I know on whose poker playing I'm side betting.

quote:

Originally posted by pessimist:
But lets not forget the ships they attacked. Were they in Iranian territory too?

Are we absolutely certain beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Iranians attacked these ships, or could it have possibly been someone else? I doubt the Iranians are the only group with mines in that area. I'm still not 100% convinced the Iranians are at fault for this one, which is why I believe Trump is slow walking all of this to try and let it shake out.

quote:

If Trump does nothing, he looks weak to a large block of his base. If he strikes back, he gives fuel to the Dems and the MSM and still loses favor with a set of voters who will not tolerate military action regardless of the circumstances.

Trump promised everyone who voted for him that he would not dabble in more middle east wars. If he were to break that promise, and begin the process of burying us in another middle eastern war, I think that would destroy his reelection chances. I believe he's moving exactly how he should right now, that being slowly and cautiously. No need to rush on this.

quote:

Originally posted by xanth:
Everything I've seen states it was a Global Hawk, not a MQ-9 Reaper. GH's are are quite a bit bigger, and more expensive.

You are correct, xanth...my apologies. I thought I had seen an article that stated "Reaper". At any rate, the Global Hawk is even bigger...



That thing is just about as big, if not AS big, as the Embraer 135 Regional Jet I was flying at my former airline. Wow...

I wonder if Iran knew it was a drone, and not a commercial airliner? Global Hawk is the size of a 737, and that is awfully congested airspace. Even if they were certain, it was incredibly irresponsible to loose a live missile in that area.



Or are we still doing the tin foil "not convinced we were in intl airspace" thing. . . ?

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Not to argue the point, but it's not quite the size of a 737. Based on the photo I posted, I'd see the scale as stated in my post. Still...BIG!

quote:

Originally posted by gpbst3:
Start drilling in Alaska. F@ck their oil.

+1.

I thought that was the MAGA plan. Let’s them assholes starve to death over there. We should have Americans drilling oil here for American consumption. Quit sending our money to assholes who hate us.

quote:

Originally posted by walker77:
Iran is doing everything to start a war with us. Makes me wonder are they really that crazy or do they have nukes hidden somewhere.

With Russia as their backup ??

Measured Response. Proportional Retaliatory Action. Measured Reply. Blah, Blah, Blah. Tit-for-Tat.

None of that has ever worked worth a shit. Never. If it did we wouldn't be here now.

How about this: In a single, large (just to drive home the point we can) coordinated strike, every Surface to Surface missile site we know of is destroyed, every SAM site we know of is destroyed, every radar site we know of is destroyed, if it floats and is outside one of their naval bases we sink it, if it floats and is inside one of their naval bases we sink it when completely destroying those navel bases, if it flies it dies, if it flies and is parked on a military airstrip it dies when we take out those airbases.

Finally, just for good measure, we destroy every single facility, lab, factory or building even remotely associated with their nuclear program.

There's your measured response fucking warning you fanatical, murdering motherfuckers.

We owe Iran for almost fifty years of dead Americans, from our hostages to the Marines in Beirut, all the way to today and every single American who has died as a result of Iran's bullshit in Europe, the Middle East and Africa.

You want to proceed to Round Two? Groovy, now we can get serious.

For those who say well, that's a war-you're right. Iran has been waging war against us since the late 1970's. Maybe, just maybe, after fifty Goddamned years we finally do something about that.

Just checked in to ClownNewsNetwork and they have a guy making the case that we're the aggressor because we pulled out of the nuclear deal and we're sanctioning them to death.

At times like this I am reminded of Henry Kissinger and his advice to Presidents. If you are not careful the military will leave you with two options: 1. Their choice or 2. Nuclear war.

Curtis Lemay and MacArthur come to mind.

quote:

Originally posted by OcCurt:
Measured Response. Proportional Retaliatory Action. Measured Reply. Blah, Blah, Blah. Tit-for-Tat.

None of that has ever worked worth a shit. Never. If it did we wouldn't be here now.

What, like bombing Libya? How about when we popped Iran in the nose last time, the mid to late 80s? They all seemed to shut up pretty damn quick.

But if course, if you are leading the bayonet charge, please sign up at the first opportunity!

quote:

Originally posted by PowerSurge:
Once again a Republican president has to mop up for a Democrat president.

Well....technically it was Dwight Eisenhower that created this mess originally.

quote:

Originally posted by pessimist:
In any event, I can't help wondering about the timing of all this and the wisdom of shooting that drone down. What are they hoping to accomplish? They certainly don't want military conflict with us despite the chest pounding.

If Trump does nothing, he looks weak to a large block of his base. If he strikes back, he gives fuel to the Dems and the MSM and still loses favor with a set of voters who will not tolerate military action regardless of the circumstances.

It seems quite clear to me that with the JCPOA agreement all but dead (Iran just announced they would resume enriching uranium to higher levels unless the other parties make it work for them despite US sanctions), they are now testing their freedom of movement against the West under the constrictions of contradictory positions of Trump, his administration, base, and allies; some apparent on this thread:

- Non-interventionism, particularly disengagement from the Middle East;

- being tough on Iran, killing JCPOA, sanctions and military threats;

- maintaining oil price stability - even if the US (and also Europe) are much less dependent on Gulf oil than they used to be, trouble in the Strait of Hormuz up to actual closure will lead to price hikes due to the global nature of the market;

- some regional allies like Israel and the Saudis who would like the US to take down Iran for them;

- tensions with European allies which the US might need for protracted effective operations - for example, the US Navy has increasingly abandoned minesweeping capabilties to that point, which was evident even during the 1987-1991 operations in the Gulf. The LCS was supposed to take over from the outgoing Avenger-class MCMs, but well ...

- Domestic and international distrust of the US government and intelligence built up in the last two decades.

I think the Iranians are betting they can suck up anything the US can allow itself to throw at them under these conditions, like the usual cruise missile barrage any POTUS has resorted to as a token measure for the last quarter century. And they probably think it won't even come to that; after all even Reagan didn't follow through on threats of counterattacks on shore sites if anti-ship missiles should be used from them, fearing the risks associated with such an escalation. Especially in view of lukewarm domestic support, a Congress divided on the whole Kuwaiti tanker reflagging thing to have them escorted by the USN, etc.

quote:

Originally posted by RHINOWSO:

quote:

Originally posted by OcCurt:
Measured Response. Proportional Retaliatory Action. Measured Reply. Blah, Blah, Blah. Tit-for-Tat.

None of that has ever worked worth a shit. Never. If it did we wouldn't be here now.

What, like bombing Libya? How about when we popped Iran in the nose last time, the mid to late 80s? They all seemed to shut up pretty damn quick.

But if course, if you are leading the bayonet charge, please sign up at the first opportunity!

No need for boots on the ground or bayonet charges. And I signed on the dotted line thirty years ago.

As to the "pop in the nose" in the late 80's what good did that really do? So Iran quit targeting tankers for a while. They certainly didn't stop any of their other extra curricular activities at the time.

quote:

Originally posted by Southflorida-law:

quote:

Originally posted by PowerSurge:
Once again a Republican president has to mop up for a Democrat president.

Well....technically it was Dwight Eisenhower that created this mess originally.

I was talking about FDR

Even if we don't need their oil (they being all the Persian Gulf countries, not Iran), the fact that the rest of the world does need it makes it strategically important.

quote:

Originally posted by gpbst3:
Start drilling in Alaska. F@ck their oil.

Yes oil is a worldwide traded commodity, in US Dollars. Even if we use our own oil (which we mostly don't since our refineries aren't yet setup to process our own crude), and Iran managed to choke off the ME supplies to rest of the world, the Brent and WTI would jump significantly on the trading floors (US and worldwide) leading to significant jump in gas prices.

Not to mention the collapse of world's economies, and eventually leading to tough times in the US.

quote:

Originally posted by saigonsmuggler:
Even if we use our own oil (which we mostly don't since our refineries aren't yet setup to process our own crude)

Say what??? We have more refining capacity than any nation on the planet and yes, we process our own crude and natural gas - having done so since the birth of the petroleum industry! You need to get out of Austin and drive south to Houston sometime...

quote:

Originally posted by bigdeal:

quote:

Originally posted by PowerSurge:

quote:

Originally posted by bigdeal:
Anybody else want to see the documented flight path of that drone, and specifically where it was hit? I'm sorry but I'm channeling my inner Ronald Reagan..."Trust but verify". 'If' it was downed in international airspace, I'd have no issue with the SAM site that downed it disappearing. But I want to be shown proof of exactly where the drone was when it was downed before any actions are taken.

Oh for Pete’s sake.

Roll your god damn eyes at someone else. The US intelligence community hasn't exactly been infallible over the past several years (the Syrian gas bombing comes to mind), so asking for them to support their position with a bit of evidence should not be too much to ask for before we start considering a stroll down a path that could lead to another Iraq or Afghanistan.

Read it and weep, pal. https://www.foxnews.com/world/...released-by-pentagon

quote:

Originally posted by PowerSurge:
Read it and weep, pal. https://www.foxnews.com/world/...released-by-pentagon

That's comical...pal. This story proves absolutely nothing. I don't need to watch a video to know a drone was shot down. The article provides zero evidence to confirm exactly where the drone was when it was attacked. And that proof is readily available, all they have to do is release it. But until the US government does release the entire flight path of that drone, all we have is noise and conflicting commentary by US and Iranian officials. And I'm not prepared to listen to either when proof of what actually happened exists.