Timing the Iran war for maximum election-year boost
July 21, 2019 at 3:01 PM - Views: 58 #89332Spud DemonParticipant
- Total Posts: 139
The UK seized an Iranian oil tanker, the Grace 1, which was headed for Syria and had avoided the Suez Canal by sailing all the way around Africa. Although the UK says it does not have sanctions against Iran, it is a party to EU sanctions against Syria.
Iran has responded in kind and seized a UK tanker, the Stena Impero. Before that, they had their sights on the British Heritage, but backed off when they realized they were outgunned.
Iran recently shot down a US drone which had flown over its territory. Trump originally ordered a retaliatory airstrike but called it off at the last minute (he says) because it would have been disproportionate. More recently, he claimed the US shot down an Iranian drone, although the military clarified that rather than shoot it, it jammed its communications and assume it crashed. Iran said all of its drones returned safely that day.
Why is the escalation so slow on Trump’s part? Do you think he actually cares about human life?
Look at Bush 41. He had a war which was politically popular, militarily successful, and fiscally incredible (almost every UN member state either participated or helped pay the US bill). But that was early in his term. By the time 1992 came around, people forgot how much they loved his war, and he lost the election to Clinton.
Trump intends to avoid that fate. Like his fellow TV star Xena the Warrior Princess, he will spend most of the episode building justification for an orgy of violence which won’t happen until just before the end of the episode (his term).
The sad part is that although I can see this happening (in slow motion for now), I can’t stop it.
July 21, 2019 at 7:27 PM #89391elias39Participant
- Total Posts: 5,325
Yep. Powerless. All you can do is hate it, and that just ruins your life. I hate being angry too much of the time. I hear it from my wife, my kids…I’ve become the dwarf Grumpy. Wife even bought me a “Grumpy” sweatshirt last year. Funny thing is I’m one of the funniest guys you’ll ever meet. I’m always making people laugh…well if I’m not in an ugly mood because I just watched a bit of news!
I’m 67 and I’ve been politically aware since high school.
It has never been this bad! I’ve never felt so hopeless. If we start raining death down on Iran I don’t know what I’ll do. I wonder how it feels to SNAP?
July 21, 2019 at 7:43 PM #89395Ohio BarbarianModerator
- Total Posts: 22,626
I understand the feeling completely. I imagine Bernie Sanders feels it even more than we do. Nonetheless I will offer this little article from Military Watch. It describes Iran’s new Khordad 15 anti-aircraft missile system which, while not as good as the S-400 the Russians gave Venezuela that deterred an American invasion of that country, is good enough to shoot down American stealth fighters and bombers.
Yes, the Empire’s military machine could overwhelm it, but there would be far higher American casualties than there were in the conquest of Iraq. Hopefully, that will continue to persuade the Joint Chiefs that invading Iran is a Very Bad Idea. We know they are opposed because “top Pentagon officials” opposed a retaliatory strike after the drone was shot down. “Top Pentagon officials” means the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
It is better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.--Eugene Debs
You can jail a revolutionary, but you can't jail the revolution.--Fred Hampton
July 22, 2019 at 3:34 PM #89645Spud DemonParticipant
- Total Posts: 139
The way things are going, it doesn’t look like a regime-change-quagmire war is brewing, more like a naval war for complete domination of the Persian Gulf, and while we’re at it, the Arabian Sea. Victory would mean continued economic starvation of Iran.
Tactically, it would be a not-huge effort for the US to take over the islands where Iran has naval bases and to obliterate its coastal bases. I think the Khordad-15 would make things dangerous for US aircraft flying overhead, but I don’t think it could protect against a large cruise missile assault. The islands would become permanent US bases, “so that Iran can never threaten international shipping again”.
My wife pointed out that economic starvation is what led to WW1. Could this become WW3? Only if a major power steps in to help Iran.
July 21, 2019 at 9:42 PM #89413EarthartistParticipant
- Total Posts: 1,733
So far the two empire builders are the only ones who are remotely interested, besides Israel. Israel would be signing it’s death warrant along with Saudi
The rest of the world would also be paying heavily as the estimated price that oil would go to is 400 a barrel. The US and England would likely start WW3 as they are not dealing with Afghanistan or Iraq, or even Vietnam. They are dealing with a highly educated country with plans in place as well as weapons. They are dealing with a country that will fight to the end, as well as countries around it that will support it. The tolerance for america is coming to an end. If this war happens it maybe worse for us then we have ever had in the past. Americans are mostly living on the edge, can you imagine the price of gas going through the roof? A draft, more and more money going to the military? Terrorism directed at us for real! I think that is what will happen, Trump and uk and Israel , are playing with fire with a world that is sick of us and the UK and israel
July 21, 2019 at 9:55 PM #89418EarthartistParticipant
- Total Posts: 1,733
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/51947.htm This is pretty good
July 21, 2019 at 10:32 PM #894383fingerbrownParticipant
- Total Posts: 3,879
At some point the rest of the world is going to stand up to the America/Israel/Saudi axis of thugs. I don’t know who exactly that would be, or who the good guys are, if any, but I do know that right now, in 2019, it isn’t America/Israel/Saudi Arabia.
All governments lie to their citizen's, but only Americans believe theirs.
July 22, 2019 at 12:34 AM #89471sadoldgirlParticipant
- Total Posts: 1,511
I don’t think that Trump wants a war in which
American Soldiers would die. Otherwise he does not
mind selling US weapons to other nations or putting
sanctions onto countries, which don’t obey the dictates
of the empire. However, I believed for a long time and
by now am convinced that the so called “Commander
in Chief” is not the “decider” anymore. He is just doing
the job of justifying the decisions of the DS. And the
fact of the UK starting the provocation, just as in the
Skripal case, gives me pause. We also have to consider
Kushner (as Israeli) and Bolton (US/Israeli citizen ship).
Yet again, Trump needs the votes, and most Americans
and that includes many Repugs are against that war. If,
indeed, the Joint Chiefs of Staff decide against a war, it
will be hard for the neocons and Israel to succeed.
July 22, 2019 at 11:28 AM #89586Pam2Participant
- Total Posts: 9,845
Agree with those who said war with Iran won’t be popular. In 2016 Trump got some votes because he sounded _less_ hawkish than Hillary. The American public doesn’t want this.
July 22, 2019 at 4:33 PM #89670game meatParticipant
- Total Posts: 1,571
If Trump starts a war with Iran:
People who support Trump will support the war because Trump started it. People who do not support Trump will not support the war because Trump started it. That will be how most people form their opinion.
At a minimum, the war will have the approval from about 1/3 of the public. That’s Trump’s hardcore base, and they will be behind whatever he does simply because he is the one doing it. All the impassioned cries to America first, end our stupid wars, none of that will matter anymore. They will change their position immediately. You can count on it.
In US politics, the general rule is that whatever the other side does is bad, and whatever my side does is good. It’s always been like this, but things have become depressingly cultish in the last few years.
"He busted in, blessed be thy lord
Who believe any mess they read up on a message board
If so, I got bridges for the low low" ~ MF DOOM
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.