Trump attacks Iran (was "Help is on the way")

[bamamc1]

Trump should have just said “don’t.” And it would be fine.

 

[bamamc1]

nothing to see here folks, please move along

https://www.cnn.com/2026/03/03/politics/patel-fbi-national-security-division-firings-iran

Just days before the United States launched a major military operation in Iran, FBI Director Kash Patel fired a dozen agents and staff members from a counterintelligence unit tasked with monitoring threats from Iran, according to two sources familiar with the matter.

They were ousted for a simple reason: Each was involved in the investigation of President Donald Trump’s alleged retention of classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate.

He should have put them in the garage by his Corvette where they would have been secure.

 

[Bazza]

The problem still remains… what is the goal here?

So again… what is the goal here?

What is the goal indeed? Nobody, including our President, knows.

It's already been achieved. We did something no other president had the stones to do. Took down the world's biggest sponsor of terror.

It's not completely over but so far so good!

 

[81usaf92]

It's already been achieved. We did something no other president had the stones to do. Took down the world's biggest sponsor of terror.

It's not completely over but so far so good!

And… it will replace him with another.

Not to be mean but Trumpers and war mongerers always seem to think in very simplistic terms when it comes to complex issues. Take for example Osama bin Laden. Did taking him out stop anything other than what one man could do against a country? No… it just evolved into other and more damaging things. It’s a hydra not a snake. They will find other leaders to continue.

If killing the ayatollah was the goal then it could have been done with far more restraint. But then again… if that was the goal then it’s a completely stupid goal. More productive kills would be his clerics and the leadership in the IRGC. Killing the ayatollah just set the Middle East in a general war that is going to further drive a wedge in between us and Iran and further tank the global economy.

 

[Bazza]

And… it will replace him with another.

Not to be mean but Trumpers and war mongerers always seem to think in very simplistic terms when it comes to complex issues. Take for example Osama bin Laden. Did taking him out stop anything other than what one man could do against a country? No… it just evolved into other and more damaging things. It’s a hydra not a snake. They will find other leaders to continue.

If killing the ayatollah was the goal then it could have been done with far more restraint. But then again… if that was the goal then it’s a completely stupid goal. More productive kills would be his clerics and the leadership in the IRGC. Killing the ayatollah just set the Middle East in a general war that is going to further drive a wedge in between us and Iran and further tank the global economy.

Well FWIW, I think you're right about me - I tend to think in very simplistic terms with many many things.

And this wasn't just about taking out the supreme leader was it? Look at the damage we've done to Iran's weaponry and it's infrastructure so far.

No matter what happens down the road this will be a huge setback for them militarily and perhaps even lead to a less hostile government.

 

[81usaf92]

Well FWIW, I think you're right about me - I tend to think in very simplistic terms with many many things.

And this wasn't just about taking out the supreme leader was it? Look at the damage we've done to Iran's weaponry and it's infrastructure so far.

No matter what happens down the road this will be a huge setback for them militarily and perhaps even lead to a less hostile government.

Okay let’s say the goal was to destroy Iran’s weaponry… Again to what end. You may say to protect American lives, but my response would be “but for how long” and “at what cost”

For the first we are assuming 2 major things if the goal was to destroy Iran’s weaponry. The first is that we as a nation are going to continue this policy after Trump and 2 Iran isn’t going to redouble its efforts to obtain them. The second is more the point I’m going to focus on. Right now the biggest potential losers economically are China and Russia. When this is over it is highly likely that they are going to take a more committed approach to their support of Iran. Because it’s been increasingly obvious that Israel under Netanyahu is far more willing to try to start a general war in the Middle East because he sees Iran as a weakling. Secondly, we have just proved the regime correct in their position that they need weapons. So it’s going to be goals 1-100 to obtain modern weaponry by the following leaders of khamennie

As for what cost… the hope is that this fizzles out and we go back to status quo but I kinda see this being a longer conflict with breaks. I think attacking the regime directly without any plan of removing it might have been the worst decision that we have made in this entire conflict. Because now they are justified in their anti western beliefs and rhetoric and we just gave them cause to continue to attack the Arabs and Jews in the Middle East.

Personally I think the best idea we could have done was to keep eliminating potential hard line successors and military leadership until the old man would have croaked of natural causes. Then you would have had the opportunity of a dialogue between us or the regime would have collapsed under weak direction. But now it’s almost a certainty that we will be dealing with it for another 20-40 years until our next opportunity.

 

[92tide]

Warren says 'it's so much worse than you thought' after classified Iran briefing

"You are right to be worried, the Trump administration has no plan in Iran," Warren said

www.irishstar.com

 

[Tidewater]

I actually expect some unenforceable EO along the lines being discussed - ordering everyone to re-register and banning absentee ballots...

Yes, that is what I believe he means when he urges "federal control over elections." If he could, he would ban mail-in ballots and probably eliminating registration techniques prone to abuse. (In Virginia to register, the applicant simply checks a box stating he is a legal voter and no one verifies that that is true. The checked box is sufficient.)
I do not know, however, for certain what Trump means when he says he wants federal control over elections.

 

[Bamaro]

It's already been achieved. We did something no other president had the stones to do. Took down the world's biggest sponsor of terror.

It's not completely over but so far so good!

Unfortunately, with fools like trump and Hegseth in control of how this progresses, both on the military and political (Iranian) side, most have little confidence this will progress well.
We shall see.

 

[92tide]

Yes, that is what I believe he means when he urges "federal control over elections." If he could, he would ban mail-in ballots and probably eliminating registration techniques prone to abuse. (In Virginia to register, the applicant simply checks a box stating he is a legal voter and no one verifies that that is true. The checked box is sufficient.)
I do not know, however, for certain what Trump means when he says he wants federal control over elections.

he does not know either

 

[92tide]

Unfortunately, with fools like trump and Hegseth in control of how this progresses, both on the military and political (Iranian) side, most have little confidence this will progress well.
We shall see.

what we will see is unimaginable idiocy with a bunch of sycophants running around celebrating the idiot

 

[UAH]

The real problem I have with the war -- BTW, is it a war if Congress doesn't declare it? I guess so. The Vietnam War was never declared -- is that victory was never defined up front.

As in, what is the goal? How do you define when it's achieved? And the corollary, "When and under what circumstances do we stop putting American military lives on the line?"

Right now, the justification is that the Iranian government is a bunch of bad guys. I don't dispute that. But so is the government of a bunch of other countries. Yet we haven't attacked them.

Why have we attacked Iran (and only Iran), and under what circumstances will the attacks stop and the ships and planes and pilots and support staff and sailors come home?

We (the American public) don't know. I seriously doubt that Trump himself knows. And even if he knows right this second, that has no bearing on his thought processes a minute / hour / day / week / month from now. He's so erratic that I promise you the generals and admirals don't know how this ends.

All that said, and without defending Sheehy's logic or presentation, the Washington Post is no less a Democrat than FoxNews is a Republican.

"Was" no less Democrat. Bezos fired everyone and controls editorial content to a significant degree.

 

[UAH]

Okay let’s say the goal was to destroy Iran’s weaponry… Again to what end. You may say to protect American lives, but my response would be “but for how long” and “at what cost”

For the first we are assuming 2 major things if the goal was to destroy Iran’s weaponry. The first is that we as a nation are going to continue this policy after Trump and 2 Iran isn’t going to redouble its efforts to obtain them. The second is more the point I’m going to focus on. Right now the biggest potential losers economically are China and Russia. When this is over it is highly likely that they are going to take a more committed approach to their support of Iran. Because it’s been increasingly obvious that Israel under Netanyahu is far more willing to try to start a general war in the Middle East because he sees Iran as a weakling. Secondly, we have just proved the regime correct in their position that they need weapons. So it’s going to be goals 1-100 to obtain modern weaponry by the following leaders of khamennie

As for what cost… the hope is that this fizzles out and we go back to status quo but I kinda see this being a longer conflict with breaks. I think attacking the regime directly without any plan of removing it might have been the worst decision that we have made in this entire conflict. Because now they are justified in their anti western beliefs and rhetoric and we just gave them cause to continue to attack the Arabs and Jews in the Middle East.

Personally I think the best idea we could have done was to keep eliminating potential hard line successors and military leadership until the old man would have croaked of natural causes. Then you would have had the opportunity of a dialogue between us or the regime would have collapsed under weak direction. But now it’s almost a certainty that we will be dealing with it for another 20-40 years until our next opportunity.

At least one of the benefits of the war and closing of the Straits of Hormuz is that Iran has been a major supplier of drones to Russia and literally hundreds of them have rained down on Ukraine. What other terror weapons did they share with Putin? The war also clearly demonstrates how much influence Putin has lost in the Middle East. A short time ago his support of Assad in Syria created a flood of immigrants that have destabilized Europe which was Putin's aim all along. There is always a silver lining to be found.

 

[4Q Basket Case]

Yes, that is what I believe he means when he urges "federal control over elections." If he could, he would ban mail-in ballots and probably eliminating registration techniques prone to abuse. (In Virginia to register, the applicant simply checks a box stating he is a legal voter and no one verifies that that is true. The checked box is sufficient.)
I do not know, however, for certain what Trump means when he says he wants federal control over elections.

I don't think he knows what he means.

While I'm dubious of whatever "federal control" might mean in practice, I do think we need to verify citizenship at registration. Could be a birth certificate. Could be a naturalization certificate. I'd be open to other documentation if it proves citizenship.

Proving you're a citizen one time (you'd prove it only to register, not to vote) is not an onerous burden. The fact that some jurisdictions once made registration difficult to impossible based on race is not a good reason to let anyone who kinda sorta looks 18 to vote today.

Otherwise, why bother with registration at all? Just show up on election day and fill in a ballot.

 

[crimsonaudio]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2029195728497643767

 

[Bamaro]

US commander said Trump "anointed by Jesus" to attack Iran​

Some U.S. military leaders are telling troops that the Iran war is part of “God’s divine plan” featuring President Donald Trump and Jesus, according to a religious freedom advocacy group. In response to Newsweek‘s request for comment on the matter, the Pentagon talked about Trump’s action in Iran.
Mikey Weinstein, founder and president of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, said the nonprofit group has received more than 200 complaints from roughly 50 military installations since Saturday involving reports of U.S. commanders linking Christianity to the “biblically sanctioned” war in Iran.

“This morning our commander opened up the combat readiness status briefing by urging us to not be ‘afraid’ as to what is happening with our combat operations in Iran right now,” one complaint reads. “He urged us to tell our troops that this was ‘all part of God’s divine plan’ and he specifically referenced numerous citations out of the Book of Revelation referring to Armageddon and the imminent return of Jesus Christ. He said that ‘President Trump has been anointed by Jesus to light the signal fire in Iran to cause Armageddon and mark his return to Earth.'”

MSN

 

[Tidewater]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2029195728497643767

Holy cow, that broke the spine of the ship.

 

[crimsonaudio]

Holy cow, that broke the spine of the ship.

First US sinking of an enemy ship via torpedo since WWII!

https://twitter.com/x/status/2029209878959362467

 

[Tidewater]

Jobs you probably do not want right now:

• Ayatollah
• Ship captain for an Iranian or Russian ghost fleet ship.
• Drug runner for Venezuela

 

[crimsonaudio]

TOTAL AIR DOMINANCE. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth just announced that the United States and Israel will soon have COMPLETE CONTROL of Iranian skies...uncontested. And then he made sure nobody misunderstood what that actually means.

HEGSETH: “Starting last night and to be completed in a few days, in under a week, the two most powerful air forces in the world will have complete control of Iranian skies, uncontested airspace.. I hope all folks watching understand what uncontested airspace and complete control means. It means we will fly all day, all night, day and night, finding, fixing and finishing the missiles and the defense industrial base of the Iranian military. Finding and fixing their leaders and their military leaders, flying over Tehran, flying over Iran, flying over their capital, flying over the IRGC. Iranian leaders looking up and seeing ONLY US And Israeli air power. Every minute of every day, until we decide it is over. And Iran will be able to do nothing about it. B-2s, B-52s, B-1s, predator drones, fighters controlling the skies, picking targets, death and destruction from the sky. All day long.”

https://twitter.com/x/status/2029189134376460362