The Official "Damned Trump" Thread: Phase II

[Angrboda]

The mad king is now threatening to blow up Kharg Island if they don't open up the strait. The orange shitgibbon had no plan and even less clue.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

The mad king is now threatening to blow up Kharg Island if they don't open up the strait.  The orange shitgibbon had no plan and even less clue.

He’s also threatening to destroy Iran’s desalination plants, which is a war crime.

But his constant demands that Iran open the Strait is an implicit recognition that they’re the ones holding the cards.

Boru

[Thumpalumpacus]

He’s also threatening to destroy Iran’s desalination plants, which is a war crime.

But his constant demands that Iran open the Strait is an implicit recognition that they’re the ones holding the cards.

Boru

The fact that he's still piling up troops and resources against an enemy he's said has been "obliterated" is an implicit acknowledgement that he's been lying about outcomes.

Like Ukraine, Iran can find victory in not losing. Trump has gone hognose-in-huff into a country five times the size of California. Landing troops will definitely open up another forever war. If we think his numbers are low now -- and they're at record lows -- just wait. The longer this goes on, the worse Republicans will pay at the polls come November.

If he backs down he loses face, if he goes forward he commits a war crime.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

He’s also threatening to destroy Iran’s desalination plants, which is a war crime.

But his constant demands that Iran open the Strait is an implicit recognition that they’re the ones holding the cards.

Boru

The fact that he's still piling up troops and resources against an enemy he's said has been "obliterated" is an implicit acknowledgement that he's been lying about outcomes.

Like Ukraine, Iran can find victory in not losing. Trump has gone hognose-in-huff into a country five times the size of California. Landing troops will definitely open up another forever war. If we think his numbers are low now -- and they're at record lows -- just wait. The longer this goes on, the worse Republicans will pay at the polls come November.

If he backs down he loses face, if he goes forward he commits a war crime.

I'm sure it will increase, but the total ground-pounding forces being deployed right now seem to total about 15 000. It took ten times that number to temporarily pacify Iraq. And I agree - Iraq can lose on the battlefield and still win this war.

I'm not a military strategist, but I'm also not so blinkered that I can't see a disaster in the making.

Boru

[Thumpalumpacus]

On March 8, 1965, 3,500 Marines of the 9th Marine Expeditionary Brigade — the first combat troops in Vietnam — waded ashore to the coastal city of Da Nang.

[...]

Many in the upper echelons of American policymaking welcomed the landings. However, Maxwell Taylor, the U.S. ambassador to Vietnam at the time and a former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, expressed strong reservations. He predicted that it would be difficult to “hold the line” on further force commitments.

His fears would prove accurate.

By the end of 1965, 185,000 U.S. troops were in Vietnam. Less than three years later, the city that welcomed the Americans with handshakes and leis had become the host to high-level U.S. and South Vietnamese operations, including the headquarters of I Corps, the military zone encompassing South Vietnam’s northern provinces.

[...]

“Johnson’s idea was to fight and negotiate simultaneously,” she [noted historian Barbara Tuchman] wrote. “The difficulty was that the limited war aim … was unachievable by limited war. The North had no intention of ever conceding a non-Communist South, and since such a concession could have been forced upon them only by military victory, and since such a victory was unattainable by the United States short of total war and invasion, which it was unwilling to undertake, the American war aim was therefore foreclosed.

“If this was recognized by some, it was not acted upon because no one was prepared to admit American failure. Activists could believe the bombing might succeed; doubters could vaguely hope some solution would turn up.”

https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/veteran...0-marines/

Ms Tuchman's analysis is equally-valid in our current circumstances. History isn't just rhyming here, it's singing in chorus.

Also, The Hill is reporting 50,000 troops in the region.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

On March 8, 1965, 3,500 Marines of the 9th Marine Expeditionary Brigade — the first combat troops in Vietnam — waded ashore to the coastal city of Da Nang.

[...]

Many in the upper echelons of American policymaking welcomed the landings. However, Maxwell Taylor, the U.S. ambassador to Vietnam at the time and a former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, expressed strong reservations. He predicted that it would be difficult to “hold the line” on further force commitments.

His fears would prove accurate.

By the end of 1965, 185,000 U.S. troops were in Vietnam. Less than three years later, the city that welcomed the Americans with handshakes and leis had become the host to high-level U.S. and South Vietnamese operations, including the headquarters of I Corps, the military zone encompassing South Vietnam’s northern provinces.

[...]

“Johnson’s idea was to fight and negotiate simultaneously,” she [noted historian Barbara Tuchman] wrote. “The difficulty was that the limited war aim … was unachievable by limited war. The North had no intention of ever conceding a non-Communist South, and since such a concession could have been forced upon them only by military victory, and since such a victory was unattainable by the United States short of total war and invasion, which it was unwilling to undertake, the American war aim was therefore foreclosed.

“If this was recognized by some, it was not acted upon because no one was prepared to admit American failure. Activists could believe the bombing might succeed; doubters could vaguely hope some solution would turn up.”

https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/veteran...0-marines/

Ms Tuchman's analysis is equally-valid in our current circumstances. History isn't just rhyming here, it's singing in chorus.

Also, The Hill is reporting 50,000 troops in the region.

I accept the correction, but I don’t imagine that will make a significant difference in facing 93 million pissed off Iranians, especially since their new co-belligerents are pretty well armed and have an estimated 200 000-300 000 men under arms.

Boru

[Thumpalumpacus]

I accept the correction, but I don’t imagine that will make a significant difference in facing 93 million pissed off Iranians, especially since their new co-belligerents are pretty well armed and have an estimated 200 000-300 000 men under arms.

Boru

Well, I can't vouch the Hill's numbers, but if accurate I wasn't thinking it would change the chances of success, which would still be about zero-point-zero, but more that the larger number would imply a stronger intention commit to ground combat.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

I accept the correction, but I don’t imagine that will make a significant difference in facing 93 million pissed off Iranians, especially since their new co-belligerents are pretty well armed and have an estimated 200 000-300 000 men under arms.

Boru

Well, I can't vouch the Hill's numbers, but if accurate I wasn't thinking it would change the chances of success, which would still be about zero-point-zero, but more that the larger number would imply a stronger intention commit to ground combat.

Good point. You don’t send 50 000 ground-pounders halfway around the world unless you plan to do something with them.

Then again, with Trump’s chicken-and-waffles approach to foreign policy, anything is possible.

Boru

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Trump’s sense of style, restraint, quiet good taste continues.





*cough* compensating *cough*

Boru

[Angrboda]

Trump’s sense of style, restraint, quiet good taste continues.





*cough* compensating *cough*

Boru

"In one scene, an enormous American flag on the outside of the tower appears to have 56 stars."