Reports: Iraq's al Asad airbase is under rocket attack

This will be the first responsive war in recent US history where the rules of engagement are simple.

President Trump will simply authorize the response and the military, hands untied for once, will carry it out.

Now we will see the true power of modern weaponry used without political restraint.

I do not foresee a ground war, there is no need.

Take out the weapons, the military and the Leaders.

NK went to the negotiation table and it worked for them.

Iran is being stupid. Too many 'deals' have made them feel much stronger than they are.

P

a reply to: xuenchen

Are they even relevant at this point or is this a political jab?

Can we stick to the topic and not make this the billionth Trump thread? Christ, people.

a reply to: ErEhWoN

Obama, Clinton never organized an army of hundreds of thousands to invade another country.

Yeah, Obama just armed muslim extremists in Libya to fight his war for him. In syria he funded more muslim extremists to prolong a civil war in hopes of toppling Assad, leading to countless civilian deaths.
Clinton waged war in eastern europe.

LBJ was a conservative

Doesn't make him any less of a democrat.

If using drones to take out the leadership is such a fantastic idea, what happened with Saddam? bin Laden? Kim?

Not sure what point you think you're making.
I'm pretty sure a surgical strike to take out a brutal dictator or terrorist leader is vastly preferable to invading an entire country, as was done in Iraq. Also, in Saddam's case, it's probably difficult to hit a person with a drone if you don't know where they are. I'm not even sure the technology was ready yet in '03.

Bin Laden? I imagine collection of intel was a close secondary objective. Hard to do that when there's nothing left to collect. Probably wanted to confirm death as well. An unauthorized strike on pakistan may have been frowned upon too.

Kim? I'm thinking that has more to do with china than anything else.

The world is not a video game, this is not Call of Duty Modern Warfare. You don't call in a drone and take out a countries leadership.

I never said we should. I personally think it's much more preferable to boots on the ground, though.

Did not any conservative learn ANYTHING from Iraq? Not one little drop?

As has already been mentioned, there is a large difference between surgical strikes and a full blown land invasion. I'm not sure why you keep conflating the two.

originally posted by: Agit8dChop

This is being repeated a lot by Middle East journalists: “Tehran told Washington DC through proxies that it will bomb US bases in Iraq to save face and claim it is a response for killing Soleimani. That’s why the USA emptied its bases hours before the attacks. Zero casualties.”

kinda reminds me of the Syria response Trump did.

more at play here?

Fascinating addition, thanks Agit8d!

If the early reports are accurate, then no American casualties with the attacks.

This is good news.

I can only hope that this aspect of the news doesn't turn partisan.

originally posted by: Liquesence
Maybe this was just a show of force to tell the US to back the F off?

Perhaps cooler heads will prevail.

With the 4d chessmaster himself and his minders at the wheel?.. eh. Im hoping Trumps generals are at least doing some serious thinking about all this and doing what they need to do, to get the least dangerous for everyone outcome. Even if it hurts the great Oranges ego... he'll get over it, children always do.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
If the early reports are accurate, then no American casualties with the attacks.

This is good news.

I can only hope that this aspect of the news doesn't turn partisan.

Ditto.

a reply to: pheonix358

That's what I've been alluding to, Trump doesn't want Soldiers killed, but at the same time, how do we project?

Well, we are the worlds superpower and maybe its time to loosen the restraints and remind the world what kind of Military power the US truly is.

***NOTE

The issue with Iran isn't WMD or OIL, this is different, which is why I am eager at the US response.

So Iran is attempting to save face w/o bringing total destruction upon itself.
I'm hearing no US casualties so far.
It's possible that Iran has already expressed this to the US through back channels.

Predicted response will be sites from which the missiles were launched will be destroyed.

a reply to: Arnie123
yea Venus is half way through its seasonal sky shine. I like watching Venus travel the night sky over the hours. But according to the Chinese, these things are going to stay put and not travel across the sky. They will be maintaining a stationary/geo-staionary (?) orbit visible over those key urban centers.

At the onset of World War 1 we had the Tungaska event. I personally believe those were the arrival of foreign travelers who managed to give a tech edge to whoever found them. There have been multiple meteorite impacts over parts of Russia since 2014, coinciding with their near term rise to global prominence. And now # will be floating over Chinese skies, during their breakout year in global power projection as claimed by their government repeatedly.

These extra-terrestrial events seem to precede global powers rising to prominence.

Im probably reach for the stars myself, but hey man! Im on ATS!!!! If we are not reaching for the stars we not doing CT correctly!

originally posted by: toysforadults
so are these rockets serious rockets? can anyone share any information on that?

Just reported that it was a face-saving attack by Iran.

Unless Iran cuts off the internet, the people who live there will soon learn the truth.

As an add to some of the comments.

Both Russia and China will stay out of it IMHO.

Why intercede?

Once the US responds and destroys much of the military hardware in Iran, Russia and China will be vying to replace all of that hardware. Billions of trade dollars coming for them both.

They will sit on the sidelines waiting for the equipment orders to come to them.

P

a reply to: ErEhWoN

Not emotional, more cold and calculating

That's interesting. A grown man telling a fellow veteran that perhaps he shouldn't have made it back from war because he disagrees with him sounds more like someone who is unable to control their emotions.

originally posted by: Agit8dChop
Hannity '' one source from DOD says ALL of these missiles missed their targets. This is not an accident ''

interesting..

I'm actually very surprised for once. How fascinating!!

I'm mind blown it's a farce (???)

a reply to: BigfootNZ

Im hoping Trumps generals are at least doing some serious thinking about all this and doing what they need to do, to get the least dangerous for everyone outcome.

That's the thing. I heard reports that he was given a variety of potential responses to the attack that killed the contractor, and they put killing Soleimani on there hoping he would take a more reasonable and more restrained response. But he didn't. He took the most extreme they presented him with.

And here we are. :/

Hopefully the next response won't be equally extreme.

Hopefully.

As has already been mentioned, there is a large difference between surgical strikes and a full blown land invasion. I'm not sure why you keep conflating the two.

a reply to: elDooberino

Because your not going to get one, without the other.

Your not going to drone strike the enemy into submission, that is a fantasy Call of Duty mentality.

I'm not sure why you can't understand that? You can't press a little joystick button and 'poof'....ohhhh Iran will capitulate now. We tried that in Iraq, and Afghanistan.

But why am I trying to convince a conservative of reality? We have alternative facts in the Whitehouse, better to listen to those.

originally posted by: muzzleflash

originally posted by: Agit8dChop
Hannity '' one source from DOD says ALL of these missiles missed their targets. This is not an accident ''

interesting..

I'm actually very surprised for once. How fascinating!!

I'm mind blown it's a farce (???)

Unless Iran can cut off the internet, the citizens there will soon learn that it was only a face-saving measure.

originally posted by: pheonix358
As an add to some of the comments.

Both Russia and China will stay out of it IMHO.

Why intercede?

Once the US responds and destroys much of the military hardware in Iran, Russia and China will be vying to replace all of that hardware. Billions of trade dollars coming for them both.

They will sit on the sidelines waiting for the equipment orders to come to them.

P

Man, Trump is so good, he is creating Jobs in other countries, SMDH.

On a side note, your analysis have been spot on and very interesting.

China especially won't do anything with Phase one being signed soon and they want that relief from that heart attack economy of theirs.

a reply to: carewemust
Cutting the internet is exactly what they can and have already done. Remember the blackout they had at the end of 2019 during which hundreds of protestors were killed by the regime while the internet was out??