Posted on 06/17/2025 11:20:00 AM PDT by RandFan
President Donald Trump on Tuesday warned Iranian leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei that he is an “easy target” and “our patience is wearing thin,” before demanding Tehran surrender in its conflict against Israel.
“We know exactly where the so-called ‘Supreme Leader’ is hiding,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.
“He is an easy target, but is safe there - We are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now,” he wrote after declaring “total control” over Iran’s airspace.
“But we don’t want missiles shot at civilians, or American soldiers. Our patience is wearing thin.”
Trump in a subsequent post made clear what he does want from Iran: “UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER!”
The threat from the U.S. president came two days after news outlets reported that Trump vetoed a plan by Israel to assassinate the ayatollah.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnbc.com ...
Oh well, 2026 was looking to be good but looks like the base is fracturing, the left has galvanized a cohesive message they say they believe in, crazy as it is, they’re mixing in economic populism into it, so I doubt Repubs keep the House. Certainly not with Trump repeatedly wanting to sell out to Big Agriculture and backpedalimg on mass deportations to allow some cheap labor to stay.
I’m pretty sure that what used to be History Class is now called Propaganda 101-207.
101 teaches that the USA started WW-ll by dropping 2 Nuke Weapons on Japan and they responded by Attacking Pearl Harbor on December 7 1941.
It’s not a science experiment so obviously you can’t “prove it.
However, we can see that NOT having unconditional surrenders extends the conflict as it has in the middle east between Israel and the others.
And Iran is no Germany or Japan. Those two actually had the wit to create efficient industry and the governments were widely supported by the citizens.
Iran had a history of secular government somewhat, so they may be ready for that. The youth sure are. Sounds like this will be easier than Iraq & Syria.
unconditional surrender of their nukes
Basically whatever carrots that were being offered are no longer on the table and Trump always said “the hard way”. The message has always been, you surrender your nukes or we (USA - not Israel) will destroy them.
The demand by Truman for an unconditional surrender of Germany came at the end of the war, when they were hanging on, delaying things, trying to get as many people out of Germany as they could. They finally capitulated, and Japan finally capitulated after we dropped two atom bombs on their asses. They had no choice. Germany by then had no troops left to fight harder, and the Japanese found out they'd have no homeland left if they continued to fight.
He wants them to agree to no nuclear weapons. If that means a regime change, so be it. You assume that Trump wants to westernize that country’s government, but has he actually said that? Iran was a westernized country before the Revolution wiped all that away, and it was an Islamic country then too.
It's a negotiation tactic. He asks for the Moon and the stars and eventually settles for a pizza.
Don’t worry about it - this isn’t the kind of CIA engineered regime change we have come to regret in the past.
This one is happening organically as a result of the current regime being a menace. It’s happening not to install a new regime, but to remove a menace.
If the Iranian people are left free to self-govern, that will prove I’m right.
If Israel, or our CIA or deep state installs some authoritarian regime to replace this one - that will prove me wrong..
But one way or another, this Islamic regime in Iran is toast - so instead of trying to prevent “regime change”, we should focus on protecting the Iranian people’s right to determine what happens next.
Failure to get unconditional surrenders - or any surrender for that matter- leads to having to fight the same war over and over again, only using terroristic asymmetrical methods- because democratic societies are simply not equipped with the necessary attention spans to contain hostile powers indefinitely. As soon as the attention span wanes, in 4 to 6 years, the temporarily set back foe simply gets back on the warpath again, using anarchic proxies against civilian targets, using brivery and lobbying of their opponents’ political factions, and stoking fear and division as a form of militant lawfare to perpetuate war without fear of being overthrown and polarize, corrupt and possibly even defeat the enemy until there is no longer a will to use containment..
I am MAGA to the core, but this is stolen valor. This is Israel’s victory.
Roosevelt made the demand on Jan 24, 1943 at the Casablanca conference and the media let it be clearly known to the Axis shortly thereafter.
Truman became president on APRIL 12, 1945 TWO FULL YEARS later and only a insignificant 3 weeks before VE.
That Germany had no troops left and we had to use 2 a-bombs on Japan simply proves my point how much unnecessary fighting the unconditional surrender demand caused.
no “uncoditional surrender” for WWII?
So, basically, just stop fighting and leave Hitler and the Nazis in charge in Germany and Hirohito and crew in charge in Japan?
Germany Ok.. We’ll stop shooting and killing all of the Jews, gypsies, gays and those awful Poles, Trust Us?
Ike.. Ok!.. Done deal!
Japan, Ok, We’ll stop shooting and using Chinese for Absurd medical experiments!
Mac.. Ok sounds good!
Sure he did. He was Vice-President of Iraq when the Shah of Iran was overthrown in 1979. What did he do?
We don’t know what would have happened. The dumb thing is, that regime change is much harder to accomplish with a nation at war. Pressure from the outside strengthens the inside.
But Roosevelt maybe let his personal animosity take over. Churchill was more hesitant.
Maybe.
But that is a term you can negotiate for. As example with Germany you could have asked for all the leadership of the Nazi party to have been handed over for trial/imprisonment
In the case of Japan they mostly just wanted the sanctity of their Emperor to be assured.
BIG difference in conditional and unconditional. In the later you are saying we can do anything we want…even commit genocide if we see fit.
What would you do if faced with that prospect? Answer: fight like hell.
No I didn't. I assume Muslims follow the dictates of the Qu'ran. They don't give a rip what Trump thinks about that.
Now that is a valid possibility.
He might be using his art of the deal to start off from a strong bargaining position.
That's why since WWII, this country has never fought in a war that ended in complete victory. We've been fighting proxy wars with different countries, mostly Russia and China, since Korea.
No, it’s not
Zoroastrianism is one of the world’s oldest monotheistic religions, originating in ancient Persia (modern-day Iran).
The islamonatzis made it Muslim with Carter’s help.
Camel piss be upon him.
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.