No One

Did none of y'all actually read any of the article much less to the end it where it talks about methodology? I'm not a Washington Post fan but all they did was verify the validity of BDA images provided by Iran utilizing open source imagery. Iran already did the BDA themselves. WaPo didn't do a damn thing with regards to BDA other than tell us that Iran wasn't lying or faking the imagery.. Also let's be honest here. China and Russia are aiding Iran in BDA in real time. A news article weeks after the fact utilizing open source imagery isn't giving Iran anything they didn't already have.

Mission Accomplished! AP NewsTrump administration says its war in Iran has been 'termi...The Trump administration is arguing that the war in Iran has already ended because of the ceasefire that began in early April.Or uhhh terminated?

So now we're going with the "lalallaa I can't hear you" level of debate. Got it. Yes I hate Trump as a person. But I've argued the policy not the man. Weird how different conflicts can have different stances. It's almost as if you're comparing apples to oranges! Ukraine: Defensive. 0 American lives. Extremely costly for 1 of our 2 global adversaries. Important for stability in Europe. Protecting a fledgling democracy Brought new critical positioned nations into NATO. Iran: Offensive. Absurdly more expensive per day than Ukraine in 2 months (iran: $48B + $1B/day vs ukraine: $120B of $180B congressionally allocated spent in 1507 days). Costing American lives and showcasing our weaknesses to China. Disrupted global economic stability, drove inflation up again, and empowered a tier 2 adversary while alienating allies.

Enemies: War only creates further resentment and enemies. It's not going to get rid of them. How many more Iranians hate us now than 2 months ago because we've killed their friends, fathers, and children? We let the regime slaughter thousands who might have been more aligned with us 2 months ago. We're supposed to be improving and learning from the past. I don't want our country to be an imperialist nation. It is insane you believe deals should only occur if we have no other choice. War should never be the first choice. The consequences are irreversible and frankly abhorrent. We are supposed to be better than that. Do you also go over to your neighbors when his dog shits on your lawn, shoot him and take his shit because you own a gun and he doesn't? Makes us no better than the Russians. No better than an animal. Policies: Most of us arguing against this have argued nothing but facts and policies. To be met with TDS or TFS whatever you want to call it. We're writing paragraphs regarding policy and the abject failure of this admin as a whole and getting 2 sentence strawman or what about X replies. Also regarding admin consistency with what we're doing there I posted the evidence 2 pages back of the daily flip flopping. Allies: Our allies are still there. They're allientated because we've elected Trump twice. Because we've proven to be unreliable. Because we've threatened to invade them multiple times in the last year. Because the values of strength, military might, and taking what we want over diplomacy, partnership, and stability align us close with Russia than the EU. NATO: Is a defensive alliance and yes it was and is quite literally America's European insurance policy against the Soviet Union/Russia. We are the only country that's enacted it, everyone answered, and our allies all paid the price alongside us. Per capita many of them paid a higher price than we did. There is 0 proof for your claim "NATO isn't an alliance anymore, it's a European insurance policy." You're parroting a talking point and fundamentally lack an understanding of what nato is and ever was. Free-trade: The economic benefit of free trade vastly outweighs the negative loss of domestic manufacturing. We still retained high level skilled manufacturing and a lot of the rest ties nations to us in a manner which is a plus for diplomacy. If Taiwan wasn't the primary source for high end chips globally or China didn't risk crippling economic trade sanctions they'd be much more inclined to make military moves. Trade has kept the developed world significantly more peaceful than the past. Immigrants/middle class: Not the thread to discuss or begin to cover that rant. I'll just say go visit the base of the statue of liberty and read Emma Lazarus' poem “The New Colossus” laid there. Politicians: "Politicians aren't respectable war veterans anymore, they're profit-seeking sociopaths." Firstly Trump fits this quote perfectly. He's a draft dodger and has utilized his second term to 2x or more his personal wealth and appointed a cabinet full of folks doing the same. Secondly, being a war vet doesn't make magically make you more respectable or better than anyone else. How you carry yourself, treat others, your words and actions do that. Our government is better off with a spectrum of backgrounds and experience. Options: "could have had a moron who couldn't string 10 words together" Lol I'm sorry what. Have you listened or read anything trump puts out himself? Neither is the orator Obama was, but it's legitimate delusion to believe Trump is a better orator than Harris.

Ah the tried and true method of this thread. Ignore the entire substantive point by point reply and argue a selected portion with a "zinger" as if it trumps everything. Remind me @HeloDude which side "don’t want to discuss in good faith." How was their AF, navy, or missile capability a realatic and substantive threat to the US before? Especially seeing as we could remove it at anytime. The reality is you're creating a false comparison as in pre and post conflict cases the threat wasn't substantive based on empirical evidence of the results you're claiming we've achieved in only 30 days. Meanwhile in return for removing the alleged threat we've lost the following: Unquestionable control of the straight to Iran causing short and long term global economic impacts and major economic leverage. Regional soft power as we can't protect our allies from drones an missiles. Diplomatic credability in any future negotiation not just with Iran but any nation. Sanctions on Russia and Iranian oil. A massive amount of ordinance and numerous assets that will take years to replace. Alienated our closest European allies and frustrated our middle Eastern ones to back Israel. 13 dead americans, 200+ injured. TBD on the peace plan.

Sunset: Because deals can never be renewed or renegotiated. Instead of being rehashed in 30 years it was abandoned in 3. Missiles: "Capable of delivering nuclear weapons." Firstly the whole idea of the deal was they don't get a nuke so who cares? Secondly anything can deliver a nuke. A car. A plane. A fishing boat. A person. Thirdly they're a sovereign nation with some backing of some other state actors. Regardless of if any of us support them and their ideology there's only so much you can do, especially when it comes to trying to limit 1940s tech in 2010s. As we've seen today drones are a bigger threat than missiles. Regional Aggression: And control of the hormuz with a $1M toll per ship is better than decreased sanctions how exactly? Perhaps we should learn our lesson and stop diddling countries in the middle east. Weak inspection: Something is better than nothing weve had since and "weak" is an opinion. During the few years the deal was in place the inspections unequivocally worked. Iran was holding their side of the deal. Additionally inspections + intelligence is a strong combo. Past work: How exactly do you address past work? Did we do so after withdrawing from the deal? Does the current peace plan do this in any measurable form? Conventional weapons proliferation... As if we aren't equally guilty having given the taliban stingers in the 90s or humvees, guns and other equipment in 2020s. Do you expect Iran to fully disarm? Can you imagine China telling the US no nukes. Also no tomahawks. Or F-16s. Sanctions relief: Firstly they're now going for sanctions relief plus control of an international waterway with tolls extracted. That's better how? Secondly you've got to negotiate with something and act as enforcement mechanisms. If the deal didn't involve easing sanctions how do you punish violations of the terms? You didn't remove anything so you can't sanction them harder. You leave military force as the main mechanism. Which is drastic. Do you invade when they go to 2.6% vs 2.5%? Do you start bombing stuff causing fear, hate, and irreversible damage? I'd much rather be able to say "we're going to reimpose X level of sanctions until you return to compliance." If they don't, ramp it up. You still have military if truly needed. It gives you options. Seriously compare the peace plan to jcpoa and tell us a single point on which it's "better" for global stability and for the US.

For the record let's exam the last deal the US managed to negotiate in 2015. Key Aspects of the JCPOA: Nuclear Constraints: Iran agreed to reduce its installed centrifuges, cap uranium enrichment at (far below the needed for weapons), and redesign the Arak heavy-water reactor to prevent plutonium production. Sanctions Relief: The UN, US, and EU agreed to lift nuclear-related economic sanctions on Iran. Monitoring: The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) was granted enhanced access and monitoring of Iranian facilities, including 25-year surveillance of uranium mines. Sounds like much better terms than were getting now. What happened to that deal? Oh right trump couldn't stand someone else's signature on it. Withdrawal: In 2018, the US withdrew under President Trump, citing limitations in the deal (e.g., sunset clauses) and re-imposed sanctions. Iran subsequently began enriching uranium to higher levels. Iran isn't going to negotiate. Last time they did in earnest, we said "lol jk" within 3 years. Then used the fact they're enriching uranium, even though we are the ones that backed of the agreement that prevented them from doing so, to bomb the shit out of them 7 years later.

100%. It's always the case. Bring paragraphs of arguments and the evidence to back it up and the only counter is "TDS. But what about Harris." 5 pages ago these guys refused to believe osint reporting we'd lost an F-15E. Now let's sweep it under the rug along with 2x MC-130s, 1x E-3, 5+ KC-135s, 1x A-10 and sky-high oil prices. Look at the backlash regarding the troops lost at abbey gate executing Trump's poorly negotiated withdrawal deal. The ability to project outrage only when the other side is at the helm is ridiculous.

Do I think the woman who had years and years of political experience and a foreign policy team that didn't consist of her immediate relatives, some real estate tycoons, and a fox news/Nat guard maj, would have done better? You can't seriously tell me that the answer to the question is anything other than yes. We wouldn't be in the conflict because diplomacy would've prevailed. If we were drawn into it anyways, we'd have more experience and stability at the helm to lead it. A person that actually could read their daily intelligence briefings, understand the levers Iran has, and work with rather than allienate allies and experts (Ukraine) to nullify their advantages. Remind me, how much was gas when Biden left office? How much is it now?

TACO Tuesday indeed. Blatant market manipulation. Next step is "defeated" Iran blowing up some more expensive equipment. Because this admin's word isn't worth the shit stained single ply trump branded toilet paper it's written on.

Crude has doubled since this kicked off, so whoever made those bets did. And whoever stole a literal boatload of Venezuelan oil and stashed it in their own personal "executive" slush fund.

The plan straight from the horses mouth: Mar 3: "We won the war." Mar 7: "We defeated Iran." Mar 8: "We must attack Iran." Mar 9: "The war is ending almost completely, and very beautifully." Mar 11: “You never like to say too ⁠early you won. We won. In the first hour it was over.” Mar 12: "We did win, but we haven't won completely yet." Mar 13: "We won the war." Mar 14: "Please help us." Mar 15: "If you don't help us, I will certainly remember it." Mar 16: "Actually, we don't need any help at all." Mar 16: "I was just testing to see who's listening to me." Mar 16: "If NATO doesn't help, they will suffer something very bad." Mar 17: "We neither need nor want NATO's help." Mar 17: "I don't need Congressional approval to withdraw from NATO." Mar 18: "Our allies must cooperate in reopening the Strait of Hormuz." Mar 19: "US allies need to get a grip - step up and help open the Strait of Hormuz." Mar 20: "NATO are cowards." Mar 21: "The Strait of Hormuz must be protected by the countries that use it. We don't use it, we don't need to open it." Mar 22: "This is the last time. I will give Iran 48 hours. Open the strait" Mar 22: "Iran is Dead" Mar 23: "We had very good and productive talks with Iran." Mar 24: "We’re making progress." Mar 24: "[Iran] gave us a present and the ⁠present arrived today, and it was a very big present, worth a tremendous amount of money." Mar 25: “They gave us a present and the present arrived today. And it was a very big present worth a tremendous amount of money. I’m not going to tell you what that present is, but it was a very significant prize.” Mar 26: "Make a deal, or we’ll just keep blowing them away." Mar 27: "We don’t have to be there for NATO." Mar 28: No major quote Mar 29: Claimed talks were progressing Mar 30: "Open the Strait of Hormuz immediately, or face devastating consequences." Mar 31: Claimed a deal was "very close" and that Iran would "do the right thing" Apr 1: "We’ll see what happens very soon." Apr 2: Repeated that a deal was likely, while warning of continued strikes if not Apr 3: "Something big is going to happen." Apr 4: Said Iran must comply "immediately" or face further consequences. Apr 5: "Open the in' Strait, you crazy bastards, or you'll be living in Hell - JUST WATCH! Praise be to Allah." Apr 6: "The entire country can be taken out in one night, and that night might be tomorrow night." Apr 6: "They made a proposal, and it's a significant proposal. It's a significant step. It's not good enough...they have to do certain things. They know that, they've been negotiating I think in good faith." Apr 7: "A whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again. I don’t want that ‌to ⁠happen, but it probably will." April 7: Iran cuts all diplomatic channels.

Glad they're out safe and uninjured. Osint reports lost 2 herks to the mission. Seems herks are allergic to Iran.

Herk driver. We're a bit too round and blunt to be the tip of the spear but I've gone into plenty of sketchy spots fighter guys won't ever go. In my personal opinion i's fine to joke after the fact but while the crew, now just the wso is mia I'm not going to joke about it. Iran has saber rattled occasionally every few months but never actually threatened global stability. Not even regional. They around with Israel through non state actors. Not our problem. But we poked our noses in and now it's become a regional issue and a global economic issue with no strategic goals.

Haven't seen proof of that on fox's articles. Not to mention we still have someone MIA so those "reasons" should still apply. Y'all love to blame TDS. Believe it or not many of us disapprove of these actions for multiple reasons not just because Trump's admin pulled the trigger. We take sides based on policy and beliefs not based on what our leadership tell us to parrot. Had this been a democratic pres, Israel alone, etc. I still would be disapproving for all the reasons I've stated. I'm tired of being in the middle East. I'm tired of spending my tax dollars on excessive amounts of ordinance rather than projects at home. I'm tired of seeing generation after generation sent off to do dumb shit. And we don't have a lame "let's go Brandon" chant among other derangements if you want to get started down the TDS path. But what about the nukes? If Iran wanted to they've shown they have the capability to launch a dirty bomb and make Israel uninhabitable. They haven't. If Iran wanted to they could develop a nuke (1940s tech), they haven't. They've continually come to the negotiating table and used the "what if" as a card. Then abide by the treaties to keep their program in check. Treaties that Trump removed us from for no reason.