‘ABSOLUTELY LOVELY MAN’ : Iran’s Rouhani Says Trump Has ‘A Nazi Disposition,’ and Much of the World Backs Iran

[phands]

Once again, trumpo gets the footgun out and savages his tiny toes....

Iran on Tuesday took advantage of President Donald Trump’s abandonment of the landmark 2015 nuclear deal, portraying itself as a law-abiding state ready to work with traditional U.S. allies to avoid war.


In a defiant address to the United Nations General Assembly, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani paid back every bit of Trump’s earlier invective against Iran with interest. “It is unfortunate that we are witnessing rulers in the world who think they can secure their interests better, or at least in the short term ride public sentiments and gain popular support through the fomenting of extremist nationalism and racism and through xenophobic tendencies resembling a Nazi disposition,” Rouhani said at the beginning of his 25-minute speech.


This was hours after Trump called Rouhani “an absolutely lovely man” in an early-morning tweet. And it was a message to Trump not to bother reprising the threaten-and-flatter approach with Iran that he used on North Korea.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/20...ed-To-Them-The-Accuser-Is-A-Sex-Crimes-Expert

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Christ! Watching the Trump Admin and Iran posturing with each other really makes me admire their ability to do such things and being capable of addressing each other while having their heads fully up their own asses.

It's a god damn South Park sketch that became sentient!

 

[phands]

Now that asswipe Bolton is threatening hellfire on Iran....we lurch closer to another war. And then trumpo declares martial law because he needs an excuse to appoint himself dictator for life.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Now that asswipe Bolton is threatening hellfire on Iran....we lurch closer to another war. And then trumpo declares martial law because he needs an excuse to appoint himself dictator for life.

Iran War isn't possible without... what, four to six months of military mobilization, at the very least? And maybe 1 million plus US troops.

Iraq was done via a shoe string military, fighting against an army that gave up right away. And while the takeover was easy, the occupation was a disaster.

Iran, won't be like that. A war with Iran is ridiculously impossible. We can't even fucking afford it? Our annual deficit will increase by half... and it is near $1 trillion already!

The worst the US can feasibly do is bomb something and say "progress". But even that could lead to destabilization that'll cost dearly.

 

[bilby]

Now that asswipe Bolton is threatening hellfire on Iran....we lurch closer to another war. And then trumpo declares martial law because he needs an excuse to appoint himself dictator for life.

Iran War isn't possible without... what, four to six months of military mobilization, at the very least? And maybe 1 million plus US troops.

Iraq was done via a shoe string military, fighting against an army that gave up right away. And while the takeover was easy, the occupation was a disaster.

Iran, won't be like that. A war with Iran is ridiculously impossible. We can't even fucking afford it? Our annual deficit will increase by half... and it is near $1 trillion already!

The worst the US can feasibly do is bomb something and say "progress". But even that could lead to destabilization that'll cost dearly.

If you fight on a desert plain, or on the ocean surface, there is nowhere to hide, and air power is the main determinant of who wins. US air power can overwhelm any other country (perhaps with the exception of Russia and China) very easily. Iraqi troops gave up right away because their only other option was to die. You can't win a war with air power alone; But air supremacy, and good coordination of ground troops with plentiful air support, makes winning easy.

If you have mountains or a jungle to hide in, things are very different. These things significantly reduce the effectiveness of air cover in protecting your ground forces, and in attacking those of the enemy. Iran is surrounded by seriously challenging mountains. Like the jungles of Vietnam, these will swallow up any US ground forces. The US military could likely invade and maybe even hold the interior, and the major cities; But supplying that force would be a massive challenge, and (like in Vietnam) the result would be a US force that controls only the cities and major highways, and those only during the daytime. The more forces you funnel in, the harder they become to resupply, and the higher the rate of attrition in guerrilla attacks by an enemy who blend in with the locals during the day, and who cannot be rooted out without further alienating the few locals who may have initially supported the campaign.

Shit, the US couldn't even manage to win the peace in Iraq. Any attempt to invade Iran would, I strongly suspect, look a LOT like the Vietnam war, and perhaps even more like the various wars in Afghanistan in the last couple of centuries. And we all know how well Vietnam turned out for the USA, and how well things went for the British, then the Soviets, and then the Americans, in Afghanistan. Sometimes having all the aircraft and military technology simply isn't enough.

 

[J842P]

Well, it depends how far you are willing to go. But nowadays, killing all adult males and capturing all the women and children to be given over to the conquering army as slaves for their eventual colonization isn't palatable.


God damn SJWs.