White House reviews military plans against Iran - New York Times

[webfact]

White House reviews military plans against Iran - New York Times

 

FILE PHOTO: A staff member removes the Iranian flag from the stage after a group picture with foreign ministers and representatives of the U.S., Iran, China, Russia, Britain, Germany, France and the European Union during Iran nuclear talks at the Vienna International Center in Vienna, Austria, July 14, 2015. REUTERS/Carlos Barria/File Photo

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The top U.S. defence official has presented an updated military plan to President Donald Trump's administration that envisions sending up to 120,000 troops to the Middle East should Iran attack American forces or accelerate work on nuclear weapons, the New York Times reported on Monday.

 

Citing unnamed administration officials, the Times said Acting Defence Secretary Patrick Shanahan presented the plan at a meeting of Trump's top security aides on Thursday.

 

Reuters could not immediately confirm the report.

 

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The Pentagon declined to comment.

 

Tensions between Iran and the United States have intensified since Trump pulled out of a 2015 international deal to curb Iran's nuclear activities and imposed increasingly strict sanctions on Tehran.

 

Trump wants to force Tehran to agree to a broader arms control accord and has sent an aircraft carrier and B-52 bombers to the Gulf in a show of force against what U.S. officials have said are threats to U.S. troops in the region.

 

Iran has said the U.S. is engaging in "psychological warfare," called the U.S. military presence "a target" rather than a threat and said it will not allow its oil exports to be halted.

 

The Times said among those attending the Thursday meeting were Trump's national security adviser John Bolton, CIA Director Gina Haspel, Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Joseph Dunford.

 

Several plans were detailed, the Times said, and "the uppermost option called for deploying 120,000 troops, which would take weeks or months to complete."

 

(Reporting by Mohammad Zargham and Eric Beech; Editing by Michael Perry)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2019-05-14

Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking Thailand news and visa info

[Chomper Higgot]

Now would be a good time to have a Secretary of Defense.

 

A fully staffed State Department might be useful and transcripts of Trump’s meetings and calls with foreign leaders (one in particular) would be nice to have.

[mtls2005]

Paging Colin Powell, please pick up the white WMD courtesy phone.

 

Wag the Dog.

 

John Bolton is in heaven.

 

I'm sure Don Jr. and Eric will enlist.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 14, 2019 by mtls2005

[Tug]

Talk about a recipe for disaster 

[ezzra]

This thing with the Iranians have been going on well before Trump time, Obama, the skilled orator of talk beautifly but do nothing, did sign on adeal that left Iran with some sort of carte blanche to pretty much do what they like as long as nobody sees and knows, Iran, boyoud with what N. Korea is game playing with the rest of the world, would have very much like to do the same, alas...not with Trump they will not, and if it has to comes to a blowes, so be it, it will anyway in not to long distance,

[mtls2005]

5 minutes ago, ezzra said:

This thing with the Iranians have been going on well before Trump time

 

Yeah, at least since 1953 when we (U.S./CIA) overthrew the democratically elected government of Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh, and installed the Shah.

 

Ah, the good old days.

 

 

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

I wonder if this ‘military plan’ has an estimate of how many refugees will be created and where they might end up fleeing to?

[ezzra]

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I wonder if this ‘military plan’ has an estimate of how many refugees will be created and where they might end up fleeing to?

If Assad and his good buddy Putin created over one million regugges, not to mention hundred of thousands of casualties, most have ended in the bosoms of Frau Merkel and the rest of Europe, but if Europe doesn't want any of those anymore, convince Iran to play nice with Trump...

[bristolboy]

17 minutes ago, ezzra said:

If Assad and his good buddy Putin created over one million regugges, not to mention hundred of thousands of casualties, most have ended in the bosoms of Frau Merkel and the rest of Europe, but if Europe doesn't want any of those anymore, convince Iran to play nice with Trump...

Actually, which nation was it that fractured Iraq and led to all this instability?

[rabas]

2 hours ago, bristolboy said:

Actually, which nation was it that fractured Iraq and led to all this instability?

Saddam, Sunni/Shia + Chemicals.

[spidermike007]

The best military plan against Iran is no plan. This has nothing to do with sanctions or nuclear capabilities. This has everything to do with regime change and embodies the same empty headed planning the US had with Iraq and Afghanistan and the same level of ignorance, hubris, arrogance, idiocy and lack of vision. Blindfold Bolton was involved in both. He is one of the world's most dangerous men. He is a disease. Pompeo is too ignorant to know any better. Iran could end up being a greater nemesis than Vietnam. The destruction they could and would wreak on American soil could be devastating and could cripple the US economy. Their cyber capabilities alone should give absolute idiots like Bolton pause, much less their willingness to invest billions on terrorism to put down America. It has historic disaster written all over it. 

 

And can Trump really afford to wage battle against a formidable adversary like Iran, while waging economic  battle against China? Is this guy delusional? Or just more incompetent and hateful than we feared?

[OneMoreFarang]

It's time that the rest of the world tells Trump and his "team" that he should relax and take a break.

Maybe he should spend the rest of his presidency playing golf to avoid any more trouble.

 

It's crazy that one maniac is able to drag the whole world down like that. And Trump supporters let him.

 

It's time to boycott the USA is Trump goes on with this aggression.

[OneMoreFarang]

So Trump does not like when other countries (aspire to) have nuclear weapons like the USA, correct?

That's why he wants to fight Iran, correct?

So what about Israel? They have nuclear weapons, all undeclared, since decades?

Will Trump treat them in the same way like the Iraqis?

No more questions.

[bristolboy]

5 hours ago, ezzra said:

This thing with the Iranians have been going on well before Trump time, Obama, the skilled orator of talk beautifly but do nothing, did sign on adeal that left Iran with some sort of carte blanche to pretty much do what they like as long as nobody sees and knows, Iran, boyoud with what N. Korea is game playing with the rest of the world, would have very much like to do the same, alas...not with Trump they will not, and if it has to comes to a blowes, so be it, it will anyway in not to long distance,

Nonsense. Even Israeli intelligence officials confirmed that the plan was working.

[kamahele]

5 hours ago, ezzra said:

This thing with the Iranians have been going on well before Trump time, Obama, the skilled orator of talk beautifly but do nothing, did sign on adeal that left Iran with some sort of carte blanche to pretty much do what they like as long as nobody sees and knows, Iran, boyoud with what N. Korea is game playing with the rest of the world, would have very much like to do the same, alas...not with Trump they will not, and if it has to comes to a blowes, so be it, it will anyway in not to long distance,

You obviously don't know anything about the treaty between the EU nations, Iran, Russia and the USA. 

[tandor]

1 hour ago, OneMoreFarang said:

It's time that the rest of the world tells Trump and his "team" that he should relax and take a break.

Maybe he should spend the rest of his presidency playing golf to avoid any more trouble.

 

It's crazy that one maniac is able to drag the whole world down like that. And Trump supporters let him.

 

It's time to boycott the USA is Trump goes on with this aggression.

...surely not every US president needs to have a war under his belt before he finishes his term in office.

[maxx58]

Nothing scarier than a draft dodging, chicken hawk as commander in chief!

You would think that the American people would have learned after that other fake tough guy, Bush.

 

[The Alien]

Is it a tradition for GOP government to create war whenever they ruled the country?

[from the home of CC]

wouldn't surprise me in the least if it was discovered that Saudi engineered the 'sabotage' on their vessels to affect American policy decisions..

[joecoolfrog]

9 hours ago, ezzra said:

This thing with the Iranians have been going on well before Trump time, Obama, the skilled orator of talk beautifly but do nothing, did sign on adeal that left Iran with some sort of carte blanche to pretty much do what they like as long as nobody sees and knows, Iran, boyoud with what N. Korea is game playing with the rest of the world, would have very much like to do the same, alas...not with Trump they will not, and if it has to comes to a blowes, so be it, it will anyway in not to long distance,

Who to believe , Trump and the Israeli hawks or pretty much the rest of the world , tough one !

[joecoolfrog]

9 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I wonder if this ‘military plan’ has an estimate of how many refugees will be created and where they might end up fleeing to?

No problem , in Trump land, wars , trade or otherwise , are easy to win.

Edited May 14, 2019 by joecoolfrog

[joecoolfrog]

4 hours ago, rabas said:

Saddam, Sunni/Shia + Chemicals.

Given that you apparently dont know what a nation is , we can safely ignore your gibberish.

[Morch]

9 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I wonder if this ‘military plan’ has an estimate of how many refugees will be created and where they might end up fleeing to?

 

I'm pretty sure it does. Even if such things weren't an item in the past, they are nowadays. The more interesting questions would be how this figures in the overall US strategy (to the extent that such exists, when discussing the present administration). Obviously, the prospect of a second wave of refugees is one which can cause much worry among European and Middle East governments. As mentioned in another post, it might represent some leverage - but personally, I see the Trump administration as lacking in the subtlety department, much needed to make good use of such (and then there was this post about State Department being depleted...).

 

On a general note, posters seem to be having some difficulties differentiating between political issues and military ones. The WH makes policy, the armed forces provide answers as needed. It would be unthinkable (well, maybe not with this administration?) for the USA to be in an evolving conflict situation and reviews of plans not take place. That said, got to wonder what was the short-version they showed Trump.

 

 

[Morch]

5 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

The best military plan against Iran is no plan. This has nothing to do with sanctions or nuclear capabilities. This has everything to do with regime change and embodies the same empty headed planning the US had with Iraq and Afghanistan and the same level of ignorance, hubris, arrogance, idiocy and lack of vision. Blindfold Bolton was involved in both. He is one of the world's most dangerous men. He is a disease. Pompeo is too ignorant to know any better. Iran could end up being a greater nemesis than Vietnam. The destruction they could and would wreak on American soil could be devastating and could cripple the US economy. Their cyber capabilities alone should give absolute idiots like Bolton pause, much less their willingness to invest billions on terrorism to put down America. It has historic disaster written all over it. 

 

And can Trump really afford to wage battle against a formidable adversary like Iran, while waging economic  battle against China? Is this guy delusional? Or just more incompetent and hateful than we feared?

 

Again with the scaremongering. To date, Iran didn't exhibit much by way of the capabilities alleged in the rant above. The hype is rather similar to talk prior to the Iraq Wars (I'm reminded of that Bill Hicks bit about the Republican Guard...worth looking up).

 

The issue is not with military plans against Iran. And it is not true that the best plan is "no plan". The issue is more to do with goals defined. If talking about regime change, agreed - didn't work out well elsewhere and no reason to expect otherwise. If a more limited goal - say, taking out ballistic and nuclear related targets - maybe more feasible (but similarly, needs to have the next, diplomatic step, in the ready). The worst would be getting into a military conflict situation with no plan whatsoever, and no predefined goals.

 

As for "formidable" - the USA's military might is built to address direct threats from the likes of Russia or China. Iran isn't quite on that level.

[heybruce]

Having military options in place in the event of Iran attacking US forces is sensible.  The fear is that Trump will act without thinking things through, which would be a disaster.

 

The US could defeat Iran's military and topple its government, but could not pacify the population or replace the government.  The result would be many times worse than Iraq.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

It's one thing when a nation has to go to war to protect its core national interests, protect its homeland, etc etc...

 

It's an entirely different, and despicable thing, when a nation deliberately seeks out a politically motivated war that's not necessary to protect any of its core interests, putting its citizen soldiers lives needlessly in jeopardy.

 

All Trump and Co. have done with their current policies on Iran is to give added power and authority to the fundamentalist hard-liners there, and marginalized the moderates who are the only hope of leading the country away from remaining a fundamentalist haven.

 

Edited May 14, 2019 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[Morch]

5 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

It's time that the rest of the world tells Trump and his "team" that he should relax and take a break.

Maybe he should spend the rest of his presidency playing golf to avoid any more trouble.

 

It's crazy that one maniac is able to drag the whole world down like that. And Trump supporters let him.

 

It's time to boycott the USA is Trump goes on with this aggression.

 

It's high time some posters realize that there is no "rest of the world", at least not in any effective manner relating to their fantasies. Imaginary alliances don't count.

 

Trump is criticized (and rightly so) for the contempt he shows toward international cooperation (or even cooperating with allies). The thing is that criticism aside, the USA is still "big" enough on many fronts, to go at it solo, or to coerce/influence grudging compliance/non-interference from others. And while in the long term this might very well erode the USA's standing, there's presently little by way of counterbalance on offer. So from a ego-driven, relatively short-term leader's point of view - someone else's problem down the line, but works in the now.

 

I get it some feel the need to rant or vent, but sheesh....boycott the USA? Get real.

 

 

 

 

[Scott]

Off-topic, conspiracy post reported and removed.

 

[candide]

A related concern is that, once Iran neutralized, the door is open to Saudi influence expansion with the benediction of the Trump administration.

I don't see the possibility of an increase of the hold of Salafist organisations in this region as positive scenario.

[Chomper Higgot]

And the winner is:

 

https://thehill.com/opinion/national-security/442843-russia-is-the-real-winner-in-any-us-iran-conflict

 

As I said earlier, right now transcripts of Trump’s conversations with a particular world leader would be a good thing to have to hand.