Moderating:
Echoing in part Aspenglow from two hours ago, please cut back the hostility to your fellow posters everyone. We have posts getting close to attacking the poster, not the post. If the circumstances are too much for you to do that (and it may be, this is a tough time and place) then take it to the Pit, not P&E.
No worries. I certainly am angry. It’s just that if we knew the location of the military target, we knew there was a school nearby, and somebody, somewhere, either deemed the risk of dead children acceptable, or (more likely) simply didn’t game out the timing of the bombing and the geographical margin of error sufficiently.
It’s the (presumed) failure to consider the actions fully that I find worse than the rest of it. Worse, because these failures are preventable, and their results will resonate for generations. Will anyone who had a sibling in that school forget?
Further, this lazy, sloppy, “move fast and break things” ethos permeates this administration. We are simply no longer a society that respects hard work or deep thinking at the top, and it shows. It’s going to REALLY show when the dust settles and we have a more damaged but angrier Iran under new but not that different leadership. I don’t think it’s going to result in a more stable Middle East, and I don’t think it’s going to result in safer Americans.
Agree 100%. It’s likely though that it will result in more money going into the pockets of the extremely wealthy. And that, I think, underlies a lot of the reasoning here.
You know, I am done here. I came here to point out a few facts- which there arent enough of, and people attack me like I am defending this actions and/or trump.
I made my post clear-
So, as the wise Moderator put it-
I am done here.
What are you basing that assessment on?
I can think of a few factors that make it more likely to have been American:
Of course, it could still have been an IRGC rocket failure.
Ooooh, and now we know the west is arming the Kurds to help put down the IRGC remnants. No idea if the Kurds will get their own territory for doing this.
Another US official said the Kurds could help sow chaos in the region and stretch the Iranian regime’s military resources thin. Still other ideas have centered around whether the Kurds could take and hold territory in the northern part of Iran that would create a buffer zone for Israel.
Another problem for getting ships through the Strait is the refusal of maritime insurers to provide hulll insurance at any price:
Ships wanting to pass through the Strait of Hormuz are finding it almost impossible to buy hull war cover following between Iran and the US and Israel.
…
“If you went to the hull market right now and said: ‘I’ve got a tanker going through the Strait of Hormuz,’ I think there is a possibility that you would struggle to find… underwriters looking to write that,” David Smith, head of marine at insurance broker McGill & Partners, said in an interview.
In seeking a cite for this I did come across articles saying Trump is promising US Navy escorts and insurance for tankers, although the cited article points out a number of caveats on this.
Still unconfirmed.
Funny to think that he could become an ace by nabbing 3 American and 2 Iranian jets.
A parody website calls for Barron Trump to join the Iran war
A post was split to a new topic: Code from new poster
Are you really saying that Iran cannot have misiles. What level of weaponry would you be comfortable with, pikes, clubs, bananas? Countries can have modern weaponry, unless you’d be happy to see Israel bombed for the crime of having weapons that can go further than a football field.
Well, now there are reports that an Israeli F-35 has shot down an Iranian Yak-130 jet, scoring the F-35’s first air-to-air kill of a manned adversary warplane.
I can see the thinking although I don’t really agree.
But if you think that a country should not have ballistic missiles, you may as well drop the pretense that it’s really about how they’‘re a dishonest negotiator or they didn’t commit to a peaceful resolution. No country on earth is just going to agree to give up ballistic missiles unless it was willing to simply become a vassal state, so anyone who thinks this should just jump straight to invasion and debating if they stuck to an agreement or negotiated in good faith is a waste of time.
Nope! I’m saying that Iran cannot build up a stockpile of long range ballistic missiles large enough to pose an existential threat to Israel, which is the goal they were openly building towards.
More than a thousand civilians in Iran killed so far, including almost 200 children, according to US human rights group:
Way to go! Well on our way to matching the Ayatollahs, and in a fraction of the time so far!
By that logic, China could flatten Israel tomorrow, since they have a stockpile of weapons that are an existential threat to Iran, or many other countries in the reason.
If Netanyahu spent the next few years screeching on TV about how China is the Great Satan that must be destroyed and staged mass rallies where people burned Chinese flags, and he built paramilitary proxy groups in Taiwan, South Korea, and Japan that he used to attack China and its allies, then you know what? I couldn’t really blame Xi or say that he is unjustified.
I won’t claim to be an expert, but from my reading over the years, the Kurds have desperately wanted a homeland for decades, and all (or almost all) the established stated don’t want this. Mostly because nobody wants to give up territory to allow it to happen, I think.
Regardless, I know that Iraq and Turkey have their problems* with the Kurds, and so it seems to me that encouraging the Iranian Kurds will just destabilize the region, as other Kurds get their hopes (and activity) up, and other stated get anxious about Kurdish activity.
*I don’t mean this as a judgement as to who is right or wrong
The fanatics in Israel and the U.S. are no different than the fanatics in Iran.
This is just another war for oil.