- 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: Why Did President Trump Apparently Change His Mind w/Regards to Intervening in Iran?
Posted on 1/18/26 at 6:38 pm to ItTakesAThief
Posted on 1/18/26 at 6:38 pm to ItTakesAThief
quote:
Because a strike would not topple the government. Unless you want a prolonged war it does not achieve much. And then you have no idea who will take over. The people must do this and the Army has to back the people. Otherwise it’s a real mess Also most of the Patriot batteries were pulled from Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Israel. Not to mention there were not enough destroyers off the coast of Israel and in the Persian Gulf for intercepts.
Very reasonable argument.
So why was it necessary for DJT to say something evidently before all this was considered.
What’s so hard about just staying quiet sometimes?
The words of the president of the United States carry a lot of weight throughout this world.
2
Posted on 1/18/26 at 6:39 pm to Bronco11
quote:
Do it right the first time.
When did we ever get it right the first time in the Middle East?
Posted on 1/18/26 at 6:40 pm to KCT
Need to save our bombs for Nuuk.
Posted on 1/18/26 at 6:44 pm to KCT
If I were Trump my decision would have been based on one thing and one thing alone:
- The military (non-Quds, non-IRGC) deciding that a regime change was necessary and joining the protesters.
Not only did it have little chance of success without that, but it would have failed with a counter-revolution in that case. No use getting involved with our assets in any shape or form if it is going to fail... now or later.
That's not saying I wouldn't give them some nudges if the military was fence sitting. But either he's waiting for the military to make a move (with intel saying they are getting ready) or he has seen no indication whatsoever they are going to side with the protesters.
- The military (non-Quds, non-IRGC) deciding that a regime change was necessary and joining the protesters.
Not only did it have little chance of success without that, but it would have failed with a counter-revolution in that case. No use getting involved with our assets in any shape or form if it is going to fail... now or later.
That's not saying I wouldn't give them some nudges if the military was fence sitting. But either he's waiting for the military to make a move (with intel saying they are getting ready) or he has seen no indication whatsoever they are going to side with the protesters.
Posted on 1/18/26 at 6:44 pm to Rebel
Nah. Just wipe out another country. There won't be years and years of power struggle. Or if you want to have a say in who is in power next years and years of troops on the ground in an occupied land. Or years and years of new terrorist training grounds.
We've always seen this same game the last 50 years. Let's just go for it again!
This is see eye ayyy slop that the idiots are eating up and supporting Iranian "Freedom!"
We've always seen this same game the last 50 years. Let's just go for it again!
This is see eye ayyy slop that the idiots are eating up and supporting Iranian "Freedom!"
This post was edited on 1/18/26 at 6:45 pm
Posted on 1/18/26 at 6:45 pm to Errerrerrwere
Have no interest in the opinion of our ally. This regime has destabilized the ME for 47 years, killed countless Americans and needs to be shown to the exit door.
They are oppressive, brutal and reek havoc across an entire region. If peace in the ME is to have a chance, cut off the head of the snake.
DJT, is your red line.....but then again, have perceived quite a few domestic red lines and precious little to show to date
They are oppressive, brutal and reek havoc across an entire region. If peace in the ME is to have a chance, cut off the head of the snake.
DJT, is your red line.....but then again, have perceived quite a few domestic red lines and precious little to show to date
Posted on 1/18/26 at 6:48 pm to wfallstiger
quote:
Have no interest in the opinion of our ally. This regime has destabilized the ME for 47 years, killed countless Americans and needs to be shown to the exit door.
They are not a direct threat to the United States. Anything else is Boomer slop that is dying off. Also majority of democrats and republicans don't want an attack on Iran at this point.
quote:
They are oppressive, brutal and reek havoc across an entire region. If peace in the ME is to have a chance, cut off the head of the snake.
Israeli propaganda, grandpa. quote:
DJT, is your red line.....but then again, have perceived quite a few domestic red lines and precious little to show to date
Trump doesn't have the political capital to drop Iran.
Or
He would have done it already.
Posted on 1/18/26 at 6:49 pm to KCT
quote:
PS - Tucker Carlson visited the White House twice this past week. Hopefully, Trump isn't listening to that bought-and-paid-for son-of-a-bitch.
You gonna apply the same bought-and-paid-for schtick to every media personality and member of Congress on the AIPAC/Israeli payroll? Because if Trump listens to anyone else in the Beltway circle, that's what it will be.
Posted on 1/18/26 at 6:51 pm to lurking
Lincoln should be there is 4 days or so.
Posted on 1/18/26 at 6:51 pm to SCLibertarian
It's really sad. Their hubris in not knowing they are the only ones left in the room that want constant war. It's incredible and they have no self awareness they are the only ones left
70 percent oppose
LINK
70 percent oppose
LINK
Posted on 1/18/26 at 6:52 pm to Errerrerrwere
This foreign policy is going to die whether you satanic cult members want to continue with the child sacrifices in the Middle East or not.
It's over for you. And it's also OT trashy.
It's over for you. And it's also OT trashy.
Posted on 1/18/26 at 6:57 pm to Errerrerrwere
quote:
Errerrerrwere
You're simple-minded. Dude, this isn't the same as the illegal invasion of Iraq by Bush and Cheney. As someone in this thread tried to tell you earlier, this despotic Iranian regime has fomented 10 tons of trouble in the ME and elsewhere.
You can't just blindly look at every situation like it's the same and fits the same profile.
Posted on 1/18/26 at 6:58 pm to Great Plains Drifter
Our strike group hasn’t arrived yet.
Posted on 1/18/26 at 7:00 pm to KCT
quote:
You can't just blindly look at every situation like it's the same and fits the same profile.
Slop.
They are NOT a direct threat to the United States. And just like our Director of National Intelligence has repeatedly told us; they do NOT have a nuke.
Continue with your child sacrifice for Baal though!
Posted on 1/18/26 at 7:03 pm to Errerrerrwere
quote:
Continue with your child sacrifice for Baal though!
I won't bother interacting with you again. It's clearly a waste of time.
Posted on 1/18/26 at 7:05 pm to KCT
quote:
As someone in this thread tried to tell you earlier, this despotic Iranian regime has fomented 10 tons of trouble in the ME and elsewhere.
Let’s don’t gloss over the historical reality that elements in our nation’s own wholly corrupted national security apparatus played a role in the ouster of the Shah and thus have some complicity in helping to foment the Iranian Revolution.
Declassified documents revealed that the Carter Administration was indirectly communicating with Khomeini and other opposition leaders in Iran before the Shah’s abdication, contradicting the widely disseminated narrative that the Carter Administration was wholly surprised by the Iranian Revolution.
Iran And The Shah. What Really Happened?
…Long regarded as a U.S. ally, the Shah was pro-Western and anti-communist, and he was aware that he posed the main barrier to Soviet ambitions in the Middle East. As distinguished foreign-affairs analyst Hilaire du Berrier noted: “He determined to make Iran capable of blocking a Russian advance until the West should realize to what extent her own interests were threatened and come to his aid…. It necessitated an army of 250,000 men.” The Shah’s air force ranked among the world’s five best. A voice for stability within the Middle East itself, he favored peace with Israel and supplied the beleaguered state with oil.
On the home front, the Shah protected minorities and permitted non-Muslims to practice their faiths. “All faith,” he wrote, “imposes respect upon the beholder.” The Shah also brought Iran into the 20th century by granting women equal rights. This was not to accommodate feminism, but to end archaic brutalization.
Yet, at the height of Iran’s prosperity, the Shah suddenly became the target of an ignoble campaign led by U.S. and British foreign policy makers. Bolstered by slander in the Western press, these forces, along with Soviet-inspired communist insurgents, and mullahs opposing the Shah’s progressiveness, combined to face him with overwhelming opposition. In three years he went from vibrant monarch to exile (on January 16, 1979), and ultimately death, while Iran fell to Ayatollah Khomeini’s terror.
Houchang Nahavandi, one of the Shah’s ministers and closest advisers, reveals in his book The Last Shah of Iran: “We now know that the idea of deposing the Shah was broached continually, from the mid-seventies on, in the National Security Council in Washington, by Henry Kissinger, whom the Shah thought of as a firm friend.”
Kissinger virtually epitomized the American establishment: before acting as Secretary of State under Republicans Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford, he had been chief foreign-affairs adviser to Nelson Rockefeller, whom he called “the single most influential person in my life.” Jimmy Carter defeated Ford in the 1976 presidential election, but the switch to a Democratic administration did not change the new foreign policy tilt against the Shah.
Every presidential administration since Franklin D. Roosevelt’s has been dominated by members of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), the most visible manifestation of the establishment that dictates U.S. foreign policy along internationalist lines. The Carter administration was no exception.
What is the solution to modern Iran? Before listening to war drums, let us remember:
It was the CFR clique — the same establishment entrenched in the Bush and Obama administrations — that ousted the Shah, resulting in today’s Iran. That establishment also chanted for the six-year-old Iraq War over alleged weapons of mass destruction never found.
Therefore, instead of contemplating war with Iran, a nation four times Iraq’s size, let us demand that America shed its CFR hierarchy and their interventionist policy that has wrought decades of misery, and adopt a policy of avoiding foreign entanglements, and of minding our own business in international affairs.
Posted on 1/18/26 at 7:05 pm to KCT
quote:
I won't bother interacting with you again. It's clearly a waste of time.
Feeling is mutual. Any so-called "Christian" advocating for more death and destruction in the public square is a Charleton. Jesus warned us of false prophets.
But if blood is what you seek by all means send your own fricking son pussy!
(You won't.)
This post was edited on 1/18/26 at 7:07 pm
Posted on 1/18/26 at 7:09 pm to KCT
Per Steve Bannon
Posted on 1/18/26 at 7:10 pm to Errerrerrwere
quote:
Feeling is mutual. Any so-called "Christian" advocating for more death and destruction in the public square is a Charleton.
You really think the Christian God would be happy with the radical Islamic regime they have now?
You and I aren't reading the same Bible.
Posted on 1/18/26 at 7:13 pm to KCT
quote:
PS - Tucker Carlson visited the White House twice this past week. Hopefully, Trump isn't listening to that bought-and-paid-for son-of-a-bitch.
Bought and paid by who?
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News