That is not dead which can eternal lie, and with strange aeons bring us some web forums whereupon we can gather
http://www.octopusoverlords.com/forum/
Air Force One has jammers and flares.stessier wrote: ↑Wed Jan 08, 2020 12:09 pm This happened in The West Wing. Iran shot down a plane because the radar signature is very similar to our AWACS because, like, it's the same plane.
It would actually make sense here - an hour after they hit us, they see a signature that might be part of a retaliatory strike and shoot it down. I'm sure crazier things have happened.
Okay, but I didn't say they thought it was Air Force One.Isgrimnur wrote: ↑Wed Jan 08, 2020 12:15 pmAir Force One has jammers and flares.stessier wrote: ↑Wed Jan 08, 2020 12:09 pm This happened in The West Wing. Iran shot down a plane because the radar signature is very similar to our AWACS because, like, it's the same plane.
It would actually make sense here - an hour after they hit us, they see a signature that might be part of a retaliatory strike and shoot it down. I'm sure crazier things have happened.
He's having trouble speaking (and reading the teleprompter).
I did miss that, but I read about it afterwards.
Not mentioned in the statement? Allegations, detailed in an extensive investigative report, that the Trump Organization participated in a scheme that likely helped the I.R.G.C. launder money and acquire weapons of mass destruction. (Must have been an oversight!) In 2017, The New Yorker published a story about Trump Tower Baku, a hotel in Azerbaijan that never opened and appeared “to be a corrupt operation engineered by oligarchs tied to Iran’s Revolutionary Guard.” According to reporter Adam Davidson, in 2012, the Trump Organization signed multiple contracts to build the tower with the Mammadov family, whose patriarch, Ziya Mammadov, was the Transportation Minister at the time. (Ziya Mammadov was described by a U.S. diplomat as “notoriously corrupt even for Azerbaijan,” which is among the most corrupt nations in the world.) The Mammadovs were financially entangled with the Darvishi family, at least three members of which were reportedly associates of the Revolutionary Guard.
Wow, I guess everything Trump touches dies literally.Holman wrote: ↑Wed Jan 08, 2020 1:07 pmI did miss that, but I read about it afterwards.
So basically he accused Obama of attacking the United States. Cool.
I don't suppose Trump mentioned that he and Ivanka were literally laundering money for Soleimani's Revolutionary Guard just a few years ago, did he?
Not mentioned in the statement? Allegations, detailed in an extensive investigative report, that the Trump Organization participated in a scheme that likely helped the I.R.G.C. launder money and acquire weapons of mass destruction. (Must have been an oversight!) In 2017, The New Yorker published a story about Trump Tower Baku, a hotel in Azerbaijan that never opened and appeared “to be a corrupt operation engineered by oligarchs tied to Iran’s Revolutionary Guard.” According to reporter Adam Davidson, in 2012, the Trump Organization signed multiple contracts to build the tower with the Mammadov family, whose patriarch, Ziya Mammadov, was the Transportation Minister at the time. (Ziya Mammadov was described by a U.S. diplomat as “notoriously corrupt even for Azerbaijan,” which is among the most corrupt nations in the world.) The Mammadovs were financially entangled with the Darvishi family, at least three members of which were reportedly associates of the Revolutionary Guard.
Tucker Carlson is saying the exact opposite thing on Fox News.Paingod wrote: ↑Wed Jan 08, 2020 11:34 amI think all we need to do is change the channel to Fox News to see what he's being told to do. If they're preaching fire and brimstone and hellacious bombings, then grab your pants and hold on tight.
Translation: They slapped our collective faces. Blow them back to hell.Fox News, Cory Mills wrote:Now only a swift and resolute U.S. response to Wednesday’s attack and Iran’s continued state-sponsored terrorism will save Iraq and U.S. interests from Iranian fanatics lashing out to deflect tension from Iran’s economic free-fall caused by corrupt and unreasonable leadership.
...
We now have an administration that does not acquiesce and draw imaginary “red lines.” President Trump’s message is clear that if any American or U.S. interests are targeted by terrorists, we will respond swiftly and appropriately.
He's made it worse, via Vox:
It's almost like there's no plan or any forethought to anything happening. I am genuinely surprised he didn't come out and announce retaliation was underway. Pence and Pompeo probably couldn't get a clear answer from Jesus by 11am?Adding further sanctions on Iran is more likely to lead Tehran to lash out again than to step back from the brink.
...
Second, Trump called on all parties to the Iran nuclear deal to exit it like the US did in 2018. “The time has come for the United Kingdom, Germany, France, Russia, and China to ... break away from the remnants of the Iran deal or JCPOA, and we must all work together toward making a deal with Iran that makes the world a safer and more peaceful place,” he stated.
That’s unlikely to happen, as those European nations want to do business with Iran and Russia and China are Tehran’s allies. But it gives the Islamic Republic another reason to unshackle itself from the nuclear deal’s restrictions and move closer to obtaining a nuclear weapon.
...
Finally, Trump called on the US’s NATO allies to be “much more involved in the Middle East process.” It’s not entirely clear what the president means by this, especially since NATO forces are already in the Middle East, including at the bases in Iraq that were targeted by Iran Tuesday night.
Trump is saying no military retaliation now. Fox will need to go back and wipe that off their website/from their tapes.pr0ner wrote: ↑Wed Jan 08, 2020 2:07 pmTucker Carlson is saying the exact opposite thing on Fox News.Paingod wrote: ↑Wed Jan 08, 2020 11:34 amI think all we need to do is change the channel to Fox News to see what he's being told to do. If they're preaching fire and brimstone and hellacious bombings, then grab your pants and hold on tight.
Translation: They slapped our collective faces. Blow them back to hell.Fox News, Cory Mills wrote:Now only a swift and resolute U.S. response to Wednesday’s attack and Iran’s continued state-sponsored terrorism will save Iraq and U.S. interests from Iranian fanatics lashing out to deflect tension from Iran’s economic free-fall caused by corrupt and unreasonable leadership.
...
We now have an administration that does not acquiesce and draw imaginary “red lines.” President Trump’s message is clear that if any American or U.S. interests are targeted by terrorists, we will respond swiftly and appropriately.
I'm a liberal, and I didn't vote for him. I won't be voting for him in the upcoming election. Still, there's no reason I can't be honest about what I see here:
Maybe the prize isn't US or Iranian "victory," but influence in Iraq.gameoverman wrote: ↑Wed Jan 08, 2020 3:18 pmI'm a liberal, and I didn't vote for him. I won't be voting for him in the upcoming election. Still, there's no reason I can't be honest about what I see here:
Iran has been bluffing all along. They claim to be able to unleash hell against anyone who attacks them. Okay, I can believe that. I'm not an expert on what various countries can or can't do.
Then Trump has one of their top people, and they themselves say he was highly important, killed. If Iran is ever going to do something big, now is the time. They have been directly provoked. They were punched right on the nose, for all the world to see. What do they do? A token retaliation. An 'attack' that pointedly does minimal damage. What does that tell you? It tells me that that's all they can do. All this time everyone has been scared of fearsome Iran and what they can do and they can't do shiat.
Is it possible that the military and/or intelligence people told Trump this? I think so. I think there's a good chance they explained what Iran would do in retaliation, because they knew that's all Iran could do. Everyone wants to believe this action was not thought out, because everyone dislikes Trump so much. What if it was thought out? The resolution, no war, is pure random luck? Really?
All the talk about it setting relations with Iran back, and pushing them to acquire nuclear weapons, come on! It would be naive to think the US is getting along with Iran any time soon or that Iran is giving up on acquiring those weapons, with or without a deal. That's what I mean by 'business as usual'. The same games will be played as before.
I've been thinking similar for several days. The talking heads that have foreign policy have explained it this way.gameoverman wrote:I'm a liberal, and I didn't vote for him. I won't be voting for him in the upcoming election. Still, there's no reason I can't be honest about what I see here:
Iran has been bluffing all along. They claim to be able to unleash hell against anyone who attacks them. Okay, I can believe that. I'm not an expert on what various countries can or can't do.
Then Trump has one of their top people, and they themselves say he was highly important, killed. If Iran is ever going to do something big, now is the time. They have been directly provoked. They were punched right on the nose, for all the world to see. What do they do? A token retaliation. An 'attack' that pointedly does minimal damage. What does that tell you? It tells me that that's all they can do. All this time everyone has been scared of fearsome Iran and what they can do and they can't do shiat.
Is it possible that the military and/or intelligence people told Trump this? I think so. I think there's a good chance they explained what Iran would do in retaliation, because they knew that's all Iran could do. Everyone wants to believe this action was not thought out, because everyone dislikes Trump so much. What if it was thought out? The resolution, no war, is pure random luck? Really?
All the talk about it setting relations with Iran back, and pushing them to acquire nuclear weapons, come on! It would be naive to think the US is getting along with Iran any time soon or that Iran is giving up on acquiring those weapons, with or without a deal. That's what I mean by 'business as usual'. The same games will be played as before.
The initial assessment of Western intelligence agencies is that a Ukrainian airliner which crashed in Iran on Wednesday was not brought down by a missile, said a Canadian security source.
The source, who declined to be identified, said the agencies believed the Boeing 737 plane had suffered a technical malfunction.
I don't think it was a bluff - it was trash talk. They often say things intended for a regional or local audience.gameoverman wrote: ↑Wed Jan 08, 2020 3:18 pmI'm a liberal, and I didn't vote for him. I won't be voting for him in the upcoming election. Still, there's no reason I can't be honest about what I see here:
Iran has been bluffing all along. They claim to be able to unleash hell against anyone who attacks them. Okay, I can believe that. I'm not an expert on what various countries can or can't do.
You are likely underestimating them. A lot of experts - especially deterrence experts said Iran made a smart move. They showed they had a sophisticated missile capability and our generals likely now know it is capable of precisely 'missing' targets. It wasn't just token retaliation. Also, instead of using a proxy they fired the missile from their own turf into a neighbor. A neighbor they fought a long war with. It was a careful response.Then Trump has one of their top people, and they themselves say he was highly important, killed. If Iran is ever going to do something big, now is the time. They have been directly provoked. They were punched right on the nose, for all the world to see. What do they do? A token retaliation. An 'attack' that pointedly does minimal damage. What does that tell you? It tells me that that's all they can do. All this time everyone has been scared of fearsome Iran and what they can do and they can't do shiat.
It isn't about luck. The point is that the *risk* Trump took wasn't worth a war. It could have spiraled. Let's say the Iranian missile attack accidentally or deliberately killed a lot of Americans or did a lot of damage then Trump would have boxed himself into a corner. So yes it worked out but it still was incredibly stupid. Incredibly stupid. Iran replaces this guy. The hardliners are now firmly in control. Our influence with our allies and Iraq is less than it was last week. People are sighing with relief but they also now have confirmation the guy is a loose cannon. Long-term there is a good chance this will not be seen as a victory.Is it possible that the military and/or intelligence people told Trump this? I think so. I think there's a good chance they explained what Iran would do in retaliation, because they knew that's all Iran could do. Everyone wants to believe this action was not thought out, because everyone dislikes Trump so much. What if it was thought out? The resolution, no war, is pure random luck? Really?
We had a deal. All our allies were in on it. The compliance regime was being adhered to and was by all accounts working. It is all dust now. Trump isn't going to get a deal done. The hardliners *can not* sign a deal with Trump. And the Iranians are going to do something more than this. They'll hit a soft target at some point. This isn't over.All the talk about it setting relations with Iran back, and pushing them to acquire nuclear weapons, come on! It would be naive to think the US is getting along with Iran any time soon or that Iran is giving up on acquiring those weapons, with or without a deal. That's what I mean by 'business as usual'. The same games will be played as before.
That's a bit of a relief to be honest though obviously a tragedy for the families.Holman wrote: ↑Wed Jan 08, 2020 3:58 pm Canadian sources say Ukrainian airliner was not brought down by a missile.
The initial assessment of Western intelligence agencies is that a Ukrainian airliner which crashed in Iran on Wednesday was not brought down by a missile, said a Canadian security source.
The source, who declined to be identified, said the agencies believed the Boeing 737 plane had suffered a technical malfunction.
It tells me that Iran is much better at this than you think they are. A full scale response would have been foolish and counter-productive for them and they know it.gameoverman wrote: ↑Wed Jan 08, 2020 3:18 pm
Then Trump has one of their top people, and they themselves say he was highly important, killed. If Iran is ever going to do something big, now is the time. They have been directly provoked. They were punched right on the nose, for all the world to see. What do they do? A token retaliation. An 'attack' that pointedly does minimal damage. What does that tell you? It tells me that that's all they can do. All this time everyone has been scared of fearsome Iran and what they can do and they can't do shiat.
That's my point though, I can't believe I've done such a poor job explaining it. Military/intelligence would be aware that Iran had specific limitations on how they could and couldn't respond. Proof of this is evident. As provocative as the assassination was, the response was muted. You don't think they had a list of possible Iranian responses, listed in order of likeliest to least likely? Whatever you think of Trump, I see no reason to think the military and intelligence people are unprofessional.Alefroth wrote: ↑Wed Jan 08, 2020 4:58 pmIt tells me that Iran is much better at this than you think they are. A full scale response would have been foolish and counter-productive for them and they know it.gameoverman wrote: ↑Wed Jan 08, 2020 3:18 pm
Then Trump has one of their top people, and they themselves say he was highly important, killed. If Iran is ever going to do something big, now is the time. They have been directly provoked. They were punched right on the nose, for all the world to see. What do they do? A token retaliation. An 'attack' that pointedly does minimal damage. What does that tell you? It tells me that that's all they can do. All this time everyone has been scared of fearsome Iran and what they can do and they can't do shiat.
This is such an important point. I feel like the U.S. public, fueled in part by the media, view Iran solely through the lens of the 1979 Revolution and the resulting theocracy. But the country and its people are not a monolith, and you're spot on about the sophisticated urban culture there. By rights, Iran and the Iranian people should be allies. The 1979 Revolution was and continues to be a tragic detour from where that country should be (and, yes, one that the U.S. has its hands all over as a result of our support for the Shah).Holman wrote: ↑Wed Jan 08, 2020 5:38 pm Trump's trashing of the Iran deal was a huge waste of opportunity. As it stood, it bought us a generation in which to coax Iran back into the fold of nations.
We've seen from the protests and the riven nature of Iranian society that that's where many of them want to be. They're not a land of rural tribesmen but a sophisticated urban society that was a cultural and economic jewel of the Middle East within living memory.
I find this really frightening. Like, crazy, John Carpenter "The Thing" horrific.Holman wrote: ↑Wed Jan 08, 2020 5:38 pm However, the fact that reform-minded Iranians would like better government does *not* mean they'll welcome invasion and forced regime change. (Show me the country that welcomes invasion.) To think otherwise is to embrace the stupid myth that inside every foreigner is an American just waiting to come out.