Trump killed Soleimani and their best response were ineffective missile launches at US bases. Israel bombed an Iranian embassy in Syria and killed Haniyeh in the middle of Tehran in a protected area, that led to True Promise 1/2 which were Iranian missile attacks on Israel that were largely ineffective. Israel then destroyed Iranian air defenses which Iran didn't respond to at all, only promising that True Promise 3 would happen "at a time and place of their choosing."
You could argue that the seeds were sown with our idiotic support of France holding authority over Vietnam.
Iraq was a military victory. Saddam is dead, his government toppled, ISIS later destroyed. We gained military bases in the region. I never said anything about political costs.
If it’s so weak and easy i guess Israel can take them out then, if it’s so easy why haven’t they done it already like with bombing saddams stuff
He might be right, at cause McCarthy actually called out commies and I'm sure wanted to have them executed, so in that way it is 'worse now'.
Yeah and the entire region is destabilized and we are still there dealing with the consequences GREAT SUCCESS YOU IDIOT.
You mean the guy that Trump kicked out for being too much of an Iran hawk? Great example.
Everything I stated was exactly your position. You have no problems with Iran openly declaring that America should be destroyed, murdering Americans, smuggling drugs into the US, and banking for the cartels. When I ask why, you never answer and always hide behind strawmen that you make up. Why can't you answer concerns directly instead of hiding behind a layer of irony?
Because the US keeps stopping Israel from doing it.
can you not understand that when you give a retard a nuclear weapon, it makes the retard far more dangerous? Look at the houthi, they're barely human cavemen that are eternally high on khat but they are a danger because iran gave them missiles and taught them how to shoot them
dude was still a high ranking national security advisor and now is UN ambassador , if that isn’t a sign for support for Iran regime change in high levels of government I don’t know what else would convince you.
UN ambassador explicitly means he's not involved in these decisions.
Jews advocating all this "you must forgive niggers and browns who rape and murder your children" shit still harbor burning hot blood grudges over shit that happened 2000+ years ago."
Can’t wait for Trump to ask him how many Chevrolets he’s seen driving on the streets of Berlin.
Why are you pretending to not get the point. It’s really smarmy
The short-lived era of the American nuclear monopoly must've been quite surreal to experience.
It was also 9-0.
again hiding behind shitposts and irony instead of actually considering things. Vietnam/Iraq/Afghanistan were also examples of invasions, not limited airstrikes. Big difference. irony poisoned
I understand your point, your point goes against you. Trump hired Waltz, saw that he was too much of a hawk on Iran and the Houthi, and then removed him to a position where he doesn't have influence on those things. This is a sign that Trump isn't being a hawk on Iran.
I have his posts blocked by I gave you a thumbs-up anyway because I assume you're right.
Sometimes the USSC acts 'sane' like this in order to balance later goofy results. 9-0's are weird in general and we just got 2.
