nymnympseudonymTrump's Kobayashi Maru
https://piefed.social/c/politicalmemes/p/1906574/trump-s-kobayashi-maru
First_ThunderI mean, there were 2 ships hit with drones… there are reasons for the insurers to be afraid
Yes, they fear the hot war Trump started without consulting any allies (except Bibi) nor any preparation
I_Has_A_HatYes, they fear Irans response to the hot war Trump started. Why is this such a difficult concept to grasp?
FiniteBanjoAnd I don’t think those sea mines are American.
I don’t think you two are getting the point. It is the way it is because of Trump’s illegal war.
Being invaded by an asshole authoritarian doesn’t really justify attacking literally everyone in reach with arms funneled in from two other asshole authoritarians.
Not that I’m particularly fond of Exxon Mobil, Dubai, or Qatar.
There is no “good side” in this fight.
All of the people Iran has attacked are directly aiding and abetting the criminal Americans.
So when the USA warmongers and preemptively attacks it’s bad
When Iran warmongers and preemptively attacks it’s good
Got it, understood.
I’m not saying it’s good or bad, I’m saying it’s not the escalation you’re claiming it is. Iran is in an existential war against the world’s strongest superpower. It’s allowed to defend itself, and they have deemed that the best way to do that is to disrupt the global economy to the point that the war isn’t worth it. It’s quite an immediately effective strategy, too, and will hasten the end of the war far faster than bombing schools or whatever it is that the US’s strategy is.
Iran is not in any such war against the USA, against Israel maybe though, only the IRGC is at risk of disappearing.
Lies and misinformation. The US killed over a million Iraqi civilians and the country is still less stable than under Saddam Husein. Similar stories for Afghanistan, Libya, and Syria. War is always an existential threat. The only reason you think it can be clean and sanitary is because you have been propagandized.
Add in the genocidal tendencies of Israel, and Iran starts looking very much like the good guy in this scenario.
My dude under the sun.
Iraq still exists.
WraithGearWe have cells that triggered are acting on orders of a dead man’s switch, and when you assassinate all possible leaders of a nation you no longer have anyone who can call off the initiated cells, nor speak for the nation to surrender
not just illegal – arguably like every US action since WWII it’s not legally even a war
But the reason it’s as f–ed up as it is is because Trump went in without
- NATO which has things like minesweepers and actual working littoral combat ships
- Getting the needed US aircraft carriers into place before telling Iranians to revolt
- Getting the needed US LCS minesweepers into place (oops they are both under maintenance RN)
- Getting support ahead of time from allies like Europe, Japan, S Korea, GCC states, all of whom could be exerting economic, political, and even military support RN
- Having a fucking plan for how to reopen the Strait which every State Department policywonk and pre-Trump Navy Admiral knew would be Iran’s first move
- Having a fucking plan for shaheds and USV water drones which are now granting Iran naval control and are built decentralized on the cheap in basements, you are not likely to bomb them all
Getting the needed US aircraft carriers into place before telling Iranians to revolt
Didn’t they bring two aircraft carriers into the region like a month before the “preemptive” strike that kicked this off? Also heard rumblings that the US has been moving quite a lot of aircraft into the region since like December
One was already in place. But was supposed to go in for maintenance like a month ago.
The other had to be sent in from IIRC the Pacific, much like the ship full of Marines currently on its way (that should have been in place a month ago if there was any chance they’d be needed…)
NATO which has things like minesweepers and actual working littoral combat ships
NATO wasn’t going to help after he spent the last year threatening Greenland and Canada with invasion.
Getting support ahead of time from allies like Europe
See above.
Having a fucking plan for shaheds
There was no way to stop it. No plan was feasible. He did it anyway.
Imagine all it takes is the US and Israel to legit say say sorry to Iran and show Iran respect in the future to restore energy security and know you are fucked because of pride
Given the people involved, ‘all’ is doing a lot of heavy lifting in that sentence.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Iran responded to complete capitulation with demands and kept the strait closed like a toll booth regardless. They’re not “good people just trying to exist” like some people would tell you, the IRGC is just middle eastern MAGA.
LIES! FALSE!
What about the respect for the hard work child traffickers put in? What about the redirect for other dictators? What about the respect for other child rapists?
What about the respect for the hard work child traffickers put in? What about the redirect for other dictators? What about the respect for other child rapists?
He respects Vladimir Putin. Or at least his cock.
So he is saying that Iran is not responsible for checks notes Iran hitting ships of third party nations? How old is he, 5 years old?
Strait of Hormuz is not international waters. They are fully allowed to close it, at least on their side of the strait. When people ignore laws, usually there is a penalty and enforcement. Closure here is enforced by missiles.
Whether Oman is a party in this war (given their harboring of US bases and military assets) is up to debate.
They are fully allowed to close it
According to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), have a right to transit international straits like the Straight of Hormuz. Article 38 to be exact: www.un.org/depts/los/…/unclos_e.pdf
I dont know. Generally it gets a bit muddy at such a stage. Are they party to the war? Did they expressly forbid USA from using military bases to resupply from/attack Iran? Did Oman cushly stay silent and complicit playing both sides? Are trade ships that are trading with the enemy, not expressly and officially guaranteed by Oman not valid targets in a strait majorly controlled by Iran (even the Oman territorial waters are a bit silly once you take into account the geography)?
If anything, Iran, in its desperation, is fighting well with the superest most bigliest ultra fascist state in the making.
Generally it gets a bit muddy at such a stage.
I think international law is actually pretty clear.
Are trade ships that are trading with the enemy, not expressly and officially guaranteed by Oman not valid targets
Iran is shooting all the ships. It is pretty clear that “legality” is not a concern Iran has.
If anything, Iran, in its desperation, is fighting well against the superest most bigliest ultra fascist state in the making.
This seems to be the root. You see that Trump/USA is evil here, which it is. And then somehow conclude that Iran must be good, if Iran is fighting against Trump.
Iran is evil too. Fucking evil. Killing innocent civilians deliberately and laughing at it evil.
There is a trend of ignoring how evil some of the Muslim groupings in the Middle East are. That has got to stop. It almost seem like “white man’s burden” - as if people think Muslims don’t have agency to know right from wrong.
I guess you’re right about the international law. But then again, it’s been out the window for a while.
I didn’t write any conclusions about Iran regime being non evil. But looking at history, you’d be a fool not to see its instability rooted in US/Israel/UK domination goals.
The excerpts from UN assemblies I saw, Iran was quite repetitive, but spoke much more eloquently than the US. Make of that what you will, in the age of ai slop.
you’d be a fool not to see its instability rooted in US/Israel/UK domination goals.
Yes the US has fucked up bigly in Iraq and Iran. There is a pattern - fuck Republicans.
But in many cases, the US has also created stability. The 1991 Gulf War was fundamentally a stability exercise - Iraq started that war by invading Kuwait. Likely Saddam would gladly have invaded Saudi Arabia, if the US had not enforced the status quo in the region.
The US was the world’s policeman. Sometimes they did some shit, but sometimes they kept the peace. Over all, I think people were glad they were there. But keeping the peace involves force or the threat of force sometimes, and it seems to me that some people only see the violence or threat of violence, and not the peace created. As in the 1991 Gulf War, for example.
Iran was quite repetitive, but spoke much more eloquently than the US.
Iran’s political leadership has shown far more competence than Trump’s administration, no question. Trump apparently started this war without knowing that Iran would close the straight of Hormuz, which random people on the street would have known would happen. Trump’s administration is literally idiots - not just people I disagree with.
The US was the world’s policeman
You know when people said that, it was derisive right? The US wasn’t elected to the role by some body at the UN. Americans decided themeselves it was their role, as history’s great exception, to decide matters across the globe.
Also, hilarious to say the Gulf War was the good and just war and the Iraq war was a big fuck up, considering they were both the product of the same political dynasty. As if one did not inextricably lead to the other.
You know when people said that, it was derisive right?
Derisive for some people. Not for some others.
Also, hilarious to say the Gulf War was the good and just war and the Iraq war was a big fuck up, considering they were both the product of the same political dynasty.
What kind of bullshit argument is that? Bush I could have taken Baghdad but didn’t, because he was not an idiot and knew it would destabilize the Middle East. Bush II undid the decision of his father - that was the act of overthrowing the actions of his father, not some long term dynastical plan.
Here is Cheney in 1994 desrcibing everything that went wrong after taking Baghdad, which is why Bush I did not do so: www.youtube.com/watch?v=YENbElb5-xY
As if one did not inextricably lead to the other.
It didn’t Clinton did not go to Baghdad, and Gore would not have done so. Because they were not idiots, would have listened to the experts saying it was incredibly stupid.
Cheney in 1994 on Iraq
that was the act of overthrowing the actions of his father, not some long term dynastical plan.
Yes, that’s how dynasties work. Inheriting political power produces stupid results.
Also worth noting that we backed Saddam Hussein through the Iran-Iraq war. You can’t pick out this or that middle eastern conflict the US has been a part of and declare it “the good one”. We’ve been meddling for more than half a century. It’s silly to act though each individual event just happens, as if shorn free from the consequences of the prior one.
What does international law say about assassinating heads of state
What does international law say about bombing industrial infrastructure
What does international law say about bombing hospitals and schools
ITS NOT WHATABOUTISM TO TALK ABOUT THE MILITARY ACTIONS OF BOTH SIDES OF A WAR; SHUT THE FUCK UP THIS ISNT FORMALIZED DEBATE; AND EVEN IF IT WERE, YOU ARENT USING THE LOGICAL FALLACIES CORRECTLY ANYWAY
There’s this whole argument about World Policing being Bad ™. But even besides that:
The US is also currently murdering, kidnapping and disappearing thousands of it’s citizens, so it’s not for the moral high ground they’re bombing civilian infrastructure.
Besides, the war will almost certainly lead to more suffering, and probably also lives lost, as a consequence of the destruction, fear, oppression and power struggle following it. So it’s not for humanitarian reasons they’re disrupting international trade and relations.
The US has also made it very clear it only intends to follow international law and treaties when it benefits them, as evidenced with Greenland, Venezuela, Cuba, trade wars, trade and protection treaty violations. So it’s not for any rules based order they’re planlessly and goallessly staging a billion dollar/day terror campaign.
It seems the US is just exercising it’s might and terrorising the world because it wants to. I wonder how long before someone gets fed up with it…
Like, I am absolutely not defending the US under Trump. That shit is straight out fascism.
Nowhere have I said the US is acting morally or legally. But you are apparently defending Iran’s illegal behavior, by pointing to the US’s illegal behavior. That is not how ethics works…
If you re-read my comment you’ll see that I’m nowhere defending Iran’s conduct, so let’s address that.
When unilaterally attacked by a terrorist state neighbour supported by the largest military in the world, I do feel Iran has the moral right to use assymetric warfare to survive. Even more so when that doesn’t cause mass civilian casualty.
Do I condone the oppression the Iranian government did before the war? No.
Do I still believe Iran has the right to sovereignty? Definitely and absolutely.
It is no business of the US to meddle in the political internalities of a country not a credible threat. And even less so at the behest of a rampaging genocidal state using terror to keep neighbours from intervening.
To put it into a simplified analogy: are you arguing dishonestly putting words in my mouth? Yes. Does that give me the right to burn your house down? No.
In the real world it’s both the US treating dishonestly and doing the burning though.
When unilaterally attacked by a terrorist state neighbour supported by the largest military in the world, I do feel Iran has the moral right to use assymetric warfare to survive.
There is an argument here, if the asymmetric warfare was against the US or US allies. But Iran is attacking the whole world, including many innocents. Especially the blockade of fertilizer exports has the potential to kill countless innocents.
To be clear: this war is Islamofascists vs Judeochristian fascists
The US bombed a fucking school and killed over 100 kids. The US and Israel started the attacks on civilians.
If the bigger player is not respecting international law, why should Iran? Also, I haven’t heard of any third party country being hit, you might want to share some sources on that claim.
RememberTheApollo_Trump can’t back down. He has no other method of operation than application of further force to make his opponent yield.
You will do what I want, you’re making me do this. This is your fault I have to hurt you more. Anything you do in retaliation is your fault and not a justifiable reaction to what I’m doing to you and I will hurt you harder for everything you do to defend yourself.
He’s an abuser.
If he were to stop, that would mean losing face and the possibility be were wrong.
No narcissist can do that.
CorkyskogSure he can, narcissists do it all the time. Wallstreet even coined the term “TACO” because he does it so often.
All he has to do is declare victory and move on to something else.
The problem this time is that he has already declared victory and tried to move on but the straights are still closed. He can’t think beyond his next meal.
He has declared victory already, but problem is that Iran was little bit more than he could chew, and they are not going to back down. Only thing Trump can do is try to hit harder and that would not end until he uses nuclear weapons.
And I’m sure that is the path he is willing to go.
GuyIncognitoMaybe, but in this case the country whose intelligence agency ran the child pimp from whom Trump got his young girls is the country that would have to fight on alone if the US declared victory and left. Even if you put that bit of leverage aside, there’s massive bipartisan support for Israel in congress and across the US ruling class in general. Thus, they’re stuck. Iran has grabbed israel by the belt and is punching it in the face.