MelroseHawkins
Well-Known Member
No, I do not think that is ethical at all. I've never said I think Trump is perfect.
I've always said, what the hell was our other option. Not much.
The War
- Thread starter NCHawker
- Start date
I've always said, what the hell was our other option. Not much.
Westernhawk
Well-Known Member
If you’re being serious, again, I feel bad for you.
1. Use your allies. Get them involved and on board in the conflict before you start it. Allies are a force multiplier.
2. Actually game out how it’s going to go so you can be prepared. We attacked the leadership then said, rise up and overthrow your government. Less than a year ago that government killed 30k people who would have maybe stood up. Those people are dead.
3. Since this was an offensive war we started, we could have spent more time getting gulf allies armed and defended against Iran, and resupplied our own stockpiles before engaging.
4. Have an actual plan on what to do about the straight, which was always going to be vulnerable the longer this drug on.
5. Identify remaining resistance within Iran to potentially arm and wage a guerilla war against the regime behind enemy lines which slows them down and provides us with intelligence.
Fryowa
Administrator
Netanyahu played Trump like a fiddle, and whether you agree with this whole mess or not it’s too late to turn back now.
I’m sorry, but there’s no diplomatic way out of this thing that doesn’t result in the US being perceived as weak and stupid. The US is not weak or stupid, its current leadership happens to be.
If the US is perceived as weak and stupid, it effectively is weak and stupid. What will result from that is China taking the reins of the world in the vacuum, and we can’t let that happen. This oil thing in the strait is either going to be fixed by alternate supply routes (which aren’t feasible in any way due to the length of time it would take as well as the terrorism threat to any new pipelines), or boots on the ground and an invasion. Period.
Neither is a good option.
The 3rd option is to keep doing what we’re doing—playing whack-a-mole with Iran and the proxies—where oil prices stay high ad infinitum, just high enough to cause the middle class pain but not the upper class. And remember the middle class can vote all they want but they don’t pull the real puppet strings.
That’s what I think is going to happen. Wack-a-mole and posturing in perpetuity.
I’m sorry, but there’s no diplomatic way out of this thing that doesn’t result in the US being perceived as weak and stupid. The US is not weak or stupid, its current leadership happens to be.
If the US is perceived as weak and stupid, it effectively is weak and stupid. What will result from that is China taking the reins of the world in the vacuum, and we can’t let that happen. This oil thing in the strait is either going to be fixed by alternate supply routes (which aren’t feasible in any way due to the length of time it would take as well as the terrorism threat to any new pipelines), or boots on the ground and an invasion. Period.
Neither is a good option.
The 3rd option is to keep doing what we’re doing—playing whack-a-mole with Iran and the proxies—where oil prices stay high ad infinitum, just high enough to cause the middle class pain but not the upper class. And remember the middle class can vote all they want but they don’t pull the real puppet strings.
That’s what I think is going to happen. Wack-a-mole and posturing in perpetuity.
Westernhawk
Well-Known Member
Tell me if this looks like success:
1. Costs estimated at $133B
2. Missile inventory depleted and will take three years to resupply
3. Hormuz greatly impacted
4. Saudi oil pipeline impacted
5. Hundreds of US buildings at bases damaged
6. Regime (same family) still in charge
7. Oil and gas prices are surging globally
8. Our allies don't know whether they can rely on us, as we did not coordinate with them.
Tell me which of these isn't true. This looks like failure to me.
1. Costs estimated at $133B
2. Missile inventory depleted and will take three years to resupply
3. Hormuz greatly impacted
4. Saudi oil pipeline impacted
5. Hundreds of US buildings at bases damaged
6. Regime (same family) still in charge
7. Oil and gas prices are surging globally
8. Our allies don't know whether they can rely on us, as we did not coordinate with them.
Tell me which of these isn't true. This looks like failure to me.
Fryowa
Administrator
I don't think anyone here is calling this thing a success.
Look, I know you're WAY out on the extreme left of this and other issues, and there are actually things you and I agree on, but walking away and saying, "Okay, we're leaving, it's all good, go back to your regularly scheduled programming in the SOH" isn't an option. There are way too many nuances here. This genie cannot be put back in the bottle no matter what anyone thinks.
Here's the options...
1) Up and leave. The stranglehold will continue even worse than it is now, and oil prices will continue to climb once you give Iran a reason to think they "won" and that they're the big dog in control now. China will become the next USA and that is NOT good for any human being on this planet. Do I wish we were in that situation? No. But we are and we can't just reverse it.
2) Convert US refineries to domestic to light sweet crude. 30 plus year project and that's if you can force private industry to invest in it. We've already seen that this chaos isn't enough to convince them.
3) Build alternate means of transportation to eliminate the need for the SOH to be open. Already been tried, easy reach for Iranian missiles, easy target because it's endless miles of above ground pipelines in a barren desert that no nation can't protect all of.
4) Invasion. Put US troops on the ground and launch an air invasion at the scale of the first Gulf War. It wouldn't take long, it'd use less weapons stockpiles in the mid to long term than what we're doing now (to no effect, I might add), and would likely be less expensive long term. The US could--if it wants--take Kharg easily, and take over/destroy Iranian military and oil infrastructure. But it requires an invasion and at least a temporary occupation. China is not going to launch nukes over the US meddling in Iran, and Russia will not either.
However...if we do that, which is the only way to truly fix the problem...US troops will die doing it. Some number of US troops will no doubt be captured, paraded on camera on twitter and tik tok, and be tortured and executed. Because of social media those videos are going to be seen by everyone in the world. That's a fact. This isn't 1991 anymore. The United States citizenry is not going to put up with something like that. Especially since now this thing is about oil prices 100% rather than regime change.
5) Do nothing and continue to skirmish back and forth, and live with $110-120 oil. This is what's going to actually happen. May as well learn to live with it because like I said, there's no fixing it that doesn't result in China taking over dominance or US troops going to another sandbox war and dying.
Westernhawk
Well-Known Member
Did I say we should just walk away? I've been extremely critical of Trump for this war, but how does that make my views "extreme left"? It makes me rational.
The various options you opine about above kind of make my point that invading Iran like this was poorly planned and the consequences were not considered. The war was a mistake, and getting out is going to be a mess, and everyone is worse off for it. That's not "leftist", although calling people that in Iowa is probably pretty popular, I guess?
You've indicated that you're extremely cynical about all things politics, and that nothing matters. Maybe just move along?
Fryowa
Administrator
Then what is your solution? You like to yell about problems like crazy but not provide any alternatives other than screaming about the other team from the roof tops. What’s your path out of this without military escalation?
I’ve asked you sooooo many times what are your 5 compromises that you’d make with the right in order to make progress rather than dig in your heels and get nothing done, and you won’t ever even entertain the idea. That tells me you’re more worried about your faction being right than you are about getting any progress made. You hate the right so much that you’d burn the whole world down out of spite rather than do anything to compromise. Same as the far right.
So…if I’m so wrong, what’s your path out of this thing that you see? I’ve given you mine in detail. Or are you too worried about being mad and screaming about how the other side sucks than to try to give a reasonable solution?
The right would say the same thing…that it makes them rational. You’re so deluded by thinking your opinion is the only morally right and rational viewpoint that you can’t possibly consider anything else. That’s a defect in reasoning and thinking that you share with the far right…like birds of a feather. Anything that’s not lined up with your views is the evil empire automatically. No grey area allowed.
Really? That’s where we’re at?
I’ve asked you multiple times how you’d compromise, how you’d get work done, how you’d solve the problem, and you can’t or won’t respond. You’re the one who sophomorically just wants to rail against the other side without offering a solution (if even a flawed one), and I’m the one who should just move along?
I think you’re getting frustrated at being called out for having no response, and you just want me to leave so you don’t have to admit you’re part of the problem (just like the hard line right is).
Westernhawk
Well-Known Member
I see that you have made this about me, personally. That's unfortunate. I highlighted some of that language above so it's clear what you're really trying to do here. Having said that, I'd like to disabuse you of some of your apparently strongly held beliefs about me and my position on these issues, so I bolded the important parts so you don't fail to read them. Your comment "I see you're getting frustrated" is a complete projection on your part.
I have been against this war since the day it started. I AGREE with you that there are no easy ways to extricate ourselves from this situation, and that the options that you laid out are all really challenging and problematic. It is for that VERY reason that I was against the war from day one. That doesn't make me left or right. It makes me rational. It isn't "railing against the other side" to make comments on the massive downsides of this war. If a Democrat was in charge and make this blunder, I would feel the exact same way. Why do you insist that making negative comments about the war is "railing against the other side"?? I'm a veteran who cares deeply about how our military is used in the world. What's your stake in this other than apparently being a keyboard warrior?
Here are a few compromises the left must make to improve governance of our beautiful country (please note that I have discussed compromises that both sides should make in a previous post):
1. Work with the remaining moderate Republicans to craft reasonable immigration reform. The far left had been too lax in the past. There should be ways to do this well in a coordinated manner. The extreme examples of both parties are troubling. Wide open borders aren't good, and killing American citizens ain't good either.
2. Improve law enforcement (numbers, policies). The left went way too far after George Floyd's death. While correct in asking for justice when bad cops murder people, they went to far in lowering the thresholds for various crimes. with major negative effects. I'm thinking property crime and the like.
3. I think the far left went too far with some of the LGBTQ stuff. There may be good ways to compromise with the right (maybe not the religious fundamentalists) that support all Americans in their freedom to love whomever they choose.
There are a few compromises right there. I don't feel the need to write a book for you, since you clearly have something against me personally, and you have not actually read some of the things I've posted on this previously. I hope this somewhat satisfies your curiosity about my thoughts on this topic? I'm not sure if you were hoping for a dialogue between the two of us on compromises? Otherwise, I'm not sure what your motive is here.
I do believe Trump is evil, and that what he's doing is evil. I do think he's part of a growing evil force in our country that must be defeated. Please understand that my comment isn't inherently "leftist" or whatever the hell you think it is. It's an anti-Trump comment. It's a fucking kakistocracy that is making our country materially worse by the day.
I'll say it one last time. You did outline several unfortunate options to get out of this war. I agree with you. There are some tough issues there. That's why we shouldn't have gone to war without allies and a plan.
I'm not sure what makes you so activated about my responses, but I don't think I could say anything that would change your opinion of me, as you seem to have cast me into some kind of stereotype in your mind. In reality, I run a fantastic organization and care deeply about the people I lead, as well as the people of my community. As a veteran, I care about this country more than you will know.
For review, I clarified my position, gave you three compromises, clarified what is important to me as a Veteran, and detailed the ad hominem attacks you made. I'm confident you'll pound out another insulting post, however.
Fryowa
Administrator
Nope, no ad hominem attacks.
What I did was point out the problem. The problem is extreme partisanship. Whether you agree or not, you are extremely left, I'm sorry. There are also people here (although not as vocal typically) who are extremely on the right.
Both sides are so angry and confounded about the others' views that they refuse to see the forest for the trees and provide realistic solutions as counterarguments. Your "Tell me if this looks like success" post does absolutely nothing but inflame. Your intent is to inflame people who disagree with you. You provided no solution of your own on how to fix it possibly, you just are angry about the far right's policies and scream about it. I can quote many others where you're screaming about "Dear Leader" and Trump and everything else but failing to provide what you think would work better. Welp...I hate to tell you this but you yelling about "Dear Leader" and Orange Man and Trump this and that, IS NO DIFFERENT than the Let's Go Brandon neanderthals.. You're no different, man. And that's just adding to the problem.
The anger and hate for the other side is what's first in your mind, not "How can we fix this with both sides?" And I'm not picking on you, the MAGA people are the same...but you're the leftist version of MAGA...can't you see that? It's no good for anyone. You post screen grabs of oil prices strictly to inflame conservatives, taking a jab at them like, "See what your orange man did?" I agree he did it. We agree on that...but how is what you're doing any different than a MAGA person taking a shot at Obama or Biden? IT ISN'T. You're more interested in the fighting and back biting than you are about the issues...at least it would seem from your rhetoric.
I applaud your compromise examples, even if they shouldn't be like pulling teeth for you to say. I know it takes some swallowing of pride to say you'd work with people you don't like. That's great and I honestly mean it. Maybe you could get people to see your side if you quit doing the Orange Man Bad spiel (regardless of what the MAGAs do...stop letting them under your skin, maybe).
As far as the SOH and Iran situation, what's your way out of that? I offered mine. I think we have to go to actual war to some amount...not just airplanes. That's a tough pill for me to swallow and admit because I won't be over there dying. But it's going to have to happen to keep world order unfortunately. Iran and China cannot be the powers because if that happens, oil will be the least of our worries.
Are you willing to go to war even if it shouldn't have happened in the first place? Or are you going to continue to just scream Orange Man Bad even though we can't undo what he did. It's water under the bridge and we have to deal with it like it or not.
HuckFinn
Well-Known Member
Not much to add, but here are a couple of thoughts. First, requiring solutions to this war from those who voice opposition is nonsense. We all recognize that Trump has entered a conflict with zero thought. So how would some third party be able to voice solutions?
Secondly, I clearly identify to the left. That happened for me at age 20 when the Viet Nam war began. My “left” was solidified by the violent racism expressed by murders of people of color and many white’s at this same period in history. Then the assassinations of JFK, Bobby, and MLK fired my very soul. Students shot dead at Kent State.
Third, I was a political moderate through several Presidents, only to be reawakened by the moral monster, DJT and the cowardice of the Repub party. When a convicted felon entered the White House, when rapists populated the presidency and members of the SC, that did it.
Secondly, I clearly identify to the left. That happened for me at age 20 when the Viet Nam war began. My “left” was solidified by the violent racism expressed by murders of people of color and many white’s at this same period in history. Then the assassinations of JFK, Bobby, and MLK fired my very soul. Students shot dead at Kent State.
Third, I was a political moderate through several Presidents, only to be reawakened by the moral monster, DJT and the cowardice of the Repub party. When a convicted felon entered the White House, when rapists populated the presidency and members of the SC, that did it.
Westernhawk
Well-Known Member
I appreciate your personal values and your clarification of those values. Mostly, I believe most of us still make decisions based on our values.
I do not have any great plans for exiting the quagmire that is the Iran war. As a veteran, and someone who has personally cared for wounded veterans and folks with terrible PTSD, I take the issue of going to war very seriously. I always find it curious when those who never served in the military, or gave any kind of public service, are the first to rally folks to go to war. I think they should enlist first. It's easy to be brave at a keyboard. Not as easy when you have to bulldoze dead bodies into a trench, or kill children. I've known many people who've done those things. It's not...good.
As you noted, those of us who were strongly against the war really shouldn't be asked for our exit strategy, as we knew it would be a mess from the beginning. Competent military leaders definitely knew this but were likely overruled by incompetent political appointees (Hegseth et al).
Going into a land war in Iran seems like a mistake to me. Especially if we are going it alone (which is another mistake). We don't need another Vietnam. Our mission is not clear (regime change, imminent nuclear threat?, oil supply?). The strategy and tactic seems to change each week.
Since this is a big mess, and knowing that my opinion on a message board means absolutely nothing, I would quickly try to assemble our allies to discuss a joint effort to end this war in concert with other western and middle east leaders. We are not going to do well in the future as a country if we go it alone.
We seem to be turning our backs on our allies, and that won't serve us well in the future (or now).
Westernhawk
Well-Known Member
For those that are interested in helping Veterans, here are two excellent organizations that will benefit from your donations:
www.woundedwarriorproject.org
www.uclahealth.org
Veterans Charity - Non Profit Organization for Veterans
Wounded Warrior Project is a nonprofit charity organization for veterans and active duty service members. Learn about our programs and supporting wounded warriors.
www.woundedwarriorproject.org
UCLA Health Veterans’ Health Care
Operation Mend heals post-9/11 military veterans and family members by providing innovative care for the physical and psychological wounds of war.
www.uclahealth.org
SwirlinLingerie
Well-Known Member
I don't think there are any good solutions in Iran right now. I don't even think the experts - very few of whom even have a role in this administration any longer - have any decent solutions.
For those advocating for a ground invasion, I think it is naive to think an occupation would be well defined or temporary. At that point, the US would be fully invested in regime change and thus nation building.
This doesn't typically go well. There would have been a ton of nuances to navigate in any attempt at political reform before our bombing campaign earlier this year - it would seem to be almost impossible after we became an occupying force post invasion.
It also seems likely that we would destabilize the region even further, radicalize even more folks across the Middle East, and lead to a consistent loss of US blood and treasure for however many years (more likely decades) that we occupied the country.
Even if at some point in time we decide that an invasion in our best bad option, this current administration and its band of sycophants absolutely cannot be trusted with that decision or to carry out the military action. Hegseth has proven to be woefully unqualified for the position, and this administration has either purged (or lost to resignation) many of our best and brightest when it comes to the military and geopolitical issues. That is not a partisan opinion. This administration has also blatantly lied from the start of the war until today. Enough.
For those advocating for a ground invasion, I think it is naive to think an occupation would be well defined or temporary. At that point, the US would be fully invested in regime change and thus nation building.
This doesn't typically go well. There would have been a ton of nuances to navigate in any attempt at political reform before our bombing campaign earlier this year - it would seem to be almost impossible after we became an occupying force post invasion.
It also seems likely that we would destabilize the region even further, radicalize even more folks across the Middle East, and lead to a consistent loss of US blood and treasure for however many years (more likely decades) that we occupied the country.
Even if at some point in time we decide that an invasion in our best bad option, this current administration and its band of sycophants absolutely cannot be trusted with that decision or to carry out the military action. Hegseth has proven to be woefully unqualified for the position, and this administration has either purged (or lost to resignation) many of our best and brightest when it comes to the military and geopolitical issues. That is not a partisan opinion. This administration has also blatantly lied from the start of the war until today. Enough.
Fryowa
Administrator
I'm highly opposed to this war, but I also don't think there's a non-military way out of it. That's what irks me more than the whole situation. Trump got played by Bennie and the Jets and now the whole country is gonna have to pay for it. US servicepeople are going to get killed over it.
We can't just say, "We're outta here..." when the next president gets elected. That won't do anything to help the SOH and oil price situation, and it means Iran won. And if Iran "wins," it's not big enough to be a big dog and China will move swiftly right into the world driver's seat that the US has occupied for the last 100+ years. That can't happen for too many reasons to list here.
But...the US can't win this thing by air power alone. The strait is too big and all it takes is a few mines or merely the threat of missiles to keep it shut down. It's whack-a-mole that the US can't win by air.
To do this we have to take Kharg, take out all Iranian military installations, and force a regime change. None of that can be done without US service people on the ground inside Iranian borders. Israel certainly won't go in on the ground to do it, that's why the first phone call BN made was to Trump.
The situation in Saudi Arabia has already shown that piping oil out of the region instead of the strait isn't feasible because all it takes is one tiny little attack from a ragtag proxy to shut the pipelines down. And once you fix that one the next one happens two weeks later, and so on.
We can't convert our refining capacity to heavy crude because that process would take 20 years, billions if not trillions of dollars, and US corporations aren't going to do that.
Trump has singlehandedly put the US between a rock, a hard place, a brick wall, and a 3' thick steel vault door. The only way to get out of it is going to involve killing a lot of people, spending billions on ammunition/missiles/logistics, and as I said, losing American servicepeople.
I also don't think Congress will let that happen...so we better buckle up for long-term $5-6 plus gasoline and higher cost of everything while railroads and trucking companies are paying $8-9 for diesel fuel.
Fryowa
Administrator
I'm not advocating for an invasion, I think it would be horrible.
I'm saying that's the only way to fix the problem. And the problem isn't just oil prices. The US cannot afford to walk away the loser. There's way more at stake here than just embarrassment. It will completely flip the world order on its head, and not in a good way. It will show China and the fundamentalist Muslim/Jewish states that the US is a paper tiger and they'll fill the vacuum post haste. We aren't a paper tiger, but in order to hit the reset button we would have to do something painful to ourselves and the world...escalate the war and invade. As you said, that's not a quick-a-minute thing. We could get the takeover done in a couple weeks easily, but then what do you do? You can't just leave as we've seen in Iraq. Doesn't work.
That's what's so frustrating. This is one of those uncommon situations where there is no good option A, B, C, D, E, or F. What makes it worse is it didn't have to happen.
Yes these fuel prices are bad when we want to go on vacation...but the long-term impacts are going to be miles worse. This country is built around movement. Movement of goods, services, and people. When that becomes next to impossible this country is in for a dark, dark time. Maybe this is the downfall of a great nation, I don't know. I do know that no great civilization in recorded history has lasted more than 2-3 hundred years...Maybe it's hubris that we think this one is somehow immune to it.
It's ironic/sad/surreal, though, that it only took electing the one wrong guy and the complicity of about two dozen others to make it happen in a nation of 350,000,000 people.
Fryowa
Administrator
Are you an American who loves his country?
If so, (and I'm not talking jingoistic Toby Keith-ism either...I'm talking true love for your country), should you not be advocating for doing something? Being against the war aside, does it help to fold your arms and sit back on the sidelines doing nothing but heckling? Just because this is a mess doesn't mean we all aren't left cleaning it up.
If not, you're no different than a Let's Go Brandon shouting MAGA-ite. That's what they do...
BuiltLikeWilt
Well-Known Member
Makes you yearn for the good ole days of W.
