It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump warns Iran

page: 15
41
<< 12  13  14    16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 23 2018 @ 04:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: matafuchs

That these things haven't yet caused WW3 doesn't mean that they won't. Getting to the point of war takes time.


My great grandfather lived into his late 90s. My great aunt pointed out the fact that he chewed tobacco and drank a shot of vodka each night and said she'd warned him it would eventually kill him... your words here remind me of my Tante Linda.




posted on Jul, 23 2018 @ 04:32 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

That's the funny thing about statistics, you can always point out an exception or two, but the trendline is very clear. Those things are correlated with dying years earlier. Just as geopolitical instability is correlated with large wars.



posted on Jul, 23 2018 @ 04:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: angeldoll

Well, someone should have told me. If Iranian was Arabic then, it's Arabic now. You just called an Arabic people "monkeys."

TheRedneck


I expected better from you. I said "Monkey see Monkey do". Referring to Trump as the Monkey.
There. Is there clear now for those who have never heard that old saying, or can't seem to comprehend what it means?

The Monkey (Trump) SAW the Iranians acting like big-mouth bullies, so the Monkey (Trump) do the same thing.

And Jesus Christ, Iranians are not Arabs. God, Red.

You should apologize to me for being accusatory and deliberately antagonistic.



edit on 7/23/2018 by angeldoll because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 23 2018 @ 06:32 PM
link   



posted on Jul, 23 2018 @ 06:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: damonster





Interesting, trump was predicting his own behavior...



posted on Jul, 23 2018 @ 07:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
Interesting, trump was predicting his own behavior...


He does that a lot. The amount of projection involved with Trumps criticisms is worth a study or two.



posted on Jul, 23 2018 @ 07:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
Interesting, trump was predicting his own behavior...


He does that a lot. The amount of projection involved with Trumps criticisms is worth a study or two.


I started noticing this during the campaign, and it never stopped. It's frightening at times.



posted on Jul, 23 2018 @ 07:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: burdman30ott6

That's the funny thing about statistics, you can always point out an exception or two, but the trendline is very clear. Those things are correlated with dying years earlier. Just as geopolitical instability is correlated with large wars.


A single shot of vodka nightly is fine. So is a single Trump tweet. Better than dropping cash.



posted on Jul, 23 2018 @ 07:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Throes

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: burdman30ott6

That's the funny thing about statistics, you can always point out an exception or two, but the trendline is very clear. Those things are correlated with dying years earlier. Just as geopolitical instability is correlated with large wars.


A single shot of vodka nightly is fine. So is a single Trump tweet. Better than dropping cash.


I don't think this tweet matters at all, I said that pages back. It's sound and fury signifying nothing... other than the emptiness of Trumps own rhetoric. The US has effectively zero leverage over Iran now that we've backed out of the nuclear deal. We no longer have any sort of diplomatic ties, and thanks to sanctions we have no economic ties. We've also shown the rest of the world that it's against their interests to sever their newly forming economic ties with Iran.

We cannot attack them. They know this, and we as a nation know this (Trump may not know this).

So it's really nothing more than an empty threat... one which was made in response to a declaration from Iran that they would be happy to work with us if we were rational, but that they'll defend themselves if provoked.

All that tweet did is make us look foolish. It's not threatening war, because we can't follow through on war or for that matter any other consequences.



posted on Jul, 23 2018 @ 07:38 PM
link   

Trump will go down in history as the president with actual balls. Rock on MAGA!


Since when does "having balls" equate with smart governing? Why is it people keep spewing this crap like it means something? Also for the record, Trump only has balls on social media. They apparently get snipped right before he meets the world leaders he rantingly harasses on social media.

Theodore Roosevelt had it right, with his method of diplomacy. Speak softly and carry a big stick (and you will go far). Trump is the polar opposite. Bully loudly and brag about your big stick. Ever notice he brags about his man-parts, in about the same way he brags about the U.S. military might? And you folks think this is a sound way to diplomatically work with other nations?

What if Iran calls Trump on his bluff? Threatens the U.S. again? Is Trump going to make them suffer more than any nation ever before? Naw.. I don't think so. Some of your man-crushes on Trump goes beyond any sort of common sense. In your minds, there is literally nothing Trump can say or do that you won't agree with, no matter -what- it is. Forgone conclusion... Trump says something.. you will 100% agree with it.



posted on Jul, 23 2018 @ 07:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: Throes

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: burdman30ott6

That's the funny thing about statistics, you can always point out an exception or two, but the trendline is very clear. Those things are correlated with dying years earlier. Just as geopolitical instability is correlated with large wars.


A single shot of vodka nightly is fine. So is a single Trump tweet. Better than dropping cash.


I don't think this tweet matters at all, I said that pages back. It's sound and fury signifying nothing... other than the emptiness of Trumps own rhetoric. The US has effectively zero leverage over Iran now that we've backed out of the nuclear deal. We no longer have any sort of diplomatic ties, and thanks to sanctions we have no economic ties. We've also shown the rest of the world that it's against their interests to sever their newly forming economic ties with Iran.

We cannot attack them. They know this, and we as a nation know this (Trump may not know this).

So it's really nothing more than an empty threat... one which was made in response to a declaration from Iran that they would be happy to work with us if we were rational, but that they'll defend themselves if provoked.

All that tweet did is make us look foolish. It's not threatening war, because we can't follow through on war or for that matter any other consequences.


Who the hell told you we have no leverage over them? We're about to hit them with new sanctions. Sanctions are precisely what brought them to the table to negotiate last time, but Obama and Kerry gave away the farm when they had all the leverage walking into the negotiations.

ETA: Also, on what are you basing the claim that we can't attack them? Not that I'm advocating that right now, but what exactly is preventing us from striking Iran?
edit on 23 7 18 by face23785 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 23 2018 @ 08:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: fleabit
Ever notice he brags about his man-parts


Yet we all know that if he had anything worth showing it would have been posted all over the internet.



posted on Jul, 23 2018 @ 08:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: Throes

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: burdman30ott6

That's the funny thing about statistics, you can always point out an exception or two, but the trendline is very clear. Those things are correlated with dying years earlier. Just as geopolitical instability is correlated with large wars.


A single shot of vodka nightly is fine. So is a single Trump tweet. Better than dropping cash.


I don't think this tweet matters at all, I said that pages back. It's sound and fury signifying nothing... other than the emptiness of Trumps own rhetoric. The US has effectively zero leverage over Iran now that we've backed out of the nuclear deal. We no longer have any sort of diplomatic ties, and thanks to sanctions we have no economic ties. We've also shown the rest of the world that it's against their interests to sever their newly forming economic ties with Iran.

We cannot attack them. They know this, and we as a nation know this (Trump may not know this).

So it's really nothing more than an empty threat... one which was made in response to a declaration from Iran that they would be happy to work with us if we were rational, but that they'll defend themselves if provoked.

All that tweet did is make us look foolish. It's not threatening war, because we can't follow through on war or for that matter any other consequences.


Who the hell told you we have no leverage over them? We're about to hit them with new sanctions. Sanctions are precisely what brought them to the table to negotiate last time, but Obama and Kerry gave away the farm when they had all the leverage walking into the negotiations.

ETA: Also, on what are you basing the claim that we can't attack them? Not that I'm advocating that right now, but what exactly is preventing us from striking Iran?


Sanctions did not bring Iran to the table. The Iran nuclear deal was brought about because the rest of the world wanted to deal with Iran. Originally, under W the sanctions we used were put into place for 10 years, on the condition that we would negotiate a deal at the end of those 10 years. A deal was made, and the rest of the world gave up those sanctions.

Under the current deal, the rest of the world is happy to trade with Iran. Iran also has the military backing of Russia and China in the event they're attacked. Europe would not side with the US if we're the aggressors either.

The problem with sanctions is that they're a last resort when it comes to economic ties. The best form of leverage over a nation is economic, by increasing or decreasing trade. Once you implement sanctions though, you cut off all trade. If sanctions are applied for long enough, as they have been in the cases of nations like Cuba, North Korea, and Iran, the country finds ways to cope and goes about their business.

Sanctions are only effective as part of a short term strategy in response to trade that a nation has been reliant on.

And no, these sanctions that Trump is proposing aren't worth anything because the rest of the world is not going to go along with them. Here's the administrations strategy in the article you linked.



The next stage in the strategy, as first reported by NBC News on July 14, was to lay the groundwork for a global embargo of Iran by telling European allies that their countries have to cut economic ties with Tehran by November if they want to continue trading with the U.S, a vastly larger market.


That strategy is not likely to work. Europe will not back out of their Iran deal, which means that we're trying to make Europe decide between trade with Russia, China, and Iran vs trade with the US. The US is also rapidly losing influence as we increase tariffs and incentivize nations to build trade networks without the US.

In fact, what Europe can do here, is call Trumps bluff, and if Trump follows through, they can completely isolate the US, put us in a weaker position, and then force us to make concessions in order to open trade back up. Europe would take a small hit in the short term by doing so, but the US would take an enormous hit and lose any and all leverage in diplomatic negotiations for at least 2 generations.



posted on Jul, 23 2018 @ 08:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

You don't seem familiar with this at all. Sanctions were indeed what brought Iran to the table. That was one of the main criticisms of the deal, even from Democrats, was that it lifted sanctions too early. The entire reason Iran demanded sanctions relief up front is because they were damaging.

The reason sanctions don't usually work is because we half-ass them. This is one of the few cases where they worked, and then we blew the diplomatic side of it.



posted on Jul, 23 2018 @ 08:40 PM
link   
for those ATS members who seem to be trying to school me about the Trump Tweet to Iran....

I am just analyzing the meaning of the Tweet, i'm neither pro nor con on the WWIII aura surrounding the Tweet...

I'm just trying to deduce just what Trump is talking about in his ALL CAPS message to the Leadership...


Here's the reply from Trump :

To Iranian President Rouhani:

NEVER, EVER THREATEN THE UNITED STATES AGAIN OR YOU WILL SUFFER CONSEQUENCES THE LIKES OF WHICH FEW THROUGHOUT HISTORY HAVE EVER SUFFERED BEFORE. WE ARE NO LONGER A COUNTRY THAT WILL STAND FOR YOUR DEMENTED WORDS OF VIOLENCE & DEATH. BE CAUTIOUS!
11:24 PM - Jul 22, 2018




at a simple level it might seem to be threatening to use Nuclear missiles/bombs. but the way i'm reading the message

it is not about nukes...Trump might be meaning the secret Space programs the USA has... and a singular strike by the metal rod energy weapon cratering a small city--- could be just a wayward asteroid hit on Earth rather than a guided impact weapon bringing about destruction ---
hence no attack was apparentor can be proven...., just a coincindental Act-of-God



posted on Jul, 23 2018 @ 08:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: Aazadan

You don't seem familiar with this at all. Sanctions were indeed what brought Iran to the table. That was one of the main criticisms of the deal, even from Democrats, was that it lifted sanctions too early. The entire reason Iran demanded sanctions relief up front is because they were damaging.

The reason sanctions don't usually work is because we half-ass them. This is one of the few cases where they worked, and then we blew the diplomatic side of it.


We've been sanctioning Iran for decades... it has done absolutely nothing to create instability in their political system. They've been an absolute failure.

Edit: To expand on the point that sanctions have been a failure. Not only is the regime still in charge, but all we've heard from the GOP and Israel for the last several decades, even while sanctions were going on, is that Iran's nuclear program is a threat. If sanctions were successful, that would not have been the case.
edit on 23-7-2018 by Aazadan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 23 2018 @ 08:50 PM
link   
a reply to: St Udio

If we had that technology (and we don't), using it preemptively would go well beyond crimes against humanity. Dropping asteroids on the cities of enemy countries unprovoked would instantly trigger a world war. And we would be the bad guys. It would be a MAD situation, and we would rightfully be utterly annihiliated.

Even doing so during a war goes well beyond even the types of casualties nuclear weapons create.

Also, such weapons don't create radiation, but if used in any sizable numbers would still put a massive amount of dust into the atmosphere, and probably kill all of the survivors regardless.

I'm sure that mass drivers will eventually be a weapon humanity has access to, and that one day in the far future they will either be used by us or against us, but we don't have them now.



posted on Jul, 23 2018 @ 08:51 PM
link   
a reply to: St Udio

I don't even know where to start with this. First of all, any talk of WW3 is just silly at this point.

And no we won't be hitting them with any Rods from God. We'll be hitting them with cruise missiles and bombs dropped from planes, if it comes to that. Hopefully it won't.



posted on Jul, 23 2018 @ 08:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: Aazadan

You don't seem familiar with this at all. Sanctions were indeed what brought Iran to the table. That was one of the main criticisms of the deal, even from Democrats, was that it lifted sanctions too early. The entire reason Iran demanded sanctions relief up front is because they were damaging.

The reason sanctions don't usually work is because we half-ass them. This is one of the few cases where they worked, and then we blew the diplomatic side of it.


We've been sanctioning Iran for decades... it has done absolutely nothing to create instability in their political system. They've been an absolute failure.


You say this like there's either "we're sanctioning you" and "we're not sanctioning you". There are a million different ways to do this. As I said, we usually do it half assed and they don't have much effect. We finally put serious ones in and they worked.



posted on Jul, 23 2018 @ 08:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: Aazadan

You don't seem familiar with this at all. Sanctions were indeed what brought Iran to the table. That was one of the main criticisms of the deal, even from Democrats, was that it lifted sanctions too early. The entire reason Iran demanded sanctions relief up front is because they were damaging.

The reason sanctions don't usually work is because we half-ass them. This is one of the few cases where they worked, and then we blew the diplomatic side of it.


We've been sanctioning Iran for decades... it has done absolutely nothing to create instability in their political system. They've been an absolute failure.


You say this like there's either "we're sanctioning you" and "we're not sanctioning you". There are a million different ways to do this. As I said, we usually do it half assed and they don't have much effect. We finally put serious ones in and they worked.


I mentioned this in my edit (which I'm guessing based on post times that you didn't see) but if they worked, Iran would have either gone through regime change, or Israel and their GOP puppets wouldn't have spent the last 15 years running around screaming about the growing threat from Iran's nuclear program and the imminent threat the posed.

If sanctions were having their intended goal, Iran wouldn't be a threat today. Thus we're left with one of two contradiactory facts that must be true: Sanctions didn't work, or Iran isn't a threat.

If they didn't work, there's little point in continuing that strategy.
If Iran isn't a threat, then this rhetoric is silly.



new topics

top topics



 
41
<< 12  13  14    16  17 >>

log in

join