- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: For People Who Don't Seem To Understand This War...
Posted on 3/4/26 at 10:53 am to GumboPot
Posted on 3/4/26 at 10:53 am to GumboPot
quote:
If the threshold is "Iran terror in the region" we are going to be in this campaign for a long time. I guess the administration will call a lull in Iranian terror in the region sufficient to say the war has ended.
The timing of this was stupid. We are going to have a spectacular military success for a month and then the real trouble starts.
There are almost 100 million people in Iran with about every religious and political faction you can imagine on the inside, some with guns, some without. All the major powers have significant interest in what happens there and will be active in trying to shape the future.
Safest bet is that the existing regime survives just strong enough to brutally keep the population down and kill tens of thousands as they have before, maybe more than that.
This is going to be a hell of a mess. Many of the cheerleaders will have a different view in the coming months.
I absolutely hope I'm wrong but if history is any guide, we have really stepped in it.
0
Posted on 3/4/26 at 10:55 am to GumboPot
This will end the Vance/Rubio presidency before it even began. Hard to see an amicable way out of the conflict, especially within 2 years.
Iran is a large country with an advanced military. There will be no boots on the ground because of the massive casualties Iran will inflict if we fight in their mountainous terrain.
This was about as wise a military strategy as Hitler invading Russia.
But look who’s in office - the CJCS tried to talk Hegseth out of it. But what does a 4-Star know? Hegseth deployed for 9 mos. to conduct FOB security as a national guard lieutenant in 2009.
Iran is a large country with an advanced military. There will be no boots on the ground because of the massive casualties Iran will inflict if we fight in their mountainous terrain.
This was about as wise a military strategy as Hitler invading Russia.
But look who’s in office - the CJCS tried to talk Hegseth out of it. But what does a 4-Star know? Hegseth deployed for 9 mos. to conduct FOB security as a national guard lieutenant in 2009.
Posted on 3/4/26 at 10:56 am to RFK
0.5/10
Posted on 3/4/26 at 10:57 am to GumboPot
It’s an incredibly precarious situation and despite the pro war hooting on fox and various social media grifters it is not going the way we wanted, not catastrophically so as of yet, but still not what we wanted. It’s not out of the realm of possibility that Israel uses a tactical nuke and then where does that leave us?
Posted on 3/4/26 at 10:57 am to Penrod
quote:How many Iranians do you know? Christianity is bigger with the younger crowd there than Islam is, thank God. Think of how right wing Gen Z males are in the US - other countries like Iran are all moving back towards conservatism in their own countries.
You are wrong when you say they prefer Christianity
Do you expect the Western media to talk about this? Especially about the Christian part? Islam in Iran is for the old people... at least this is what I understand from my Gen Z son who has been talking with people from all over the world - even in places like Russia and Iran.
Too many of the people on this board are out of touch with what is really going on in the rest of the world. I'd be out of touch too probably if I didn't have a Gen Z kid who keeps me informed.
Posted on 3/4/26 at 10:58 am to wackatimesthree
I'll play.
1. I think the nuclear armament cascade argument is real. But I think it's a fairly weak justification in explaining why exactly this measure and why now, though.
2. I think the "Iran will use nuclear weapons on Israel or would prompt a nuclear engagement" is a real risk, I think it's probably also the most traditional dumbed-down argument the American people will get. It's the "masks don't work, don't use them" argument equivalent we got at the outset of COVID when the real reason was they didn't want us taking the supply. Rubio, who I like a lot, made the very conventional "Iran is an apocalyptic actor, they'd immediately use a nuke on Israel" thing this week, which just isn't true.
3. The most realistic nuclear risk is that Iran becomes a less touchable peer nation for us and allies if they have a weapon. It changes the power dynamics in the region in irreversible ways. So OP is right that it ups the likelihood of a nuclear engagement, but I don't think it's on the "they're crazy, they're wanting the end times basis" that we're hearing from some places. That's just talking heads conflating Iran with ISIS/AQ because they think we're too dumb to understand the nuance.
4. I continue to think there is deep interest in MAGA world or clearing the decks for the coming age. We need an available South America - hence the Maduro move and the Colombia engagement. I'd be watching for future major partnership on the cartels for the same reason. It's going to be a major hurdle for what we need if narcoterrorists control big swaths of Mexico. On Iran and Venezuela, we're lessening the energy availability for adversaries. We're also removing friction points in important regions which will be important for America lessening its protecting hand on global shipping, which is coming regardless. I see this as Trump/Rubio/Vance/Miller saying "the world is changing, drastically so, we're going to pull back accordingly, but we're not leaving these festering issues for the next generation to solve during an era where solving them is going to be harder and even more out of place for how America is operating."
5. In line with that, if America sees itself less involved in MENA in the next half century - and it should - we're giving the region a reasonable platform to start from. Abraham accords, empowered Gulf states, potentially removing the most significant obstacle for those improvements to persist. In short, Trump going: "Here, we've given you a platform for stability, your turn, we're out."
"Iran's gone man. I'll be outside. Good luck."
1. I think the nuclear armament cascade argument is real. But I think it's a fairly weak justification in explaining why exactly this measure and why now, though.
2. I think the "Iran will use nuclear weapons on Israel or would prompt a nuclear engagement" is a real risk, I think it's probably also the most traditional dumbed-down argument the American people will get. It's the "masks don't work, don't use them" argument equivalent we got at the outset of COVID when the real reason was they didn't want us taking the supply. Rubio, who I like a lot, made the very conventional "Iran is an apocalyptic actor, they'd immediately use a nuke on Israel" thing this week, which just isn't true.
3. The most realistic nuclear risk is that Iran becomes a less touchable peer nation for us and allies if they have a weapon. It changes the power dynamics in the region in irreversible ways. So OP is right that it ups the likelihood of a nuclear engagement, but I don't think it's on the "they're crazy, they're wanting the end times basis" that we're hearing from some places. That's just talking heads conflating Iran with ISIS/AQ because they think we're too dumb to understand the nuance.
4. I continue to think there is deep interest in MAGA world or clearing the decks for the coming age. We need an available South America - hence the Maduro move and the Colombia engagement. I'd be watching for future major partnership on the cartels for the same reason. It's going to be a major hurdle for what we need if narcoterrorists control big swaths of Mexico. On Iran and Venezuela, we're lessening the energy availability for adversaries. We're also removing friction points in important regions which will be important for America lessening its protecting hand on global shipping, which is coming regardless. I see this as Trump/Rubio/Vance/Miller saying "the world is changing, drastically so, we're going to pull back accordingly, but we're not leaving these festering issues for the next generation to solve during an era where solving them is going to be harder and even more out of place for how America is operating."
5. In line with that, if America sees itself less involved in MENA in the next half century - and it should - we're giving the region a reasonable platform to start from. Abraham accords, empowered Gulf states, potentially removing the most significant obstacle for those improvements to persist. In short, Trump going: "Here, we've given you a platform for stability, your turn, we're out."
"Iran's gone man. I'll be outside. Good luck."
Posted on 3/4/26 at 10:58 am to cajuntiger1010
quote:
End the capabilities of Iran terror in the region.
Nothing vague and open-ended about that at all.
Posted on 3/4/26 at 10:59 am to LSURoss
Lol any comebacks?
Why exactly was this brilliant military strategy?
Why exactly was this brilliant military strategy?
Posted on 3/4/26 at 11:02 am to RFK
quote:
This will end the Vance/Rubio presidency before it even began. Hard to see an amicable way out of the conflict, especially within 2 years.
With the recent protests and attempted revolution in Iran, this was a golden opportunity, the likes of which I have never seen in my lifetime. We'd be absolute idiots to not be taking advantage of the situation in Iran to just stand back and watch. It's unfortunate that the revolt couldn't hold on long enough for us to get our forces into place.
I'm all against "no new wars" generally but I'm not opposed to taking action when it must be taken (defensively) or when it'd be dumb not to do something (like with the current Iran thing). I just hope it doesn't turn into an occupation or anything that's too long lasting. The American military is the best in the world, but we're not so great at being an occupying force and we shouldn't be.
Posted on 3/4/26 at 11:02 am to wackatimesthree
NK and pock-ee-stahn shoulda never been allowed nukes. period.
ESAD bill clinton for giving NK 2 light water reactors you traitorous scumbag
ESAD bill clinton for giving NK 2 light water reactors you traitorous scumbag
Posted on 3/4/26 at 11:03 am to RFK
quote:
This will end the Vance/Rubio presidency before it even began.
Pollster Richard Baris said yesterday that his recommendation to JD Vance is to bow out of a 2028 run and wait for 2032. The potential for Operation Epic Fury being a political boat anchor tied to GOP presidential candidates is very high. Even GOP candidates that try to distance themselves from this military action will be viewed with a jaundiced eye.
Posted on 3/4/26 at 11:03 am to wackatimesthree
quote:
This War
What war?
Posted on 3/4/26 at 11:05 am to GumboPot
quote:
Pollster Richard Baris said
Posted on 3/4/26 at 11:05 am to EastWestConnection
quote:
It’s not out of the realm of possibility that Israel uses a tactical nuke and then where does that leave us?
Good God, if Israel uses a nuke, tactical or not that changes the entire calculus.
Posted on 3/4/26 at 11:09 am to RFK
quote:
This was about as wise a military strategy as Hitler invading Russia.
hitler was destroying soviets until the harsh record winter.....and he was missing 1/3 of his troops. had he had all on eastern front he defeats stalin. Allies should have conveyed this message then easily defeat hitler after due to huge attrition.
quote:
This will end the Vance/Rubio presidency before it even began.
you don't know shite commie.
This post was edited on 3/4/26 at 5:05 pm
Posted on 3/4/26 at 3:26 pm to mwrawls
quote:
How many Iranians do you know? Christianity is bigger with the younger crowd there than Islam is, thank God.
Your data set is the Iranian diaspora in the US. To answer your question, it depends on what you call an “Iranian”. I know about a dozen because I spent my career in the engineering business, and there are a fair number of them in that. These are people who were born in Iran and mainly got luckily stranded in America in 1979. Then I know the half American children of some of them, but I don’t think their opinions matter.
Iran is primarily Muslim, and it will stay primarily Muslim for the foreseeable future.
Posted on 3/4/26 at 3:36 pm to wackatimesthree
Let me shorten the answer to your title up for you.
Chopping off the head of Venezuela and Iran curbs the flow of oil to China, giving the U.S. a bargaining chip when trading for rare earth metals.
Chopping off the head of Venezuela and Iran curbs the flow of oil to China, giving the U.S. a bargaining chip when trading for rare earth metals.
Posted on 3/4/26 at 4:34 pm to CovingtonCrooner
quote:
4. I continue to think there is deep interest in MAGA world or clearing the decks for the coming age. We need an available South America - hence the Maduro move and the Colombia engagement. I'd be watching for future major partnership on the cartels for the same reason. It's going to be a major hurdle for what we need if narcoterrorists control big swaths of Mexico. On Iran and Venezuela, we're lessening the energy availability for adversaries. We're also removing friction points in important regions which will be important for America lessening its protecting hand on global shipping, which is coming regardless. I see this as Trump/Rubio/Vance/Miller saying "the world is changing, drastically so, we're going to pull back accordingly, but we're not leaving these festering issues for the next generation to solve during an era where solving them is going to be harder and even more out of place for how America is operating."
5. In line with that, if America sees itself less involved in MENA in the next half century - and it should - we're giving the region a reasonable platform to start from. Abraham accords, empowered Gulf states, potentially removing the most significant obstacle for those improvements to persist. In short, Trump going: "Here, we've given you a platform for stability, your turn, we're out."
"Iran's gone man. I'll be outside. Good luck."
This is correct.
Posted on 3/4/26 at 4:42 pm to NashvilleTider
quote:
This is all about China.
This.
This will cripple China
Posted on 3/4/26 at 5:35 pm to udtiger
If we control the shipping lanes then we control the oil.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News