- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: F the Strait of Hormuz
Posted on 3/31/26 at 2:41 pm to ronricks
Posted on 3/31/26 at 2:41 pm to ronricks
quote:
This is a complete 180 from what Trump was saying just "two weeks" ago. Its amazing how MAGA will conform or contort to anything Trump says.
This would be an epic fail if we don't clean up the straight before leaving.
What if us leaving is what makes Iran open it back up?
What benefit is it to Iran to keep it closed if the US stops bombing and goes home?
Posted on 3/31/26 at 2:43 pm to Indefatigable
quote:Re-import what? Uranium? We should be prepared to bomb whatever nuclear-based sites we discover ad infinitum.
They will rebuild and re-import the stuff.
Posted on 3/31/26 at 2:46 pm to Projectpat
quote:When it comes to having inflation or fighting evil, I'm going to fight evil. Prepare temporarily to pay more for your shite. Please have your pussy card stamped on the way out.
Everything becomes much more expensive without free movement in the Strait.
Posted on 3/31/26 at 2:46 pm to RoyalWe
quote:
Re-import what? Uranium? We should be prepared to bomb whatever nuclear-based sites we discover ad infinitum.
Anti air weapons, radar and electronics, missiles and drones, small missile craft, nuclear components, you name it—they will (and probably are) already working on replacing what has been destroyed.
There is no way to prevent this without massive regime and political change requiring a huge occupation and invasion.
That’s why this little foray is such a head-scratcher for me. There is practically no chance of long-term success just by bombing their stuff and their top leaders.
Posted on 3/31/26 at 2:46 pm to DeathByTossDive225
quote:
quote:
Well half of the regime leaders are currently dead.
Lots of issues here. Killing members doesn’t mean regime change. Regime change doesn’t guarantee a “better” regime. We don’t have a headcount on IRGC.
quote:
the other half is changing their tune pretty quick.
So you didn’t trust the Iranians enough to see JCPOA through, but you’re willing to trust the same regime now that they hate us 10x more than 10 years ago?
quote:
Sounds like he's getting what he wants with or without out the "regime change"
Define “what he wants” because this is starting to look more and more like “mowing the lawn”.
1. Well, if half of the decision makers do not exist, that certainly has the makings of something changing.
2. They are severely weakened now. Doesn't matter how much they hate us. For example, I bet the last of Al-Qaeda reallllllly hates us, too bad they can't do shite about it.
3. Have you not learned how Trump works yet? He demands way more than he knows he can get, settles in the middle, and gets way more than he had to begin with. Works pretty well.
Posted on 3/31/26 at 2:49 pm to Techdave
quote:They never get this. They don't want to believe that he's been so successful with this strategy. They'd rather believe that he's just a bad, stupid man.
Have you not learned how Trump works yet?
Posted on 3/31/26 at 2:52 pm to RoyalWe
quote:
They don't want to believe that he's been so successful with this strategy. They'd rather believe that he's just a bad, stupid man.
How would that apply to this current situation?
The stated goals would be the bare minimum of making this ordeal remotely close to worth it. What’s the middle ground we’re negotiating for here?
Posted on 3/31/26 at 2:53 pm to RoyalWe
quote:
They never get this. They don't want to believe that he's been so successful with this strategy. They'd rather believe that he's just a bad, stupid man.
Its fricken hilarious listening to never-Trumpers trying to say he "gave in" or "TACO"
But he ends up getting his way, pretty much every time. Granted not as far as he claimed, but way ahead none the less.
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:00 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
How would that apply to this current situation?
The stated goals would be the bare minimum of making this ordeal remotely close to worth it. What’s the middle ground we’re negotiating for here?
USA got to pummel an adversary that has been needing this arse-kicking for their years of supporting anti-US terrorists. We got to set them back decades while further reminding the world who daddy is.
Any president with half a set of balls should have done this long ago as opposed to bribing them with cash...that they used to build weapons to kill us with.
Goal achieved
This post was edited on 3/31/26 at 3:01 pm
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:04 pm to Techdave
quote:
USA got to pummel an adversary that has been needing this arse-kicking for their years of supporting anti-US terrorists.
So it’s just letting off some steam?
quote:
We got to set them back decades while further reminding the world who daddy is.
It will not take them decades to buy and build more missiles and drones, or to buy Russian radar and defense systems.
quote:
Any president with half a set of balls should have done this long ago as opposed to bribing them with cash...that they used to build weapons to kill us with
What is the virtue of doing it, with the knowledge that you’ll just have to keep doing it so long as the IRGC and mullahs are the authority in Iran?
If they were THAT close to getting a deliverable nuke AND that close to actually using it, several senior officials in this administration need to be fired and/or prosecuted for lying under oath.
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:04 pm to RoyalWe
quote:
They never get this. They don't want to believe that he's been so successful with this strategy.
I understand Trump’s negotiation tactics. I asked a specific question.
quote:
1. Well, if half of the decision makers do not exist, that certainly has the makings of something changing
We don’t have a headcount on IRGC. Killing regime members does not mean regime change. Often “change” means an even more hardline regime.
That’s why it’s an ambitious goal. This is what we learned when we took out Hussein. The deck is stacked against you.
quote:
He demands way more than he knows he can get, settles in the middle, and gets way more than he had to begin with. Works pretty well.
This is a non-answer. No goals are mentioned here.
It’s also not congruent with reality of the lead up to this war. We had a compromise with Iran already. It was the first diplomacy with them in 30+ years. We were so genuinely committed to our unrealistic demands like no ballistic missiles that we chunked it, escalated, and now we are at war. Relations with this regime have gone far backwards.
So what is the goal? Because again… sounding more and more like “mowing the lawn”.
This post was edited on 3/31/26 at 3:07 pm
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:10 pm to Indefatigable
Honestly, I think he's achieved pretty much all of his immediate goals. I don't have intel as to remaining nuclear capability, so I'll defer to the people we pay to handle that and trust that they will react if there is an imminent threat. We've destroyed their missile capability as far as I can tell. He's killing their leaders to change regional behavior -- but they're obviously not rolling over yet as evidenced by the Strait of Hormuz being closed. So we'll see if Trump can bring them to heel on any other conditions and, if not, then we can say he lost some face -- but still stopped a religiously fanatic "death to America" regime from having a nuclear weapon any time soon.
While I won't downplay the indirect importance of the Strait of Hormuz to the USA and markets, the rest of the entire world also has a dog in that fight (and many large players are directly impacted moreso than we are). So, I'm good with walking away -- especially given how the Europeans were dicks about it. Sure, China and Asia are more directly impacted, but the Europeans are absolutely impacted and all are more directly impacted than us. There is going to be a lot of inflation for several months even if they snapped their fingers and got everything moving at 110% capacity right this second. But if we, the irritant, step out then they will probably settle down and get things moving again.
Since I'm not in the room with Trump, I'm guessing that his threatening to take out their energy infrastructure is a bluff (or at least it's possible that it's a bluff) to get them to concede on Hormuz. He could still do it if the thought he would get what he wanted, but he's trying to get everything he can before going that route. So, I guess you could say this is possibly him using his strategy of bluster for gain.
I do believe that Trump understands the seriousness of boots on the ground and will avoid that if possible. So, moving troops into the area is either another large bluff to get what he wants, but again he reserves the right to go that route. He better have a damn good reason for doing it because many of us have seen this enough to know NOTHING GOOD WILL COME OF IT in the long run. Stop wasting our money and killing our sons and daughters.
While I won't downplay the indirect importance of the Strait of Hormuz to the USA and markets, the rest of the entire world also has a dog in that fight (and many large players are directly impacted moreso than we are). So, I'm good with walking away -- especially given how the Europeans were dicks about it. Sure, China and Asia are more directly impacted, but the Europeans are absolutely impacted and all are more directly impacted than us. There is going to be a lot of inflation for several months even if they snapped their fingers and got everything moving at 110% capacity right this second. But if we, the irritant, step out then they will probably settle down and get things moving again.
Since I'm not in the room with Trump, I'm guessing that his threatening to take out their energy infrastructure is a bluff (or at least it's possible that it's a bluff) to get them to concede on Hormuz. He could still do it if the thought he would get what he wanted, but he's trying to get everything he can before going that route. So, I guess you could say this is possibly him using his strategy of bluster for gain.
I do believe that Trump understands the seriousness of boots on the ground and will avoid that if possible. So, moving troops into the area is either another large bluff to get what he wants, but again he reserves the right to go that route. He better have a damn good reason for doing it because many of us have seen this enough to know NOTHING GOOD WILL COME OF IT in the long run. Stop wasting our money and killing our sons and daughters.
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:12 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
It will not take them decades to buy and build more missiles and drones, or to buy Russian radar and defense systems.
quote:
It will not take them decades to buy and build more missiles and drones, or to buy Russian radar and defense systems.
Of course they will build more. But I guarantee they aren't the same Iran after this war. There is a whole lot of instability there right now. They were struggling economically before this. Now they really will be.
quote:
What is the virtue of doing it, with the knowledge that you’ll just have to keep doing it so long as the IRGC and mullahs are the authority in Iran?
If they were THAT close to getting a deliverable nuke AND that close to actually using it, several senior officials in this administration need to be fired and/or prosecuted for lying under oath.
The Middle East needs this sort of bitch-slapping every few years to get right, this is just another step in the process.
As far as the nuke goes, I don't really believe they were "close" yet to a true nuke. But even trying to enrich Uranium is too far. They can make a dirty bomb already, and we don't need that in the world.
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:12 pm to DeathByTossDive225
See my reply to Indefatigable. Also, you're replying to me and quoting someone else.
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:13 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
I wonder what our perspective would be if the EU unilaterally invaded Panama, damaged the Canal, then popped smoke and said “oh well, we don’t really need it. Why are you refusing to assist!?!”
An equally worthwhile "what if" is what if your dad pulled out before your idiotic arse was conceived?
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:44 pm to Techdave
Not a drop of our oil comes through that strait
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:53 pm to RoyalWe
quote:
When it comes to having inflation or fighting evil, I'm going to fight evil. Prepare temporarily to pay more for your shite. Please have your pussy card stamped on the way out.
The argument was whether we should care at all that the Strait of Hormuz is closed (which we should), not whether we should be taking any action in the region at all, but ok tough guy.
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:54 pm to FLTech
quote:
Not a drop of our oil comes through that strait
The price of every drop of our oil is in large part determined by the amount of oil that flows through that strait.
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:55 pm to Indefatigable
Not when we start our own drilling
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:56 pm to FLTech
quote:
Not when we start our own drilling
Are you trolling, or are you unaware that we already drill?
shite, we were the first to drill
No amount of drilling will shift oil out of the global marketplace.
This post was edited on 3/31/26 at 3:56 pm
Popular
Back to top



0





