
- 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: Official US/Israel vs Iran war thread
Posted on 6/18/26 at 1:07 pm to dovehunter
Posted on 6/18/26 at 1:07 pm to dovehunter
Sounds like an Israel issue. Not sure why we need to be involved when our own country is falling apart.
Posted on 6/18/26 at 1:23 pm to 1999
quote:
Sounds like an Israel issue. Not sure why we need to be involved when our own country is falling apart.
Our country isn't falling apart. It's just those big dem run cities that are falling apart, but they don't love America anyway.
This post was edited on 6/18/26 at 3:25 pm
Posted on 6/18/26 at 2:01 pm to Auburn1968
Posted on 6/18/26 at 2:04 pm to BayouBengal51
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here. quote:
IRGC-affiliated Fars News said on Thursday that Iran’s negotiating team is expected to suspend any follow-up talks with the United States until it is fully assured that attacks in Lebanon have stopped and that Washington is adhering to the Iran-US memorandum of understanding’s provisions regarding Lebanon.
Posted on 6/18/26 at 2:33 pm to BayouBengal51
Iran is asking for it. They'll never act in good faith.
Posted on 6/18/26 at 2:51 pm to BayouBengal51
Posted on 6/18/26 at 3:12 pm to BayouBengal51
Maybe they dont realize all of our military is still there.
Once we start taking their military people and not their military assets you will see mass exodus of the foot soldiers that mean nothing to their military leaders.
Or the foot soldiers will turn on them.
Once we start taking their military people and not their military assets you will see mass exodus of the foot soldiers that mean nothing to their military leaders.
Or the foot soldiers will turn on them.
Posted on 6/18/26 at 3:44 pm to BayouBengal51
The US-Iran deal is putting real strain on America’s relationships with its close partners, starting with Israel but more importantly the friendly Gulf states like Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Kuwait, and Bahrain. VWith Vance's rhetoric today about Israel stating that Trump is their main sympathetic supporter right now and that too much pushback will isolate them.
The MOU now opening up paths for sanctions relief on Iran and points toward scaling back US military bases in the region, particularly the Gulf states. Both Israel and the Gulf states now feel like they have all been cut out of discussions on their own security issues and Iranian influence.
While officially, the Gulf governments gave official nods to parts of the deal for lowering immediate conflict risks and getting normal shipping back through Hormuz. At the same time, the unofficial yet official voices of government in those same countries have said their input on handling Iran got sidelined during the talks and they are pissed. The memorandum was struck directly between the US and Iran, with Israel and the Gulf states left on the outside even as talks about pulling back American bases were moving forward. This was why the Saudi's in particular leaked the MOU in the press first.
This fits with the Gulf states’ ongoing push to strengthen ties with China, India, Russia, and Europe on energy and security. Biden's disastrous Afghanistan withdrawal plus this shift toward Iran has a lot of people in Israel and the Gulf states questioning how steady US security commitments will stay. With the US now putting its own costs and political risks first instead of steady backing for longtime allies it has left Israel and the Gulf states more exposed as the US is now strengthening Iran/Qatar/Turkey over its long-time allies. Vance freezing out countries that have been allies of their input on the MOU is creating a huge power shift away from the US.
The public back-and-forth is feeding the sense that US commitments can flip quickly depending on what US politicians wants at the moment. That’s already pushing the Gulf states to spread their bets wider. These countries still hold big investments in the US through funds like the Saudi Public Investment Fund, the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority, and Mubadala, so any big move toward China which now appears to be taking place will eventually affect capital flowing into American businesses.
It’s worth paying attention because these alliance shifts have longer-term effects on US standing and economic position. Fueling all of this are reports that an Arab States-China Summit will be announced in the next few weeks.
The MOU now opening up paths for sanctions relief on Iran and points toward scaling back US military bases in the region, particularly the Gulf states. Both Israel and the Gulf states now feel like they have all been cut out of discussions on their own security issues and Iranian influence.
While officially, the Gulf governments gave official nods to parts of the deal for lowering immediate conflict risks and getting normal shipping back through Hormuz. At the same time, the unofficial yet official voices of government in those same countries have said their input on handling Iran got sidelined during the talks and they are pissed. The memorandum was struck directly between the US and Iran, with Israel and the Gulf states left on the outside even as talks about pulling back American bases were moving forward. This was why the Saudi's in particular leaked the MOU in the press first.
This fits with the Gulf states’ ongoing push to strengthen ties with China, India, Russia, and Europe on energy and security. Biden's disastrous Afghanistan withdrawal plus this shift toward Iran has a lot of people in Israel and the Gulf states questioning how steady US security commitments will stay. With the US now putting its own costs and political risks first instead of steady backing for longtime allies it has left Israel and the Gulf states more exposed as the US is now strengthening Iran/Qatar/Turkey over its long-time allies. Vance freezing out countries that have been allies of their input on the MOU is creating a huge power shift away from the US.
The public back-and-forth is feeding the sense that US commitments can flip quickly depending on what US politicians wants at the moment. That’s already pushing the Gulf states to spread their bets wider. These countries still hold big investments in the US through funds like the Saudi Public Investment Fund, the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority, and Mubadala, so any big move toward China which now appears to be taking place will eventually affect capital flowing into American businesses.
It’s worth paying attention because these alliance shifts have longer-term effects on US standing and economic position. Fueling all of this are reports that an Arab States-China Summit will be announced in the next few weeks.
Posted on 6/18/26 at 4:12 pm to MrLSU
quote:
While officially, the Gulf governments gave official nods to parts of the deal for lowering immediate conflict risks and getting normal shipping back through Hormuz. At the same time, the unofficial yet official voices of government in those same countries have said their input on handling Iran got sidelined during the talks and they are pissed.
Do you have links to these unofficial official voices? Do they have names or just voices? I'd like to read their official unofficial official statements or, lacking that, whatever their unofficial spokesperson on twitter or CNN/Al Jazeera/Politico/Axios says that sources say that they said will suffice. Are they mad at the US for bombing Iran, or for being too lenient with Iran? Do they have any constructive suggestions to offer, or kind of an "OMB" thing where they say "that sucks and it should've been better"?
This post was edited on 6/18/26 at 5:04 pm
Posted on 6/18/26 at 4:36 pm to dovehunter
quote:
Iran is asking for it. They'll never act in good faith.
They never have acted in good faith and the Islamic Republic never will. Nor will they give up their nuclear ambitions as long as they have power. They might try to hide what they are doing, but they will always act in bad faith.
What's worse is that they have a storehouse of knowledge that means they can do it much faster in the next rounds.
Posted on 6/18/26 at 4:45 pm to BayouBengal51
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here. quote:
BREAKING: Iran has suspended its entire 60-day negotiation period with the US over the direct violation of the MOU's first clause, with Israeli attacks on southern Lebanon constituting a breach less than 24 hours after the MOU was electronically signed, per Fars and Al-Mayadeen.
Iran's negotiating delegation had already been preparing to depart for Switzerland to launch the first round of talks before Iran made the decision to suspend the entire trip.
Iran will also not unilaterally fulfill its commitments, and until Iran is fully assured Israeli attacks on Lebanon have stopped and the US has practically adhered to the first-clause obligations, talks remain cancelled.
Posted on 6/18/26 at 5:09 pm to Bronco11
Posted on 6/18/26 at 5:12 pm to BayouBengal51
Good. They weren’t going to be honest anyway. Israel has a right to defend itself. Iran knows that, we know that and the Gulf States know that. This is a building block for cooperation amount the Gulf States that is needed. Iran tried to bomb all of them too. Iran is going to be out on a very brittle limb. No money, no Iran.
Posted on 6/18/26 at 5:15 pm to wdhalgren
quote:
Do you have links to these unofficial official voices? Do they have names or just voices? I'd like to read their official unofficial official statements or, lacking that, whatever their unofficial spokesperson on twitter or CNN/Al Jazeera/Politico/Axios says that sources say that they said will suffice. Are they mad at the US for bombing Iran, or for being too lenient with Iran? Do they have any constructive suggestions to offer, or kind of an "OMB" thing where they say "that sucks and it should've been better"?
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.Posted on 6/18/26 at 5:23 pm to MrLSU
Posted on 6/18/26 at 5:27 pm to MrLSU
If you wrote this, Well Done.
If you didn't I'd like to know who did in order to follow their articles.
Posted on 6/18/26 at 5:38 pm to MrLSU
Thanks for that. So I guess the gist of what this activist says is that Trump should've taken a harder line. I wish he had. I would like to see Trump finish the job he started and end the Islamic regime once and for all. I'd also like to have seen, for once, the American people and their politicians and media wholeheartedly support Trump's effort. Unfortunately, even his own base has abandoned him on this one, the other branches of government are working against him, so I admire him for deferring to the wishes of the country. That is his job, even if the country has lost its backbone. If nothing else, this is evidence that Trump isn't, and never intended to be, a dictator.
Regarding this statement from your previous post:
As you say, the Gulf States have moved toward China and Europe and India, but not because of anything JD Vance said or did. That's nothing to do with a shift of this magnitude. It's because those are by far their biggest customers and that's not changing anytime soon. And because America continues on a long and unwavering course to currency destruction, making the petrodollar a liability and the US military an unpredictable force for maintaining stability. Also, maybe because China and Russia's well armed attack dog is holding a gun to their head for a little extra incentive, and unfortunately that may not change either. When China completes their "Silk Road" to Iran, it will only get worse. In time, this war may be recorded as the beginning of a new global era. Maybe they'll call it the post-dollar era. If so, I'm not sad that I won't be around when those books are being written.
Regarding this statement from your previous post:
quote:
This fits with the Gulf states’ ongoing push to strengthen ties with China, India, Russia, and Europe on energy and security.....Vance freezing out countries that have been allies of their input on the MOU is creating a huge power shift away from the US.
As you say, the Gulf States have moved toward China and Europe and India, but not because of anything JD Vance said or did. That's nothing to do with a shift of this magnitude. It's because those are by far their biggest customers and that's not changing anytime soon. And because America continues on a long and unwavering course to currency destruction, making the petrodollar a liability and the US military an unpredictable force for maintaining stability. Also, maybe because China and Russia's well armed attack dog is holding a gun to their head for a little extra incentive, and unfortunately that may not change either. When China completes their "Silk Road" to Iran, it will only get worse. In time, this war may be recorded as the beginning of a new global era. Maybe they'll call it the post-dollar era. If so, I'm not sad that I won't be around when those books are being written.
This post was edited on 6/18/26 at 6:29 pm
Posted on 6/18/26 at 5:41 pm to wdhalgren
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here. quote:
JD Vance just gave the clearest breakdown of the Trump vs. Obama Iran deal distinction I've heard.
Here it is — the Gulf State test:
The Gulf Coast Coalition loves this deal.
They hated the Obama deal.
Why?
They thought Obama made Iran stronger.
They think Trump makes Iran weaker.
Vance: "They know more about this, and they have more to lose than anybody, including the USA. So I trust their judgment."
The negotiating position:
Obama in 2015: Iran has a sophisticated nuclear program. Let's bribe them with American money to stop it.
Trump in 2026: We already destroyed your nuclear program. Promise not to rebuild it, and you get some sanctions relief.
One is negotiating from fear.
The other is negotiating from rubble.
The substance:
"The Obama nuclear deal allowed enrichment, ours will not."
"The Obama deal allowed the accumulation of stockpiled weapons-grade material, ours is actually leading to the destruction of that stockpile of enriched material."
"The Obama deal gave them over a billion dollars of American money. This deal gives them $0 of American money."
Bottom line from @JDVance:
"We're coming at it from a position of strength, and the fact that our gulf coast partners love this deal."
Posted on 6/18/26 at 5:41 pm to SemperFiDawg
The big thing is this lack of stability with our allies is essentially global. Many around here clap like seals when Trump does it to our European allies but it nonetheless paints a picture of a United States that cannot be relied upon to the degree they once were.
I’m sure nativist/isolationist will jaw off something and that’s fine but you can’t have global leadership and all that entails while browbeating, lecturing, and disregarding your allies. If we don’t want to be a global power anymore, we need to seize all of North America to essentially create the continental fortress necessary for it to work.
I’m sure nativist/isolationist will jaw off something and that’s fine but you can’t have global leadership and all that entails while browbeating, lecturing, and disregarding your allies. If we don’t want to be a global power anymore, we need to seize all of North America to essentially create the continental fortress necessary for it to work.
Posted on 6/18/26 at 6:01 pm to hawgfaninc

Popular
Back to top



1








