First, you’re changing what I said so I have the distinct impression you’re being disingenuous. My contention is that the US military has always advised against war with Iran because of Hormuz. I’ll respond once more, granting you the benefit of the doubt.So you’re contending that he ignored all US intelligence in favor of Israeli intel. What are you basing that conclusion on?
What I read shortly after Trump attacked Iran made it clear (and this was before Hormuz became a central issue) that the US military had for decades found no solution to the Hormuz problem thus hamstringing the US in attacking Iran since Carter. This basically allowed Iran to foment trouble in the Middle East unabated, despite our sanctions and despite their 8-year war with Iraq.
Charlie Kirk had relations with Israel and Netanyahu and evidence was aware of Israel’s push to get the US in a war with Iran because Kirk was vocal about his opposition to said war for at least six months before his death.
Trump met with Netanyahu shortly before the decapitation.
Obviously our military is not going to reveal to the public their advice to Trump prior to the decap. Obviously after he majes that decision, they will advise him to the best of their ability to support his decision.
None of that, 0, means that anyone suggesting he ignored US military intelligence & developed his own plans with foreign nations is anything other than wild speculation that you want so badly to be true because you have TDS, but carry on.
Where were the mine sweepers? If Trump is a military strategist, why were they thousands of miles away?
Trump isn’t a military strategist, that’s the point. He approved action on plans that were presented to him, by our military. Of that there is no doubt.
Trump isn’t a military strategist, that’s the point. He approved action on plans that were presented to him, by our military. Of that there is no doubt.
My take, which combined with $5 you can get a Starbucks, is he was told from Israel they had a shot at the Iranian leader but there wasn't much time. He wanted to take the shot so we threw a plan together. There was no nuclear urgency, Midnight Hammer gave us breathing room. There wasn't time to worry about minesweepers or anything else, the target would disappear.
But the question I think he didn't consider is what happens after the decapitation strike. Venezuela led him to think that hitting some other security targets would cause it all to collapse in a house of cards. No need for the minesweepers which is why they were not immediately recalled.
I supported Bush 43 in invading Iraq, he had "proof". Of course the proof came from the source curveball and no one else believed him but us. We believed him because we wanted to believe him, what he said we believed and wanted to be true. I think that happened here. We wanted a decapitation strike to mean a free iran. I don't think Trump looked the gift horse in the mouth even one time.
I supported Bush 43 in invading Iraq, he had "proof". Of course the proof came from the source curveball and no one else believed him but us. We believed him because we wanted to believe him, what he said we believed and wanted to be true. I think that happened here. We wanted a decapitation strike to mean a free iran. I don't think Trump looked the gift horse in the mouth even one time.
Just a corrective note. He was one source, not THE source. All of our intelligence services and those of our allies assessed that Iraq had WMD. Of course, there were dissenting opinions in every intelligence service - that's how it works. However, the most confident and consensus estimates was that Iraq had them. Saddam actually wanted everyone to believe it because he felt it was a deterrence, so we all did. His own military believed it. They had their gas masks with them in the field in case Saddam used them. We did too. Even on the ships.
@aloha-hoosier the nuclear part wasn't him, but pretty much all the biological program was including the mobile labs.
As to the atomic, the head of the IAEA testified to the UN before the invasion they didn't see evidence of a program.
My take, which combined with $5 you can get a Starbucks, is he was told from Israel they had a shot at the Iranian leader but there wasn't much time. He wanted to take the shot so we threw a plan together. There was no nuclear urgency, Midnight Hammer gave us breathing room. There wasn't time to worry about minesweepers or anything else, the target would disappear.
But the question I think he didn't consider is what happens after the decapitation strike. Venezuela led him to think that hitting some other security targets would cause it all to collapse in a house of cards. No need for the minesweepers which is why they were not immediately recalled.
Rubio spilled the beans on Day Two -- Israel was going to take out the leadership, and when Iran retaliated it was going to be us taking the brunt of it. We went after their missile capacity hoping to prevent or at least mitigate the extent of the retaliatory damage, and we didn't come close to putting them out of business. We'd have been better off letting Israel do what they were determined to do and letting Tehran know it would be leveled if they came after us.
@aloha-hoosier the nuclear part wasn't him, but pretty much all the biological program was including the mobile labs.
As to the atomic, the head of the IAEA testified to the UN before the invasion they didn't see evidence of a program.
But Yellowcake!!!
@aloha-hoosier the nuclear part wasn't him, but pretty much all the biological program was including the mobile labs.
As to the atomic, the head of the IAEA testified to the UN before the invasion they didn't see evidence of a program.
He provided additional details but our intelligence and those of our allies already assessed that Iraq had WMD remaining. I sat through Top Secret intelligence briefs when I was on my fifth ship, before the Iraq war, that said this. The real question about this war was "what should we do about it?" If we had 20/20 hindsight we might have made another decision. Personally, I think the invasion was justified, but after ousting/killing Saddam we should have left and let the Iraqis figure it out. Despite all the mistakes we made though, Iraq is actually a partner nation at present, and our largest US embassy is in Baghdad. Been there, and it's very nice. 😉
What we do know explicitly is what Trump said at the beginning, including:
”This regime will soon learn that no one should challenge the strength and might of the United States Armed Forces. I built and rebuilt our military in my first administration and there is no military on earth even close to its power, strength or sophistication. My administration is taking every possible step to minimize the risk to U.S. personnel in the region.”
What we do know explicitly is what Trump said at the beginning, including:
”This regime will soon learn that no one should challenge the strength and might of the United States Armed Forces. I built and rebuilt our military in my first administration and there is no military on earth even close to its power, strength or sophistication. My administration is taking every possible step to minimize the risk to U.S. personnel in the region.”
So we failed that. Thirteen US bases in the Middle East have been rendered "nearly uninhabitable". If one doesn't like that link, there are plenty more. About the time he made that quote, he made quotes that we had basically rendered Iran incapable of responding. That doesn't seem accurate. Heck, even in the Gulf War, we found it difficult to wipe out all the scuds.
If we entered this war because Israel was going to attack and we felt we needed to protect our bases, 1) it hasn't worked and 2) shows Trump isn't the colossus on the world stage some think. If we entered to destroy Iraq's nuclear capability, what evidence did we have that Midnight Hammer didn't do exactly that? Was Trump told that in war games, Iran always blockaded the Strait? What led him to think this would be different?
Winning a war totally by air has been a wet dream for a long time for some. Going back to WWII and our strategic bombing campaign where some thought we could knock out Germany and Japan without ground forces. It proves very difficult to do. Was Trump told we could do it or did he come to that conclusion totally on his own? If he was told, did he challenge it?
We'll probably never know what was said and by whom. But the early bluster of how we destroyed Iran's ability to fight and that they would surrender any day appears to have been inaccurate.
https://twitter.com/CENTCOM/status/2101292730030669968/video/1?s=46
It doesn't matter how much propaganda you sh#t libs post and digest, Iran is still f#cked.
Interesting.
What we do know explicitly is what Trump said at the beginning, including:
”This regime will soon learn that no one should challenge the strength and might of the United States Armed Forces. I built and rebuilt our military in my first administration and there is no military on earth even close to its power, strength or sophistication. My administration is taking every possible step to minimize the risk to U.S. personnel in the region.”
So we failed that. Thirteen US bases in the Middle East have been rendered "nearly uninhabitable". If one doesn't like that link, there are plenty more. About the time he made that quote, he made quotes that we had basically rendered Iran incapable of responding. That doesn't seem accurate. Heck, even in the Gulf War, we found it difficult to wipe out all the scuds.
If we entered this war because Israel was going to attack and we felt we needed to protect our bases, 1) it hasn't worked and 2) shows Trump isn't the colossus on the world stage some think. If we entered to destroy Iraq's nuclear capability, what evidence did we have that Midnight Hammer didn't do exactly that? Was Trump told that in war games, Iran always blockaded the Strait? What led him to think this would be different?
Winning a war totally by air has been a wet dream for a long time for some. Going back to WWII and our strategic bombing campaign where some thought we could knock out Germany and Japan without ground forces. It proves very difficult to do. Was Trump told we could do it or did he come to that conclusion totally on his own? If he was told, did he challenge it?
We'll probably never know what was said and by whom. But the early bluster of how we destroyed Iran's ability to fight and that they would surrender any day appears to have been inaccurate.
Trump was emboldened by the relative ease and quick success of the Maduro operation, and probably thought that this "excursion" would also be quick and easy. Also, I have little doubt that Netanyahu was encouraging him, blowing smoke up his ass that the attack on Iran and elimination of leadership would cement his (Trump's) legacy as the man who brought peace to the Middle East, saved Israel and became widely recognized as the greatest president in US history. Everyone knows he eats that kind of bullshit flattery right up. Instead, this war has made him look weak, indecisive and incompetent, and he has further destabilized the Middle East.
And what Trump's war has done to prices is a whole nother story. Inflation is higher now than it was at the end of Biden's term.
Time to vote this incompetent, corrupt lunatic's enablers OUT.
@big-ryan no bc the other side are Dems. You can never vote in Dems. Next Republican up. I’ll even try an @aloha-hoosier pub. But never a Dem.
and as for inflation it hit a 40 year high under Biden. 9 percent. Trump inflation is nothing like that. What’s more the only reason the big bills stopped under Biden is manchin sinema and they lost the house.
your memory is awful. Now enjoy your Sunday. Your bosses will have you by the balls by six am tomorrow I’m sure