Sheesh.
They’re an expansionist colonial power, very much modeled on early America; everyone in the region but them is a “threat” who has to be eliminated.
So Iran has retained their nuclear program, likely retained some missile manufacturing and launch capability (and will almost certainly be able to regain what they’ve lost with revenue from controlling the Strait), will be even wealthier and more eager/able to support terrorist proxies in the region, and has increased domestic support for its government. Oh, and they’ve shown the world that Iran can hold off the mightiest military in the world.
Still think this war was the right move with Hegseth and Trump in charge? Was it worth killing so many Iranian women and children?
Same question for you, @Wesley_Clark.
Hindsight is 20/20. Who could have predicted it would turn out this way (other than everyone except warmongering pieces of shit)?
In the eyes of such people that isn’t a cost; it’s just the first step towards the annihilation of all Islamic people everywhere.
The warmonger will just call them terrorists.
Never.
Trump is not going to learn, he’s not going to change. He’s a bully and a thug.
If this keeps up the world will unite against us and bring the US to ruin. There are plenty of vultures that will be happy to pick at the carcass - assuming the rest of the world doesn’t go down in the fight because it won’t be quick, clean, or pretty.
Maybe?
^ More likely
Not to mention the crowd that WANTS to bring on Armageddon so as to bring back Jeebus.
Or they’ll say that terrorists were hiding underneath babies’ cribs. Evidence pending.
And in Lebanon…the towns are terrorist, OK? That’s why all buildings must be destroyed, including in controlled demolitions.
I said it before, but to me the only semi-honorable way this war of choice can end is if:
- Trump is removed from office,
- New President immediately ceases all belligerent actions in and around Iran,
- The US issues a formal apology to Iran,
- The US offers reparations and assistance in rebuilding, and,
- The US extradites TFG to Iran for trial.
In exchange, we might be able to negotiate the re-opening of the Straits of Hormuz and maybe even an Obama-era-like nuclear deal.
Of course, none of this will happen.
I think embarrassing defeat for the US including paying reparations to Iran will do it.
And it’s pretty feasible I think…the US wants out of this ASAP and Trump losing bigly in Iran is much easier to handwave as “fake news” than gas prices. Heck, I’m surprised that a narrative of Trump “solving” the Hormuz strait problem “that Biden started” has not already spread round MAGA media.
The wildcard remains Israel. This can’t end while Bibi wants it to continue.
Oh give them time. I expect to be hearing that in the next few days.
Always.
Hezbollah was created as a reaction to the Israeli invasion in 1982, which had as aim to purge South Lebanon of PLO as well as setting up a Maronite Christian rule for the country.
Sometimes I wonder if the fascist elements of Israel want to take over all of Lebanon. There’s cleary needed some lebensraum.
/cue a certain war apologist calling me tankie.
Well, when violence doesn’t solve the problem, there are always two choices: admit the violence was a bad idea, or insist that the failure was because there wasn’t ENOUGH violence. No amount of failure will ever convince those determined to stay in the second camp.
I agree with your analysis, I just can’t really think of any conflict that was ended because the protagonists admitted that violence was a bad idea.
We human are good at rationality in theory- in theseses, papers, doctorates, degrees- but real life, are very poor
Babale:
Yes, you’re on Neville Chamberlain’s side, along with the majority of English and German people, on the side of peace, while warmongers like Hitler and Churchill (The Chief Villain of World War II) are on the side of war.
Chronos:
You might be misremembering history. Chamberlain was the one who was fine with Germany making war.
Babale again:
He was the one who was fine with Germany doing anything they wanted as long as England didn’t have to get directly involved in the fighting, because he thought the most important thing was to not have war. “Peace in our time” and all that.
Sort of like the people who oppose Israel’s actions in Gaza or Lebanon are fine with whatever Hezbollah or Hamas do, as long as Israel isn’t going to war.
AUUUGHH! You guys can find one thing to agree on, and you’re both completely wrong!
You have finally inspired me to spend the morning writing an OP I can bump whenever Chamberlain’s memory is maligned, rather than trying to fight the ignorance on a thread-by-thread basis.
The Vietnam War seems like a good example. It ended because US public opinion turned against it. Obviously none of the politicians and generals who had been promoting the war explicitly admitted that it had been a bad idea from the start, but their actions demonstrate that they came to understand it.
Well their new border will be right next to Lebanon
That’s an unacceptable risk, and a buffer zone will need to be established.
There is, indeed, a faction in Israel that is in favor of establishing a “Greater Israel” that wound involve a lot or all of modern Lebanon. In the greatest extent, this would mean a goal of Israel being in control from the Nile to the Euphrates river so… not just Lebanon,