- 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
Were the “Panicans” right after all on Iran?
Posted on 8/10/26 at 1:45 pm
Posted on 8/10/26 at 1:45 pm
Trump voters that opposed the war in Iran pointed out that this would result in major damage to the US without any attainable or realistic goal. They pointed out to control Iran could only be done with boots on the ground.
We are now months into this and Iran holds all of the cards. We may have to pay them money and leave with tolls being taken in the Straits to Iran…that we’re not in place before we started.
At least 18 service members are dead and others severely wounded.
We’ve spent close to $40B. We have billions in damages to bases in the region. Fuel costs are up. We have no real allies left.
What have we gained?
Were the so called panicans and cucks right all along? How is Trump going to make this right?
We are now months into this and Iran holds all of the cards. We may have to pay them money and leave with tolls being taken in the Straits to Iran…that we’re not in place before we started.
At least 18 service members are dead and others severely wounded.
We’ve spent close to $40B. We have billions in damages to bases in the region. Fuel costs are up. We have no real allies left.
What have we gained?
Were the so called panicans and cucks right all along? How is Trump going to make this right?
16
Posted on 8/10/26 at 1:45 pm to DeltaDoc
In before:
This post was edited on 8/10/26 at 1:47 pm
Posted on 8/10/26 at 1:45 pm to DeltaDoc
First downvote
Make it stop Chicken
Make it stop Chicken
Posted on 8/10/26 at 1:45 pm to DeltaDoc
.
This post was edited on 8/10/26 at 1:47 pm
Posted on 8/10/26 at 1:49 pm to DeltaDoc
I think it's still all speculative about how this will turn out so it's hard to say at this point who's right or wrong. Do I think something needed to be done about Iran? Yes. However do I think we underestimated their capabilities, what it would take for them to surrender, and how far we would need to go to get them to surrender? Also, yes. At this point it seems like it's a waiting game of who cries uncle first.
Posted on 8/10/26 at 1:49 pm to DeltaDoc
If we walked away, the rest of the world will have to deal with ransom for oil shipments and any commercial shipping that is at risk. Let them deal with it. In the meantime, continue building the military and getting ready to take on China or any other country that crosses us when they do. We aren't soft. We may even be able to blast Iran into oblivion at a later date.
Posted on 8/10/26 at 1:51 pm to LARancher1991
I don’t necessarily disagree, but their leaders have an ability to endure (and force) suffering that ours do not.
Posted on 8/10/26 at 1:52 pm to DeltaDoc
Maga was against wars and especially Middle East wars
Until they weren’t
Lol
Until they weren’t
Lol
Posted on 8/10/26 at 1:53 pm to DeltaDoc
It’s a great advantage they hold in not caring about their citizens.
Whatever it is will be sold as Allah’s will.
These negotiations, lol, are foolish.
Savages only understand one thing.
Whatever it is will be sold as Allah’s will.
These negotiations, lol, are foolish.
Savages only understand one thing.
Posted on 8/10/26 at 1:53 pm to DeltaDoc
Don't forget they called people panicans for being against a huge spending increase that would lead to more inflation and more big government claiming there would be a series of bills after that would tackle those things.
Those bills magically never happened and any discussion of them disappeared.
And of course, the massive campaigns to get any republican who opposed these things out of congress because they were the problem.
It was saddening how quickly people turned against the things they claimed to be for during the election.
Those bills magically never happened and any discussion of them disappeared.
And of course, the massive campaigns to get any republican who opposed these things out of congress because they were the problem.
It was saddening how quickly people turned against the things they claimed to be for during the election.
Posted on 8/10/26 at 1:54 pm to SlidellCajun
quote:
Maga was against wars and especially Middle East wars
Until they weren’t
Posted on 8/10/26 at 1:55 pm to DeltaDoc
No trollalah, they were not.
Posted on 8/10/26 at 1:55 pm to ArHog
quote:Make what stop? What, specifically, would you like Chicken to make stop? And how would you prefer him to stop it?
Make it stop Chicken
Posted on 8/10/26 at 1:56 pm to SlidellCajun
quote:
Maga was against wars and especially Middle East wars
Nope. That's pure ignorance on your part.
We are against NEVER ENDING WARS where we have boots on the ground.
Posted on 8/10/26 at 1:56 pm to Boom33
To be one of the most ardent one be willing to be flexible.
Posted on 8/10/26 at 1:57 pm to roadGator
quote:
It’s a great advantage they hold in not caring about their citizens.
I don;t think it is. But I understand why people think that. I think it's priming them, pushing them to act.
Starvation is a crazy motivator.
Posted on 8/10/26 at 1:58 pm to BCreed1
quote:
We are against NEVER ENDING WARS where we have boots on the ground.
Lol
Really? Where is that written? The official maga policy book? Trumps negotiating book -art of the deal?
Where
And hiw do you figure we can end Irans Nuclear ambitions for good without boots on the ground?
#goalpost
This post was edited on 8/10/26 at 2:04 pm
Posted on 8/10/26 at 2:00 pm to BCreed1
I hope so but I’m not convinced they have the power to takeover the savages that lead them with an iron fist.
Posted on 8/10/26 at 2:01 pm to DeltaDoc
quote:
I don’t necessarily disagree, but their leaders have an ability to endure (and force) suffering that ours do not.
No, they do not.
What they have is a foreign nation attacking them and that is going to bring the people to support those who are most harsh against that attacker.
Imagine if Russia decided to take out our leaders, threaten to bomb our power plants and bridges to cripple our economy resulting the deaths of millions of Americans, and told us we must bend to their will or face further consequences.
Are you going to embrace the Russians and go against our leaders who want to fight Russia, unless our leaders have the ability to force you to dislike Russia? Hell no. You're going to want the people who put up the biggest fight to those.
And that's how you end up with "extremists" in charge of these countries. And if you take out the current leaders.
It's human nature and the notion that you can attack a country and be met as liberators who is going to overthrow is pure delusion.
It was easy to see this entire thing was a bad idea from the start. How many times do we need to fail as invaders before people get it?
Page 1 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News