Trump says he halted U.S. strike on Iran over possible casualties

[rabas]

9 hours ago, bristolboy said:

"Yes deals get broken, such as life,"

You might it sound like it's the weather or some other natural phenomenon. If deals get broken, it's because people break them. In this case it's Trump. He's been doing it all his life. So what's the point in negotiating with someone who has no compunctions about breaking his word?

Most deals that get broken were flawed to begin with. Who break's deals that benefit both parties?

[stevenl]

31 minutes ago, rabas said:

Most deals that get broken were flawed to begin with. Who break's deals that benefit both parties?

Trump.

[Toosetinmyways]

Be careful Donny boy on your plan to obliterate Iran as they have the largest concentration of Jews in the middle east outside Israel. Won't look good on your son-in-law's Nobel peace plan resume.

[heybruce]

5 hours ago, bristolboy said:

"Trump also thanked Iran for the “wise” decision not to shoot down an American military plane with a crew of 38 aboard. Trump said Iran had a manned plane “in their sights” but instead hit the remotely-piloted surveillance plane, “and that’s something we really appreciate.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/irans-foreign-minister-tweets-images-he-saysleaves-no-doubt-us-drone-was-over-iranian-airspace/2019/06/22/38f8ee08-94f8-11e9-956a-88c291ab5c38_story.html?utm_term=.fa4110dfa163

 

Trump is actually thanking the Iranians for targeting the drone! This has got to be a first for an American President. Maybe Trump can turn tail and retreat? 

Trump fans love the fact that he isn't politically correct.  What could be more politically incorrect than thanking Iran for "only" shooting down a $120 million drone?

 

In my opinion, politically correct means thinking before speaking and trying to avoid offense.  I have no problem with that.  However Trump definitely doesn't think before he speaks and enjoys offending people.  I don't see that as a positive, but clearly many people do.

[Morch]

 

@bristolboy

 

So, two standard issue going on about Trump this, that and the other. Still not much of an answer as to Iran's realistic options.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[bristolboy]

43 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

@bristolboy

 

So, two standard issue going on about Trump this, that and the other. Still not much of an answer as to Iran's realistic options.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Really?  Trump is in a bind. Iran could make it even more difficult for him to get reelected. Certainly consistency has never been a constraint for Trump. He could agree to some face-saving measure that would relax the economic sanctions. It seems to me he is desperate for this to come to an end. To the point where he actually praised the Iranians for shooting down a drone instead of a planeload of Americans.

[mfd101]

On 6/22/2019 at 6:43 AM, ezzra said:

Trump is playing with the Iranians just like a cat plays with a mouse before the final act, admittedly, no one wants war, least of all Iran, but Iran being Iran with it's well known passion for rhetorics and death and destructions proclamation to anyone whom they don't like, and Trump being Trump, he will hold on as long as he can before he will have to strike back, casualties or not, just to maintain and show who's boss here...

Mmmm, not entirely clear who's the cat & who the mouse.

[bristolboy]

6 minutes ago, mfd101 said:

Mmmm, not entirely clear who's the cat & who the mouse.

My point exactly but you said it better.

[owl sees all]

1 minute ago, bristolboy said:

Really?  Trump is in a bind. Iran could make it even more difficult for him to get reelected. Certainly consistency has never been a constraint for Trump. He could agree to some face-saving measure that would relax the economic sanctions. It seems to me he is desperate for this to come to an end. To the point where he actually praised the Iranians for shooting down a drone instead of a planeload of Americans.

USA could unleash hell in Iran and be triumphant in the short term. This would satisfy the hawks that he has surrounded himself with. But, after just a short while (days), the world would start to see the changes. Oil would double (or more) in price and their would be retaliation attacks against anything US.

 

The Don is aware of this, and although he has different people whispering in his ear, he is not a stupid man. Perhaps his business brain kicked in and overwhelmed the Boltons, Abrahams, Pompeoes and others that would love to see Iran obliterated.

 

This common sense approach, is why he is much loved by Americans, and will comfortably get a second term in office.

[bristolboy]

Just now, owl sees all said:

USA could unleash hell in Iran and be triumphant in the short term. This would satisfy the hawks that he has surrounded himself with. But, after just a short while (days), the world would start to see the changes. Oil would double (or more) in price and their would be retaliation attacks against anything US.

 

The Don is aware of this, and although he has different people whispering in his ear, he is not a stupid man. Perhaps his business brain kicked in and overwhelmed the Boltons, Abrahams, Pompeoes and others that would love to see Iran obliterated.

 

This common sense approach, is why he is much loved by Americans, and will comfortably get a second term in office.

As Trump's generals pointed out, unleashing hell on Iran most likely would also unleash it on US troops stationed in Iraq.

As for Trump being much loved...do you understand that he is also much not loved? As the midterm elections showed.

[owl sees all]

2 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

As Trump's generals pointed out, unleashing hell on Iran most likely would also unleash it on US troops stationed in Iraq.

As for Trump being much loved...do you understand that he is also much not loved? As the midterm elections showed.

Good reason for getting the US troops out of Iraq then. Iran is surrounded by more than 50 US bases. The Don need a cool head on his shoulders. He wouldn't want to do anything that would endanger the petro-dollar or jeopardize his second term or his pending Nobel Peace award.

[Morch]

37 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Really?  Trump is in a bind. Iran could make it even more difficult for him to get reelected. Certainly consistency has never been a constraint for Trump. He could agree to some face-saving measure that would relax the economic sanctions. It seems to me he is desperate for this to come to an end. To the point where he actually praised the Iranians for shooting down a drone instead of a planeload of Americans.

 

Yes, really. As in you're still going on about Trump, while my post and question were dealing with Iran's side of the equation.

[Sujo]

Iran dont have to do anything. Trump will make all the moves. 

 

Trump will make the situation as bad as it can be, to the brink of war. Then he will get a very small concession from Iran. Then he will brazenly claim that he alone stopped a war and tell everyone how great he is.

 

Thats what he does. He takes a situation that is working. He makes it much worse. He then gets a little back and claims a success.

[canuckamuck]

 This thread would be a better discussion if we could forego all the 'orange man bad' repetitions and focus on the real issue, which is the American government ramping up to war and manufacturing consent. Trump may color the commentary with his oddball statements, but you're fooling yourselves if you think the military decisions are his to make. 

Right now they are simply working on the narrative and a pretext for war. America is pretending to be cautious and showing restraint.  They got lots of time to light the fires and kick the tires. Remember how long they waited to unleash 'shock and awe'?

[JHolmesJr]

17 hours ago, xylophone said:

So this many times bankrupted businessman is trying to focus on economic prosperity by imposing tariffs on imports which will affect the manufacturers and the end-users in the USA.

 

And his trade war with China is impacting the poor US farmers quite markedly, and for all of the bluster and threats in relation to the trade deal with Canada, all he got was a minor alteration and still did not get full access to Canada's dairy market, which is what he wanted.

 

I'm afraid this man has no brain and therefore doesn't understand the nuances as regards negotiating and quite what this plonker is doing to the country and the world is beyond a joke.

 

The previous agreement with Iran was working, but Trump had to dismantle it because it was put in place by somebody he seems to hate, so now he wonders why the current situation exists – – it is of his making only.

 

I think we can all agree that many elements of trade with China are unfair to the US.

When a system like the one in existence is allowed to run for decades, it hardens and sets, like

concrete. So yes, there will be some disruption if an attempt is made to correct it. 

 

I was faced with a situation that involved paying for some of his tariffs recently. I just chose

something that didn't have any tariffs on it. 

[bristolboy]

23 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Yes, really. As in you're still going on about Trump, while my post and question were dealing with Iran's side of the equation.

I think bookkeeping is a better metaphor than "equation": Trump's minuses are Iran's pluses. You don't think Iran is factoring those in? One of those pluses being the electoral problems that an escalation would bring to Trump. All you've focused on are the disadvantages to Iran in the present situation. That's rather one-sided. I advise you to read an excellent article from the Washington Examiner about the election perils this venture poses for Trump:

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/white-house/america-first-allies-say-trump-saved-presidency-from-john-bolton-by-scrapping-iran-strike

There is also an excellent general discussion of the pickle Trump finds himself in here:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/22/world/middleeast/trump-iran.html

And no, I don't claim it makes any references to the upcoming election. 

 

[Thakkar]

 

Edited June 23, 2019 by Thakkar

[simple1]

46 minutes ago, Thakkar said:

 

It's difficult to accurately decipher trump's commentary. Perhaps equally valid interpretation is trump signalling open to talks, as he has repeatedly claimed. However, it does seem that trump's style is to demand people swallow their pride before progress can be made which could be a roadblock.

Edited June 23, 2019 by simple1

[jaideeguy]

Maybe he realized in a brief moment of clarity that we don't need and can't afford another endless war or maybe he was thinking that WE won't stand for another one especially with the election so close.  This event is far from over................let's see what happens next week.

[OtinPattaya]

On 6/21/2019 at 4:16 PM, Somtamnication said:

That is impossible. All military options and casualties, both in war zones and collateral, are discussed, reviewed and prepared for presidential briefings. He did not listen to them.

 

Now, one more reason to not add the USA as a world partner; you cannot believe them anymore!

You cannot believe the USA "as a world partner." Where are you coming from, mate, that you, or your country, can be "believed"? You don't say. Easy for you to criticize a country when you won't even acknowledge your own. 

[zydeco]

29 minutes ago, jaideeguy said:

Maybe he realized in a brief moment of clarity that we don't need and can't afford another endless war or maybe he was thinking that WE won't stand for another one especially with the election so close.  This event is far from over................let's see what happens next week.

Could be an example of a Trumpian 6D chess move. He'll attack Iran AND start the ICE deportations at the same time. Nobody will know which one to criticize. Instant paralysis. Just like Trump's brain.

[OtinPattaya]

4 hours ago, bristolboy said:

Really?  Trump is in a bind. Iran could make it even more difficult for him to get reelected. Certainly consistency has never been a constraint for Trump. He could agree to some face-saving measure that would relax the economic sanctions. It seems to me he is desperate for this to come to an end. To the point where he actually praised the Iranians for shooting down a drone instead of a planeload of Americans.

If you think Trump is "desperate" with the Chinese or the Iranians, wait till you elect a democrat. Then you will truly see what real desperation is. We can always try to bribe the Iranians with another 400 million of US tax payer dollars, as Obama did. But that didn't work out too well. 

Edited June 23, 2019 by OtinPattaya

[bristolboy]

Just now, OtinPattaya said:

If you think Trump is "desperate" with the Chinese or the Iranians, wait till you elect a democrat. Then you will truly see what real desperation is. We can always try to bride the Iranians with another 400 million of US tax payer dollars. 

If a democrat had won in 2016 the nuclear agreement would still be in effect and there wouldn't be this current mess. If Trump hadn't decided to threaten the EU and Japan with tariffs, odds are he'd be getting a lot more support now. Ya think they want to do anything that might give them 4 more years of Trump?

[OtinPattaya]

4 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

If a democrat had won in 2016 the nuclear agreement would still be in effect and there wouldn't be this current mess. If Trump hadn't decided to threaten the EU and Japan with tariffs, odds are he'd be getting a lot more support now. Ya think they want to do anything that might give them 4 more years of Trump?

That's a new one. Trump is now threatening Japan. Why not Zimbabwe? 

Edited June 23, 2019 by OtinPattaya

[bristolboy]

Just now, OtinPattaya said:

That's a new one. Trump is now threatening Japan. Why not Zimbabwe? 

Are you claiming he isn't threatening Japan with more tariffs? He has already imposed them on Japanese steel. Where do you, or, rather, where don't you get your news from?

Edited June 23, 2019 by bristolboy

[OtinPattaya]

I think the sad truth is that, no matter how you Brits and euros, demonize Trump and America, the truth is that none of you are going to do anything with the Chinese any more than you did with the Nazis. You're going to sit on the sidelines, twiddling your thumbs, in blissful neutrality, and political correctness, and vent your vitriol on the big kid on the block. 

[stevenl]

22 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

If a democrat had won in 2016 the nuclear agreement would still be in effect and there wouldn't be this current mess. If Trump hadn't decided to threaten the EU and Japan with tariffs, odds are he'd be getting a lot more support now. Ya think they want to do anything that might give them 4 more years of Trump?

Plus us didn't pay Iran anything, but Iran's own money was returned.

[OtinPattaya]

8 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Plus us didn't pay Iran anything, but Iran's own money was returned.

I don't know how many millions of US tax payer dollars were paid by Obama in order to placate Iran--and it didn't work. Billions of dollars under Obama? Why aren't the democrats in 2020 talking about this, about Obama's slavish billion-dollar bride to Iran?

Edited June 23, 2019 by OtinPattaya

[stevenl]

9 minutes ago, OtinPattaya said:

I don't know how many millions of US tax payer dollars were paid by Obama in order to placate Iran--and it didn't work. Billions of dollars under Obama? Why aren't the democrats in 2020 talking about this, about Obama's slavish billion-dollar bride to Iran?

Agree with you, you don't know how much because you clearly don't know what you're talking about.

[OtinPattaya]

6 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Agree with you, you don't know how much because you clearly don't know what you're talking about.

Well, nor do you, mate. This is global politics, global economics, The fact is none of us know what we're talking about. But we're doing the best we can. 

Edited June 23, 2019 by OtinPattaya