Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Anyone going to comment on Iran?

Anyone going to comment on Iran?
Thread Tools
reader50
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Jun 22, 2019, 08:31 PM
 
So ... we had a stable nuclear agreement with Iran and our allies. Verified regularly by UN inspectors.

Against our allies' wishes, we pulled out of it. Imposed sanctions as bad as we possibly could. Again, against our allies' wishes.

Iran shoots down one of our drones, they claim in their airspace. The pentagon claims it was in international airspace. Iran claims to have recovered fragments from within their waters.

Trump launches a retaliatory ground strike, estimated casualties: 150. Then calls it off with the planes already in the air, 10 minutes away from launching the missiles.

And someone is planting bombs on oil tankers near Iran? Maybe us -- everyone is denying involvement.

It seems like after Iraq, Afghanistan, involvements in Syria & Libya - we desperately need to get into another Middle East war. How are we going to pay for it? We just did a big tax cut, while we're in debt. Maybe a 50% cut to Social Security?

I'd been skipping world news for awhile, too depressing. Now I checked back in, and it's gone from depressing to crazy.
     
andi*pandi
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Jun 23, 2019, 10:53 AM
 
Don promised the war industry he'd keep the money coming.
     
Thorzdad
Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Nobletucky
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 23, 2019, 12:37 PM
 
Word now is the US carried-out a cyber attack on Iran’s air-defense systems. The cynic in me says he’s desperately fishing for some sort of military “glory” to boast about during his 4th of July event.
When I want your opinion,-
I'll read it in your entrails
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 24, 2019, 03:54 AM
 
The situation is bananas. What I really don't get is what the end game is: Iran has twice the population of Iraq, but unlike Iraq a history as a country that reaches back, literally, millennia. Their military is trained for insurgency operations. So take Iraq, multiply it by 2 and imagine a foe that is well-trained in insurgency operation defending his or her home turf. Do you like what you see? Is that really a military conflict you want to enter? Even if you “win”, what have you gained at the end? I don't think the Iranians will see that as a liberation from the mullahs.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
Laminar
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 24, 2019, 08:35 AM
 
Pompeo seems to call it "The Islamic Republic of Iran" each time he mentions it. I'm assuming this is on purpose.
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 24, 2019, 12:26 PM
 
Trump ripped up the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) painstakingly negotiated between Iran, China, France, Russia, United Kingdom, German, and the United States without anything to replace it with .... for no other reason than to torpedo Obama's signature foreign policy achievement. He was told repeatedly that Iran was complying with the terms of the agreement with independent verification. He was told repeatedly that unilaterally pulling out of the agreement could lead to armed conflict between the US and Iran ... which he clearly does not want ... but he did it anyway for no reason than his own pettiness. Supreme Leader Khamenei has said repeatedly that the US government can't be trusted. And one would be hard pressed to prove him wrong.

OAW
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 24, 2019, 12:27 PM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
Pompeo seems to call it "The Islamic Republic of Iran" each time he mentions it. I'm assuming this is on purpose.
No doubt. But that is the official name of the country.

OAW
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 24, 2019, 07:52 PM
 
It’s just funny how the US is always f$&@ing with those Islamic countries that have oil or gas.

Libya, Iraq, Iran, Syria



-t
     
Thorzdad
Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Nobletucky
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 24, 2019, 08:45 PM
 
What’s especially frustrating is that I suspect all that most Americans know about Iran is that they took over the US embassy in Tehran (and, thus, deserve a beating, of course) without understanding the longer history the US has with $&#@ing with Iran’s government.
When I want your opinion,-
I'll read it in your entrails
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 24, 2019, 10:34 PM
 
Originally Posted by turtle777 View Post
It’s just funny how the US is always f$&@ing with those Islamic countries that have oil or gas.

Libya, Iraq, Iran, Syria
Plus, it is so obvious that principles are applied very selectively: of course, Iran has a huge human rights problem. But so does Saudi Arabia, which is best buddies with the US. And the US is allowing itself to be pulled in the regional Sunni vs. Shii conflict. I don't this is wise. Right now, the only reason Saudi Arabia is not lusting after nuclear weapons is that they feel they are under the US's protection. Once that changes, I think they are also on the market for nuclear reactors. (And you can see a funny déja vu here, Saudi Arabia wants to build a nuclear reactor with parts from the US. That's also how Iran got its nuclear program started.)
Originally Posted by Thorzdad View Post
What’s especially frustrating is that I suspect all that most Americans know about Iran is that they took over the US embassy in Tehran (and, thus, deserve a beating, of course) without understanding the longer history the US has with $&#@ing with Iran’s government.
Sure, but at a certain point, you need to move on, especially since politics is business. Should e. g. the Chileans still carry the same anger for the US's role in Pinochets coup and the subsequent years of suffering under his dictatorship?
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 24, 2019, 10:38 PM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
Supreme Leader Khamenei has said repeatedly that the US government can't be trusted. And one would be hard pressed to prove him wrong.
Not just Khamenei, but the whole world is watching. Countries that used to rely on the US for their strategic defense (e. g. South Korea and Japan) are getting very nervous. Especially since Trump's claims are often provably false (e. g. that Japan does not pay for the US's military presence, it does) and ignore important ancillary factors (such as the Korean's essential help in the US's early warning system for North Korean nukes).

South Korea's president Moon especially is changing the country's approach to dealing with its Northern neighbor. Japan, on the other hand, is still flailing, trying (but largely failing) to placate Trump.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 26, 2019, 11:08 AM
 
Trump is trying to engineer a war to get himself re-elected. Plain and simple.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
andi*pandi
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Jun 26, 2019, 02:05 PM
 
"If there is a war, it won't last long, believe me."
Iraq and afghanistan: lol
     
Thorzdad
Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Nobletucky
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 26, 2019, 05:12 PM
 
Originally Posted by andi*pandi View Post
"If there is a war, it won't last long, believe me."
Iraq and afghanistan: lol
Remember, this guy really likes nukes. He wanted to start building new ones and build-up the stockpile almost as soon as he took office. I wouldn’t want to be one of the Joint Chiefs if that particular order came down from the Oval Office. Big decision time, that.
When I want your opinion,-
I'll read it in your entrails
     
reader50  (op)
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Jun 26, 2019, 07:56 PM
 
I hope there are some legal limitations on when the Prez can use nukes. In response to an incoming nuclear attack of course. But without that, I hope it requires some action from Congress. Like a declaration of war.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 26, 2019, 08:28 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
Trump is trying to engineer a war to get himself re-elected. Plain and simple.
I think you are giving Trump too much credit for strategic thinking. Of course, he is thinking about being re-elected, but his behavior towards Iran has been the same negotiation tactic he has used with everyone: do something outrageous to get the other side off balance, and then do a 180 and go to the negotiating table. However, ultimately, he is usually the one to pull back in a game of chicken. Oh, and Trump respects “strength”. His behavior towards Iran fits that pattern.

The evidence that Trump is hell bent on war with Iran is equivocal: on the one hand, he has not taken a lot of opportunities to escalate conflicts to wars. Yes, there was the bombardment of Assad's air strip, but Trump did not take that opportunity to really get into it. On the other, he hates looking weak and he has hired John Bolton. Honestly, I think one of the reasons is that foreign policy isn't his strong suit, and he is much more skilled to galvanize his base with domestic issues.
Originally Posted by reader50 View Post
I hope there are some legal limitations on when the Prez can use nukes. In response to an incoming nuclear attack of course. But without that, I hope it requires some action from Congress. Like a declaration of war.
It doesn't, and hasn't been so since the US became a nuclear power. During the Cold War the argument was that an authorization by Congress would take too long, so the President effectively is able to declare war. (Perhaps technically the President would then nuke a country he or she hasn't declared war against, but once you go nuclear, you are at war.)
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
Doc HM
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UKland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 5, 2019, 12:35 PM
 
So for some reason it looks like the US has managed to get us, the plucky and eternally stupid, Brits to step up. Having got the Royal Navy to seize a tanker full of supposedly Iran bound oil the Iranians are now threatening to seize British tankers in return.

All this for free. You'll be getting your grubby hands on our NHS next if we were ever stupid enough to let you...

oh wait...
This space for Hire! Reasonable rates. Reach an audience of literally dozens!
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 5, 2019, 09:44 PM
 
What’s getting me is that the narrative has changed to Iran now violating the deal with its announcement to enrich uranium above the levels in the JCPA. The US withdrew from the treaty and thus, broke it. And US policies have effectively prevented the other parties from sticking to their end. But now this is portrayed as Iran violating the deal.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
Doc HM
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UKland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 12, 2019, 10:07 AM
 
So now the Iranians are pissed at the UK for seizing a tanker full of oil and the US have got the Royal Navy doing their dirty work in the gulf with a RN ship having to train its guns on Iranian boats.

Europe is not at ALL convinced that it wants to go along with painting the Iranians as the bad guys here but if the US can split the UK off by say having a Royal Navy ship involved in an incident then they will get their way by another route.

And the US wants a multinational fleet in the gulf but of only non US ships with the US tasked with controlling and telling the other navies which ships they want stopped and/or attacked. What could possibly go wrong?
This space for Hire! Reasonable rates. Reach an audience of literally dozens!
     
reader50  (op)
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Jul 12, 2019, 11:47 AM
 
If Trump has promised Brexit support behind the scenes, I'd be very hesitant to commit based on that.

Trump says many things each day. He's been much less consistent with follow-through. As an example, last I heard, Mexico is still going to pay for the Wall.
     
Doc HM
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UKland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 12, 2019, 11:54 AM
 
Originally Posted by reader50 View Post
If Trump has promised Brexit support behind the scenes, I'd be very hesitant to commit based on that.
.
I don't think that Trump has offered Brexit support as much as mentioned that Boris can have an almost immediate trade deal based on the US having control of basically the entire UK economy.

And because Boris want to be PM more than he cares one single iota what happens to everyone else in the UK that's good enough for him. The rest of us can be reduced to eating our own (heavily chlorinated) pets for all he (and Trump) cares. Besides Trump will be too busy counting all the NHS contracts money that being his "friend" has cost us.
This space for Hire! Reasonable rates. Reach an audience of literally dozens!
     
reader50  (op)
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Jul 12, 2019, 04:46 PM
 
I had a thought today. Provoking fights with Iran does not contribute to US national security, so maybe it's not about that.

The Iran deal was Pres. Obama's signature foreign policy achievement. Just as the ACA was his signature domestic achievement. And it seems to be a priority to erase President Obama from the history books. Gotta undo everything he did, no matter how popular it is. (I'm looking at Net Neutrality)

Could the whole Iran situation just be about undoing Obama's legacy? If so, it's a terrible price to put the world through. To achieve something of no value.
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 12, 2019, 05:16 PM
 
Originally Posted by reader50 View Post
I had a thought today. Provoking fights with Iran does not contribute to US national security, so maybe it's not about that.

The Iran deal was Pres. Obama's signature foreign policy achievement. Just as the ACA was his signature domestic achievement. And it seems to be a priority to erase President Obama from the history books. Gotta undo everything he did, no matter how popular it is. (I'm looking at Net Neutrality)

Could the whole Iran situation just be about undoing Obama's legacy? If so, it's a terrible price to put the world through. To achieve something of no value.
When you view Trump's actions through this lens then it all makes sense. The man truly is petty enough to risk a war with Iran and cause millions to lose their health insurance because he's still salty about how Obama roasted him at the WH Correspondents Dinner.

OAW
     
OldManMac
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 13, 2019, 03:12 PM
 
It's beyond petty. It's called Malignant Narcissism. It's incurable. It's dangerous.
Why is there always money for war, but none for education?
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 13, 2019, 04:07 PM
 
Originally Posted by OldManMac View Post
It's beyond petty. It's called Malignant Narcissism. It's incurable. It's dangerous.
Indeed.

OAW
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 13, 2019, 04:20 PM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
When you view Trump's actions through this lens then it all makes sense. The man truly is petty enough to risk a war with Iran and cause millions to lose their health insurance because he's still salty about how Obama roasted him at the WH Correspondents Dinner.

OAW
You do understand that ACA is not giving people insurance in any meaningful way.
People were duped, and drank the cool aid.

The high deductibles essentially make people pay insurance premiums for an insurance that will in practice unusable.

Congrats. You just got taxed even more.

Obama was a coward, just like Trump is today.
They both don’t have the balls to truly fix the healthcare monopolies and cartels that fleece the American people.
Both are beholden to special interests for money.


-t
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 13, 2019, 10:36 PM
 
He's been a supporter of Brexit for years because he knows it leaves the UK in a position of desperation to sign trade deals and we'll finally lower our safety standards so you can sell us your chlorine chicken and maggot juice.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 14, 2019, 07:27 AM
 
Originally Posted by reader50 View Post
I had a thought today. Provoking fights with Iran does not contribute to US national security, so maybe it's not about that.

The Iran deal was Pres. Obama's signature foreign policy achievement. Just as the ACA was his signature domestic achievement. And it seems to be a priority to erase President Obama from the history books. Gotta undo everything he did, no matter how popular it is. (I'm looking at Net Neutrality)

Could the whole Iran situation just be about undoing Obama's legacy? If so, it's a terrible price to put the world through. To achieve something of no value.
Trump like all conservatives trades in fear. He doesn't need to start an actual war (he probably doesn't have the balls if we're honest), he just needs to ramp up the threat of one in the hope it motivates voters who are conditioned to think that you want a hard ass Republican in charge when there's a war on. Wrongly, obviously but they clearly are conditioned to think that.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 14, 2019, 07:30 AM
 
Originally Posted by turtle777 View Post
Obama was a coward, just like Trump is today.
They both don’t have the balls to truly fix the healthcare monopolies and cartels that fleece the American people.
Both are beholden to special interests for money.


-t
Or Obama tried hard to fix it and was hamstrung by Republicans and Trump has no interest in fixing it because his buddies are making bank and killing poor people and those are two of their favourite sports.

Its the same conservative spin we keep seeing over here where one side throws a spanner into the works and then yells "Look how bad they ****ed things up!" Its always the same side doing that too.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 14, 2019, 11:47 AM
 
May I remind you that Obama had the majority in the House AND the Senate.
Just as Trump.
They both weren’t interested in fixing things.

Blaming it on the other party is bullish!t.

-t
     
reader50  (op)
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Jul 14, 2019, 01:56 PM
 
Originally Posted by turtle777 View Post
You do understand that ACA is not giving people insurance in any meaningful way.
People were duped, and drank the cool aid.

The high deductibles essentially make people pay insurance premiums for an insurance that will in practice unusable.
I've had an ACA policy since the first year. Was never able to buy health coverage before. I do not feel duped, and yes, I could pay the deductibles.

It's not perfect. But it's something within reach, where nothing was before. Individual policies before started at $500 a month, with high deductibles, and almost zero coverage. Going to $1K a month gave only a marginal improvement. Today you have full coverage, for $500 a month (with subsidies for lower income brackets), with moderate deductibles. Big improvement in most of the variables.

In my opinion, your position would have more merit if the R's had stuck to their promise. To replace, not repeal. But when they couldn't muster the votes, they tried to repeal anyway. Go from something back to nothing, and wait for a solution to magically appear. Or for all affected people to die of old age. Or something.
     
Thorzdad
Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Nobletucky
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 14, 2019, 04:33 PM
 
I had to buy my insurance on the open market for several years before ACA. What an expensive, frustrating nightmare. Without question, my ACA policies have been far more affordable and with lower deductibles. Not having to worry about a couple of pre-existing conditions has been a real blessing, too. If the ACA is killed-off and I’m forced to go back to the open market of old, I’m probably going to have to go uninsured.
When I want your opinion,-
I'll read it in your entrails
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 14, 2019, 05:51 PM
 
There seem to be quite a difference between the ACA offerings between the States.
Where some States offer ok plans, others don’t offer any choices, and crappy plans with very high deductibles ($5000 and up per person).



I’m happy for anyone that it works, but that’s not the case for many people.

-t
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 15, 2019, 07:57 AM
 
I could be wrong, but the ones lacking choice look to me to be mostly red states. I'm sure its just a coincidence and not Republicans trying to sabotage it in their crusade to repeal it though.

I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Laminar
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 15, 2019, 09:03 AM
 
Originally Posted by turtle777 View Post
May I remind you that Obama had the majority in the House AND the Senate.
Just as Trump.
They both weren’t interested in fixing things.

Blaming it on the other party is bullish!t.

-t
If you could, talk a little bit about the initial plan Obama proposed, and the concessions he made based on what the Republicans wanted.
     
reader50  (op)
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Jul 21, 2019, 11:19 PM
 
Now the UK is holding an Iran oil tanker hostage. So Iran is holding a Brit oil tanker hostage.

At least it's entertaining. But also kinda dangerous.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 22, 2019, 02:06 AM
 
Originally Posted by reader50 View Post
Now the UK is holding an Iran oil tanker hostage. So Iran is holding a Brit oil tanker hostage.
The hawks are playing tit-for-tat. And the Iranians, I think, are already anticipating PM Boris Johnson who will surely have better ties to President Trump than Theresa May could ever hope for.
Originally Posted by reader50 View Post
At least it's entertaining. But also kinda dangerous.
It is all so transparent and sad. The hawks are “proving” each other right (“See, the American's can be trusted to hold up their end of the bargain.” —> “See, the Iranians are not trustworthy.” —> …), politcally weakening people who stuck their neck out for a compromise.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 28, 2019, 09:45 AM
 
Originally Posted by turtle777 View Post

Blaming it on the other party is bullish!t.

-t
Depends what you're blaming them for. In the case of recent US administrations there's a very clear pattern of Democrats fixing the economy and Republicans coming in to **** it up. Rinse and repeat.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
   
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:24 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,