Skip to comments.
Trump Dodged An Ambush By Avoiding War With Iran
Townhall.com ^
| June 24, 2019
| Kurt Schlichter
Posted on 06/23/2019 11:58:18 PM PDT by Kaslin
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-48 next last
1
posted on
06/23/2019 11:58:18 PM PDT
by
Kaslin
To: Kaslin
It is time for all to understand that wars weaken us and should not be engaged in lightly.
2
posted on
06/24/2019 12:10:12 AM PDT
by
thoughtomator
(The Clinton Coup attempt was a worse attack on the USA than was 9/11)
To: Kaslin
This column was weak. Really weak. Praying Mantis settled the Iranians for years. The Iran military is relatively weaker today than it was in the 80’s, when it had a huge inventory of the latest American hardware, thanks to the Shah’s massive arms buildup before Jimmy “Killer Rabbit” Carter convinced him to step down.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Praying_Mantis
The President will do what he wants. I hope he does prevent the Iranians from deploying nuke-tipped ballistic missiles.
3
posted on
06/24/2019 12:38:30 AM PDT
by
Zhang Fei
(My dad had a Delta 88. That was a car. It was like driving your living room.)
To: All; Kaslin
Iran is one of Russia’s central pawns. There is no way they would have done such a thing without Russia’s prior knowledge and approval. In fact, it may have actually been of their doing, via their agents within Iran, in an attempt to get us involved in a long costly distracting war while they march along in their expansionist mission to bring back their lost empire.
Have no doubt about it, the Russians are NOT happy that Hillary lost the 2016 election. They, working with the Dems via that elaborate “TRUMP-Russia collusion” hoax, tried very hard to defeat the president.
The Obama-Biden-Hillary admin bent over backward to appease the Russians in such critically important areas as missile defense, the New Start nuke treaty, the Putin-loving Iran nuke and huge cash deal, the Obama-Hillary Uranium-One deal, etc. This, as they practically dismantled OUR defenses. Pres Trump has just about reversed ALL of these things over course of his time in office. The Russians are (obviously) fuming over all of this.
4
posted on
06/24/2019 12:45:52 AM PDT
by
ETL
(REAL Russia collusion! Newly updated FR Page w/ Table of Contents! Click ETL)
To: Kaslin
Here we go again. Same old stuff again. The bully nations of the international schoolyard, unopposed, are building up and getting more cohesive with each other for another world war, this time with nukes, plagues and whatever. And a few morons with inadequate educations in history or more selfish motives are pushing for that process to be repeated.
5
posted on
06/24/2019 12:46:45 AM PDT
by
familyop
("Welcome to Costco. I love you." - -Costco greeter in the movie, "Idiocracy")
To: Zhang Fei
If it were just Iran....unfortunately they are closely allied with the Russians
You want nuclear war?. It won’t be boots on ground
6
posted on
06/24/2019 12:48:59 AM PDT
by
Nifster
(I see puppy dogs in the clouds)
To: thoughtomator
It is time for all to understand that wars weaken us and should not be engaged in lightly.
President Trump clearly knows this.
his head-fake iran attack was clearly an exercise for his own edification/iran's contemplation. He's playing way above our pay grade, and we can only guess what he's up to.
7
posted on
06/24/2019 12:58:44 AM PDT
by
867V309
(Lock Her Up)
To: Nifster
[If it were just Iran....unfortunately they are closely allied with the Russians
You want nuclear war?. It wont be boots on ground]
The Russians won’t initiate a nuclear attack against a country with significant second strike capability. Any war fought with a peer nuclear power with the ability to wreak large-scale nuclear retaliation will be fought on a conventional level. Because no leader wants (1) his family and everyone he knows wiped out and (2) his record in the history books to involve the destruction of tens of millions of his own countrymen. National leaders assume their posts for all kinds of reasons. But the one minimum objective they definitely try to fulfill is not be recorded in the history books as the worst leader every for their particular realm. And the nuclear slaughter of half of Russia’s population, after he initiated a nuclear strike against the US, would mark Putin down as the worst Russian leader ever, by orders of magnitude. That’s not even counting the more personal loss of all his kin and friends.
8
posted on
06/24/2019 1:07:32 AM PDT
by
Zhang Fei
(My dad had a Delta 88. That was a car. It was like driving your living room.)
To: ETL
9
posted on
06/24/2019 1:12:34 AM PDT
by
rrrod
(just an old guy with a gun in his pocket)
To: 867V309
I think what we saw go down here is the Deep State attempted to railroad Trump into starting a war, and Trump railroading them right out of it.
The primary conflict is between our elected government and a permanent bureaucracy both domestic and transnational, with the whole world seemingly the battleground.
10
posted on
06/24/2019 1:17:25 AM PDT
by
thoughtomator
(The Clinton Coup attempt was a worse attack on the USA than was 9/11)
To: Zhang Fei
The race is on for hypersonic missile development in the U.S.A., Russia and China—one of several trends that might introduce surprises. Communist leaders do focus on shelter and security for the upper echelons of their party faithful but care less about their general populations (see human waves, malnutrition and stress fractures in women, and all).
11
posted on
06/24/2019 1:30:23 AM PDT
by
familyop
("Welcome to Costco. I love you." - -Costco greeter in the movie, "Idiocracy")
To: thoughtomator
I think what we saw go down here is the Deep State attempted to railroad Trump into starting a war, and Trump railroading them right out of it.
there is NO WAY president Trump would be "railroad" into something so dramatic. this was a head fake to sort out his friends.
12
posted on
06/24/2019 1:47:20 AM PDT
by
867V309
(Lock Her Up)
To: Zhang Fei
I know that you have just conveyed the view of DC elites on war and it is awfully alarming.
Just remember how and why WWI started and ended. I believe everyone involved expected it would be a little bit more ‘conventional’.
To: Kaslin
Think about "They wanted to be attacked" and "No practical military option exists to defeat the mullahs." Both these statements are to be true.
Yes, we could bloody Iran really well, except we have no strategy to capitalize on it and it never a good idea to attack when a enemy wants it. Other than getting some revenge, a single massive air strike would accomplish little in the long run or backfire on us and our allies.
If or when it comes to attacking Iran, there needs to be a long term strategy, and any campaign needs to really hurt the regime, not just the Iranian military.
To: Kaslin
15
posted on
06/24/2019 2:02:31 AM PDT
by
familyop
("Welcome to Costco. I love you." - -Costco greeter in the movie, "Idiocracy")
To: Widget Jr
The military option on Iran has two consequences.
It would empower the Iranian regime and there would be different POTUS after the elections.
To: Kaslin; dp0622
Our President is smart. He didn't fall for the "let's send American boys to die for Saudia against Iran"
President Trump to be re-elected!!!
17
posted on
06/24/2019 2:10:54 AM PDT
by
Cronos
(Obama hated Assad as he wasn't a Muslim but an Alawite)
To: Widget Jr
Correct. The USAF could win over in a few hours or days. But then what?
18
posted on
06/24/2019 2:13:57 AM PDT
by
Cronos
(Re-elect President Trump 2020!)
To: Kaslin
The neocon never trumpers are just as dirty as the radical rats, this was a piss poor setup to get trump to bite at the hook, once they set the hook he would be finished for 2020. The war mongers would get what they wanted and so would the rats for 2020
To: NorseViking
[I know that you have just conveyed the view of DC elites on war and it is awfully alarming.
Just remember how and why WWI started and ended. I believe everyone involved expected it would be a little bit more conventional.]
It was fought for control of Europe, the crown jewels. And it ended well short of the annihilation of even 10% of any major participant’s population. And in no instance were the families or friends of the major decision makers in any danger of being exterminated in their entirety. There was also the prospect of material and territorial gain to offset the manpower and infrastructure losses. What gains would offset the flattening of all of Russia’s major cities and the deaths of 70m Russians resulting from the American response to a Russian nuclear first strike? Putin’s not an Iranian mullah who thinks launching nukes at DC might cause the Twelfth Imam to reveal himself and initiate the end times predicted in the Koran. He’s basically an atheist who is guided by cost benefit calculations like other non-Muslim cleric decision makers. Launching a nuclear strike at the US for *any* reason other than in retaliation for an American nuclear attack on Russia falls on the wrong side of the cost-benefit register.
20
posted on
06/24/2019 2:44:04 AM PDT
by
Zhang Fei
(My dad had a Delta 88. That was a car. It was like driving your living room.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-48 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson