Oh joy, another round of “Trump hates the dead soldiers”
Progressive shitheads love going back to that well.
He doesn't hate them. He just doesn't give a shit.
Yesterday he compared his "skirmish" to past wars and was almost bragging about "only" 18 service members' deaths in this war. That's a slap in the face to the families of the dead soldiers. They sure as hell don't view it as "only" 18.
Every day and twice on Sundays Trump repeats his mantra of "Iran can never have a nuclear weapon." Great. Who would disagree with that. But what is he DOING about it? When and how is he going to get to the enriched uranium? He has no fucking clue, and he's utterly full of shit, 24/7.
Several of the families of the fallen have gone on record saying they felt he did "give a shit". He also launched a war, to stop Iran from attaining a nuclear weapon. That's what he's doing about it. Maybe he'll be able to ensure they don't have one for the forseeable future but if not, it'll be incumbent on the next administration to take the baton. Thank him for buying us another 5+ years of a non-nuclear Iran. Show some humility.
You come here and work yourself into a lather everyday about something said the previous day by Trump. Examine your autistic pedantry. You're not a well man. Your brain is completely fucked.
Hardly breaking news, but Trump truly has no shame or decency. He's willing to exploit dead American soldiers for his political messaging. "All of them said very strongly, 'We cannot let Iran have a nuclear weapon,'" Trump claimed."
And he has no empathy. He can't even fake it. Here's what he said to reporters yesterday when asked about the fallen soldiers: "All I’m going to say is we love you, we love your child, and that’s what they are to them, they’re their children. There’s no games, no nothing that’s their child and, er, all you
Hardly breaking news, but Trump truly has no shame or decency. He's willing to exploit dead American soldiers for his political messaging. "All of them said very strongly, 'We cannot let Iran have a nuclear weapon,'" Trump claimed."
And he has no empathy. He can't even fake it. Here's what he said to reporters yesterday when asked about the fallen soldiers: "All I’m going to say is we love you, we love your child, and that’s what they are to them, they’re their children. There’s no games, no nothing that’s their child and, er, all you
Oh joy, another round of “Trump hates the dead soldiers”
Progressive shitheads love going back to that well.
He doesn't hate them. He just doesn't give a shit.
Yesterday he compared his "skirmish" to past wars and was almost bragging about "only" 18 service members' deaths in this war. That's a slap in the face to the families of the dead soldiers. They sure as hell don't view it as "only" 18.
Every day and twice on Sundays Trump repeats his mantra of "Iran can never have a nuclear weapon." Great. Who would disagree with that. But what is he DOING about it? When and how is he going to get to the enriched uranium? He has no fucking clue, and he's utterly full of shit, 24 removed link
Several of the families of the fallen have gone on record saying they felt he did "give a shit". He also launched a war, to stop Iran from attaining a nuclear weapon. That's what he's doing about it. Maybe he'll be able to ensure they don't have one for the forseeable future but if not, it'll be incumbent on the next administration to take the baton. Thank him for buying us another 5+ years of a non-nuclear Iran. Show some humility.
You come here and work yourself into a lather everyday about something said the previous day by Trump. Examine your autistic pedantry. You're not a well man. Your brain is completely fucked.
I remain open-minded but let's thank him after the war is over, when we've verified their nuke program is kaput. Until then, we should be asking what this admin is doing constantly. What they have done -- and this is verifiable -- is remind the Iranians that with a few soldiers, a truck, and a drone they can negatively affect our everyday lives.
@fredom would a nuclear Iran theoretically be able to exercise even more control over the Strait?
Not directly, because Iran wouldn't and couldn't use threat of nuclear attack to close the strait. Even crazy people understand starting a nuclear war isn't merely an escalation. For a country like Iran, it would be a final move. Crippling the world economy isn't worth being evaporated. However, it would give them substantial leverage in negotiations. Land invasion would be forever off the table if it ever really was on the table.
But it's not like the world always knew bombing the crap out of them would end their nuke program with the only problem being no one had the balls to do it (except Israel). The math never worked for us before because success was always far from certain and the consequences of failure were too high. That's where we are now. We have no clue how far we pushed back their program and we've reminded them they can shut down the strait for a few hundred grand.
Forget politics, we should all be asking what's being done about all this. it's an absolute disaster.
@fredom got it. So it makes any conventional kinetic movement against Iran as a response to closing the strait pretty much impossible. Which put another way, allows Iran to exercise more control over the Strait.
If you’re going to hang around this board for a while, you’d do well to just admit when someone spots a flaw in your argument. Rather than tying yourself into knots to justify your previous position.
@fredom got it. So it makes any conventional kinetic movement against Iran as a response to closing the strait pretty much impossible. Which put another way, allows Iran to exercise more control over the Strait.
If you’re going to hang around this board for a while, you’d do well to just admit when someone spots a flaw in your argument. Rather than tying yourself into knots to justify your previous position.
No, it doesn't. Nuke armed countries still get attacked conventionally. You aren't understanding what escalation is.
My dude, i was just replying to a post. I was being cool about it. We've had exchanges before. One time you were trying to reference Tolstoy in some dumb argument you were making. It was like a grade schooler trying to write a dissertation. I still laugh about it sometimes. lol
@fredom got it. So it makes any conventional kinetic movement against Iran as a response to closing the strait pretty much impossible. Which put another way, allows Iran to exercise more control over the Strait.
If you’re going to hang around this board for a while, you’d do well to just admit when someone spots a flaw in your argument. Rather than tying yourself into knots to justify your previous position.
No, it doesn't. Nuke armed countries still get attacked conventionally. You aren't understanding what escalation is.
My dude, i was just replying to a post. I was being cool about it. We've had exchanges before. One time you were trying to reference Tolstoy in some dumb argument you were making. It was like a grade schooler trying to write a dissertation. I still laugh about it sometimes. lol
Good thing you edited the first sentence. Well keep the inanity of the original a secret between us 😉.
Falklands, Paki/ China/ India border and terrorism skirmishes, and Ukrainian missiles and drones into Russia. There are your examples of conventional strikes on nuclear powers in the last half century. When spelled out like that it makes the argument you’re making sound incredibly silly.
But for the sake of argument let’s take the only one that is really comparable in the Ukrainian attacks on Russia. According to the fredom school of war “even crazy people understand starting a nuclear war isn’t merely an escalation”.
Putin isn’t crazy. His conventional forces are unimpressive. With American air and naval support we could push Russian forces out of Ukraine all together. Putin understands that being pushed out of Ukrainian territory in a war he started isn’t “worth being evaporated”.
Now that last paragraph I wrote is of course ridiculous. But that’s your shit logic we’re dealing with here not mine.
Bottom line, Iran with a nuke allows them to toll and open and close the Strait at their whim with no realistic option of stopping them. It is something they would use. The power over the Strait isn’t some revelation born of this war as people like yourself would suggest. That’s asinine. It’s being used now as a last ditch attempt to varying success thanks to political hysterics like yourself calling slightly more expensive gas an “absolute disaster”.
Also, you joined the board yesterday… You’re an incarnation of what previous retard? Please describe the context of the Tolstoy reference as well, better yet, link it. That can’t be a name thrown around often on this board, should be easy to find with the search function. It still makes you laugh (a weird lie, you freak) so I’m assuming you remember the context.
The Iran War is forcing the administration to draw down on our emergency stockpiles (the SPR) of crude to dangerously low levels not seen in 40 years. "It's a pretty monumental number to hear multidecade lows reached. The longer this goes on, the fewer tools the administration has in dealing with it and the more risk there is to a slingshot for costs."
At the same time, the US stockpile of air defense missiles is being dangerously depleted, creating increased danger for our service members in the Middle East and raising concerns for readiness for larger global conflicts like China.
In sum, the “No New Wars!” president’s war, with shifting objectives, inconsistent messaging, and no articulable strategy for a successful conclusion, has exposed new strategic vulnerabilities for the US straining military stockpiles, raising regional risks for service members, and triggering domestic economic pain.
@big-ryan it’s clear there is a unit economics problem with air defense. This isn’t a U.S. specific problem either. Any country would run into the same thing. We’re at the forefront (along with Israel) of fixing the problem, which is reassuring.
If a few months with Iran puts out THAAD’s and Patriots at desperate levels, then they wouldn’t have last weeks with China.
@big-ryan it’s clear there is a unit economics problem with air defense. This isn’t a U.S. specific problem either. Any country would run into the same thing. We’re at the forefront (along with Israel) of fixing the problem, which is reassuring.
If a few months with Iran puts out THAAD’s and Patriots at desperate levels, then they wouldn’t have last weeks with China.
"Iran still has access to ample and relatively cheaper missiles and drones, which are now able to better evade America’s air defense systems."
Retaliatory attacks (against the US) continue to come "at an alarming rate."
Much of the US' inventory of advanced weapons is "not expected to return to pre-war levels until the end of the decade."
@big-ryan you would think with how often you harp on air defense stockpiles you would have done a modicum of research into how the issue is being addressed.
Is it an issue you’re actually interested in outside of wielding it as a club against an administration you hate and a war you disagree with?
Israel, the United States, and Ukraine are leading the world in addressing the air defense unit economics problem. They face an unsustainable asymmetry where multi-million-dollar interceptors target low-cost drones and rockets, prompting major shifts toward directed-energy and low-cost alternatives. [1, 2, 3, 4]
Key Nations and Strategies
Israel:
Pioneered the Iron Dome system to manage mass short-range threats.
Developing the Iron Beam high-energy laser system to achieve a marginal cost-per-shot measured in single digits of dollars. [1]
United States:
Investing heavily in directed-energy programs like HELIOS to offset the high cost of standard interceptors.
Exploring rapid prototyping of low-cost cruise missile analogues and affordable interceptors through initiatives like the LUCAS program. []
Ukraine:
Forced by intense conflict scaling to manufacture millions of domestic low-cost drones.
Partnering with European developers to construct indigenous, affordable cruise missiles and deep-strike alternatives (such as the FP-1 and Flamingo) to bypass reliance on expensive Western stock. [1, 2, 3]
