Did world war 3 just start?

[BugI02]

Maybe I need a second account for when I post personal opinions vs when I post news stuff.

[Negative, just preface it as opinion 'I believe Trump will do X' rather than fact and be less passive-aggressive . Aggressive-aggressive is fine, too much crawfishing is suspect]

It's really not as deep as you explained it, and I'm not Hough, I don't call back to my past posts to try and score points.

[I was never in any doubt that you're 'not Hough' ]

I just assume President_# will always do something in their first term to assist into their second term, under my assumption that conflict helps. Very off-the-cuff and innocent post. Seems like legislators are talking more and more about Iran, so I assume it's building up to something.

SMH. Unless I'm totally off the mark in my [high] opinion of your intelligence, you have to think that there is more to the Iran situation than legislators are talking more about it. I have to believe you know who pulls the strings on Hezbollah and the Houthi and who believes further destabilizing the existing order in the ME will work in their favor and improve their position. I simply cannot think that you believe that it is US sanctions that are impoverishing the Iranian people rather than outsized military spending and ambition, nor can I comfortably conclude that you believe if left to their own devices the Iranians are/will become peaceful players on the world stage. I think we tried that ( see: 2008 - 16)
and the results can't even be described as 'mixed'

Iran is the Cuba of the ME

 

[NKBJ]

Did anyone catch the story about the Iranians arrested while trying to purchase speed boats like the ones used by their military?

 

[SheepDog4Life]

Never seen it.

I'm thinking of it more as... there are a lot of things around the world that need fixin'

Sometimes, we sit aside and let them continue dicking around.

But, perhaps, we kill two birds with one stone. We see an opportunity to deal with a problem, and (my assumption) help my chances of sticking around.

Honestly, I'm just assuming conflict helps the incumbent. The only conflicts I was cognizant of were GWB's, and the bombing of Iraq during Clinton's presidency. Obviously Clinton had a different conclusion, but in my mind... the Afghanistan/Iraq stuff helped GWB, did it not?

Really not trying to look at it as a negative/derogatory thing... more of a pessimistic "this is just what presidents do" kind of thing. I assume all Presidents, right or left, use large-scale events to their favor.

I think the more apt analogy with Clinton was kicking the can down the road with with "pretend" agreements and N. Korea's nuclear, then, ambitions. We see where that lead, and it wasn't a surprise.

I mean... if I'm wrong, then I'm wrong. I just don't trust government, at all, to be moral.

Trying to divine morals out of government actions is like trying to understand "crazy"... it'll drive you nuts in the end.

Rather, look at whether the actions taken are correct to achieve the desired effect... IMO, they are. The Obama Iran agreement was a sham that would only lead to a nuclear Iran.

 

[NKBJ]

Did yall see what IRAN just did?

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Did yall see what IRAN just did?

Told Trump not to listen to Bolton?

 

[JettaKnight]

Did yall see what IRAN just did?

This?

In Brazen Act Of Aggression, Iran Deploys Its Country Right Next To Our Aircraft Carrier

 

[NKBJ]

Any yall notice that for some purpose the picture in the papers of the Andrea Victory has the ship's name diddled with?

 

[Dead Duck]

Any yall notice that for some purpose the picture in the papers of the Andrea Victory has the ship's name diddled with?

Looks like it had another name at some point. There is some oil damage to the letters from that oil/slime...... if that's what you mean.

 

[printcraft]

Any yall notice that for some purpose the picture in the papers of the Andrea Victory has the ship's name diddled with?

Looks like it had another name at some point. There is some oil damage to the letters from that oil/slime...... if that's what you mean.

Some language in the video... Warning.


[video=youtube;ZSAezpbpWbc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZSAezpbpWbc[/video]

 

[NKBJ]

In the close up shot it looks as though the "O" could have had inadequate surface prep prior to application and later came completely off.

 

[NKBJ]

Ah ha.
Was just looking at a photo from when she left the US east coast the end of February.
The orange stains cover the left half of the "O". But in the current photo the orange is missing. So surface prep has been performed now because the staining is removed from the area encompassed by where the replacement letter will be applied (though it remains outside and below the letter).

 

[ghuns]

This?

In Brazen Act Of Aggression, Iran Deploys Its Country Right Next To Our Aircraft Carrier

That's just funny.

But on a more serious note, a US carrier in the Persian Gulf is a giant, floating bullseye. It's a lot of blood and treasure to put on the line to "send a message" in response to vague threats from Iran.

A carrier is best deployed in the open ocean, out of range of land based attacks. The Persian Gulf is a mud puddle. Our carrier is very well protected, but one lucky Iranian cruise missile is all it would take for s**t to go seriously south.

John Bolton has been trying to get us into a shootin war with Iran since forever. He may finally get his wish.

I wish Mattis was still around.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

US orders non-emergency embassy staff to leave Baghdad, Erbil

 

[Leadeye]

That's just funny.

But on a more serious note, a US carrier in the Persian Gulf is a giant, floating bullseye. It's a lot of blood and treasure to put on the line to "send a message" in response to vague threats from Iran.

A carrier is best deployed in the open ocean, out of range of land based attacks. The Persian Gulf is a mud puddle. Our carrier is very well protected, but one lucky Iranian cruise missile is all it would take for s**t to go seriously south.

John Bolton has been trying to get us into a shootin war with Iran since forever. He may finally get his wish.

I wish Mattis was still around.

Remembering how effective anti ship missiles like the Exocet were against lightly armored British ships in the Falklands, I've wondered how effective modern missiles would be against the battleships of yesterday.

 

[Thor]

Remembering how effective anti ship missiles like the Exocet were against lightly armored British ships in the Falklands, I've wondered how effective modern missiles would be against the battleships of yesterday.

I saw an interview with the commander of the Missouri after the Stark incident. He was asked what his plans were to defend against an Exocet missile attack. He had a couple of sailors step forward, one with a broom the other with a paint brush and said "This is my Exocet defense, we'll sweep away the debris and paint over the spot."

 

[actaeon277]

Sweepers man your brooms, clean sweepdown,
fore and aft..
Take all trash and garbage to the fantail

 

[Ark]

That's just funny.

But on a more serious note, a US carrier in the Persian Gulf is a giant, floating bullseye. It's a lot of blood and treasure to put on the line to "send a message" in response to vague threats from Iran.

A carrier is best deployed in the open ocean, out of range of land based attacks. The Persian Gulf is a mud puddle. Our carrier is very well protected, but one lucky Iranian cruise missile is all it would take for s**t to go seriously south.

John Bolton has been trying to get us into a shootin war with Iran since forever. He may finally get his wish.

I wish Mattis was still around.

Not exactly vague threats when oil tankers are being bombed and Saudi oil facilities are being attacked with drones. It kinda sounds like exactly the "threats" that Trump was accused of making up have come to pass.

I agree that penning up an entire carrier group in a small body of water is a risky move that negates many of their advantages. It is especially risky when the Iranian-backed rebels in Yemen are known to have advanced anti-ship missiles that have already been used to kill Saudi warships. Yeah, a carrier group is probably going to be more on-the-ball with their defenses, but...we just had a destroyer crash into a cargo ship that it didn't even know was there. The best eyes on the ocean and they ran into a freakin' container ship. What happens when a volley of ASMs get fired off when you have a watch crew of newbies who haven't slept in 72 hours and the CIWS radar is broke?

 

[ATOMonkey]

From the Trump Chopper Presser

Is it true you're going to send 120,000 troops to Iran

No, that's not true, that's fake news, but if we did, it'd be a hell-of-a lot more than that!

lol

I can see Trump in a military planning session telling them to just send everything.

 

[ditcherman]

Looks like it had another name at some point. There is some oil damage to the letters from that oil/slime...... if that's what you mean.

Could the O be an exhaust or vent port? Thats what it looks like to me.
I don't no nuttin' bout no boats, but that huge gash at the bottom would worry me more than the name missing the o. Don't waste the sticker, things gonna sink as soon as they stop moving forward anyway.

 

[ghuns]

Not exactly vague threats when oil tankers are being bombed and Saudi oil facilities are being attacked with drones...

If only we had provided the Saudis with BILLIONS of $$$ worth of military hardware and training, maybe then they'd be in a position to defend THEIR tankers and THEIR facilities.