- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- 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: Update: Situation in Iran thread
Posted on 2/26/26 at 9:42 am to GumboPot
Posted on 2/26/26 at 9:42 am to GumboPot
Someone please explain the point of these talks to me.
We know the Iranians always negotiate in bad faith. So whatever they agree to is BS anyway. And we know that we have enough tech superiority to use precision weapons and daisy cutters to level whatever they build without having to go nuclear.
And Trump clearly isn't going to hesitate to do that.
So what's the point?
We know the Iranians always negotiate in bad faith. So whatever they agree to is BS anyway. And we know that we have enough tech superiority to use precision weapons and daisy cutters to level whatever they build without having to go nuclear.
And Trump clearly isn't going to hesitate to do that.
So what's the point?
2
Posted on 2/26/26 at 9:42 am to GumboPot
quote:
Ballistic missiles were not in the scope of the diplomatic negotiation framework. Ballistic missiles are scope creep by the U.S./Israel delegation. I’m not saying ballistic missiles shouldn’t be in the diplomatic framework. I’m just pointing out that ballistic missiles are not even discussed in diplomatic meetings.
The fact that Iran refuses to accept ballistic missiles as part of the negotiations is reason enough to strike them. Iran tested an intercontinental ballistic missile last month that in theory is capable of hitting parts of the US including the major population centers on both coasts. That means that they pose a threat to the USA itself now. Even if it’s just a conventional warhead it is still a threat to us.
Posted on 2/26/26 at 9:48 am to Sharlo
quote:
Someone please explain the point of these talks to me.
We know the Iranians always negotiate in bad faith. So whatever they agree to is BS anyway. And we know that we have enough tech superiority to use precision weapons and daisy cutters to level whatever they build without having to go nuclear.
And Trump clearly isn't going to hesitate to do that.
So what's the point?
Wouldn't be surprised if it's for optics purposes. That way if/when we strike we can come out and say that we tried the diplomatic route first but Iran wouldn't agree with our terms
Posted on 2/26/26 at 9:49 am to VolInBavaria
Posted on 2/26/26 at 9:50 am to VolInBavaria
quote:
House Democrats
Traitors
Posted on 2/26/26 at 9:55 am to Sharlo
quote:
Someone please explain the point of these talks to me.
It's for Israel, not us. Iran wants to destroy Israel and we can't allow that to happen. It's as simple as that.
ETA: meanwhile China is sitting on the sidelines hoping the U.S. goes all in depleting our armaments in a regime change war in Iran, therefore minimizing U.S. led Taiwan defenses against China.
Taiwan is A LOT more important to the U.S. in terms of international trade than regime change in Iran.
This post was edited on 2/26/26 at 10:03 am
Posted on 2/26/26 at 9:56 am to WeeWee
quote:
The fact that Iran refuses to accept ballistic missiles as part of the negotiations is reason enough to strike them. Iran tested an intercontinental ballistic missile last month that in theory is capable of hitting parts of the US including the major population centers on both coasts. That means that they pose a threat to the USA itself now. Even if it’s just a conventional warhead it is still a threat to us.
That risk while not zero is practically zero.
Posted on 2/26/26 at 9:59 am to GumboPot
Posted on 2/26/26 at 9:59 am to Decatur
Counterfactual prevarications, hopefully but poorly, disguised as salient musings.
Just stay seated with all the other theatre-kid punks…
Just stay seated with all the other theatre-kid punks…
Posted on 2/26/26 at 10:04 am to VolInBavaria
quote:
quote:
Someone please explain the point of these talks to me.
We know the Iranians always negotiate in bad faith. So whatever they agree to is BS anyway. And we know that we have enough tech superiority to use precision weapons and daisy cutters to level whatever they build without having to go nuclear.
And Trump clearly isn't going to hesitate to do that.
So what's the point?
Wouldn't be surprised if it's for optics purposes. That way if/when we strike we can come out and say that we tried the diplomatic route first but Iran wouldn't agree with our terms
That what I think... but of course that is speculative...
I think we know who the current regime is. They have been consistent in their mode of operating since they overthrew the Shah. While I don't want "war" with Iran it is catastrophically ignorant to think we can just bow out and let them develop nuclear capabilities that could reach the US. Their history supporting and involvement with shite stirring in an already messy region and their alignment with other players (China / Russia) is the reason for my perspective on this.
With the level of unrest (thats putting it mildly) within Iran and the status of things regionally (Arab Nations generally content to live peaceably with their neighbors..) this is a unique moment/opportunity for decisive military action...
Posted on 2/26/26 at 10:05 am to Knight of Old
Anyone else surprised we haven’t seen more assets move to Djibouti to deal with the Houthis? Surely Iran will turn them loose once the bombing starts.
Posted on 2/26/26 at 10:06 am to Decatur
One of the many reasons for the planning and delays. They don’t want the next a hole to just move in and then we have to worry about the power vacuum.
Posted on 2/26/26 at 10:07 am to GumboPot
quote:
It's for Israel, not us. Iran wants to destroy Israel and we can allow that to happen. It's as simple as that.
ETA: meanwhile China is sitting on the sidelines hoping the U.S. goes all in depleting our armaments in a regime change war in Iran, therefore minimizing U.S. led Taiwan defenses against China.
Taiwan is A LOT more important to the U.S. in terms of international trade than regime change in Iran.
Do you mean the optics drill / diplomacy dog-and-pony-show VolinBavaria mentioned is for Israel's sake, to give them cover?
Does anyone really think that Iran can square off with Israel toe-to-toe and survive?
I'm all for keeping our powder dry for China. So why not let Israel defend themselves with the massive resources we provide? I thought that was the point of having a proxy in the ME?
Everything in that part of the world is quicksand. We need to be as hands off as possible. Show up every few years and drop some bombs if need be, but everything else is a damned fool's errand.
Posted on 2/26/26 at 10:07 am to METAL
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here. quote:
Urgent | Senior Iranian official to Al Jazeera: The principle of permanently zeroing out enrichment, dismantling nuclear facilities, and transferring the uranium stockpile is completely rejected
Posted on 2/26/26 at 10:11 am to hawgfaninc
X Post text after the embed.
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here. quote:
Senior Iranian official tells Al Jazeera: Uranium enrichment is a sovereign right, and Tehran is proposing a temporary freeze for a limited period, but rejects zero enrichment, dismantling nuclear facilities, transferring uranium stockpiles, or any discussion of its missile and defense programs. He added that Iran’s proposal in the Geneva talks focuses on sanctions relief and addressing U.S. concerns, including technical and practical pathways and data to show it does not seek nuclear weapons.
Posted on 2/26/26 at 10:13 am to METAL
I just don’t see the regime change angle without a plan for boots on the ground. And I don’t see a plan for boots on the ground.
Posted on 2/26/26 at 10:15 am to Sharlo
quote:
Does anyone really think that Iran can square off with Israel toe-to-toe and survive?
If it was that easy Israel would have toppled Iran a long time ago.
Due to geography and population Iran is a military logistics nightmare.
Posted on 2/26/26 at 10:23 am to Decatur
quote:
I just don’t see the regime change angle without a plan for boots on the ground. And I don’t see a plan for boots on the ground.
.... maybe the groundswell of support within the military is enough that they help the populace topple the current regime without our needing to put boots on the ground.
I think if we have to put boots on the ground we lost the gamble for regime change...
I also think doing nothing is a more risky gamble (see my previous post...)
Posted on 2/26/26 at 10:24 am to METAL
Page 196 of 207
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News