The President of the US has been impeached

[Link | 2,816]

2 hours ago, m308gunner said:

  I understand your frustration and respect your wish to put an end to the conversation.  

It’s all good, man

[MuNKeY | 241]

Generally I stay out these things but seeing Iran retaliated as most of us figured they would,  it's about to get interesting. 

[MrWunderful | 2,927]

Damn Trump legit started a war to distract people from his impeachment. Lol

[Quest4Nes | 376]

3 hours ago, MrWunderful said:

Damn Trump legit started a war to distract people from his impeachment. Lol

looks like a blink to me. You say you are done responding and you kill zero americans? 

 

And to say this is a distraction? Why the hell would he distract by starting a war? Nobody wants to go through a war. It would be hugely unpopular, and he ran on and said many times he is not a war president.

It would legitimately be the worst distraction you could possibly create. Think about it for a second. Lets wait to see what happens. If they start a war with Iran, then we can talk. We took out a terrorist. Former administrations have struck targets with drones left and right. Where was the outrage?. Lets wait and see what happens. It seems like whatever strategy he does, you arent going to like it. He is coming at it at a different approach that isnt pay Iran money to appease them. Lets see how it plays out. Hopefully it doesnt lead to war. After the strike tonight, it looks like Iran doesnt want to go to war either. I dont blame them, theyd be crushed.

Edited January 8, 2020 by Quest4Nes

[RH | 5,058]

Heavy sanctions the past couple of years, strong civil unrest within their borders and a military probably not even 1/10th the size of the US... there’s no way they would have started a war unless the Iranian leadership had a death wish.

I’m pretty sure the shots that were fired this evening were just to show that they wouldn’t accept circumstances without a response, but they weren’t dumb enough to kill a single American. So far, it appears the didn’t.

[MrWunderful | 2,927]

17 minutes ago, Quest4Nes said:

looks like a blink to me. You say you are done responding and you kill zero americans? 

 

And to say this is a distraction? Why the hell would he distract by starting a war? Nobody wants to go through a war. It would be hugely unpopular, and he ran on and said many times he is not a war president.

It would legitimately be the worst distraction you could possibly create. Think about it for a second. Lets wait to see what happens. If they start a war with Iran, then we can talk. We took out a terrorist. Former administrations have struck targets with drones left and right. Where was the outrage?. Lets wait and see what happens. It seems like whatever strategy he does, you arent going to like it. He is coming at it at a different approach that isnt pay Iran money to appease them. Lets see how it plays out. Hopefully it doesnt lead to war. After the strike tonight, it looks like Iran doesnt want to go to war either. I dont blame them, theyd be crushed.

It was an over simplification, relax lol. Trump doesnt think about repercussions of anything, so I have ZERO doubt he didnt consider how it would blow up in his face.  Hannity probably told him it was a good idea, so he did it.  Remember hosting G7 at his personal property? 
 

Most of the other targets killed werent loved by the general population from what I hear, so that isnt really a comparison- but for the record I am anti war and tend to prefer the most diplomatic solution. 
 

The general was a different figure than a normal terrorist, there werent millions of people at any regular ISIS Terrorists funeral. 
 

Acting like this guy was just another insurgent setting up IEDs isnt giving the proper amount of gravity to the situation. 
 

And even though I was willing to give Trump a shot at the beginning, absolutely nothing he has done I personally agree with. So yes- the chance of him doing something I personally think is “right” is pretty slim. 

[MrWunderful | 2,927]

19 minutes ago, RH said:

Heavy sanctions the past couple of years, strong civil unrest within their borders and a military probably not even 1/10th the size of the US... there’s no way they would have started a war unless the Iranian leadership had a death wish.

I’m pretty sure the shots that were fired this evening were just to show that they wouldn’t accept circumstances without a response, but they weren’t dumb enough to kill a single American. So far, it appears the didn’t.

Thats the stupid thing. The easiest path would have been to let Iran’s economy implode along with the civil unrest. They would have come crawling back for us to pull sanctions. 
 

and their military is even smaller than that, and what they do have is mostly out of date. 

[Quest4Nes | 376]

4 minutes ago, MrWunderful said:

 

The general was a different figure than a normal terrorist, there werent millions of people at any regular ISIS Terrorists funeral. 
 

 

Like one guy I was listening to was saying, saying their were millions at this mans funeral is like when North Korean voter turnout was 99.9%. You know why.

State controlled media/fear of repercussions for you and your family will probably get you to turn out to the funeral. Besides you live in Iran. What the hell else are you going to do.

Edited January 8, 2020 by Quest4Nes

[MrWunderful | 2,927]

Just now, Quest4Nes said:

Like one guy I was listening to was saying, saying their were millions at this mans funeral is like when North Korean voter turnout was 99.9%. You know why.

State controlled media/fear of repurcussions for you and your family will probably get you to turn out to the funeral.

Tell that to the 56 people killed in the stampede. Unlike North korea, there are pictures that are convincing. 
 

But I dont really care to argue about the people at this guys funeral, Im not a fan of state sponsored terrorism like Iran perpetuates. Personally, Im glad the guy is gone- I am far more concerned about impact to our service personnel.  

[Quest4Nes | 376]

4 minutes ago, MrWunderful said:

Tell that to the 56 people killed in the stampede. Unlike North korea, there are pictures that are convincing. 
 

But I dont really care to argue about the people at this guys funeral, Im not a fan of state sponsored terrorism like Iran perpetuates. Personally, Im glad the guy is gone- I am far more concerned about impact to our service personnel.  

Then you should feel great that zero reported deaths from the "retaliation" and looks like Iran is backing down. We will see what happens. To think he acts and doesnt think of any repercussions is pretty naive.

Edited January 8, 2020 by Quest4Nes

[MrWunderful | 2,927]

22 minutes ago, Quest4Nes said:

Then you should feel great that zero reported deaths from the "retaliation" and looks like Iran is backing down. We will see what happens. To think he acts and doesnt think of any repercussions is pretty naive.

You are Right- Trump does think about things that will benefit him personally or financially. 
 

My personal opinion is that Trump is an idiot, and dumber than the average american.  Have you heard him talk? Its OK to think he is a genius, I am not in the business of trying to convince you otherwise

 

And I would feel better if none of this would have happened to begin with. 

[Quest4Nes | 376]

5 minutes ago, MrWunderful said:

You are Right- Trump does think about things that will benefit him personally or financially. 
 

My personal opinion is that Trump is an idiot, and dumber than the average american.  Have you heard him talk?

 

And I would feel better if none of this would have happened to begin with. 

unfortunately this world is what you have, and its not always what you want. You cant orchestrate attacks against the United States and expect nothing to happen. We struck, they appear to have blinked for show/domestic PR. We will see what happens

[MrWunderful | 2,927]

2 minutes ago, Quest4Nes said:

unfortunately this world is what you have, and its not always what you want. You cant orchestrate attacks against the United States and expect nothing to happen. We struck, they appear to have blinked for show/domestic PR. We will see what happens

I hope nothing else does happen. 
 

But dont forget that we arent saints in the matter either
 

-downing the aircraft

-1953 coup

-iran contra affair

Not trying to defend Iran, because I dont personally care for their country. But its not like we were minding our own business and they attacked Us. 

[osg | 52]

6 hours ago, Quest4Nes said:

And to say this is a distraction? Why the hell would he distract by starting a war? Nobody wants to go through a war. It would be hugely unpopular [...]

I dunno, it seems to me like it was a successful distraction. For example, I just went to a video game forum and clicked on a thread about impeachment and everyone was talking about Iran in there in stead. Doesn't really matter if it's popular, the subject has been changed.

[CodysGameRoom | 2,009]

8 hours ago, Quest4Nes said:

To think he acts and doesnt think of any repercussions is pretty naive.

Have you seen his Twitter account? lol

[arch_8ngel | 1,597]

9 hours ago, Quest4Nes said:

To think he acts and doesnt think of any repercussions is pretty naive.

Trump's "strategy", if you want to call it that, is to redirect into a new scandal to distract from the old in a long chain of chaos.

The guy is barely playing Snakes and Ladders let alone the game of "4D Chess" that his more rabid supporters think he is.

 

It is also funny, in a sad sort of way, that he has flipped from spending his entire time in office ripping on the intelligence community as being incompetent and out to get him (where he claimed to trust the word of Putin over their analysis regarding Russian attempts at interference), and suddenly he trusts them so much that he is willing to execute a missile strike against a top Iranian general on the sovereign soil of a 3rd country.

Edited January 8, 2020 by arch_8ngel

[cartman | 195]

So what are the angles here with all this shit? Whose political ambitions advance, and in what way?

Has Iran increased their influence over there/globally after is that how it is?

[Californication | 1,490]

11 hours ago, Quest4Nes said:

Then you should feel great that zero reported deaths from the "retaliation" and looks like Iran is backing down. We will see what happens. To think he acts and doesnt think of any repercussions is pretty naive.

Iran attacked American/Iraqi bases and before they attacked, Iran called the Iraqi's and told them they were going to attack. 

Iran was sending a message. 

I heard one expert say the message was that every missile the Iranians fired hit its target. Meaning despite giving the Iraqi's notice of the missile strike the American/Iraqi missile defense system was able to stop ZERO missiles. 

I guess what I am trying to say is don't think Iran failed because nobody died. If someone dies the U.S. would have more talking points to escalated the attacks. This was a warning.

Also, by Iran playing this slowly, if the U.S. continues to attack Iran, we look even worse as we continue to be the primary aggressor.

Edited January 8, 2020 by Californication

[RH | 5,058]

Basically, this is a way for them to respond, without actually killing a US Citizen, which is our line-in-the-sand.

But, imagine what we would have done if our top-brass for the Army, Air Force or Navy was shot down coming out of Iraq. We would have done more than sent a few missiles there way, intending to not kill someone.

This was a way to respond with aggressive “talk”, but without doing any real damage that would “wake the bear”. They’ve attempted to save face.

Now, what I’m really scratching my head about was the downed Boeing flight. Considering Iran’s response, I’m sure they shot it down. If it was a quick, US retaliation, they would have been screaming that fact.  So, what happened there? The chance of a true, accidental, crashed passenger plane in a country that just launched airstrikes hours before is rather astronomical. Regardless, I can’t think of any reason why they’d do that and, today, why someone wouldn’t be screaming “foul”.  So far, no one has anything official to say about it.

[arch_8ngel | 1,597]

26 minutes ago, Californication said:

I heard one expert say the message was that every missile the Iranians fired hit its target. Meaning despite giving the Iraqi's notice of the missile strike the American/Iraqi missile defense system was able to stop ZERO missiles. 

 

I think you are completely misreading that detail, regarding the quality of American missile defense capabilities.

If you can otherwise guarantee you don't need to use a defensive capability to prevent loss of life, then you generally don't use it, because every time you do you let your enemies learn more about how they work.

 

It wouldn't surprise me to find out that, given the advance warning, they changed how the systems were monitoring the airspace.

Basically (1) nobody dies (2) equipment gets moved ahead of time to protect it (3) Iran gets their "satisfaction"/"saves face" and (4) defensive capabilities aren't exposed in the process.

 

 

US missile defenses are very good.  It would be one thing to overwhelm defensive batteries to where you exhaust the defensive capability.  But it is quite another to suggest that they completely failed to detect and prevent ANY incoming missiles.

Edited January 8, 2020 by arch_8ngel

[arch_8ngel | 1,597]

15 minutes ago, RH said:

Now, what I’m really scratching my head about was the downed Boeing flight. Considering Iran’s response, I’m sure they shot it down. If it was a quick, US retaliation, they would have been screaming that fact.  So, what happened there? The chance of a true, accidental, crashed passenger plane in a country that just launched airstrikes hours before is rather astronomical. Regardless, I can’t think of any reason why they’d do that and, today, why someone wouldn’t be screaming “foul”.  So far, no one has anything official to say about it.

It is either really bad timing of an accident (coincidence) or a miscalculation of Iranian air defenses (similar to the shoot-down over Ukraine a couple years ago).

The US has much better target discrimination than that, nowadays, to where we wouldn't end up with a repeat of the fiasco MrWunderful mentioned upthread.

[RH | 5,058]

To add to what @arch_8ngel just said, another problem with shooting missiles out of the sky is that if you shoot them out of the sky over enemy territory (e.g. within the borders of Iran) verifying that you shot down their missiles vs. them verifying that they shot down your missiles is practically impossible.

By clearing out the areas where their missiles will land and eliminating the chance of casualties, letting the bombs hit where they were targeted provides rather concrete evidence that this attack was initiated by Iran.

[RH | 5,058]

2 minutes ago, arch_8ngel said:

It is either really bad timing of an accident (coincidence) or a miscalculation of Iranian air defenses (similar to the shoot-down over Ukraine a couple years ago).

The US has much better target discrimination than that, nowadays, to where we wouldn't end up with a repeat of the fiasco MrWunderful mentioned upthread.

Yes, I agree to that.  The two most plausible causes I can think of, though I'm not sold that either is correct, is that it was either a miss fire and they accidentally shot down a civilian jet, or the US, or it's allies, had spies on board and shot down the plane in retaliation, but the US/Canada/whomever wasn't going to admit to having spies on the plane.

[arch_8ngel | 1,597]

2 minutes ago, RH said:

To add to what @arch_8ngel just said, another problem with shooting missiles out of the sky is that if you shoot them out of the sky over enemy territory (e.g. within the borders of Iran) verifying that you shot down their missiles vs. them verifying that they shot down your missiles is practically impossible.

By clearing out the areas where their missiles will land and eliminating the chance of casualties, letting the bombs hit where they were targeted provides rather concrete evidence that this attack was initiated by Iran.

The size, type, and trajectory of missiles being fired makes it extremely obvious who shot first... there would be no mystery about it, at all.

It is just a waste of defensive capability that exposes it to enemy-actor analysis if it isn't actively needed to save lives.

[arch_8ngel | 1,597]

2 minutes ago, RH said:

Yes, I agree to that.  The two most plausible causes I can think of, though I'm not sold that either is correct, is that it was either a miss fire and they accidentally shot down a civilian jet, or the US, or it's allies, had spies on board and shot down the plane in retaliation, but the US/Canada/whomever wasn't going to admit to having spies on the plane.

The second scenario isn't all that plausible, because if Iran had good intelligence that spies would be fleeing on the plane they would have just detained them long before they boarded or ordered the plane to turn around.

They don't need to murder 180 people to kill a few foreign spies, when they could do that in broad daylight anytime they want with zero repercussions.