Us embassy in iraq
- Thread starter Crazyhole
- Start date
Here’s his position: mindlessly bitch and whine about the President on everything regardless of merit or understanding of the issue
Stay in the area in some capacity or write a blank check yearly to Israel. There will always be an American presence there. Deal with it.
Apparently these people don’t understand the difference between having troops in an active war zone and having them stationed in allied nations, at their request, that are stable.
Did we just start a war with Iran? Based on what I am reading, killing Qassem Suleimani is likely going to create a very dangerous situation.
Just saw this. Pretty bold move doing an airstrike at an international airport. Iran doesnt seem to be terribly fond of this guy but will most likely respond. The cynic in me says "well, we're in an election year so Trump wants to be in the middle of a war", but the guy was the leader of a known terrorist group so maybe the motivation is pure.
Really wishing that shukster would have gone on record by now about how this should go down.
This guy has lots of Americans blood on his hands and was planning more attacks. This will send a strong message to Iran to back off. You can’t coddle these people, you have to defeat them. Let’s hope this will lead to peace through strength, not a war.
![[roll]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/classic/roll.r191677.gif "roll [roll]")
Iran isnt fond of him? He was probably one of the most important people in Iran. It would be the equivalent of a foreign nation assassinating our vice president or Secretary of state or something along those lines. He also helped fight ISIS in both Iraq and Syria, so while he was a terrible person by all means, he has plenty of support in the region.
Even if the motivation was pure, that doesnt stop the response and that doesnt make it the right decision. I just hope Trump and co. have thought this out and have a plan for the backlash, and it wasnt just a rash decision.
Look, I hope you are right, but I also think that is a very optimistic outlook. I think it is far more likely we have created a war like situation more so than Iran packing their bags and backing off. This seems to be a much bigger deal than killing Bin Laden or Al-Baghdadi, this was a prominent member of a government.
They'll respond, no doubt. We'll probably end up evacuating the embassy by sunday and have some sort of counter strike against us somewhere in the region. I'm so glad we spent a trillion dollars to get into this mess, just so we can spend another trillion to make a new version of the mess .
I wouldnt be surprised if the embassy isnt evacuated and/or under attack again by tomorrow. I think the worry is that this mess could end up being even worse than the Iraq war and more of a regional war. Iran is much stronger than Iraq was, and with all of the other wars going on in the region, it is certainly a fragile situation that could spill over into a regional war.
I obviously dont like Trump, but I do really hope they know what they are doing here and this ends up working out as best as it possibly can. IN saying that, Eric Trump apparently tweeted something about the attack before it happened. So the fact the presidents son, who has no security clearance and no role in the government appears to have had knowledge of it, doesnt give me a lot of hope that this was a well thought out plan.
If I had to bet, I’d say that Iran is going to bluff and bluster and not do anything overt for awhile. When they strike back, it’ll be through proxies. They play the long game knowing that our leadership is temporary and our people are weak and divided.
We killed 1 terrorist and probably created 1000 more.
That mindset is precisely why Iraq ended up being a mess because we were completely wrong about the response after Saddam was taken out. Nobody is sad this guy was killed, but that doesnt change that there will likely be an aftermath of some sorts we are going to have to deal with.
Absolutely. So.., we will now have to deal with it. Doing nothing is not the answer. Terrorist organizations thrive on weakness. Hopefully we have learned from the past and we will have a plan for their response as well
Terrorist organizations have literraly attacked some of the strongest nations on the planet, including ours. So I dont know where this idea comes from that they thrive on weakness. If they thrived on weakness then 9/11 would have never happened, considering it was an attack on the strongest nation on the planet who they knew (and probably wanted) to respond militarily.
We gained absolutely nothing by this. That's my issue with the whole deal. Now they're going to retaliate and we're going to send 20 year old kids over there that end up getting killed while we borrow another trillion dollars.........and for what? We dont even buy oil from them anymore. There is zero reason for us having a military presence there, let alone conducting air strikes.
Why isn’t there a formidable ISIS anymore you ask? Because basically wiped them and their leaders out. Complacency and weakness is what caused 9-11. And no, they didn’t know or want a military response and to be killed after 9-11, nor did they want to lose their safe havens.
They wanted the USA to bring the war over there, so they could kill more of our people
THAT is where we have to be smarter
I agree, after Iraq, I cant possibly see how anyone thinks going at it with Iran is going to be something that benefits us at all.
Look. If you think that they loved us before this and didn’t have terrorist acts planned against the West (USA) until the end of time, then you haven’t been following the history of these people
I am confused. In the first paragraph you say they didnt want a military response, and the second paragraph you say they wanted us to bring the war over there. Is that not wanting military response?
And Bin Laden most certainly wanted a military response because he thought the way to defeat the US was by draining our money, much like they did with Russia during the Afghan war in the 80s.
Seems like a legit kill. He wasn't supposed to leave Iran. What is an Iranian general doing in Iraq?
Yes. They wanted a military response like the Russian war. They DO NOT want a military response of any type that is going to wipe them out. So, I will clarify that. They underestimated us to a degree and we must improve on that even more
But you are also not following history. Terrorist attacks are a response to our being in their land. We have a long history of trying to control the Middle East going back 70 years or so. They dont attack us out of the blue, they dont attack us because they "hate us for our freedoms" or any of that simpleton bullshit. That isnt justifying terror attacks, but it is the reason for them. SO basically we have a circular pattern where we are involved in their countries, they dont like it so they attack us, we respond, etc etc etc. So maybe we should try getting out of the middle east as much as we can and seeing how that works for a while.
But the problem that may arise from this was the proportionality in our response. This wasn’t a truck load of militia members or Hezbollah foot soldiers, this was someone viewed as a potential future Iranian President. The guy was a piece of shit and deserved it, but this is how larger wars are started. I’m conflicted about this one.
We have too many allies over there to simply just disappear. When was the last time the USA attacked unprovoked? These people will
always find a way to attack the west because they are extremists. They never have a reason and never will
Exactly. Not to mention, the attack on the embassy was a result of our disproportinate response as well. They killed an American contractor (which is obviously horrible), so we respond with air strikes that killed about 30 people, and that is when they attacked the embassy.
Umm, the Iraq war was unprovoked. And also, our relationship with Iran was pretty stable when Trump took office. The tension came when he got out of the Iran deal and issued harsh sanctions for reasons I still dont understand.
That’s a show of superiority and strength. That’s how it works. Sorry, we are NEVER going to agree on this principle
Similar threads
