Iran shoots down American drone in international airspace, US official confirms

Is this supposed to elevate your self-perceived superior intellect?

Nope not at all, my ability to make you Trump supporters go completely off topic because you have no way of defending him does that.

Actually, it demonstrates your insufficiency. You're even attacking "offspring" .... kindergarten, playground name-calling.

Wrong again, it demonstrates my willingness to stoop to someone else's level. If a person wants to throw childish insults and disrespect me, I have no problem throwing them back no matter who or what that person is even if it means getting pointed and going on vacation, I think I have proven that.

You revealed your membership in the SocialistLiberalAntiTrump groupies. You have no cogent criticism of Trump that is fact-based just your worn-out, meaningless opinions pretending to be more intelligent than a billionaire businessman,

A billionaire who got his money from mommy and daddy, a billionaire who has had to rip people off, a billionaire who has multiple failed businesses, a billionaire who has had to resort to tax loopholes due to his failed businesses that's why he refuses to show his tax returns. Yeah smart man he is, let me tell you!! Those are all facts get over it


so there's your cogent criticism, please do continue to feed me

who ran for POTUS and won as his first ELECTION TO ANY OFFICE and whipped the favored candidate who was the putative spouse of a POTUS and who had the support of the current administration at the time of the election and had made a living sopping up on the government tit most of her adult life,

"whipped"??? wrong again. Take away just one itty bitty swing state and his dumb ass loses. He got embarrassed by her in the popular vote. The only reason he is prez is because the Bernie supporters didn't vote, he's not gonna have that luxury this time. 2018 was a clear indication as to what happens when the dems do show up and vote. We whip your asses. HAHAHAHAHAHA


including the time two terms she resided in the White House. And you call ANYONE dumb and ignorant. If you weren't so sad you'd be a natural comedian. Originally Posted by LexusLover

Nope not anyone, just clueless individuals like yourself that's all. It would only figure you have no logical explanation as to why Trump backed down like he always does.

This is what thoughtful, intelligent criticism of Trump's decision-making on Iran looks like... but hey, if you're incapable of making thoughtful or intelligent points, just continue to call him a "pussy"!


Iran Calls Trump’s Bluff

The President is caught between hawkish goals and dovish means.
By The Editorial Board
June 21, 2019 6:47 pm ET

President Trump called off a military strike against Iran in mid-mission Thursday, and his supporters and even some of his critics are hailing it as an act of restraint and courage. The question for American interests is whether Iran and other adversaries will see it instead as a sign of weakness and indecision.

“We were cocked & loaded to retaliate last night on 3 different sights when I asked, how many will die. 150 people, sir, was the answer from a General. 10 minutes before the strike I stopped it, not proportionate to shooting down an unmanned drone,” Mr. Trump tweeted Friday morning.

It’s important to understand how extraordinary this is. The Commander in Chief ordered ships and planes into battle but recalled them because he hadn’t asked in advance what the damage and casualties might be? While the planes were in the air, he asked, oh, by the way? This is hard to take at face value.

More likely, he changed his mind because he had second thoughts about the military and political consequences of engaging in a conflict he promised as a candidate to avoid. Mr. Trump may have saved Iranian lives now, but his indecision and professed fear of casualties may be risking more American lives later.

Squeezed by the U.S. “maximum pressure” campaign, Iran’s rulers are trying to pressure Mr. Trump in return. In recent weeks they have attacked oil pipelines, mined oil tankers, and this week brazenly shot down a $130 million U.S. drone monitoring shipping lanes over international waters. Iran’s bet is that Mr. Trump is so averse to military confrontation that he will ease U.S. sanctions. On the evidence of the aborted mission, they may be right.

The damage from Mr. Trump’s stand-down depends in part on how Iran’s leaders respond. If they agree to talks to revise the 2015 nuclear agreement, the restraint might pay off. Yet Iran’s leaders have shown no interest in talking as long as U.S. sanctions are in place. If Mr. Trump eases sanctions to get Iran to the bargaining table, he is back to the Obama nuclear deal.

On the other hand if the Iranians escalate again, Mr. Trump’s restraint will look misguided and weak. If Americans are now killed by Iranian proxies, his failure to use force to deter attacks will deserve some of the blame.

Laying out these potential stakes isn’t “war mongering,” as the new isolationists on the right claim. This is the reality of geopolitics in which credibility is crucial to deterrence. The more that adversaries think Mr. Trump’s threats of force aren’t credible, the more they will seek to exploit that knowledge.

After Barack Obama failed to enforce his “red line” in Syria in 2013, adversaries soon took advantage. Vladimir Putin snatched Crimea from Ukraine and moved into Syria, China pushed further into the South China Sea, and Iran expanded its proxy wars in the Middle East. Will they draw similar license now from Mr. Trump’s stand-down?

The great weakness of Donald Trump’s foreign policy is its volatility. He is unpredictable to a fault. He has doubted his own Venezuela policy from the first week he signed off on it. He called Kim Jong Un crazy but now says he’s a swell guy. He signed a trade deal with Mexico then threatened it with new tariffs.

On Iran he has adopted a policy goal favored by hawkish Sen. Lindsey Graham but wants to use only the means of isolationist Sen. Rand Paul to achieve it. He warned that “if Iran wants to fight, that will be the official end of Iran,” but he lets Iran shoot down a drone and interfere with international shipping.

If Mr. Trump’s real policy is Mr. Paul’s, then he should be honest with Americans and return to the Obama nuclear deal. In the meantime, Iran appears to be calling Mr. Trump’s bluff.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/iran-ca...ff-11561157239 Originally Posted by lustylad

No that's the reply from someone who gets paid to post articles or propaganda. I find it hilarious that you had to post someone else's writing in order to attempt to display a "well thought out and intelligent" response. Gee I wonder why you couldn't post none of your own?? Probably because your next "well thought out and intelligent" post will be your first.

I called Trump a pussy because he's a draft dodger among other things. And I believe he backed down from Iran because he knows it would cost him political wise. That man does not give a shit about anyone else but himself. Period

And I believe he backed down from Iran because he knows it would cost him political wise. That man does not give a shit about anyone else but himself. Period Originally Posted by Little Monster

There's your problem. You say "you believe" like it means something. A child believes in the tooth fairy or the Easter Bunny, that doesn't make it true. You have no facts, no proof, only the opinion of political hacks which you regard as truth...wait! I just saw a unicorn canter by the window...why don't you grab your camera. I'll wait.

There's your problem. You say "you believe" like it means something. A child believes in the tooth fairy or the Easter Bunny, that doesn't make it true. You have no facts, no proof, only the opinion of political hacks which you regard as truth...wait! I just saw a unicorn canter by the window...why don't you grab your camera. I'll wait. Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

The door swings both ways "Einstein", you have no proof that what I say is not true. But do keep trying.

then explain your hatred for "shithole" America, Anglophile. Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

The door swings both ways "Einstein", you have no proof that what I say is not true. But do keep trying. Originally Posted by Little Monster

Lol. A typical liberal playbook answer. Throw out bullshit false accusations without any proof and then claim you can't prove me wrong.

The new mantra of the left. guilty until proven innocent, unless you are a liberal, then nothing to see here.

Lol. A typical liberal playbook answer. Throw out bullshit false accusations without any proof and then claim you can't prove me wrong.

The new mantra of the left. guilty until proven innocent, unless you are a liberal, then nothing to see here. Originally Posted by eccielover

Trump gave the go ahead to strike back at Iran and at the last minute "pulled back", that is a fact, get over it.
My guess as to his reasoning for doing so is every bit as factual as yours, get over it.

Trump gave the go ahead to strike back at Iran and at the last minute "pulled back", that is a fact, get over it.
My guess as to his reasoning for doing so is every bit as factual as yours, get over it. Originally Posted by Little Monster

Trump did them a favor. however .. they are running out of favors .. and the map shows what they are in for ..







BAHJAHAHAHHAAAAAA

Trump did them a favor. however .. they are running out of favors .. and the map shows what they are in for .



BAHJAHAHAHHAAAAAA Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

Please pull up any article or twitter post where Trump directly said he was "doing them a favor". News flash America had bases outside of Iraq years before they invaded and you still got your asses kicked. Trump backed down to save his own ass nothing more.

Please pull up any article or twitter post where Trump directly said he was "doing them a favor". News flash America had bases outside of Iraq years before they invaded and you still got your asses kicked. Trump backed down to save his own ass nothing more. Originally Posted by Little Monster

Asses kicked? not militarily. the political fallout from Bush II resulted in the predictable power struggle but as far as military capability .. Iraq got their asses kicked and it wasn't even close. both times.






it was called SHOCK AND AWE for a reason.

note the source .. the Clinton News Network.

Trump gave the go ahead to strike back at Iran and at the last minute "pulled back", that is a fact, get over it.
My guess as to his reasoning for doing so is every bit as factual as yours, get over it. Originally Posted by Little Monster

However, I'm not guessing at his reasoning, I'm taking the White House statements as the basis of the reasoning until they are proven false.

You are taking them as being false and throwing out "guesses" that differ. It's yours to prove your "guesses". I simply refer to the stated reasons.

However, I'm not guessing at his reasoning, I'm taking the White House statements as the basis of the reasoning until they are proven false.

You are taking them as being false and throwing out "guesses" that differ. It's yours to prove your "guesses". I simply refer to the stated reasons. Originally Posted by eccielover

It's been stated that Trump's reason for backing down was for political reasons, I believe that to be true.
Trump has been proven to be a pathological liar, that is a fact. If you wanna believe a pathological liar then by all means do so.

Hey guys, there is another stray cat shitting in the flowerbeds because you keep feeding him.

Asinine assumptions do not call for, or warrant, responces.

paging eddie munster ... eddie munster ...



Iran Loves This: The Royal Navy Doesn’t Have Enough Ships to Patrol Persian Gulf

David Axe, The National Interest 7 hours ago


https://nationalinterest.org/blog/bu...ian-gulf-67232



The Royal Navy plans briefly to double its number of warships in the Persian Gulf following an attempted attack by Iranian forces on a British oil tanker on July 20, 2019.

But the temporary increase in British warships in the region, from one to two, underscores just how few ships the Royal Navy can deploy even in an emergency.

Iranian boats tried to “impede” the British oil tanker near the Strait of Hormuz, the BBC reported. HMS Montrose, a Type 23 frigate, “was forced to move between the three boats and the tanker,” according to the BBC.

The British government claimed the attacking boats belonged to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps militia. The IRGC also allegedly was behind several recent bomb attacks targeting oil tankers in the Gulf and surrounding waters.

Tensions have escalated in the Middle East following U.S. president Donald Trump decision unilaterally to withdraw the United States from the 2015 deal limiting Iran’s nuclear program. After Trump restored economic sanctions, Tehran resumed stockpiling uranium.

The July 2019 tanker incident compelled the Royal Navy to accelerate by several weeks a planned deployment to the Gulf by the Type 45 destroyer HMS Duncan. Montrose and Duncan together will patrol the Persian Gulf before Montrose returns to U.K. waters for maintenance.

Duncan sailed south through the Bosphorus on July 13, 2019. The destroyer had been in the Black Sea region for NATO exercises.

The previous plan was for Montrose to depart the Gulf before Duncan arrived. The destroyer’s accelerated deployment “will allow a continuous naval presence to be sustained in the Strait of Hormuz,” a British defense ministry spokesman told Jane’s.

The Royal Navy likely cannot keep two major warships in the Persian Gulf for more than a few weeks. After decades of deepening defense cuts, the Royal Navy possesses just 19 destroyers and frigates. Only a few of them are deployable at any given time.

London's new defense strategy, released in December 2018, promised to maintain the fleet but not significantly expand it.

Periodic cuts since the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991 have shrunk the British military roughly by half. The most recent rounds of cuts starting in 2010 eliminated, among other forces, two aircraft carriers, two amphibious ships and four frigates, plus the Royal Air Force’s maritime patrol planes and carrier-compatible Harrier jump jets. Uniformed manpower dropped by 30,000.

As recently as late 2017, there were rumors that the United Kingdom might try to offset the cost of the country's exit from the European Union by further cutting the military. Amphibious ships appeared to be particularly vulnerable.

Fortunately for U.K. forces, funding stabilized at around $55 billion annually. In 2017 and 2018, the government allocated the armed forces an extra $2 billion, combined, above planned spending levels, enough to employ 196,000 active and reserve sailors, soldiers, airmen and civilian personnel.

The extra money in part came from a $13-billion reserve fund for four new Dreadnought-class ballistic-missile submarines that the Royal Navy is developing at a total cost of around $39 billion, which is nearly as much as the entire British military spends in a year.

Banking on the higher level of spending to continue, officials plan on building and maintaining a fleet including two Queen Elizabeth-class carriers, six Type 45 destroyers, eight Type 26 frigates, five low-cost Type 31 frigates, seven Astute-class attack submarine, 24 patrol vessels, 12 minehunters, five amphibious assault ships and nine logistics ships, together embarking six helicopter squadrons and 48 F-35 stealth fighters.

But that fleet still mostly exists on paper.

Mark Sedwill, the government's national security adviser, in May 2018 revealed that the Royal Navy likely wouldn't have enough ships to escort its two new aircraft carriers and would rely on allied navies to protect the carriers during wartime.

That the Royal Navy struggles to maintain two warships in the Persian Gulf reveals just how overstretched the fleet is.




David Axe serves as Defense Editor of the National Interest. He is the author of the graphic novels War Fix, War Is Boring and Machete Squad.