https://www.newsweek.com/trump-claims-victory-iran-war-we-won-kentucky-speech-11663426

Its good to know that WE WON!

MISSION ACCOMPLISHED.

If WE WON, why are the Dow Futures - 460 points?

Please explain that.
Thanks.

Wasn't Trump bragging about gas prices at $2.30 a gallon just last month?

Flip Flop.




Trump Insists 'I Have a Plan for Everything' as Gas Prices Surge During Iran War

DiabloWags said:

---

Wasn't Trump bragging about gas prices at $2.30 a gallon just last month?

Flip Flop.


Trump Insists 'I Have a Plan for Everything' as Gas Prices Surge During Iran War

---

Does Trump have a plan for his age related shrinking brain?

DiabloWags said:

---

---

Not sure encouraging the tankers is a bad thing.

oski003 said:

---

Not sure encouraging the tankers is a bad thing.

---

Please explain.

DiabloWags said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Not sure encouraging the tankers is a bad thing.

---

Please explain.

---

If our goal is to secure the Strait, this should give us more insight into how it should be done.

oski003 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Not sure encouraging the tankers is a bad thing.

---

Please explain.

---

If our goal is to secure the Strait, this should give us more insight into how it should be done.

---

Their death is a sacrifice Trump is willing to make

oski003 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Not sure encouraging the tankers is a bad thing.

---

Please explain.

---

If our goal is to secure the Strait, this should give us more insight into how it should be done.

---

More insight?
How so?

There are roughly 60+ ships sitting in the Strait.
They aren't moving for fear of being attacked by a drone that can kill their crew.

How smart would it be to encourage these ships to start moving again?
What further insight could be provided given that 2 tankers were already attacked this week?

Easy for Trump to make such a stupid claim given that he's not one of the crew.

Never mind the fact that insurance rates have soared to as much as 1 - 1.5% of the vessel's value from 0.25% before the war started, if you can get it. - - - Never mind that shipping lanes in the channel are 2-miles per vessel. That choke point of only 21-miles could potentially wind up being a real blood bath.

Given the narrow size of the passageway and its proximity to Iran, any U.S. Navy vessels operating there would offer a large, visible, potentially close-in target for Iranian-launched drones, missiles, or small boat swarms. U.S. Navy ships clearing the Strait would not have the expansive defensive "ranges" they operated within when under attack in the Red Sea, a circumstance which might make it more difficult to successfully defend large, deep-draft warships.

Earlier this morning, Dan Caine said the following:

Strait of Hormuz 'tactically complex environment', top US general says - DAWN.COM

DiabloWags said:

---

oski003 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Not sure encouraging the tankers is a bad thing.

---

Please explain.

---

If our goal is to secure the Strait, this should give us more insight into how it should be done.

---

More insight?
How so? *To further see where the attacks are coming from.

There are roughly 60+ ships sitting in the Strait.
They aren't moving for fear of being attacked by a drone that can kill their crew. *irrelevant

How smart would it be to encourage these ships to start moving again?
What further insight could be provided given that 2 tankers were already attacked this week? *already answered

Easy for Trump to make such a stupid claim given that he's not one of the crew. *leaders make tough decisions.

Never mind the fact that insurance rates have soared to as much as 1 - 1.5% of the vessel's value from 0.25% before the war started, if you can get it. *irrelevant

Given the narrow size of the passageway and its proximity to Iran, any U.S. Navy vessels operating there would offer a large, visible, potentially close-in target for Iranian-launched drones, missiles, or small boat swarms. U.S. Navy ships clearing the Strait would not have the expansive defensive "ranges" they operated within when under attack in the Red Sea, a circumstance which might make it more difficult to successfully defend large, deep-draft warships. *the challenges are there. However, it seems like you think getting ships through the Strait is a hopeless cause. I disagree.

Earlier this morning, Dan Caine said the following:

Strait of Hormuz 'tactically complex environment', top US general says - DAWN.COM

---

Answers above.

dajo9 said:

---

oski003 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Not sure encouraging the tankers is a bad thing.

---

Please explain.

---

If our goal is to secure the Strait, this should give us more insight into how it should be done.

---

Their death is a sacrifice Trump is willing to make

---

Their death is a sacrifice that posters here are also willing to make.
Lots of keyboard "warriors" out there.

DiabloWags said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

oski003 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Not sure encouraging the tankers is a bad thing.

---

Please explain.

---

If our goal is to secure the Strait, this should give us more insight into how it should be done.

---

Their death is a sacrifice Trump is willing to make

---

Their death is a sacrifice that posters here are also willing to make.
Lots of keyboard "warriors" out there.

---

Not a fan of war, but, when you are fighting it, there are casualties and tough choices are made.
Lots of keyboard "morons" out there.

oski003 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

oski003 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Not sure encouraging the tankers is a bad thing.

---

Please explain.

---

If our goal is to secure the Strait, this should give us more insight into how it should be done.

---

Their death is a sacrifice Trump is willing to make

---

Their death is a sacrifice that posters here are also willing to make.
Lots of keyboard "warriors" out there.

---

Not a fan of war, but, when you are fighting it, there are casualties and tough choices are made.
Lots of keyboard "morons" out there.

---

And encouraging tankers and ships to move thru the Strait of Hormuz is a terribly dumb idea.
That's not a "tough" choice to me made in a war.
That's pure stupidity.

If the Straight could be secured by our Navy, we would have done it by now.
Hence General Caine's remarks.

Thanks for providing more insight into this discussion.
You're truly well informed.

"answers above"

DiabloWags said:

---

oski003 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

oski003 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Not sure encouraging the tankers is a bad thing.

---

Please explain.

---

If our goal is to secure the Strait, this should give us more insight into how it should be done.

---

Their death is a sacrifice Trump is willing to make

---

Their death is a sacrifice that posters here are also willing to make.
Lots of keyboard "warriors" out there.

---

Not a fan of war, but, when you are fighting it, there are casualties and tough choices are made.
Lots of keyboard "morons" out there.

---

And encouraging tankers and ships to move thru the Strait of Hormuz is a terribly dumb idea.
That's not a "tough" choice to me made in a war.
That's pure stupidity.

If the Straight could be secured by our Navy, we would have done it by now.
Hence General Caine's remarks.

Thanks for providing more insight into this discussion.
You're truly well informed.

"answers above"

---

"Securing the Strait of Hormuz is technically possible but current military assessments describe it as an "Iranian kill box" that cannot be safely cleared or secured quickly under enemy fire. While naval force can degrade threats, analysts suggest that durable security may require "boots on the ground" to occupy the Iranian coastline and neutralize mobile missile launchers and mine-laying operations."

I am always happy to help provide insight into discussions, even if they question your narrow-minded conclusions.

oski003 said:

---

"Securing the Strait of Hormuz is technically possible but current military assessments describe it as an "Iranian kill box" that cannot be safely cleared or secured quickly under enemy fire.

---

Thanks for entering into this discussion and then winding-up AGREEING with me after the fact.
I'm glad that you are able to use Ai to come around to the same answer that I provided off the top of my head.

Given your above quote from Ai, it's probably not a good idea to encourage movement in the Strait
in order to provide more insight.

Like I mentioned in my original post, the "insight" is already clear and present.
I'm glad to have helped you finally arrive at that conclusion.

Thanks again.

oski003 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

oski003 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Not sure encouraging the tankers is a bad thing.

---

Please explain.

---

If our goal is to secure the Strait, this should give us more insight into how it should be done.

---

Their death is a sacrifice Trump is willing to make

---

Their death is a sacrifice that posters here are also willing to make.
Lots of keyboard "warriors" out there.

---

Not a fan of war, but, when you are fighting it, there are casualties and tough choices are made.
Lots of keyboard "morons" out there.

---

Yes, all these foreign people are really excited to risk their lives for Trump's ego war. The arguments are reaching new levels of dumb.

dajo9 said:

---

oski003 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

oski003 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Not sure encouraging the tankers is a bad thing.

---

Please explain.

---

If our goal is to secure the Strait, this should give us more insight into how it should be done.

---

Their death is a sacrifice Trump is willing to make

---

Their death is a sacrifice that posters here are also willing to make.
Lots of keyboard "warriors" out there.

---

Not a fan of war, but, when you are fighting it, there are casualties and tough choices are made.
Lots of keyboard "morons" out there.

---

The arguments are reaching new levels of dumb.

---

You would be a good judge of that

The Pentagon has war-gamed the closing of the Strait of Hormuz for decades.
The fact that they haven't secured the Strait is very telling.

For some reason, there are people that are unable to fathom this.
That's why we see new levels of "dumb".

Anything to defend the Mango Messiah.
No matter how dumb.

Sadly, 3 more years of new levels of dumb.

DiabloWags said:

---

The Pentagon has war-gamed the closing of the Strait of Hormuz for decades.
The fact that they haven't secured the Strait is very telling.

For some reason, there are people that are unable to fathom this.
That's why we see new levels of "dumb".

Anything to defend the Mango Messiah.
No matter how dumb.

Sadly, 3 more years of new levels of dumb.

---

And the dumbest, most pig-headed folks in the world can't comprehend that we are still trying to secure the Strait.

For some reason, there are people that are unable to fathom this.
That's why we see new levels of "dumb".

Anything to attack whatever the administration does, no matter how little info they have in their shrinking brain.

It's good to see that some posters are no longer relying on Ai to become informed.

But behavior that does nothing but "copy" other people's posts - - - changing a few words in a silly, childish, pedantic effort does not show a genuine "good-faith" interest in promoting discussion.

Fortunately, there are only a couple of posters that behave this way.
Thankfully, the majority of posters here are not Trolls.

"answers above"

oski003 said:

---

Anything to attack whatever the administration does, no matter how little info they have in their shrinking brain.

---

Right.
Because the U.S. military has NEVER ever planned for a closing of the Strait of Hormuz.

Instead, our President is "encouraging" ships to travel through the Strait and "show some guts".

Makes perfect sense.