Politics

[steve white]

I reluctantly concede that Iran will not surrender until a certain level of civilian as well as infrastructure destruction takes place. And doing it massively might just save lives in the long term. Wasn't that the justification for Hiroshima? This war has been so clean they thumb their collective noses at it.

I also wonder if we are not letting our ME allies box us into corners in terms of limited aggression? At the end of the day, are they allies if they only help you lose...

 

[RLD]

I reluctantly concede that Iran will not surrender until a certain level of civilian as well as infrastructure destruction takes place. And doing it massively might just save lives in the long term. Wasn't that the justification for Hiroshima? This war has been so clean they thumb their collective noses at it.

I also wonder if we are not letting our ME allies box us into corners in terms of limited aggression? At the end of the day, are they allies if they only help you lose...

You have to keep in mind that Hiroshima took place both before the Fourth Geneva Convention and Additional Protocol 1.

 

[375 Ruger Fan]

I reluctantly concede that Iran will not surrender until a certain level of civilian as well as infrastructure destruction takes place. And doing it massively might just save lives in the long term. Wasn't that the justification for Hiroshima? This war has been so clean they thumb their collective noses at it.

I also wonder if we are not letting our ME allies box us into corners in terms of limited aggression? At the end of the day, are they allies if they only help you lose...

Vietnam went on and on for years, fighting a limited war. Operation Linebacker II ended it. Most notable was 100 B-52s doing bombing missions each day for a 10 day period. The Navy had 5 aircraft carriers in the region and 100s of sorties were launch with strike, jamming and other missions. It brought North Vietnam to the negotiating table and the war finally came to an end.

Do we need Linebacker III?

 

[fourfive8]

I reluctantly concede that Iran will not surrender until a certain level of civilian as well as infrastructure destruction takes place. And doing it massively might just save lives in the long term. Wasn't that the justification for Hiroshima? This war has been so clean they thumb their collective noses at it.

I also wonder if we are not letting our ME allies box us into corners in terms of limited aggression? At the end of the day, are they allies if they only help you lose...

Yes.

I looked at our resident Canadian left libtard lewya’s (RLD) response to this post with typical nonsense that means nothing since he had nothing substantial but felt compelled to use some past tense, junk logic. Good grief!

 

[RLD]

Vietnam went on and on for years, fighting a limited war. Operation Linebacker II ended it. Most notable was 100 B-52s doing bombing missions each day for a 10 day period. The Navy had 5 aircraft carriers in the region and 100s of sorties were launch with strike, jamming and other missions. It brought North Vietnam to the negotiating table and the war finally came to an end.

Do we need Linebacker III?

And here I thought the fall of Saigon ended the Vietnam war.

 

[Hunt anything]

And here I thought the fall of Saigon ended the Vietnam war.

We left Vietnam in ‘73, fall of Saigon was in ‘75. If I remember correctly .

 

[RLD]

Yes.

I looked at our resident Canadian left libtard lewya’s (RLD) response to this post with typical nonsense that means nothing since he had nothing substantial but felt compelled to use some past tense, junk logic. Good grief!

My nationality aside, the United States of America played a leading role in creating both the Fourth Geneva Convention and Additional Protocol 1 and are signatories to both.

While you may be able to parrot some silly names to throw around you certainly don't seem to have even basic knowledge of either American history or the International Law of Armed Combat, which really at a deep level arises from the work of President Lincoln.

Maybe if you took a few minutes to remove your tongue from Trump's anus and learn a little about the subjects you chose to comment on it might help you avoid looking like a moron so often.

 

[RLD]

We left Vietnam in ‘73, fall of Saigon was in ‘75. Off I remember correctly .

Quite right. American involvement in Vietnam ended in 73, the war kept going without American involvement.

Personally I am hoping for a better result in this war than the unfortunate outcome of that conflict.

 

[375 Ruger Fan]

@RLD

If you were to play word association with the term "Iranian," what do you think most westerners would say? My guess is "Terrorist" would be either the top reply or near the top. Wouldn't it be nice if that changed? I am hopeful that it can. During World War 2, most Americans hated the Japanese because of Pearl Harbor and the vicious atrocities that occurred during the war. And yet, the US helped to rebuild Japan and a lasting friendship between our two nations was formed. Similar story with Germany and later, Vietnam. Maybe its going to take breaking Iran before we can get there.

 

[Doug3006]

I don’t believe Iran will ever surrender. Their leaders are religious fanatics who are prepared to sacrifice their own people in a jihad. No, the only good outcome for the West is to leave Iran incapable of projecting force outside their own borders. This we can do, by destroying their economy and as much of their military capabilities as possible. We also must be willing to revisit them with utter destruction to keep them in their box.

 

[RLD]

@RLD

If you were to play word association with the term "Iranian," what do you think most westerners would say? My guess is "Terrorist" would be either the top reply or near the top. Wouldn't it be nice if that changed? I am hopeful that it can. During World War 2, most Americans hated the Japanese because of Pearl Harbor and the vicious atrocities that occurred during the war. And yet, the US helped to rebuild Japan and a lasting friendship between our two nations was formed. Similar story with Germany and later, Vietnam. Maybe its going to take breaking Iran before we can get there.

Iran has a terrible regime that committs crimes internally and externally all the time. I, and all of my Iranian employees, would be more than happy to see that regime change for the better. Like now.

But I don't think committing what we now all consider war crimes is the way to go about it.

While I am not sure what exactly was the reasoning for the current war to get started, I would say that so far the U.S. military and the politicians behind it, are fighting it the way a modern war by a democracy should be fought. They have been focussed on military targets, they have worked hard to minimize their own casualties and civilian casualties as well. To date, as far as I can see, the United States has fought this war scrupulously in accord with the law of war. For instance they put the blockade in place literally in absolute, letter perfect compliance with international law. That is how it should be done.

I don't think that the mass killing of civilians, like happened at Hiroshima, is the way to go forward.

And don't take that as a critique of the use of a nuclear weapon at Hiroshima. There is debate around that but I am firmly on the side that is was legal, ethical and moral when it was carried out. You cannot judge an action ahistorically.

But since then, the world, and international law has changed. The Fourth Geneva Convention and other statutes would now suggest targeting of a civilians is a war crime. I don't see that as the way for democracies to advance their objectives.

 

[cash_tx]

Huh... it's almost like some of the more seasoned members of this forum saw this coming.

GOP senators warn confidence in Hegseth eroding as Iran war drags on

Republican senators say that confidence is waning in Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s leadership of the U.S. armed forces as the war with Iran drags on without an end in sight. They are also …

thehill.com

 

[Doug3006]

I’m not a big fan of Hedgeseth. He’s too interesting in being the star of the show. But blaming him for the war dragging on seems unfair. The military has achieved every goal it was tasked to achieve. Take out the original leadership…check. Destroy their Air force and Navy…check. Degrade their air defenses and achieve air superiority….check. Set back their nuclear capabilities…check. Trump and his closest advisors are responsible for the 2 pauses that have dragged this thing out.

 

[cash_tx]

I’m not a big fan of Hedgeseth. He’s too interesting in being the star of the show. But blaming him for the war dragging on seems unfair. The military has achieved every goal it was tasked to achieve. Take out the original leadership…check. Destroy their Air force and Navy…check. Degrade their air defenses and achieve air superiority….check. Set back their nuclear capabilities…check. Trump and his closest advisors are responsible for the 2 pauses that have dragged this thing out.

Fair point, and I agree that the prolonged conflict is much more on Trump than Hegseth. I guess I was referring more to the general loss of confidence in his leadership than the Iran war in particular.

 

[RLD]

I’m not a big fan of Hedgeseth. He’s too interesting in being the star of the show. But blaming him for the war dragging on seems unfair. The military has achieved every goal it was tasked to achieve. Take out the original leadership…check. Destroy their Air force and Navy…check. Degrade their air defenses and achieve air superiority….check. Set back their nuclear capabilities…check. Trump and his closest advisors are responsible for the 2 pauses that have dragged this thing out.

I think you are right, and I think the Senators in question agree with you, but the political risk of critiquing Trump is too high so they use the hair model as a proxy for their concerns about the impact of the war on the upcoming midterms.

 

[Brent in Az]

I think the GOP lack of confidence in Hegseth is somewhat misdirected.
It's not Hegseths fault that this conflict is dragging on, and they know that the war against Iran could be costly in the midterms if not ended soon.
I'm sure that Iran is smart enough to realize that a Democrat controlled Congress would benefit Iran to some extent. As the Dems will go on a political blitzkrieg against Trump

 

[Tubby’s Canteen]

Would not the use of a nuclear weapon on Iran open the door for Russia to use one or more in Ukraine?

 

[Tanks]

On a different subject I watched the Odyssey over the weekend. Before the movie came out the far right went on a tear about casting choices and there are tons of memes about Page being cast as Achilles etc., etc..

They were wrong about Page as he was cast as Sinon. Most of the people that were criticized by people for being DEI and woke casting also had very limited scenes in the movie. No hidden meanings there. Though Oscars requiring certain amount of diversity might have had an influence on casting choices in these minor roles that anyone could have filled.

The movie was about the journey of Odysseus trying to make his way home and politics in Ithaca. War of Troy was just a backstop.

Now that is out of the way here is what I think about the movie.

Go see it. It was very enjoyable, great acting and cinematography. I was glad that they used zero green screens and CGI. Everything that was on the screen were real people and puppetry instead of being digitally generated.

 

[Tanks]

Would not the use of a nuclear weapon on Iran open the door for Russia to use one or more in Ukraine?

We will not use a nuclear weapon on Iran unless they used one first, and most likely Israel would nuke them anyway in that case.

 

[Tanks]

The movie was about the journey of Odysseus trying to make his way home and politics in Ithaca. War of Troy was just a backstop.

Meant "backdrop".