and why is Israel so important to the US?
1 Like
That turned out to be factual.
Fact: Trump never said he didn’t know that the straight would be attacked.
Fact: military force was never threatened to be used against Greenland.
Writers were stating facts, it was just the readers adding their own opinion. Military force is always an option but never threatened to use.
He spent a few dollars yesterday dropping bunker buster bombs on the weapon-storing facilities of the murdering scum.
2 Likes
I’ve answered that question multiple times. Last time it’s the only real allie in that part of the world. Very basic.
And so have I, why is the obvious so difficult to grasp?
1 Like
Not looked at it Bruce, but remember the USA makes about 85 million dollars a day selling arms. I think?
1 Like
Ya, that happens, facts are hard to dispute. Once the truth or facts are provided it leaves only a few options, except the fact, deflect and try to deflect to something else. Or wait for tomorrow and find something else Trump has done.
Didn’t watch it all but it is Australia’s choice on who they deal with. Basics
Sorry about getting back to you, was on a conference call with the white House, with the Vice president and the secretary of war.
As you’ll see the facts were provided.
1 Like
Australia makes $1.2 billion a day from selling rocks they dig up so $85 million is just small change.
1 Like
Looks like the surprise surprise moments were on Monday :
Trump was warned of likely Iranian retaliation on Gulf allies, sources say
WASHINGTON, March 16 (Reuters) - President Donald Trump was warned that attacking Iran could trigger retaliation against U.S. Gulf allies despite his claims on Monday that Tehran’s reaction came as a surprise, said a U.S. official and two sources familiar with U.S. intelligence reports.
Pre-war intelligence assessments did not say that Iran’s response was “a guarantee, but it certainly was on the list of potential outcomes,” said one source, who like the other two requested anonymity to discuss the issue.
The president twice on Monday said that Iran’s retaliatory strikes against Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Kuwait were a surprise, the first time at a Kennedy Center board meeting in the White House.
“They (Iran) weren’t supposed to go after all these other countries in the Middle East,” he said. “Nobody expected that. We were shocked.”
Trump’s assertion followed other administration claims that have not been backed by U.S. intelligence reporting, such as that Iran would soon have a missile capable of hitting the U.S. homeland and that it would need two to four weeks to make a nuclear bomb and would then use it.
And yet Israel is the one place were there are very few US military installations. so that sounds like nonsense, it looks like the USA has a lot of friends in the region.
1 Like
Your grasp of NATO is dismal. If NATO establishes an operation then it would be NATO that leads that operation - not NATO doing the bidding of the US military. That changes if a NATO country decides to align with the US - see Afghanistan.
I’d re-read what this French general says - his experience is extensive. Insulting him, his country or Europe does not dilute his argument, it just highlights that you rely on insults because your arguments are flawed.
Now you see the issue with Trump asking for help from other countries. They would have to be under the control of the US military - who is going to put the troops of their country under the instruction of Hesgeth and Trump? That would be cruel to their troops and idiotic & unjustifiable to the people of their country. You make that point very clearly., ta.
It is worth repeating the point about how untrustworthy Trump is. Either because he chickens out or because he switches allegiances. The end conclusion is always do not align with this two-faced, friend only if he needs you, happy to use lies against you president. Especially if alignment risks people’s lives.
Might I suggest that diversions to discuss how lawless or not the UK might be (its not), or whether Trump threatened to use military action to take over Greenland (who cares, he wasn’t exactly sending Denmark flowers) or anything that does not directly relate to this war (or whatever word you prefer). The use of diversion and demanding evidence is purely to take away from weakness of the position of defending this war on Iran. Ignore them or set up a separate thread.
1 Like
That was two posts from a man who clearly has not read the British Government and FBI reports on the threats posed by the Iranian regime to the UK and the USA.
2 Likes
Well at least we are back on topic.
You will need to explain why you think I’m content with Iranian regime?
You need also to try to get your head around “they are brutal to their own people and a threat to other countries” can sit beside “lets not create a middle east war we cannot control and that may end up with a situation worse than we have now”. There is a worthwhile discussion on many issues raised - such as:
How imminent was the threat from Iran, did Trump really have to act now, and why did the CIA assessment state the threat was not imminent?
Is regime change realistic in Iran, will Trump’s strategy of air assault only work and why the Iranian people won’t rebel this time round?
How does the threat from Iran compare to other countries, why pick Iran before these other countries and what role has Israel had in making this prioritisation?
What other approaches might have been taken by the US, the UN and other middle eastern countries to address the threat from Iran - was (misguided and likely to be unsuccessful) air strikes truly the best option?
We can discuss all or any of that. What you do not get to do is make claims about my views on the current Iranian regime. Instead you can ask.
1 Like
Sure, ok, logical. We have a military installation in cuba too. Everyone knows we a friends with them too. Makes sense.
Sounds like we are in a classroom
2 Likes
Your knowledge of US law is non-existent.
“IF” give me an example. La la land.
Are you saying NATO mission us no longer protecting Europe? NATO now is suppose to cover Asia except Ukraine. As I said, making accusations deflecting from the facts. I like this part - - see Mongolia .
His experience may be extensive in the eyes of France and maybe a few countries in Europe but that would be it, at its best. don’t want to insult some two bit general, from a country that best military experience is writing surrender terms. And no, the world is not worrying about his feeling. The General can put on his big boy pants.
This advice coming from someone that only gets to insult the most powerful man in the world.
Your in good company with that French General. Can’t seem to figure out, your oil tanker, your escort, your problem. Not the US problem. Ya it’s hard to figure out.
Lol, isn’t it funny that a General in France, which supports Ukraine. Not standing next to them, not standing with them but 2000 kilometers behind them. That general or French military need to learn, you lead from the front. Not the other side of a Continent.