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

[bristolboy]

Just now, simple1 said:

Better try another tact. trump has just warned Iran of 'obliteration'

Compassionate obliteration.

[xylophone]

5 minutes ago, JHolmesJr said:

Trump is not a warmonger like the Cheney, Rumsfeld, Powell, Rice cabal.

 

He's a businessman so his focus is on economic prosperity.

 

Democrats must be the most confused people right now.

 

First they say he'll get us into a war with Iran, now they seem disappointed that

he showed restraint. He's creating them on every front and they don't know how to deal

with him. #lovinit

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.

[RJRS1301]

10 hours ago, Tug said:

More likely a moment of clarity realizing how he and he alone would have been responsible for starting another war in the Middle East imo I think he might be starting to realize how out of hand things have become under his administration 

No that would take some insight from him, something which he is incapable of.

 

[Sujo]

What is scary is that he only asks how many people may be killed only 10 minutes before they bomb.  Surely he would have known that before he gave the order to bomb.

 

I think he just got owned by Iran. 

 

He tells Iran thru Oman that he has ordered a bombing. But says he wants to talk. Iran says no talk. Trump scurries back into his cave.

[observer90210]

10 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

He ordered those attacks. And he obviously didn't think about or care to ask how many people will possibly die when he ordered it.

And as an afterthought possible dead people came to his mind - long after he ordered the attack and possible start of the big war.

And you praise him for that? No more questions.

As I said in my previous post, it takes many fools to start a war, but it takes just one person with balls to STOP it and that's what I think he did.

 

Obviously neither of us were in the Oval Office or the Crisis Room when it all happened so all this leads to individual opinions that every person can have, depending on one's own interpretation what we humbly here in the news.         No offence and have a nice week end.

[moskito]

until NOW i said, OK no one must love Trump but he is the first president in 80 years without an active war...thats why the weapons industry,  Killary and her folks badmouthing him and hate him.  But NOW he seems to be just the retard they say!
:
The USAmericans need a WAR IN THEIR OWN F.....G Homeland to make them see what they  Export since 100 years to other Nations for their lies of Democracy. 
IF Trump starts a War in IRAN - ALL OF US will have something to do with it and i dont belive the Russians AND BIG FAT CHINA will just look and chill this time....and I am on the CHINESE and Russian side... Kick the US Warmongers home and let them take care, finally of their own country....they are having HUGE problems in the USA, thats the only reason they need  a war

[Thakkar]

Whatever you do, DON’T google “cocked and loaded”

 

...unless you enjoy gay porn, in which case, knock yourself out, as it were.

[griffon2011]

22 minutes ago, Sujo said:

What is scary is that he only asks how many people may be killed only 10 minutes before they bomb.  Surely he would have known that before he gave the order to bomb.

 

I think he just got owned by Iran. 

 

He tells Iran thru Oman that he has ordered a bombing. But says he wants to talk. Iran says no talk. Trump scurries back into his cave.

You are correct Trump was owned by Iran.  Read the article "Iran and Trump on the Edge of the Abyss" by Elijah J Magnier.   According to Magnier Iran's main objective in case of war is to completely stop the flow of oil from the Middle East to the rest of the world by hitting the source of oil (not tankers) in every country in the ME.  Also, Iranian allies all over the ME are on the highest level of alert and will attack predesignated targets simultaneously if the war starts. This scenario appears to be more realistic than the BS spouted by the US media.  

[Thakkar]

11 hours ago, rooster59 said:

Iranian officials told Reuters on Friday that Tehran had received a message from Trump warning that a U.S. attack on Iran was imminent but that he was against war and wanted to talk.

They rebuffed him, and his bluff failed.

 

The bluffoon with his junk-jitsu brinkmansh!t.

 

Don’t get me wrong. I’m glad he didn’t attack. But he shouldn’t have made the threat in the first place. In fact, he shouldn’t have pulled out of the nuclear deal in the first place.

[Thakkar]

Trump’s initial tweets suggested that he had canceled his own order: “10 minutes before the strike I stopped it,” he said. But in an interview with NBC’s Chuck Todd for “Meet the Press,” the president said he hadn’t given final approval to any strikes and that no planes were in the air.

“Nothing was green lighted until the very end because things change,” Trump said in the interview.

In his Twitter posts Friday morning, Trump wrote that “sanctions are biting & more added last night.” However, the Treasury Department did not add any new sanctions against Iran on Thursday night.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/trump-ordered-attack-on-iran-for-downing-drone-then-called-it-off/2019/06/21/24f4994e-93f3-11e9-aadb-74e6b2b46f6a_story.html?noredirect=on

 

So, the truth is, he was “uncocked and unloaded” 

Edited June 22, 2019 by Thakkar

[RJRS1301]

5 minutes ago, Thakkar said:

They rebuffed him, and his bluff failed.

 

The bluffoon with his junk-jitsu brinkmansh!t.

 

Don’t get me wrong. I’m glad he didn’t attack. But he shouldn’t have made the threat in the first place. In fact, he shouldn’t have pulled out of the nuclear deal in the first place.

His posturing and bullying tactics will not serve him well, he is not working with construction companies or golfers here.

[Enoon]

37 minutes ago, observer90210 said:

As I said in my previous post, it takes many fools to start a war, but it takes just one person with balls to STOP it and that's what I think he did.

 

Obviously neither of us were in the Oval Office or the Crisis Room when it all happened so all this leads to individual opinions that every person can have, depending on one's own interpretation what we humbly here in the news.         No offence and have a nice week end.

 

It would have been "disproportionate response".

 

That's the problem with UAVs being used "provocatively".......no aircrew to risk, but no dead aircrew to "avenge".

 

So any plan put forward to bomb anything with humans in the vicinity was/is going nowhere.

 

There was no plan to halt.

 

Trump is just trying to cover his impotence with a fig leaf of "compassion".

 

That's not to say that some unmanned installation isn't going to suffer his petty spite. 

 

Or perhaps he'll send a manned reconnaissance flight next?

 

 

 

 

Edited June 22, 2019 by Enoon

[moskito]

3 minutes ago, Thakkar said:

Trump’s initial tweets suggested that he had canceled his own order: “10 minutes before the strike I stopped it,” he said.

FACT is if Putin not have saved his ass a year ago when this big mouth said he will attack Russian Battleships, we would have a war already (over)
Putin let him bomb an empty Airport for Trump not loosing his face totally.
I doubt he will do this a second or third time

[observer90210]

1 minute ago, Enoon said:

 

It would have been disproportionate response.

 

That's the problem with UAVs being used "provocatively".......no aircrew to risk, but no dead aircrew to "avenge".

 

So any plan put forward to bomb anything with humans in the vicinity was/is going nowhere.

 

There was no plan to halt.

 

Trump is just trying to cover his impotence with a fig leaf of "compassion".

 

That's not to say that some unmanned installation isn't going to suffer his petty spite. 

 

Or perhaps he'll send a manned reconnaissance flight next?

 

 

 

 

The problem in politics is that there are fools and madmen on all sides, no matter in which country.

 

One could just hope,  that despite the big bucks it generates and will make for many.... that a major war does not ignite between the two belligerents in this issue, because as always it is the commoners who will suffer the colateral damages on both sides.

[Thakkar]

1 hour ago, RJRS1301 said:

His posturing and bullying tactics will not serve him well, he is not working with construction companies or golfers here.

 

“he is not working with construction companies or golfers here.”

 

Or—let’s be honest—teenage beauty pageant hopefuls.

[Morch]

6 hours ago, stevenl said:

Of course Iran is not willing to talk. There was an agreement Iran adhered to, but it was suddenly and one-sided cancelled. Why would they go back to the negotiating table when there already is a very workable agreement.

 

Don't know about the 'hardly a positive influence in the region', guess that depends on your point of view. Iran is doing the same as Israel and SA are doing: trying to expend their sphere of influence. So no surprise they meet eachother on occasion. Doesn't make one better than the other.

 

Other than saying it's not fair - what, in your opinion, are Iran's realistic options? If negotiations are rejected, and war is not a viable path, that is.

 

You and Iran may insist on the USA returning to the existing agreement, but I think that's unlikely to happen while Trump is in office. At least not without some concessions (cosmetic or otherwise) which would allow him to present such a move as a "win".

 

Like it or not, Iran is unpopular with many countries in the Middle East. In the countries where Iran is is involved and entrenched, these matters are controversial too. Even supposed allies in the region (Russia, Turkey) have their different agendas and interests.

[metisdead]

Posts in violation of fair use policy have been removed.

 

A music video troll post has been removed. 

[Morch]

1 hour ago, RJRS1301 said:

His posturing and bullying tactics will not serve him well, he is not working with construction companies or golfers here.

 

In the Middle East, posturing and bullying tactics are quite common. I think the issue is more to do with following up on threats.

[moskito]

12 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

"Mrs. X expressed a dislike for politicians, old men, perverts, and the poor."

i feel offended, 3 out of 4 ????

 

have a WAR free weekend and some cold beers

[candide]

3 hours ago, BestB said:

Yes deals get broken, such as life, refusing to renegotiate or even to speak does not do them any favors. They are in no position of bargaining power, even though they think so.

 

No Israel and SA do not go into neighboring countries, establish their proxy parties and then try to overrun that country.

 

Lebanon is a perfect example of that.

Israel cannot do it in the ME for obvious reasons, so there's nothing to compare. They are 'only' expanding their territory.

 

As far as SA is concerned, they support Salafi mosques that have been territorits' nest for al quaida and ISIS. They are also currently doing it in Yemen and Lybia.

About Iran creating proxies, they did not create the problems that led to the emergence of Shia (or quasi-Shia) movements in Lebanon, Yemen or Bahrain. 

[candide]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

In the Middle East, posturing and bullying tactics are quite common. I think the issue is more to do with following up on threats.

Trump is unknowingly adopting local customs! Ah! Ah!

[BestB]

5 minutes ago, candide said:

Israel cannot do it in the ME for obvious reasons, so there's nothing to compare. They are 'only' expanding their territory.

 

As far as SA is concerned, they support Salafi mosques that have been territorits' nest for al quaida and ISIS. They are also currently doing it in Yemen and Lybia.

About Iran creating proxies, they did not create the problems that led to the emergence of Shia (or quasi-Shia) movements in Lebanon, Yemen or Bahrain. 

I did not bring Israel into it, other poster did but since has failed to back up his assertions

[bristolboy]

4 hours ago, BestB said:

Yes deals get broken, such as life, refusing to renegotiate or even to speak does not do them any favors. They are in no position of bargaining power, even though they think so.

 

No Israel and SA do not go into neighboring countries, establish their proxy parties and then try to overrun that country.

 

Lebanon is a perfect example of that.

"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?

[heybruce]

5 hours ago, BestB said:

Yes deals get broken, such as life, refusing to renegotiate or even to speak does not do them any favors. They are in no position of bargaining power, even though they think so.

 

No Israel and SA do not go into neighboring countries, establish their proxy parties and then try to overrun that country.

 

Lebanon is a perfect example of that.

Before Trump came to office, what was the most recent deal the US unilaterally quit even though the other parties were in full compliance?

[heybruce]

4 hours ago, observer90210 said:

As I said in my previous post, it takes many fools to start a war, but it takes just one person with balls to STOP it and that's what I think he did.

 

Obviously neither of us were in the Oval Office or the Crisis Room when it all happened so all this leads to individual opinions that every person can have, depending on one's own interpretation what we humbly here in the news.         No offence and have a nice week end.

As was explained before, you are giving him credit for stopping a war he was about to start.

[Morch]

2 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?

 

Yes, Trump is not trustworthy. And a liar. And he's bad. Alright. No argument there. But he's currently POTUS, and regretfully, he's gonna stay POTUS for the next couple of years or so, maybe more if he wins the elections.

 

So like him or not, that's how things are. Realistically, Iran cannot win a war, or come out of it in a good shape. Sustaining its economy under the strain of the USA sanctions is tricky, and can even effect the regime's stability at some point.

 

Other countries rushing to Iran's aid? Doubtful the Europeans will come through. China and Russia might, but it will come with a heavy price tag (example, Syria becoming more of Russia's playground, and/or major economic concessions given to China).

 

If it's not negotiations, and not war - what then? Playing for time? Hoping to wait out Donald? May work or it might not. Tensions going on for two more years (at least)? Chances are something will snap.

[metisdead]

A troll post containing trolling representations of Obama's name and Hillary's name has been removed. 

[gk10002000]

I test systems and software on these unmanned air vehicles with Northrop.  Obviously it was the talk of the day at work.  Can't wait to see the publicly released details and information of actual locations, headings, altitudes, what type of missile Iran used, etc.

[bristolboy]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

Yes, Trump is not trustworthy. And a liar. And he's bad. Alright. No argument there. But he's currently POTUS, and regretfully, he's gonna stay POTUS for the next couple of years or so, maybe more if he wins the elections.

 

So like him or not, that's how things are. Realistically, Iran cannot win a war, or come out of it in a good shape. Sustaining its economy under the strain of the USA sanctions is tricky, and can even effect the regime's stability at some point.

 

Other countries rushing to Iran's aid? Doubtful the Europeans will come through. China and Russia might, but it will come with a heavy price tag (example, Syria becoming more of Russia's playground, and/or major economic concessions given to China).

 

If it's not negotiations, and not war - what then? Playing for time? Hoping to wait out Donald? May work or it might not. Tensions going on for two more years (at least)? Chances are something will snap.

Also, realistically, Trump most likely can't win an election if he goes to war. There's a good article here https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/white-house/america-first-allies-say-trump-saved-presidency-from-john-bolton-by-scrapping-iran-strike

It points out the obvious reason why Trump reversed on the strike: electoral considerations.

 

After campaigning as the guy who was going to keep America out of war, he realized the electoral danger of getting sucked in. Trump is now, in effect, a hostage to the mullahs. He can't turn tail and recall the flotilla, but attacking poses a great risk, too.. What happens if the Iranians up the ante and some American soldiers suffer an awful fate in Iraq? US military brass have strongly warned Trump about this possibility. 

 

Those same political consequences will affect the calculations of what were once known as America's allies until Trump came along. Can't see the assisting the USA if shooting breaks out is going to be a very popular option politically.

 

 

[bristolboy]

35 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Also, realistically, Trump most likely can't win an election if he goes to war. There's a good article here https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/white-house/america-first-allies-say-trump-saved-presidency-from-john-bolton-by-scrapping-iran-strike

It points out the obvious reason why Trump reversed on the strike: electoral considerations.

 

After campaigning as the guy who was going to keep America out of war, he realized the electoral danger of getting sucked in. Trump is now, in effect, a hostage to the mullahs. He can't turn tail and recall the flotilla, but attacking poses a great risk, too.. What happens if the Iranians up the ante and some American soldiers suffer an awful fate in Iraq? US military brass have strongly warned Trump about this possibility. 

 

Those same political consequences will affect the calculations of what were once known as America's allies until Trump came along. Can't see the assisting the USA if shooting breaks out is going to be a very popular option politically.

 

 

"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? 

Edited June 22, 2019 by bristolboy