The question isn’t what i sound like. The point is i have accurately described Iran.
Yes the question is what you sound like. Bush said Saddam was a clear and present threat to the US. You - and Bush’s neocon followers - today say the same thing about Iran. And it’s no more true.
I’m a Reaganite. Unlike Bush he defeated enemies without war.
I’m a Reaganite and he defeated enemies without war.
Not true. President Reagan sent our Marines, Navy, and Special Forces to conquer Grenada after it was overrun by the Communist Cuban military.
This was an air, sea, and ground invasion. The Classic Definition of WAR.
President Reagan also directed attacks on Iran and Libya.
Special Forces were involved as were Marines but, the taking of land was extremely limited and transitory thus, it didn’t fit the technical definition of war.
The objective was to eliminate the Iranian air force such as it was. The elimination of the Iranian Navy. Ditto. And, the disabling of military outposts on islands in the Persian Gulf and the Straights of Hormuz.
All was accomplished in short order. Yet all this involved the Death and Destruction of an Enemy by way of limited and targeted objectives. Meant to intimidate and influence. Not to conquer and take over.
Doves, like you call this WAR. It is NOT WAR. It is ACTION. It is RETALIATION. It is RETRIBUTION. PUNISHMENT if you will.
Words mean things. There are definitions that accurately describe things.