Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
SquallStrife

Trump: The third POTUS ever to be Impeached

Recommended Posts

The WW3 hyperbole has been pretty good for my first week of 2020... Just look at the TikToks people have made, they're hilarious!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, chrisg said:

but the "great unwashed" still hate Israel with a passion, it's in their genes.


The great unwashed are fed propaganda which has turned in Israel’s favour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, SquallStrife said:

The WW3 hyperbole has been pretty good for my first week of 2020... Just look at the TikToks people have made, they're hilarious!!


Western leftists are bigger idiots than Iranian Mullahs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
23 minutes ago, Leonid said:


The great unwashed are fed propaganda which has turned in Israel’s favour.

!NewsFlash!

 

Israel needs a new Minister of Propaganda,  Leo being positioned for the role !!!

 

Seriously, I really am starting to wonder what you are smoking, this is a very, very dangerous situation that Trump has created.

 

You think Israel can assist, no they can't, they would only make it worse and undo years of efforts to reduce tension in the region.

 

You think America has it under control, they do not, they are scrambling like cats covering shit to get in position. The White House heel spurred no-nothing military blunder-master has fucked up even worse than I thought he could....

 

Cheers

 

 

 

 

Edited by chrisg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, chrisg said:

Seriously, I really am starting to wonder what you are smoking, this is a very, very dangerous situation that Trump has created.


Yes. To Iran.

 

Nobody else really. 

30 minutes ago, chrisg said:

You think Israel can assist, no they can't, they would only make it worse and undo years of efforts to reduce tension in the region.


Israel will only attack Iran if Iran attacks Israel but that would be a dumb move on Iran’s part.

31 minutes ago, chrisg said:

You think America has it under control, they do not, they are scrambling like cats covering shit to get in position. The White House heel spurred no-nothing military blunder-master has fucked up even worse than I thought he could....


As mentioned previously: Trump has more military experience than you do, on the evidence.

I also trust that if he was offered the Soleimani hit as is being suggested, as a menu option - then there have been military plans for how to deal with the fallout.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, do not be stupid - did you see Pompeo on TV today ?

 

He's having to make it up as he goes along, not very well either.

 

Trump gave his military basically no warning of this escalation and they are really struggling to get re-positioned.

 

At most the airbridge can move a few  thousand troops a day over the Atlantic, with even minimal supplies for when they get there, let alone anything to fight with.

 

It is highly noticeable how the longer this endures the more you become like Trump - faced with reality you simply begin criticising me, the situation is not about me although actually whilst dated I do have a very good grasp of simple logistics.

 

I will repeat, America does not have a big presence in the region, 5,000 troops total in Iraq, who may well be kicked out, 700 or so in Italy, similar numbers or less scattered around the region in various pockets - the biggest is Afghanistan, no idea how many but they kind of have their hands full already, after 18 Years in country busy losing an unwinnable war.

 

The numbers vary all over the place but a lot are not actually combatants.

 

That's another thing - if this was so fucking per-meditated as your delusional state wants to believe how come only since the hit has America been urgently telling its citizens to get the hell out of Iraq ?

 

It is an utter disaster, a complete bungle by a President who wears slip-ons because he does not know how to tie shoe laces.

 

If by some miracle the long timers at the Pentagon can pull any kind of success out of this it really will be a miracle. Again to repeat, Desert Shield leading into Desert Storm took around 4.5 months to get everyone into position for what was then a very short successful campaign. There has been a small amount of build up of late but not much. Be charitable and take a month off that, so far they have had around 3.5 DAYS since the hit - the Pentagon is pretty damned good but miracles take a lot longer...

 

No wonder the C-5s and C-17s are streaming out of Fort Bragg et al but it takes a lot, lot longer to move an army, whilst as disorganised and obsolete as the Iranians are they are there, and pissed off.

 

Trump is purely and simply proving he is an impulsive idiot who has now put his men and women at extreme risk and totally on the back foot.

 

The scariest thing is that in order to cover that he may have to go for an intense air campaign, which he is also not well positioned for. At that point he is at war, whether he declares it or not.

 

At the moment there is somewhere around 15% of the air build-up that led into Desert Storm sort of in region, nowhere near enough to sustain a campaign and in region is being generous - I'm including Europe and as far afield as Diego Garcia to get to around that number. However you cannot strip those resources utterly bare, they are there for good reason.

 

Very high value assets such as the 21 B-2s haven't even moved yet, probably because the only place they can safely go is Garcia and it is a long haul from there into Iran subsonic particularly when no flight orders are likely to have been cut and a state of war has not yet been declared.

 

It's a cluster-fuck, pure and simple....

 

Cheers

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, chrisg said:

Oh, do not be stupid - did you see Pompeo on TV today ?

 

He's having to make it up as he goes along, not very well either.


He’s a politician. Duh.

 

1 hour ago, chrisg said:

Trump gave his military basically no warning of this escalation and they are really struggling to get re-positioned.


Trump didn’t invent the target. It was presented to him as an option by the military. Which means it has been thought and planned about - even as the extreme option.

 

1 hour ago, chrisg said:

It is highly noticeable how the longer this endures the more you become like Trump - faced with reality you simply begin criticising me, the situation is not about me although actually whilst dated I do have a very good grasp of simple logistics.


I criticise you for the same reason everyone else does. The stories you tell about your life are punctured by your lack of elementary knowledge and impossible circumstances.

 

Some time ago you told a fantastic story about flying a Mirage out of RAAF Pearce.

 

People whom I (and in fact, all of us) know to be in the military on this forum flatly contradicted your claim. To this date there’s more evidence of Jesus’s existence than any stint of yours in the military.

 

I am NOT in the military and if we were gonna talk about the geopolitics of South America, I’d shut up because I know a little but not a lot.

 

What I am really good on is the geopolitics of the Middle East and associated external actors. I rate your story of flying Mirages in Israel as “pants on fire” because everything I have ever heard, researched and had explained to me makes your story improbable at best.

 

You are not being attacked. You’re just not believed. Don’t get me wrong - I reckon you’ve read a shitload of books and articles about warplanes - you clearly love them - but you’ve never been operational in one. Of that - every single member of the military on this forum - is certain.

 

And I believe them because they’ve provided evidence of their military pasts or present.

 

What I can tell you is that your geopolitical analysis of the Middle East is poor. Someone who is certain that killing a general of Iran is “end is nigh or thereabouts” escalation would not ask what a Quds Force commander was doing in Iraq. And would know that 5y ago Israel killed a Quds Force Brigadier General in Syria and the blow-back was very small.

 

You just aren’t believable as a military analyst.

 

More importantly - Soleimani was on the menu as an option from the US Military. He wasn’t Trump’s addition. This means the US military always knew that at some stage, some president might auth a strike against Soleimani.

 

This is another reason your TDS-born analysis is whacko.

Edited by Leonid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eh,

 

 I've said repeatedly that I really do not care what people believe or not believe, I entertain with tales from my rather full and colorful past from time to time, although actually not for a long time, up to you what you think credible or not, it is not some fruitless debate that I care to get into.

 

Military analysis is a different story, I've been trying to get away from it for years and it wont let me. Which is not to say I'm especially current on the ME because I am not, I'm at least three years out of date, question of circumstance, knocked completely off my feet by an unscheduled house move, a deal of time in hospital, an inter-state move, I've had little time to pay much attention to the news.

 

However several things about the present unfolding crisis, and I do believe that is what it is, the USAF does not start streaming aircraft in large number from the major bases of SF and front line troops in the South of the US without good reason and particularly not after an even - if this had been in any way planned hit,  they would have been well ahead of the game.

 

I have no more clue than you do of how this option to take out Suleimani was presented to Trump but I can  tell with some certainty that he reacted in a knee-jerk fashion and took the extreme option, the least palatable one from his advisors point of view.

 

As a result a crisis is unfolding - mark my word on that.

 

I'd actually almost forgotten about the guy which is why I was surprised that he was even in Iraq - like it or not he was basically the 2 I/C in Iraq before his demise, but he had a reputation for grandstanding and putting himself in peril - I'd forgotten that. There is however a great deal of difference between killing a Quds Brigadier General in Syria, which is a war zone and killing Suleimani at Baghdad airport, on the territory of a supposed recuperating if fragile ally.

 

A Canadian report today, one I would tend to trust over American hyperbole, suggested that was reckless, dangerous, probably illegal under international law and would inevitably lead to unsavory consequences for America and its allies.

 

That is what is unfolding.

 

You are quite correct, I'm not particularly an expert on ME geopolitics, it kinda bored me years ago because in the end it hardly makes any sense, not in any rational manner and for some time now that has included Israeli arrogance.

 

However, the ME is only half the story, or less. Washington I do know and do keep abreast of somewhat through necessity. What is going on there right now is nothing short of panic, their leader has dropped a shoe that they do not know how to respond to so atm they are just chucking troops in-theatre as fast as they can and watching Iran like a Hawk.

 

Btw, Pompeo is not really so much a politician, he's ex-Mil and ex-CIA, although his time heading up CIA was not much longer than Bush Snr's. He's also an attorney, only really been in politics for a decade or so - I tend to think he is one of the few left in Swampy bottom who have much of a clue - whether he has the backbone to stand up to Trump, time alone will tell.

 

Your analysis of the situation is arrogant and very much predicated by looking through Israeli eyes, the next few days, let's bear in mind Arabs and Persians very much prefer revenge served cold, and they mourn death for a traditional three days, will see who has the more accurate analysis.

 

We shall see, I by the way would very much like to be proven wrong, but I fear that I will not be and I am not alone in that fear.

 

Cheers

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, chrisg said:

However several things about the present unfolding crisis, and I do believe that is what it is, the USAF does not start streaming aircraft in large number from the major bases of SF and front line troops in the South of the US without good reason and particularly not after an even - if this had been in any way planned hit,  they would have been well ahead of the game.


Whether planned or not is irrelevant. None of the hits presented were planned. 
 

More importantly no quick response to an emerging situation is thoroughly planned.

5 minutes ago, chrisg said:

I'd actually almost forgotten about the guy which is why I was surprised that he was even in Iraq


Here we go. Your usual “forget” excuse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, chrisg said:

Your analysis of the situation is arrogant and very much predicated by looking through Israeli eyes, the next few days, let's bear in mind Arabs and Persians very much prefer revenge served cold, and they mourn death for a traditional three days, will see who has the more accurate analysis.


My analysis is through Russian AND Israeli eyes as well as the cold reality facing Iran.

 

One of the reasons the West is exceptional is we’re actually allies. Russia, China and their “allies” are not allies - they’re losers thrust together by circumstances of being rejected.

 

You don’t seem to understand that. You seem to think Russia will step in for Iran when every bit of history shows otherwise.

 

Hell if you had any understanding of geopolitics you’d understand that while defending Syria was a means of keeping America from taking over a country with Russia’s only Med naval base - Iran’s defense carries no advantage. More importantly Russia is about 15% Muslim and almost all of those are Sunni and hate Iran.

 

The Muslim areas of Russia also provide a significant amount of Russia’s remaining industrial power. Pissing them off for Iran where Russia has no assets, serves no purpose.

 

Even more importantly - Nursultan is Russia’s majority access to space. Pissing off Kazakhstan by backing Iran serves no purpose.

 

12 minutes ago, chrisg said:

We shall see, I by the way would very much like to be proven wrong, but I fear that I will not be and I am not alone in that fear.


Yeah, you and Rose McGowan.

Edited by Leonid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you would like to suggest that some minion let Trump know whilst on his vacation, probably after a swing on the course, that there was a possible opportunity to take out this guy and Trump, who previously demurred on responding to a drone knock down and had only a no fatalities demonstration at the Baghdad Embassy to hang his hat on but did have Impeachment looming large over him gave it measured consideration whilst golf karting between tees and then pressed the button ? 

 

Yeah right.

 

The ME desk at the big house must be in an utter uproar at the moment, in full triage mode.

 

Just how, ME genius were they to know that the guy was going to be there with much warning? He has little to no record of predictability.

 

Someone, probably Trump, severely mis-calculated, but he has surrounded himself with so many yes men that it was bullied through, now lots of soldiers are mobilising for a potential conflict that could well get very ugly, very quickly and they are not prepared.

 

I repeat, we shall have to see - I totally agree  it i not in Putin's interest really, but if you can fathom his mind that will be a first.

 

Cheers

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
27 minutes ago, chrisg said:

So you would like to suggest that some minion let Trump know whilst on his vacation, probably after a swing on the course, that there was a possible opportunity to take out this guy and Trump, who previously demurred on responding to a drone knock down and had only a no fatalities demonstration at the Baghdad Embassy to hang his hat on but did have Impeachment looming large over him gave it measured consideration whilst golf karting between tees and then pressed the button ? 

 

Yeah right.


You know... for someone who implies some skill in military analysis...

 

https://www.businessinsider.com.au/trump-had-menu-for-iran-strike-but-chose-soleimani-2020-1

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/04/us/politics/trump-suleimani.html

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/04/how-trump-decided-to-target-irans-top-general.html

 

Soleimani has always been on the strike menu.

27 minutes ago, chrisg said:

Just how, ME genius were they to know that the guy was going to be there with much warning? He has little to no record of predictability.


Again evidence you have no skill in military analysis.

 

Soleimani got cocky over time knowing that US Presidents were too chicken shit to target him. He flew most places commercial, a lot on Syria’s Cham Wings. That’s how he flew from Beirut to Baghdad.

27 minutes ago, chrisg said:

Someone, probably Trump, severely mis-calculated, but he has surrounded himself with so many yes men that it was bullied through, now lots of soldiers are mobilising for a potential conflict that could well get very ugly, very quickly and they are not prepared.


Nobody “severely miscalculated”. It has been the most extreme option on a menu of options for more than a decade - back to Bush’s Presidency.

 

This means it’s been analysed by the Pentagon and considered extreme but doable. Long before Trump became President.

Edited by Leonid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

🙂

 

 Not implying any skill at all ,  just been doing it for a while, a while back, and don't do it now any more than I can avoid.

 

I think you just re-inforced my point though - Trump chose the one with the most dire potential consequences.

 

Btw, with your analysis "skills" we'd have stopped worrying long ago - if anyone took your advise the world would be a nuclear desert by now....

 

"Measured response"  does not seem to exist in your lexicon, nor does negotiation over Armageddon.

 

Cheers

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, chrisg said:

think you just re-inforced my point though - Trump chose the one with the most dire potential consequences.


Sure. But doable and considered acceptable by the military.

6 minutes ago, chrisg said:

“Measured response"  does not seem to exist in your lexicon, nor does negotiation over Armageddon.


Measured responses are for sane enemies.

7 minutes ago, chrisg said:

Btw, with your analysis "skills" we'd have stopped worrying long ago - if anyone took your advise the world would be a nuclear desert by now....


I just firmly believe that wars need to be ended rather than managed into perpetuity and the only thing worse than war is not going to war when required.

 

This world is in this shitty state because so many conflicts have not been allowed to resolve themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, chrisg said:

but I can  tell with some certainty that he reacted in a knee-jerk fashion and took the extreme option, the least palatable one from his advisors point of view.

  

" certainty " is a strong word, usually. It tends to mean the person claiming it has proof ... so um what's your proof ?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, the way of war is to win, to which end you plan.

 

Trump has not.

 

I very seriously doubt the military had any say whatsoever in the matter.

 

I must  I do agree - I'm STILL pissed off by Bush stopping on the road to Baghdad in '91 - stupidest political intervention in war that I've ever seen.

 

This is a bit pointless, all we can do is wait and see now.

 

Cheers

 

 

2 minutes ago, eveln said:

" certainty " is a strong word, usually. It tends to mean the person claiming it has proof ... so um what's your proof ?

 

 

 

 

The events of he last 48 hours.

 

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

should choose your words more carefully chrisg. just cos your certain in your own mind is not proof of anything ...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, chrisg said:

No, the way of war is to win, to which end you plan.

 

Trump has not.

 

Not his job.

His job is to select a target for a reminder strike to Iran so that they remember who’s boss.

 

It is the military’s job to plan. They provided the option. He selected it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, eveln said:

" certainty " is a strong word, usually. It tends to mean the person claiming it has proof ... so um what's your proof ?

 

 

 

?  All it means is that the speaker is convinced of the argument. Watch how many god-botherers use that word irt their invisible friend.

 

I think Chris has more evidence on his side in this instance than they do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, eveln said:

should choose your words more carefully chrisg. just cos your certain in your own mind is not proof of anything ...

 

 

 

There has been a rapid mobilisation of troops and tankers operating as a continuous airbridge out of Georgia and surrounding States for 48  no, make that 72 hours now, you can track it on Flightradar24 if you like. It was not happening before, not been seen for years.

 

Draw your own conclusions.

 

Cheers

4 minutes ago, Cybes said:

 

?  All it means is that the speaker is convinced of the argument. Watch how many god-botherers use that word irt their invisible friend.

 

I think Chris has more evidence on his side in this instance than they do.

 

 

I'd hope so, I'm talking facts.

 

Not sure what he's talking.

 

Cheers

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Leonid said:

 

Not his job.

His job is to select a target for a reminder strike to Iran so that they remember who’s boss.

 

It is the military’s job to plan. They provided the option. He selected it.

 

 

Heh.

 

 He is, laughably "Commander in Chief."

 

A Commander needs to have respect for the abilities of those he is a Commander of - this moron does not even know what he is the Commander of.

 

I do not think the military gave this option, it was political - quite possibly Bolton, he's an utter warmonger even if supposedly out of the loop.

 

Getting time to hide the football....

 

Cheers

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, chrisg said:

Draw your own conclusions.


The military is activating plans they’ve drawn up.

3 minutes ago, chrisg said:

I do not think the military gave this option, it was political


I agree with the first four words of that sentence. Everything else is in disagreement with every authoritative source.

16 minutes ago, Cybes said:

I think Chris has more evidence on his side in this instance than they do.


You trust the guy every single military person on this forum says is lying?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Leonid said:

You trust the guy every single military person on this forum says is lying? 

 

Where did I say a word about trust?  Honestly man, if that's indicative of your abilities to infer lately...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's probably Washington buck passing - hard to know.

 

No Leo, I can happily believe that they had plans for such a contingency, they have plans for most everything, that does not equate to having troops in position let alone materiel.

 

It's panic-city within the US Mil right now, doubtless organised but still decidedly chaotic.

 

Even with fast ships, which have to be positioned and loaded, they are looking at weeks to get a credible force into position. The best bet they have on their side right now is that Iran stays asymmetric and defends its sites of note.

 

I have no idea how many drones the US can deploy but at the moment that would be their best threat, except Iran has already demonstrated ability to knock them down.

 

Drones in the main are fragile things, they will not last long against even obsolete SA-2s et al.

 

In the main the US does not overfly Iran with them, they know they are vulnerable, they rely on side-scan.

 

i'm pretty certain they have some newer more capable ones but they do not have them in quantity.

 

Cheers

 

 

Um,

 

 Hands up how many mil types still post on this site....

 

It's been quite a long time, and we are not involved in my creds, you are just doing a Trump again Leo, attacking the man because you cannot defend the evidence.

 

I am getting tired of saying - it will play out, and I hope I'm wrong.

 

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Cybes said:

 

?  All it means is that the speaker is convinced of the argument. Watch how many god-botherers use that word irt their invisible friend.

 

I think Chris has more evidence on his side in this instance than they do.

again it's all down to opinion only not certainty. which is what you'd likely say to the " god-botherers" too, yes ?

As for the "god-botherers",  I'd rather not watch them thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×