Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 8 of 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 78,888
P
Legend
Offline
Legend
P
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 78,888
I certainly agree with you that there have been quite a few mishaps but I suppose it's possible I don't see that as unusual as you might. I think that's just a symptom of war as it always has been. I know people probably expected me to jump on the "trash trump train" as it pertains to this but war has always been messy and filled with mishaps.

At least speaking for myself that's why I'm always so skeptical of war and only feel it should be used as a last resort. I don't feel that's the case here.


Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.

#gmstrong
BADdog #2135382 03/25/26 03:12 PM
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 78,888
P
Legend
Offline
Legend
P
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 78,888
Originally Posted by BADdog
We seem to have the most expensive military, but Iran has showed us cheap weapons can be more effective in the right circumstances than expensive ones.

I feel as though Ukraine set the bar on this.


Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.

#gmstrong
PitDAWG #2135383 03/25/26 03:38 PM
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 14,352
M
Legend
Offline
Legend
M
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 14,352
Originally Posted by PitDAWG
But just like other examples of our wars in the middle east he grossly underestimated the resolve of the enemy and there was no clear exit strategy.

I don't think the military has under performed. It's bombed the crap out of its targets, sunk the navy.

What it can't do is fight a guerilla war without boots on the ground. Iran is vast. They are hunkered down and obviously prepared to fight this sort of war. And they've clearly also thought about strategy, the impact to the US and Israel of hitting the Strait of Hormuz and also hitting it's neighbours.

I think this paragraph by Pit probably sums it up... And it's not a failure of the military because I'd bet my house that many many many individuals warned about what has happened, but Hegseth and Trump in their ego-mania wouldn't listen. Drunk on the previous Iran strike and their military action in Venezuela. Both went off without any blowback or a hitch.

Last edited by mgh888; 03/25/26 03:42 PM.

The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
PitDAWG #2135387 03/26/26 02:08 AM
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 14,364
Legend
Offline
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 14,364
Originally Posted by PitDAWG
I will just say this. A military performs as well as its leaders. Proper planning and execution prevent a lot of terrible things from happening. One example is the bombing of that school. At one point in time it had been a military installation but it hadn't been for years. Nobody bothered to check if it was a proper target at the time it was bombed. Instead they depended on old intel without any updates or current verification.

I will not however isolate this to the trump administration. This is not all that uncommon. The thing I find most odd about the current situation seems to be the consistent moving of the goal posts and the mixed messages. In June trump said that Iran's nuclear program had been obliterated and set back decades if not years. In March, the US intelligence community assessed that Iran was “not building a nuclear weapon.”

Yet it was presented that Iran was an "immanent threat". 2+2 does not equal 6. Unless it's the White House version of new math. There is zero evidence to support that Iran was an immanent threat when he decided to attack.

The first time he struck Iran he said our goal was to eliminate their nuclear threat. This time it is their nuclear capability he claimed he obliterated just months before plus destroying their missile capability which is no threat to the U.S., their drones and a regime change.

Now he claims to be in talks with Iran but it's not the new supreme leader while claiming he has achieved a regime change even though it is still being run by the same group that ran it before and the revolutionary guard.

I can't make sense out of any of it because none of it makes any sense.

But just like other examples of our wars in the middle east he grossly underestimated the resolve of the enemy and there was no clear exit strategy.

I'm glad I stopped by here to read, for a change. I'm not sure I can agree with this post much more than I do.

There are some caveats and "yeah, but maybe" moments, but ^ that's ^ the nutshell version.

What pisses me off, literally, is that there was never any real exit strategy *if* there was no plan to chop off the head. And no plan can be effective without one.

If there isn't already a new regime lying in wait, you're just spoon-feeding a never-ending cycle. Only thing that changes is being "nuke-ready" will take place on an ever-quickening timetable.

We didn't think this whole thing through very well. We convinced ourselves that overwhelming force and the "epic fury" at which we administered it would be enough. The snake is still slithering.

And now Trump is caught with his pants down. His only hope to avoid "forever war" is to root out the snake by installing a new regime. I'm not sure how that's possible without boots on the ground.


HERE WE GO BROWNIES! HERE WE GO!!
mac #2135428 03/26/26 07:40 PM
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,590
N
Hall of Famer
Offline
Hall of Famer
N
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,590
So today just after the stock market bell closed trump again extended the deadline with Iran-this time for 10 days till April 6.
Just after the Nasdaq moved into correction territory after taking another bath today.

Somebody on CNN referred to one of the financial services companies and their advise to their advisors based on the trump taco chart. Every time it the market is pricing in whatever "strategy" trump is working on at that present time and the market it crapping, they advise their investors that trumo is going to change his mind. Their chart said this afternoon that trump was going to change on Iran and not bomb the energy or power plants.

But I have to wonder, is this just market manipulation, are the talks really progressing or is an attack coming sooner or later?

Also Axios is reporting tonight that a ground invasion seems imminent at some point and we are expanding areas that we could attack with ground forces.

And in that meeting yesterday, alot of people with R after their name were really pissed off at what is coming. Nancy Mace said that we want to send in the troops. They say that this is a red line in the sand-I don't think they have the guts to agree with the dems on some oversight on this or to cut he purse strings.

FATE #2135439 03/27/26 04:49 AM
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,708
L
Legend
Offline
Legend
L
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,708
Originally Posted by FATE
Originally Posted by PitDAWG
I will just say this. A military performs as well as its leaders. Proper planning and execution prevent a lot of terrible things from happening. One example is the bombing of that school. At one point in time it had been a military installation but it hadn't been for years. Nobody bothered to check if it was a proper target at the time it was bombed. Instead they depended on old intel without any updates or current verification.

I will not however isolate this to the trump administration. This is not all that uncommon. The thing I find most odd about the current situation seems to be the consistent moving of the goal posts and the mixed messages. In June trump said that Iran's nuclear program had been obliterated and set back decades if not years. In March, the US intelligence community assessed that Iran was “not building a nuclear weapon.”

Yet it was presented that Iran was an "immanent threat". 2+2 does not equal 6. Unless it's the White House version of new math. There is zero evidence to support that Iran was an immanent threat when he decided to attack.

The first time he struck Iran he said our goal was to eliminate their nuclear threat. This time it is their nuclear capability he claimed he obliterated just months before plus destroying their missile capability which is no threat to the U.S., their drones and a regime change.

Now he claims to be in talks with Iran but it's not the new supreme leader while claiming he has achieved a regime change even though it is still being run by the same group that ran it before and the revolutionary guard.

I can't make sense out of any of it because none of it makes any sense.

But just like other examples of our wars in the middle east he grossly underestimated the resolve of the enemy and there was no clear exit strategy.

I'm glad I stopped by here to read, for a change. I'm not sure I can agree with this post much more than I do.

There are some caveats and "yeah, but maybe" moments, but ^ that's ^ the nutshell version.

What pisses me off, literally, is that there was never any real exit strategy *if* there was no plan to chop off the head. And no plan can be effective without one.

If there isn't already a new regime lying in wait, you're just spoon-feeding a never-ending cycle. Only thing that changes is being "nuke-ready" will take place on an ever-quickening timetable.

We didn't think this whole thing through very well. We convinced ourselves that overwhelming force and the "epic fury" at which we administered it would be enough. The snake is still slithering.

And now Trump is caught with his pants down. His only hope to avoid "forever war" is to root out the snake by installing a new regime. I'm not sure how that's possible without boots on the ground.


[Linked Image from i28.photobucket.com]

gmstrong

-----------------

lampdogg #2135440 03/27/26 04:50 AM
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,708
L
Legend
Offline
Legend
L
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,708
Originally Posted by lampdogg
Originally Posted by FATE
Originally Posted by PitDAWG
I will just say this. A military performs as well as its leaders. Proper planning and execution prevent a lot of terrible things from happening. One example is the bombing of that school. At one point in time it had been a military installation but it hadn't been for years. Nobody bothered to check if it was a proper target at the time it was bombed. Instead they depended on old intel without any updates or current verification.

I will not however isolate this to the trump administration. This is not all that uncommon. The thing I find most odd about the current situation seems to be the consistent moving of the goal posts and the mixed messages. In June trump said that Iran's nuclear program had been obliterated and set back decades if not years. In March, the US intelligence community assessed that Iran was “not building a nuclear weapon.”

Yet it was presented that Iran was an "immanent threat". 2+2 does not equal 6. Unless it's the White House version of new math. There is zero evidence to support that Iran was an immanent threat when he decided to attack.

The first time he struck Iran he said our goal was to eliminate their nuclear threat. This time it is their nuclear capability he claimed he obliterated just months before plus destroying their missile capability which is no threat to the U.S., their drones and a regime change.

Now he claims to be in talks with Iran but it's not the new supreme leader while claiming he has achieved a regime change even though it is still being run by the same group that ran it before and the revolutionary guard.

I can't make sense out of any of it because none of it makes any sense.

But just like other examples of our wars in the middle east he grossly underestimated the resolve of the enemy and there was no clear exit strategy.

I'm glad I stopped by here to read, for a change. I'm not sure I can agree with this post much more than I do.

There are some caveats and "yeah, but maybe" moments, but ^ that's ^ the nutshell version.

What pisses me off, literally, is that there was never any real exit strategy *if* there was no plan to chop off the head. And no plan can be effective without one.

If there isn't already a new regime lying in wait, you're just spoon-feeding a never-ending cycle. Only thing that changes is being "nuke-ready" will take place on an ever-quickening timetable.

We didn't think this whole thing through very well. We convinced ourselves that overwhelming force and the "epic fury" at which we administered it would be enough. The snake is still slithering.

And now Trump is caught with his pants down. His only hope to avoid "forever war" is to root out the snake by installing a new regime. I'm not sure how that's possible without boots on the ground.

OMG, Fate’s gone rogue on us.

Or…….
Has he?


[Linked Image from i28.photobucket.com]

gmstrong

-----------------

Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 14,352
M
Legend
Offline
Legend
M
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 14,352
Originally Posted by northlima dawg
So today just after the stock market bell closed trump again extended the deadline with Iran-this time for 10 days till April 6.
Just after the Nasdaq moved into correction territory after taking another bath today.

Somebody on CNN referred to one of the financial services companies and their advise to their advisors based on the trump taco chart. Every time it the market is pricing in whatever "strategy" trump is working on at that present time and the market it crapping, they advise their investors that trumo is going to change his mind. Their chart said this afternoon that trump was going to change on Iran and not bomb the energy or power plants.

But I have to wonder, is this just market manipulation, are the talks really progressing or is an attack coming sooner or later?

Also Axios is reporting tonight that a ground invasion seems imminent at some point and we are expanding areas that we could attack with ground forces.

And in that meeting yesterday, alot of people with R after their name were really pissed off at what is coming. Nancy Mace said that we want to send in the troops. They say that this is a red line in the sand-I don't think they have the guts to agree with the dems on some oversight on this or to cut he purse strings.

To me - this is like a symptom of Trump. I don't know if I can explain this very well - but he's conducting himself in the same way with Iran that he has with every other major talking point or policy. He fires from the hip, he contradicts himself, he says one thing then does another .... when it winds up the Democrats and "libtards" on immigration or the border or tariffs or whatever - then the R's love it. Think it's genius. Think that he's scripted it all out to get what he wants ...

With Iran there have been constant contradictions. Go back 9 months or whatever and their Nuclear capability and enriched uranium was completely and utterly obliterated. That's changed now. We've won. That's changed now. Their ability to launch missiles was destroyed. That changed. Regime change with Trump influencing the successor was the goal - that has changed now. No wars - that has changed now (Bigly). Rubio said that it was Israel that forced our hand - that changed quickly (no doubt because it made Trump look weak).

I do think that at the end of the day the market - the economy - Trump and Trump's circle of associates making money is the single most important thing to Trump (other than his image/ego). I think when markets tank - he reacts. IN some cases I think he clearly enables others (and himself) to profit from his reaction. $1/2 Billion bet on oil futures in a QUANTUM spike in trades ... minutes before his last announcement. That might explain some of what we have seen.

But the reality is - driven by ego - he may also think that he has egg on his face after declaring he is negotiating with Iran. I mean that was a contradiction inside the space of 2 paragraphs: There's no-one left to talk to, they are all dead. We are talking to a top guy, the negotiations are going great. . . . and then Iranian sources (everywhere) mocked him and said there is no negotiation and increased their military strikes on Israel and neighbors.

We could see boots on the ground and an escalation. We might see a claim that objectives are complete and he backs out claiming a win. We could see his 15 point negotiation (where points 1-2-3 are all "never have nuclear weapons" !!) put in place - and essentially something similar to the Obama deal that he trashed in his first term put back in place ... we just don't know. I am not sure he knows.

I do think that the wanna-be He-Man Hegseth thinks this is some sort of video game and has zero regard for loss of life or long term consequences and all he wants to do it flex and show the world how mighty the US military is.


The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
mac #2135443 03/27/26 06:25 AM
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,316
B
Legend
Offline
Legend
B
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,316
We just need to make sure they are pretty much neutered completely. We have been dorking around with that regime for over 40 years.

Better this that giving them $billions so they can fund their proxies around the globe. LOL, and to think some people around here insisted we were still in control of the money.


If everybody had like minds, we would never learn.

GM Strong




[Linked Image]
Page 8 of 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Iranian War

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5