- Reaction score
- 11,887
- Points
- 1,040
Iran Super Thread- Merged
- Thread starter JasonH
- Start date
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Fossil
- Reaction score
- 45,821
- Points
- 1,160
Don't worry... MAGA think tanks located in Europe, funded by the US, will pump out thousands of Trump mini-mes to change their minds about the US
US funding for MAGA think tanks in Europe will backfire
The Trump administration is engaged in self-defeating hypocrisy by moving to fund think tanks in Europe that will promote its ideological worldview. The Financial Times reported yesterday that the State Department intends to provide financial grants and other support to European initiatives which challenge European governments’ policies on free speech and promote MAGA values. This strategy will waste taxpayer money, while alienating allied governments and fostering anti-Americanism among their populations.
US funding for MAGA think tanks in Europe will backfire
The Trump administration is engaged in self-defeating hypocrisy by moving to fund think tanks in Europe that will promote its ideological worldview. The Financial Times reported yesterday that the State Department intends to provide financial grants and other support to European initiatives...
unherd.com
- Reaction score
- 11,887
- Points
- 1,040
Sure. Another 10-15 years of the US outpacing everyone else. Just as likely they'll be begging the US to save them from whatever squabbles they fail to head off. By then it'll be just about time for Ukraine Round 3, assuming Ukraine manages to survive this one, no thanks to direct involvement by the rest of Europe.
Amusingly, "elections have consequences" is exactly what Trump supporters often say when they spike the ball for another policy victory, just before they start citing the litany of people who have never really accepted the results of 2016 and 2024.
- Reaction score
- 2,262
- Points
- 1,140
Plan the parade.
I actually still think they would have got some allies. Possibly some Gulf States. But this whole appeal seems to be so that Trump can hand this mess over and declare victory. Of course, when the less resourced militaries then fail, Trump blames them for it.
Let's not forget, they got Ukraine joining them in Iraq. There has always been somebody willing to fight to curry favour with the US. That's what makes this current situation so extraordinary. Nobody wants to step up.
The fact that Danes had casualty rates nearly as high as the US in Afghanistan, and were planning to blow up runways in Greenland just four months ago seems to have simply been memoryholed. Utter insanity and audacity.
I'm genuinely curious to see what happens to the US after Trump. Maybe morbid curiosity based on how closely we are tied to them. But I see the decoupling starting at work. It's pretty clear we're not going back.
- Reaction score
- 2,262
- Points
- 1,140
The west cannot risk going back to the USA for anything.
MAGA won't die with trump so the risk of another one is always just 4 years away.
Nations need to be able to rely on partners for more than 4 year cycles. And by rely i mean, you can pull back and be isolationalist and most nations can accept that. Hungary wasn't kicked out of the EU for example. But when you actively start to actively undermine and threaten others, you've moved past isolationism to hostile actor and the west cannot afford to deal with that every 4 years.
This war of two parties will be the norm for generations. The leaders of tomorrow won't forget this either.
- Reaction score
- 11,887
- Points
- 1,040
Why bother? We could be having one right now. Putin telegraphed himself in 2014, and look where things are. Europe had years to get ready before phase II; Europe's had years to do something more decisive since phase II started.
- Reaction score
- 11,887
- Points
- 1,040
Of course it can, and will. People who talk seriously about more engagement with adversaries like China cannot expect to be also taken seriously when they talk about less engagement with the US. As bad as the Trump-led facets of the US are, they are not remotely as bad as true adversaries of western countries.
Countries that grit their teeth and suck up Trump's provocations and work to maintain a relationship with the US are going to be pulled along by the US in its economic wake. Long term, that is going to matter, a lot.
- Reaction score
- 11,887
- Points
- 1,040
Yes, the US is doing well. The effect of Trump's tariffs has not been as ruinous to the US as either predicted or hoped; by almost all measures of output and employment the US is somehow still thriving. Every time there's a glimmer of hope for a resolution of the war, markets respond favourably within hours. The US can walk away from the conflict with Iran strutting behind its back and almost all its economic indicators will be "green board", except the appropriations passed by Congress. The adults in the administration and military will humbly apply some lessons learned about drone warfare and ammunition stockpiles, even if Trump spends every day auditioning to be Monty (everything goes gloriously and victoriously according to plan).
Iran will have to rebuild a lot of stuff and then get back to dealing with ongoing problems like the Tehran drought. There's going to be a lot of competition in the country for hard currency. Iran may try to make Gulf oil producers and consumers pay for some of it; they may or may not put up with it.
Ukraine will still be fighting its war with Russia, and the rest of Europe will be half-heartedly giving it just enough aid to keep an approximate stalemate/quagmire going while hoping the US might suddenly pick up the lion's share of the burden - an outcome less likely than it was before some of them got snotty over Trump's war.
- Reaction score
- 3,915
- Points
- 1,040
The US is at risk of losing world currency status. Once that goes the end is in sight for their empire.
My current largest question with all this is when is Trump going to start removing US forces from this war. The 60 days is up and congress hasn’t authorized this war.
- Reaction score
- 2,262
- Points
- 1,140
They took a break. Resets the timer. According to them anyways.
Turns out you can wage war for 59 days, take a 1 day break, and get back at it for another 59 days in perpetuity.
- Reaction score
- 11,887
- Points
- 1,040
Why "at risk"? A few countries selling and buying oil in alternative currencies isn't going to unseat the stability of the USD ("full faith and credit"), nor its widespread usage in countries with unstable currencies. About half of USD extant is thought to be circulating outside the US.
A president of the past few decades submitting to constitutional limitations without being forced to by action of Congress or courts? A novel idea.
My guess is Congress will provide some kind of authorization. Americans don't like this war, but they like a legislated cut-and-run even less.
- Reaction score
- 17,951
- Points
- 1,160
He already said they won and had a ceasefire and talks. Now they can start the war afresh.
Maxman1
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,992
- Points
- 1,190
Then they shouldn't be leaking classified information.
- Reaction score
- 2,262
- Points
- 1,140
Maybe not, but if they are, don't be stupid about it.
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 19,269
- Points
- 1,260
Kev... Who is going to want to be part of this ? It would be pretty rich for the USA to go asking friends for help after everything it has done in DJT second term. You folks have a made a mess of your alliances and friendships.
Im not even one of the anti-Americans around here I know this is pure fantasy. Its political suicide for any western leader.
The west should should go bow in on this and wait Trump out.
KevinB
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 30,060
- Points
- 1,260
Maybe everyone else?
Want a voice, pull up to the table with something other than convening. I get that many don’t like POTUS, but some here seem to be eager for him to fail (and seem to miss the second and third order affects of that). Sitting on the sidelines tossing poo doesn’t do anyone any good.
Moaning about how we got here doesn’t do anyone any good.
Finding a solution should be a goal. That doesn’t mean you need to join a US/ISR alliance. One can have a third party entity that has its own plan.
Iran having a Regime Change is not a bad thing.
While people can bemoan what was done in Iraq, Saddam was a really bad guy, and while the occupation and transition was botched horribly, (due to failure to understand what was needed in terms of troops if the Ba’ath party was eliminated, and lack of a replacement structure) that doesn’t mean that the goal wasn’t morally justified.
The Iranian Regime is right up there with Saddam, external and internal terrorism. So them needing to go should be understood as a good thing by any decent person.
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 19,269
- Points
- 1,260
Who is that ?
What if people don't like your table anymore ?
Why does the US need others to come in a be the solution to the mess they made ?
In principal I agree.
Why does the US need to be arbiter and executioner of the worlds bad guys ? Sure Saddam was but so was what the US and friends did to that country.
No debate. But if you want a coalition you have to collaborate with your allies. Not ignore them, financially punish them or threaten to take them over.
Its quite hypocritical for the USA to want or to expect help from its traditional friends right now... That's all I am saying. And I am among the ranks of the Pro USA folks around these parts.
- Reaction score
- 7,624
- Points
- 1,260
With all that being said - what could another 20ish warships (about equal to the warships of the Saudi's, UAE, Kuwaiti, Omanis and Qataris already have WITHIN the S of H) and say another 80ish warplanes really add to the fight? The US has the world's mightiest navy, but they themselves are too afraid to put warships into the S of H. Why is that?
If that CIA report is correct and the Iranians really do have 75% of their missile stockpile still available after all the pounding the US/Israeli's have already unleashed on them, will another 80ish fighters move the needle from a 25% usage down to a remaining stockpile of less than 15%? How much more damage to the oil infrastructure within the UAE, Saudi, Qatar or Kuwait will occur - resulting in potential muti-year reductions in the availability of oil, nat gas, fertilizer or aluminum?
What is the real objective? Can anyone or has anyone even ' clearly ' define what it would be?
Is it:-
1) Straight Regime change,
2) Regime change to neutral evil,
3) Regime change to true neutral,
4) No nuclear weapons ever, but continued support to Hamas and Hezbollah and Regime change to lawful evil
5) No nuclear weapons but no Regime change and no Hamas support but continued Hezbollah support,
6) No nuclear weapons, pro US gov't, no Hamas/Hezbollah support, complete recognition of Israel
7) Induce Civil War and division of Iran into multiple entities
The US - and Israel - would have to build a coalition that can clearly articulate one of the above points - or another version of one of them - and then as a coalition - where all information and decision making is done in the open among the coalition partners, with a complete nodding of the heads, they go about doing it. That would mean that it would need to be approved by the UN, as any potential coalition partners would require this as the first step. If the Israeli's are not willing to play ball as a coalition team player and they go rogue, will the US be willing to 'cut them loose' as the other coalition members would demand?
It's easy to say, 'the West must help the US out of this mess', but in reality no one, no one has any clear idea on what they want to achieve short term, medium term or long term. Its a country of 93m people, there is no easy answer, none.
Pick one from the chart below, which do you want Iran to be going forward?
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Fossil
- Reaction score
- 45,821
- Points
- 1,160
Ireland/ Taxhavenland.
At least we beat Spain
www.visualcapitalist.com
At least we beat Spain
Key Takeaways
- Ireland ranks #1 in GDP per hour at $151, far ahead of its peers—but the figure is heavily influenced by multinational corporations.
- European economies dominate the top of the ranking, with Norway and Luxembourg also exceeding $120 per hour.
- The U.S. generates $97 per hour—above average, but behind many smaller, high-income economies.
Ranked: The Most Productive Countries in the World
See how productivity per hour varies across OECD countries, and why some economies outperform despite working fewer hours.
www.visualcapitalist.com
