Just an Earth-Bound Misfit: The Rantings of an Aging, Armed, Pinko Chick

Words of Advice:

"If Something Seems To Be Too Good To Be True, It's Best To Shoot It, Just In Case." -- Fiona Glenanne

“The Mob takes the Fifth. If you’re innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?” -- The TOFF *

"Foreign Relations Boil Down to Two Things: Talking With People or Killing Them." -- Unknown

“Speed is a poor substitute for accuracy.” -- Real, no-shit, fortune from a fortune cookie

"If you believe that you are talking to G-d, you can justify anything.” — my Dad

"Colt .45s; putting bad guys in the ground since 1873." -- Unknown

"Stay Strapped or Get Clapped." -- probably not Mr. Rogers

"The Dildo of Karma rarely comes lubed." -- Unknown

"Eck!" -- George the Cat

* "TOFF" = Treasonous Orange Fat Fuck, A/K/A Dolt-45,
A/K/A Commandante (or Cadet) Bone Spurs,
A/K/A El Caudillo de Mar-a-Lago, A/K/A the Asset., A/K/A P01135809

Sunday, January 5, 2020

A Question for Those Advocating War with Iran

Define "winning".

Explain how that comes about, keeping in mind our recent experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan.

34 comments:

Glen Filthie said...: Nobody is advocating a war. The people are demanding that the President protect legitimate interests and assets in the area, and the people involved with them. He's doing that. Mature adults understand that shelling a nation's embassy is an act of war; the US has shown great compassion and restraint by killing only a few people directly involved with that - as a warning to the rest. The POTUS has done a superb job - or as well has anyone can do under the circumstances. Whether that escalates or not is entirely up to Iran, just as it was with Iraq. If they choose war, they will get the worst of it and be responsible for it just as the Iraqies were.

The doings with Iran are fascinating though. For once we have a meaningful application of asymmetric warfare turning the tables on classical Islamic terrorism and successfully countering it. Terrorists strike anywhere, any time with no regard to decency or international law. Now - thanks of course to Donald Trump - they are getting taken out the same way. Whereas former Presidents would have been cowed by Iranian threats and bluster - this President calmly acknowledges it and promises retaliation - and delivers. And - this is only the side show!

What's really fascinating though, is the picture behind the scenes. Consider: the Iranians are masters of brinkmanship. They know how far they can push people and they know fools and cowards when they see them. That is why they had so much sport with Carter and again with Obama. They went quiet as church mice during the Reagan and Bush Administrations and wisely didn't screw with them. Trump is the same - he deals with idiots and shysters with utter contempt and ease. He defeated Hillary Clinton in the last election with a cartoon frog! HAR HAR HAR!!! What is driving the Iranians - other than the usual Islamic lunacy? To me, they appear scared and desperate about something. But what is driving that?

But that is all adult grownup stuff. You may continue with the usual Orange Man Bad schtick. Have a great Monday Comrade! :); 1/05/2020 12:13 PM
New Jovian Thunderbolt said...: The only people I see advocating for war are Lefties that want to re-enact draft resistance protests. "Cuz, you know, those looked fun. What do you mean there is no draft? But I had to sign up with Selective Service! The draft is why I smoke the reefer."

Hippy Protester Cosplayers?; 1/05/2020 12:30 PM
bigredwookie said...: So, Glen it’s ok now for us, as a nation state, to engage in terrorism/assassination without informing or respecting the boundaries of the countries and the governments of those same countries. It doesn’t matter whether they are corrupt or not, they are the official leaders of those areas. For all those who think people are advocating for a war, make no mistake what we just did IS an act of war under international law.; 1/05/2020 1:12 PM
SteveP said...: Iran declared war on the US in 1979. They have committed innumerable acts of war in the 40 years since. Attacking our embassy is an act of war for those of you who don't understand.
Anything the US does in response to Iran's aggression is legal and justified. Initiating military action against Iran is legal and justified.
We are in a declared war, whether you want to acknowledge reality or not.

How do you define winning?

Wreaking so much destruction and hardship on the enemy that they sue for peace and end their murderous activities throughout the world.; 1/05/2020 1:35 PM
CenterPuke88 said...: Glen, non-responsive...reread and try again to answer the question, how do we win versus Iran?

NJT, see above.

SteveP, thank you, could you clarify how we define “end their murderous activities”.

Here my take, the era of winning wars is over. The Gulf War, starting c. 1990, is still going on with no end in sight. We tacked the Afghan Foray onto that, and look likely to add a little Iranian Party as well. The conventional answer is once we have destroyed Iran’s ability to threaten or attack us, but to do that in the modern, technological world is simply impossible.

Consider this minor concern. Donnie’s plan in the business world was often simply to hurt the other guy and outlast him in the courts. In war, that translates to a grinding war of attrition, something that Iran, and the Middle East as a whole, is quite willing to engage in. Versus the United States, this is likely to succeed, see War, Vietnam...

As a parting thought, as we retreat out of Baghdad shortly, the echos of the Fall of Saigon will be audible. There will be those that demand we do not leave Baghdad when the agreement to allow U.S. troops is rescinded, if we listen to those, the U.S. will face an absolutely impossible task with an entire population opposed to occupation, and the casualties will make the last 30 years look tame.; 1/05/2020 1:56 PM
Glen Filthie said...: The reason terrorism is a problem is because - it works. Consider what happens in classical terrorist attacks: the bad guys shoot up a bus full of kids, they blow up a shopping mall, or hijack a plane. They do their dirty deeds and escape because in the west, we are people of laws. We can’t retaliate in kind because the lawyers, politicians and courts get involved and tie up any action for years. Our judiciary is their greatest accomplice, and our downfall.. they literally murder people in cold blood to score political points and walk away Scott free.

Contrast that with Sharia Law. You do the crime, you do the time. The death penalty is used, and used often. There are no corrupt courts where justice is purchased by the highest bidder who can afford the best lawyers. Most of their judges answer only to God...and there is no room for plea bargains, mercy, stacked juries etc. Their law is fast, brutal, simple...and effective. It’s usually public so that everyone in the tribe or village sees it work for themselves. If they see any shenanigans the mullahs and Imams will catch the very hell of it from their own people.

For us to make any headway with them, we must do the same. Their guy orchestrated a hit on an American embassy. A couple hours later he was dead. No lawyers, grand standing photo ops, or virtue signalling. The message is that if they want to kill innocents, they will be killed in response. “ Make your mistake, Mohammed, and the missiles are in the air. They could get you, your friends or your family.” The liberal American is too pozzed and separated from reality to respect this... but the moslem does.

Trump knows this and has done an excellent job of utilizing asymmetrical warfare to speak to the Iranians on their own terms. As he said, this should have been done long ago.; 1/05/2020 4:00 PM
Eck! said...: GF,

Winning is not entering a terrorist asymmetrical war for generations.
It's effective for them as the cost is low, as a result they can
continue to do it across generations. Never confuse revenge for
outright war. That we have missiles is just being asymmetric
without committing bodies, and they have figured how to do
that too.

That's the problem there is no win, no end, just later,
revenge leads to more that will follow. They do not
consider anyone as innocents, that is not relevant when
the they see us "infidels" killing theirs for any reason.

As to trump, since he has lowered himself to their level they
should fear, as should all of us. Tit for tat wars are costly.
and its always a worry there will be escalation

So no, there can be no winning, that's about total devastation.
At least not while the other side can press for terrorism. The
last war that was "won" killed literally millions of military
and civilians and as a result burned most of Germany and Japan
to the ground and left a lot of Europe and Asia in ruins.

So winning is total destruction, we as a people are not
inclined to do that without provocation to the extreme.
If you don't see that, read history.

Eck!; 1/05/2020 5:01 PM
CenterPuke88 said...: Glen, non-responsive again, please outline winning.; 1/05/2020 6:32 PM
DTWND said...: On another note, how can we as Americans, trust what this Administration is telling us to be the truth? Trump has spread lies, half-truths, and falsehoods since the day he was inaugurated. He has cried wolf so many times that taking his word as fact is ludicrous for any rational individual. To be sure, other Presidents have presented a slanted viewpoint to fulfill their agenda, but I sincerely believe they did so with the preservation of our country first and foremost. I do not believe Trump to be so honorable.

Dale; 1/05/2020 6:48 PM
New Jovian Thunderbolt said...: Win, what? The request at this stage is nonsensical. When are we gonna win over the Barbary Corsairs?; 1/05/2020 7:36 PM
dinthebeast said...: We may have forgotten August of 1953, but the Iranians have not.

-Doug in Oakland; 1/05/2020 7:54 PM
Glen Filthie said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; 1/05/2020 8:49 PM
Comrade Misfit said...: Glen, now you're just being homophobic and misogynistic, as is often your wont. Maybe it makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside to be an asshole, but if you are trying to convince the other commentators on here of the correctness of your views, you are doing it wrong.

Whatever. Blatant violation of Rules #1 and #2.A. Red card issued. Comment deleted.; 1/05/2020 9:45 PM
Comrade Misfit said...: NJT, it's not nonsensical to ask what the strategy is. It's not nonsensical to ask what the objectives are.

So far, the only objective that I see is that Trump wants to prove to the world that he is a tough guy.; 1/05/2020 9:47 PM
dinthebeast said...: Trump's only objective is to get reelected and stay out of prison.

-Doug in Oakland; 1/06/2020 12:53 AM
Ten Bears said...: Fascinating ...; 1/06/2020 5:57 AM
New Jovian Thunderbolt said...: There are no objectives. Iran has been at war with us for 41 years, we have never been at war with Iran. Which is a 41 year old problem, I agree. But pasting a terrorist leader? Even Barack McPeacePrize liked doing that. So what happens next? I'm no crystal gazer. Most likely what will happen now is two times the response we got when you helped sink half Iran's nave in 1988. Remember that? What happened then?; 1/06/2020 8:02 AM
Mike R said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; 1/06/2020 10:01 AM
Comrade Misfit said...: Mike: Rule 1 violation. Red card.

Look, people, I know this is a hot topic. But if you can't make comments without snark or insults, then either shut up or make them on your own blog.

I will close the comments on this if I must.; 1/06/2020 11:00 AM
Comrade Misfit said...: Very interesting twitter thread on this.

I have a real problem in taking at face value a rationalization or explanation from Trump, a man who reflexively lies about everything.; 1/06/2020 11:24 AM
Eck! said...: Interesting there is no question of policy or what happens next!
The question is to my eyes what does winning mean to you or what
constitutes a win?

I did see diversion, denial, Ad hominem, bandwagon, as well as other logical fallacies.

I still argue that there is no win that does not destroy at least one
combatant. I argue that is the case as the remaining constitutes a
sufficiently large group, will continue under the guise of political,
racial, or religious revenge, hence no win.

The idea that a sufficient level of destruction of the opposing combatant
is both war and possibly repugnant is not the question but may be the element
of why is hard to focus.

Eck!; 1/06/2020 12:02 PM
Comrade Misfit said...: The Reagan Administration had no problem with selling weapons to Iran. In recent times, including the tenure of this Administration, we had no problems unofficially working with Iran (and the Quds Force) to crush the ISIS self-styled caliphate.

Now, what happens there? What happens to the small teams of special ops guys who have been working the ISIS problem?; 1/06/2020 12:16 PM
seafury said...: Mr filthie, your argument is as eloquent as it is unpersuasive. Having said that, I would consider sending it along with an audition tape to
Fox News, OAN, or CBN.; 1/06/2020 12:29 PM
dinthebeast said...: "Now, what happens there?"

Currently what is happening is... nothing. Meaning we have ceased trying to fight ISIS while we wait for Iran's response.

And Pompeo is out there blaming the hornets nest they have kicked over on Obama.

-Doug in Oakland; 1/06/2020 3:19 PM
MarkS said...: Left unsaid is that Soleimani was a general. Their job description is to kill as many of their country's enemies as possible, with as few losses as possible.In an assymetrical fight( i.e. anyone against the U.S)re-enacting the battle of Kursk is suicidally bad tactics. So I'm at a loss as to how this guy turns into a terrorist mastermind when he's just an (opposition) general doing what generals get paid to do effectively; 1/06/2020 7:56 PM
CenterPuke88 said...: I’m personally wondering if Donald realizes just how small his traveling world will be if he finds a way to hit any cultural site...something I doubt the brass will let happen.; 1/06/2020 8:06 PM
pigpen51 said...: I have to say that while Trump authorizing killing this General was sort of unexpected, it is not really atypical of him.
The one thing that we should all remember is when the Iranians took one of our Naval vessels and it's sailors and held them as basically hostages, with them being made to kneel on the deck of their own boat, at gunpoint, with their hands over their heads, in fear for their lives, while basically making a spectacle of them. This is not how a civilized nation should treat the military members of another nation.
As far as Obama, just like his presidency, and how he blamed Bush for the economy and other problems of the nation, during the much of his first term, it is about time for Trump and his henchmen to stop blaming Obama and his administration for the failures of this first term, if he gets a second term, or his only term, if he doesn't. And you should remember that it is always very hard to defeat a sitting president for his second term, unless there is a real problem. Usually that problem is only related to the economy, such as the 1st Bush or Jimmy Carter, who had the problem with the Iranian hostages, plus the bad luck of running against an actor who could perform in front of an audience, even though Carter was perhaps the most honorable, highest character president we have had in the modern era. While many candidates always like to claim their great religious beliefs, Jimmy Carter was probably the one president who actually did not have to proclaim his religion, he lived it. The problem is, he was an ineffective president.
While we will never learn to like Iran as a nation, we must at least learn to respect them. And especially their population, if not their leadership. While our country is by default the only remaining super power left in the world, we should also strive to be the example that other countries look to. We can do that, and still use our military might when it is called for.; 1/06/2020 8:12 PM
MarkS said...: A: all of those sailors are now alive B;there was some ambiguity as to whether there was an incursion into Iranian territorial waters.they all got a meal, and Iran got to make a point re: territorial incursions. no harm, no foul.Why this is any kind of a big deal is kind of opaque to me. Iran took advantage of of an ambiguous situation to gain propaganda points, then released the seamen. We assassinated Soleimani after he landed at an international airport as part of what has been reported as a de escalation project at the behest of the Saudis. Global shortage of heroes here. This USA!!F!CK YEAH! shit is beyond tiresome; 1/06/2020 9:12 PM
Ten Bears said...: Raw Story is reporting Soleimani had 'business' dealings with Trump Organization.; 1/06/2020 10:47 PM
dinthebeast said...: Kind of. Ivanka and her brother were scouting a development deal in Azerbaijan through a front company set up to get cash to the IRGC in defiance of sanctions.
Money changed hands, but nothing ever got built, if I remember correctly.

-Doug in Oakland; 1/07/2020 1:10 AM
Glen Filthie said...: LOL.

Well Comrade - your blog, your campfire, your rules. For the record - I WAS polite and courteous. I am usually far more contemptuous of nasty women and other stupid people but I wanted to make sure I had judged you correctly. Unfortunately it appears that I have! As usual. The deletions and bans are their way of conceding a debate, and I shall accept your surrender like a scholar and a gentleman. 😆👍

Let me leave YOU with a warning, Comrade. People like you got Trump elected in 2016. You are well on the way to getting him elected again. And... if you STILL miss the point after all that... wait’ll you see the next guy!👌😊🖕🏻

MAGA, bitches!; 1/07/2020 9:02 AM
Comrade Misfit said...: Mr. Filthie,

If you want to smear shit on the walls in lieu of argument, please do it in your own blog.

Not here.; 1/07/2020 12:04 PM
seafury said...: As far as the next guy goes, Don jr? Like you said, wait til you see the next guy. And not to get too far ahead of ourselves here, is this before or after the civil war? One of my co workers is active in the militia world. According to him (and he would know) there won't be an election next year. While no one can disagree that the president would win in a landslide ( biggest margins since the inauguration) he isn't going to take that chance. As my colleague said with a wink "he's taking our leashes off this spring .Lets just say life for pu$$ified Hilary lovers is gonna change". I'm curious, are you guys in the same club?; 1/07/2020 1:20 PM
Comrade Misfit said...: Ok, we’ve wandered far enough off-field.; 1/07/2020 2:55 PM