***Official Political Discussion Thread***

[heelsandeers]

Iran appears to be standing down.

they're likely planning the real response as we speak

it'll be asymmetric, through proxies or sleeper cells so it cannot be directly laid at Iran's feet, and so it can hit targets of greater value

last night was to show they can easily target US troops and to help push Iraq to get the US out of there

 

[spiceman80]

Trump suggesting that we can just cut other Iran Deal would be like ole girl telling me she wanted to work things out after she destroyed my Xbox 360.

Some **** there is no coming back from.

Facts!

But this is typical of Trump. He starts a fire then wants to be the one to put it out and be praised for it.

 

[boris]

I'm glad no Americans got killed

Is Trump really serious about getting trying to get a nuclear agreement though? the same agreement he ripped to shreds earlier?

Nah, he’s serious about undoing everything Obama did. He’s such a narcissist he thinks he can do everything better.

 

[debso]

it'll be interesting to see how this plays out given the fact that trump looks like he's backtracking (and grateful that iran didn't do anything further) and iran used those specific missiles and hit those specific targets in an attempt to appeases the ppl of iran while showing restraint because they don't really want a war.

 

[Present]

One thing that's been really revealing and disturbing about the public discourse over the last week or so has been the ubiquitous assumption of U.S. geopolitical hegemony.

I don't know that I've heard one elected official or mainstream media outlet question whether the U.S. had the right to assassinate Soleimani or not. Instead, since he was deemed by U.S. officials to be a "bad guy" and a "terrorist" (the specifics of which have been extremely vague and/or clearly fabricated post-hoc) it is simply presumed that we had the right to do so, and the discussion has largely shifted to whether doing so was a "smart move" in terms of geopolitical strategy or not. Not even Bernie really challenged this bull****.

So now the parameters of the conversation are limited to which geopolitical actions do or do not "advance American interests," leaving untouched the poisonous assumption that we can do whatever the hell we want to if we deem it to advance those interests. (On a related note, the entire notion of "American interests" is often just a cover for "the interests of U.S.-based transnational corporations" but that's a whole other discussion.)

Need a "1000" button for this post!!!

 

[getback]

Nah, he’s serious about undoing everything Obama did. He’s such a narcissist he thinks he can do everything better.

Like that sweet new health bill he's got up his sleeve.

 

[KHUFU]

it'll be interesting to see how this plays out given the fact that trump looks like he's backtracking (and grateful that iran didn't do anything further) and iran used those specific missiles and hit those specific targets in an attempt to appeases the ppl of iran while showing restraint because they don't really want a war.

You know better than that. Iran is still going to do something. it is simply a matter of when and where. The Orange sphincter saying that it seems like they are standing down, is simply a ploy to make him look like the victim.

 

[spiceman80]

That's what this administration fails to realize. They don't need to pound their chest and act hard like Trump. They're strategic, this is what they do. Best believe this isn't over, and everyone who thinks so is in for a rude awakening.

 

[debso]

You know better than that. Iran is still going to do something. it is simply a matter of when and where. The Orange sphincter saying that it seems like they are standing down, is simply a ploy to make him look like the victim.

yeah...I do...

but while i'm at work I have to rely on fox news on mute (a person at the top of this dept keeps it on there all day every day) and I have to make sense of it smh. plus I can't see 90% of that ppl post here because twitter is blocked here so I have to read around what you guys are saying smh.

that and seeing what cnn/bbc/MSNBC are saying on their respective websites.

I feel like i'm in a cave. once I get off work since I cut the cord niketalk on my phone is all I have for live updates.

youtube on the firestick isn't helpful at all because all the vids are old.

 

[KHUFU]

yeah...I do...

but while i'm at work I have to rely on fox news on mute (a person at the top of this dept keeps it on there all day every day) and I have to make sense of it smh. plus I can't see 90% of that ppl post here because twitter is blocked here so I have to read around what you guys are saying smh.

that and seeing what cnn/bbc/MSNBC are saying.

I feel like i'm in a cave.

Yeah, that sucks. However you are well informed anyway.

The issue with Trump is that he has turned everything into a street fight. People who do not know how to thump that way, wont know his next move or know how to go back at him. This move is pretty clear. He was the aggressor, made a move, then let the chips fall where they may. The Cleaner came in, and they waited for the Iran response, of which Trump forced their hand. Now Trump thinks that he knows what they are going to do, and his staff is preparing for that. In that prep, Trump is suggesting they are standing down.

It's a drug dealer move, the same thing that one would do if someone had better product than he.

I know you know this tho'...

 

[gry60]

One thing that's been really revealing and disturbing about the public discourse over the last week or so has been the ubiquitous assumption of U.S. geopolitical hegemony.

I don't know that I've heard one elected official or mainstream media outlet question whether the U.S. had the right to assassinate Soleimani or not. Instead, since he was deemed by U.S. officials to be a "bad guy" and a "terrorist" (the specifics of which have been extremely vague and/or clearly fabricated post-hoc) it is simply presumed that we had the right to do so, and the discussion has largely shifted to whether doing so was a "smart move" in terms of geopolitical strategy or not. Not even Bernie really challenged this bull****.

So now the parameters of the conversation are limited to which geopolitical actions do or do not "advance American interests," leaving untouched the poisonous assumption that we can do whatever the hell we want to if we deem it to advance those interests. (On a related note, the entire notion of "American interests" is often just a cover for "the interests of U.S.-based transnational corporations" but that's a whole other discussion.)

It's amazing to watch, really. What is clear about the last ten years is that any nation that is within reach of nuclear technology had better grab it. Just look at how nicely NK is treated.

 

[gry60]

That's what this administration fails to realize. They don't need to pound their chest and act hard like Trump. They're strategic, this is what they do. Best believe this isn't over, and everyone who thinks so is in for a rude awakening.

Persians have been playing chess since at least 600AD.

Just saying.

 

[boris]

Like that sweet new health bill he's got up his sleeve.

I’m still patiently waiting.

 

[IATT]

Like that sweet new health bill he's got up his sleeve.

and those tax cuts for the middle class that were coming before the midterms...

or his taxes he’d release right after he was being audited...

Or the caravan that was headed towards the US

 

[spiceman80]

or the proof of the so called imminent attack on Americans that started this entire thing

 

[aepps20]

Or that liberals are human.

 

[mplsdunk]

Should have just let him nuke the hurricane so he could get it out of his system.

 

[keko jones]

As oil prices plunge, I cant help but to think this was all a plot for people in the circle to get super rich before Trump is gone. Hell, I wouldnt doubt if there are a couple of Iranians in the deal.

 

[lovehateself]

Real g’s move in silence, like lasagna

You’ll see retaliation in allied nations
But best believe us government will not acknowledge it and the us media will not cover it

 

[cragmatic]

 

[wballz]

Persians have been playing chess since at least 600AD.

Just saying.

The Persians almost got brought back to the middle ages.

The Persians may be playing chess, but their opponents in recent history are cheaters.

- Sadam's Iraq
- Trump's America
- The Star Prince MBS's Saudi

 

[Belgium]

One thing that's been really revealing and disturbing about the public discourse over the last week or so has been the ubiquitous assumption of U.S. geopolitical hegemony.

I don't know that I've heard one elected official or mainstream media outlet question whether the U.S. had the right to assassinate Soleimani or not. Instead, since he was deemed by U.S. officials to be a "bad guy" and a "terrorist" (the specifics of which have been extremely vague and/or clearly fabricated post-hoc) it is simply presumed that we had the right to do so, and the discussion has largely shifted to whether doing so was a "smart move" in terms of geopolitical strategy or not. Not even Bernie really challenged this bull****.

So now the parameters of the conversation are limited to which geopolitical actions do or do not "advance American interests," leaving untouched the poisonous assumption that we can do whatever the hell we want to if we deem it to advance those interests. (On a related note, the entire notion of "American interests" is often just a cover for "the interests of U.S.-based transnational corporations" but that's a whole other discussion.)

I don't know about elected officials but I saw plenty of legal analysis in the media about the Soleimani strike.

By the way, I would recommend following Justsecurity and Lawfare for a non-mainstream rigorous analysis of such matters.

https://www.justsecurity.org/

https://www.lawfareblog.com/

Some specific recommendations:
https://www.justsecurity.org/67970/...nd-u-s-uses-of-force-under-international-law/
Lawful Self-Defense vs. Revenge Strikes: Scrutinizing Iran and U.S. Uses of Force under International Law

Spoiler: Author bio:

https://www.justsecurity.org/67949/...-soleimani-its-lawfulness-and-why-it-matters/
The Targeted Killing of General Soleimani: Its Lawfulness and Why It Matters

Spoiler: Author bio:

https://www.lawfareblog.com/did-president-have-domestic-legal-authority-kill-qassem-soleimani by Scott R. Anderson
Did the President Have the Domestic Legal Authority to Kill Qassem Soleimani?

Spoiler: Author bio:

https://www.lawfareblog.com/soleimani-strike-one-person-decides by Jack Goldsmith
The Soleimani Strike: One Person Decides

Spoiler: Author bio:

 

[dwalk31]

it'll be interesting to see how this plays out given the fact that trump looks like he's backtracking (and grateful that iran didn't do anything further) and iran used those specific missiles and hit those specific targets in an attempt to appeases the ppl of iran while showing restraint because they don't really want a war.

The administration stated that the killing of Soleimani was to de-escalate. And it appears, based on Iran's restrained response, that it worked to this point.

 

[heelsandeers]

The administration stated that the killing of Soleimani was to de-escalate. And it appears, based on Iran's restrained response, that it worked to this point.

lol

 

[WASPS ANDD ASPS]

Trumps Newclear Deal probably gonna involve coal.