This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
World War III
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
 Badger11  Beckenham 07 Jan 20 8.02am |
  |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
I have very mixed feelings about this. Whilst I agree it is very unlikely to be the precursor for WW3 it could spark a significant worsening of the problems in the middle east. Part of me detests seeing the world's leading democracy behaving unlawfully. They aren't at war with Iran and provocation ought not be a reason to lower your own standards. Demonstrating to the world at large that you are above such things shows leadership and how to be responsible. Another part of me understands the cold hard realities and the benefits of intimidation via the demonstration of superior technology and power. Would it have been better to have done this more quietly, via some kind of proxy, thus providing believable deniability? That would have given cover for the allies and the rest of the world, even if Iran would still be mad. That it was immediately acknowledged as a "hit" by Trump, and positioned as a great victory, speaks more of playing to internal US politics in an election year than a carefully analysed military strategy. As the only long term solution has to be regime change in Iran will this make it more or less likely? It seems the jury is still out on that and I don't have an opinion yet either. What worries me most is having Trump as the Commander in Chief. I just don't have any confidence that he is listening to, and taking advice from, his senior military commanders. Is there a long term strategy? Is there any kind of strategy beyond wanting to look more decisive than Obama? Where will this leave us? Will we, as we should, try to be, together with our European allies, the voices of reason? Or will we, in the post Brexit period, feel the need to cosy up to Trump to ensure his ego is sufficiently lubricated? The very fact that such thoughts come to mind makes me feel that this has much more to do with US politics than concerns about Iran's regional aspirations or nuclear capabilities. If we see Johnson using weasel words to brown nose Trump in the coming days then my fears will be proved correct. Edited by Wisbech Eagle (07 Jan 2020 12.05am) And then you and others would be shouting conspiracy "Trump is behind all this". No I think if you are going to kill someone, and I am still not sure politically it was the right thing to do, at least man up which Trump has done. So no need for leaks, inquiries and what did Trump say or offer to some proxy to do it on behalf of the USA.
One more point |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
  |
| Badger11 Beckenham 07 Jan 20 8.05am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by serial thriller
Iran has been in a state of internal political turmoil for the past few years due to the crippling effects of embargo Trump has placed on them. Civil unrest was growing and with it probably a desire for armistice with the US. But Trump has undone all of that. Now the Iranians have a martyr, and now their political leaders can point away from their corruption and economic weakness towards a renewed sense of nationalism and hatred of the West. And all for what? So that Trump can avoid scrutiny at home and potentially boost his numbers for the election. This is a man who ducked out of Vietnam for a bullsh*t medical condition. He's now risking the lives of thousands of US citizens for personal gain. The middle East will never be resolved until we get real about the reasons we are actually involved there. The sooner the west ends it's dependency on oil and gas the better. Then we can ignore them which after all is what they want.
One more point |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| dannyboy1978 07 Jan 20 8.18am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by serial thriller
Iran has been in a state of internal political turmoil for the past few years due to the crippling effects of embargo Trump has placed on them. Civil unrest was growing and with it probably a desire for armistice with the US. But Trump has undone all of that. Now the Iranians have a martyr, and now their political leaders can point away from their corruption and economic weakness towards a renewed sense of nationalism and hatred of the West. And all for what? So that Trump can avoid scrutiny at home and potentially boost his numbers for the election. This is a man who ducked out of Vietnam for a bullsh*t medical condition. He's now risking the lives of thousands of US citizens for personal gain. The middle East will never be resolved until we get real about the reasons we are actually involved there. Is that why the US went to Afghanistan?
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Badger11 Beckenham 07 Jan 20 9.43am |
|
|---|---|
|
Media reporting many dead in stampede
One more point |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 07 Jan 20 9.51am |
 |
|---|---|
|
If you are 'above such things' then you don't do it either directly or by proxy. America killed an enemy, they have been using drone strikes since drones were capable of it. This is a top general but the concept is the same. I think it's perfectly valid to argue that all this is the wrong path and another state's war. However, I question the rabid anti Americanism that often accompanies it. Edited by Stirlingsays (07 Jan 2020 9.51am)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 07 Jan 20 10.29am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Badger11
And then you and others would be shouting conspiracy "Trump is behind all this". No I think if you are going to kill someone, and I am still not sure politically it was the right thing to do, at least man up which Trump has done. So no need for leaks, inquiries and what did Trump say or offer to some proxy to do it on behalf of the USA. The point about believable deniability is not that we wouldn't know who wrote the script but who was actually responsible for performing it. My question was whether this would help hold the allies together rather than drive wedges between them. It has nothing to do with "manning up"or looking tough. It's about having a thought through strategy and an end game as a consequence. I am quite sure the US military will have done this and looked at every kind of possible scenario. What bothers me is whether Trump listens or just acts on impulse. He seems to believe he knows best about everything. That's far from "rabid anti Americanism". In fact it is respecting the capabilities of their extremely sophisticated military machine. What it is is being realistic and objective about the current Commander in Chief, which is a very different matter. No-one is supporting terrorists and that kind of suggestion is quite frankly naive.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 07 Jan 20 10.40am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Badger11
The sooner the west ends it's dependency on oil and gas the better. Then we can ignore them which after all is what they want. We might but the USA won't. So long as they unconditionally support Israel the conflicts will continue until the money runs out. Which could be a long time. Economic sanctions and ensuring they don't develop a nuclear weapon look more likely to me to yield results than direct confrontation.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 07 Jan 20 10.59am |
|
|---|---|
|
'Ensuring they don't develop a nuclear weapon'?
Like with pakistan and North Korea? You can't 'ensure' nothing. Time, ensures that it happens. All you can do with sanctions is ensure they are poor. Vietham showed that ultimately everything but death can be endured if your leadership isn't required to respond to its suffering populous......That's why Democracies can't maintain wars for more than a short duration. US policy in the middle east is centred around the protection of Israel and in maintaining good relations with its business interests. States like Iran want to throw the west out of the middle east (while its wider religion continues its populating of the west) and destroy Israel. To be honest I haven't a thought out position on how involved we should be there...Obviously we need to be there as otherwise we will cede the whole region to China and Russia...However, I doubt I'd be eager to wage wars.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Midlands Eagle 07 Jan 20 11.02am |
|
|---|---|
|
Why didn't America deny that it was them rather like the Iranians denied targeting the Saudi oil terminals
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Rudi Hedman Caterham 07 Jan 20 11.06am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
We might but the USA won't. So long as they unconditionally support Israel the conflicts will continue until the money runs out. Which could be a long time. Economic sanctions and ensuring they don't develop a nuclear weapon look more likely to me to yield results than direct confrontation. You’ve posted quite a bit of sense apart from this. And whatever I read and hear, people are suggesting leaving someone alone to attack and kill westerners. The message that sends out and the much longer term damage and fatalities due shouldn’t be acceptable.
COYP |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| mezzer Main Stand, Block F, Row 20 seat 1... 07 Jan 20 11.15am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
The point about believable deniability is not that we wouldn't know who wrote the script but who was actually responsible for performing it. My question was whether this would help hold the allies together rather than drive wedges between them. It has nothing to do with "manning up"or looking tough. It's about having a thought through strategy and an end game as a consequence. I am quite sure the US military will have done this and looked at every kind of possible scenario. What bothers me is whether Trump listens or just acts on impulse. He seems to believe he knows best about everything. That's far from "rabid anti Americanism". In fact it is respecting the capabilities of their extremely sophisticated military machine. What it is is being realistic and objective about the current Commander in Chief, which is a very different matter. No-one is supporting terrorists and that kind of suggestion is quite frankly naive. People who think like that can be quite tiresome can't they?
Living down here does have some advantages. At least you can see them cry. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 07 Jan 20 1.22pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Rudi Hedman
You’ve posted quite a bit of sense apart from this. And whatever I read and hear, people are suggesting leaving someone alone to attack and kill westerners. The message that sends out and the much longer term damage and fatalities due shouldn’t be acceptable. I don't though think we just "leave them alone". It's a question of minimising and containing the attacks, which will only be worse if tensions are deliberately inflamed. We clearly need to maintain our alertness, use the very effective monitoring and security systems we have set up and take covert action in times of extreme threat. Of course no total guarantees are available which will completely assure that a nuclear weapon isn't developed but we have become much better at the way the responsible agencies inspect and monitor things these days. From all I know the agreement the west had made with them was holding but is now threatened. None of us know what our security forces know so second guessing what the strategy ought to be is all rather speculative. What troubles me is when it appears that Trump is more concerned about securing his own future than on how his actions actually play out in the middle east.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / RegisterNew users
Registration is now on our new message board
Existing users
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
Sponsors
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.