I was so sure Trump was starting a war. Now I am confused. There is still a power struggle in Iraq and Syria, US is still exerting economic sanctions on Iran, Soleimani's dead, Iran has restarted...
I was so sure Trump was starting a war. Now I am confused.
There is still a power struggle in Iraq and Syria, US is still exerting economic sanctions on Iran, Soleimani's dead, Iran has restarted it's nuclear program, all diplomatic relations between the US & Iraq have broken down...
It's easier to understand when you realize there is no grand plan. Trump is a mentally deficient, morally bankrupt geriatric surrounded by yes men whose support for him hinges on how it benefits...
Now I am confused.
It's easier to understand when you realize there is no grand plan. Trump is a mentally deficient, morally bankrupt geriatric surrounded by yes men whose support for him hinges on how it benefits them. Every day is a new contest to see who can most effectively manage his whims and narcissism. Who can be just subservient enough, but not too subservient that it loses his respect? Anyone with a shred of morality or a hint of a backbone has long since been fired by tweet.
After the missiles, Iran claims 80 American casualties, and have stated that if there will be no further retaliation if the US does not hit back. On the other side, American sources say 0 US...
President Trump backed away from further military confrontation with Iran on Wednesday after a barrage of missiles fired at American troops killed no one and Tehran indicated that would be the end of its retaliation for the killing of a top general.
After the missiles, Iran claims 80 American casualties, and have stated that if there will be no further retaliation if the US does not hit back.
On the other side, American sources say 0 US casualties (which is likely more accurate).
It seems very possible now that no further escalation will occur.
Tehran may have "retaliated" mainly to quell internal cries for war; now they can claim to have killed 80 Americans and scared off the US, while on the other side, the missile strikes didn't actually do anything.
I think your analysis here is spot on. I'd add that all the countries with personell on the two bases and regional powers too were warned of the missiles ahead of time to avoid casualty and...
I think your analysis here is spot on.
I'd add that all the countries with personell on the two bases and regional powers too were warned of the missiles ahead of time to avoid casualty and therefore escalation to a real war. This underpins the view that the 80 figure for the local audience was meant simply as a PR victory to cool things down.
Even so, the consequences of an active Iranian nuclear program and severely worsened US diplomatic relations in the region remain as middle and possibly long term consequences.
It seems pretty audacious to me to call Soleimani "The world's biggest terrorist" to try to get a Bin Laden-size win out of this as Trump seemed to be trying to do today.
No. Trump ran on ending wars, not the futility or moral wrongness of wars. His whole deal was that we should just indiscriminately kill them all quickly and it'll be over. That's not "anti-war"...
As much as a lunatic Trump is, I genuinely believe he's anti-war. Like, this is the closest thing to a moral principle he actually has.
No. Trump ran on ending wars, not the futility or moral wrongness of wars. His whole deal was that we should just indiscriminately kill them all quickly and it'll be over. That's not "anti-war" that's just ignorance of how war actually works.
I was so sure Trump was starting a war. Now I am confused.
There is still a power struggle in Iraq and Syria, US is still exerting economic sanctions on Iran, Soleimani's dead, Iran has restarted it's nuclear program, all diplomatic relations between the US & Iraq have broken down...
So... Trump considers this a win and moves on?
It's easier to understand when you realize there is no grand plan. Trump is a mentally deficient, morally bankrupt geriatric surrounded by yes men whose support for him hinges on how it benefits them. Every day is a new contest to see who can most effectively manage his whims and narcissism. Who can be just subservient enough, but not too subservient that it loses his respect? Anyone with a shred of morality or a hint of a backbone has long since been fired by tweet.
After the missiles, Iran claims 80 American casualties, and have stated that if there will be no further retaliation if the US does not hit back.
On the other side, American sources say 0 US casualties (which is likely more accurate).
It seems very possible now that no further escalation will occur.
Tehran may have "retaliated" mainly to quell internal cries for war; now they can claim to have killed 80 Americans and scared off the US, while on the other side, the missile strikes didn't actually do anything.
I think your analysis here is spot on.
I'd add that all the countries with personell on the two bases and regional powers too were warned of the missiles ahead of time to avoid casualty and therefore escalation to a real war. This underpins the view that the 80 figure for the local audience was meant simply as a PR victory to cool things down.
Even so, the consequences of an active Iranian nuclear program and severely worsened US diplomatic relations in the region remain as middle and possibly long term consequences.
It seems pretty audacious to me to call Soleimani "The world's biggest terrorist" to try to get a Bin Laden-size win out of this as Trump seemed to be trying to do today.
As much as a lunatic Trump is, I genuinely believe he's anti-war. Like, this is the closest thing to a moral principle he actually has.
No. Trump ran on ending wars, not the futility or moral wrongness of wars. His whole deal was that we should just indiscriminately kill them all quickly and it'll be over. That's not "anti-war" that's just ignorance of how war actually works.