MiZery said:

---

Better question is - why are there american soldiers in Iraq? Who are responsible for the deaths of 10s of thousands of civilians.

---

Is that really still a question? Did we all just skip the last 17 years and are we still asking why we made what we all agree was a huge mistake?

What happened with the Human Genome Project? What do you guys think about the creation of the Department of Homeland Security? Is it needed?

dajo9 said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

I think all of us who opposed the War in Iraq from the beginning must be military geniuses to have wanted to avoid all this. Raise your hand if you voted for GWB - the blame lies with you.

---

I have no idea whether you were for Iraq war or not (Hillary and Kerry were for the war when it mattered until they weren't). All I can say is that, if you want to take this stand, be someone of significance so that your military genius in knowing the results of the Iraq war would have meant something. Because, frankly, outside of these hallowed halls of military excellence disguised as political forum of a football site, you raising your hand and pointing fingers amount to just sound and fury signifying nothing. No one cares, and it doesn't make one bit of a difference other than in inflating your delusion of grandeur.

---

I'll put you down as having voted for GWB

---

Don't care what precious list of yours you put me in. You are a person of no significance.

News to me: I had no idea Iran's foreign minister went to high school and college in San Francisco.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Javad_Zarif

calbear93 said:

---

MiZery said:

---

Better question is - why are there american soldiers in Iraq? Who are responsible for the deaths of 10s of thousands of civilians.

---

Is that really still a question? Did we all just skip the last 17 years and are we still asking why we made what we all agree was a huge mistake?

What happened with the Human Genome Project? What do you guys think about the creation of the Department of Homeland Security? Is it needed?

---

The Iraqis want us out of their country. The invasion and occupation of their country has been a total disaster for everyone involved, and it doesn't seem like your neocon ilk has learned anything from this.

No, I'm saying that we kill every Islamo-Nazi bas**rd we can find and in the meantime, keep Turkey and Syria and Iran and Iraq and Saudi Arabia and Sunnis and Shia fighting amongst each other so they grind and wear each other down until they're absolutely depleted and maybe then, finally wake up from their stupid 6th century mindset and maybe then they'll move into modernity. At least, while they fight amongst each other they won't be a threat to the rest of us.

calpoly said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

I think all of us who opposed the War in Iraq from the beginning must be military geniuses to have wanted to avoid all this. Raise your hand if you voted for GWB - the blame lies with you.

---

I have no idea whether you were for Iraq war or not (Hillary and Kerry were for the war when it mattered until they weren't). All I can say is that, if you want to take this stand, be someone of significance so that your military genius in knowing the results of the Iraq war would have meant something. Because, frankly, outside of these hallowed halls of military excellence disguised as political forum of a football site, you raising your hand and pointing fingers amount to just sound and fury signifying nothing. No one cares, and it doesn't make one bit of a difference other than in inflating your delusion of grandeur.

---

"I have no idea whether you were for Iraq war or not (Hillary and Kerry were for the war when it mattered until they weren't)."

You mean the war the American public was lied into? How quickly you forget that it was ALL about WMD's!

---

Yes, we were all lied to about the WMD. But let's be honest. It really wasn't about WMD for the US. That was more for the UN. The tone and politics in the US after 9/11 made it so that we were all aligned on getting after those we thought were responsible. The bigger lie to Americans was that Iraq had anything to do with 9/11. If there was any country other than Afghanistan that was responsible, it was Saudi Arabia and not Iraq.

Besides, the point was that Dajo was such a military genius, he was against the Iraq war even when Hilary and Kerry were for it. Either he didn't care whether Iraq had WMD or he somehow knew more than the Senators on what the truth was.

dajo9 said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

I think all of us who opposed the War in Iraq from the beginning must be military geniuses to have wanted to avoid all this. Raise your hand if you voted for GWB - the blame lies with you.

---

I have no idea whether you were for Iraq war or not (Hillary and Kerry were for the war when it mattered until they weren't). All I can say is that, if you want to take this stand, be someone of significance so that your military genius in knowing the results of the Iraq war would have meant something. Because, frankly, outside of these hallowed halls of military excellence disguised as political forum of a football site, you raising your hand and pointing fingers amount to just sound and fury signifying nothing. No one cares, and it doesn't make one bit of a difference other than in inflating your delusion of grandeur.

---

I'll put you down as having voted for GWB

---

Don't care what precious list of yours you put me in. You are a person of no significance.

---

You have a great Christian heart

---

You are still an insignificant weasel. Beside, what do you care? You don't believe in any of that anyway.

Cal88 said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

MiZery said:

---

Better question is - why are there american soldiers in Iraq? Who are responsible for the deaths of 10s of thousands of civilians.

---

Is that really still a question? Did we all just skip the last 17 years and are we still asking why we made what we all agree was a huge mistake?

What happened with the Human Genome Project? What do you guys think about the creation of the Department of Homeland Security? Is it needed?

---

The Iraqis want us out of their country. The invasion and occupation of their country has been a total disaster for everyone involved, and it doesn't seem like your neocon ilk has learned anything from this.

---

So, we take marching orders from Iraq now?

Yes, the second Iraq war was a total disaster. So was Vietnam. Who is arguing with that?

But WWII and Korea were not. Afghanistan was not. Syria was not. The first Iraq war was not.

But according to you, let's build a great wall around US and pretend that we can be isolationist and that military might doesn't matter. It isn't as if we need to worry about Russia, China or Middle East.

calbear93 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

I think all of us who opposed the War in Iraq from the beginning must be military geniuses to have wanted to avoid all this. Raise your hand if you voted for GWB - the blame lies with you.

---

I have no idea whether you were for Iraq war or not (Hillary and Kerry were for the war when it mattered until they weren't). All I can say is that, if you want to take this stand, be someone of significance so that your military genius in knowing the results of the Iraq war would have meant something. Because, frankly, outside of these hallowed halls of military excellence disguised as political forum of a football site, you raising your hand and pointing fingers amount to just sound and fury signifying nothing. No one cares, and it doesn't make one bit of a difference other than in inflating your delusion of grandeur.

---

I'll put you down as having voted for GWB

---

Don't care what precious list of yours you put me in. You are a person of no significance.

---

You have a great Christian heart

---

You are still an insignificant weasel. Beside, what do you care? You don't believe in any of that anyway.

---

No, but I do love to find hypocrisy

dajo9 said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

I think all of us who opposed the War in Iraq from the beginning must be military geniuses to have wanted to avoid all this. Raise your hand if you voted for GWB - the blame lies with you.

---

I have no idea whether you were for Iraq war or not (Hillary and Kerry were for the war when it mattered until they weren't). All I can say is that, if you want to take this stand, be someone of significance so that your military genius in knowing the results of the Iraq war would have meant something. Because, frankly, outside of these hallowed halls of military excellence disguised as political forum of a football site, you raising your hand and pointing fingers amount to just sound and fury signifying nothing. No one cares, and it doesn't make one bit of a difference other than in inflating your delusion of grandeur.

---

I'll put you down as having voted for GWB

---

Don't care what precious list of yours you put me in. You are a person of no significance.

---

You have a great Christian heart

---

You are still an insignificant weasel. Beside, what do you care? You don't believe in any of that anyway.

---

No, but I do love to find hypocrisy

---

This coming from a fool who rails against corporate greed and others not caring for the poor but doesn't lift a finger to actually help out individuals stuck in poverty while he himself lives comfortably in suburbia benefiting from the same corporations. But go ahead and preach about your compassion and lack of hypocrisy. Physician, heal thyself.

calbear93 said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

MiZery said:

---

Better question is - why are there american soldiers in Iraq? Who are responsible for the deaths of 10s of thousands of civilians.

---

Is that really still a question? Did we all just skip the last 17 years and are we still asking why we made what we all agree was a huge mistake?

What happened with the Human Genome Project? What do you guys think about the creation of the Department of Homeland Security? Is it needed?

---

The Iraqis want us out of their country. The invasion and occupation of their country has been a total disaster for everyone involved, and it doesn't seem like your neocon ilk has learned anything from this.

---

So, we take marching orders from Iraq now?

Yes, the second Iraq war was a total disaster. So was Vietnam. Who is arguing with that?

But WWII and Korea were not. Afghanistan was not. Syria was not. The first Iraq war was not.

But according to you, let's build a great wall around US and pretend that we can be isolationist and that military might doesn't matter. It isn't as if we need to worry about Russia, China or Middle East.

---

I like this exercise and want to play along.

Totally worth it:
WWII

Not necessary for U.S. interests but I think the corporations liked it:
1st Iraq War, Panama

Total disaster:
2nd Iraq War, Vietnam, Korea, Afghanistan (our purpose was worthy but it was completely bungled by GWB)

I'm not about building walls. I think we should have a strong military and work with our allies to promote democracy and peace. We just aren't very good at nation-building.

BearNIt said:

---

Yes, that Kim lovefest with the Idiot in Chief is working out so well. The U.S. has been promised presents by the "Fearless Leader". Denuclearization is just around the corner, nothing to worry about there.

Our allies are right behind us because the Idiot in Chief has been so supportive of our allies. Our closest ally the UK gave us their strongest support telling all parties to de-escalate. Nothing to worry about in the Middle East.

---

This strike is Trump's belated Christmas present to Kim. Watch out or you're next. Speak softly and carry a big stick diplomacy.

dajo9 said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

I think all of us who opposed the War in Iraq from the beginning must be military geniuses to have wanted to avoid all this. Raise your hand if you voted for GWB - the blame lies with you.

---

I have no idea whether you were for Iraq war or not (Hillary and Kerry were for the war when it mattered until they weren't). All I can say is that, if you want to take this stand, be someone of significance so that your military genius in knowing the results of the Iraq war would have meant something. Because, frankly, outside of these hallowed halls of military excellence disguised as political forum of a football site, you raising your hand and pointing fingers amount to just sound and fury signifying nothing. No one cares, and it doesn't make one bit of a difference other than in inflating your delusion of grandeur.

---

I'll put you down as having voted for GWB

---

Don't care what precious list of yours you put me in. You are a person of no significance.

---

You have a great Christian heart

---

You are still an insignificant weasel. Beside, what do you care? You don't believe in any of that anyway.

---

No, but I do love to find hypocrisy

---

There is something to this. Obama, and to a lesser degree Clinton, were criticized by many, particualry Trump, for foreign policy by drone. If you attack an American embassy you should expect retaliation. I guess Trump now finally understands what Obama was forced to do. Obama has to make some tough decisions, and his Presidency is looking better and better as time goes by.

wifeisafurd said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

I think all of us who opposed the War in Iraq from the beginning must be military geniuses to have wanted to avoid all this. Raise your hand if you voted for GWB - the blame lies with you.

---

I have no idea whether you were for Iraq war or not (Hillary and Kerry were for the war when it mattered until they weren't). All I can say is that, if you want to take this stand, be someone of significance so that your military genius in knowing the results of the Iraq war would have meant something. Because, frankly, outside of these hallowed halls of military excellence disguised as political forum of a football site, you raising your hand and pointing fingers amount to just sound and fury signifying nothing. No one cares, and it doesn't make one bit of a difference other than in inflating your delusion of grandeur.

---

I'll put you down as having voted for GWB

---

Don't care what precious list of yours you put me in. You are a person of no significance.

---

You have a great Christian heart

---

You are still an insignificant weasel. Beside, what do you care? You don't believe in any of that anyway.

---

No, but I do love to find hypocrisy

---

There is something to this. Obama, and to a lesser degree Clinton, were criticized by many, particualry Trump, for foreign policy by drone. If you attack an American embassy you should expect retaliation. I guess Trump now finally understands what Obama was forced to do. Obama has to make some tough decisions, and his Presidency is looking better and better as time goes by.

---

But Obama didn't make the tough decision in Benghazi and obscured the facts, something silly about a youtube video and Clinton famously stated, "what difference at this point does it make?".

BearForce2 said:

---

BearNIt said:

---

Yes, that Kim lovefest with the Idiot in Chief is working out so well. The U.S. has been promised presents by the "Fearless Leader". Denuclearization is just around the corner, nothing to worry about there.

Our allies are right behind us because the Idiot in Chief has been so supportive of our allies. Our closest ally the UK gave us their strongest support telling all parties to de-escalate. Nothing to worry about in the Middle East.

---

This strike is Trump's belated Christmas present to Kim. Watch out or you're next. Speak softly and carry a big stick diplomacy.

---

What Would War with North Korea Look Like?


https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/what-would-war-with-north-korea-look-like
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/what-would-war-with-north-korea-look-like/amp

Well, last time I checked, we did a damn good job at nation-building in Japan and West Germany.

And ask the South Koreans if the Korean War was a "total disaster"? If MacArthur had gotten his way all of Korea and maybe China, a nascent communist state, would be free today like South Korea and Taiwan.

And Vietnam was a disaster because we repeated the mistakes of Korea and listened to a bunch of drug-filled, maggot-laden hippies, when we should have been crossing into North Vietnam and capturing Hanoi.

Panama -- we were right to go in and protect our interest in the Panama Canal while not letting the country become another Narco-State. In hindsight, worked out very well ... Panama is a pretty decent country these days. Same with Grenada.

First Gulf War (Iraq #1) was very much justified and masterful in how it was handled and executed. Left a tyrant in place who was pretty much nootered except to kill his own Kurds and Shia...again, who cares...let them all constantly fight each other until they all kill each other off.

Agreed ... decision on going forward in the Second Gulf War (Iraq #2) was a disaster. He was doing no harm to us. Could have easily continued to keep Saddam hemmed in without much effort. Or could have taken him out and let another Baathist take over with the explicit warning that they'll be taken out if they didn't do what we said. Just stupid and more stupid as time went on.

And of course, WWII was perfectly ok ... had to participate or face extermination in a matter of years from the Axis.

WWI was a horrifically stupid war to get involved in. Should have completely stayed out and like the Muslims in the Middle East, just let these Europeans do what they've always done and just fight each other to the death and grind and wear each down.
All you needed to do was protect American-flagged ships with American warships and if you're dumb enough to get on an Allied ship and it got sunk by a German/Central Powers sub then that's your problem). It's not like the governments of Imperial Germany or the Austro-Hungarian Empire were much different from Great Britain or Italy or France ... they weren't driven by some evil ideology like Nazism/Fascism or Islamo-Fascism or Communism. They embraced Western Civilization values and simply were doing what they had done for centuries. They weren't going to try and conquer us like the Japs wanted to.

Stuck on Stupid!

BearForce2 said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

calbear93 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

I think all of us who opposed the War in Iraq from the beginning must be military geniuses to have wanted to avoid all this. Raise your hand if you voted for GWB - the blame lies with you.

---

I have no idea whether you were for Iraq war or not (Hillary and Kerry were for the war when it mattered until they weren't). All I can say is that, if you want to take this stand, be someone of significance so that your military genius in knowing the results of the Iraq war would have meant something. Because, frankly, outside of these hallowed halls of military excellence disguised as political forum of a football site, you raising your hand and pointing fingers amount to just sound and fury signifying nothing. No one cares, and it doesn't make one bit of a difference other than in inflating your delusion of grandeur.

---

I'll put you down as having voted for GWB

---

Don't care what precious list of yours you put me in. You are a person of no significance.

---

You have a great Christian heart

---

You are still an insignificant weasel. Beside, what do you care? You don't believe in any of that anyway.

---

No, but I do love to find hypocrisy

---

There is something to this. Obama, and to a lesser degree Clinton, were criticized by many, particualry Trump, for foreign policy by drone. If you attack an American embassy you should expect retaliation. I guess Trump now finally understands what Obama was forced to do. Obama has to make some tough decisions, and his Presidency is looking better and better as time goes by.

---

But Obama didn't make the tough decision in Benghazi and obscured the facts, something silly about a youtube video and Clinton famously stated, "what difference at this point does it make?".

---

U.S. officials said: surveillance over Libya would increase, including the use of unmanned drones, to "hunt" for the attackers. There were drone strikes in Libya against militias, and they agreed to disband and turn in their weapons, which they did. That sounds like a millitary response to me.

What happened in disclosure of events or investigations is a whole different can of worms.

The 1000 Year Pax Americana aka the Neocon wet dream.

BearForce2 said:

---

BearNIt said:

---

Yes, that Kim lovefest with the Idiot in Chief is working out so well. The U.S. has been promised presents by the "Fearless Leader". Denuclearization is just around the corner, nothing to worry about there.

Our allies are right behind us because the Idiot in Chief has been so supportive of our allies. Our closest ally the UK gave us their strongest support telling all parties to de-escalate. Nothing to worry about in the Middle East.

---

This strike is Trump's belated Christmas present to Kim. Watch out or you're next. Speak softly and carry a big stick diplomacy.

---

So let me get this straight`, the Idiot in Chief's belated Christmas to Kim was bombing an Iranian General and an Iraqi Hezbollah Deputy? Next, you say I should watch out or I'm next. Hmmmm?

The strike on Suleimani was wildly reckless. Blowback will come


https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jan/03/the-strike-on-suleimani-was-wildly-reckless-blowback-will-come?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

bearister said:

---

The strike on Suleimani was wildly reckless. Blowback will come


https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jan/03/the-strike-on-suleimani-was-wildly-reckless-blowback-will-come?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

---

Forget about leasing opinions of others.

If it is true that there was a plot by Suleimani to attack our forces or our embassies, what do you think would have been the right course of action considering such short time frame to take action? I would really like to understand what you view as the right course of action in that situation.

I don't know if I am comfortable with the consequences of escalating this tension with Iran, but I also think there is a strong argument to not allow countries like Iran to become even more embolden to attack us after letting him off after he coordinated attacks by Iraqi militia against our forces after the second Iraq war and after he coordinated recent attack against our embassy.

bearnation93 said:

---

Well, last time I checked, we did a damn good job at nation-building in Japan and West Germany.

And ask the South Koreans if the Korean War was a "total disaster"? If MacArthur had gotten his way all of Korea and maybe China, a nascent communist state, would be free today like South Korea and Taiwan.

And Vietnam was a disaster because we repeated the mistakes of Korea and listened to a bunch of drug-filled, maggot-laden hippies, when we should have been crossing into North Vietnam and capturing Hanoi.

Panama -- we were right to go in and protect our interest in the Panama Canal while not letting the country become another Narco-State. In hindsight, worked out very well ... Panama is a pretty decent country these days. Same with Grenada.

First Gulf War (Iraq #1) was very much justified and masterful in how it was handled and executed. Left a tyrant in place who was pretty much nootered except to kill his own Kurds and Shia...again, who cares...let them all constantly fight each other until they all kill each other off.

Agreed ... decision on going forward in the Second Gulf War (Iraq #2) was a disaster. He was doing no harm to us. Could have easily continued to keep Saddam hemmed in without much effort. Or could have taken him out and let another Baathist take over with the explicit warning that they'll be taken out if they didn't do what we said. Just stupid and more stupid as time went on.

And of course, WWII was perfectly ok ... had to participate or face extermination in a matter of years from the Axis.

WWI was a horrifically stupid war to get involved in. Should have completely stayed out and like the Muslims in the Middle East, just let these Europeans do what they've always done and just fight each other to the death and grind and wear each down.
All you needed to do was protect American-flagged ships with American warships and if you're dumb enough to get on an Allied ship and it got sunk by a German/Central Powers sub then that's your problem). It's not like the governments of Imperial Germany or the Austro-Hungarian Empire were much different from Great Britain or Italy or France ... they weren't driven by some evil ideology like Nazism/Fascism or Islamo-Fascism or Communism. They embraced Western Civilization values and simply were doing what they had done for centuries. They weren't going to try and conquer us like the Japs wanted to.

Stuck on Stupid!

---

I don't know how you continue a conversation with someone who thinks the Korean war was a disaster and we should have let China take all of Korea. It is as if this person is completely oblivious to the importance of our alliance with South Korea and Japan in reigning in aggression of China. But he is the military genius.

Cal88 said:

---

What a ****ing idiot Trump is, this will cost him the election.

---

I don't think so. I think it helps him get re-elected . Of course it is highly volatile but Iran has serious domestic problems while fighting proxy wars in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen. Maybe the ayatollahs don't want to escalate right now, especially since they don't have a commander as good or as successful as Suelimani. This was a huge loss.

There is also no domestic opposition to this here. There is no peace party, only two war parties. There will be the usual BS about "we weren't informed" but the Dems will go along with the exception of Gabbard and Sanders. ( A progressive amendment to the Defense budget trying to stop war without authorization of Congress was widely defeated by both parties.)

So Trump will head into the State of the Union with two dead terrorist scalps, NAFTA, a probable China deal and a humming economy. And how will the Dems counter- with telephone calls to the Ukraine!

I thought Trump's re-election was unlikely- just don't run another moron and sit around and watch him self- destruct and tell people how you will improve their lives -but with the crazed focus on Russia and a partisan inconsequential impeachment it now seems 50/50 Also, if war with Iran is on the horizon- and this has been pushed in conjunction with Israel since his election- Joe Biden will become the John Kerry " I voted for it before I didnt" peace candidate of 2020. Doomed.

No doubt the Korean War was good for South Korea but now we have a madman with nukes in the North of a divided country we are still technically at war with. The outcome was better for America in Vietnam, which we outright lost to a Chinese proxy. Vietnam did not remain divided in perpetual war with itself and America. Now instead of nukes they have Nike factories. Both of them are disasters for America but Vietnam was only a short term disaster because at least the situation was resolved, even if we lost. In Korea we still have big problems 70 years later.

In Korea we were fighting a Chinese proxy. Vietnam engagement was solely because of fear that monolithic communism would spread throughout SE Asia.- "domino theory"- and that we were fighting the Soviet Union and China in a proxy war. But there was no monolithic communism at work, just nationalism- Ho Chi Minh wasn't interested in becoming a vassal state. China didn't and still does't have a lock on Vietnam. China and the Soviets were also at odds which Nixon successfully exploited. It was strictly a "cold war" narrative but times had changed.

Everybody that thinks straw men for the tRump Crime Family shifted out of equities before the good general got reduced to a ring please raise your hand.*





*The previously insolvent tRumps get soggy in their dad jeans just thinking about possessing the key to the market manipulation kingdom (especially when the enforcement wings of the IRS and SEC are being gutted faster than the EPA).

Star this if you think we have a president who would never stoop to starting a war with Iran with the primary objective of getting re-elected.

Anarchistbear said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

What a ****ing idiot Trump is, this will cost him the election.

---

I don't think so. I think it helps him get re-elected . Of course it is highly volatile but Iran has serious domestic problems while fighting proxy wars in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen. Maybe the ayatollahs don't want to escalate right now, especially since they don't have a commander as good or as successful as Suelimani. This was a huge loss.

There is also no domestic opposition to this here. There is no peace party, only two war parties. There will be the usual BS about "we weren't informed" but the Dems will go along with the exception of Gabbard and Sanders. ( A progressive amendment to the Defense budget trying to stop war without authorization of Congress was widely defeated by both parties.)

So Trump will head into the State of the Union with two dead terrorist scalps, NAFTA, a probable China deal and a humming economy. And how will the Dems counter- with telephone calls to the Ukraine!

I thought Trump's re-election was unlikely- just don't run another moron and sit around and watch him self- destruct and tell people how you will improve their lives -but with the crazed focus on Russia and a partisan inconsequential impeachment it now seems 50/50 Also, if war with Iran is on the horizon- and this has been pushed in conjunction with Israel since his election- Joe Biden will become the John Kerry " I voted for it before I didnt" peace candidate of 2020. Doomed.

---

This may be a non-issue. Not many people oppose retaliating against a country that supported an attack on our embassy. The Dems may make some noise about not be consulted, but no one outside the beltway will care. Iran could lower the temperature less it become over extended. Or Trump could utterly screw it up and turn it into an active shooting war. You have a lot more faith in Trump's abilities than I do.

calbear93 said:

---

bearister said:

---

The strike on Suleimani was wildly reckless. Blowback will come


https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jan/03/the-strike-on-suleimani-was-wildly-reckless-blowback-will-come?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

---

Forget about leasing opinions of others.

If it is true that there was a plot by Suleimani to attack our forces or our embassies, what do you think would have been the right course of action considering such short time frame to take action? I would really like to understand what you view as the right course of action in that situation.

I don't know if I am comfortable with the consequences of escalating this tension with Iran, but I also think there is a strong argument to not allow countries like Iran to become even more embolden to attack us after letting him off after he coordinated attacks by Iraqi militia against our forces after the second Iraq war and after he coordinated recent attack against our embassy.

---

Serious question: do you trust Trump to navigate this carefully and appropriately with America's best interests at the forefront?

You are saying, quite correctly, that there may be circumstances under which this was the right decision but that decision has consequences and we have to navigate those with Trump at the helm. How does that make you feel?

I don't have a lot of faith in him but I certainly don't think it cost him the election as Cal88 posits. I think it's a positive. Iran may do something but it will be asymmetrical not a direct attack - more likely to rally the country than not.

My operating assumption is that this has little effect on Trump's re-election chances one way or another. This isn't 9/11 and the public has a lot more fatigue around Middle East war. On the other hand, the Republicans and conservative media will carry water for Trump as usual, so his base will mostly remain solid.

Of course if he really bungles things (always possible with Trump) then it could hurt him.