Gulf War No.37: Iranistan

[Blazing Saddles]

He said



No mention of except those that did not require boots on the ground

Quite frankly it was an inaccurate and hyperbolic claim that is demonstrably untrue, just looking at Iran alone, let alone the many other countries that have had regime change without boots on the ground

I am not going to defend someone else’s patch over this, but I think if you look at a post in isolation, rather than the context of the ongoing discussion, you can usually find something to dispute.

It’s a rather pedantic approach if you don’t mind me saying ?

 

[Pblakeney]

I am not going to defend someone else’s patch over this, but I think if you look at a post in isolation, rather than the context of the ongoing discussion, you can usually find something to dispute.

It’s a rather pedantic approach if you don’t mind me saying.

I’m confused by this post.
Should there be a ? at the end? To be pedantic. 😉

 

[briantrumpet]

I’m confused by this post.
Should there be a ? at the end? To be pedantic. 😉

No - it's not a question. To be pedantic.

 

[Beebo]

I've seen a comparison made of Starmer with Harold Wilson refusing to get directly involved in the Vietnam War. Seems apposite.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_and_the_Vietnam_War

Trump seems to be forgetting that NATO is a defensive force.
There is no need for everyone to pile on with other unplanned attacks.

 

[briantrumpet]

Trump seems to be forgetting that NATO is a defensive force.
There is no need for everyone to pile on with other unplanned attacks.

The UK position of defending allies and UK interests seems sensible/proportionate. I also see that France has sent anti-drone systems to help defend Cyprus and the UK's bases there.

 

[Dorset Boy]

He said



No mention of except those that did not require boots on the ground

Quite frankly it was an inaccurate and hyperbolic claim that is demonstrably untrue, just looking at Iran alone, let alone the many other countries that have had regime change without boots on the ground

I was quoting what a large number of geo-political historians and commentators have been saying.

 

[spen666]

I am not going to defend someone else’s patch over this, but I think if you look at a post in isolation, rather than the context of the ongoing discussion, you can usually find something to dispute.

It’s a rather pedantic approach if you don’t mind me saying.

How pedantic of me to point out something is factually wrong

 

[spen666]

I was quoting what a large number of geo-political historians and commentators have been saying.

you may well have been, but it doesn't make it correct as the 2 examples I've quoted show it is not true.
Just because someone else has said it doesn't mean it is true - I mean Donald has said a lot as have many politicians and a lot of what is said is not correct

 

[TailWindHome]

He said



No mention of except those that did not require boots on the ground

Quite frankly it was an inaccurate and hyperbolic claim that is demonstrably untrue, just looking at Iran alone, let alone the many other countries that have had regime change without boots on the ground

The people doing the overthrowing weren't wearing boots?

 

[Pblakeney]

No - it's not a question. To be pedantic.

I was asking because I was confused.
Thank you for your answer, and your attention to this matter.

 

[Blazing Saddles]

?

 

[briantrumpet]

?

!

 

[Pblakeney]

This may have already been covered on here but I am losing track. Scary enough to bear repeating in any case.

"A government watchdog reports that U.S. troops are being told the war in Iran is biblically ordained and that “Trump has been anointed by Jesus to light the signal fire in Iran to cause Armageddon and mark his return to Earth,”"

 

[BoldonLad]

This may have already been covered on here but I am losing track. Scary enough to bear repeating in any case.

"A government watchdog reports that U.S. troops are being told the war in Iran is biblically ordained and that “Trump has been anointed by Jesus to light the signal fire in Iran to cause Armageddon and mark his return to Earth,”"

Exactly "with god on our side" 😂

 

[spen666]

This may have already been covered on here but I am losing track. Scary enough to bear repeating in any case.

"A government watchdog reports that U.S. troops are being told the war in Iran is biblically ordained and that “Trump has been anointed by Jesus to light the signal fire in Iran to cause Armageddon and mark his return to Earth,”"

Any link to this