Israel and Iran
- Thread starter TLDR20
- Start date
Devildoc
Verified Military
Devildoc
Verified Military
Topkick
Verified Military
Yeah, Two major reasons I voted for Trump are that he promised no new wars and complete release of the Epstein files.....Just saying.
I am not for a war in Iran, but I haven't forgotten where the equipment to make the IED's that injured or killed some of my soldiers came from.
TLDR20
Verified SOF
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2009
- Messages
- 6,731
I think a lot of people, not ones on this board, were quite anti interventionist. President Trump becoming extremely interventionist is not what he ran on. Seeing the switch with receipts is somewhat comical.
I however see what I think is his overall thinking, and maybe I’m giving him too much credit, but bro, he is fucking sweating the Chinese.
Topkick
Verified Military
All we have to go off of during elections is what they run on. Trump stuck to his guns during his first term and that got him elected again. He can't run again, so he doesn't have to keep his word and he isn't. But, he is still likely better than the alternative.
Watching Hegseth's speech right now. Im not a fan of his bravado, but I agree with what he stands for and like a lot of the changes he made to the force, such as focusing on war fighting, fitness, and losing DEI.
Navy sub sunk an Iranian ship with a torpedo. Pretty bad ass. I bet those dudes are living it up right now.
Trump ran on no new wars and I firmly believe Iran was, and is, a legit target of strikes like this. Unless this becomes a 10 year counter insurgency, I’m for it. And I'm not just talking out my ass, I'm close to the danger.
Navy sub sunk an Iranian ship with a torpedo. Pretty bad ass. I bet those dudes are living it up right now.
Trump ran on no new wars and I firmly believe Iran was, and is, a legit target of strikes like this. Unless this becomes a 10 year counter insurgency, I’m for it. And I'm not just talking out my ass, I'm close to the danger.
Iran hasn't been a new war since 1979.
I think a lot of people, especially in the political-media complex, are misinterpreting (or weaponizing their interpretation of) what the Republican Party platform was in the last election. Hint: "no new wars" wasn't part of it. Here it is: The Republican Party Platform, 2024
A few highlights:
America first.
Peace through strength.
Use of the military when our national interests are threatened.
^it seems like the Iran war fits the above
Trump indeed had "no new wars" and "ending wars" as part of his campaigning. And he has done a good bit of the latter. But no president should ever say "no new wars," because, as we all know, the enemy gets a vote. Sometimes the wars find you.
At the same time, does anyone doubt that we have been at war with Iran--at least as far as they are concerned--for most of our adult lives? If that's the case, then isn't this following up on President Trump's promise to "stop wars?" And it's stopping it in the only way that totalitarian regimes understand: with overwhelming and sustained violence.
I'm thrilled that we're going after Iran. IMO, it's long overdue, and this is the right moment to strike. Not for the Iranian people. Not for Israel. Not for the Kurds, or the Europeans, or the Saudis, or for anyone else. For us. Because Iran threatens our people, our national interests, and our trade and security partners. Taking out Iran (and Venezuela) also weakens our two biggest threats, China and Russia.
At the end of the day, it's high time that the people who have chanted "death to America" get a little "death from America."
A few highlights:
America first.
Peace through strength.
Use of the military when our national interests are threatened.
^it seems like the Iran war fits the above
Trump indeed had "no new wars" and "ending wars" as part of his campaigning. And he has done a good bit of the latter. But no president should ever say "no new wars," because, as we all know, the enemy gets a vote. Sometimes the wars find you.
At the same time, does anyone doubt that we have been at war with Iran--at least as far as they are concerned--for most of our adult lives? If that's the case, then isn't this following up on President Trump's promise to "stop wars?" And it's stopping it in the only way that totalitarian regimes understand: with overwhelming and sustained violence.
I'm thrilled that we're going after Iran. IMO, it's long overdue, and this is the right moment to strike. Not for the Iranian people. Not for Israel. Not for the Kurds, or the Europeans, or the Saudis, or for anyone else. For us. Because Iran threatens our people, our national interests, and our trade and security partners. Taking out Iran (and Venezuela) also weakens our two biggest threats, China and Russia.
At the end of the day, it's high time that the people who have chanted "death to America" get a little "death from America."
Topkick
Verified Military
I'm for regime change, not for war. Lets make sure our old people who funded Social Security and Medicare all their lives are taken care of before we spend gazillions of tax dollars on another war profiteering quagmire.
Devildoc
Verified Military
I was talking to someone at work about Iran and the 'no new wars' thing, and she legit didn't know the history of the past 47 years...Beirut (Marine barracks and embassy), two embassies in Africa, USS Cole, USS Stark, mining the Straits of Hormuz, Hezbollah, Bill Buckley, etc. She didn't really change her stance about US military in the ME but now believes this is not a 'new' war.
TLDR20
Verified SOF
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2009
- Messages
- 6,731
I think mostly what I see is from “influencers” or more rigid right wing commentators, who were very anti intervention then immediately switching when the intervention happens. R/thisyou is pretty full of them at the moment.
We have been at war with Iran for a long time. They are getting what they deserve, and they have the blood of many Americans on their hands.
I’d like to see a coherent message from the administration on the reasons why an attack now was so important. I thought we destroyed their nuclear capability last year, but now we didn’t, they are close to attacking us, or they aren’t. Pick a message and hammer it in, I’m for it.
Good points, especially the bolded part.
This is why absolutes are so bad in politics. If we "obliterated Iran's nuclear capabilities" in the Fordow strike, why are those capabilities still a threat today? Did they rebuild everything in that time? We were wrong in our initial assessment? ...?
A lot of people, myself included, remember the "WMD" debacle of the Iraq invasion. Let's not repeat that one.
I can't find it now but while site was down but there was talk about the purchases and transfers from Russia and China in the past year. With the rumors of a nuclear test after the earthquake yesterday. It wouldn’t surprise me if Iran was planning any sort of attack, whether nuclear or not.
The Quartermaster
Verified Military
First US since WWII I believe. The first sinking of a surface combatant by a nuclear powered sub was HMS Conqueror and the Belgrano during the Falklands War.
I think the Pakis and Indians had some subs sunk or doing the sinking during one of their many conflicts.
Sinking a ship that far away from home waters is a major statement. Also, the dudes running to dive off the bow. lol
