EHocking
Penultimate Amazing
What, attack a foreign nation for oil access and then back down when they resist and you’ve destroyed half of their infrastructure as well as murdering their political leaders?
What is praiseworthy in that?
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
Ed Israel/US Attacks Iran /Yet Another Country/Iran
- Thread starter Orphia Nay
- Start date
What is praiseworthy in that?
The Atheist
Psychopath
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2006
- Messages
- 37,952
I agree with that but I was referring to people who think it's a win for Trump.
It's pretty much a win for everyone but Trump and Netanyahu.
Roger Ramjets
Philosopher
Yes. JD Vance initially opposed striking Iran, but as VP had little choice but to (at least publicly) support the president. Jared Kushner was involved in peace negotiations from the start. Steve Witkoff also preferred negotiations to war. I'll add the late Charlie Kirk too, who implored Trump not to start a war with Iran.
Charlie Kirk Is Haunting the Trump Administration’s Iran Debate
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2016
- Messages
- 32,681
Everyone said striking Iran was a bad idea - it's not the Vance Genius to realize that just because The LibsTM say it's bad it's automatically a good idea.
angrysoba
Philosophile
What is interesting about the newly worded MOU is this:
Which is essentially a prohibition on Israel to attack Hezbollah. Besides, Trump now seems to want Syria to be a partner for dealing with Hezbollah instead of Israel. The Syrian president's been on quite some journey, from al-Qaeda to best buddies with Donald Trump.
Israel has been on a different trajectory, it seems.
Link
My understanding was that the Iranians still had something like 75% of their missiles.
Besides, Trump is now mocking his own staff who want the Iranian missiles to be taken out.
Please watch.
Last edited:
angrysoba
Philosophile
angrysoba
Philosophile
Anyway, for what it is worth, I am happy that Trump is doing this and ending the war. The continued destruction of the global economy is not worth it over his willy waving competition that he is having with the legacy of Obama.
Literally everything he is doing is an attempt to one-up or to destroy what Obama put there. The Iran deal, the Affordable Care Act, the Nobel Peace Prize. His OBS will be the end of the US unless people gather round and say, "Well done, Donald J Trump, you genius! Only you could have done this!!"
So I'm not complaining about him finishing it. I can complain about his starting a stupid and pointless war.
Literally everything he is doing is an attempt to one-up or to destroy what Obama put there. The Iran deal, the Affordable Care Act, the Nobel Peace Prize. His OBS will be the end of the US unless people gather round and say, "Well done, Donald J Trump, you genius! Only you could have done this!!"
So I'm not complaining about him finishing it. I can complain about his starting a stupid and pointless war.
Roger Ramjets
Philosopher
Thanks for the clarification. Partisans do what partisans gotta do.
Sadly many on the 'left' are gloating about it being a big loss for the US. This is counterproductive because it inflames those on the 'right' who also think the deal is bad for the US. The last thing we want is for those people to scupper the agreement. It's also not true. It's actually a lot better for everyone - including the US - than if the war continued. It doesn't contain anything explicitly harming the US or putting it at an unfair disadvantage. Only a blinkered partisan would claim otherwise.
Helen
Implicitly explicit
And the Iranian regime comes out of this much stronger, and even more repressive, than it was before this utterly senseless war.
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2016
- Messages
- 32,681
BS.
The US Right can get frothing mad over a Tan Suit. There is less than no point in handling the snowflakes with kid gloves.
The US Right can get frothing mad over a Tan Suit. There is less than no point in handling the snowflakes with kid gloves.
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2016
- Messages
- 32,681
Will it?
Sanctions relief will massively boost the power of the Merchant Class. So will the influx of money. The Regime has already abandoned a lot of religious restrictions, just focusing on Anti-Regime activism to be brutally suppressed.
Iran is undergoing massive change, with Climate Change and lack of water making massive investments in agriculture and green energy necessary for survival.
It will be interesting to hear what the Youth in Iran is thinking once their Internet access is fully restored.
Last edited:
Helen
Implicitly explicit
I hope you are right, but I fear the worst.
Roger Ramjets
Philosopher
I'm not giving Trump credit for anything here. He didn't negotiate the peace deal. His policy was all over the place, and half the time it sounded like he was just parroting stuff people told him. His negotiation tactic consisted of threatening genocide if Iran didn't come to the table on his terms, following by lying about a deal being imminent and/or there wasn't anybody in Iran to make a deal with. He campainged on not starting any wars and then started the exact war he accused Kamala Harris of wanting to start.
None of this would have happened if Trump hadn't torn up the deal Obama made with Iran - out of pure spite. You don't come back from that by then starting a war and not backing down until there's no way out. You also don't come back by constantly lying about Obama's deal being worse (which is objectively false).
Of course Trump will now claim that he's the great peacemaker, when he himself had little to do with it and a lot to do with keeping the war going. So again, no credit from me. I'm also not giving him credit for accidentally boosting the transition to renewables. He would have to consciously do a lot more good to atone for his sins, and we both know that won't happen.
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2016
- Messages
- 32,681
The worst is happening in Gaza and the West Bank
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2016
- Messages
- 32,681
you can take a very different, but also legitimate perspective, and see this as a big loss for Iran and a huge win for Israel, though I doubt any Zionist would be able to see it that way.
Iran set itself up as the Defender of All Muslims against The Zionist Entity, and it failed to protect the Palestinians, the people in Southern Lebanon, Syria and Yemen.
In the end, if only managed to protect itself, leaving its nominal allies to fend for themselves (some doing better with that than others). And it did so at a tremendous cost to its infrastructure. It will be reluctant to rebuild alliances that could drag it into another conflict that would cause it to lose what it has gained.
The World is so worried about the Strait that they will probably let Israel get away with occupying most of Gaza and the West Bank for the foreseeable future, until an internal shift in polices and international pressure will make it rethink the value of losing money and people for nothing in return. And the destruction they caused in Iran, Gaza, Syria and Lebanon will slow any return to something normal for at least a decade, giving Israel time to come to terms with the new reality of not always having the US at its beck and call.
Iran set itself up as the Defender of All Muslims against The Zionist Entity, and it failed to protect the Palestinians, the people in Southern Lebanon, Syria and Yemen.
In the end, if only managed to protect itself, leaving its nominal allies to fend for themselves (some doing better with that than others). And it did so at a tremendous cost to its infrastructure. It will be reluctant to rebuild alliances that could drag it into another conflict that would cause it to lose what it has gained.
The World is so worried about the Strait that they will probably let Israel get away with occupying most of Gaza and the West Bank for the foreseeable future, until an internal shift in polices and international pressure will make it rethink the value of losing money and people for nothing in return. And the destruction they caused in Iran, Gaza, Syria and Lebanon will slow any return to something normal for at least a decade, giving Israel time to come to terms with the new reality of not always having the US at its beck and call.
Last edited:
So you defend this highly humiliating preliminary agreement with the point that it might not come true? That's some overwhelming support...
I don't know how anyone could sincerely defend this utter debacle - if the USA goes to war it does not expect a humiliating draw, or I guess this is more like a win by points for those disgusting, bloodthirsty theocrats. God, what incompetence and stupidity! Of course, as you say it might not come to this but nothing points to it - superpowers don't sign even preliminary agreements for fun, escpecially very humiliating ones. What an absurd circus of an administration.
Last edited:
EHocking
Penultimate Amazing
That has no qualms about killing people because of their leader’s delusions an small dick.So you defend this highly humiliating preliminary agreement with the point that it might not come true? That's some overwhelming support...
I agree. The regime change is more likely post war, than during the war. Affluence and removal of sanctions and isolation will encourage change and not preserve the regime. We see how effective sanctions are at regime change in Cuba.
I think it will be an evolutionary change, with the parliament gaining more power and the religious leadership losing power. The real struggle will be between the military and the politicians. I worry that the US will support a military right wing coup as opposed to supporting a strengthened democracy.
Gulliver Foyle
Philosopher
Nah Ogham has a structure to it.