Posted on 06/21/2019 7:22:23 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
For some, you could hear the sound of war drums. It was coming. Iran had shot down a surveillance drone in international waters. President Trump did not mince words, saying Iran made a huge mistake, though was cagey about military action. He told the press “you’ll find out” when asked. President Trump has taken action before, firing cruise missiles at an airfield in Syria in 2017 after a horrible chemical weapons attack struck the town of Khan Shaykhun. The airfield was the staging ground. Reports trickled in last night that air strikes were ordered against Iran but were halted by Trump. We didn’t know why, but earlier this morning the president tweeted that he aborted the mission because the retaliatory strikes were not proportionate (via WaPo):
EXCLUSIVE: Iran received message from U.S. President Trump via Oman overnight warning of imminent attack on Iran - Iranian government officials pic.twitter.com/kzV1S1MCHC— Reuters Top News (@Reuters) June 21, 2019
....On Monday they shot down an unmanned drone flying in International Waters. We were cocked & loaded to retaliate last night on 3 different sights when I asked, how many will die. 150 people, sir, was the answer from a General. 10 minutes before the strike I stopped it, not....— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 21, 2019
....proportionate to shooting down an unmanned drone. I am in no hurry, our Military is rebuilt, new, and ready to go, by far the best in the world. Sanctions are biting & more added last night. Iran can NEVER have Nuclear Weapons, not against the USA, and not against the WORLD!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 21, 2019
President Trump ordered an attack on Iran on Thursday in retaliation for the downing of a surveillance drone in the Strait of Hormuz but called the operation off just before it was due to occur because it would have caused extensive casualties, he said Friday.
In a series of morning tweets, Trump said he called off strikes on three Iranian sites minutes before they were to be launched because he was informed of the likely loss of life among Iranians.
“We were cocked & loaded to retaliate last night on 3 different sights when I asked, how many will die,” Trump tweeted. “150 people, sir, was the answer from a General. 10 minutes before the strike I stopped it.”
Such a death toll was “not proportionate to shooting down an unmanned drone,” Trump wrote, adding: “I am in no hurry, our Military is rebuilt, new, and ready to go, by far the best in the world.
Thanx for the reasoned and thoughtful reply. It's so disappointing to have conversations quickly devolve into fact-free, emotionally driven diatribes. OK, so since we're on the same page as to an objective evaluation of US strengths & weaknesses, we can move into the more subjective sphere where reasonable people can disagree about differing policy debates.
The segment I quoted above is where we disagree; I don't believe the US owes anything to anybody. Like the Romans, or any good ruler, it's better to be feared than loved. The love will flow anyway as long as rigid standards are upheld. People may bitch & complain, but at the end of the day, smooth and harmonious commercial transactions without piracy and/or fraud, and stress free nights of restful sleep more than compensate for perceived 'unfairness'.
You may choose to disagree, and I completely concur your perspective is valid. After all, hasn't this been the core essential debate with respect to law & governance since man first formed societies?
“WH “doves” are winning. It’s 1983 all over again.”
I assume it’s the below you are referring to?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_Beirut_barracks_bombings
If so, it’s an absurd analogy. We lost 241 men that day.
And unarmed drone is not even close.
To get rid of Saddam, we had to invade. To get rid of Khadafy we had to bomb.
I am not making a case the Libya was something we should have done. Iraq is a bit different. There was a good case for overthrowing Saddam, but we were not willing to commit to the necessary long haul. Problem is you need to decide that before you invade. In the Iraqi case, we could have changed the ME for the better, had we not allowed Iranian influence in the new govt, and then basically pulled out altogether before they could get their stuff in one sack. In Libya, we got rid of a despot and then let country fall apart under its warlords.
So the outcomes were both managed poorly, but in neither case could the oppressed in the regimes rise up on their own.
Nope, Trump is wise here. He tweets that there won’t be an attack, watch the markets rise and then tweet about record numbers. He’s the right guy for the job. The political equivalency of the silent treatment shows that he’s not trigger happy so when and if he does need to strike he will have the support he needs because he will have developed trust between the citizenry
If it's their governing body who keep threatening us with total destruction, once they get their nukes online, I say go for it.
Otherwise, let's capture or sink Iran's empty oil tankers, one at a time, for each friendly tanker damaged and one extra for our downed drone there for this reason. If nothing else, it'll be a strong incentive for Iran not to offload them.
Seriously? 130 million? You would think for that kind of money it would have anti-missile technology or able to escape the track of a missile.
From what I've gathered there is now major resentment amongst some of the Euros that we can unitarily decide for them their national trade policies - remember they are still honoring the Iran treaty even if we are not, and thus are p*ssed off at losing the biz. There has even been talk amongst them in cooperating in forming an alternative payment system to avoid such things in the future, thereby accelerating the de-dollarisation of trade. What are we gonna do start bombing western Euro countries when that happens? That's what I mean when I suggest it necessary that we be good stewards and maintain goodwill with these countries as being in our own best interest.
Iran doesn't own any of those tankers. We start taking out tankers and insurance rates skyrocket along with oil adversly affecting the world economy including the US (oil is a fungible commdity). So not feasible.
Wiki, for whatever that is worth has it at about $120 million - so that sounds about right
It was expensive but it was still a drone. They are expendable, which is precisely why we use them. If they picked it up and were studying it, blowing it all the way up once it got to a lab or something would be justifiable. If they had attacked a manned plane that would need a response. Or if they keep blowing up our military assets.
Maybe that’s exactly what they are doing.
Remember when they dropped the MOAB bomb in Afganistan?
Well, the activity in that area of that country went to near zero for a short time after that.
So, here were are 75 years later, still enjoying the fruits of the labor of a nation of 150m, 80%+ culturally cohesive, with rigid standards as to discipline, behavior and conduct. Think we can maintain it? Think Germany, France et al (EU) can create a completing network? With what army?
No, we don't have to worry about our Euro 'allies'. France itself is a pipsqueak. I love France, especially Paris. We try and go every year - we were there in March when Xi Ping was visiting. Imagine a nation of 50m+- trying to assert equal standing with one of 1.5b - and no muzzies (or other religions) or distention really allowed.
We are only one failed confrontation away with China to put the dollar reserve system at risk. $trillions upon $trillions of (phantom) wealth are tied up in paper & promises completely dependent on the status quo ie the US can pay. Admittedly with yet more printed money, but as long as the dollar can (actually, must) buy a barrel of oil, who cares.
As you can tell from the tone of my posts - this one and others, I believe China is our biggest threat. Empires come and go, and the reason for that is because the very people who built them no longer could maintain control, either via demographic majority, or institutional processes.
The America people still imagines extant - especially @ FR - simply doesn't exist, especially the one that won all our rewards 75 years ago . All it takes is an open mind, a willingness to look at facts, and an honest evaluation of actual circumstances to see where the trend line is going. That's why I believe we still have to maintain an aggressive posture, if only to keep playing pantomime before the grand revel demonstrates we're a spent force ripe for the plucking.
Third would be William Henry Harrison for staying out in the freezing cold rain all day for his inauguration and getting pneumonia and dying.
Indeed.
Funny you rarely see this important issue examined much in the MSM, guess they don't want to freak out joe6-pack, kinda like how we've been kept in the dark about UFO's too lol. But since this is really the genesis of pretty much all of our wars of empire and that might not sit well with the majority of Americans, they have to feed us various other bs reasons (WMD, ect)to win the public over. Amazing most people haven't figured this out yet.
MOAB is very effective, but you have to have complete air supremacy to use it. The C-130 would get shot down in an environment that was still contested in any way by air defense missiles or enemy aircraft air-to-air.
Same here. Being the neocons’ favorite president is not the way to get re-elected. And if it was the way to get elected in 2016 we’d have another Bush or Clinton now getting us into another ill-advised war questionable for our genuine national interests.
Military bases are not all nuclear research facilities. Jet runways, for example; those used to fly military aircraft. How ‘bout navy stations. BTW, are the military people out of bounds for strikes? After all, it’s their military that carried out the drone strike, and it’s their soldiers that are killing our soldiers on the field in Iraq and elsewhere. So, if military casualties are ruled out, Iran can get away with anything. Where would you start, it at all?
Never said to use a MOAB there.
But a cruise missile can carry a thousand pounder.
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.