishonor and you will have war.” Winston Churchill
I up voted you just for your icon. Big Daffy Duck fan here.
…and now a drone blasted out of the sky
Just wait for the media spin about how Trump did us all a bad service on his “foreign policy” but how Obama was so much better just handing terrorists money while encouraging bad behavior.