Tensions in the Middle East

[Luder]

Hesgeth must have been pissed his Saturday night binge drink was ruined. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER!!

Tremendous! OH! Thanks God!

[CliffFletcher]

Iran overplayed their hand. Their strategy relied on proxies in Hamas and Hezbollah posing enough of a threat to Israel that the latter was deterred from striking Iran itself. But Oct 7 provoked such an overwhelming response that Hamas and Hezbollah will be crippled for years. Now that Iran can't strike at Israel from Gaza or Lebanon anymore, and Israel has a compliant partner in Washington, the gloves have come off against Iran itself.

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

Those attacks better have crippled them.

Not interested in hypersonic missiles getting sent in this general direction.

Not sure I trust the "dome" if its equipped how Isreal's was.

Generally speaking, using acts of war as a negotiation tactic doesn't tend to inspire cooperation. Trump is naive to think he can retreat and expect Iran to throw its arms up.

Now Iran will do something to hit back and antagonize them further, i.e. disrupting the strait of Hormuz or something of the sort.

What's worse, congress probably takes this sitting down.

[kermitology]

Originally Posted by belsarius

Part of me is

"what's Iran going to do about it"

And another part of me is

"what IS Iran going to do about it"

Can Trump fight a two front war with Iran on one side and California on the other? Stay tuned!

I had this thought tonight, and honestly, I’ve been pondering part of this question for a very long time..

Is Trump trying to induce a terrorist attack?

He’s dismantled the entire Joint Terrorist Task Force, he’s gutted the national intelligence system, he’s put clearly incompetent people in charge of national security, he’s reassigned so much of the FBI to support ICE. I have been trying to think about the end game of all that. Like, what rationality would you come up with to do all of this if not to induce a terrorist attack.

Then Trump illegally bombs Iran, and threatens more if they don’t capitulate entirely. They seem to be goading an attack on US soil. Is the thinking that they can ram through more domestic spying like Bush did after 9/11?

[KelVarnsen]

Yes.

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

While I really feel for the innocent lives affected in Isreal, it's really better that Isreal takes the heat from Iran and its proxy terrorist organizations.

What this ultimately leads to is Trump getting his excuse to tighten his grip on his own country, chalking it all up to security.

It's likely all in the plan.

[Delthefunky]

Originally Posted by kermitology

I had this thought tonight, and honestly, I’ve been pondering part of this question for a very long time..

Is Trump trying to induce a terrorist attack?

He’s dismantled the entire Joint Terrorist Task Force, he’s gutted the national intelligence system, he’s put clearly incompetent people in charge of national security, he’s reassigned so much of the FBI to support ICE. I have been trying to think about the end game of all that. Like, what rationality would you come up with to do all of this if not to induce a terrorist attack.

Then Trump illegally bombs Iran, and threatens more if they don’t capitulate entirely. They seem to be goading an attack on US soil. Is the thinking that they can ram through more domestic spying like Bush did after 9/11?

He's done the same with everything though. Health, education, etc. There is a disaster waiting to happen, but it could be another pandemic which actually seems pretty likely right now, or perhaps a civil disturbance. In short, Trump is a well diversified moron.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by kermitology

I had this thought tonight, and honestly, I’ve been pondering part of this question for a very long time..

Is Trump trying to induce a terrorist attack?

He’s dismantled the entire Joint Terrorist Task Force, he’s gutted the national intelligence system, he’s put clearly incompetent people in charge of national security, he’s reassigned so much of the FBI to support ICE. I have been trying to think about the end game of all that. Like, what rationality would you come up with to do all of this if not to induce a terrorist attack.

Then Trump illegally bombs Iran, and threatens more if they don’t capitulate entirely. They seem to be goading an attack on US soil. Is the thinking that they can ram through more domestic spying like Bush did after 9/11?

He's too dumb and shortsighted for something like that.

He only wants to fund what he both understands and likes, and those are both very small circles even before you start looking at where they overlap.

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by TrentCrimmIndependent

Those attacks better have crippled them.

Not interested in hypersonic missiles getting sent in this general direction.

Not sure I trust the "dome" if its equipped how Isreal's was.

Generally speaking, using acts of war as a negotiation tactic doesn't tend to inspire cooperation. Trump is naive to think he can retreat and expect Iran to throw its arms up.

Now Iran will do something to hit back and antagonize them further, i.e. disrupting the strait of Hormuz or something of the sort.

What's worse, congress probably takes this sitting down.

This is exactly what people said before Israel attacked Hezbollah. They were wrong.

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Wikipedia has a pretty good list of Iran proxies recognized as terrorist groups and are engaged in operations.

The countries/regions that they are active in are in parentheses:

Al-Ashtar Brigades (Bahrain)
Asa'ib Ahl al-Haq (Iraq)
Badr Organization (Iraq)
Hamas (Gaza)
Harakat al-Nujaba (Iraq)
Hezbollah (Lebanon)
Houthis (Yemen)
Palestinian Islamic Jihad (Gaza)
Kata'ib Hezbollah (Iraq)
Liwa Fatemiyoun (Syria, Afghanistan)
Saraya al-Mukhtar (Bahrain)

Here is a list of countries/regions where terrorist attacks or foiled attacks linked to the Iranian government have taken place:

Albania
Argentina
Bahrain
Denmark
France
India
Israel
Palestine
Iraq
Kenya
Netherlands
Sweden
Thailand
USA
Venezuela

This does not include al Qaeda attacks where funding or training came from Iran through their proxies, such as the Ryadh bombings.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_a...ored_terrorism

The total defeat of Iran may actually bring about a long lasting peace to the region.

[Whynotnow]

Originally Posted by Pointman

The total defeat of Iran may actually bring about a long lasting peace to the region.

Has us led regime change ever accomplished that in the region?

[Fuzz]

Yes, this time regime change in the ME will work out just fine. Like, you remember how Iran got to be what it is in the first place, right? HINT: learn your CIA history.

[kermitology]

Originally Posted by Itse

He's too dumb and shortsighted for something like that.

He only wants to fund what he both understands and likes, and those are both very small circles even before you start looking at where they overlap.

You have to understand that this is not just him making decisions. Everything to do with ICE and their domestic terrorism of anyone who isn’t white is all at the direction of Stephen Miller.

[Tron_fdc]

Originally Posted by Pointman

The total defeat of Iran may actually bring about a long lasting peace to the region.

Hahahaha yeah right. This time for sure, hey?

USA USA USA!!!

[puffnstuff]

Five things to remember about war:

1. Many things reported with confidence in
the first hours and days will turn out not to be true

2. Whatever they say, the people who start wars are often thinking chiefly about domestic politics

3. The rationale given for a war will change over time, such that actual
success or failure in achieving a named objective is less relevant than one might think

4. Wars are unpredictable

5. Wars are easy to start and hard to stop

[activeStick]

Originally Posted by TrentCrimmIndependent

What's worse, congress probably takes this sitting down.

Yes! I had mentioned earlier how it's obvious what's happening here when you have all of their media outlets promoting content that prior to the US attack, we're all around justifying why US involvement would make sense. Networks that are ALWAYS against Trump's actions weren't just silent, but telling viewers through interviews with retired admirals, military commanders, etc why the US would be justified to act. But even more telling in many ways, people like Chuck Schumer have been completely silent throughout all of this before the attack. No call to have congressional sessions even though it's required if America were to go to war. The military industrial complex makes the decisions. The President, Congress, politicians and all media, left or right, have fallen in line.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Whynotnow

Has us led regime change ever accomplished that in the region?

Its accomplished a lot! Not necessarily what the US' stated goals were, but there were regime changes.

So yeah, they got some stuff done. Not necessarily 'good stuff' but stuff none the less.

[DoubleK]

Originally Posted by kermitology

I had this thought tonight, and honestly, I’ve been pondering part of this question for a very long time..

Is Trump trying to induce a terrorist attack?

I had precisely this same thought last night.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by kermitology

I had this thought tonight, and honestly, I’ve been pondering part of this question for a very long time..

Is Trump trying to induce a terrorist attack?

He’s dismantled the entire Joint Terrorist Task Force, he’s gutted the national intelligence system, he’s put clearly incompetent people in charge of national security, he’s reassigned so much of the FBI to support ICE. I have been trying to think about the end game of all that. Like, what rationality would you come up with to do all of this if not to induce a terrorist attack.

Then Trump illegally bombs Iran, and threatens more if they don’t capitulate entirely. They seem to be goading an attack on US soil. Is the thinking that they can ram through more domestic spying like Bush did after 9/11?

Throughout History, inducing a Terrorist attack and/or faking it yourself, have been age-old and time-tested successful strategies for circumventing Democracies and consolidating Dictatorial power.

Initially my thought was...Drumpf wants to start a war because then he has excuses to hand out lucrative government defense contracts to his buddies and probably take some kickbacks on those.

But I feel like there has to be more to it than that, but at the same time, Trump isn't that crafty. I tend to believe that Trump is genuinely thicker than pig s###. So...its hard to derive motivation without knowing who the real puppet-master is and what they want.

IMO Trump is the Monkey, I want to know who the Organ Grinder is.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by puffnstuff

2. Whatever they say, the people who start wars are often thinking chiefly about domestic politics

Personally, I think Trump's main concern in the Strait of Hormuz and Red Sea shipping routes which have been disrupted several times by Iran and Iran's proxy in Yemen respectively. Back in May when the nuclear site inspections were occurring, Iran used threats of shutting it down again. There was also an incident not that long ago when an Iranian tanker was stopped in the Mediterranean because it was shipping to Assad's regime in Syria and Iran responded by seizing a British ship in the Strait of Hormuz and held the crew hostage. I think the the nuclear dilemma is a convenient pretext, but the main concern is shipping and the economic control the Iran regime has on global business. It's the same thing with the Panama and Suez canals, the South China Sea, and the Arctic. How these areas are controlled and their stability is always political, but the common denominator is shipping.

As a side note, Iran has apparently stopped supplying Russia for the time being. Fewer Iranian drones and missiles murdering Ukrainians isn't a bad thing.