Iran Catch-All | IRAN WAR
- Thread starter nycfan
- Start date
- Replies: 5K
- Views: 144K
- Politics
Callatoroy
Inconceivable Member
- Messages
- 2,907
ZenMode
Legend of ZZL
- Messages
- 6,397
Or Trump just wants new leaders. Non Islamists. Non terrorists.
sringwal
Iconic Member
- Messages
- 2,304
And if you point out the inconsistency of the current war with Trump’s repeated statements that he wouldn’t do exactly that (and subsequent Republican Party about face to line up with dear leader), well, you just haven’t learned to “speak Trump” I guess. Dumb liberals!
- Messages
- 3,170
That’s one of those articles where someone desperately tries to make sense of some idiotic thing that Trump has done and concocts some idea that hasn’t remotely crossed Trump’s mind. Not that it’s a sensible idea anyway.
ChileG
Inconceivable Member
- Messages
- 3,187
I wish there was an actual, workable plan for that. This administration can’t even decide if regime change is even a goal or not.
ChileG
Inconceivable Member
- Messages
- 3,187
Ret-conning everything Trump does has become a full-time job for right-wing commentators.
- Messages
- 1,960
"It is what it is."
- Messages
- 3,145
OK, let's assume the motive is to undercut China. That would be a worthy pursuit. Why not make that case to the American people? Why lie (and it is an obvious lie) about Iranian nuclear capability?
Furthermore, there is no guarantee at all that simply bombing Iran leads somehow to less volatility in the Middle East. If one accepts the premise of this article that the US would be more able to combat China because of less need for attention on the Middle East, one has to assume that less attention will be necessary.
Many of us believe the exact opposite to be true. Many ofnus believe that this has set off a powder keg that will reverberate for years and years requiring the full attention of American military for the next decade. This says nothing of our reduced readiness and the reduced ability of our Gulf "allies" to defend themselves because of the expenditure of arms that take years (decades) to replace.
I fail to see how both China and Russia are not laughing their asses off at this development. China will just continue to buy the crude on the open market. That will dent their economy, sure, but it won't stall them and the overall cost to them will be FAR less than the American expenditure. China won't be hampered in their Taiwan pursuit by this. In my opinion, they will be emboldened.
This reeks of "doing something...anything... is always better than the status quo" which is absolutely not true.
- Messages
- 41,688
The Most Chilling Detail in the U.S. Attack on an Iranian Naval Ship
The Iranian warship was taking part in an international exercise with many other countries—including the United States.
“… But the Dena may not have been armed because it was returning from an international exercise in the Indian Ocean, and the U.S. Navy likely knew it because it was taking part in the same exercise.
Both the United States and Iran were taking part in the MILAN 2026 exercise, organized by the Indian Navy, on February 15–26, with the U.S. sending a maritime patrol aircraft and Iran sending the Dena.Iranian sailors from the ship paraded on land before India’s president.
… The exercise in question required ships not to carry any ammunition. Normally, the Dena carriesvarious missiles and guns, including anti-ship missiles. Because the U.S. also took part, it would have been aware that the Dena was unarmed.
Former Indian Foreign Minister Kanwal Sibal accused the attack of being “premeditated as the US was aware of the Iranian ship’s presence in the exercise.”
… At least 87 sailors were killed in the torpedo attack in international waters in the Indian Ocean, and the Sri Lankan navy responded to the Dena’s distress call and rescued 32 survivors, but 61 members of the crew are still missing. The U.S. didn’t respond to the call, and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth crowed about the attack to reporters on Wednesday.
… The sinking of the Dena seems to be part of Hegseth’s new policy of ignoring “stupid rules of engagement” and “punching them while they’re down,” and it raises questions of what the Trump administration would say if a country like Iran attacked an American ship it knew was unarmed.“
If this reporting is true, then the order to sink the IRIS Dena by the U.S. Navy may go down as one of the few and one of the greatest acts of cowardice by the U.S. Navy.
- Messages
- 41,688
The Most Chilling Detail in the U.S. Attack on an Iranian Naval Ship
The Iranian warship was taking part in an international exercise with many other countries—including the United States.www.yahoo.com
“… But the Dena may not have been armed because it was returning from an international exercise in the Indian Ocean, and the U.S. Navy likely knew it because it was taking part in the same exercise.
Both the United States and Iran were taking part in the MILAN 2026 exercise, organized by the Indian Navy, on February 15–26, with the U.S. sending a maritime patrol aircraft and Iran sending the Dena.Iranian sailors from the ship paraded on land before India’s president.
… The exercise in question required ships not to carry any ammunition. Normally, the Dena carriesvarious missiles and guns, including anti-ship missiles. Because the U.S. also took part, it would have been aware that the Dena was unarmed.
Former Indian Foreign Minister Kanwal Sibal accused the attack of being “premeditated as the US was aware of the Iranian ship’s presence in the exercise.”
… At least 87 sailors were killed in the torpedo attack in international waters in the Indian Ocean, and the Sri Lankan navy responded to the Dena’s distress call and rescued 32 survivors, but 61 members of the crew are still missing. The U.S. didn’t respond to the call, and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth crowed about the attack to reporters on Wednesday.
… The sinking of the Dena seems to be part of Hegseth’s new policy of ignoring “stupid rules of engagement” and “punching them while they’re down,” and it raises questions of what the Trump administration would say if a country like Iran attacked an American ship it knew was unarmed.“
If this reporting is true, then the order to sink the IRIS Dena by the U.S. Navy may go down as one of the few and one of the greatest acts of cowardice by the U.S. Navy.
- Messages
- 3,145
This sinking was just murder. There is no way to look at it otherwise.
1. The ship was not armed and this was well known by the US.
2. The ship could have easily been boarded and the crew forced to abandon ship into lifeboat.
3. The ship could have been seized and/or scuttled. I would prefer seized to avoid the ecological impact but I get the idea that it might again be used offensively.
4. The sailors in the water should have been rescued.
ChileG
Inconceivable Member
- Messages
- 3,187
I remember being mocked by my fellow (at the time) Republicans on the ACBoards for thinking the second war in Iraq wasn’t going to be a short affair (a few months tops!)
They used to derisively mock those of us who didn’t accept that the war would be quick and painless with sarcastic posts over and over - “Quagmire!!!” While they raised banners that read “Mission Accomplished” a couple days after the initial invasion.
How did that turn out?
Is it true that Russian has become Israel's second language? Just connecting the dots on how it has changed.
- Messages
- 41,688
“… The submarine departed without attempting a rescue or alerting anyone. Congress never authorized the war. The ship had just participated in naval exercises alongside American personnel. And the ship, some argue, may have been unarmed.
…
Sibal produced no proof for that assertion. India's own official record complicates the claims even further.
The Press Information Bureau, India's government press office, published a detailed account of MILAN 2026's sea phase confirming that "live firings as part of surface gun shoots, as well as anti-air firings, were also undertaken" by participating vessels. If a blanket ammunition ban governed the exercise, it was not reflected in the account India itself provided.
Whether the Dena specifically had her weapons systems loaded when she departed Visakhapatnam on Feb. 25 remains unconfirmed by any official source on either side.
… Under the law of naval warfare, the question may be beside the point. A warship's status as a lawful military target derives from its flag and its function in a conflict, not the state of her magazines at a given moment. Under the same laws, even unarmed merchant vessels flying an enemy flag can be sunk during armed conflict, provided certain conditions are met, including visit and search procedures in some cases.
The Dena was an Iranian Navy war vessel transiting the Indian Ocean while her country was in open conflict with the United States. As such, a warship flying an enemy flag is a valid military target, but whether the United States was lawfully at war is a question the strike off Sri Lanka has forced into open debate.
Wes Bryant, a former Air Force special operations targeting expert and former chief of civilian harm assessments at the Pentagon, called the strike illegal.
"Was that warship actively posing a threat or participating in hostilities?" Bryant said. "You cannot say that this warship was an imminent threat to anyone. By targeting it, is the Trump administration saying that the imminent threat is all of Iran's government and military? If so, that's an incredibly dangerous example of military overreach."…”